Cluster of wheat image Grapes and vines image Cluster of wheat image
February 5th, 2009


There are well over 3000 surgical abortions performed in the United States every day of the year, as well as countless non-surgical abortions brought about by drugs designed to interrupt a very early pregnancy.  With all these babies being cut off at the start, it is small wonder that there are literally millions of women walking about with the pain of knowing that once there was a baby on the way that never made it.  Some initially feel relieved  — it was not a “planned” pregnancy — but the thought of the “child that could have been” crops up in the future and haunts them.  Others grieve from the very beginning – they feel a terrible loss, they become depressed, they try various things to soothe the pain. If they aborted because of pressure from the boyfriend they often feel an animosity toward him and the relationship comes undone.   Through the years they notice children of the age their child might have been.  Some learn, much to their despair, that they have rid themselves of the only child they would ever conceive.   Or when they eventually do bear a child they appreciate more fully what they ended in the past.  The pro-life signs are spot-on when they say ABORTION  =  ONE DEAD,  ONE WOUNDED

Most women are naturally nurturers.   Most women have a kind of built-in desire to mother.  But on top of their normal womanly feeling of loss, those who have aborted often experience a kind of spiritual despair.  If they ever believed that abortion is morally wrong, if they ever believed in the commandment, “thou shalt not kill,”  they know in their heart that something, someone, has died and they feel responsible.    They may think they can’t go to church any more, they can’t tell anyone what they’ve done.  It is just too awful.  In short, they cannot forgive themselves and doubt that anyone else can.

Last month following the annual March for Life in Washington DC a group of 100 woman from Silent No More told their stories of healing and forgiveness after abortion from the steps of the Supreme Court building.    Their page of resources on their website for women after abortion is impressive.    Some of these groups have been around, serving post-abortive women, for years.

Another newer group I recently learned of, which actually prompted this post, is PATH (which stands for Post Abortion Treatment and Healing)

Many millions of women have felt the pain of abortion.  Years later they are still suffering.  They need to know that countless others have not only suffered but have learned and grown and healed.   Because these women  have been there, raw and suffering,  they want to help others who are still there, still unhealed.    There is a path to healing, wholeness, and peace.  To any woman with an abortion in her past I would urge that she click on one of the above websites.  Read the testimonies.   Be aware of the groups that exist for no other reason than to help you.  Look at the books that have been written about post-abortion syndrome and finding wholeness.   Know that even if you can’t forgive yourself, if perhaps others may not forgive, God always forgives……and is waiting to do just that.   It is never too late.


For of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these, “It might have been.”  —  Whittier

January 29th, 2009


I have just added Inside Catholic to my blogroll.  Their post today, titled 8  Responses to the Pro-Choice Mindset,  is a must.

January 26th, 2009


Dear Sasha and Malia,

Thus begins President Barack Obama’s letter to his daughters, published in Parade Magazine on January 18, 2009.   He continues as follows:

When I was a young man, I thought life was all about me—about how I’d make my way in the world, become successful, and get the things I want. But then the two of you came into my world with all your curiosity and mischief and those smiles that never fail to fill my heart and light up my day. And suddenly, all my big plans for myself didn’t seem so important anymore. I soon found that the greatest joy in my life was the joy I saw in yours. And I realized that my own life wouldn’t count for much unless I was able to ensure that you had every opportunity for happiness and fulfillment in yours. In the end, girls, that’s why I ran for President: because of what I want for you and for every child in this nation.

The title of Obama’s letter is What I Want For You – and Every Child in America. He says, “I want every child to have the same chances to learn and dream and grow and thrive that you girls have. That’s why I’ve taken our family on this great adventure.”   He wants them to be able to attend good schools, get good jobs, have good health care.  He tells them in his letter about how his grandmother talked about the Declaration of Independence and about the people years ago who had marched for equality.   Does he not realize that the first equality that is necessary before any other becomes possible is an equal right to life?  Should he not, as an avowed Christian,  respect not only the right to life but the commandment: Thou shalt not kill?

It was that same Barack Obama – now our  “abortion president” – who once said: “ I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”  Appallingly, what President Obama implies is that should one of his daughters make a “mistake” and become pregnant, he would be party, either by consent or by act, to the killing of his unborn grandchild!

Abraham Lincoln, who Obama pretends to model himself after, freed the slaves with his Emancipation Proclamation.  Mr. Obama, however, with his repeal of the Mexico City Policy and his intent to sign a Freedom of Choice Act which will undo all the pro-life gains since 1973 is destined to condemn an unprecedented number of unborn babies to death world-wide  He intends to fund groups (with our money) that promote abortion on demand and use abortion for population control  — how un-Lincolnesque!

We came, 300,000 thousand of us, to Obama’s doorstep in Washington, D.C. on January 22 and he totally ignored us.  He could at least have said ‘hello’.  President Bush always did.  We went, 30,000 of us to  San Francisco to march for the lives of the babies.   Who cares?  Ignore them, and maybe they’ll go away. I don’t think so.

Mr. Obama, your daughters are watching.   What are you teaching them?  That they are precious but other babies are disposable like so many Kleenexes?  Their daddy could have freed babies as Lincoln freed the slaves – given them civil rights as human beings made in the image of God.  He is choosing not to.

Father Benedict Groeschel said so succinctly just yesterday:  “We did not declare war on Obama.  Obama declared war on us.”

And our children.

Actor/producer Eduardo Vestegui called this video:   Obama Must See.

November 24th, 2008


Janis Clark sings for the unborn.

No comment necessary. Just weep.


Listen, they are weeping, little ones who died in darkness
They plead for us and intercede for us
Their blood is on our hands as we lay hold of the lie –
They have to die.

Small voices cry, they whisper “Mercy”
To him whose blood alone heals our hearts of stone
Listen, they are singing now, “Mercy” – they are our hope
Pia Jesu, pia Jesu, miserere (Gentle Jesus, gentle Jesus, have mercy)
Pia Jesu, pia Jesu, miserere
Pia Jesu, pia Jesu, miserere, miserere, pia Jesu.


I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me. Matthew 25:40

August 29th, 2008


The minute I heard the scuttlebut that McCain’s veep might be Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska,  I hurried to google to see whether she was pro-life.   Behold, she is not only prolife but is the mother of five and she was recently in the news because she refused to consider abortion when she learned her last baby would have Down’s syndrome.   THIS IS SO RIGHT IT CAN’T BE WRONG!   I was jumping up and down (figuratively speaking, of course),  going “Praise God!   Glory Hallelujah!”


Born Sarah Heath on February 11, 1964,  in Sandpoint Idaho, moved to Alaska as an infant. Her father was an elementary school teacher.

She attended Wasilla High School where she played on the state champion basketball team.  She fishes, hunts, and snowmobiles,  and is a lifetime member of the NRA. Read the rest of this entry »

August 28th, 2008


I first started blogging because I wanted to give tribute to a saintly doctor, Herbert Ratner, M.D. I now give tribute to a saintly priest, Reverend William C. Smith, who died one year ago today.

Father William C. Smith

Born January 11, 1921

Ordained: December 22, l945

Died: August 28, 2007

Father Bill came twice a week to our local abortion mill but also, in between his various surgeries (including a nephrectomy for cancer), he also went regularly to the mills in Bridgeport and Stamford. There he would stand (STAND!) for hours, in all weather, praying for an end to abortion. So dedicated was he that after his death homilist Fr. Towsley commented that they were unable to find a decent pair of shoes for him to wear in his casket!

Father Smith was Catholic and pro-life to the core. In memoriam, on the first anniversary of his death, I would like to honor him by posting online what he wrote about (1) his Catholic faith and (2) about his pro-life convictions.

Reverend William C. Smith
January 12, 1991

When I was first asked to write an article for the religion page, I wondered what I would write about. I decided I’d write about six subjects that non-Catholics may misunderstand. They are (a) the Bible, (b) Biblical interpretation, (c) Sacred tradition, (d) Papal infallibility, (e) Purgatory, and (f) Mary.

Not all readers will agree with what the church holds but I thought it would be of interest if I briefly stated our position.

We hold that the Catholic Church preserved the 73 books of the Bible and in 397 A.D. the Council of Carthage arranged them into one book – the Bible. Until the invention of the printing press (1445), handwritten copies were made in monasteries by candlelight and on parchment. Often there was only one Bible in a town and it was chained so all could read it, as the telephone company chains phone books so all can read them.

The first Bible printed by Gutenberg in 1445 was the Catholic Bible. By 382 St. Jerome had translated the entire Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Latin (the “Latin Vulgate”). Translations into various languages followed. About 1226 Cardinal Langton of Canterbury developed the chapter divisions. Portions of the Bible have always been read at Mass and private reading and study have always been encouraged.

In America we encourage folks to read the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, etc., but we do not allow for private interpretation of these documents. Similarly, Catholics are encouraged to read the Bible, but we do not believe in private interpretation. We believe Christ left the task of interpretation to his Church when he commissioned Peter and the apostles to “go teach all nations what I have commanded you” and he promised to send the Holy Spirit to “bring to your minds what I have taught you.”

In a similar way the Supreme Court interprets our documents; private interpretation would lead to anarchy.

In Acts 1:3 we read that Christ appeared to his apostles for 40 days after His resurrection and “spoke of the kingdom of God.” Yet the Bible does not record what he said! John 20:30 reads: “Many other signs also Jesus worked which are not written in this book.” 2 Timothy 1:13 reads: “Hold to the form of sound teaching which you have heard from me.”

Christ himself never wrote, nor did some of his apostles. They were sent out to “teach-preach.” The New Testament was written between 51-100 A.D. The church (33 A.D.) was in full operation for about 18 years before one word of the New Testament was written! Sacred Tradition contains the oral teachings of Christ and is a second source of divine Revelation, according to Catholic teaching.

Regarding papal infallibility: It does not mean that the Holy Father is inspired (as were the Gospel writers) nor that he receives a revelation (divine revelation ceased with the death of John, the Evangelist), nor that he is impeccable (cannot sin). It simply means he is protected from theological error when declaring to the whole Catholic world a teaching in faith or morals already contained in divine revelation (Bible and Sacred Tradition). This protection, we believe, is based on Christ’s command to Peter: “feed my lambs, feed my sheep,” plus Christ’s promise to be with the church till the end of time; plus his words: “he who hears you hears Me,” plus his promise to send the Holy Spirit to guide the church “into the way of truth” and to be the “pillar of truth.”

Catholics, of course, believe in Heaven and Hell. We also believe, however, in a place of cleansing called “Purgatory.” The Bible says (Revelation 21:) “Nothing unclean can enter Heaven.” Matthew 12:32 speaks of sins which cannot be forgiven “neither in this world, nor in the world to come.” This implies some sins can be forgiven after death. We believe venial sins (smaller sins) which are not repented in this world can be expiated (cleansed) in Purgatory. Macabees 12:46 reads: “It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from their sins.”

Catholics neither adore nor worship Mary. To do so would be a brazen act of idolatry! We honor her as the mother of Christ. Christ honored her and thus fulfilled His own commandment – “Honor thy father and mother.” He performed his first miracle at her request at Cana. After Joseph’s death he supported her until He was 30 years of age in the home at Nazareth, when He left to begin His three years of public ministry.

If we love and adore Christ, we pay Him respect by honoring His mother. I can never understand people who feel they honor Christ by snubbing his mother, anymore than I honor you (the reader) by snubbing your mother. From the cross he said, “Behold thy mother.” I believe even a church needs a mother! The second Vatican Council has given Mary a new title: “mother of the church.” If Christ is the head of the body, the church, and she is his mother, then she is the mother of the church!–the mother of the head is mother of the members.!


In Genesis 1:27 we hear God saying, “let us make man in our own image and likeness.” This image is the soul, not the body, since God is a divine spirit and the soul a human spirit. At conception, God creates a human soul and joins it to the material provided by mother and father. This great act of creation between God and parents is destroyed by abortion. The fetus, at conception, is a person because personhood is in the soul, not the body. Angels, e.g., are angelic persons, yet have no bodies. The body of the conceived fetus grows, not the soul, unless destroyed by abortion.

Conception is like marriage; body and soul are joined by God, and what God has joined, let no man put asunder, until death parts them. Weddings, like conception, are meant to be joyful. Abortions, like divorce, are always sad.

Every year in the U.S.A. we have many divorces. Every year we have millions of abortions. Doctors in abortion clinics put asunder what God has joined. The tiny, incipient, physical life of babies is snuffed out and the soul is sent prematurely into eternity, for the soul (spiritual and immaterial) cannot be killed. Abortionists, for money, push God aside, push his law aside, and say, in so many words, by their foul, murderous action: “I am God – I decide who lives and who dies – for I am Lord of life and death.”

Are we “one nation under God” or a divided nation under the pro-choice, pro-abortion crowd?


Whenever we parted from Father Smith, either at the abortuary site or at his nursing home, Father would bless us:  Benedicat vos omnipotens Deus, + Pater, + et Filius, + et Spiritus Sanctus.
R. Amen….

At our last visit, three days before he died, instead of his usual blessing Father gave us general absolution. I don’t know if that is according to the rubrics or not, but surely general absolution from a holy dying priest must be a good thing!

Well done, good and faithful servant. We who are left behind thank you. Pray for us.


And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16:18

August 25th, 2008


When I put my blouse on this morning my thoughts went back to Atlanta, Georgia, July, 1988. I was in a prison camp with sundry other prolifers, including the renowned Randy Terry and a rather feeble priest whose name I don’t recall. We were allowed to wear our own clothes in the camp but after a few days some of us badly needed a change. A call went out to Christians on the “outside” who brought clothing for us and that’s where my blouse came from. It has served me well.

We called ourselves rescuers although the media and the prison staff called us protesters. We were protesting abortion, yes, but the primary aim was to save the lives of babies scheduled to be killed on the particular morning of the rescue. We were pledged to be passive, to accomplish our goal by putting our bodies between the pregnant Moms and the abortionist. We would sit at the door of the “clinic” until the police carried us off. In the meantime our counselors would talk to the mothers and offer them help to deal with the pregnancies they wanted to end. Over the years when Rescue thrived, thousands of babies’ lives were saved in this way.

There was a time, in the early days of Rescue, when what we did, just sitting down and refusing to move, received a just punishment for a charge such as simple trespass. We did not usually have to deal with more than a few days in jail or a modest fine. FACE (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances) and RICO (Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organization Act), which were laws passed specifically to protect abortion, seriously upped the cost of resisting abortion. It was the fear of these laws, of years in jail, of thousands of dollars in fines, that stifled the Rescue movement and made killing unborn babies a deed legally protected by the government itself.

According to John Cavanaugh O’Keefe the need to resort to such Draconian laws as FACE and RICO was a clear measure of Rescue’s success. He writes:

FACE posed a question. “You say that zygotic dots and blastular mulberries and embryonic humanettes are your brothers and sisters. I don’t consider dots and mulberries to be members of my family. And you know what? I don’t think you believe that either. But if you want to keep saying that stuff, let’s test your words. You would go to jail for years to protect your little sister. Will you do the same for a slimy fetus?”

Is that “slimy fetus” a being worthy of protection? There is a DVD available called Baby Steps which shows 4-D ultrasound images of babies as they roll, yawn, blink, spin, smile and stretch throughout 16 stages of development from 8 to 34 weeks of pregnancy. It is a real eye-opener. This is obviously neither slime nor blob, but a creature of marvelous complexity. From a scientific standpoint, it is incontrovertible that a human being is formed when the sperm fertilizes the ovum. Everything is there in that tiny package — it has only to grow and develop. That zygotic dot has a full complement of 46 chromosomes and a lifetime supply of human DNA. YOU were once a little package such as that. (Click here for the diary of an unborn child.)

From a Christian point of view there is no question whether the unborn child is a person worthy of protection. Consider that when the the angel Gabriel announced to Mary that she was to bear the Son of God she “went in haste” to visit her cousin Elizabeth who was also pregnant. It was just days after Christ’s conception when they met, yet Elizabeth exclaimed “blessed is the fruit of thy womb” and the baby in Elizabeth’s womb leapt for joy at the presence of Jesus. The Greek word for the baby in Elizabeth’s womb is brephos, exactly the same word that is used to describe Christ in Luke 2:12: “You will find a babe {brephos} wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.” No Christian can read the description in Luke and believe that killing an unborn child is a matter of no import.

There have been totally non-violent prolifers who have spent several years in jail due to the vagaries of the venues where they were arrested. Many others have months of incarceration to their credit. This is called “walking the walk.” Many of us however, have responded to the above question by saying we might go to jail for a few weeks to save a fetus, but not for years.

Richard John Neuhaus (FIRST THINGS, June 1999, pg. 85) writes:

…for more than twenty-five years there have been thousands of people who have stood vigil at America’s abortuaries, who have prayed, counseled, and sometimes gone to jail, in order to prevent the rest of us from averting our eyes from the horror. It is not the only way of being prolife or even of being a prolife activitist, but they are heroes and heroines, and we are all in their debt.

As Operation Rescue languished, it seems to me that the willingness of Christians (and even Catholic prelates) to confront abortion in the streets has increased. It is true, as Francis Schaeffer wrote, that each abortion mill exists with the permission of the Christians in that community. Praying and peaceful picketing are still relatively risk-free and more and more rosaries are being prayed where and when abortions are being done. Father Frank Pavone’s Priests for Life has been doing a masterful job. Among the others who have visibly witnessed to the evil of abortion in the streets the names of Msgr. Phillip Reilly, Bishop Austin Vaughn, Bishop George Lynch, Cardinal Francis George, Fr. Benedict Groeschel, Bishop James McHugh, Bishop Paul Loverde, Bishop William Lori, and Father Michael Scanlon come to mind. There are many others.

Proverbs 24:11 still challenges us. “Rescue those who are being taken away to death…If you say, ‘Behold, we did not know this,’ does not he who weighs the heart perceive it?”

We cannot say “We did not know this.” The right to kill the unborn is a hot topic in the current elections. I pray (and know) that there will always be Christians who are willing to put their bodies and lives on the line for their unborn brothers and sisters. Jesus was a Rescuer (some translate it Savior) who laid down his life that others might live. There is no more noble calling.


PASTOR RICK WARREN: At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?

SEN. OBAMA: Well, you know, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is, is above my pay grade.


MR. BROKAW: Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his pay grade, whether you’re looking at it scientifically or theologically. If he were to come to you and say, “Help me out here, Madame Speaker. When does life begin?” what would you tell him?

REP. PELOSI: I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester. There’s very clear distinctions. This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins. As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…

MR. BROKAW: The Catholic Church at the moment feels very strongly that it…

REP. PELOSI: I understand that.

MR. BROKAW: …begins at the point of conception.

REP. PELOSI: I understand. And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy. But it is, it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And we want abortions to be safe, rare, and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception.

My Republican colleagues do not support contraception. If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must–it would behoove you to support family planning and, and contraception, you would think. But that is not the case. So we have to take–you know, we have to handle this as respectfully–this is sacred ground. We have to handle it very respectfully and not politicize it, as it has been–and I’m not saying Rick Warren did, because I don’t think he did, but others will try to.

MR. BROKAW: Madame Speaker, thanks very much for being with us.

REP. PELOSI: It’s my pleasure. Thank you.




Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008. What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York
August 26, 2008


Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

June 21st, 2008


Have you noticed? They’re not saying anymore that the unborn baby is not a baby. After all, everyone knows it’s a baby. A woman is “with child.” They can see it on the ultrasound, in the premature nursery, or examine its little parts when it is aborted. They are saying, “Yeah, it’s a baby. But it’s unwanted, it’s an embarrassment, it’s defective, it’s expensive. We should have the right to kill it.”

Have you noticed? They aren’t saying anymore that the disabled should be allowed to die and have extraordinary means of life support removed. They are saying, as in the Cruzan case, as in the Schiavo case, “She is not on life support systems and shows no signs of dying. Her quality of life is very poor and nursing care is expensive. The taxpayer is footing the bill. It is time to withdraw food and water and let her go. She can be medicated to help with the suffering of dehydration.” In other words, we should have the right to kill her.

And, God help us, we are buying the lies of the death-peddlers! Read the rest of this entry »

June 9th, 2008


A headline in the New York Times, 11/5/91 read: “Stark Data on Women: 100 Million are Missing.” Actually, it was not 100 million women who were missing. It was 100 million children––girl children. “At least 60 million females in Asia are missing and feared dead, victims of nothing more than their sex,” the article continued. It seems that Asian countries, especially China and India, have noted markedly skewed ratios of boys to girls in recent years.

Under normal circumstances, the ratio of boy births to girl births the world over is about 105 to 100, but this ratio is evened up as the years go by, more boys dying at every age after birth. However, in the Asian countries such as China and India, boys have traditionally been preferred so that even as far back as 1953 boy children outnumbered girl children by about 108 to 100, due primarily to female infanticide or neglect.

A more recent New York Times piece (July 12, 1993) reported a dramatic increase in the ratio of boys to girls with such shocking preliminary statistics that authorities ordered them kept secret. The culprit is apparently the ultrasound scanner. A peasant in Xiamen, China, reported: “Last year we had only one girl born in the village–everybody else had boys.” For a bribe of $35 or a carton of cigarettes, a doctor could be coaxed to reveal the sex of the child and “If it’s a girl, you get an abortion.” China’s shocking statistics may soon reach 120 boys for each 100 girls, according to a Chinese think-tank. In South Korea a ratio of 116 boys to 100 girls was reported in 1990 but is now shifting toward parity with a ratio of 107 boys for every 100 girls. Read the rest of this entry »

May 12th, 2008


What would prompt a seemingly sensible 65-year-old woman to abandon her job, spend a night sleeping on a New York store-front floor and then take a bus to Atlanta, only to be arrested for sitting on the ground in front of an abortion mill? When the Opinion editor of the News-Times in my home town asked me to explain why I did the things I did that day, and subsequently, in their Community Forum, I was happy to oblige.


News-Times, Danbury CT

July 28, 1991

On September 28, 1990, in Dobbs Ferry, NY, I had the privilege of being handcuffed to a chain link fence behind an abortion clinic next to a Maryknoll priest whom I knew only as Father Andrew.

The occasion was Father Andrew’s first rescue and 38 of us had been arrested for sitting in front of the door of the Women’s Medical Pavilion, refusing to move. Father Andrew told me at the time that he had prayed about it and felt he was obeying God in trying to prevent, at least for a day, the killing of unborn children at that facility. I remember putting my free hand over his in appreciation of his caring enough to be there, Roman collar and all, lending a certain quiet respectability to our efforts. Read the rest of this entry »