Faith in Action Blog

Faith in Action Blog

Meghan Duke (’08) and Elizabeth (McPherson ’99) Claeys (Photos: Dana Rene Bowler) Meghan Duke (’08) and Elizabeth (McPherson ’99) Claeys (Photos: Dana Rene Bowler)

Wednesday morning, while the United States Supreme Court held oral arguments in the case that the College and 34 co-plaintiffs have filed against the HHS Contraceptive Mandate, Women Speak for Themselves organized a rally outside the Court. Among the speakers at the rally were two alumnae of the College, Meghan Duke (’08) and Elizabeth (McPherson ’99) Claeys.

A former managing editor of First Things who is now a writer in The Catholic University of America’s Office of Marketing and Communications, Miss Duke spoke about her time volunteering for the Little Sisters of the Poor, who have become the focal point of the national debate on religious freedom. Mrs. Claeys, who is chairman of the Washington, D.C., Board of Regents, spoke about the importance of the Catholic faith to the College and pressed the key points in the College’s case. The full text of her remarks is available via the College’s website.

 


Dr. Adam Seagrave ('05)Dr. Adam Seagrave ('05)In honor of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the National Park Services, Dr. Adam Seagrave (’05) has penned a thoughtful piece for The Public Discourse about the role of the national parks — and Nature more broadly — in the American political tradition. “Over the past 400 years, we Americans have had a very different relationship with nature than the Europeans have,” writes Dr. Seagrave, “and this relationship has powerfully informed what is best in our political culture and public discourse.”

An assistant professor of political science at Northern Illinois University, Dr. Seagrave is the author of The Foundations of Natural Morality: On the Compatibility of Natural Rights and the Natural Law and editor of Liberty and Equality: The American Conversation. A regular contributor to The Public Discourse, Dr. Seagrave observes, “It was because of Americans’ early and unique experience with ‘Nature’ that they came to embrace Locke’s political philosophy in the eighteenth century, with its emphasis on the importance of natural rights and the natural law for politics.” Yet as the country became further removed “from this original experience of nature, through the passage of time and the development of artificial civilization and culture, the original meaning and political significance of nature progressively began to be forgotten. … By the early twentieth century, we were ready to ‘progress’ beyond the founders’ and Lincoln’s ideas, which now seemed naïve, about the political relevance of a grand and significant ‘Nature.’”

By restoring our awe, or reverence, for nature, Dr. Seagrave concludes, the National Parks play a vital role in helping Americans to “connect — or rather reconnect — with something important and distinctive about our national heritage.”

The full article I available via The Public Discourse.

Related


David DaleidenDavid DaleidenOn January 25 a Texas grand jury indicted David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), the organization that exposed Planned Parenthood’s program of fetal organ-harvesting. Prosecutors in Harris County filed charges against the two documentarians, alleging that they tampered  with a governmental record by using fake IDs to gain access to Planned Parenthood. Prosecutors further charged Mr. Daleiden with attempting to purchase or sell human organs as part of his sting operation against the abortion giant.

In the days since, Catholic scholars and attorneys have been divided over the ethics of CMP’s undercover operations as well as the justice of the charges against Ms. Merritt and Mr. Daleiden. Among those who have weighed in are two alumni of the College — faithful Catholics, committed champions of the unborn, and practicing attorneys, both — who have presented thoughtful perspectives.

Tim Cantu (’10)Tim Cantu (’10)Writing for the Catholic legal blog The Campion, Tim Cantu (’10) argues that the indictments are, even if unfortunate, legally sound and just. “David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt are charged with crimes of which they are almost certainly guilty. Were their intentions noble? Yes. Was it in service of a good cause? Yes. But to a prosecutor, one charged with carrying out the law instead of making it, that does not and cannot matter,”  Mr. Cantu observes. Appealing to the example of St. Thomas More, he notes, “The ends do not justify the means; if we wish to defy a just law, we must accept the consequences of that choice under the law. The law exists not only as a sword against the wicked; it is also our shield, and by misusing or disregarding it we weaken that shield at our peril.”

Katie Short (’80)Katie Short (’80)Meanwhile, Katie Short (’80), co-founder and vice president of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, which is defending Mr. Daleiden in three civil suits, has found fault with the grand jury’s reasoning. “The tampering charge, which is a felony offense, is for the use of a California identification in order to enter the Planned Parenthood clinic for the purpose of investigation,” Mrs. Short tells LifeNews.com. Yet Texas law “provides a defense where the false information has ‘no effect on the government’s purpose for requiring the governmental record,’” she continues — and the purpose of the law in question is to prevent minors from purchasing alcohol, not to shield Planned Parenthood from undercover investigation.

Moreover, a press release issued by Mrs. Short’s Life Legal Defense Foundation contends that the law against attempting to purchase or sell body parts has been, at the very least, unevenly applied. “Daleiden was … charged with human organ trafficking, a misdemeanor charge, for allegedly offering to purchase fetal body parts from Planned Parenthood,” the statement reads. “Inexplicably, Planned Parenthood was not charged with the corresponding crime of offering to sell human organs.”

That disparity, Mr. Cantu acknowledges, may hint “that this was a politically motivated indictment designed to punish Daleiden and Merritt for having the wrong cause,” although the “mere existence of the indictment does not establish that.” Still, he adds in a footnote, “There is a good counterargument that this is a case ripe for the exercise of prosecutorial discretion, and [the district attorney] should drop these charges.”


Viewers of the Super Bowl may remember the lighthearted Doritos ad about the unborn baby who, at his or her ultrasound appointment, develops a craving for the bag of nacho-cheese chips that Dad is eating nearby. (See video, above.) The 30-second clip, which was the most shared ad from this year’s game, drew chuckles from most Americans — except for the pro-abortion scolds at NARAL. The ad, the pro-abortion lobby complained on its Twitter feed, employed the “antichoice tactic of humanizing fetuses.”

Katrina Trinko (’09) Katrina Trinko (’09)Writing for the Daily Signal, Katrina Trinko (’09) observes that NARAL, its humorlessness notwithstanding, may be on to something. No, the ad is not political, as NARAL suggests it is, but it does reflect a cultural reality that the pro-abortion lobby surely dreads.

“Moms and dads are now developing relationships with their children long before the due date, sometimes even announcing both name and sex to friends and family before the baby is born,” writes Miss Trinko, the Daily Signal’s managing editor and a member of USA Today’s Board of Contributors. “And that’s what’s frightening to NARAL and other pro-abortion advocates. … [The] increasing awareness that these unborn babies are growing and developing does raise questions about current abortion policy in the United States.”

The Doritos Super Bowl ad, Miss Trinko concludes, was effective not because it engaged in political advocacy, but “because it resonated—and that should terrify pro-abortion advocates.”


Members of the Washington, D.C., Board of Regents and their families outside the U.S. Supreme Court

A number of alumni and their families joined the College’s Washington, D.C., Board of Regents to brave the snow for the national March for Life on January, 22 — the 43rd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Among those marching were Maggie Wynn (’80), Paul White (’95), Nora (Maher ’96) and Rory Nugent (’97), James Layne (’08), Cristina Schardt (’14), and Abby Quinan (’14). In the above photo, the group stands before the United States Supreme Court building at the end of the March.


Bl. Mother Teresa presents the 1982 Commencement Address at Thomas Aquinas College. Bl. Mother Teresa presents the 1982 Commencement Address at Thomas Aquinas College.

Sean Fitzpatrick ('02)In anticipation of Friday’s March for Life in Washington, D.C., Sean Fitzpatrick (’02) has penned an article for Crisis about two women who loom large in America’s ongoing debate about the morality and legality of abortion — Bl. Mother Teresa and Hillary Rodham Clinton. Mother Teresa, who will be canonized this year, was an ardent defender of the unborn; Mrs. Clinton, who will likely be on November’s presidential ballot, is an unstinting champion of abortion “rights.” Yet few might remember that, nearly two decades ago, their paths crossed, and the soon-to-be saint had a notable influence on the would-be president.

Mr. Fitzpatrick recalls a poignant exchange between the two:

“Why do you think we haven’t had a woman as president yet?” First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton asked her guest over their lunch at the White House.

The little woman sitting at table with Mrs. Clinton did not hesitate in her reply.

“Because she has probably been aborted,” said Mother Teresa.

Yet even though Mother Teresa was direct, even blunt, in her language, she had the insight and wisdom to find common ground where she and Mrs. Clinton could work together. Writes Mr. Fitzpatrick:

Although Hillary Clinton was, and remains, a supporter of legalized abortion, she agreed with Mother Teresa that adoption was a preferable alternative. Speaking to her afterwards, Mother Teresa told Mrs. Clinton of her desire to continue her mission to find homes and families for orphaned, abandoned, and unwanted children by founding an adoption center in Washington, D.C. .... Hillary Clinton did the necessary legwork and succeeded in opening The Mother Teresa Home for Infant Children in 1995 in an affluent section of Washington, D.C.

To appreciate fully the grace and influence of Mother Teresa, one must read Mr. Fitzpatrick’s fine article, Marching for Life, Mother Teresa, and Mrs. Clinton, in full. The headmaster of Gregory the Great Academy in Scranton, Pennsylvania, Mr. Fitzpatrick writes frequently for Crisis. This is the second year in a row that he has written an article pegged to the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. (See last year’s Funeral March for Life.) He concludes this year’s story on a hopeful, inspiring note:

This Friday, pro-life Americans march to … convert the hearts of those like Hillary Clinton. Mother Teresa would have Americans do no less. She herself showed us how to protest against abortion fearlessly. She herself marched peacefully but purposefully, to save the lives of children in any way she could. She shook the walls of the White House with her entreaties, and the Gates of Heaven with her prayers. The marchers in DC gather to rekindle the perfect and patient passion of Mother Teresa — a power that broke through, even to Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Members of the Thomas Aquinas College community will be participating in both this year’s March for Life in Washington, D.C., and the Walk for Life West Coast in San Francisco. Please join us!


Mary Bridget Neumayr (’85)

Please pray for Mary Bridget Neumayr (’86), a graduate of the College, a member of the Washington, D.C., Board of Regents, and the eldest daughter of Founder and Senior Tutor Dr. John W. Neumayr. Miss Neumayr underwent surgery last week to remove a gastrointestinal tumor, and now awaits biopsy results.

A graduate of the Hastings College of the Law, Miss Neumayr is the senior energy counsel for the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the U.S. House of Representatives, where she works on energy and environmental matters. Please pray for her health, for her well-being, and for good news in her test results.


Lauretta Brown (’13) interviews Sean Cardinal O’Malley, Archbishop of Boston, at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in 2014. Lauretta Brown (’13) interviews Sean Cardinal O’Malley, Archbishop of Boston, at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in 2014.

With the new year close at hand, Lauretta Brown (’13) finds herself commemorating two significant anniversaries. It was a little over a year ago that she became a fulltime reporter at the Cybercast News Service (CNS) — and shortly thereafter that she unsettled House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi with a frank question about abortion.

Just weeks into her job at CNS, Miss Brown went to Mrs. Pelosi’s weekly press briefing to query the California Congresswoman about her opposition to the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Eschewing the distracting political angles, Miss Brown cut to the chase, asking, “Is an unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy a human being?”

When the Minority Leader responded with the usual pro-abortion boilerplate, Miss Brown’s CNS colleague pressed further. “My question is pretty simple,” she began. “Legislation aside, when it comes to the matter of whether or not an unborn child is a human being at 20 weeks’ gestation, what is your personal take on it? If it is not a human being, then what do you believe it is?”

A simple question, to be sure, but one to which Mrs. Pelosi refused to provide a straightforward answer. “She was dumbfounded, offended. She would not answer,” Miss Brown recalls. “She said she had been around a lot longer than I had. She said she was a Catholic mother, and she knew more about having babies than the Pope. She raised up all kinds of tangential issues, but never answered directly.”

Asking the tough and important — but too often overlooked — questions, Miss Brown says, is among her greatest joys as a political reporter. “I try to find stories that maybe are not being reported on as much,” particularly those that touch upon matters of the right to life, religious freedom, and the plight of Christians in the Middle East. “That’s our mission, to find stories that aren’t being reported as widely, and bring those to life.”

Yet when she graduated from the College in 2013, Miss Brown did not envision a career in journalism. She intended to become a lawyer, and was considering offers from law schools when a friend told her about an internship at CNS — a short-term commitment, or so she thought when she agreed to take the position. She soon, however, developed a love for journalism and set aside all thoughts of law school. In short order, her internship turned into a trial position that, last December, became a fulltime job.

Since then, Miss Brown has worked to report the untold stories from Capitol Hill. She has interviewed numerous notable figures political, cultural, and religious, including presidential candidates Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, entertainers Geena Davis and Leona Lewis, and Church prelates such as His Eminence Cardinal Sean O’Malley, Archbishop of Boston, and His Excellency William Lori, Archbishop of Baltimore.

When cutting through politician’s all-too-common dissimulations, she says, she finds herself drawing upon her Thomas Aquinas College education. “Smart reporting is always improved through critical thinking, looking at statements, and saying, ‘OK, what is factual about this?’” she observes. “I have been shocked at how much, in conversations and in my writing, I’ve been able to draw back on my experience from the College. It has been a tremendous help.”


Dr. Adam Seagrave ('05)Dr. Adam Seagrave ('05)“It would be a mistake to think that even the total defeat and eradication of the organization known as ISIS will result in long-term peace and an absence of radical Islamic terrorism in Europe and the United States,” writes Dr. Adam Seagrave (’05) in The Public Discourse. “There is a much more powerful and permanent reason behind radical Islamic terrorism: the motivation to die for an other-worldly cause inevitably overpowers the motivation to live for this world.”

An assistant professor of political science at Northern Illinois University, Dr. Seagrave is the author of The Foundations of Natural Morality: On the Compatibility of Natural Rights and the Natural Law and editor of Liberty and Equality: The American Conversation. A regular contributor to The Public Discourse, he laments that there is neither a military nor a quick resolution to the threat of radical Islamic terrorism.

“If Western culture continues to be defined by the pitiful desire to go on living in as much physical comfort as possible, we will continue to be victimized and oppressed by the much more powerful appeal of radical Islam to die for God and eternal happiness,” Dr. Seagrave observes. “We in the West need to work to understand better and persuasively articulate the moral vision underlying liberalism, connecting this moral vision to the theological principles of Christianity.”

Dr. Seagrave contends that, for the last 500 years, the West has struggled between two competing visions of liberalism. The first is the Hobbesian model, more prevalent in Europe, which reduces the purpose of life to the pursuit of survival, pleasure, and power. Then there is a Christian/Lockean counterpart, which historically has been more influential in the United States, and which places Hobbesian individualism within a spiritual and moral framework that satisfies man’s yearning for meaning and guides his actions toward the good. To the extent that the Hobbesian model continues to dominate Western thought, Dr. Seagrave argues, the West will remain vulnerable to radical Islam. Only the Christian/Lockean vision, he insists, can provide a viable alternative.

“If we in the West are ultimately to withstand the threat of radical Islam to our way of life, we would do well to draw upon the resources in our intellectual and religious traditions that are powerful enough to inspire its continuing defense,” Dr. Seagrave concludes. “Without consistent and widespread efforts to provide a coherent and compelling alternative philosophy and way of life, all the military might in the world will not be able to resist the onslaught of Islamic extremism.”

Related


Katie Short (’80), attorney for David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress, leads his defense team at federal court in San Francisco.
Katie Short (’80), attorney for David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress, at federal court in San Francisco.

When David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress first devised his plan to expose Planned Parenthood’s practice of harvesting and selling the organs of aborted babies, he knew he would need legal advice. So the undercover journalist turned to San Francisco’s Life Legal Defense Foundation and its co-founder and vice president, Katie Short (’80). Mrs. Short and others helped Mr. Daleiden to prepare for the inevitable legal challenges and to navigate the myriad laws in several jurisdictions.

Katie Short (’80) with David Daleiden of the Center for Medical ProgressKatie Short (’80) with David Daleiden of the Center for Medical ProgressNearly three years later, that effort has proved to be a tremendous success, drawing national attention to Planned Parenthood’s gruesome practices and fueling a Congressional movement to strip the abortion provider of federal funding. Predictably, the abortion industry’s premier trade group, the National Abortion Federation, has struck back with a lawsuit designed to ruin Mr. Daleiden and suppress his findings. And so the young filmmaker has turned to Mrs. Short once again, asking her foundation to defend him against a fevered legal onslaught.

“We at Life Legal have fought for decades to guarantee the First Amendment rights of pro-life activists,” says Mrs. Short. “Usually this happens on a small scale right in front of an abortion mill. Now we are seeing the same drama play out on a grand scale in the public eye, as the NAF throws its resources into crushing David Daleiden’s witness. There’s really little else that they can do, as David truly has the goods on the abortion industry in general and on Planned Parenthood in particular. Only by doing our all at this crucial juncture can Life Legal keep the truth about Planned Parenthood available to the public.”

A home-schooling mother of nine children, Mrs. Short has written numerous briefs for state and federal courts, including petitions for certiorari and amicus briefs in the United States Supreme Court and California Supreme Court. She co-authored the text of Propositions 73, 85, and 4, California ballot initiatives aimed at requiring parental notification before a minor can obtain an abortion. She additionally served as co-counsel in People’s Advocate v. ICOC, a suit challenging the constitutionality of the governing board of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the agency established by Proposition 71 to fund embryonic stem cell research.

Last week Mrs. Short was at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, leading Mr. Daleiden’s pro bono defense team during his deposition — one small step in what promises to be a lengthy, exhausting, and expensive legal battle. “The case has extremely high stakes for all participants,” says Mrs. Short’s husband, Bill (’80), a fellow attorney. “Please pray for Daleiden, the project, Katie, and the rest of the legal team, and encourage others to do so as well.”