Plan B decision is another step toward population control

Re: “Parents fear Plan B reversal puts daughters at risk” (News Analysis, June 30).

The Obama administration has reversed course and now agrees with U.S. District Court Judge Edward Korman’s one-sided order that Plan B contraceptives be provided over-the-counter to anyone.

Why did Korman, Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice groups fight so hard for this ruling? While cloaking the birth control issue under the guise of woman’s health and right to choose (now that will include little girls), the objective is — and always has been — population control. According to pro-choice advocacy groups going back to their zero population growth roots, humans are bad for the planet. Pro-choice groups, led by a single judge, have now included children in their advocacy, who at an early reproductive age can birth more unwanted babies that society will be challenged to feed and nurture, adding to the overall population problem. A woman’s health and right to choose mantra is a clever penumbra that masks the real issue behind the pro-choice movement, population control.

Richard Smith, Garden Valley, Idaho

Exemplary life

I am thrilled that Pope John Paul II, a man of deep faith, will soon be proclaimed a saint by the Catholic Church! He was an inspiration and a model witness to the life of Christ; a shepherd of truth immersed in profound humility and immense love for both God and man.

His many writings and worldwide pilgrimages of faith have been a source of strength, encouragement, confidence, optimism and enlightenment not only to Catholics but to all men of good will.

He lived the Christian virtues in an heroic way. He was slow to condemn and quick to forgive, applying the medicine of mercy to all sinners — including the man who tried to assassinate him.

Alongside his historic role in the fall of communism, Pope John Paul was the world’s most influential and uncompromising defender of the dignity of human life. His tenacious pleas for the development of a “culture of life” and parallel denunciations of the “culture of death” have been instrumental in rallying opposition to war, terrorism, abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, contraception and embryonic-tissue research.

Paul Kokoski, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Remember Roe ruling

Re: “Serving two masters” (Letters to the Editor, June 30).

I am truly amazed that M.H. Anderson of Louisville had never heard of a pro-life Democrat. Thank you, Rebecca Hamilton.

From this I must assume also that Anderson does not know how abortion became the law of the land. When Republican Richard Nixon was president, a Republican-controlled Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on this. At that time there were only three justices appointed by Democrats serving. Two voted “yes” and one voted “no.”

This showed clearly that the Republicans in the court sent down the ruling.

Thomas Raines, Pensacola, Fla.

Missed opportunity

Re: “Anybody out there?” (Spectator, June 23).

Greg Erlandson asks the question, “What does it mean to be a Catholic journalist?” He agrees with Russell Shaw’s observation that “a Catholic journalist is called to be honest, intelligent and loyal.” Sometimes OSV strays from this. In a June 9 article by Brian Fraga (“Enforcement of teachings puts Church in uneasy spot”), Jesuit Father Thomas J. Reese makes statements about individuals being fired by the Church for sexual sins. He challenges the Church’s handling of these matters and thus puts doubts in readers’ minds about the morality of these issues. OSV should not allow his statements to go unanswered.

When a sin is committed and bad example is on display, the Church is obligated to address the matter — whether sexual or otherwise. It is important to answer such statements at the point in the article where the statements are made.

Michael P. Smyth, Finksburg, Md.

Gender identity

Re: “Male-female distinctions” (Pastoral answers, June 2).

I agree with Msgr. Charles Pope when he states that being male or female is “a distinction that goes to the very depths of our being, including our soul.” He notes that it is a common error to reduce sexual distinction to merely physical characteristics.

However, Msgr. Pope gives sex change as an example of this error. It is actually the opposite in most instances. Most of those transgendered individuals who do this are attempting to bring their body into congruence with their mind and soul. They truly feel like a fish out of water. Their mind is oriented differently than their body.

The Church needs to keep itself aligned with science, as preached by Pope Benedict XVI. Let’s not get it wrong, as we did with the solar system.

John Murray, Philadelphia, Pa.

Editor’s note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church makes it clear that such procedures are incongruous with Church teaching:

“Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law” (No. 2297).