From Fr. Pacwa's most recent Ignatius Production e-letter, which I received yesterday:
Dear Friends of Ignatius Productions,
Peace, Peace (Jeremiah 6:13)
A variety of arguments have been made about President Barak Obama's surprise reception of the Nobel Peace Prize. Arguments, both from the conservative and liberal sides of the political spectrum, mostly concern themselves with the small amount of time he has been president and the prestigious quality of the award.
I, for my part, strongly object to his being awarded the Peace prize because of his policies to spread violence to the most peaceful places on earth.
Remember that Mr. Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace prize in early February, about two weeks after his inauguration as president. What has he actually done in those two weeks that might make him unworthy of this peace prize? Among his very first executive orders was his decision to allow the federal government to fund abortions and abortion counseling on January 23, 2009, the day after the thirty-sixth anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision to decriminalize abortions. In fact, on the actual anniversary of Roe v. Wade Mr. Obama wrote, "We are reminded that this decision not only protects women's health and reproductive freedom but stands for a broader principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman's right to choose."
He highlighted that commitment while a member of the Illinois State Senate, when he refused to vote for a law protecting children who survive an abortion; even though Roe v. Wade recognized that once a child is outside the womb, he or she is a person and deserves the protection of the law. We would do well to remember that on March 9, 2009, one month after his nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Obama signed another executive order permitting embryonic stem cell research. Not only does he support the killing of children in the womb but also the use of their bodies for research.Fr. Pacwa is currently working on an ambitious 10-part video series titled "The Reformation Project". Check it out on You Tube.
In a normal world, the womb is one of the most peaceful places on earth. The child within the womb is not hungry, thirsty, or in need of any other shelter. Life exists without conflicts and an amazing unfolding of incredibly complex growth and development takes place. The only conflict comes from outside that safe haven, as when an abortionist wields a knife to dismember the otherwise peaceful and defenseless child.
As far as I am concerned, the last award I would bestow on someone who signs orders to spread an inevitable deadly violence against content, safe, and defenseless children in wombs throughout the world is a peace award. I cannot help but take to heart the words of Jeremiah the Prophet: "For from the least to the greatest of them, every one is greedy for unjust gain; and from prophet to priest, every one deals falsely. They have healed the wound of my people lightly, saying, `Peace, peace,' when there is no peace. Were they ashamed when they committed abomination? No, they were not at all ashamed; they did not know how to blush. Therefore they shall fall among those who fall; at the time that I punish them, they shall be overthrown," says the Lord. (Jer. 6:13-15)
In Christ Jesus,
Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J.
Yep. The fires burn hot in the belly of the modern Moloch. We just throw the children in a little earlier than the ancient Canaanites did.
M. L. Hearing
Posted by: M. L. Hearing | Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 05:47 PM
Hi,
This is my perspective, naturally, not many may agree; however it is based upon my experience and knowledge. With new knowledge I may think differently. I am, and have changed my mind on issues, often, based on new factual evidence.
I think on a superficial level that is true. If I was aware of any Jesuit organisations who are active in creating an environment where only children who are very much wanted and loved by mommy and daddy, are conceived into the womb, I would agree. But the encouragement of slave and cannon fodder breeding, whether conscious or covert (be denying an honest conversation about the issues relating thereto, or contraceptive measures for poor women, or how sexual slavery is one of the largest business empires on the planet, etc) means that in my view there are millions of babies in wombs, of mothers who really if given their own preferences would not want that baby in her womb.
So, i think it is a little hypocritical, for men who do very little to enable such poor women, to achieve a sense of procreation destiny over their lives; to pretend 'concern' about the babies being carried in these women's wombs; when they did precious little to give the woman the opportunity to make sure the sperm did not force itself into her womb. The future for many of these unwanted babies in allegedly 'peaceful' wombs, is for the most part, in our overpopulated world colliding with scarce and finite resource (which unfortunately god is being extremely stubborn about, and refusing to simply replenish with trillions of barrels of more oil, etc!), is one of sexual slavery, or that of a refugee, or similar.
Anyway, that is my view as a 42 year old woman, who has never been pregnant, nor had an abortion; nor advocated for population, or economic growth, or materialist consumerism.
Here is a recent letter on the issue, I wrote to the Jesuit Refugee Service - Europe, if you are interested, on the issue of President Obama's 25.5 million Nuclear Refugees Nobel Peace Prize (PDF).
Regards
Posted by: Francis Marion Braidfute | Saturday, October 24, 2009 at 02:06 AM