Why are proponents pushing Amendment 2 so hard?

I had a motime email sent to me asking the exact question that is the title of this blog entry above. It seemed like both a prudent question and a question that maybe most people are not asking themselves. So, why are proponents pushing Amendment 2 so hard? The simple answer is money!

There are numerous financial gains that can be made by the passage of this amendment both for individuals and businesses. The major companies and research institutions are seeing dollar signs because this amendment would bring them millions upon millions of dollars in profit. Patents, new drugs and the sale of new embryonic stem-cell lines are just a few of the money trees that this amendment would bring. There is an excellent article on the Missouri Right to Life web site that points this out. 

There are also individual gains to be had. For example, persons can be given huge sums of money for selling their eggs. Proponents of this amendment say that this is absolutely untrue and that the bill specifically bans this. They point to paragraph 2, subsection 4 in the legislation that says:

No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.

These proponents, however, have written this statement so that it is completely misleading and full of double-talk. Let me explain. If you read paragraph 6, subsection 17 of the document you will see the term valuable consideration defined as:

"Valuable consideration" means financial gain or advantage, but does not include reimbursement for reasonable costs incurred in connection with the removal, processing, disposal, preservation, quality control, storage, transfer, or donation of human eggs, sperm, or blastocysts, including lost wages of the donor. Valuable consideration also does not include the consideration paid to a donor of human eggs or sperm by a fertilization clinic or sperm bank, as well as any other consideration expressly allowed by federal law.

Basically, if the research institution cannot compensate the women, they simply have a fertility clinic obtain the eggs, pay the donor (which often is a substantial sum of money) and then they "reimburse" the clinic for the costs of obtaining the eggs which, by dancing around the wording of the legislation, includes reimbursing the money put out by the clinic as payment to the donor.

It the use and "definition" of a number of words in the document that mislead and even circumvent the true purposes of what they wish to do. Money is a leading factor in this amendment, which is why these major institutes, research centers and fertility clinics are strongly supporting this legislation. Unfortunately, the dignity of life is being sold out literally by greed. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 22:53 | link | comments |
blog

More resources on embryonic stem-cell research

I want my readers to have as much ammunition as possible to challenge those who support embryonic stem-cell research. The best means of supporting the Culture of Life is to calmly, faithfully and compassionately present the true facts both on embryonic stem-cells and the dignity of life. So, here are a few resources to help you bring the Culture of Life to thosw around you.

With the upcoming election in Missouri, the proposed constitutional amendment that would allow nearly unlimited embryonic stem-cell research has taken center stage. Amendment 2, the full text of which you can read here, claims to allow embryonic stem-cell research while banning cloning. This is absolutely false. Fr. Edward Richard, the Vice-Rector of Kenrick-Glennon Seminary and an expert in Moral Theology, has a wonderful blog site that points out some of the misleading statements regarding this amendment. His blog site, Contemplating Life, is in my list of links to the left and a site I recommend you visit often. His blog has dozens of resources to help in understanding the truth of this issue.

Another excellent resource is a web site titled 2Tricky.org. This web site succicently and clearly points out the tricky wording and outright misleading elements of this amendment. It helps one to see the real intentions of this amendment and how it give the medical community a blank check for the purposes of unethical cloning.

Another web site that helps one understand this proposed amendment is the Missouri Catholic Conference. Their site has an extensive page dispelling some of the falsehoods of this legislation. It anwsers nearly every question one could have regarding this amendment.

Lastly, here is a web site that provides broader election assistance is the Kansas Catholic Conference. Their site has a page entitled, Moral Principles for Catholic Voters, in which they explain the responsibilities of a Catholic in voting.

I encourage you to check out these web sites to arm yourselves with solid, truthful and convincing information you may need in the coming weeks prior to the elections. Feel free to direct persons to this blog site for more information and check the site often in the next couple of weeks as I plan on blogging about the issues of this coming election nearly every day. Until next time...God bless.

 

posted by: crossman at 21:54 | link | comments |
blog

Media battle over Missouri Amendment 2

As the November election draws ever closer, proponents of the Missouri embryonic stem-cell research bill, known as Amendment 2, are making their strongest push yet to secure votes. Their commercials have become even more midleading. Those who know the truth, however, have raised their voices in the past couple of weeks as well.

There is a outstanding ad that was broadcast on Thursday evening, during the World Series, to the Missouri viewers of the game. This ad, which can be seen here, included the St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Jeff Suppan, Kansas City Royals first baseman Mike Sweeney and Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner just to name a few. This ad was specifically designed to counter an ad shown by proponents of the amendment featuring Michael J. Fox, who has Parkinson's disease. He appears on the ad showing the actor with serious effects of the disease. He is swaying and having uncontrollable twitching throughout the ad, which is consistent with Parkinson's disease.

This ad is so deceptive in a number of ways. First, the actor claims that the amendment specifically bans cloning, which is absolutely untrue (see my blog entry from Sept. 29th titled Missouri Constitutional Amendment #2). Secondly, it has been reported that Michael J. Fox, in order to manifest the symptoms of his disease, either did not take his medication for that day or he exaggerated the symptoms (see this article). Lastly, these ads again mislead the public into believing that cures for dozens of diseases are just months or a couple of years away, but that restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research are holding back these cures. Even if embryonic stem-cell research was ethical, the experts themselves admit that the possibility of cures are at least 10 to 20 years down the road. Those who are claiming that voting yes on the amendment will save their lives are simply wrong. Unfortunately, any cures that could come about from embryonic stem-cell research will not happen until after these persons have died.

The reason I have been speaking on this Missouri amendment is because it isn't just a state issue. The media beyond Missouri is responding to the battle because both proponents and opponents of embryonic stem-cell research see this as a landmark legislative issue. Numerous media outlets, such as MSNBC, CBS and Yahoo.com, are putting out stories about the ads and the amendment debate.

Over the next couple of weeks, I am going to focus all my blog entries on this upcoming election. Most of my entries will be on the Missouri amendment, but there are also other issues and politicians that threaten the dignity of life. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 19:47 | link | comments |
blog

The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Part 1: What is the Mass?

As I promised, I am going to begin a series on the Mass. I will post the audio for this entry on Wednesday (I am back in KS until Tue. evening).  We are going to discuss what the Mass is, why it is "the center and summit of the Catholic faith" and we are going to try to better understand the meaning behind the parts of the Mass. As always, I value your input, questions and suggestions. In this case especially, though, I want to encourage and offer you an open invitation to submit questions and comments. The Mass is the absolutely most important, vital and central aspect of our faith and I want to do ANYTHING I can to help my readers better understand and appreciate this Holy Sacrament instuted by Jesus Christ himself at the Last Supper and fulfilled by his death on the cross.

WHAT THIS SACRAMENT IS CALLED
Before we begin studying the Mass, we need to understand just what is the Mass. The word 'Mass' is actually short for "The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass." Other names for the sacrament are: The Eucharist, the Lord's Supper, the Holy and Divine Liturgy, Holy Communion and the Memorial of the Lord's Passion and Resurrection. Each of these names is correct and yet each highlight a particular aspect of the sacrament (Catechism of the Catholic Church, ¶1328 - 1332).

THE MASS IS A SACRIFICE
In my opinion, "The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass" best describes this sacrament. If we break down this title, we can better understand the Mass. First are the words 'The Most Holy' that give insight into the importance of the Mass. The Catechism states: the Eucharist is "the source and summit of the Christian life" (CCC ¶1324). When we use the term Eucharist here, we are referring to the actual consecrated bread and wine that are the Body and Blood of Christ himself and not to the name of the sacrament. Everything in our Catholic faith is oriented toward the Eucharist. Everything in our faith flows from the Eucharist.

The most important word in this title, however, is the word 'sacrifice.' The Mass IS...A...SACRIFICE!!! The Church intends the Mass to be regarded as a "true and proper sacrifice." The Mass cannot be understood whatsoever without realizing that it is a Sacrifice with a capital S. This is not a symbolic sacrifice. It is not simply a reminder of something long ago. It is a real sacrifice. At Mass we participate in and are a part of a true sacrifice, very real and very present here and now!!! It is a true and present sacrifice because Jesus commanded that His bloody sacrifice on the Cross should be daily renewed by an unbloody sacrifice of His Body and Blood in the Mass under the simple elements of bread and wine. The Council of Trent clarified this by saying, "the Mass is in its very nature a "representation" (representatio), a "commemoration" (memoria) and an "application" (applicatio) of the Sacrifice of the Cross" (Trent, Session XXII, para. 1). The Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross is made present here and now in the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

If we begin to understand that the Mass is a real and true sacrifice that makes present the one Sacrifice of the Cross, we begin to see that the Mass is not simply another event in our day or just one of the many elements of the Church. Rather, the Mass renews that moment in time when Jesus Christ sacrificed himself on the cross, bringing us freedom, salvation and delivering us from damnation. Because the Mass makes that one, complete, ultimate Sacrifice of Christ present today, it is easy to understand why it is "the source and summit of our Christian life."

That is a lot to think about and digest. Next time we will explore how we participate in the Mass and then we will begin to look at the parts of the Mass. Again, if you have any questions, want something clarified or just have some insight to give, please feel free to leave a comment. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 16:42 | link | comments |

TITLE: Sir MacHinery - The book with everything
GENRE: Book Review
REVIEWED BY: AN

Sir MacHinery has: a little robot, Merlin, a physicist, a Scottish constable, King Arthur returned, dwarves and brownies, grenades, Urlug and evil demons plotting to take over the world, the Sword of Power, a WWII Sergeant Major, the Loch Ness Monster and a good witch and her cat, and two armies of ghosties, and a dragon.  All this in 155 fifth-grade-appropriate pages?  What a deal! 
Tom McGowen’s Sir MacHinery is a little known gem in children’s literature.  The motley band of heroes work wrestle with temptation and use their diverse talents to defeat a great evil threatening the world.  Each character has unexpected gifts, and they need everyone’s gifts along their quest.  “What is the difference between science and magic?” is a perennial question of the book – without, however, a satisfactory answer.   
Some readers will find the books’ use of magic problematic.  Merlin and Maggie MacMurdoch’s good magic has trappings of the occult.  Nor is good magic linked to a good spiritual power (devotion or art, for example), but is only power used well. 
On the other hand, Sir MacHinery is told well.   McGowen draws likable and diverse characters who give good example by dedication to the common good, bravery, and cooperation.  Some succumb to temptation and abandon their quest, while others remain faithful until the tales surprising conclusion.  A reader thus asks, “What temptations am I weakest against?” and resolves more fervently to be faithful in the test.  McGowen also has a delightful ability to play with stock elements of children’s fantasy, including the obligatory End of All Magic which restores the world to normalcy. 
In summary, readers who enjoy fantasy stories will find Sir MacHinery a short, delightful treasure.

posted by: crossman at 21:48 | link | comments |
catholic blog review

Decisions, decisions....

I've made an executive decision that, since I have had a number of requests to explain the Mass on my blog site and since I can't seem to get the Catechism 101 series off the ground, I am going to combine the two and begin a series on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This will be a part of the Catechism 101 series, but it will also have its own separate tag because it goes beyond simple catechizing due to the fact that it is the absolute center and undeniable focus of our faith.

I will post the entries for the series over a period of weeks beginning this coming Friday (appropriate I believe because each Friday is the day of the Lord's Sacrifice on the Cross). Initially, the entries will be posted both in text and in audio format. It is my hope to expand them to include a full video presentation, but I am not going to promise something I am unsure I will have time to do. That decision will probably be motivated by you, my readers, in your feedback on the series.

With that in mind, I will post the first part of the series on Friday, October 20th both in standard text and as a mp3 audio file. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 18:15 | link | comments (1) |

Do whatever you want!!!

I just read an article on the death of U.S. Representative Gerry Studds, who was the first openly gay Congressman. Now, I am by no means attacking a person who has just died or disrespecting him in any way. Yet, two things in this article, by the Associated Press, caused me concern. The first was the AP using the term "husband" to describe Rep. Studds partner. The AP simply laid the word out there as if it was standard and obvious to refer to a man's same sex partner as husband. The second thing that concerned me was a comment by his partner in which he said of Rep. Studds: "He gave people of his generation, of my generation, of future generations, the courage to do whatever they wanted to do." It is not what Rep. Studds did or didn't do that concerns me - again I am not attacking or attempting to disrespect the man. Rather, its the fact that there is a belief in our society today that we should be able to do whatever we want to do.

Unfortunately, we live in a society today in which our motto seems to be, "Do whatever makes you feel good...do whatever you want." Society in the past couple of decades has become more and more open to encouraging people to do whatever they desire. In recent years, society has opened the floodgates that once controlled what was acceptable in our world. If you're pregnant and that impedes on your way of life, have an abortion. If the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman infringes upon your wanting to marry a person of the same sex, let's alter the concept of marriage that was given to us by God at the beginning of time. If there is a remote and falsely hyped possibility of treating various diseases and this will help you either with your disability or by placing huge sums of money in your pocket, then it's ok to kill a new, human life.

Until our society realizes that there are both divine limitations on what man should do and that there are also cultural limitations on such things, our world will continue its downward spiral. We will continue to sink into the abyss of self-importance and complete disrespect for anything but what we want. In short, our society will continue to fail in its purpose as a society - to unite everyone as a community in an ever-deepening relationship with God. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 20:18 | link | comments |
blog

Culture of Death vs. Culture of Life

As we come ever closer to the November elections, I think it is increasingly important to do all we can to support the Culture of Life. As such, I thought I'd write a shord blog and post a few facts about the Culture of Death. These are some statistics regarding abortion, both by the drug RU486 and conventional abortion. Some of the figures include:

The RU486 drug:

• 8% of the use this drug results in an incomplete abortion
• 2% of women suffer moderate to severe hemorraging
• 2% of women require surgery to stop severe bleeding
• 1% of women require hospitalization
• 1 in 20 had infections resulting from using the drug

Abortion facts:

• Since 1973, there have been 47,282,293 abortions in the U.S.
• There were nearly 1.3 million abortions in 2002.
• There are over 3,500 abortions per day, 147 per hour, about one every 25 seconds.
• For every 1,000 live births, there were 319 abortions in 2002.
• There were more than 148,000 second and third trimester abortions 2001.
• The American Journal of Public Health in 1998 found aborting women facing a 50% increased risk
• of having a subsequent ec-topic or tubal pregnancy.
• The Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health found, on average, a 30% increased risk in breast cancer among women who had a abortion.

As of 2004, Planned Parenthood made $94,865,580 in revenue from abortions!!!

This collection of facts sends a shiver down my spine. They clearly show that the dignity and respect for life is greatly lacking in the United States. Yet, there are still thousands upon thousands of people fighting to support life. For example, the photo above is of my sister, Becky Schneider, at the Life Chain in Kansas City. The people lined up along 95th Street, a major street in KC, as far as the eye can see witnesses to the continued support of the Culture of Life. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 21:45 | link | comments (1) |
blog

Odds and Ends...

This entry is going to be a mix of topics, thoughts and ramblings hence the title Odds and Ends.

I mentioned on an earlier post that I wanted to talk about the parts of the Mass. I will begin doing so in my coming blog entries, although I am going to intersperse those entries with other topics as well. I have had a request though that I make these into a multimedia format so that others can use them as a teaching tool. I have no problem doing this so my plan is to write the entry and then to make an audio mp3 of the entry that can be used. I will consider whether to do a mpeg video of the entries, but since Catholicism 101 has been on the backburner (it hasn't been trashcanned, but it is low on my priority list) I am not sure that is something I want to commit to at this point.

I gave my first homily at Cathedral this weekend. I was kind of bold, or maybe just naive, and decided to focus my homily on embryonic stem cell research. I can't gage how it went, but I had a number of persons asking questions or wanting to discuss it with me after Mass. Since this is my first homily at Cathedral, I was a little nervous, but not overly so. I have posted the homily on my homily blog, An Instrument of God, and all are welcome to read it. As I give homiles at Cathedral this year, I will post each on the homily blog site and welcome your feedback, comments and criticisms. It will help me to be a better priest and be able to more effectively minister to the people.

Well, this was a short entry, but it has also been a busy and tiring weekend. I will blog tomorrow and give you the rundown of my weekend at Cathedral. I'll try to begin my series on the Mass by the middle or end of the week. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 21:52 | link | comments |

Mass is not like a movie

Recently, I overheard someone comparing Mass to being like a movie showing at the theater. I thought about it and I suppose an analogy could be made, although a very bad anology.Their analogy went like this: a large amout of people arrive late (to miss the previews???) missing the Penitential rite and often the 1st and 2nd reading. They tend to listen to the homily and Eucharistic prayer with about as much attention as watching a movie with the same plot they've seen hundreds of times before. And as soon as they've recieved Communion, they leave (much like leaving as soon as the credits begin showing at then end of a movie) missing the final prayer, blessing and dismissal.

While I find this analogy lacking in a number of ways, I find the description of a typical parish Mass unfortunately quite accurate. Now, I am not scolding any of my readers who may do one or more of the above things because it seems to be a common thing at every church, but I am asking you to reflect on why this seems to be common. The Mass is not like a bad movie whatsoever and over the next few blogs I am going to discuss the elements of the Mass and why it is not like anything else we encounter.

If I must compare the Mass to some form of entertainment, and it CERTAINLY is not a form of entertainment, I see Mass not as a B movie but more like your favorite TV show. When you watch your favorite TV show, you get in front of the TV early so your don't miss the beginning of the show. Usually the first few minutes set the theme for the whole TV show. You watch intently throughout the show because you don't want to miss a moment of the action. Lastly, you don't leave five minutes before the end of the show, because you want to see how it ends.

This is another poor anology of what the Mass should be, but it gets the point across. The Mass is so much more than just entertainment. Why is it not just another show to watch weekly or a movie to go to every now and then...well I guess you'll have to read my next few blogs to find out. To be continued...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 12:22 | link | comments |
blog

Media myths about stem cell research

I ran across a fantastic web site that points out 10 myths the media uses to advance embryonic stem cell research. These were compiled by Tadeusz Pacholczyk, who is the Director of Education for the National Catholic Bioethics Center. It can be viewed at The Crossroads Initiative web site. I wanted to point out two of these myths that I believe are of direct interest to us Catholics. The first myth is that The Catholic Church is against stem cell research. This, of course, is incorrect. The Church only opposes embryonic stem cell research because it destroys a human life. Umbilical and adult stem cells are not only acceptable by the Catholic Church, they are lauded as being wonderful and ethical therapies for diseases and disabilities.

The second myth is that because frozen embryos may one day end up being discarded by somebody, they should be used for extracting embryonic stem cells so that their destruction has a positive benefit. The thinking here is skewed. The belief is that since the embryos are going to die anyway why not harvest the stem cells. If that is the case, we are ALL going to die someday, so why don't we harvest the organs from those who are old, weak or disabled. They are all going to die and they are simply taking up space much like these embryo that are destroyed.

The misunderstandings of just these two myths raises concerns both about what the public 'knows' about stem cell research and what agenda the media has to spread these myths. I am especially concerned about the second myth. This is a slippery slope in that if we step onto it we may find human life becoming something that is ranked. A particular value is placed on certain humans and those that don't meet this standard are disposable. In essence, we are talking about eugenics, which is a theory advocating the improvement of humans through various forms of intervention. By selectively removing those who don't meet the standards set, we create a healthier, more intelligent people. The Culture of Life is completely replaced by a culture of survival of the fittest. Would you want to be ranked to see if you meet these standards as the criteria for whether you live or die? That is the future if embryonic stem cell research is allowed to have free reign. Until next time...God bless.

posted by: crossman at 22:00 | link | comments |
blog