Elena LaVictoire's Bookmarks

Ending Zeke’s life now wouldn’t short-cut their sadness. God has a reason and a purpose for this little baby, Jessica told Dave.

She decided that the best gift she could give to her unborn son was to love him until his death, even if the only fullness of his life would be in the soft cushion of her womb.

As long as Zeke lived, they would love him as best they could. Maybe he would go all the way to term. Maybe they could hold him before he died.

Jessica vowed she wouldn’t let herself wallow in grief. She would choose to seek joy. Look for it in every kick, every flutter, every wonderful moment.

After he came off the blocks with a startling triumph in Iowa and ran up a dozen straight primary and caucus victories in February, arrived the spring when Hillary, though Obama's media auxiliary was ordering her to get out, defeated him in Texas, crushed him in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and humiliated him in West Virginia and Kentucky.

Each time the voters take a long second look at Obama, their positive first impressions seem to dissipate. Obama is a weak closer.

Herein lies McCain's hope. The country wants change, but it has not concluded it wants Obama. But if John McCain cannot raise grave doubts about his agenda, his associates, his record, his character, his fitness to be president, Obama is going to win by default.

Obama has succeeded in the debates by playing defense. By his cool demeanor and persona, he has diminished apprehensions about an Obama presidency. There is no evidence of surging enthusiasm.

As McCain is an establishment man on illegal aliens, NAFTA and Wall Street bailouts, uneasy with social issues like affirmative action and abortion, he lacks the full panoply of weapons that successful Republicans like Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Bush II used to win two terms. He seems to confine himself to the limited arsenal Gerald Ford, Bush I and Bob Dole employed when they went down to defeat.

This election is not over. Yet, even if McCain gets a bit of luck, a dead cat bounce on Wall Street, he must persuade the nation Obama is an unacceptable occupant of the White House if he is to win.

At weekend rallies and fundraisers she criticized Illinois
Senator Obama personally, particularly his association with Bill
Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground radical group,
whom she described as a ``domestic terrorist.'' The Democratic
presidential nominee ``is not a man who sees America as you see
it,'' she said at a campaign rally in Carson, California.

Her supporters said they liked the new tone. ``It's about
time the pit bull got loose,'' said Ken Gow, a 47-year-old police
officer who was among the more than 10,000 people at the Oct. 4
rally.

Pius XII returned to the sophism that the Church prefers the life of the child
over that of the mother. That is not true. “Never and in no case has the Church
taught that the life of the child must be preferred to that of the mother. It
is erroneous to put the question with this alternative: either the life of the
child or that of the mother. No, neither the life of the mother nor that of
the child can be subjected to an act of direct suppression. In the one case
as in the other, there can be but one obligation: to make every effort to save
the lives of both, of the mother and the child.” [16]

John XXIII carried forward the same principles, with special insistence on
the evil effects of legalized abortion on the whole of society, once its leaders
approve the slaying of the unborn. “Human life,” he wrote, “is sacred; from
its very inception the creative action of God is directly operative. By violating
his laws, the divine majesty is offended, the individuals themselves and humanity
are degraded, and the bonds by which members of society are united are enervated.” [17]

When the Second Vatican Council, in its Constitution regarding today’s world,
declared that “Life from its very conception must be guarded with the greatest
care,” and that “Abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes,” it rested
its case on almost two millennia of Catholic faith and doctrine. Paul VI confirmed
this teaching with a special declaration in the clearest possible terms. “Respect
for human life,” he wrote, “is called for from the time that the process of
generation begins. From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun
which is neither that of the father nor of the mother; it is rather the life
of a new human being with his own growth. It would never be made human if it
were not human already.” Consequently, “Divine law and natural reason exclude
all right to the direct killing of an innocent human being.” [18]

n talking to my wife Janet, (the actual baby carrier in this family), she points out the following:

First, ultrasounds have been wrong.

Second, miracles happen sometimes.

Third, and most salient here: every baby she has had is dying.  The question is simply, when?  Most of them, God willing, will die in 50 to 70 years.  But they could die in five minutes.

In contrast, the unspoken contract, it seems to me, of much of our culture is that the baby is there for the sake of the parents and if the baby is not Perfect, then the parents have the right to break the deal.  Speaking of playing God….

Finally, as a Catholic I would note that, if aborted, a baby has no access to the sacrament of Baptism.  We can, of course, still entrust unbaptized babies to the mercy and love of God, but I would not be able to look God in the eye and tell him I denied my baby the sacrament because my feelings were more important than his eternal welfare.

These are all things I would say to myself if I were weighing the matter.  They

A claim like this one tears away the pretense of "choice" among some in the medical community. When the medical establishment encourages doctors to encourage broad genetic testing for genetic abnormalities, then emphasizes the hardship of raising a disabled child, eugenic abortion is not merely an "option" but a recommendation. And people such as Sarah Palin, who resist the consensus against the elimination of "genetic abnormality," become a bad example, instead of a heroic one.

This difference clarifies the most basic question of medical ethics: How do we improve humanity? By eliminating the "imperfect" from among us? Or by showing our humanity, especially toward the "imperfect"?