You are on page 1of 24



Pro-life Santorum lights the Conservative fire


2 PageMarch2012


Rick Santorum hones image along GOP campaign trail



In the opening weeks of the Republican presidential race, Rick Santorum came across as a prickly, exasperated figure on the fringe of the debate stage, spending much of his airtime complaining about the lack of attention from the moderators. But Santorum gradually has taken on a different image, one of a confident, good-natured and almost fatherly presence on the campaign trail who has shrewdly taken advantage of the shifting political landscape.
Obamas Truth Team aims to network its way to a reelection winBishops oppose birth-control compromiseCandidates make their appeals at CPACPresident Obama looks to tame U.S. debtRick Santorum touts conservative pedigreeObama campaign cranks up spendingRomney: I was 'severely conservative' governorSantorums takes on womens rolesObama revises birth-control coverage ruleMan pleads guilty in plot to kill ObamaJustices getting served on late-night television .While his rivals attacked one another in the media glare, Santorums campaign has followed a carefully calibrated strategy to leverage his status below the radar. Hearing from voters that Santorums electability was an issue, his advisers honed his message and focused his attention on a handful of states where he could win. When the controversy about contraception coverage and the Catholic Church emerged last week, Santorum leapt at the chance to address social issues, which are his strength. And after nine months on the campaign trail, he has sharpened his stump speech, speaking with more confidence and authority and centering on a theme unique to his candidacy: It is impossible to tackle the economy without addressing the social problems that contribute to it.

That more sure-footed demeanor was on display as a beaming Santorum spoke Friday to a packed house at the Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington, flanked by his wife and six of his seven children. This is not the von Trapp family and were not going to sing, he joked before drilling in the message that he has sought to make stick that the country wants and needs an unabashed conservative such as him at the helm. The lesson weve learned is that we will no longer abandon and apologize for the principles that made this country great, for a hollow victory in November. Santorum has become a better candidate, supporters say, at the same time as the campaign atmospherics have changed in a way that helps his candidacy. When I look at the three candidates on the stage now, if there was an award for the most improved, it would be Rick Santorum, said J. Gresham Barrett, a former congressman and chairman of Santorums South Carolina campaign. Early on, Santorum and his advisers noticed that voters at town hall meetings were raising questions about his electability a widespread and persistent concern, considering that only 2 percent of Republican voters labeled him the best candidate to take on President Obama in a recent Washington Post-ABC poll. Santorum, known for his back-and-forth engagement with his audience, grilled the voters about what they meant. The conversations, advisers said, helped sharpen Santorums stump speeches. He now invariably mentions that he is the only candidate to have won an election in a swing state, and that, as the grandson of a coal-miner, he is uniquely suited to win over conservative blue-collar Democrats. In his victory speech after sweeping three state contests last week, he noted: Governor Romneys greatest attribute is, Well, I have the most money and the best organization. Well, hes not going to have the most money and the best organization in the fall, is he?

Itsprettybasic:RickSantorum iscomingforyourcontracep tion.Anyandallofit.Andwhile hemaynotbealoneinhisop positiontononprocreativesex, heiscertainlythemosthonest aboutitashehimselfac knowledgedintheinterview. ManyoftheChristianfaith havesaid,well,thatsokay, contraceptionisokay.Itsnot okay.Itsalicensetodothings inasexualrealmthatiscounter tohowthingsaresupposedto be.(Irin Carmon is a staff writer

for skeptical Salon.)

The former Pennsylvania senator also benefited from the shifting dynamics of the race. He may have always emphasized his blue-collar roots, but this suddenly seemed more relevant as Romney has struggled recently to defend his wealth and demonstrate empathy with the poor. Santorum, by contrast, has made helping the impoverished a key part of his campaign and doubled down on that emphasis as Romney flailed. Obamas Truth Team aims to network its way to a reelection winBishops oppose birth-control compromiseCandidates make their appeals at CPACPresident Obama looks to tame U.S. debtRick Santorum touts conservative pedigreeObama campaign cranks up spendingRomney: I was 'severely conservative' governorSantorums takes on womens rolesObama revises birth-control coverage ruleMan pleads guilty in plot to kill ObamaJustices getting served on late-night television .Early in the campaign, Santorum seemed out of step with the times when he launched his candidacy on a message of social conservatism, arguing that the countrys financial problems were inextricably linked to its sagging marriage rates and the number of children born out of wedlock. Then last week, the Obama administrations guidelines requiring many religious institutions to cover contraception as part of employee health insurance galvanized conservatives, who view the decision as a breach of religious liberty. The controversy handed Santorum, a conservative Catholic, a tailor-made campaign issue, even after the Obama administration revised its rules Friday. Santorums embrace of social issues has been a stealth benefit in the primary because those issues galvanize grass-roots voters, said Ralph E. Reed Jr., a longtime Republican operative and founder of the Faith and Freedom Coalition.

The upper echelon of the party, the givers and bundlers, tend to be Chamber of Commerce Republicans. But the grass roots of the party, theyre primarily driven by cultural and social issues, Reed said. The message and the raison detre of the Santorum candidacy could be summed up in one sentence: The way to have a strong economy is to have strong marriages and families. Santorum also has managed to finesse his reputation as a testy and self-righteous culture warrior, cultivated over 16 years in Congress. His persona has evolved over the course of the campaign into something softer and humbler at least to conservative voters, who see in Santorum an earnest and passionate believer in their causes. At house parties and town hall meetings, Santorum has lingered long after the events to answer questions and pose for pictures. As his rivals focused their attacks on one another in Nevada, Santorum used the opportunity to condemn the infighting and campaign elsewhere. And when opponents mocked his sweater vest as a garment of a bygone era, Santorum turned it into an emblem of his campaign. Recent polls show that he has become better known and better regarded since June his favorability rating among Republican voters was a solid 52 percent in a January Washington Post-ABC News poll. He performs well among voters for whom social issues are critical and those who believe strong moral character is the most important candidate attribute. I think part of his likability, especially within the Republican right, is based on the perception that he is earnest, that he believes what he says, said Chris Borick, a political science professor at Muhlenberg College in Allentown, Pa., who has followed Santorums campaign. You wrap that all up in a sweater vest and youre the Mister Rogers of the Republican primary.

4 PageMarch2012



Santorum leading Romney with Evangelicals, Catholics


The Feb. 8-12 poll, which looked at non-Latino white Republicans and Republican-leaning registered voters, shows Santorum with the support of 41 percent of evangelical Protestants and 37 percent of Catholics, while Romney is supported by 23 percent of evangelical Protestants and 27 percent of Catholics. Among mainline Protestants, on the other hand, Romney has 30 percent support to Santorum's 24 percent support. Santorum's support among evangelicals and Catholics has risen dramatically since mid-January when only 22 percent of evangelicals and only 12 percent of Catholics said they would vote for him. Romney, meanwhile, has seen a drop in support, especially among Catholics. In November 2011, 57 percent of Catholics said Romney was "a strong conservative" and 50 percent said he "takes consistent positions on issues." In the recent poll, only 32 percent of Catholics said he was "a strong conservative" and 35 percent said he "takes consistent positions on issues," a drop of 25 and 15 percentage points, respectively. The proportion of mainline Protestants who think Romney is a strong conservative has, on the other hand, increased slightly, from 44 percent in November 2011 to 51 percent in February 2012. Santorum is Catholic and Romney belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Texas Congressman Ron Paul is the only evangelical Protestant remaining in the race, but his support among evangelicals is only six percent. Newt Gingrich was baptized in a Southern Baptist church, but is now Catholic. His support among evangelicals is about the same as Romney's, 20 percent. He

Presidential candidate Rick Santorum is besting rival Mitt Romney among evangelicals and Catholics, while Romney is preferred by mainline Protestants, according to a new Pew Research Center poll.

comes in third among Catholics at 18 percent. Gingrich, Romney and Santorum would all perform about the same in potential match-ups against President Obama. Obama would beat each of those candidates with 57, 52 and 53 percent of the vote, respectively, if the election were held at the time of the survey. All three candidates would win about 70 to 76 percent of the white evangelical vote as well. The white Catholic vote would go to Romney (52 percent) or Santorum (55 percent) if either of those candidates were the nominee. If Gingrich were the nominee, though, Obama would win the white Catholic vote (52-44 percent). The full sample had 1,501 adults. The sample of 552 non-Latino white Republicans and Republicanleaning registered voters included 184 evangelical Protestants, 110 mainline Protestants and 111 Catholics. The margin of error for the full sample is three percentage points. The margin of error for the sample of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents is five percentage points.

RickSantorumcelebratesaGOPTripleWinwithvictoriesin Missouri,MinnesotaandColoradoonFebruary7athisPri maryNightRallyinSt.Charles,Missouri.(Photo by Dave David-

son - )

SantorumSurgestoTieRomneyRacetakesanotherturnasSantorumgains14pointssincewinningFeb.7GOPcontests.Anew GalluppollshowsMittRomneyandRickSantorumarenowstatisticallytiedfortheleadinGOPrace,32%to30%,respectively.

puzzling, to general election voters. BIRTHCONTROL Santorum: Says he wouldn't try to take away the pill or condoms. But he believes states should be free to ban them if they want. He argues that the Supreme Court erred when it ruled in 1965 that Americans have a right to privacy that includes the use of contraceptives. Birth control, even within marriage, violates his beliefs as a Catholic. Last year Santorum told the Christian blog Caffeinated Thoughts that as president he would warn the nation about "the dangers of contraception" and the ByConnieCass,AssociatedPress permissive culture it encourages. "Many of Christian faith have said, 'Well, that's OK. Contraception is OK,'" WASHINGTON (AP) Most Americans don't he said. "It's not OK. It's a license to do things in the share Rick Santorum's absolutist take on abortion. He's sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed out of step on women in combat. He questions the valto be. ... If it's not for purposes of procreation, then you ues of the two-thirds of mothers who work. He's even diminish this very special bond between men and troubled by something as commonplace as birth conwomen." Santorum has campaigned on a pledge to end trol for married couples. all federal funding of birth control, which low-income Even among a Republican presidential field anxious women in some states receive through the state-federal to please religious conservatives, Santorum's ideas stand Medicaid program. out. Catholics: Despite the church's teachings, 84 perA Catholic father of seven whose kids are homecent of Catholics believe a person who uses artificial schooled, Santorum may seem to wear his conservatism birth control can still be a good Catholic, according to a as comfortably as his sweater vests. But he's walked a CBS News poll. And 89 percent of Catholic women facareful path, keeping the more provocative opinions vor expanding access to birth control for those who that helped sink his re-election to the Senate in 2006 can't afford it, the nonpartisan Public Religion Research mostly out of his presidential campaign. Institute found. That is until he leaped to the top of the polls, along All Americans: Almost everyone uses it. Threeside Mitt Romney. fourths of U.S. women have taken the pill, the CBS Now Santorum's record on social issues is getting a News poll says, and other studies show virtually all sexucloser look. On several matters, he's outside the Repubally active women have used some type of birth control. lican mainstream. And if he becomes the GOP nomiA mere 8 percent of Americans think birth control is nee, some of his ideas would likely be surprising, even


Santorum, so out-of-step with nation...

6 PageMarch2012 morally wrong, according to a Pew Research Center poll this month. Four in 10 say it's not even a moral issue these days. WORKINGWOMEN Santorum: His 2005 book, "It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good," suggests parents in two-income families aren't doing what's best for the kids. Too often, he writes, both parents work when the family could get by on one salary: "For some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home." He described it as a sad situation created by "radical feminists" who undermined the traditional family by "convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness." Santorum's unsuccessful re-election bid took a hit from a rival's TV ad featuring a working mother challenging the senator "to come to my house at the end of the month when we're doing our bills and tell me how we can live on one income." Santorum recently tried to deflect questions about the book by saying that his wife, who left her nursing career to care for their children, helped write that section because she felt her decision to become a stay-at-home mom wasn't valued

by society. He predicted a Santorum administration would have "plenty of working moms." All Americans: Two-thirds of married mothers with husbands are working or looking for jobs, according to the Labor Department. Like Santorum, most Americans don't think it's best for children when moms work full time; they're divided over whether staying at home or working part time is ideal. But more moms are working for economic reasons than personal satisfaction. Half of full-time working mothers would rather work part time, and a third would prefer to stay home, according to a 2009 Pew Research Center poll. About 1 in 10 of the moms working full-time says it's an ideal situation. WOMENINCOMBAT Santorum: Spoke out against women in combat when the Pentagon announced plans to allow them to serve closer to the front. He says he worries that fighting men will be distracted by their "natural instinct" to protect women. He also says the differences in physical abilities between men and women aren't being taken into account. Republicans: Six in 10 would allow women to serve in units that engage in close combat; about a third Today,werecognizeoneofthegreatestpresidentsin ourhistory,AbrahamLincoln.Heoncesaid:'America willneverbedestroyedfromtheoutside.Ifwefalter andloseourfreedoms,itwillbebecausewedestroyed ourselves.'Thesearepowerfulwordswhicharerele vantforustoday.Ipledgetofightforthepreservation ofourfreedomsandtorestoreourgreatcountry.Join meinthisfight!Santorum, 02/12/2012

Idontjusttalka goodconservative game.Iliveit!

Romney leads but Independents still going for Santorum...why?

In Cumming, Georgia, Rick Santorum has sharpened his rhetoric against President Obama on the campaign trail, painting a picture of a president out of touch with the American people that seems aimed at tapping into fear and anger among Republican primary voters. Throughout the weekend, he began painting an increasingly grim picture of a president whom he contended has a theology that is not based on the Bible, is imposing amoral values on the Catholic church and is requiring insurance companies to cover prenatal testing in order to weed out disabled children. Much of it is an attempt to convince voters, as he said Sunday night, that the president is one "of the few elite snobs who think they know better how to run their life." The former Pennsylvania senator senses that his audiences want passion, and he delivers it to them in spades, frequently employing war and religion as metaphors. The former Senator does not speak with a teleprompter but from his heart. He does not dodge questions. He is so spontaneous and real, and that is a refreshing note to a teflon Obama, a contrived Romney or a whining Gingrich. But best of all, he has kept his rhetorics on a high ground as he addresses the issues and not dabble on so much personalities.

are opposed, a Quinnipiac University poll last year found. All Americans: Slightly more favorable toward women in combat than Republicans. ABORTION Santorum: Favors amending the Constitution to ban abortion. He says that human life begins at conception and doctors who perform abortions should be charged as criminals. In his book, he compared women who have abortions to 19th-century slaveholders, writing that "unlike abortion today, in most states even the slaveholder did not have the unlimited right to kill his slave." In the past, Santorum supported allowing abortions in cases of rape or incest, but he now says no to those exceptions. Republicans: Although united in the belief that abortion should be illegal in most cases two-thirds say so an overwhelming majority of Republicans are willing to make some exceptions. Only a fifth say abortion should always be illegal, according to AP-GfK polling in August.

All Americans: Even less likely to say there should be no abortions at all 16 percent support a total ban. About half of Americans want abortion to be legal in most cases, and almost as many say it should be mostly illegal. GAYSINTHEMILITARY Santorum: Wants to reinstate the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that banned openly gay service members. In a GOP debate in Florida, Santorum said lifting the ban was social engineering and that "sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military." He added: "Keep it to yourself whether you're a heterosexual or a homosexual." Republicans: Santorum's party is divided on the issue. A CBS News poll gave a 48-41 edge to supporters of gays serving in the military. Republicans who felt strongly about the issue were twice as likely to support gays in the military than to oppose them, however. All Americans: An overwhelming number 68 percent favor allowing gays to serve openly, the same poll found.


Bob Scheiffer spars with Rick Santorum on Obama environmental worldview, pre-natal tests, public school orientation
If you want to listen to this 13-minute interview instead, click to santorum_obamas_worldview_upside-down.html
What-- what in the world were you talking about, Sir? RICK SANTORUM: Well, I was talking about the-- the radical environmentalists. That's why I was talking about energy, this-- this idea that-- that man is-- is not-- is here to serve the Earth as opposed to husband its resources and be good stewards of the Earth. And I think that is a- a-- is a phony ideal. I don't believe that that's what-that's what we're here to do. That-- we-- that-- that man is here to-- to use the resources and use them wisely, to care for the Earth, to be a steward of the Earth. But we're not here to serve the Earth. The Earth is not the objective. Man is the objective. And-- and I think a lot of radical-- a-- a-- a lot of radical environmentalists have it upside down. BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, how does that translate into some sort of theology that the President's theology-RICK SANTORUM (Republican Presidential Candidate/Former Pennsylvania Senator): It's not about you. RICK SANTORUM (voice overlapping): Well, it's-- it's It's not about you. It's not about your quality of life. It's a world view. not about your jobs. BOB SCHIEFFER: --is not based on the Bible. I mean that suggests that he's not a Christian. MAN: Right. RICK SANTORUM: No, I wasn't suggesting that PresiRICK SANTORUM: It's about some phony ideal, some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the dent's not a Christian. I accept the fact that the President is a Christian. I-- I just said that when you have a-- a-- a Bible, a different theology. world view that-- that elevates the Earth above man and (Crowd applauding) -- and-- and says that, you know, we can't take those reBOB SCHIEFFER: So, Senator, I've got to ask you. sources because we're going to harm the Earth by-- by

ANNOUNCER: This is FACE THE NATION. From CBS News in Washington FACE THE NATION with Bob Schieffer. BOB SCHIEFFER: And good morning. Welcome, Senator. You are the leader in the polls this morning. And I have to say you were very busy yesterday. The Associated Press led its story of your appearance in Columbus, Ohio, by saying, quote, "Rick Santorum questioned Barack Obama's Christian values." That was after you lashed out at the President's proposal on energy of all things when you said this.


March2012Page9 took on the Pres-- President on prenatal care for expectant mothers. Here's what you said at this-- in this passage. RICK SANTORUM: One of the things that you don't know about Obamacare and one of the mandates is they require free prenatal testing in every insurance policy in America. Why? Because it saves money in health care. Why? Because free prenatal testing ends up in more abortions and therefore less care that has to be done because we cull the ranks of the disabled in our society. BOB SCHIEFFER: Senator, I-- I have to ask you to-- to give some explanation of that. You sound like you're saying that the purpose of prenatal care is to cause people to-- to have abortions, to get more abortions in this country. I think there are any number testing, I think any number of people would-- would say that's not the purpose at all. RICK SANTORUM: Well, Bob, that's simply not true. The-- the bottom line is that a lot of prenatal tests are done to identify deformities in-- in utero and the customary procedure is to encourage abortions and in fact, prenatal testing that-- that particularly amniocentesis. I'm not talking about general prenatal care. You said prenatal care. I-- I didn't say prenatal care shouldn't be covered. We're talking about specifically prenatal testing and specifically amniocentesis, which is a -- which is a procedure that actually creates a risk of having a miscarriage when you have it and is done for the purposes of identifying maladies of a child in the womb. In-- in which in many cases and in fact most cases a physicians recommend, particularly if there's a problem, recommend abortion. We know, Bob, that ninety percent of Down syndrome children in America are aborted. So to suggest where does that come from? I have a child who has trisomy 18. Almost a hundred percent of trisomy 18 children are encouraged to be aborted. So, I know what I'm talking about here. BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, I-- I know you know what you're talking about. I know that well. I know you also had another child that was stillborn. But-RICK SANTORUM (overlapping): And I was-BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): Didn't you want to know about that, just a minute. (Cross talking) BOB SCHIEFFER: Just hold on.

things that are-- that-- that frankly are just not scientifically proven, for example, that politicization of the whole global warming debate, I mean, this is just all-all-- all an attempt to, you know, to centralize power and to give more power to the government. And-- and it's not questioning the President's beliefs in-- in Christianity. I'm talking about, you know, his-- the-- the belief that-- that man is-- should be in charge of the earth and should have-BOB SCHIEFFER (voice overlapping): No, but once-RICK SANTORUM: --dominion over it and should be good stewards of it. BOB SCHIEFFER: I-- I don't want to just spend the whole program on this, but was your-RICK SANTORUM (voice overlapping): Good. BOB SCHIEFFER: --use of the word theology, perhaps, you could have had a better word than that? I mean, don't you know that-- that-RICK SANTORUM (voice overlapping): It-BOB SCHIEFFER: --or do you wonder that-- that might lead some people to suggest that you were questioning the President's faith? RICK SANTORUM: Well-- no, because I've repeatedly said I don't question the President's faith. I've-- I've repeatedly said that I believe the President is a Christian. He says he is a Christian. But I'm talking about his world view or his-- the-- the way he approaches problems in this country and I think they're-- they're different than how most people do in America. BOB SCHIEFFER: At another stop in Columbus, you

Rickspillar ofstrength isKaren...

RICK SANTORUM: But what my-- my child was not stillborn. My child was born alive. BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. RICK SANTORUM: --and he lived two hours. BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. RICK SANTORUM: And by the way, prenatal testing was-- we had a-- we had a sonogram done there and they detected a problem. And, yes, the doctor said, you know, you-- you should consider an abortion. This is typical, Bob. This is what goes on and in-- in medical rooms around the country. And yes, prenatal testing, amniocentesis does, in fact, result more often than not in this country in abortions. That is-- that is a fact. BOB SCHIEFFER: I stand corrected on the stillborn. You're absolutely right. I simply misspoke. But, Senator, do you not want any kind of prenatal testing? I mean would we just turn our back on science that this is something that expectant mothers should not go through, that it's best not to know about these things ahead of time? I mean is that what you're saying here? RICK SANTORUM: No, I'm not saying. Look, people have the right to do it but to have the government force people to provide it free, just as to me, has a has is-- is a bit loaded. There are all sorts of prenatal testing which should be provided free. I have no problem with that if the-- if the insurance companies want to. I'm not for any of these things to be forced. Just let me-- just step back and say I don't believe any of these procedures, anything in insurance should be forced. So let me-- let me just start from there. BOB SCHIEFFER: Okay. RICK SANTORUM: But the idea of having, for example, sonograms and other types of prenatal care, absolutely, if-- if I think that is-- that is a wise thing to do. And If I was an employer, I would certainly encourage that. But not all prenatal testing, amniocenteses basically are used for the purposes of identifying children who are disabled and in most cases end up as a result with abortions. It's the bottom line. BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): You're not saying. Let me just ask you, you're not saying that the cause of this, that the President looks down on disabled people, are you? You're not accusing him of that? RICK SANTORUM: Well, the President supported partial birth abortion and partial birth abortion is a procedure used almost exclusively to-- to kill children late in pregnancy when they've been found out to be disabled. The President voted for a provision that-- that said that children born alive as a result of abortions late in preg-

nancy who were-- who were otherwise viable should be allowed to be killed by the doctor. I think the President has a very bad record on-- on-- on the issue of abortion and children who are disabled who are in the womb. And I think this simply is a continuation of that idea. BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, since you brought all this up, I just wanted to make sure that everybody had a clear understanding of exactly what you meant-RICK SANTORUM: Yeah. BOB SCHIEFFER: And-- and how you feel about this. Another thing that raised a few eyebrows yesterday, Senator, you questioned the value of all things at the public school system. Now here's what you said about that. RICK SANTORUM: But the idea that the federal government should be running schools, frankly, much less that the state government should be running schools is anachronistic. It goes back to the time of industrialization of America when people came off the farms where they did home school or have the little neighborhood school and into these big factories. So we built equal factories called public schools. BOB SCHIEFFER: So, there you are, Senator. I mean, are you saying that we shouldn't have public schools now? I mean I thought public schools were the foundation of American democracy. RICK SANTORUM: Yeah, I think, I'm saying that-that local communities and-- and parents should be the ones who are in control of public education, not the-- certainly not the federal government and to as I said before, as I said in that clip I think the state governments have not done a particularly good job in public education. I think public education should be a dynamic process that's locally run, that works with parents to provide the optimal opportunity for each child in America to get the education that they need, not what the federal government or the state government says that you should have. That's why I refer to it as, you know, going back to the industrialization of America when we had a-- we had a system in-- in this country with industrialization where, you know, you had one car produced. And, you know, you maybe got it in two colors. And-- and we haven't changed public education significantly since then. Every single car on a Detroit line is custom ordered. Why? Because it's designed to meet the needs of the customer.


March2012Page1 1 states and certainly in the federal government what President Obama is trying to do. What we need is to have the same kind of change and dynamic change in the public school system as we've seen in the economy of this country. Customized. Everybody gets what they need. I have seven children. I can tell you each one of them learn differently. All of them can excel in different settings. And that goes with every-- every American child. And we can do better than a system that one in three children drop out of school. If that is the hallmark, Bob, that you talk about as a-- as a great society, when one of three children drop out of school and a lot of the folks who don't drop out of school still can't read at grade level, that to me is a failure and defending that failure is not something I'm planning on doing which is what the President does. BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, what-- what do you do to-what would you do to fix it, Senator? RICK SANTORUM: Well, as I said before, first I'd get the federal government out. I would, to the extent possible with res-- with respect to mandates and-- and designing curriculum and the like, I would get the state government out. I think that-- that the parents should be in charge working with the local school district to try to design an educational environment for each child that optimizes their potential. And whether it's in a public school or a private school or a Christian school or whatever kind of-- and whatever kind of setting that is best that the people at the local level can determine, I think that's where we need to go in education. It's got to be a much more dynamic process. We are failing American children. We're failing our society with having these high rates of dropouts and the people graduating without the skills or frankly without the value structure that's necessary to be able to go out and work hard and to be able to-- to produce in our society and to build strong communities. And I think we need some really dramatic changes. And we're not getting that. BOB SCHIEFFER: Senator, I want to thank you very much for being with us this morning. I had hoped to ask you about some questions about the economy. But, frankly, you made so much news yesterday, out there on the campaign trail, I felt compelled to ask you about that. RICK SANTORUM: Well, I'm-- I'm happy to make news about-- about important issues of the day that obviously don't get talked about a lot. BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, thank you so much. We'll be back in just a minute with our political round table.

The education system, federally run, state run, is not designed to meet the-- meet the needs of the customer. It's designed for the purposes of the school not the children and the parents who are the customers of that system. And I think we need a dramatic change in that system. BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, you know, Senator, if everybody could afford to home school their children that would be one thing but-RICK SANTORUM: I'm not talking about home schooling. I'm talking about public education, Bob. BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, you know, there are little communities where the people couldn't afford to have a public school. And that's why you have states involved in the schools. And there-- there-RICK SANTORUM: Well, there's one thing the state-there's one thing for states to-- to help fund public education. It's another thing to dictate and micromanage and-- and create a "one size fits all education" system in


Testifying before Congress

For my testimony today, I would like to tell a story. Lets call it The Parable of the Kosher Deli. Once upon a time, a new law is proposed, so that any business that serves food must serve pork. There is a narrow exception for kosher catering halls attached to synagogues, since they serve mostly members of that synagogue, but kosher delicatessens are still subject to the mandate. The Orthodox Jewish community whose members run kosher delis and many other restaurants and grocers besides expresses its outrage at the new government mandate. And they are joined by others who have no problem eating pork not just the many Jews who eat pork, but people of all faiths because these others recognize the threat to the principle of religious liberty. They recognize as well the practical impact of the damage to that principle. They know that, if the mandate stands, they might be the next ones forced under threat of severe government sanction to violate their most deeply held beliefs, especially their unpopular beliefs. Meanwhile, those who support the mandate respond, But pork is good for you. It is, after all, the other white meat. Other supporters add, So many Jews eat pork, and those who dont should just get with the times. Still others say, Those Orthodox are just trying to impose their beliefs on everyone else. But in our hypothetical, those arguments fail in the public debate, because people widely recognize the following: First, although people may reasonably debate whether pork is good for you, thats not the question posed by the nationwide pork mandate. Instead, the mandate generates the question whether people who believe even if they believe in error that pork is not good for you should be forced by government to serve pork within their very own institutions. In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is: No. Second, the fact that some (or even most) Jews eat pork is simply irrelevant. The fact remains that some Jews do not and they do not out of their most deeply held religious convictions. Does the fact that large majorities in society even large majorities within the protesting religious community reject a particular religious belief make it permissible for the government to weigh in on one side of that dispute? Does it allow government to punish that minority belief with its coercive power? In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is: No. Third, the charge that the Orthodox Jews are imposing their beliefs on others has it exactly backwards. Again, the question generated by a government mandate is whether the government will impose its belief that eating pork is good on objecting Orthodox Jews. Meanwhile, there is no imposition at all on the freedom of those who want to eat pork. That is, they are subject to no government interference at all in their choice to eat pork, and pork is ubiquitous and cheap, available at

the overwhelming majority of restaurants and grocers. Indeed, some pork producers and retailers, and even the government itself, are so eager to promote the eating of pork that they sometimes give pork away for free. In this context, the question is this: Can a customer come to a kosher deli, demand to be served a ham sandwich, and if refused, bring down severe govern-

March2012Page1 3

ment sanction on the deli? In a nation committed to religious liberty and diversity, the answer, of course, is: No. So, in our hypothetical story, because the hypothetical nation is indeed committed to religious liberty and diversity, these arguments carry the day. In response, those proposing the new law claim to hear and understand the concerns of kosher deli owners and offer them a new accommodation. :Separa LinesCrossed You are free to call your. urchandState self a kosher deli; you tionofCh ministra are free not to place ham Ad HastheObama Freedom sandwiches on your nTrampledon menu; you are free not tio ndFreedomof to be the person to preofReligiona pare the sandwich and nscience? Co hand it over the illiamLoriof counter to the cusBishopW n tomer. mento feredthisstate But we will force your onference

behalfofthec o before stFebruary16, la eon ouseCommitte theH overn versightandG O . ring. tReformshea me n Loriof BishopWilliam sthe geport,Conn.,i Brid eAdHoc chairmanofth ious mitteeforRelig Com fer oftheU.S.Con Liberty . ishops. ceofCatholicB en

meat supplier to set up a kiosk on your premises and to offer, prepare and serve ham sandwiches to all of your customers free of charge to them. And when you get your monthly bill from your meat supplier, it will include the cost of any of the free ham sandwiches that your customers may accept. And you will, of course, be required to pay that bill. Some who supported the deli owners initially began to celebrate the fact that ham sandwiches didnt need to be on the menu and didnt need to be prepared or served by the deli itself. But on closer examination, they noticed three troubling things: First, all kosher delis will still be forced to pay for the ham sandwiches. Second, many of the kosher delis

1 4 PageMarch2012


Father,wearereadyforthat homilyoncontraceptionnow
NationalCatholicRegister February22,2012

A couple of weeks ago, our priest gave a homily about contraception. While speaking about the Health and Human Services mandate, our associate pastor, Fr. Jonathan Raia, made a few allusions to the fact that the Church believes that contraception is bad. There were over a thousand people packed into the building, and a slight but noticeable tension developed as he inched closer and closer to the subject. This most controversial of Catholic teachings had been splashed all over the news in recent days, ridiculed

and denounced throughout popular culture, and the question hung in the air: Is he going to go there? He did. You can hear the whole homily on our parish website here. In the second half of his talk, he gently but unflinchingly explained that the Catholic Church teaches that contraception is wrong. He gave a bit of background about the reasoning behind this stance, cleared up some common misconceptions, and pointed people to resources where they could find out more about methods of Natural Family Planning. As he spoke, the thought came to mind:

I think were finally ready for this. In the seven years that Ive been going to Catholic churches, Id never heard a priest speak so directly about the Churchs teaching in this areaand I can understand why. For decades our culture has perceived contraception as being akin to air or water: a universally good resource with no downside. Only an institution with the most nefarious motives would oppose everyone incorporating this invaluable blessing into their lives, the thinking went. And so Im guessing that many of our priests felt like the misunderstanding on this topic was so deep and so widespread that

THEPARABLEOFTHEKOSHERDELI... meat suppliers themselves are forbidden in conscience from offering, preparing or serving pork to anyone. Third, there are many kosher delis that are their own meat supplier, so the mandate to offer, prepare and serve the ham sandwich still falls on them. This story has a happy ending: The government rec -ognized that it is absurd for someone to come into a kosher deli and demand a ham sandwich; that it is beyond absurd for that private demand to be backed with the coercive power of the state; that it is downright surreal to apply this coercive power when the customer can get the

same sandwich cheaply, or even free, just a few doors down. The question before the United States government right now is whether the story of our own church institutions that serve the public, and that are threatened by the HHS mandate, will end happily too. Will our nation continue to be one committed to religious liberty and diversity? We urge, in the strongest possible terms, that the answer must be: Yes. We urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to answer the same way. Thank you for your attention. #

has its challenges, the grass is just as complicated on the other side. After forty years of collective experience, it is dawning on people that contraception does not give women freedom over their bodies. Rather, it takes it away, as we see when we consider the data that over half of women who seek abortions were using contraception at the time they conceived. And while it may or may not be true that 98 percent of people sitting in the pews at Mass use contraception, Im willing to bet that 98 percent of them also know someone who has ended up in an abortion clinic because of failed contraception. The society-wide experiment of artificially severing the sexual act from its lifegiving potential has been going on for four decades now, and people have had time to see that its not the cure-all solution they were told it would be. The tension is building as more and more men and women are disappointed by the solution of contraception, and the time is ripe for the message that theres another way. Im not naive enough to think that one homily would be enough to inspire everyone in the pews to throw out their birth control pills the moment they Fr.JonathanRaiaisassociate get home; but I do think it pastoratSt.WilliamCatholic could get them to consider it. As we sat listening to Fr. ChurchatRoundRock,TX. theyd need hours of speaking time to even begin to address it properly, and thus avoided it in homilies. (Ive seen quite a few parishes, for example, where it may not be preached from the pulpit, but parishioners are encouraged to get involved in marriage and family ministries, where the issue is discussed in a more interactive, personal setting.) But things are changing now. Just as the tide has turned on the issue of abortion, I see it turning with contraception too. Even nonCatholic publications are conceding that that the Church may not be totally crazy when it says that artificial birth control is neither good for the individual nor for society. More and more couples are realizing that contraception does not make marriage easier; theyre coming to see that, while Natural Family Planning

Jonathans homily that Sunday, I think we were all surprised to hear such an open discussion of this topic. Not only did he eloquently state the Churchs teaching, but then he issued a gentle message to anyone who may not currently accept this doctrine, challenging them to reconsider their stance. In the tone of a caring father, he suggested that each of us pray for conversion within the broader issue of respect for life and human sexuality, wherever we may be in need of it. He ended by saying, This is at the heart of our Faith, because its at the heart of who we are as human beings. When he finished, the church was still. The topic had been hotly debated all over the country in recent days, even among Catholics, and there was an electric silence as we all internalized what he had said. I think many of us also wondered how our fellow parishioners would react. There had been so much media speculation about practicing Catholics opinions on this issue, how would the thousand-plus people in this church, located in a politically liberal metropolitan area within the Protestant South, receive this homily? The question was unexpectedly answered when, as Fr. Jonathan returned to his chair at the side of the altar, the pews erupted in spontaneous, thunderous applause. #

A Beautiful Story
Introduction Many today equate the word sacristan merely to refer to an altar boy, or a church volunteer help, who not necessarily a fulltimeworker. In olden times, it was way more than that. Cura parocos or parish priests initiate persons that have earned their trust by training them first in the liturgical rites of the Catholic Church, and then as they mature in service, by delegating more and more serious administrative functions. Thus a sacristan would have a solid understanding of how liturgies flow - the order of service, the preparations and the tear down. Additionally he should be skilled at cleaning and organizing, and trustworthy enough to have keys to the church and accesss to its safes and precious objects. Sacristans have responsibilities over lay church volunteers that he should have good delegation and people skills, mostly acquired through on-the-job training. Almost always, sacristans

led celibate lives as a result of the high demands of his work, making it flexible for them to be able to tag along whenever the priests place of mission is moved, especially as the priest moves up in the hierarchy that he belongs. I came to know about this by generational word-ofmouth. My great grandfather on my mothers side was himself a sacristan who served the friar of Tiaong, Tayabas. He accompanied his priest when he was moved


March2012Page1 7

Theheroism ofPedro Calungsod issotoday, inourfightfor ourreligious rightsunder oppressive Obamaand Aquino regimes

lands in 1672 for a missionary work for the Landrones Islands in 1672 with Mariana of Austria, Queen of Spain, as their benefactress. Calungsod (spelled Calonsor in Spanish records) was born ca. 1654. Historical records never mentioned his exact place of birth and merely identified him as "Bisaya." Historical research identifies Ginatilan in Cebu, Hinunangan and Hinundayan in Southern Leyte, and Molo district in Iloilo as probable places of origin. Loboc in Bohol also makes a claim. Nevertheless, we can be certain of his ecclesiastical provenance since the entire Visayas region was under the old Diocese (now Archdiocese) of the Most Holy Name (Cebu). Few details of his early life prior to missionary work and death are known. It is probable that he came to one of the boarding schools run by Jesuits and received his basic education there, mastering the Catechism and learning to communicate in Spanish. It is also safe to assume that he also honed his skills in drawing, painting, singing, acting, and carpentry as the nature of their mission demanded such skills. Calungsod would have been expected to have some aptitude in serving the Holy Mass according to the Tridentine Rite (now known as the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite Mass). Calungsod, then around 14, was among the young exemplary catechists chosen to accompany the Jesuits in their mission to the Ladrones Islands (Islas de los Ladrones or Islands of Thieves). Around 1667, these were later to Baler by his superiors, and named Marianas (Las Islas de Mariana) in honour of Queen Maria Ana of Austria who supported the mission. was only able to return to In 1668, Calungsod travelled with Spanish Jesuit misTiaong to start his own family, sionaries to the Marianas Islands, named in honour of both after the friar died. the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the Queen Regent of And this is why I somewhat Spain, Mara Ana of Austria, who funded their voyage. relate to Pedro Calungsod (c. San Vitores and Calungsod went to Guam to catechize 1654 April 2, 1672). the native Chamorros. The missionary landed on Guam in the village MissiontoGuam Pedro was a young Roman Catho- of Hagta (now Agana, Guam) and was greeted by Chief Kepuha whose family donated land to establish the first lic Filipino migrant, sacristan and missionary catechist, who accompa- Catholic mission on Guam. On February 2, 1669 Padre San nied his priest Diego Luis de San Vi- Vitores established the first Catholic Church in Hagta and dedicated it to the sweet name of Mary Dulce Nomtores as he sailed for Ladrones Is-

bre de Maria. After Kepuhas death in 1669, however, Spanish missionary and Chamorro nobility relations worsened and the Chamorro-Spanish War began in 1671 led by Chief Hurao. After several attacks on the Spanish mission, a peace was negotiated. Though San Vitores chose to emulate Saint Francis Xavier, who did not use soldiers in his missionization efforts in India, as his model priest, he recognized that a military presence would be necessary to protect the priests serving Guam. In 1672, San Vitores ordered Churches built in four villages, including Merizo. Later that year, Chamorro resistance increased, led by Makahnas and Kakahnas (indigenous priests and priestesses) from the Chamorri (high caste) who would lose their leadership position and

status under a Roman Catholic mission organization and male dominated Spanish society. Missionary life was hard. The provisions for the Mission did not arrive regularly; the jungles were too thick to cross; the cliffs were very stiff to climb, and the islands were frequently visited by devastating typhoons. Despite all these, the missionaries persevered, and the Mission was blessed with many conversions. Martyrdom and Death The missionaries fate, however, took a dangerous turn. A Chinese merchant named Choco began spreading rumors that the baptismal water used by missionaries was poisonous and was causing a slew of babies dying. As some sickly Chamorro infants who were baptised eventually died, many believed the story and held the missionaries responsible. Choco was readily supported by the macanjas (medicine men) and the urritaos (young males) who despised the missionaries. Calungsod and San Vitores came to the village of Tumon, Guam on April 2, 1672 in their search for a runaway companion named Esteban. There they learned that the wife of the village chief Mata'pang gave birth to a daughter, and according to some accounts, she consented to have child baptized. The chief, influenced by the lies of Choco, strongly refused. To give Mata'pang some time to cool down, Padre Diego and Pedro gathered the children and some adults of the village at the nearby shore and started chanting with them the truths of the Catholic Faith. They invited Matapang to join them, but the apos-


March2012Page1 9

tate shouted back that he was angry with God and was already fed up with the Christian teachings. Determined to kill the missionaries, Matapang went away and tried to enlist in his cause another villager, named Hirao, who was not a Christian. At first, Hirao refused, mindful of the kindness of the missionaries towards the natives; but when Matapang branded him a coward, he got piqued and so he consented. Meanwhile, during that brief absence of Matapang from his hut, Padre Diego and Pedro took the chance of baptizing the infant, with the consent of the Christian mother. When Matapang learned of the baptism, he became even more furious. He violently hurled spears first at Pedro. The lad skirted the darting spears with remarkable dexterity. The witnesses said that Pedro had all the chances to escape because he was very agile, but he did not want to leave Padre Diego alone. Those who knew Pedro personally believed that he would have defeated his fierce aggressors and

The positio, which relied heavily on the documentation of San Vitores's beatification, was completed in 1999. Blessed John Paul II, wanting to include young Asian laypersons in his first beatification for the Jubilee Year 2000, paid particular attention to the cause of Calungsod. In January 2000, he approved the decree super martyrio (concerning the martyrdom) of Calungsod, setting his beatification on March 5, 2000 at Saint Peter's Square in Rome. Regarding Calungsod's charitable works and virtuous deeds, Pope John Paul II declared: ...From his childhood, Pedro Calungsod declared himself unwaveringly for Christ and responded generously to his call. Young people today can draw encouragement and strength from the example of Pedro, whose love of Jesus inspired him to devote his teenage years to teaching the faith as a lay catechist. Leaving family and friends behind, Pedro willingly accepted the challenge put to him by Fr. Diego de San Vitores to join him on the Mission to the Chamorros. In a spirit of faith, marked by strong Eucharistic and Marian devotion, Pedro undertook the demanding work asked of him and bravely faced the many obstacles and difficulties he met. In the face of imminent danger, Pedro would not forsake Fr. Diego, but as a good soldier of Christ preferred to die at the missionary's side. Sainthood On 19 December 2011, the Holy See officially approved the miracle qualifying Calungsod for sainthood by the Roman Catholic Church. The recognized miracle dates from 2002, when a Leyte woman who was pronounced clinically dead by accredited physicians two hours after a heart attack was revived when a doctor prayed for Calungsod's intercession. Cardinal Angelo Amato presided over the declaration ceremony on behalf of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. He later revealed that Pope Benedict XVI approved and signed the official promulgation decrees recognising the miracles as authentic and worthy of belief. The College of Cardinals were then sent a dossier on the new saints, and they were asked to indicate their approval. On 18 February 2012, after the Consistory for the Creation of Cardinals, Cardinal Amato formally petitioned Pope Benedict XVI to announce the canonization of the new saints. The Pope set the date for 21 October 2012

would have freed both himself and Padre Diego if only he had some weapons because he was a very vbrave boy; but Padre Diego never allowed his companions to carry arms. Finally, Pedro got hit by a spear at the chest and he fell to the ground. Hirao immediately charged towards him and finished him off with a blow of a cutlass on the head. Padre Diego gave Pedro the sacramental absolution. After that, the assassins also killed Padre Diego. Matapang took the crucifix of Padre Diego and pounded it with a stone while blaspheming God. Then, both assassins denuded the bodies of Pedro and Padre Diego, dragged them to the edge of the shore, tied large stones to the feet of these, brought them on a proa to sea and threw them into the deep. Those remains of the martyrs were never to be found again. In the Roman Catholic Church, Calungsod's death and Christian martyrdom is also called In Odium Fidei or In Hatred of the Faith, signifying the religious persecution endured by the martyr in evangelizing. Beatification A year after the martyrdom of San Vitores and Calungsod, a process for beatification was initiated but only for San Vitores. Political and religious turmoil, however, delayed and eventually killed the process. In 1981, when Agaa was

preparing for its 20th anniversary as a diocese, the 1673 beatification cause of Padre Diego Lus de San Vitores was rediscovered in the old manuscripts and taken up anew until Padre Diego was finally beatified on October 6, 1985. It was his beatification that brought the memory of Pedro to our day. In 1994, then Cebu Archbishop Ricardo Cardinal Vidal asked permission from the Vatican to initiate a cause for beatification and canonization of Pedro Calungsod. In March 1997, the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints approved the Acta of the Diocesan Process for the Beatification of Pedro Calungsod. That same year, Cardinal Vidal appointed Fr. Ildebrando Jesus A. Leyson as vice-postulator for the cause and was tasked with the compilation of a Positio Super Martyrio to be scrutinized by the Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints in Rome.


March2012Page2 1

(World Mission Sunday). After Saint Lorenzo Ruiz, Calungsod will be the second Filipino declared a saint by the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic calendar of Martyrology celebrates Calungsod's feast along with Blessed Diego Luis de San Vitores every 2 April. Iconography No one really knows how Calungsod looked like. "The writer Alcina, who was a contemporary of Pedro Calungsod, described the male Visayan indios of his time as usually more corpulent, better built and somewhat taller than the Tagalogs in Luzon; that their skin was light brown in color; that their faces were usually round and of fine proportions; that their noses were flat; that their eyes and hair were black; that they especially the youthwore their hair a little bit long; and that they already started to wear camisas (shirts) and calzones (knee-breeches). Pedro Chirino, S.J., who also worked in the Visayas but in the 1590's, also described the Visayans as well-built, of pleasing countenance and lightskinned." Calungsod is often depicted as a young man wearing a camisa de chino. He holds the martyr's palm, indicating his death, or sometimes a crucifix, catechism book or rosary, representing his missionary work. In some early statues, Calungsod is sometimes shown with a spear and catana (cutlass), the instruments of his death. The first portraits of Pedro Calungsod were drawings done by the award-winning artist, sculptor, and designer Eduardo Castrillo in 1994 in connection with the Heritage of Cebu Monument in Parian. A bronze statue of Calungsod was created and now forms part of the monument. Sculptors Francisco dela Victoria and Vicente Gulane of Cebu and Justino Cagayat Jr. of Paete, Laguna, created statues of Calungsod in 1997 and 1999 respectively. In 1998, when the Archdiocese of Manila published the pamphlet Pedro Calungsod: Young Visayan "Proto-Martyr" by the Jesuit theologian Catalino Arevalo, one Ronald Tubid, then 17 years old, from Oton, Iloilo, was chosen as stand-in for Calungsod. This then became the basis for Rafael del Casal's painting in 1999, which was chosen as the official portrait for Calungsod. The original painting is now enshrined at the Archdiocesan Shrine of Blessed Pedro Calungsod in Cebu.

ture Special Fea itor rom the Ed f

is In necessari unitas, in opinabilibus libertas, in omnibus caritas.


A Timely Saint for our Times In a confused era such as that existing today where secular humanism and extreme liberal values have infested our young generations, and naked socialism have been subverting our constitutionally -guaranteed freedoms, Pedro Calungsod and his saintly courage comes as a fresh air of hope. Pedro was definitely selfless and industrious, a stark contradiction to the addiction to entitlement that we live in. There is no doubt that he was loyal to his Christian faith, he understood the importance and urgency of evangelization, and that he was not only willing to abandon his comfort zones, young as he was with a long bright future elsewhere, but mission-ready to take extraordinary risks in pursuing his share of the Great Commission. For this, he surely serves our young ministries of a champion for the glory of God. But as we find ourselves being goodtimed by oppressive governments towards the altar of abortion and onto a culture of death, Pedro Calungsod is also our icon for standing firm before. EditedfromaWikipediaoriginal.

GraveThreat FilamsseeBSAquinoaping AGAINST obnoxiousObamacare OUR

ABSCBNNewsNorthAmericaBureau, March3,2012

WASHINGTON D.C. Some Filipino-American prolife advocates warn that President Benigno Aquino III may be walking the same path that recently forced President Barack Obama to retreat from requiring church-run businesses to provide abortion and contraceptive services to their workers. Aquino supports the passage of the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill pending in the Philippine Congress. Obamas own woes, leading to a clash with the influential Catholic bishops in the United States, stems from implementation of health insurance reforms, the so-called "Obamacare." "Both renders the mandatory and free distribution of contraceptives and abortifacient pills and aggressively allows the use of taxpayers money for funding," Margi Paglinawan, a leader of the Couples for Christ Foundation for Family & Life (CFCFFL) in the Metro DC region. Obama backtracked from a Department of Health & Human Services mandate that would compel church-run schools, hospitals and charities

RELIGIOUS to pay for abortionFREEDOMS inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilization for their workers, if they wished to get them. Paglinawan said He instead lifted the manthat both Presidents Aquino date for faith-based entities but and Obama "are engaged in still ordered insurance compaverbal engineeringby execunies covering these organizative fiat Obama calls it pretions to provide the service ventive medical care, Aquino free of charge. pursues it through congres"The administrations prosional legislation as essential posal continues to involve medicines and supplies." needless government intrusion "Proponents say the RH in the internal governance of bill does not include abortion religious institutions," wrote yet it provides for postCardinal Donald Wuerl in an abortion intervention. Most opinion piece published by the abortions in the Philippines Washington Post. are passed on as DNCs "Obama," Paglinawan ech(dilation and curettage proceoed, "did not really cave in to dure for miscarriages)," she the demands of the Catholic explained. Church or faith-based groups "The Obama fiat can be objecting to the mandatory in- easily overturned if a Repubclusion of religious institutions lican president assumes the in the Obamacare coverage for White House in November. free contraception.: The proposed reproductive The problem is that its not health legislation in the Philreally free because the emippines is driving us into the ployer's religious institution same slippery slope that the still pays for his share of the US brought itself into," Pagliinsurance premium, Paglinanawan added. wan insisted. "The American experience "The accommodation that has gone almost 360 degrees. the President announced still Meanwhile, the Philippines is presents grave moral concerns being lured into a disaster," and continues to violate our she argued. constitutionally protected reli"We are grateful to Presigious freedom," Cardinal dent Obama for uniting Wuerl declared. the Catholics to not vote

for him in November," she added. But a Reuters report showed that the bishops hardline stand has shined a light on the already existing schism between what the church preaches and what it practices. While the US Conference of Catholic Bishops vowed to fight the federal mandate, other Catholic groups including the Catholic Health Association have distanced itself and accepted President Obamas compromise. "The bishops have lost their monopoly on speaking," Reuters quoted Georgetown University theologian Fr. Thomas Reese.

March2012Page2 3

she explained. "What weve observed is the

It was discovered in the heat of the religious uproar that several large Catholic institutions like Georgetown, Fordham and DePaul universities already covered contraception in employee insurance plans. "We welcome increased debates on life issues here in the US as well as in the Philippines," Paglinawan said. "It is constructive because we work closely with the Catholic Church on these issues. In Washington D.C., we are directly collaborating with Christa Lopiccolo, executive director for life issues in the Archdiocese of Washington,"

more abortion debate gets heated, the more the cause of abortion weakens," she said. In the Philippines, the RH bill has made little progress despite several determined attempts to pass it in Congress. Catholic bishops have periodically fired broadsides against Aquino for continuing to support the measure. And here in the U.S., the abortion debate does not show any signs of subsiding even after Obamas compromise offer. Groups like the CFCFFL intend to turn it into a campaign issue for the Fall elections. In 2008, Obama won 54 percent of the Catholic vote. Catholics comprise about a quarter of the U.S. population and have significant presence in prospective 2012 battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

MargiPaglinawan(centerleft)andMannyHermano(extremeright)explainstoSofronioCortel,Philippine consularandlegalofficer,thethreepagepositionpaperofCouplesforChristFoundationforFamilyand Life,20ecclesialmovementsintheArchdioceseofWashingtonand37membersoftheNationalCoalition toExpose/DefundPlannedParenthood,duringaprayervigillastJanuary23,2012infrontofthePhilippine chanceryat1600MassachussettsAveNW,asMargieHermanolookson.

Two presidents are redefining pregnancy as a disease

ObamahasclonedBS Aquinointotheevilartand scienceofverbalengineer ingbyexecutivefiatObama callsitpreventivemedical care,Aquinopursuesit throughlegislationasessen tialmedicinesandsupplies."


Will Congress vote on RH by March 23?

equally important measures, he added. Gonzales pointed out that if the House decides to end the repetitive discussions on the RH bill before its Lenten recess, it would consider amendments when session resumes on May 7. We might be able to take a second-reading vote on it before the next adjournment on June 8, he added. At least one author of the bill, Pangasinan Rep. Kimi Cojuangco, has urged House leaders to exercise their power of cloture or power to force ending of debate on those opposed to the measure so that a vote could finally be taken. The reproductive health and population management measure is one of the legislative priorities of President Aquino. Its proponents have urged Aquino to take a more active role in pushing for its approval by the House, which is dominated by administration allies. He should show the same zeal in pushing for it as in getting impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona convicted, one proponent, who did not want to be identified, said. The lawmaker said unless the President personally intervenes and calls his allies, this bill wont move.

He said that a vote to terminate plenary debates means the RH bill has a chance of eventual approval. If the other side prevails, then the bill will continue to be in limbo and we might have to devote our time on other

MANILA, Philippines The leadership of the House of Representatives is scheduling a crucial vote on the controversial reproductive health (RH) or responsible parenthood and population development bill. Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II told reporters yesterday that he has suggested to Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. that the House vote to terminate debates before Congress goes on its fiveweek Lenten break on March 23. The Speaker has already agreed to my suggestion, he said. At some point, we have to put an end to the interminable discussions. This bill cannot continue to be in a state of suspended animation. He said the debates have been going in circles, but still, there are about 20 more House members wanting to be enlightened about the measure.

Butshouldntwe insteadterminate thetoxicbill?

In2004,theformerPresi dentofthePhilippinesissued ProclamationNo.586declar ingMarch25ofeachyearas the"DayoftheUnborn"inthe country. Likeinothercountries,this dayisdevotedtothesoulsof thevastnumberofbabiesfor biddentoliveandpartakein thisworld. Itisadaywhenallpeopleof goodwillshouldrededicate themselvestoadvocatethat societiesaroundtheworldin cludeeveryunbornchild withintheirunderstandingof thehumancommunity.