CNN's Bias Exposed....or is it?

I write about many things that are close to my heart; this subject rates in the top five. I do not understand how folks can so easily dismiss another human being who is so innocent, so fragile, so vulnerable. Here is a snippet of a story that cuts to the chase of one media organization's bias towards one side of an issue. They consistently claim objectivity, but the reality is only hidden from the already sold. Please see the following link for the video in question:

www.catholicvote.org

Dear CatholicVote.org Member,

We have been quieter than usual the past two weeks for good reason. Following NBC's refusal to air our ad during the Super Bowl, we received some great feedback from our members on what we should do next. The consensus was that our latest ad should be broadcast following President Obama's first State of the Union Address -- scheduled for next Tuesday.

So we contacted CNN, thinking their audience contains precisely the type of people we want to reach. Further, given CNN's track record of running advocacy ads, we were confident we would succeed. Not so.

For the past two weeks, we have been pushing and prodding them for an answer. And late this week we finally got a response: No way.

A representative from CNN wrote: "Thank you for your patience. We have decided to pass on this creative. CNN doesn't accept advocacy ads that portray personal decisions in a manner that suggests a position in favor of the advocacy message, without having permission of the persons involved."

This is absurd. Our ad does not suggest that Barack Obama is pro-life. Instead, our ad presents nothing but facts. President Obama, like every human being, began as an unborn child. Because he was born, he was able to become the President of the United States.

CNN and others simply don't like the obvious conclusion of our ad - there was no ‘choice' for abortion back in 1961. Thankfully, we had laws then safeguarding unborn children -- laws that protected the life of a future president who tragically is unwilling to fight for those same protections today.

But wait. Is this fair?

The standard CNN used to reject our ad did not prevent the network from airing a 2005 ad sponsored by the pro-abortion group NARAL that suggested that then Judge John Roberts supported violence against abortion clinics.

FactCheck.org described the NARAL ad this way: "An abortion-rights group is running an attack ad accusing Supreme Court nominee John Roberts of filing legal papers ‘supporting . . . a convicted clinic bomber' and of having an ideology that ‘leads him to excuse violence against other Americans' It shows images of a bombed clinic in Birmingham, Alabama. The ad is false.'"

Several prominent pro-abortion supporters condemned the ad, including President Clinton's Solicitor General Walter Dellinger. The commercial, which attributed views to John Roberts that were not his, was ultimately pulled from the air not by CNN, but by NARAL.

At the time CNN issued a statement saying: "CNN accepts advocacy advertising from responsible groups from across the political spectrum who wish to express their views and their opinions about issues of public importance."

CNN is willing to run ads insinuating that a federal judge supports violent criminal activity, but it won't allow an ad celebrating the potential of all human life, including Barack Obama? Not to mention, we are fairly sure NARAL didn't get permission from John Roberts to run their ad.

If you want to express your concerns, please do so firmly, but charitably. You can write CNN President Jonathan Klein at jonathan.klein@cnn.com

So what now?

We aren't going to sit back and complain. We are still looking at several additional options to air the ad. We are also working on our next ad, and have set our sights high once again.

If you liked what we have done so far, we are confident you will be excited about what is coming next.


Brian Burch
CatholicVote.org



P.S. I discussed the decision by CNN to reject our recent ad with an executive of a prominent commercial ad agency. He said bluntly: "Their excuse is a textbook answer for a network that does not want to run your ad."

Of course, all is not lost. CNN's refusal will only create more attention for our ad, which has been widely discussed even among abortion groups like NARAL and nationally-syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman. The ad remains a viral hit on the Internet with over 1.6 million views on YouTube.

We have successfully provoked a national conversation about the gift of every human life -- which is why we created the ad to begin with.

Rest assured, we are working hard on the next phase of this campaign. Thank you for your continued prayers and support.

This message was intended for: mikepoast@gmail.com
You were added to the system January 20, 2009. For more information
click here.
Update your preferences | Unsubscribe

Paul or Cornelius: Who's Conversion do You Prefer?

Mr Keating is the founder of Catholic Answers-

KARL KEATING’S E-LETTER

September 23, 2008

TOPIC: Owing More to Cornelius Than to Paul

Dear Subscriber:

Whose conversion to Christianity was more important, that of Paul or that of Cornelius? “Why, Paul’s, of course,” you say. After all, who talks about Cornelius nowadays? Paul gets all the press—and for a good reason.

But let’s think this through. I believe one can argue that Cornelius’s conversion was the more important. Let me explain by turning to Luke’s Gospel, chapters 9 and 10, and looking at what happened to each man.

First of all, each had a vision, Paul having perhaps history’s most famous as he was on the road to Damascus. A light flashed around him, and he was knocked to the ground (whether from his feet or, as in traditional artwork, from a horse we don’t know). He heard a voice: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” The voice was Jesus’. Saul, now blind, was told to go into Damascus and to await further instructions. Meanwhile, in Damascus a man named Ananias had a vision, the Lord telling him to restore Paul’s sight and to baptize him.

Now let’s switch to Cornelius. He lived in Caesarea and was a Roman soldier—in fact, an officer commanding a century, which was a subdivision of a Roman legion. One afternoon Cornelius had a vision of an angel. The vision at first terrified him (an unsurprising response, I would think). The angel told Cornelius to send men to Joppa and to have them bring Peter to Caesarea. The phrasing indicates that Cornelius did not know who Peter was, but he obeyed at once, sending one of his trusted soldiers and two of his personal servants.

While the three were on their way to Joppa the next day, Peter himself had a vision, the one in which a giant sheet contained all sorts of animals, clean and unclean. In the vision Peter was told to eat the animals, but he protested against eating the unclean ones. The voice told him that it was God, not Peter, who would determine what was clean and what wasn’t. After the vision concluded, Peter sat thinking about it, and just then the men sent by Cornelius showed up. The next day Peter set off with them for Caesarea.

At the house of Cornelius Peter gave an address, and, as he ended, “the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word,” with graces coming even to the Gentiles. Peter asked, “Can anyone forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” Then the Gentiles—Cornelius included—were baptized.

Later Peter reported on these events to the other apostles, and they said, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance unto life.” (Keep in mind that Jesus had neither baptized nor authorized the baptism of Gentiles; the apostles here accepted Peter’s determination of what should be done.)

Let’s summarize. Paul and Cornelius received visions that resulted in their conversions. Paul was baptized by Ananias, a man of such little importance that he disappeared from Christian history, as though he had only a walk-on part. Cornelius, by contrast, was baptized by the first pope. Paul was brought into the Church in order to bring others in; he would become the first great missionary. What later became of Cornelius is unclear, but he and those with him were the first non-Jews to become Christians, which means that he was the prototype for most of us.

Which conversion was the more important—the one that opened the faith to the large majority of mankind (everyone who was not a Jew) or the one of the man who would begin the task of bringing in those people?

Fr. Vincent McNabb put it this way eighty years ago, “Paul’s conversion prepared the worker for the harvest; the call of Cornelius prepared the harvest-field for the worker.” While Paul’s conversion was “fateful for the Church, [it] was not so fateful as that of the centurion who, when he entered the flock of Christ, brought with him the world of Gentiles.”

This is not to say that Cornelius ended up the greater saint, of course, but it does suggest that we may profit from looking at biblical events in slightly different ways.

Until next time,

Karl

Do You Know The Power?

I just want to share my past week with you. Over the past weekend I had not been listening to the news to hear what was going on with the weather. So we go church on Sunday and we come out and we feel the wind just whipping around us and pushing Tyler along. We go to the grocery store, like we normally do, to buy Sunday dinner and food for the week. My niece Ryan was moving into her first apartment and after dropping off the groceries we changed and went to her apartment.

Ryan's apartment was filled with family and friends. As we sat in the living room we began noticing people's roofs coming apart, garbage cans being swept blocks up the street, and branches flying around like we were in Kansas (Wizard of Oz). Then the lights went out. After the second outage we all decided to head home. In Cincinnati we were not prepared for uprooted trees and power lines sparkling on most major roadways. Getting home was something of a puzzle. All the traffic lights were going out. Even the detours had detours. Once we finally got home we realized our power was out too. Alex got out a deck of cards and we played several games of 'Kings in the Corner' I went outside and spoke with my neighbor and remembered that my friend Stephanie had gotten a call that the city would be out of power for days.

My lights went out on Sunday and did not come back on until Wednesday afternoon. We, like many of our neighbors, lost all of our food and had no hot water. Over that span of time we visited my sister and parents probably more than we have all year. A very close friend of mine made sure we had candles and kept our home secure at night. So for three nights we had what I now call 'Kool Aid by candlelight' It has been difficult for many in our city, our family, and my close circle of friends to regroup and go on with daily life.

School was out for three days, only three grocery stores were open and getting gas was like a scene in an action movie. Our lives were simply at a standstill.
What I will cherish the most is the time I spent with my family, especially with my sons. Talking to them each night before going to sleep and running around the city making sure they were clean and fed made me realize how much I enjoy being their mother.

My life has changed so much. Sunday September 14, 2008 forced me to see life differently. What if I did not have electricity? What if I had to travel around the city daily searching for food and clean water? What if at night I had no place to sleep? God is amazing and He delivers us through our adversities. I want you to always remember that God has you through your situation. He loves you so much that He will allow a blackout to happen to prove that He is all you truly need. Be Blessed Arlinda

Pope Pelosi At the Gate

"In other words, human life begins at conception. That is not a religious posture, but a scientific fact that the lowest paid laborer on the planet can assert without qualm. What we do with that understanding is another matter, but no one in the 21st century should pretend not to know when human life begins."

read more | digg story

Look Before You Judge...or Pope Paul IV Was Right!

Who the hell am I? I mean i don't know everything, even though I am very sure of quite a bit. The world is a crazy place and it is extremely difficult to know who to believe. For me, track record says a lot. If what you say pans out I am going to listen up a little more the next time you have something to say; just makes sense right?

Well Pope Paul IV had something to say 40 years ago, and you could argue that it's all coincidence, that's fine. You should look into it though.

Forty years after "Humane Vitae"

BY FATHER PETER J. DALY

There was an eruption in the Catholic Church 40 years ago over the release of Pope Paul VI's encyclical letter Humanae Vitae ("Of Human Life").

At the time, secular culture pronounced it a "dead letter." Cultural critics said the church was out of touch with the modern age on the role of human sexuality.

"Humanae Vitae" was blamed for the erosion of respect for the church's moral teaching and the departure of many people from the Catholic Church.

But, at the time, secular culture made some pretty extravagant claims for the virtues of artificial contraception. Forty years on, it is worth asking: What about the claims of secular culture? Were they right?

Happier marriages?
The first birth control pill came on the market in the early 1960s. It was featured on the cover of news magazines. It was talked about on television. People said it would usher in a new and happier age of sexual relations.

Did it?

Forty years ago it was said that artificial contraception would make marriages happier and more stable. Freed from the stress of many children, married couples would be better able to concentrate on each other and their marriage.

So what happened?
The divorce rate has skyrocketed. Marriages are less stable. There were many cultural factors involved, of course, but whatever can be said about birth control, it has not made marriages happier or more stable in U.S. culture.

Forty years ago it was said that the pill would mean more fulfilled sex lives. People could be more spontaneous. Sex would be more joyful. People would be less repressed.

Did it happen?

Separating the sexual act from conception has degraded the meaning of sex, caused it to lose its significance. Instead of being special, a sign of love and commitment reserved for husbands and wives, it is now commonplace.
When something becomes commonplace it loses its allure. Ice cream and cake, for example, are special if reserved for birthdays. If eaten all the time, they are boring, even damaging.

Anti-child mentality
The pill has meant that sex is meaningless, the stuff of sit-coms and lurid talk shows.
In our modern world sex has nothing to do with making babies. It also has very little to do with making love. The surreal "Sex in the City" world has turned everyone into a sex object, because sex is seen as an act without meaning or consequence. It has more to do with giving pleasure to the self than showing love for the other.

Forty years ago the advocates for contraception said that it would mean fewer unwanted children. There would be less child abuse and neglect because children would be more wanted since they were more "planned."

Ironically, today children seem less wanted. They are seen not as gifts from God but as financial burdens. Television reporters do stories on the "total cost" of raising a child as if children could be compared to buying a boat or second home.

With the ability to prevent pregnancy came the presumption that you should prevent pregnancy. Babies are now regarded as a burden. Large families are regarded with derision even in Catholic circles.

Birth control has led to an anti-child mentality.

When a woman today begins to show with a third or fourth pregnancy, people ask her, "Did you make a mistake, dear?"

Forty years ago there was an explosion in the church over "Humanae Vitae." Now that the dust has begun to settle a bit, it seems that secular culture was wrong about many of its claims for birth control.

It helps to take the long view. Maybe that is God's view?

Catholic News Service

Father Peter J. Daly writes on church life from his parish, St. John Vianney in Prince Frederick, Md. He may be contacted at cns@Catholicnews.com.

Hannity's Gospel

A clip of Sean Hannity's "cafeteria" approach to Catholicism in arguing with Fr Thomas Euteneuer of HLI.ORG on FoxNews.This apparently happened last year and I am very shocked by Sean's position here. He obviously is misinformed about the faith he proclaims...Here's the deal, you do not have to be a Catholic, but if you choose to name yourself as an adherent to this faith it is incumbent upon you that you know what it means. Sean is very misguided and is wrong and illogical in the way that he argues. He engages in classic issue switching and relativistic arguments which take away from the central point of the debate. It is not if Sean is a good person, or if the Catholic Church is comprised of perfect people. The point is that if you are going communicate with other people it is critical that you agree on the meaning of terms. In this case Sean is wholly mistaken in his definition of The Catholic Faith; it is not what any one person decides it to be, but rather what Jesus Christ, The Apostles and The Holy Spirit say that it is. this is not a debatable point.

read more | digg story