Griffin Internet logo

by Thomas A. Droleskey

January 16, 2002

The twenty-ninth annual March for Life will take place in 
Washington, D.C., on January 22, 2002. Between 100,000 and 200,000 
pro-life Americans will gather to participate in what has become 
one of this country's saddest annual pilgrimages, which starts 
from the Ellipse and makes its way up to Capitol Hill. Thousands 
will have come the night before for a Mass held on the vigil of 
the March at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate 
Conception. Many of those thousands will spend at least part of 
the eight or nine hours after the conclusion of the Mass in solemn 
prayer before the exposed Blessed Sacrament in the Crypt Church of 
the Basilica. This army of prayer will be joined by thousands more 
by the break of the first rays of light on January 22 as busloads 
of marchers make their way to the nation's capital city. The fact 
that so many thousands of Americans make so many sacrifices to 
participate in the March for Life (as well as the Mass and all 
night vigil) should be a source of great encouragement at a time 
when abortion is as firmly entrenched in our national life as it 
ever has been.

Sadly, though, many of these good people (some of whom make the 
trip to Washington on buses from the Midwest and Southeast) are so 
desperate for any kind of good news that they will cheer wildly 
when President George Walker Bush gives them his annual pro-life 
crumb to keep them on his administration's reservation, which is 
composed of so many out-and-out pro-aborts. Last year, for 
example, the newly sworn-in President authorized Rep. Christopher 
Smith (R-N.J.) to read a letter stating that it was his goal to 
"welcome every child in life and to protect every child in law," a 
remarkably meaningless statement in light of the simple fact that 
George W. Bush does not believe that every child should be 
protected by law. He believes that certain babies may be executed 
under cover of law in the cases of rape, incest, or alleged 
threats to the life of a mother. However, the crowd assembled on 
the Ellipse cheered wildly as Smith read those meaningless words.

The crowd cheered also when Smith said that the president would 
restore the Ronald Reagan-era "Mexico City" policy of banning U.S. 
tax dollars for the funding of "family planning" programs and 
agencies that perform abortions or counsel women where to kill 
their babies. As Howard Phillips demonstrated a few months later, 
the actual Bush policy is so porous as to be void of any real 
meaning. In point of fact, you see, employees of such "family 
planning" agencies are free to counsel women on "their own time" 
(during a lunch break, after hours) without jeopardizing their 
agency's funding. And what is left entirely unexamined by the 
average pro-lifer, so desperate to find political heroes, is the 
nasty little fact that this government continues to fund chemical 
abortions by means of those international family-planning programs 
and by means of Title X funding in our own country. Little 
embryonic human beings are put to death by means of chemical 
abortifacients just as surely as they are put to death by the 
suction machine or saline solution or by the use of scalpels or 
scissors. George W. Bush is not pro-life. His administration is 
not a champion of the babies whatsoever.

Nevertheless, George W. Bush is as clever as his predecessor, 
former President William Jefferson Blyth Clinton. He knows that he 
can provide meaningless tokens to various segments of his 
political base while doing nothing of any real substance to 
threaten his attempt to broaden his electoral appeal beyond that 
base. This January 22, for example, the president will announce 
that he has been convinced that the United Nations Population Fund 
(UNFPA) is no longer eligible to receive the $34 million allotted 
to it in the Foreign Aid Bill he signed into law on January 11, 
2002. Citing the evidence provided by pro-life organizations -- 
and thousands of phone calls made to the White House by committed 
pro-lifers to convince him to use his discretionary power to issue 
an Executive Order to deny funds to agencies that engage in or 
support coercive "family planning" activities, the president will 
indeed use his discretionary power to deny UNFPA the monies 
allotted to it in the Foreign Aid Bill. The thousands gathered on 
the Ellipse will cheer wildly as some surrogate, probably Rep. 
Christopher Smith, announces the president's decision.

While the decision will be a good thing as far as it goes, it is 
nothing other than a carefully planned exercise in political 
tokenism, especially in light of the fact that this country 
continues to fund those chemical abortions with complete and total 
impunity in this "pro-life" administration. Contraception is 
simply not an issue that most "establishment" pro-life officials 
and self-anointed leaders want to deal with. Indeed, the National 
Right to Life Committee, which is actually a pro-abortion 
organization in that it supports the execution of the innocent 
unborn in cases where it is alleged that a mother's life is at 
risk, takes no position on contraception whatsoever, even though 
Pope John Paul II pleaded personally with Dr. John Wilkie, the 
long-time head of the National Right to Life Committee, to oppose 
this grave moral evil (which is responsible for undermining the 
integrity of the family, helping to feminize poverty, and 
promoting promiscuity among the young, and whose cultural 
acceptance led inevitably to the acceptance of surgical abortion).

While I agree that it is very important for pro-lifers to call the 
White House, as many solid pro-life organizations urged us to do 
in the last few days, anyone with a modicum of common sense knows 
that a truly pro-life president would not need to be "pressured" 
in order to make the right decision. He would simply do the right 
thing without any phone calls having to be made at all. Among 
other things, this is an attempt prior to the March for Life to 
show pro-lifers how much "clout" they have with their "friend" in 
the White House. Again, the decision to defund UNFPA will be a 
good thing if it happens. However, this nation is still funding 
chemical abortions here and around the world in "voluntary" 
family-planning programs. And a truly pro-life President would 
issue an Executive Order barring any American individual or 
company from contributing to UNFPA or UNICEF or Planned Parenthood 
(and its allied agencies). If presidents can issue Executive 
Orders to prevent Americans from contributing to organizations 
with suspected ties to terrorist organizations, they can issue 
Executive Orders to ban contributions to organizations that make 
war upon the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity of marital 
relations and upon the innocent unborn, both chemically and 

No, the thousands gathered on the Ellipse on January 22 will 
convince themselves that they have a true pro-life champion in the 
White House. Most of them will either ignore the president's 
support for some abortions or seek to justify his intellectual 
shallowness and philosophical inconsistency. Most of them will not 
say a word of criticism about his horrendous decision to permit 
limited federal funding on the stem-cell lines derived from 
embryonic human beings who were killed prior to 9:00 p.m. on 
August 9, 2001, specifically for the cultivation of their stem 
cells, a decision that was based on the president's blithe 
acceptance of the evil of in vitro fertilization as a necessary 
means to help infertile couples who desire to have children of 
their own. They will try not to think too hard about the fact that 
the "pro-life" administration contains numerous pro-aborts within 
its ranks and that the president himself has lent his political 
support to pro-aborts, including the pro-abortion Republican 
candidate Michael Bloomberg to succeed the pro-abortion Republican 
Catholic mayor of the City of New York last year, Rudolph William 

Oh, no, most of the thousands gathered on the Ellipse and who will 
participate in the March for Life will not want to think too 
deeply (or at all) about the fact that the emerging Republican 
strategy for dealing with the life issue is to simply say 
gratuitously that one is pro-life while at the same time saying 
that Roe v. Wade is settled law and that there is nothing we can 
do to unsettle it. And many of these good people, most of whom are 
indeed on the front lines of the abortion battle by praying our 
Lady's Most Holy Rosary regularly in front of the killing centers, 
will say nothing about the fact that the one thing Bush said he 
was going to do -- sign a bill that conditionally restricted the 
killing of babies by means of partial birth abortions -- is 
nowhere on the political horizon. The "thousands of babies" we 
were told by Bush apologists who were going to be "saved" by a 
Bush administration remain on the chopping block each and every 
single day.

The tokenism of the likes of President George W. Bush takes 
advantage of the political blindness caused by abortion's 
institutionalization in every fabric of our national life. This 
political blindness is one of the many consequences of the heresy 
of Americanism, the belief that the specific cultural milieu of 
the United States necessitated a response from Catholics that 
accepted religious indifferentism and naturalism as the 
foundations of public policy while eschewing any effort to 
subordinate our national life to the Social Kingship of Jesus 
Christ as exercised by his true Church. This heresy was condemned 
in no uncertain terms by the great Pope Leo XIII on, of all dates, 
January 22, 1899, just seventy-four years before Roe v. Wade. The 
more Catholics convince themselves that it is somehow an exercise 
in preconciliar triumphalism to proclaim the truths of the true 
Faith as the only basis for personal sanctity and hence all social 
order, the more they will permit themselves to look the other way 
as those who support one abject evil after another rise to the 
forefront in America politics.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom among pro-lifers, things are 
not better now than they would have been in the horror of an Al 
Gore administration. Things are actually worse. Why? Precisely 
because good people are blinding themselves to programs and 
policies they would never be silent about in a Gore 
administration. The current administration is getting a free pass 
from good people who do not realize that most of what a Gore 
administration would have done is actually being done by the Bush 

This is what has happened with former New York City Mayor Rudolph 
Giuliani. Even though he did, as I have pointed out in recent 
commentaries, spend himself tirelessly to demonstrate his support 
for the survivors of those killed in the September 11 terrorist 
attacks on the twin towers of the World Trade Center, Giuliani 
himself supports state-sponsored terrorism upon the innocent 
unborn in our own country, making us more and more vulnerable to 
attacks from foreigners who have no more regard for own lives than 
we have for our own innocent unborn. How scandalous, therefore, it 
was for Edward Cardinal Egan, the Archbishop of New York, to tell 
Giuliani at the Christmas Midnight Mass that TIME Magazine, which 
had named Giuliani "Person of the Year" for the year 2001, "got it 
right." No man who supports the destruction of the innocent unborn 
is anyone but Satan's man of the year. For a man who supports the 
slaughter of the innocent unborn under cover of law has no 
credibility when he talks about the value of the innocent lives 
killed in terrorist attacks. None whatsoever. Cardinal Egan thus 
continues to feed into the notion that it is simply a matter of 
acceptable political expediency for Catholics in public life to 
support abortion in order to enable them to do the sort of work 
they would not be able to do if they did not hold the offices to 
which they have been elected. This is irresponsible and leads the 
average Catholic into thinking that support for the destruction of 
the innocent unborn does not disqualify one from holding any 
office of public trust, whether elected or appointed.

Giuliani's star power is such, however, that it blinded many 
Catholic New Yorkers into voting for Michael Bloomberg to succeed 
him as mayor in the November 6, 2001, elections. Bloomberg had 
pronounced himself to be as thoroughly pro-abortion as Giuliani. 
Alas, Giuliani's hold on the electorate was such that many 
Catholics of Irish and Italian and Polish descent, grateful to the 
mayor for the support he showed to the families of the 
firefighters and police officers and rescue workers killed in the 
terrorist attacks, just followed his lead without giving the 
matter of abortion any thought whatsoever. After all, these voters 
had supported Giuliani himself in 1989 (when he lost narrowly to 
City Clerk David N. Dinkins) and 1993 and 1997 despite his 
unapologetic pro-abortion stance. Why should they abandon their 
political hero and cast a vote on the Right to Life Party line for 
mayor of New York when could show their solidarity with and 
gratitude to Giuliani by voting for the man he endorsed, Michael 
Bloomberg? What difference did it make that Bloomberg is alleged 
to have said, "Kill it! Kill it!," to a pregnant employee of his 
Bloomberg media and financial empire whose services he did not 
want to lose to maternity leave? No, Bloomy was Rudy's boy. That 
was good enough for most of the ethnic Catholics who remain as 
residents of the five boroughs of the City of New York.

Well, the new mayor is proving his pro-abortion bona fides very 
early on in his new administration. He is advancing a plan to 
require all residents (recent graduates of medical colleges) 
serving in the city's 11 publicly run hospitals who specialize in 
obstetrics and gynecology to receive training in how to kill 
babies as a mandatory part of their residency program. Oh, he 
would provide a "conscience clause" for those who would want to 
opt out of such a program. However, it should come as no surprise 
that a man who supports abortion so militantly as Bloomberg would 
seek to curry favor with his political base by proposing a program 
that was actually drafted by the National Abortion and 
Reproductive Rights Action League (NARRAL) itself.

Even the New York State Right to Life Committee, an affiliate of 
the National Right to Life Committee, found this too much to 
ignore. Although the New York State Right to Life Committee has 
given the pro-abortion Republican Catholic governor of New York, 
George Pataki, a free pass by refusing to endorse Right to Life 
Party gubernatorial candidates Robert Walsh in 1994 and Michael 
Reynolds in 1998, it is pretty hard for its leaders to ignore 
Bloomberg's blatant effort to continue the process of politicizing 
the training of doctors for purposes of making them killers of 
innocent human lives. However, it is doubtful that even 
Bloomberg's outrageous decision is enough for the New York State 
Right to Life Committee to abandon its reflexive support of pro-
abortion Republicans while actually opposing candidates of 
conscience who run on the New York State Right to Life Party line. 
Indeed, if Bloomberg had taken the lead of the pro-abortion Rick 
Lazio and said he was opposed conditionally to partial-birth 
abortions, that would have been good enough for the New York State 
Right to Life Committee to endorse his candidacy. For, sadly, all 
it takes for a candidate to receive the endorsement of the 
National Right to Life Committee's political action committee (or 
the endorsement of its state affiliates' political action 
committees) is to proclaim himself conditionally opposed only to a 
certain form of child killing in the later stages of pregnancy. 
That is all it takes to be considered "pro-life" by the National 
Right to Life Committee and its state affiliates. Thus, the 
dumbing down of what it means to be pro-life makes it easier for 
out-and-out pro-aborts to trade upon the reputation of other pro-
aborts whose support for abortion is ignored by prelates (such as 
Cardinal Egan) or rationalized by "pragmatic" organizations (such 
as the National Right to Life Committee).

Some pro-lifers, who must be living in a fantasy world worthy of 
Al Gore, said that Bloomberg had "shown his true colors." What are 
these people using for brains? Bloomberg said he was pro-abortion. 
Isn't that enough? Have we reached such a nadir in our cultural 
life that we refuse to be outraged when an aspirant for elected 
office says matter-of-factly that he supports child-killing under 
cover of law? Does such an aspirant, once elected, have to do 
something to stir our outrage? When are we going to accept the 
simple fact that anyone who supports even a single abortion under 
cover of law is not pro-life, and those who support Roe v. Wade 
unconditionally are the sworn enemies of objective justice founded 
in the Splendor of Truth Incarnate?

Bloomberg said quite unapologetically during the course of the 
campaign that he was a "straight male" who liked to womanize. As a 
man who is an unrepentant violator of the Sixth and Ninth 
Commandments, Bloomberg has a vested interest in promoting 
abortion. His own personal pleasure depends upon it. However, once 
one accepts the public scandal of the married Catholic mayor of 
New York consorting with a mistress in public, what's the big deal 
about accepting an admitted Jewish playboy who believes that a 
violation of personal purity is not a matter for the confessional 
and thus a call to amend one's life by attempting to live 
according to the precepts of the Divine positive law and the 
natural law? The unwillingness of Catholics to think and to act as 
Catholics is astounding.

As if the proceeding was not enough, State of New York Attorney 
General Elliot Spitzer, attempting to re-do the work of one of his 
nefarious predecessors, Robert Abrams, is busily issuing subpoenas 
to those who run and staff Crisis Pregnancy Centers. This is 
really not new. Abrams, who was New York State Attorney General 
between 1975 and 1992, waged war on Crisis Pregnancy Centers in 
1987 and 1988 after many of them first started operations. Spitzer 
is attempting to prove himself to be as militantly pro-abortion as 
Abrams, who came very close to defeating Sen. Alfonse M. D'Amato 
for reelection in 1992. Spitzer is positioning himself to run for 
higher office, perhaps governor of the State of New York in 2006, 
especially if the Democratic nominee for that office this year 
loses to the expected Republican nominee, incumbent Gov. George 
Pataki. However, it should be pointed out that Spitzer got elected 
in 1998 because his predecessor, Attorney General Dennis Vacco, 
refused the Right to Life Party line and refused to take a clear 
position against abortion. Vacco took the advice of D'Amato, who 
counseled any number of aspiring Republicans in New York to avoid 
the issue of abortion or to say that they were "pro-choice," and 
ran away from the most important moral issue of the day. Spitzer 
would be in private law practice today if Vacco had had the 
courage to take a clear stand against baby killing.

Again, the political blindness of those who fear the evil more 
than they love the good, more than they believe in the power of 
God's grace to effect the conversion of hearts and minds and 
souls, is resulting in another needless attack upon the brave and 
selfless volunteers who seek to direct women into giving birth 
rather than dealing death to the fruit of their own wombs. How 
very tragic that the state in which most of the deaths caused as a 
result of the September 11 terrorist attacks is busily attacking 
innocent lives (and those who defend them) quite terroristically. 
None of the proper lessons from September 11 have been learned. 
None at all. And no amount of bombs dropped in Afghanistan is 
going to make us more secure as a nation as long as we continue to 
protect and further institutionalize legalized baby killing in our 
own midst.

Tokenism and blindness know only one antidote: a defense of the 
primacy of the Divine positive law and the natural law as those 
laws are protected and explicated by the Church the God-Man 
founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. It will not be until 
Catholics take the truths of their Faith seriously and actually 
believe that it is possible to Catholicize this land and to 
establish the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ and the Queenship of 
our dear Blessed Mother that will stand a chance, humanly 
speaking, of replacing this culture of death and cynicism with a 
culture of eternal life.

Our Lady of Life, pray for us to see clearly through the eyes of 
the true Faith and to act courageously in defense of the standard 
of your Divine Son's Holy Cross as the only foundation of personal 
sanctity and hence all social order.

         Copyright 2002 Griffin Internet Syndicate

Dr. Thomas Droleskey, speaker and lecturer, is a 
professor of political science, the author of CHRIST IN 
CONDITION (, and editor of 
the CHRIST OR CHAOS newsletter.

This column is distributed and archived by Griffin 
Internet Syndicate, All rights 

You may forward this column if you use this disclaimer:

Subscribe to Dr. Droleskey's column. 
See "Subscribe" at 
or call 800-513-5053.