Protests Come to Campus Alongside Obama
Video by Amanda Summers-Plotno.
Among the students and locals crowded around Healy Gates Tuesday morning to catch a glimpse of President Obama, approximately seven pro-life protesters rallied in opposition to the pro-choice president and his visit to a Catholic university, while around 10 Georgetown students demonstrated against the pro-life protesters.
Obama’s reversal of two policies enacted by former President George W. Bush — one that prohibited federal funding for clinics that promote abortions and another that restricted embryonic stem-cell research — have angered some Catholics and drawn criticism from the Vatican. Thirty U.S. bishops and 260,000 people, according to The Irish Times, have signed a petition demanding the University of Notre Dame to withdraw its invitation to Obama to speak at its commencement this May.
Several protesters on Tuesday morning demonstrated against Georgetown’s invitation to the president by displaying signs such as “It’s murder, Georgetown” and “If you want a Catholic education don’t come to Georgetown.” They held several large photographs of graphic abortions, and one protestor even dressed in a suit, wore a mask of Obama’s face and painted his hands with fake stage blood. The protesters stood inside and outside of Georgetown’s front gates, shouting slogans with a megaphone.
A counter-protest led by 10 students, originally organized through Facebook by Mara Hollander (COL ’12), opposed the pro-life protesters.
“People need to know there’s more than one element to this discussion,” she said. “We were out there to provide a balance … to create an awareness that there are people at Georgetown who support choice.”
The cluster of students stood inside the gates and held signs declaring “I’m a Hoya for Choice” and chanting “We support Obama, we support choice.”
Randall Terry, a prominent pro-life activist, founder of Operation Rescue and leader of the Georgetown pro-life protest, described Georgetown’s invitation to the president as “… an affront to faithful Catholics and to the innocents we are charged to defend” as well as “[a deliberate poke] in the eye of the bishops and faithful Catholics who have condemned President Obama’s appearance at [the University of Notre Dame],” according to a press release from Christian Newswire.
GU Right to Life president Caitlin Devine (COL ’10) said the group was not contacted by any of the outside groups that held protests Tuesday and was therefore not aware of their plans.
Devine added that Georgetown’s invitation differed from Notre Dame’s, as Obama spoke specifically on the economic crisis and did not receive any honorary degree or speak at a commencement ceremony. But she emphasized that abortion policies can not be swept under the rug.
“Pressing life issues exist in the midst of this serious economic crisis,” Devine said.
University spokesperson Julie Bataille said that Georgetown is committed to supporting free speech and respecting all views.
“Georgetown does not endorse the views or statements of individual speakers but supports the right for a range of perspectives to be expressed,” she said.
Apr 15 2009 at 9:51 a.m.
Tousends of articles for seven pro-life protesters! Can somebody tell me please what is going wrong here. Could it be possible that a crazy and arrogant think tank is occupying the newspapers for their private war? And at what kind of club this arrogance is reminding us? Maybe the nobel club of incompetence we were forced to see over the last eight years?
Apr 15 2009 at 10:06 p.m.
Just one quick comment, the clinics Obama's administration now funds do not "promote" abortion. They do, however, offer the service and counsel women who find themselves facing an unintended or life threatening pregnancy. In the future, I hope that "The Hoya" will remember that nobody is pro-abortion. However, a number of GU students support a woman's right to control her body and receive complete, accurate medical information.
Apr 15 2009 at 11:55 p.m.
Ashley B. you should really read this article by Robert George - you will see that the proper term is indeed "pro-abortion"
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14.001.pdart
"According to the standard argument for the distinction between these labels, nobody is pro-abortion. Everybody would prefer a world without abortions. After all, what woman would deliberately get pregnant just to have an abortion?.... The defect in this argument can easily be brought into focus if we shift to the moral question that vexed an earlier generation of Americans: slavery. Many people at the time of the American founding would have preferred a world without slavery but nonetheless opposed abolition....Some (though not Jefferson) showed their personal opposition to slavery by declining to own slaves themselves or freeing slaves whom they had purchased or inherited. They certainly didn't think anyone should be forced to own slaves. Still, they maintained that slavery should remain a legally permitted option and be given constitutional protection.
Would we describe such people, not as pro-slavery, but as ''pro-choice''? Of course we would not. It wouldn't matter to us that they were ''personally opposed'' to slavery, or that they wished that slavery were ''unnecessary,'' or that they wouldn't dream of forcing anyone to own slaves. We would hoot at the faux sophistication of a placard that said ''Against slavery? Don't own one.'' We would observe that the fundamental divide is between people who believe that law and public power should permit slavery, and those who think that owning slaves is an unjust choice that should be prohibited." - Robert George
Apr 16 2009 at 1:39 p.m.
Georgetown again demonstrates that it is no longer a Catholic institution by providing Obama a platform and by covering up IHS for him (CBSnews.com Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name of Jesus to Comply With White House Request Wednesday, April 15, 2009).
The Georgetown University spokesperson Julie Bataille said that Georgetown is committed to supporting free speech and respecting all views.
U.S. bishops speaking and writing publicly against the decision of the University of Notre Dame to honor and host President Barack Obama at commencement have cited the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ 2004 statement “Catholics in Political Life” as support for their position. Therein, it states "The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions."
Obviously, Georgetown is either not aware of, or doesn't care about, the dictats of “Catholics in Political Life”.
For those of you who are still Catholics, and have not read this Bishops statement, it is provided below.
"Catholics in Political Life
We speak as bishops, as teachers of the Catholic faith and of the moral law. We have the duty to teach about human life and dignity, marriage and family, war and peace, the needs of the poor and the demands of justice. Today we continue our efforts to teach on a uniquely important matter that has recently been a source of concern for Catholics and others.
It is the teaching of the Catholic Church from the very beginning, founded on her understanding of her Lord’s own witness to the sacredness of human life, that the killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified. If those who perform an abortion and those who cooperate willingly in the action are fully aware of the objective evil of what they do, they are guilty of grave sin and thereby separate themselves from God’s grace. This is the constant and received teaching of the Church. It is, as well, the conviction of many other people of good will.
To make such intrinsically evil actions legal is itself wrong. This is the point most recently highlighted in official Catholic teaching. The legal system as such can be said to cooperate in evil when it fails to protect the lives of those who have no protection except the law. In the United States of America, abortion on demand has been made a constitutional right by a decision of the Supreme Court. Failing to protect the lives of innocent and defenseless members of the human race is to sin against justice. Those who formulate law therefore have an obligation in conscience to work toward correcting morally defective laws, lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good.
As our conference has insisted in Faithful Citizenship, Catholics who bring their moral convictions into public life do not threaten democracy or pluralism but enrich them and the nation. The separation of church and state does not require division between belief and public action, between moral principles and political choices, but protects the right of believers and religious groups to practice their faith and act on their values in public life.
Our obligation as bishops at this time is to teach clearly. It is with pastoral solicitude for everyone involved in the political process that we will also counsel Catholic public officials that their acting consistently to support abortion on demand risks making them cooperators in evil in a public manner. We will persist in this duty to counsel, in the hope that the scandal of their cooperating in evil can be resolved by the proper formation of their consciences.
Having received an extensive interim report from the Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians, and looking forward to the full report, we highlight several points from the interim report that suggest some directions for our efforts:
We need to continue to teach clearly and help other Catholic leaders to teach clearly on our unequivocal commitment to the legal protection of human life from the moment of conception until natural death. Our teaching on human life and dignity should be reflected in our parishes and our educational, health care and human service ministries.
We need to do more to persuade all people that human life is precious and human dignity must be defended. This requires more effective dialogue and engagement with all public officials, especially Catholic public officials. We welcome conversation initiated by political leaders themselves.
Catholics need to act in support of these principles and policies in public life. It is the particular vocation of the laity to transform the world. We have to encourage this vocation and do more to bring all believers to this mission. As bishops, we do not endorse or oppose candidates. Rather, we seek to form the consciences of our people so that they can examine the positions of candidates and make choices based on Catholic moral and social teaching.
The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.
We commit ourselves to maintain communication with public officials who make decisions every day that touch issues of human life and dignity.
The Eucharist is the source and summit of Catholic life. Therefore, like every Catholic generation before us, we must be guided by the words of St. Paul, “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the Body and Blood of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:27). This means that all must examine their consciences as to their worthiness to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord. This examination includes fidelity to the moral teaching of the Church in personal and public life.
The question has been raised as to whether the denial of Holy Communion to some Catholics in political life is necessary because of their public support for abortion on demand. Given the wide range of circumstances involved in arriving at a prudential judgment on a matter of this seriousness, we recognize that such decisions rest with the individual bishop in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles. Bishops can legitimately make different judgments on the most prudent course of pastoral action. Nevertheless, we all share an unequivocal commitment to protect human life and dignity and to preach the Gospel in difficult times.
The polarizing tendencies of election-year politics can lead to circumstances in which Catholic teaching and sacramental practice can be misused for political ends. Respect for the Holy Eucharist, in particular, demands that it be received worthily and that it be seen as the source for our common mission in the world.
Catholics in Political Life was developed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians in collaboration with Francis Cardinal George, OMI, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, OFMCap, and Bishop Donald W. Wuerl. It was approved for publication by the full body of bishops at their June 2004 General Meeting and has been authorized for publication by the undersigned.
Msgr. William P. Fay
General Secretary, USCCB
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3000 © USCCB. All rights reserved."
Apr 16 2009 at 5:14 p.m.
Approximately 7 protesters? Really? I think Obama has a lot more important thing to worry about than dealing with the same tired discussion that has consumed every major presidential debate for the past 15 years. Let him focus on things that actually matter.
Tx,
Please make sure the numbers are right
Apr 16 2009 at 5:51 p.m.
As a Catholic priest, educated by real Catholic Jesuits (well there were a few in the 1970's at the University of Scranton), I'd like to ask Mara just exactly how does one provide "balance" for an issue so central to the central teaching of Catholic education........
that EVERY LIFE is important.
I guess it doesn't matter to you whether your mother aborted you or not..........
or am I treading on "hate speech" as to be moderated out of the conversation.......
GU........selling it's soul like ND......
Ignatius pray for them! and for us!
Apr 16 2009 at 6:23 p.m.
How dare the University cover his NAME to honor the abortionist OBAMA. Vile filth -- throw out these weak and feeble minded Jesuits -- we need STRONG CATHOLIC LEADERS!
Apr 16 2009 at 6:26 p.m.
Forgive me if I am missing something here but how is inviting the President of the United States to speak at Georgetown anything like selling your soul? Calm down Padre. It's this kind of blind intolerance that has lead to the decline of the Catholic Church.
Apr 16 2009 at 9:45 p.m.
"I guess it doesn't matter to you whether your mother aborted you or not.........."
This is the most inane argument used by the anti-choice movement, the equivalent of responding to an argument with "whatever." It lacks both thought and a point. Every child should be a wanted child. Yes, I am here because I was a wanted child, so no my mother didn't abort me. And .... ?
And "real Catholic Jesuits"? Sounds like someone is judging. Unless you're in a direct communication with the Big Guy via your God phone, refrain from these petty statements.
Apr 17 2009 at 4:31 a.m.
To all those commenting about Georgetown not being "really Catholic:" No...One...Cares. Most people at Georgetown do not attend because it is nominally Catholic. It's reputation does not rest on its Catholicism. Nor does it report to the Archbishop of Washington. It reports to its board, comprised almost entirely of secular individuals. I am proud to call Georgetown my alma matter, and religion has nothing to do with it. For all you who went to Scranton or elsewhere, you press down on Georgetown because of its prominence, not its Catholicism. To be sure, no one would really care if a 'pro-choice' individual spoke at any Catholic school save for Georgetown, Notre Dame and perhaps BC.
Apr 17 2009 at 1:34 p.m.
As a socially conservative Catholic, I tend to follow the Church's teachings (ie. I'm pro-life). I know we may not agree with Obama in many issues. Honestly, we will never have that perfect politician that shares our same values.
Honestly whether he is pro-life or pro-choice, he is as human as us. We all have beliefs that not everyone will agree with.
Hate the sin, love the sinner. We should not be hypocrites. We all sin and do dumb stuff. I'm sure there are Catholics here at Georgetown that party at night and get drunk. Getting drunk is abusing your body. Not caring for what God has given you.
So instead of bashing Obama, we should pray for him so that he can make wise decisions.
Apr 17 2009 at 1:43 p.m.
It's no secret that the Univerity happily tossed our Catholic identity over the bridge many years ago. It continues to accommodate pro-choice activities. It accommodated the White House request for President Obama's speech this week to cover the monogram symbolizing the name of Jesus. To describe University spokeswoman Bataille's defense of this action as lame would simply be a kind assessment. Until the University President and his administration tender their resignations, there's no hope that our Catholic identity will breathe new life. The Catholic members of the University community deserve better than our post-morality administration.
Norma Laughrige
Law Cener Staff
Apr 17 2009 at 2:22 p.m.
Catholicism = hypocrisy....so why so serious?
Stop believing in fiction and prehaps justifying action in reality and not faith will become an easier task.
Apr 17 2009 at 2:39 p.m.
By and by angry ones...where was the outcry when Georgetown hosted Bush at the Kennedy Center on various occasions? Did he not wage the Iraq war and support the death penalty? Certainly not on the same level as abortion for Catholics, but nonetheless opposed by the Church. I know, I know - babies versus prisoners and all that.
Apr 17 2009 at 3:03 p.m.
Speaking as a graduate of the CAS and the Law School, I disagree with your position at least as pertains to the undergraduate school or as used to pertain thereto. When I attended GU, the Catholicism of the school as a Jesuit University was a big factor for many people choosing to attend GU. The majority of the students were Catholics (and it is my understanding that they still are - at least in name). Further, many if not most students regularly attended mass at GU.
Granted, GU is governed by a Board and no longer by the Jesuits. However, GU still holds itself out as a Catholic University. As such, GU does fall under the discipline of the archdiocese and of the Vatican. The apostolic constitution Ex corde Ecclesiae — issued by Pope John Paul II in 1990 — does define a Catholic college or university under the Church's canon law and imposes specific requirements on any institution that is permitted to bear the label "Catholic." If the college or university steadfastly refuses to abide by Ex corde Ecclesiae, the local bishop can declare the
institution no longer Catholic.
You further state that no one would care if a pro-choice individual spoke at any Catholic school other then ND or GU. This statement is woefully ignorant of the facts. For example:
Marist College - In 2003, Marist College was declared no longer Catholic, when the school invited then New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer to deliver the commencement address due to Spitzer's public pro-abortion rights positions.
Nazareth College and Saint John Fisher College - In 2005 were removed from The Official Catholic Directory, having been declared to no longer be a Catholic institution by the Rochestor Bishop after hosting The Vagina Monologues and then declaring they were not Catholic in response to a query from the bishop. Proceeds from the Saint John Fisher College’s presentation of the Monologues last year were given to Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the U.S. Nazareth College had hosted The Vagina Monologues for the fourth year in a row. The prior year’s performance was co-sponsored by the College’s campus ministry.
Marymount Manhattan College - On April 29, 2005, the Archdiocese of New York determined that Marymount Manhattan College was no longer a Catholic institutionthe college's announcement of its decision to invite then-Senator Hillary Clinton to deliver a commencement address and to confer an honorary doctoral degree upon her.
College of the Holy Cross - In October 2007 warned by its bishop due to the College’s renting space for a conference sponsored by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy. The conference involves workshops presented by members of Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. Both organizations promote positions on artificial contraception and abortion that are contrary to the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.
Misericordia University - In March 2009, was warned by Scranton diocese over its hosting of two public presentations by Keith Boykin. In at least one of his talks, he discussed advocacy for issues such as same sex marriage, and he addressed the intersection of religion and sexuality. The Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexual behavior was not presented at the event.
Maybe it doesn't matter to you whether or not GU remains a Catholic institution. Perhaps, you aren't Catholic yourself.
However, I would venture to guess that the catholicism of GU is important to many alumnae and to many prospective students who would be repelled by the thought that GU decided to make itself a private, non-secular institution.
Finally, if living one's Catholic faith is of no importance, then remember: Matthew 10:32-33 "Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father."
Apr 17 2009 at 3:12 p.m.
"No...One...Cares" This is pretty much dead on. Thanks for posting it.
Apr 17 2009 at 3:18 p.m.
OK, it's pretty clear that Scott M. cares, but I tend to agree with Gtown Alum and Vivek. "When I attended GU, the Catholicism of the school as a Jesuit University was a big factor for many people choosing to attend GU." Did Georgetown still bar women from attending when this statement was true?
Think on it, pray on it....
Apr 17 2009 at 4:03 p.m.
You really seem to know your facts here - good stuff. I also have some facts which can address the 2 issues on hand here. WHO REALLY CARES RIGHT NOW. obama did not come to georgetown to relate to your faith and fundamentally support the ideals of the catholic religion. Here's why he came (you would know this if you actually listened to his speech instead of thinking about dying babies): because Georgetown is an amazing educational institution, and many of tomorrow's financial and political leaders will come out of schools like Georgetown. His message was that if we keep our eyes open we can learn a lot from the recession and use that knowledge to make the world economy a more stable place down the road. Great, i understand abortion is an issue that will be on the table perhaps forever. but, really? is this really the time for that crap? we're trying to get consumers going again, get unemployment down - generally stimulate the economy...and you guys are raving about abortion? again, i know its a big issue, but i'm sorry I think the clusterf*** that is our economy may be a BIT larger right now. you know what we need? everyone to come together so we can come out the other end employed and able to own homes and feed ourselves. you know what we DONT need right now? a friggin abortion debate. seriously. grow up.
Apr 17 2009 at 5:17 p.m.
In response to "Joe Hoya", at one time GU did not permit women to attend the CAS but they did attend the SLL and the NS. However, when I attended GU, the CAS was 50% female.
In response to "D Alum", it isn't a question as to why Obama came or didn't come, rather it is a question of whether or not the university stands up for its Catholic beliefs. Regarding your cavalier attitude towards the "friggin abortion debate", and your more "serious" desire to spend your way out of bankruptcy, you statements speak for themselves.
Apr 17 2009 at 5:55 p.m.
Scott M., pretty hard to substantiate anything you are saying given that you continue to play the, guess the year I graduated game.
Think on it, pray on it
Apr 17 2009 at 6:14 p.m.
Scott you seem to be distracted by the fact that I have used the word "friggin" but unfortunately the alternative word i wished to use to express my frustration is not appropriate here. Since you prefer very proper English (and since a casual writing style apparently weakens an argument), i'll lay it out in that way for you. There is a time and a place for a discussion about the right to choose vs. the right to life. While I certainly do not have a "cavalier" attitude about the abortion debate (apparently putting other people's words in quotes also weakens an argument), I don't appreciate people putting off-topic issues on the table. I gaurantee a lot of people missed a very important message about that entire day because they were consumed in holding up signs which compared Obama to Hitler or Mussolini. And why is GU not standing up for its catholic beliefs according to you? Because someone who supports gay rights and is pro-choice spoke to us? or because we covered up Jesus's picture? I'm hoping, nay, praying that you have a better answer for me than either of those two because that would be offensive. I bet you were one of those people thoroughly offended by the April Fools issue too.
I won't even bother with tackling whatever attempt at an economic argument that was at the end there. for your benefit - stick to the religious debate.
Apr 17 2009 at 8:13 p.m.
D Alum, either you are not a Catholic, which would explain your lack of concern over GU acting in a manner consistent with maintaining its Catholic identity, or if you are a Catholic, you do not seem to understand the Church's position on abortion as an intrinsic evil that should be opposed by all faithful Catholics, the Church's position on Catholics in Political Life, or Ex Corde Ecclesiae.
Apr 17 2009 at 10:35 p.m.
Letting someone speak, even if you disagree with them, seems to be allowed by the Catholic Church. And beyond the simple fact that Obama was not talking about abortion rights at all - so this is really an inane argument on the level of substance based on what he came here for - I'd think that the Church, Georgetown and any other reputable institution would rather dialogue than one-sided declarations and attitudes.
Stop thinking that a Catholic university requires indoctrination as part of its mission statement. Georgetown would not be where it is today if that were the case throughout its history. Vibrant debate is what breeds good students, not shrill refusal to consider other positions.
Apr 18 2009 at 12:18 a.m.
I have repeatedly tried to provide, here, proper witness to the Catholic faith as supported by pastoral letters and Vatican apostolic decrees.
However, I cannot persuade people who base their arguments and beliefs on what they desire without any theological base.
As a Catholic who is struggling to faithfully practice my faith consistent with the teachings of the Church, I am responsible for acting in a manner consistent with that faith. As Georgetown no longer appears to be attempting to inculcate the Catholic faith in its students and doesn't appear to be behaving in a manner consistent with the Church's guidance to Catholic institutions, I cannot continue to financially support Georgetown. Rather, I will re-direct my financial contributions to more faithful Catholic institutions.
I doubt John Carroll would have ever envisaged or countenanced Georgetown as it functions today.
Apr 18 2009 at 12:49 a.m.
Scott M.,
Do you think John Carroll would have envisioned the world as it functions today?
Apr 18 2009 at 1:42 a.m.
WF:
You have baited me into responding.
It doesn't matter whether or not Archbishop Carroll would have envisaged the present world. Rather, he would have rightly expected Catholics and Catholic institutions to remain faithful to the tenants of our faith.
As the first bishop of the hierarchy of the United States of America and the first Bishop and Archbishop of Baltimore, Archbishop Carroll's faith was defined by the Nicene Creed which was approved in amplified form at the Council of Constantinople in 381 Anno Domini (not CE) and is the profession of the Christian Faith common to the Catholic Church, to all the Eastern Churches separated from Rome, and to most of the Protestant denominations.
Over two hundred years later, our faith is still defined by the same Nicene Creed.
The tenants of our faith have not changed since Georgetown was founded by John Carroll as the first Catholic college in America.
As a reminder,
NICENE CREED
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.
Amen.
The Ten Commandments haven't changes since the founding of the Republic, either, and John Carroll believed in them, also and would have expected Georgetown to remain faithful to them and to defending and espousing Catholic beliefs.
Apr 22 2009 at 1:33 p.m.
Scott M., you are a tool...