Thankfully only his name is Law

By Cheryl Gevry
Featured Rightgrrl December 1998
December 27, 1998

A rebuttal to an article printed on Thursday, December 24 in the Boston Herald

Cardinal Bernard Law is at it again - now he's on the bandwagon about welfare reform. He claims that the new laws have been harshest on children. How about all the unborn children that will be saved when the young, unwed teenagers realize that the everyday taxpayer will no longer support their irresponsible behavior with state funded abortions and programs like WIC? Is it not the Catholic Church's agenda to prevent the senseless murder of unborn children?

Law reminds us not to become so involved in the merriment that we forget the families that were cut off from welfare. He goes on to mention that Massachusetts is experiencing unparalleled prosperity.

Perhaps the abusers of the system may wish to think of seeking employment during this time of prosperity? Which mother would willingly allow her children to go hungry rather than find alternative means to provide for them? Which selfish individual would deprive her children of proper provisions in order to avoid entering the workforce?

If there were such individuals, then Law would be better off spending his time preaching to them about love and responsibility than finding fault with much needed legislation. His idle tongue could be put to finer use imploring the Catholic Church to utilize their immeasurable amounts of money toward charitable contributions, rather than setting up awards dinners in honor of John Sweeney, President of the AFL-CIO. Coincidentally, the AFL-CIO is one of the largest contributors to the Democratic National Committee - the supporters of partial birth abortion.

Law decries the United States embargo in Iraq. Would he prefer we allow Saddam Hussein to create biological weapons to use in the Middle East? Maybe that is why the Catholic Church would prefer the United States not get involved; since the only country truly at risk would be Israel. He states that instead of food we send missiles. Is the United States involvement not one of good will - protecting the innocent from a dictator who has no concern for life or freedom?

As for the cost of these missiles that Law states as being $400,000,000 - is it not a small price to pay for life and freedom! Is any sum of money equivalent to even one human life? I would remind you that those who support the social programs that have not worked for decades continue to waste taxpayers' money in order to demean the poor and keep them under their thumb.

This article copyright © 1998 by Cheryl Gevry, and may not be reproduced in any form without the express written consent of its author. All rights reserved.