Letters to the Editor

Submit a letter to the editor electronically | For our letter writing policy, click here

When it comes to abortion, end justifies means in undercover reporting, reader says

This letter is in regard to the article on page 2 of the Aug. 7 issue of The Criterion, “Ethical issues arise from California center’s ‘undercover’ videos.”

I agree with Vicki Evans, coordinator of the San Francisco Archdiocese’s Respect Life Program, and Roberto Dell’Oro, director of the Bioethics Institute at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.

It seems that the article says, and quotes the Catechism of the Catholic Church as proof, that it may be a greater sin to lie than to do what is necessary to bring a horrible, barbaric activity to light so that it can be stopped.

Planned Parenthood is in the abortion business, plain and simple. The majority of their business is abortion. A 2011 Planned Parenthood report showed 334,000 abortions, 28,674 prenatal services, and 2,300 referrals to adoption agencies. And they do no mammograms.

For me, it is more important to stop the abortions and the sale of baby parts if I can than to be “completely truthful” and have none of the truth come out. If these women had known to whom they were really talking, none of the chilling conversations would ever have taken place and we would never have known for sure aborted baby parts (hearts, lungs, livers) were going for the most money possible.

Remember, we are talking about a totally innocent, totally defenseless human life. What, in the eyes of God, is more important than the life of one of his children? Not telling a lie?

- Lowell McLaughlin | Aurora
 

Editorial writer’s message undoes Pope Francis’ pastoral outreach

I was very disappointed and hurt by John Fink’s editorial in the Aug. 28 issue of The Criterion attempting to explain what Pope Francis said about divorced and remarried Catholics. I am divorced and remarried.

Pope Francis wrote in a compassionate and pastoral manner, whereas Mr. Fink finds it necessary to call us adulterers repeatedly. This is hardly the tone of the pope’s message.

At the end of his editorial, Mr. Fink suggests more people should be barred from Communion.

Is this the role of an editorial writer—to call out those he thinks should not be receiving Communion? Is this an appropriate and respectful response to our remarkable pope’s message?

I think Pope Francis would be disturbed by this attempt to undo his pastoral outreach.

How about letting the pope speak for himself?

- Mia Namow | Indianapolis