Washington D.C., Oct 20, 2016 / 06:02 am (CNA).- A reputed “Catholic Spring” group played a key role in influencing Barack Obama’s controversial 2009 Notre Dame speech, and its campaigns “broadened the agenda” of Catholic voters to see abortion as just one of several election issues. This is according to a leaked memo attributed to George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. The group, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, was founded in 2005. While early backing from billionaire financier George Soros’ philanthropic network was previously reported, a 2009 memo leaked earlier this year seems to provide the foundations’ view of the group’s early activities. “CACG has helped to transform Catholic values in the mainstream media and in the public discourse on religion and politics, thereby thwarting previously successful attempts by the conservative movement to use religious faith for partisan advantage,” said the memo. The memo, dated Sept. 22, 2009, is attributed to the Open Society Foundations’ U.S. Programs’ Democracy and Power Fund. The memo, apparently a series of grant proposals, was posted to the website DCLeaks.com. According to the memo, Catholics in Alliance played “pivotal roles” in 2009 during “critical Catholic moments” like President Barack Obama’s 2009 Notre Dame commencement speech.   President Obama’s controversial speech at the University of Notre Dame included the bestowal of an honorary degree on the new president. The action had drawn criticism from dozens of bishops who said it caused scandal and confusion. The bishops cited U.S. bishops’ 2004 document “Catholics in Political Life,” which said that Catholic institutions should not honor those who “act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.” Bishop John D’Arcy, who at the time headed the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, objected that the university in his diocese honored someone “whose activities both as president and previously, have been altogether supportive of laws against the dignity of the human person yet to be born.” The Open Society Foundations memo praised Catholics in Alliance for “reframing” the abortion debate in terms of reducing abortions. “Indeed, this reframing is where the group has showed some of its most successful policy influence within the new Obama administration: the President made this reframing the centerpiece of his much anticipated Notre Dame speech,” the memo said. The memo lists Catholics In Alliance for the Common Good under the section “grassroots organizing and civic engagement.” It indicates the group received at least $450,000 in financial support from the massive George Soros philanthropy network from 2006-2010, when the foundations also operated under the name Open Society Institute (OSI). The group is currently in the public eye because the site Wikileaks has posted alleged 2012 emails involving Hillary Clinton campaign chief John Podesta, who appears to state that Catholics in Alliance was founded to aid a “Catholic Spring” political revolution within the Church. Chris Hale, who became Catholics in Alliance’s executive director in late 2013, distanced himself from accusations he and his colleagues aimed to split the Church. “We don’t concern ourselves with the internal politics of the Catholic Church,” Hale told CNA Oct. 17. “I think that it’s important to distinguish the work of organizations from those who funded it or used to fund it,” he added. “No organization funders agree 100 percent with its activity.” Catholics in Alliance has become more critical of powerful abortion groups in recent years “I want to state categorically that we are pro-life. If anyone has doubts about that commitment, ask Planned Parenthood,” Hale said. The group broke with many political progressives by criticizing Planned Parenthood following the release of investigative videos appearing to show the abortion provider breaking laws in selling harvested fetal tissue and body parts from aborted unborn babies. According to the 2009 Open Society Foundations memo, Catholics in Alliance drew criticisms from pro-abortion rights groups like Catholics for Choice for its efforts to “play down abortion rights and reframe the debate in terms of reducing the number of abortions.” “We believe that CACG’s reframing may actually be one of its strengths,” said the memo. The Soros network typically supports abortion rights. The memo added: “We will continue to monitor this issue, but at this time feel that CACG’s position on choice is not at odds with OSI priorities.” Catholics in Alliance’s politics-related actions also drew praise from the grantmaker. “Unlike in 2004, CACG and the progressive faith community in 2008 provided a consistent counterpoint to the religious right-wing’s message in key media stories,” the memo said. “Importantly, CACG broadened the agenda of Catholic voters.” Hale discussed Catholics in Alliance’s current view of the abortion debate. “Catholics should definitely consider abortion as central component of the social teaching of the Catholic Church. But it is fair to say that it’s not the only issue,” Hale told CNA. “While abortion is very important to Catholic conscience, it can’t be the only issue,” he said. “We’re proudly pro-life. That means more than pro-birth.” Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good has spoken up about a wide variety of political issues, criticizing the parties and platforms on both sides of the aisle. However, it has drawn criticism for its general avoidance of criticizing Hillary Clinton by name, while it has criticized Donald Trump on numerous occasions. The Open Society Foundations’ memo said the group filled an important vacuum by “providing a progressive voice for Catholics.” It claimed that the group’s outreach to Catholic voters in 2006 and 2008 resulted in a situation where the Catholic population believed that “abortion is not the overriding issue at the ballot box” but took into account the moral questions of the economy, health care, fair wages and a just immigration policy. The memo claimed proof of the group’s success in post-2008 election poll results. It highlighted the large majorities of Evangelical and Catholic voters who told pollsters people of faith “should focus on all issues that are central to their values, rather than focusing on one or two issues.” As evidence the memo also listed poll results showing voters made the economy, Iraq, health care, and terrorism their top issues, while only 14 percent named abortion and 6 percent same-sex “marriage.” Catholics in Alliance also drew praise for its use of “robust media, grassroots, and collaborative strategies” to educate and mobilize “voters of faith in support of social justice.” The memo said the group had gained attention through circulating local letters, producing radio ads, websites and op-eds, booking commentators on cable television, and in major news coverage The memo said another critical Catholic moment the group influenced in 2009 was the release of Pope Benedict XVI’s 2009 encyclical “Caritas in Veritate,” but it did not specify any reasons for this claim. The foundation memo said Catholics in Alliance fits into a broader strategy “to inspire greater public participation from mainstream and social justice oriented faith communities” on Open Society priority issues and also to “counter the outsize influence and impact of right-wing religious constituencies.” Catholics in Alliance was mentioned in a recently leaked February 2012 e-mail exchange between Hillary Clinton’s present campaign manager, John Podesta, and Sandy Newman, president of the progressive organization Voices for Progress. They discussed the controversy over a federal rule requiring Catholic organizations to cover contraception. Newman discussed the possibilities of a “Catholic Spring,” similar to Arab protests, to lead Catholics to demand “the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic church.” Newman wondered how one would plant “the seeds of revolution.” Podesta responded by saying, “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this.” At the same time, Podesta suggested it lacked the leadership to do so. He suggested former Maryland Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend be involved. Newman replied to Podesta: “Great. I suppose it's conceivable that a few organizers could spark a high-profile demonstration or two (a la Occupy [Wall Street]) that might turn out to be the spark. But it is indeed a puzzle to figure out why some events, usually with very little planning, ignite a movement no one would have predicted, while other, far better planned things fashioned by experienced organizers don’t.” As of 2009, Catholics in Alliance organized local Catholic activists to promote public policy. It followed a media organizing strategy to promote the voices of religious leaders, and conducted “strategic coordination and support of the Catholic social justice movement,” the memo said. The memo praised Catholics in Alliance’s role in immigration reform and in states affected by immigration raids. According to the memo, the group planned to offer media training and leadership training for Latino faith leaders, including the Academy of Catholic Hispanic Theologians, with a focus on immigration reform. The memo named Catholics United as the group’s 501c4 sister organization. It claimed both groups had a combined membership of 60,000 and fundraising totals above $3 million as of 2009. The memo also included a critical evaluation of Catholics in Alliance as an organization. It faulted the group for its alleged failure to incorporate and employ Latino Catholics, given demographic trends in Catholicism. The memo said the group was working to improve minority representation among Hispanics and people of color in its board of directors, its advisory council and its speakers’ bureau. It said the departure of the group’s co-founder Alexia Kelley to join the Obama White House in 2009 left the group “without strong leadership.” Another co-founder, Tom Perriello, is mentioned in other documents in the Soros leak. Another Soros foundations grantee, Faith in Public Life, is discussed in the 2009 memo for its role in media messaging on the University of Notre Dame controversy, stem cell guidelines, conscience protections for medical professionals, as well as issues like health care reform, climate change and immigration. Faith in Public Life is described as a partner organization for Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. The same document from the Soros foundations recommends a nearly $1.4 million grant to Podesta’s Center for American Progress and indicates previous Open Society Institute support for the center totaling nearly $5 million. It describes the Center for American Progress as “the most influential think tank in our funding universe.” According to the memo, there is major foundation support for the center from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Humanity United Fund, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Ford Foundation, among others. Other more recent documents leaked from the Soros foundations indicate the grantmaker aims to change Ireland’s pro-life laws against abortion as a model for Catholic countries. The grantmaker also took part in a $7-8 million dollar effort to respond to 2015 media reports appearing to show the abortion giant Planned Parenthood was involved in the illegal sale of fetal tissue and organs. The Open Society Foundations did not respond to a request for comment on the document. It has previously said a number of internal documents were removed from “an online community that served as a resource for our staff, board members, and partners across the world.” It charged that the publication of documents was an apparent symptom of “an aggressive crackdown on civil society and human rights activists that is taking place globally.” Read more

New York City, N.Y., Oct 19, 2016 / 10:04 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Progress for the world’s children has left out the young victims of war, conflict, and poverty, the Holy See has told the United Nations. “The dramatic progress made in the red... Read more

Kansas City, Kan., Oct 19, 2016 / 04:54 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Vice presidential candidate Sen. Tim Kaine’s stand in favor of legal abortion shuns consistency in reason and faith and ignores the pain abortion causes, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas has said. “It was painful to listen to Senator Kaine repeat the same tired and contorted reasoning to profess his personal opposition to abortion while justifying his commitment to keep it legal,” the archbishop said, reflecting on Kaine's abortion comments in the Oct. 4 vice presidential debate. He characterized the senator’s remarks as “the usual made-for-modern-media sound bites.”Writing in the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas' newspaper The Leaven Oct. 14, Archbishop Naumann critiqued the senator's “sound bite” comment that “it is not proper to impose his religious beliefs upon all Americans.” "With regard to the imposition of religious beliefs, Senator Kaine appears to have no qualms with his public positions conforming with his religious beliefs with regard to such issues as the church’s opposition to racism or our preferential option for the poor." "He appears not to be conflicted with our public policies mirroring the Ten Commandments with regard to stealing, perjury, or forms of murder, other than abortion." In the Oct. 4 debate, Kaine professed support for Roe v. Wade, the United States Supreme Court decision that mandated legal abortion nationwide. He said he supported “the constitutional right of American women to consult their own conscience, their own supportive partner, their own minister, but then make their own decision about pregnancy.” The archbishop commented, “It is difficult to imagine that Senator Kaine has not seen the ultrasound images of his children and grandchildren when they were in their mother’s womb. Is the senator unaware that abortion stopped the beating hearts of 60 million American children aborted legally since 1973?” Archbishop Naumann asked, “Does anyone really have the choice to end another human being’s life? Our choices end where another individual’s more fundamental rights begin.” The archbishop also questioned Kaine’s stand on conscience, given his support for forcing taxpayers to fund abortion and his support for rules that would coerce the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide abortifacients, contraceptives, and sterilizations in their health plans. Kaine said it was not the role of a public servant who is a religious believer to mandate “the commands of your faith.” Archbishop Naumann countered that although religion speaks about fundamental human rights, the right to life is not based in religion. “As the Founders stated, these are self-evident truths. They are accessible to everyone through the use of reason. They do not require faith,” the archbishop said, adding that the American Founding Fathers “actually believed that the right to life is given to us by our Creator, not by the Supreme Court.” The archbishop said that the senator was inconsistent in citing his religion, given that he follows Catholicism’s opposition to racism and preference for the poor. “He appears not to be conflicted with our public policies mirroring the Ten Commandments with regard to stealing, perjury, or forms of murder, other than abortion,” he added. In the debate, Kaine countered Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s early comments, later retracted, that women should be punished for having an abortion. “Before Roe v. Wade, states could pass criminal laws… to punish women if they made the choice to terminate a pregnancy,” Kaine said. According to Archbishop Naumann, decades of legal history show that this was “certainly not the case.” “The laws were enforced against the abortionists,” he said. “Our own legal experience shows clearly that it is possible to develop public policies aimed at protecting children, not punishing women.” The archbishop invited Kaine to speak with women who have had abortions and have sought the assistance of Project Rachel and other post-abortion ministries that help women and men find “healing, hope and mercy after an abortion.” He blamed permissive abortion policy for placing the entire burden of an abortion decision upon the woman. Archbishop Naumann noted Kaine’s expression of anguish when he enforced death sentences as governor and the impression that Kaine attempted to convince Virginians to abolish the death penalty. But he said Kaine seems not to have made a similar effort to convince Virginians “to work for public policies that protect the lives of the unborn.” “Instead, he appears eager to champion not only maintaining the status quo, but actually expanding abortion rights,” the archbishop charged. Archbishop Naumann also acknowledged the tensions of the 2016 election year. “This presidential election presents all Americans with a difficult choice. Both major political parties have nominated very flawed candidates,” he said. He encouraged voters to think not only of the presidential candidate, but who they will appoint to “key Cabinet and other powerful government positions … We are choosing not just a president, but an entire administration,” he said. The archbishop conclude by advising voters to “be wary of candidates who assume to take upon themselves the role of defining what Catholics believe or should believe. Unfortunately, the vice-presidential debate revealed that the Catholic running for the second highest office in our land is an orthodox member of his party, fully embracing his party’s platform, but a cafeteria Catholic, picking and choosing the teachings of the Catholic Church that are politically convenient.” Read more

Washington D.C., Oct 30, 2016 / 03:21 am (CNA/EWTN News).- With the Nov. 8 election approaching, the Knights of Columbus have released a novena addressed to Mary, the Immaculate Conception, who is the patroness of the United States. The novena consists of nine days of prayer, starting Oct. 30 and running through Nov. 7, the eve of the election. In 1791, America’s first bishop, John Carroll, entrusted his diocese – which was the entire country at the time – to Mary in 1791. The U.S. bishops affirmed that dedication in 1846, declaring Mary the Immaculate Conception to be patroness of the United States. The novena prayer comes from the 1959 dedication of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C. It was approved that year by Cardinal Patrick O'Boyle, then-archbishop of Washington.   Parishes, Knights of Columbus councils, families and individuals are invited to participate in the novena. “The Church teaches that Catholics are called to form their consciences based on Church teaching and vote in accordance with that well-formed conscience,” said Knights of Columbus CEO Carl Anderson. “Pope Francis has said in reference to the U.S. election that we should ‘study the proposals well, pray and choose with your conscience,’ and this novena is designed to help Catholic Americans do that.” The text of the novena reads:Most Holy Trinity: Our Father in Heaven, who chose Mary as the fairest of your daughters; Holy Spirit, who chose Mary as your Spouse; God the Son, who chose Mary as your Mother, in union with Mary we adore your majesty and acknowledge your supreme, eternal dominion and authority.Most Holy Trinity, we put the United States of America into the hands of Mary Immaculate in order that she may present the country to you. Through her we wish to thank you for the great resources of this land and for the freedom which has been its heritage.Through the intercession of Mary, have mercy on the Catholic Church in America. Grant us peace. Have mercy on our president and on all the officers of our government. Grant us a fruitful economy, born of justice and charity. Have mercy on capital and industry and labor. Protect the family life of the nation. Guard the precious gift of many religious vocations. Through the intercession of our Mother, have mercy on the sick, the tempted, sinners — on all who are in need.Mary, Immaculate Virgin, our Mother, Patroness of our land, we praise you and honor you and give ourselves to you. Protect us from every harm. Pray for us, that acting always according to your will and the will of your divine Son, we may live and die pleasing to God. Amen.   ...... This article originally ran Oct. 19, 2016. Read more

New York City, N.Y., Oct 19, 2016 / 06:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The apostolic nuncio to the United Nations again stressed the need for nuclear weapons disarmament on Monday, with the worldwide adherence to the non-proliferation treaty a step to this goa... Read more

Orange, Calif., Jun 6, 2017 / 02:49 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Stephanie Packer cherishes every moment with her husband and four children. Living with a terminal illness in Orange, California, her goal is “to do everything I can to have one more second with my kids.” When assisted suicide legislation was officially passed in California in 2016, Packer experienced the ultimate slap in the face: her insurance company denied the coverage of critical chemotherapy treatment that her doctors recommended for her condition. Her insurance would, however, cover end-of-life drugs for just $1.20. “It was like someone had just hit me in the gut,” said Packer, who shared her story in the documentary, Compassion and Choice Denied. Produced by the Center for Bioethics and Culture Network, the documentary details Packer’s experience of living with a terminal illness in an age where assisted suicide is cheaper than the fight for life. Particularly concerning: the insurance company had initially suggested that they would cover the chemotherapy drugs. It was one week after assisted suicide was legalized that they sent Packer a letter saying they were denying coverage. Despite multiple appeals, they continued to refuse. “As soon as this law was passed, patients fighting for a longer life end up getting denied treatment, because this will always be the cheapest option… it’s hard to financially fight,” Packer said in the documentary. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in a handful of states, gaining momentum ever since the high profile suicide of cancer patient Brittany Maynard in 2014. Many prominent Catholic leaders, such as Pope Francis, have spoken out against assisted suicide, calling it “false compassion.” Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez has said that assisted suicide “represents a failure of solidarity” and abandons the most vulnerable in society. “We are called as people to support each other, to hold each other’s hand and walk through this journey,” Packer said, adding, “I want my kids to see that dying is a part of life, and the end of your life can be an opportunity to appreciate the things you didn’t appreciate before.” Packer leads support groups for individuals with terminal and chronic illnesses. She said there was a clear morale change in many of the group members when physician-assisted suicide became legalized in her state. “Normally, we would talk about support and love, and we would be there for each other, and just encourage them that, you know, today is a bad day, tomorrow doesn’t have to be,” she said. But when assisted suicide was legalized, individuals became more depressed, with some saying that they wanted to end their lives. “Patients are going to die because of this,” Packer said. “Patients need to know what this means, and the public needs to know that it’s going to kill these patients because they aren’t going to get the treatment they need to extend their life.” She also said that assisted suicide proponents have twisted the meaning of suicide to make it sound “sweet and pretty,” and have also redefined what it means to live with a terminal illness. “It makes terminally ill patients feel ‘less than,’ that they are not worthy of that fight, that they're not worth it,” she said. Packer believes that end-of-life drugs should never “be supported by physicians or run by the government. That’s not okay... because it affects me negatively and affects my fight and my ability to stay here longer with my children.” Packer pointed to other resources, saying that there is a whole treasury of support for terminal patients – financially, psychologically, physically, and even if patients just need someone to talk to. While life-affirming palliative care remains an expensive medical cost, Packer recommended that more energy and resources fund hospice care, instead of making death the cheaper option. “We can start to fix our broken health care system, and people will start to live instead of feeling like they have to choose to die.”  This article was originally published on CNA Oct. 19, 2016.   Read more

Washington D.C., Oct 18, 2016 / 05:15 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Treatable depression, financial gain from a patient's death, doctors who can write a fatal prescription with little knowledge of the person it's for – all things that supporters of physician assisted suicide in the District of Columbia would perhaps prefer not to discuss. But as the city council in the nation’s capital may soon legalize the procedure, both the Church and local citizens have taken up arms to label it as prejudiced against the “most vulnerable.” The bill is immoral, unethical, and unjust, said Dr. Lucia Silecchia, a law professor at the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law, and a D.C. citizen. “Thus, while the Catholic and Christian understanding of the dignity of human persons, made in the image and likeness of God undergirds the moral critique of such statutes, the medical opposition long predates Christ, and the legal objections should compel anyone who observes how easily disregard for the life of one spreads,” she stated to CNA. On Oct. 18, the city council for the District of Columbia voted to put legalization of physician-assisted suicide on their legislative agenda. The bill was introduced in January 2015 by Mayor Muriel Bowser. In the summer of 2015, citizens of the city showed up in large numbers to support or oppose the bill; a public hearing went on for hours as many advocates, one after another, insisted that the city not legalize the measure. Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington has been outspoken against the measure, and other assisted suicide measures that have been introduced in states around the country in what he called “a concerted aggressive campaign…which plays on people’s darkest fears and exploits their vulnerabilities to advance ideas and practices that have long been understood to be grave infamies opposed to human dignity and which poison human society.” What is at stake is nothing less than how society views human life, he maintained. “We are facing a seismic shift in how we, as a society, will look at life in the future and, even more frightening, what powers the state will have to determine who lives and who dies,” he said. “We are all responsible for working to protect all human life until it ends naturally, until the time that God alone appoints for our departure. It is not for us to decide the hour, we are not the arbiters of life and death.” The D.C. bill is flawed for a number of reasons, Silecchia explained to CNA. For one, any two physicians could write a prescription for a fatal drug overdose request, no matter how little they know the patient. Also, if patients are refused their request by their primary care physician, they could just seek out another doctor who may not know them well, but will write them a prescription. “This undermines the dignity of those who suffer by suggesting to them – while they are most vulnerable – that their lives no longer have value,” she said. Witnesses of the patient’s consent could be an “interested party” – someone who could benefit financially or personally from the patient’s death – Silecchia noted, raising even more ethical challenges to the proposal.   Also, the measure may apply disproportionately to the “most vulnerable,” like low-income or elderly persons who feel they may be a “burden” to friends and family as they become sicker, and those suffering from mental illness like depression or anxiety, she explained. Herbert Hendin, M.D. has written on the psychological issues surrounding patients with terminal diagnoses. In his book Seduced by Death, he explained how many of these patients, when they fear a terminal diagnosis, desire to end their lives – but many of them are suffering from a curable mental illness that can be treated. It’s not the fear of death that exacerbates their psychological condition, but rather the fear of dying, he explained, when “patients displace anxieties about death onto the circumstances of dying: dependence, loss of dignity, and the unpleasant side effects of medical treatments.” The advocacy group “Not Dead Yet” has also claimed that such fears drive a patient’s desire to die, noting that “among the top five reasons given” for a fatal prescription request “are feelings of being a ‘burden on others’ (41%) or feeling a ‘loss of autonomy’ (92%) or ‘loss of dignity’ (78%).” “These are not about pain from a terminal disease, but are psychological and social issues that cry out for meaningful supports and genuine care,” the group continued. “Yet the assisted suicide law does not even require disclosures about consumer controlled home care options to address feelings of loss of autonomy or feelings of being a burden on family, much less require that those services be provided.” “When these fears are dealt with by a caring and knowledgeable physician, the request for death usually disappears,” he added. In his experience treating these patients, Hendin found that when a patient chose treatment over a fatal prescription and resolved his fears – as well as unresolved conflicts he may have had with friends or family – he greatly appreciated his final months to do so, even if he experienced physical suffering in that time. And, some warn, the legalization of assisted suicide actually opens the door for the normalization of other dark practices like euthanasia. When a patient expresses a desire to die but chooses to wait until they are further along in their sickness to take the prescription, the ethical lines can become blurry as to whether that action was their own decision made with a clear mind, or was the decision of their friends and family who pressured them, while under extreme duress, into taking the medication. The state of New York Governor Mario Cuomo’s own task force pointed to the possibility of this scenario in their 1994 guidelines “When Death Is Sought,” updated in 2011. “Even if the law is never changed to sanction involuntary euthanasia, the potential for abuse would be profound,” they wrote. This is because “once euthanasia is established as a ‘therapeutic’ alternative, the line between patients competent to consent and those who are not will seem arbitrary to some doctors,” including in some cases of patients who are “incapacitated” where their doctors will deem it therapeutic to give them a fatal dose of medication. Leon Kass, who chaired President Bush’s Council on Bioethics from 2001-05, explained this from a doctor’s perspective in his work “Why Doctors Must Not Kill” – cited in the task force report. “How easily will they be able to care for patients when it is always possible to think of killing them as a 'therapeutic' option?” he asked. “Physicians get tired of treating patients who are on their way down - 'gorks,' 'gomers,' and 'vegetables' -  are only some of the less than affectionate names they receive from house officers.” And an assisted suicide law could also disproportionately target minorities and the poor, the New York task force report argued, because everyday prejudices – from which physicians, however well-intentioned, “are not exempt” – will affect how doctors choose to treat patients – with their very lives at stake. “Finally, it must be recognized that assisted suicide and euthanasia will be practiced through the prism of social inequality and prejudice that characterizes the delivery of services in all segments of society, including health care,” the report stated. “Those who will be most vulnerable to abuse, error, or indifference are the poor, minorities, and those who are least educated and least empowered.” For example, the disproportionate number of minorities and poor persons who are executed by the state shows how policies like the death penalty are not immune from prejudice, the task force claimed. That injustice would not disappear under physician-assisted suicide, they added. Someone who faces a terminal diagnosis is in a tough situation, Cardinal Wuerl acknowledged in a recent blog post on assisted suicide. Yet the merciful response is not to give them a fatal dose of medication, he insisted. “It cannot be denied that there are hardships in life, some of which seem to overwhelm us,” he wrote. “Whether experienced late in life, in a physical illness of a bout of mental depression, or in a crisis pregnancy, the human condition is for us all beset with trials and tribulations. In particular, the losses and changes associated with the progression of a terminal illness often contribute to psychological distress and feelings of worthlessness and despair.” “A truly compassionate and merciful response to the sick and vulnerable is not to confirm these impulses by offering them a lethal drug,” he added, but rather “our response should be to draw them away from the edge, to help the vulnerable among us – regardless of their condition or circumstances – with genuine compassion and give them hope.” Read more