Democrat Baby Lynching

from THE AMERICAN CATHOLIC    August 9, 2019


Guy McClung

The  assertion that our Founding Fathers hid the right of mothers for baby killiing in the shadows of our Constitution, and hid it so well that it took two centuries for the prodeath Democrats to discover it,  is another chapter in the Democrat Party’s deadly lust for power. They are again engaging in their typical, centuries-old,   agenda of political dehumanization that leads to the pain, torture, and deaths  of human beings, which now  includes babies – both born and unborn. In fairly recent history, regimes with such an agenda have killed over 100 million human beings.

Democrats’ present denial of the humanity of babies is eerily reminiscent of their previous denial of the humanity of African-Americans. Benjamin Tillman, Democrat governor of South Carolina (1890-1894 A.D.) and later a U. S. Senator, provided a succinct summary of the Democrat dehumanization ideology and its use as the justification for lynching:

We of the South have never recognized the right of the negro to govern white men, and we never will. We have never believed him to be the equal of the white man, and we will not submit to his gratifying his lust on our wives and daughters without lynching him.

Change a few of Tillman’s words, think in terms of how they Party Of Death spokespersons today have proclaimed “reproductive freedom,” that includes  baby killing, as “health care,”  and  the  “autonomy” of “my body my self,” and the above speech is today’s Democrat abortion lynching manifesto.

Party Of Death, Truly

Human deaths are the inevitable result of the Party Of Death’s position on abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, cloning,  assisted suicide, and now, infanticide.   This is the reason why there is no doubt that the Democrat party is the Party Of Death. Their “open borders” policy for importing new voters to replace the minority voters [who, in ever increasing numbers, are seeing through the Democrat lies], also has led to and will lead to  citizens dying, citizens being the victims of illegal aliens’ crimes, including murder. [Their coming here being facilitated by those who know they will overwhelmingly vote Democrat, legally or illegally, is another story.]

Top Democrats Support the Right to Infanticide

Many Democrats and  the overwhelming majority of the top contenders for the Democrat Party’s nomination for the presidency in 2020 support the killing of babies who are born alive after an attempted abortion.    This is infanticide  – infant  cide – baby murder.  Extension of the court-created right to abortion to include a woman’s right to baby murder will undoubtedly be an integral  part of the Party’s 2020 Platform. And again, it will be no surprise that any effort to include “God” in the platform will be quashed.

There may have been a time when this party was ‘democratic,” but that time is long gone. Totalitarians are in absolute control of this Party Of Death. There is no democracy here; only numerous amoral and immoral litmus tests and requirements for unwavering adherence to  deathly socialist dogmas, which, if rejected, make one a democrat heretic. One must publicly vow to accept and to promote, proclaiming  “Credo,” I believe, all these democrat dogmas to be a democrat candidate for any office,  or to be  part of the party’s power elite.

The latest dogma of the Democrat magisterium is an alleged  mother’s constitutional  right to infanticide. As one democrat presidential candidate says, for democrats this is a “sacred choice for women.”

Extrajudicial Murder

Lynching is  extrajudicial  murder by a group of people. Prior to the time of the court creation of the right to abortion in 1973, it is estimated that in all of U.S. history that there were about 5,000 lynchings, group murders, the extralegal killings of both some guilty of crimes and of some who were innocent.

Those who today  kill innocents or who kill those denied due process of law and a fair trial are, right now,  criminally liable for such murders.  It is no wonder that the Party Of Death is trying to get the baby murderers off the hook by creating the constitutional right to infanticide.

Just like the lynchings by Democrats in the past, these present day baby lynchings are “extrajudicial,” or outside the law.  At present, no legislature, nor the Congress and Senate, and no majority of justices on the Supreme Court have enlarged the scope of the right to abortion or have “found” a right to infancticide in the Constitution.  So, until the Democrats get the deadly change they want, their current baby lynchings are extrajudicial.

Killing Little Citizens

For now, the Democrats of the Party Of Death must face the issue of babies born alive after an attempted abortion. [Yes,  there are babies born alive after an attempted abortion]. Any such baby is a U.S. Citizen with all the rights guaranteed to each citizen by the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the amendments added after the original ratification of the Constitution.  Even “anchor babies” born here to illegal aliens enjoy these rights of citizenship. If the scope of the right to abortion is not enlarged, or a new right to infanticide is not discovered in the penumbras of some language in the Constitution, then  the Democrats will be unable to prevent legislation that makes it clear – killing a baby who survives an abortion is murder.

This will make the executives of baby killing businesses, the baby killers themselves, the murderous doctors and the nurses with bloody hands, and all who aid and abet them murderers under the law.

Celebration of Murder,  Lynchings as Public Spectacles

In some cases, often in nineteenth century America, lynchings were planned and announced long before the actual time of the event. Some were conducted as public spectacles. Trains brought whole families to the lynching site. Thousands, even ten thousand,  were sometimes present for a previously-scheduled lynching. Photographs were taken, live victim before and dead corpse after, photos of the assembled throng and of families – including women and children – and individual spectators, photos of the living  with the dead victim’s corpse, and photos of the victims while  dying.

Such photographs were often sold as souvenirs, many in the form of postcards  A writer for Time magazine noted:

Even the Nazis did not stoop to selling souvenirs of Auschwitz, but lynching scenes became a burgeoning subdepartment of the postcard industry. By 1908, the trade had grown so large, and the practice of sending postcards featuring the victims of mob murderers had become so repugnant, that the U.S. Postmaster General banned the cards from the mails”   [In Without Sanctuary (2000), a book of lynching postcards collected by James Allen.

Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Leon F. Litwack wrote:

The photographs stretch our credulity, even numb our minds and senses to the full extent of the horror, but they must be examined if we are to understand how normal men and women could live with, participate in, and defend such atrocities, even reinterpret them so they would not see themselves or be perceived as less than civilized. The men and women who tortured, dismembered, and murdered in this fashion understood perfectly well what they were doing and thought of themselves as perfectly normal human beings. Few had any ethical qualms about their actions. This was not the outburst of crazed men or uncontrolled barbarians but the triumph of a belief system that defined one people as less human than another. . . . One has only to view the self-satisfied expressions on their faces as they posed beneath black people hanging from a rope or next to the charred remains of a Negro who had been burned to death. What is most disturbing about these scenes is the discovery that the perpetrators of the crimes were ordinary people, not so different from ourselves – merchants, farmers, laborers, machine operators, teachers, doctors, lawyers, policemen, students; they were family men and women, good churchgoing folk . . ..

Democrats are no different today from their lynching predecessors. Having finally admitted the decades-long chanting of their mantra  of making abortion “safe, rare, and legal” was intentional subterfuge,  they now are showing their true dark colors by encouraging baby killers to publicly “celebrate” their lynchings; and to demonically “shout” their abortions.

Monstrous Murders

It is difficult, in some cases heart-wrenching and sickening, to research the various lynching methods Democrats used in both the 19th and the 20th centuries. Some of these methods were monstrous and diabolical.  They included hanging;  quick burning alive, or slow, controlled burning which was, in essence, cooking a live human being to death;  repeated branding of the victim with red-hot irons while still alive; and  shooting a victim again and again, carefully, so that many shots were used to ultimately kill the victim.

In some ways, the post-abortion lynchings of babies born alive today are worse than any of the previously-known lynching methods. The living child is already suffering from the attempted abortion. Perhaps with bleeding stumps where limbs have been torn away; perhaps with open wounds where their tiny bodies have been punctured and opened by medical instruments of killing; perhaps with breathing difficulties when only one  lung is operational or only one lung remains.  Perhaps these babies are immobile due to the fact that their killers have broken their spinal cords or their necks, each of their futile, attempted breaths an agony.

No Harvest of Organs of  Still-Living Lynching Victims – Until Today

In the case of some lynchings, body parts of a victim, including genitalia, were taken, cut away, then put on display, and sometimes distributed as souvenirs. Slave markets were common before the Civil War, but there was no established market for the organs and body parts of slaves or for the victims of lynchings.

Today, the abortion-generate organ and body part market thrives in the United States. No wonder Party Of Death presidential candidate Kamala Harris, while in power in California, was a driving force, working with Planned Parenthood, to have criminal charges brought against Sandra Merritt and David Deleiden, true modern day prolife heroes,  for their courageous expose of Planned Parenthood’s  baby butchering business and organ sales.

So long as what is growing safe and happy within a mother is mere property – my cell mass, my body, my self, my property – the sale of the “property,” or parts of it, make perfect sense. To put legal restrictions on such sales – according to Party of Death logic –  is to put an undue burden on a woman’s, or girl’s, property rights and freedom. And such restrictions would mean they can no longer sign over their “property” to Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses.

If the Party Of Death is successful in its efforts to make the right to infanticide part of the right to abortion, there will be nothing to stop the sale of a live baby who has survived an abortion, nothing to stop the harvesting of organs and body parts from the child while still alvie  before it is “terminated” successfully, and nothing to prevent in vivo vivisection for “educational” purposes of a living child.

Farfetched? Deluded? Crazy thinking ?  Go back to 1965 and tell the citizens of America that one day Planned Parenthood will be selling babys’ organs, and doing this legally, based on seven men creating the constitutional right that makes it possible. You would cause eyes to roll and caring relatives to consider having you committed to a psychiatric ward.

Democrat Opposition to Anti-Lynching Laws & Now Anti-infanticide Laws

Again and again over our history the Democrats of death opposed anti-lynching legislation at both the state and the federal level. Even during the presidency of Democrat saint Franklin D. Roosevelt the Democrats were successful in preventing the passage of such laws. Their successful defeat of the federal Dyer anti-lynching legislation in the 1920s and similar legislation in the 1930s are but two examples of their program of dehumanization and death. As in so many cities and states today,  de facto Democrat one-party rule made and makes it possible for the Democrats to stifle any such legislation.

Try as they may to assert that those Democrats were really Republicans, or “We are no longer like that,” the response to the Democrats is:  if it walks like a godless totalitarian, talks like an adovcate of  dehumanization, and looks like a killer of unborn children, it is a Democrat, a modern day proponent of baby lynching.

Today, Democrat death dealers see the efforts – at both the state and federal level – to protect babies born alive after an abortion as a restriction on what is viewed by them as an absolute right. No other right in our history has been accorded such a legally sacred status.

This is why efforts to at least get the Democrats to vote, on the record, in the House of Representatives to proceed to a vote on proposed federal anti-infanticide legislation has been thwarted now over 70 times by the Democrats. In early 2019, the Democrat senators running for president — Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand and Bernie Sanders — all voted to block an anti-infanticide bill in the U.S. Senate.

Conclusion-Democrats,  Stone Cold Killers 

In an article entitled “Murder: It’s A Democrat Thing,”  Selwyn Duke pulls no punches about Democrat baby lynching:

Leftists were once part of the counter-culture, but the only culture that’s truly theirs is the Culture of Death . . .  So you can point fingers, modern Democrats, but in your hearts, some of you, I suspect, know exactly what too many of you are: stone-cold killers. [The American Thinker, August 7, 2019]

Two questions:

  1. How will the failed and the malevolent bishops and cardinals deliver the Catholic vote to the Democrats in 2020?  Make no mistake, these  faux shepherds must and they will  find some new way, some new program of lies to try to  deliver the Catholic vote to their Democrats – while ignoring the fact they are advocates of baby lynching.
  1. And, a second question: Why cannot anti-lynching laws now in force, state and federal, be used to indict, prosecute, convict, and imprison those who today kill baby U.S. Citizens who have survived an abortion?



Hell-Vote Yourself In 2016



Hell – Vote Yourself In 

What is presented here applies to some individuals;  but it applies to all members of the  Party  f Democrats, which is the Party Of Intrinsic Evil, the Party of Death 

It is a mortal sin for a baptized person with a well-formed conscience to vote for any Democrat (and their ilk) 

Guy McClung, J.D., Ph.D.


Hell – Vote Yourself In

by Guy McClung Feb. 20, 2016


Yes, say the Democrats, indeed there is a Hell; and, even further, what you do politically can result in you ending up in Hell. And, although “Who am I to judge?” is the new tolerance, even of perversion, we now have a papal pronouncement that you can indeed judge individual political candidates by name as not Christian, and, implicitly, affirm that they can end up in that Hell.

Since 2007 I have been trying to spread the word  – “Mortal Sin Vote Democrat.” In all its fullness, this word is: “It is a mortal sin for a baptized person with a well-formed conscience to vote for any Democrat at any level of government.”

Now, no one less than one of Hillary Rodham C’s higher minions has confirmed that, Yes, hell exists and, Yes, you can go to hell for your political activity and voting. Thank you, Madam Madleine Albright, who, with Hillary at her side applauding and laughing with approval, preached some campaign-trail hellfire and brimstone. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright introduced Hillary Clinton at a campaign event at Rundlett Middle School in Concord, New Hampshire, on Feb. 6, 2016:

“Hillary Clinton will always be there for you. And just remember, there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.”

This is the same Madam Albright who was asked on the TV show 60 minutes in  1996 “We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” To which she replied: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.”(That “we” was her and then President Clinton). Who am I to judge that there is a  place, a very special one, in Hell for that ?

Finally – the issue is not “does hell exist?” The issue is not: can a vote for a particular person be the act that merits eternal damnation for the voter? Hillary’s spokeswoman has made it  clear that these two issues have been resolved in the affirmative.

The question now is this: Is it a mortal sin (i.e. you vote, you don’t repent, you die, you go to hell) to vote for a Democrat?  I answer that question with a resounding “Yes!”

There are certainly circumstances in which there is no debate, not even liberal closet-Democrat clergy would argue, that a vote for a Democrat is a mortal sin. For example, if a person votes for no other reason than that voting for a Democrats will give them control of government and they will pass legislation so that our tax dollars will be used to kill living children who survive an abortion attempt, or tax dollars will be used only to kill black babies in abortions, that is a mortal sin. There are numerous other examples, undisputed, of when voting for a Democrat (or anyone for that matter) is a mortal sin. But now the question is – is it always under any and all circumstances a mortal sin to vote for a Democrat?

In their recent documents dealing with voting, the U.S. bishops have made it crystal: “A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who favors a policy promoting an intrinsically evil act, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, deliberately subjecting workers or the poor to subhuman living conditions, redefining marriage in ways that violate its essential meaning, or racist behavior, if the voter’s intent is to support that position.” (The Bishops 2016 document, Forming Consciences For Faithful Citizenship- The U.S. Bishops’ Reflection On Catholic Teaching And Political Life).

The message I have been trying to spread for years  –  in dozens of letters to editors across the country, in several published articles, and in numerous blah blah blah blog comments – is that, no matter who and no matter which office, it is a mortal sin for a baptized person with a well-formed conscience to vote for any Democrat office holder or candidate. The reasoning goes like this:  According to the Church, there are some “intrinsic evils;” actions so evil, so totally wicked, that there is no circumstance, no situation, no mitigating factors, no other considerations, no “proportionate reasons”  that could make such actions morally acceptable.  Part of forming one’s conscience is to learn the facts about the Democrat Party, its platform, and its leaders – what they have done in the past, are presently doing, and what they have promised to do in the future  – to support, advocate for, promote, and directly involve government in intrinsic evils. Therefore, a person who knows all this – which is part of what a person with a well-formed conscience knows – cannot in good conscience vote for any Democrat, even those “personally opposed” Democrats. Such a vote would be a mortal sin – and condemn the voter to Albright’s “special place in hell” for all eternity. This is expanded on in my Virtuous Citizenship 2014 at and

In their voting document in 2014, Faithful Citizenship, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops stated that there were two intrinsic evil actions: racism and abortion. In their 2016 document, the bishops state that an intrinsically evil action is a   “thing we must never do” and  they have listed  intrinsically evil actions in addition to abortion and  racism: “ . . . other acts that directly violate the sanctity and dignity of human life are also intrinsically evil. These must always be opposed.”  They go on to say: “Other direct assaults on innocent human life, such as genocide, torture, and the targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified. Nor can violations of human dignity, such as acts of racism, treating workers as mere means to an end, deliberately subjecting workers to subhuman living conditions, treating the poor as disposable, or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, ever be justified.”

It is notable that other things, which are not necessarily good or necessarily evil, are not included in “intrinsic evils;” things like actions of war, taxation, immigration policy, welfare policy, and environmental policies.

For decades there has been push-back from Church members, clergy and hierarchy who fear that telling the truth about mortal-sin voting will result in Democrat candidates losing, which,  all things being equal, will – horror of horrors – translate to Republicans winning.  But not voting for a Democrat leads to options besides voting for a Republican opponent – such as voting for another candidate, not voting, or writing in another person’s name – and if there is a moral obligation to tell voters they put their souls in mortal danger by voting for a Democrat, it is no justification for voting for a Democrat to say another candidate or a  member of another party is bad.  It is as if one were to say, well, in the Bundy vs Dahmer race, you can in good conscience vote for Dahmer since Bundy too is wicked. You cannot vote for Hitler over Stalin.  And those church folks who support Democrats, including clergy and hierarchy, have trotted out, very successfully, a series of  inadequate responses: “seamless garment;” “proportionate reasons;” and “not single issue voters” to name a few.

The “not single issue voters” has struck a chord in the past and succeeded in getting many Democrats elected, with the deciding votes cast by Catholics. I was at a parish on Tomball Parkway in Texas during the campaign leading to the second term of the current Democrat president at which the pastor held up the voting document of the bishops and told the congregation that it said that we Catholics are not single-issue voters, and so we can vote for candidates who may be wrong on one issue, but who are right on others. He ignored the teaching on intrinsic evils. Putting aside the fallacy of his statement, we are no longer talking about a single issue, such as abortion. Now we lay at the feet of the Party of Death (for so they are called by Cardinal Burke), numerous evils. This Party Of Death is also the Party Of Abortion, the Party Of Euthanasia, the Party of Human Cloning,  the Party of Destructive Embryonic Research, the Party of Racism – of  RETA  (racially targeted eugenic abortion), the Party of the Destruction of the  Institution of Marriage, and Party of the Denial of Religious Liberty. The Party Of Death is now The Party Of Intrinsic Evil.

The so-called “seamless garment” argument was used, by both laity and clergy,  to provide cover for Democrat failure on pro-life issues, while trumpeting their success on other issues like employment, hunger, poverty, “social justice,” and education. Instead of focusing on the one evil that results in the murder of about 3800 babies a day in the USA, the “seamless garment” subterfuge said that pro-life issues are not limited to abortion,  but include all these other good things that government can do, many of which a pro-death candidate will do if elected. With what has happened since Roe V. Wade, this “seamless garment” is in shreds and more stained than Monica Lewinsky’s famous apparel. In the case of abortion, it is stained with the blood of millions of babies.

An appeal to “proportionate reasons” can no longer buttress the claim that it is moral to vote for a Democrat.  There is nothing proportional to the annual killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent babies.  There is nothing proportional to the purposeful directed eugenic killing of millions of black babies and millions of  hispanic babies. As Bishop John Myers of Newark said:  “Certainly policies on welfare, national security, the war in Iraq, Social Security or taxes, taken singly or in any combination, do not provide a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.”

Save a soul, spread the words:  You can judge an individual candidate – as in judge that, for what they do, they will go to hell, and so will you if you vote for them with a well-formed conscience; no member of the Party Of Intrinsic Evil can hide behind “I am personally opposed,” or sneak around in a seamless garment; and  this is true” “Mortal Sin Vote Democrat.”



by Guy McClung, J.D., Ph.D. 

What is presented here applies to some individuals; but it applies to all members of the Party Of Democrats, which is the Party Of Intrinsic Evil, the Party of Death 


  1. Who made you?
  2. God made me.

Why did God make you?

  1. God made me to know, love and serve Him in this world to be happy with Him forever in heaven.
  1. How can I serve God here and be happy with God forever in Heaven?
  2. You can be happy with God forever in Heaven by turning to Him consciously desiring to be with Him forever, by doing His will even if it is contrary to your will, and by obeying His laws.


  1. What are human rights?
  2. Human rights are the rights you and every human being have because God made you with inherent human dignity.


  1. Do governments create or grant these rights?
  2. No, these rights are yours and are the rights of every human being due to the inherent human dignity embodied in you and created by God. No government gives you these rights, no government creates these rights, and no law or government grants you these rights.


  1. Does the President create rigths or grant them to us?
  2. The President does not create any rights. The President does not grant you any rights. No government official, no politician, no elected person, no legislation, and no public office holder gives you your human rights, creates these rights, or grants you these rights.
  3. Can a government or an elected official take away these inherent human rights?
  4. No, these human rights are inalienable and cannot be taken away by a government or by an elected official.


  1. What is the most basic human right?
  2. The most basic human right is the right to life and all human beings are endowed by their Creator with this most basic of human rights from the first moment they are alive within their mothers.




  1. What is sin?
  2. Sin is consciously turning from God, acting according to your will and against your conscience when you know it is contrary to His will, and disobeying His law.
  3. How many kinds of sin are there?
  4. There are two kinds of sin, mortal sin and venial sin.
  5. What is venial sin?
  6. Venial sin is a slight offence against God, committed without sufficient reflection or without full consent.
  7. What is mortal sin?
  8. Mortal sin is a grievous offence against God.
  9. What if I die having committed a mortal sin for which I have not repented and for which I have not received absolution?
  10. If you die unrepentant in unforgiven mortal sin, you will not be allowed to be with God for all eternity, the gates of heaven will be shut to your forever, and you will be condemned to suffer the pains of hell alone eternally.
  11. Can my mortal sin be forgiven?
  12. In the sacrament of Penance (reconciliation) if you have sorrow for your mortal sin and confess your mortal sin to a priest, with a firm resolution never more to commit the sin, and accept and do the penance given you, your mortal sin will be forgiven.
  13. If I do not serve God here on earth, will I be with Him in heaven?
  14. If you sin mortally without repentance, you will not go to heaven, you will not be with God forever. You will spend eternity in Hell alone forever. If you by your free choice choose not to be with God, you will get what you choose.



  1. What is conscience?
  2. Conscience is the voice of God in each individual.  It is God telling each of us what is good and what is evil.  It is a natural facility of human reason that: reminds us always to do good and avoid evil; which makes a judgment about the good and evil of particular choices in a specific situation; and which refers to good or evil already done (e.g., having a clear conscience or  having a guilty conscience.)
  3. Is Conscience the source of moral law?
  4. No, one’s conscience is not the source of the moral law and it is a mistake to consider one’s conscience as the source of moral law.
  5. Is conscience simply how I feel about right and wrong?
  6. No, conscience is not simply human feelings or simply human reasons, nor is it simply what a person thinks or feels with other like-minded persons.
  7. Does each baptized person have a duty to form his or her conscience?
  8. Yes, and this duty requires that one’s conscience be correctly formed or “well-formed.”
  9. How do I correctly form my conscience so that it is well-formed?
  10. You must educate and train your conscience by learning the moral law as found in Scripture and in the authoritative teachings of the Church. Practicing acts of virtue can help form your conscience correctly.
  11. Can I have a well-formed conscience if I am ignorant of the moral law?
  12. You cannot claim to have a well-formed conscience if you are ignorant of, misunderstand, or reject outright God’s law and thus you commits acts that the Church considers gravely evil.



  1. Must I always follow my conscience?
  2. If your conscience is well-formed, and you are being careful to reason clearly and objectively from true moral principles, then you must follow the reasoned judgment of your conscience about the morality of a specific act.


  1. Will my well-formed conscience ever contradict what the Church teaches?
  2. Your well-formed conscience will never contradict the objective moral law, as taught by Christ and His Church .
  3. If my conscience is not well-formed, can I just do what my conscience tells me to do?
  4. You cannot simply say “My conscience told me to do that” as justification for any action.
  5. Is it a sin to do what my well-formed conscience says is evil?
  6. Yes.
  7. Is it possible for a well-formed conscience to require that a person vote for or support political candidates, programs, or legislation which contradict the fundamental contents of faith and moral law?
  8. No, this is not possible.
  9.  So, is it a sin for a person with a well-formed conscience to vote for or support political candidates, programs, or legislation which contradict the fundamental contents of the moral law?
  10. Yes, it is a sin.
  11. Is it a sin for a person with a well-formed conscience to donate money to a party or to a candidate who promote, support, advocate for or condone abortion or racism, or human cloning, or a sinful redefinition of marriage, or other intrinsic evils.
  12. Yes, it is a sin.



  1. What is the Fifth Commandment?
  2. The Fifth Commandment is:  Thou shalt not kill.


  1. Q. What killing does this commandment forbid?
  2. This commandment forbids the killing of human beings.


  1. Q. What are we commanded by the Fifth Commandment?
  2. We are commanded by the Fifth Commandment to live in peace and union with our neighbor, to respect other’s rights, to seek the spiritual and bodily welfare of our neighbor, and to take proper care of our own life and health.


  1. Q. Is it ever lawful for any cause to deliberately and intentionally take away the life of an innocent human being?
  2. It is never lawful for any cause to deliberately and intentionally take away the life of an innocent human being. Such deeds are always murder, and can never be excused for any reason, however important or necessary.


  1. Q. What is forbidden by the Fifth Commandment?
  2. The fifth Commandment forbids all willful murder, fighting, anger, hatred, revenge, and bad example.


  1. Q. Can the Fifth commandment be broken by giving scandal or bad example and by inducing others to sin?
  2. The Fifth commandment can be broken by giving scandal or bad example and inducing others to sin, because such acts may destroy the life of the soul by leading it into mortal sin.


  1. Q. What is scandal?
  2. Scandal is any sinful word, deed or omission that disposes others to sin, or lessens their respect for God and holy religion.


The Fifth Commandment & Abortion


  1. Is it a violation of the Fifth Commandment to have or participate in an abortion?
  2. Yes, this is a sin


  1. Is it a mortal sin to have or participate in an abortion?
  2. Yes, it is a mortal sin to consciously have or participate in an abortion intending to kill the preborn baby. Such a direct abortion violates God’s command “Thou shalt not kill.”  The life of the preborn baby is sacred and no one, not even the mother or the father, or the government, has the power to destroy this life.
  3. Is it a mortal sin to support with money or financial contributions a political party that supports, promotes, or advocates for abortion?
  4. Yes, it is a mortal sin to give money to or make contributions to such a party of any of its candidates.







  1. When is an action intrinsically evil?
  2. An action is intrinsically evil when the object of the action is incapable of being in accord with God’s will since the action radically contradicts the good of a person made in the image of God.


  1. Are such actions always evil?
  2. Yes, intrinsically evil actions are always and per se evil, despite any intention of the person acting and despite any circumstance, even if the intention or the circumstances are to produce some other or perceived good. Intrinsically evil actions are always evil, always grievously sinful, they are never good, never right, never. They must always be rejected and opposed, never supported or condoned.
  3. Have the bishops told us that any actions are intrinsically evil, particularly within the context of voting?
  4. Yes, the bishops have told us that these are intrinsically evil actions: abortion, euthanasia, racism, human cloning, destructive human embryo research, genocide, torture, redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, targeting noncombatants in acts of terror or of war, treating workers as means to an end, subjecting workers to inhuman living conditions, and treating the poor as disposable.
  5. Is abortion intrinsically evil?
  6. Direct intended conscious abortion is intrinsically evil.
  7. When is such an abortion morally acceptable?
  8. Never. There are no considerations and no circumstances that can make such an abortion morally acceptable; there is nothing that can be weighed against the evil of such an abortion to make such an abortion good. There is nothing that can be taken into consideration in deciding to have a direct intended abortion that can make the abortion morally permissible. The intentions of one who decides to have such an abortion cannot change the fact that it is intrinsically evil.





  1. Does the Democratic Party promote abortions?
  2. Yes. The Democratic Party advocates abortion, promotes abortion, and seeks to have and has succeeded in having abortions paid for with taxpayer money. Prominent Democrats at all levels of government have touted and celebrated abortion and their own abortions. The Democrats have insured that Planned Parenthood has received millions of dollars of taxpayer money from the U.S. Government. Under Obamacare hundreds of thousands from tax dollars paid by U.S. citizens has already been granted to Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion business in the U.S.A. and millions of more taxpayer dollars will flow to Planned Parenthood under Obamacare.  Although Planned Parenthood is accused of Medicaid fraud on a scale of millions of dollars, the current Democratic Administration continues to grant tax money to it. The Democratic Party Platform in 2012 advocated taxpayer-funded abortion for all nine months of pregnancy; and ignored the request of some 25,000 people to amend the Party  Platform to recognize the existence of pro-life members. The Party also rescinded language that abortion should be “rare.” For these and other reasons it has been called the “Party Of Abortion,” and the “Party Of Death.”
  3. Has a Cardinal Archbishop of the Church called the Democratic “Party the Party of Death”?
  4. Yes.


  1. Has a Bishop of the Church resigned as a registered Democrat because of the Democratic Party’s support of abortion?
  2. Yes.


  1. Is it a mortal sin for me to vote for a Democrat with the intention that the Party’s Platform be enacted and preborn babies be aborted?
  2. If you vote for a Democrat so that preborn babies will be killed by abortions, you commit mortal sin.


  1. What if I do not vote for a Democrat so that preborn babies are killed by abortion – even though this will be a result of my vote and I know this – but I vote for a Democrat to achieve some other good, such as the reduction of poverty, the end of war, the elimination of the death penalty, a fair economic system, or just treatment of immigrants?
  2. Since abortion is an intrinsic evil, none of the other goods you list can change this evil and none of the other goods you list can be used to outweigh or negate this evil.  So, again, in this situation, you will commit mortal sin.


  1. Does this apply to all Democrats at all levels of government?
  2. Yes, this applies to all Democrat candidates. The Democratic Party does not change its program, policies, platform, or agenda for any member who disagrees with its policies and aims regarding abortion, nor does it do so for Democrats who say they are against the party’s proabortion program. No candidate for office – at any level – who is a Democrat no matter if he or she denies individual support of intrinsic evil –  can negate the Party’s involvement in, advocacy of,  and promotion of intrinsic evil.  A Democrat candidate saying “I am personally opposed, but  . . . “ in no way changes the Party, its history, its promises, or its goals. Therefore, a vote for any Democrat at any level of government is a vote on behalf of the Party’s program, goals, platform, policies, and agenda and a vote for its agenda of abortion.
  3. So is it a mortal sin to vote for any Democrat?
  4. Yes, it is a mortal sin to vote for any Democrat.





  1. In addition to the eternal damnation that results from unabsolved mortal sin, are there any consequences in this life?
  2. Yes. A woman who intentionally has an abortion and anyone who assists her to kill her preborn baby is automatically excommunicated.


  1. Are any other persons besides the abortionist who kills the preborn baby included in the meaning of those who “assist” the woman?
  2. Yes, anyone who formally conspires with or helps the woman to kill her preborn baby is excommunicated, and this includes the abortionist, nurses who assist her or him, workers at the abortion business, husbands,  boyfriends, family members, and others whose counsel and encouragement made it morally possible for the woman to kill her preborn baby, as well as those whose direct practical support make it possible (financially, driving to the abortion business location etc.).


  1. Has a bishop of the Church announced the excommunication of a person who was baptized in the Church who became a medical doctor and performed abortions?
  2. Yes.


  1. Do the same conclusions apply regarding other intrinsic evils and voting as apply to abortion?
  2. Yes. It is impossible for a baptized person with a well-formed conscience to vote for Democrat without supporting and condoning many intrinsic evils.


  1. What is heresy?
  2. Heresy is the obstinate denial by a person baptized in the Church of some truth which must be believed with faith or is an obstinate doubt concerning some such truth.


  1. Is the doctrine on intrinsic evils and particularly abortion truths to believed with faith?
  2. Yes, the doctrine on intrinsic evils and abortion are true – and direct and voluntary abortion is always gravely immoral.


  1. Is it heresy for a baptized person to obstinately deny or obstinately doubt the truth about abortion?
  2. Yes.


  1. Does this apply to politicians who are baptized members of the Church ?
  2. Yes.


  1. Does this apply to persons baptized in the Church who are political commentators, or public speakers, or who write or otherwise publicly communicate the erroneous view that direct abortion can be morally-acceptable or that direct abortion should be legal?
  2. Yes, a sentence of automatic excommunication applies to such people, and this includes those who are or who claim to be theologians or Biblical scholars, but who believe or teach that direct abortion is not always gravely immoral.
  3. Why are such people automatically excommunicated?

  4. Such people are automatically excommunicated because: a), they have committed the sin of heresy by believing that direct abortion is not always gravely immoral; and b) they provide substantial assistance to women in obtaining abortions by influencing public policy to legalize abortions, to keep abortions legal, and to broaden access to abortion.


  1. Has a Bishop of the Church publicized the excommunication of a nun who approved of an abortion?
  2. Yes.



  1. Is it a mortal sin for a politician who is a baptized member of the Church to cast a vote with the intention of legalizing abortion, or of protecting laws allowing abortion, or of widening access to abortion?
  2. Yes, such a politician commits a mortal sin.
  3. Is it a mortal sin when such a vote indicates that the politician believes that direct abortion is not always gravely immoral?

  4. Yes.


  1. Does such a vote result in the excommunication of the politician?
  2. Yes, such a politician incurs an automatic excommunication. This occurs whether or not a Bishop of the Church publicizes the excommunication.
  3. Is it a mortal sin for such a politician to vote so that abortion is legal, or more easily obtainable, or more widely available?
  4. Yes.


  1. Does such a politician incur an automatic excommunication by such votes?
  2. Yes, because such politicians who vote for such laws which legalize, protect, or widen access to abortion, are providing essential assistance to women who want to obtain abortions.
  3. What if such a politician claims to be “personally opposed” to abortion?

  4. If any such politician favors legalized abortion, despite a claim of personal opposition, such a politician commits a mortal sin by promoting abortion and by voting in favor of abortion.
  5. What about a person baptized in the Church who obstinately denies the truth about abortion or who obstinately doubts it and casts any vote with the intention of legalizing abortion, or of protecting laws allowing abortion, or of widening access to abortion?

  6. Such a voter commits a mortal sin and incurs an automatic excommunication because: a) such a voter is committing the sin of heresy by obstinately believing that abortion should be legal and available; and b) such a person is committing the grievous sin of providing women with substantial or essential assistance in obtaining abortions, by attempting to legalize or broaden access to abortion.



  1. Is racism intrinsically evil?
  2. Yes, racism is intrinsically evil.


  1. What can make racism morally acceptable?
  2. There are no considerations and no circumstances that can make racism morally acceptable; there is nothing that can be weighed against the evil of racism to make racism good. There is nothing that can be taken into consideration in an intended conscious racist action that can make the action morally permissible. The intentions of one who decides to engage in racism cannot change the fact that such an action is intrinsically evil.
  3. Is the party Of Democrat’s RETA policy – racial eugenic targeted abortion – a policy of intrinsic evil?
  4. Yes.


  1. What can make racist genocide morally acceptable?
  2. There are no considerations and no circumstances that can make racist genocide morally acceptable; there is nothing that can be weighed against this evil to make it good. There is nothing that can be taken into consideration in an intended conscious racist genocidal action that can make the action morally permissible. The intentions of one who decides to engage in racist genocide cannot change the fact that such an action is intrinsically evil.
  3. Is the party Of Democrat’s RETA policy – racial eugenic targeted abortion – a policy of genocide, a policy of intrinsic evil?
  4. Yes.




  1. Does the Democratic party advance racism and racist policies?
  2. Yes. The Democratic Party is a racist organization because it advocates and promotes abortion businesses that perform abortions for racist motives, such as Planned Parenthood, an organization founded on principles of eugenics and racial superiority, which intentionally locates the majority of its business locations in or near minority neighborhoods and is on record as willing to accept donations so that minority babies will be killed by abortions. The Democratic Party has seen to it that millions of taxpayer dollars have been paid to Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses, knowing full well that this money will be and has been used for racist purposes. Already during the current Democrat Administration – while millions of dollars of Medicaid fraud by Planned Parenthood is ignored – under Obamacare millions of tax dollars have been and will be paid to Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion business in the U.S.A, over half of whose revenues come from killing unborn children. For these reasons, the Democratic Party is the “Party Of Racism.”
  3. Do statistics support the fact that the Democratic Party is the Party Of Racism?
  4. Yes. Since the Supreme Court created the “Right To Abortion,” of the approximately 58,000,000 abortions in the U.S.A., about 18,000,000 of these murdered unborn children have been African-American, although only 7% of Americans are African-American mothers. About 12,000,000 of these abortions have been abortions of Hispanic babies. Over 50% of aborted children are members of minorities. In the United States, abortion kills minority children at more than three times the rate of non-Hispanic, white children. Non-Hispanic whites, who make up 63.7% of America’s population, account for only 36% of all U.S. abortions. In one year in New York City, 81.9% of the abortions performed  were on Black or Hispanic women.


  1. Has the current President made clear his administration’s and the Democratic Party’s racist eugenic policies and agenda?
  2. Yes, this President’s Center For Disease control has publicly stated this about a new program’s purpose: the “purpose of this program is to demonstrate the effectiveness of innovative, multicomponent, community wide initiatives in reducing rates of teen pregnancy and births in communities with the highest rates, with a focus on reaching African American and Latino/Hispanic youth aged 15–19 years.”
  3. Is the systematic, purposeful killing of African-American unborn babies not only racist, but also Black Genocide?
  4. Yes. The African-American population is the only minority in America that is on the decline; and, if the current promotion of abortion by Democrats is successful, by the year 2038 the African-American vote in the U.S.A. will be insignificant. The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a devout racist who created the “Negro Project” designed to sterilize unknowing black women and others she deemed as undesirables of society. She believed that “Colored people” were “human undergrowth,” weeds to be exterminated. This is genocide.
  5. Is it a mortal sin to vote for a Democrat with the intention that my vote results in the promotion of this racism and the killing of minority preborn babies?
  6. If you vote for a Democrat so that the Party’s racist agenda, program and policies with be successful, and so that minority preborn babies will be killed, you commit mortal sin.
  7. What if I do not vote for a Democrat so that its racist agenda, programs, and policies will be successful, or so that minority preborn babies will be killed – even though I know my vote will  result in this  racism – but I vote for a Democrat to achieve some other good, such as the reduction of poverty, the end of war, the elimination of the death penalty, a fair economic system, or just treatment of immigrants?
  8. Since racism is an intrinsic evil, none of the other goods you list can change this evil and none of the other goods you list can be used to outweigh or negate this evil.  So, again, in this situation, you will commit mortal sin.
  9. Does this apply to all Democrats at all levels of government?
  10. The Democratic Party does not change its program or agenda for any member who disagrees with its policies and aims regarding racist abortions. Any candidate for office – at any level – who is a Democrat no matter if he or she denies individual support of intrinsic evil – cannot negate their Party’s involvement in and promotion of intrinsic evil.  Therefore, a vote for any Democrat at any level of government is a vote on behalf of the Party’s programs and policies and a vote for its agenda of racist abortions.
  11. Has Planned Parenthood endorsed a candidate for President?
  12. Yes.
  13. Planned Parenthood receives millions in tax dollars and gives millions to political candidates, almost all of whom are Democrat. Is this part of what a person with a well-formed conscience must take into account in concluding that voting for any Democrat is a mortal sin?
  14. Yes.
  15. So is it a mortal sin to vote for any Democrat?
  16. Yes, it is a mortal sin to vote for any Democrat.


  1. Should politicians  who are baptized in the Church whose public position on abortion  or racism is incompatible with the position that abortion and racism are always intrinsically evil be denied Holy Communion?
  2. Yes. Such politicians, and anyone else who has been baptized in the Church, who obstinately persists in manifest grievous sin should be denied Holy Communion.
  3. Have such pro-abortion Democrat politicians in the United States been denied Holy Communion?
  4. Yes.
  5. Is it a source of scandal when such politicians publicly oppose the teaching and doctrine on abortion and yet they are permitted to receive Holy Communion?
  6. Yes this is a source of scandal for all devout believers.
  7. Has a Pope said that those politicians who facilitate abortion should be denied Holy Communion?
  8. Yes. A Pope has said that those who speak or act against the commandments, in particular to facilitate abortion, euthanasia, and other crimes against life and family, cannot receive Holy Communion.
  9. Has a Cardinal Archbishop of the Church said that Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi should be denied communion due to, among other things, her position on abortion which is directly contrary to the teaching of the Church?
  10. Yes.





  1. Should politicians  who are baptized in the Church whose public position on abortion  or racism is incompatible with the position that abortion and racism are always intrinsically evil be denied an ecclesiastical funeral?
  2. Yes. Such politicians, and anyone else who has been baptized in the Church, who persists in manifest grievous sin should be denied an ecclesiastical funeral. Such a funeral would cause scandal of the faithful.


  1. Is there any way such a person can have a church funeral?
  2. Yes. If such a manifest sinner gives a sign of repentance before death, then such a manifest sinner can have an ecclesiastical funeral.


















Abortion Celebrations

Catholic Lane   April 20, 2015

By Guy McClung


If you’re happy killing babies, clap your hands.

If you’re happy killing babies, clap your hands.

If you’re happy baby killing and for you its so fulfilling,

If you’re happy killing, babies clap your hands. 

The Abortion Industry has been having “Abortion celebrations” around the country whose themes include: “Celebrate the death of your innocent defenseless child,” “Rejoice in your abortion as a life-sustaining act,”and “Smile, I also killed my baby.”

If you’re happy babies die, clap your hands.

If you’re happy babies die, clap your hands.

If you’re happy babies die, and you’ll never hear them cry,

If you’re happy babies die, clap your hands.

Since 1973 over 58,000,000 babies have been killed in abortions in America.

If you’re happy killing human weeds, clap your hands.

If you’re happy killing human weeds, clap your hands.

If you’re happy, kill those weeds to satisfy your needs.

If you’re happy killing weeds, clap your hands.

The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, referred to minority children as “human undergrowth” and “human weeds.” Groups whose aim was to rid us of these “unfit” human beings included eugenics groups and the Ku Klux Klan. Margaret Sanger, a member of The American Eugenics Society, was welcomed by the KKK as a speaker.

If you’re happy black kids die, clap your hands.

If you’re happy black kids die, clap your hands.

If you’re happy black kids die, and black’s the reason why,

If you’re happy black kids die, clap your hands.

Over 20,000,000 black babies have been killed in America, representing about 36% of all abortions. Their mothers make up only about 7% of the population. In a personal letter, Margaret Sanger, whose “Negro Project” was intended to eradicate the African-American population, said her organization could “hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. And we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Historical estimates are that five thousand black Americans were lynched in America. More black children are now killed in one week here than all the men in all the lynchings in all of U.S. history. What the KKK longed for and failed at, Planned Parenthood has done and continues to do with deadly success.

If you’re happy brown kids die, clap your hands.

If you’re happy brown kids die, clap your hands.

If you’re happy brown kids die, and brown’s the reason why,

If you’re happy brown kids die, clap your hands.

Over 12,000,000 Hispanic babies have died in the United States, representing about 25% of all abortions. Their mothers make up only slightly over 8% of the population.

If you’re happy killing girls, clap your hands.

If you’re happy killing girls, clap your hands.

Just because they’re little girls, they’re killed all around the world.

If you’re happy killing girls, clap your hands.

Over 200,000,000 baby girls have been killed by abortion worldwide because they were girls, and for no other reason. Under the principles of the US Supreme Court, in America it is totally legal to kill a child in its mother’s womb for no reason other than that the child is a girl. Pro-Death proponents of the unrestricted absolute right to abortion will not support laws that outlaw killing a child in its mother’s womb based on its sex.

If you’re happy killing defects, clap your hands.

If you’re happy killing defects, clap your hands.

If you’re happy killing defects, because they’re only human rejects,

If you’re happy killing defects, clap your hands.

Hundreds of thousands of babies in America have been killed because they were labeled “defective.”


If there are no consequences, clap your hands.

If there are no consequences, clap your hands.

If there are no consequences, killing children so defenseless,

If there are no consequences, clap your hands.


If killing babies makes you equal, clap your hands.

If killing babies makes you equal, clap your hands.

If killing babies makes you equal, because these children are not people,

If killing babies makes you equal, clap your hands.


If killing your baby makes you free, clap your hands.

If killing your baby makes you free, clap your hands.

If killing your baby makes you free, and all you care about is “me,”

If killing your baby makes you free, clap your hands.


If you’re old and all alone, don’t clap your hands.

If you’re old and all alone, don’t clap your hands.

If you’re old and all alone, and your children aren’t at home,

If you’re old and all alone, don’t clap your hands.


Copyright 2015 Guy McClung ©


America is Post-Abortive

By Guy McClung, J.D., Ph.D.

Catholic Lane July 6, 2015


If you’re an American, you’re post-abortive.

It is estimated that, since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 by which  seven Justices created the “right to abortion” in America, over 58,000,000 babies have been killed here. “Post-abortive” persons include the mothers of babies killed, fathers, and close family members.



Due to girls and women having multiple abortions, the number of post-abortive mothers there have been in America is somewhat less than 58,000,000. The death of some of these mothers since 1973, also reduces the  number of living post-abortive mothers. For the sake of this article, let us go, conservatively, with 40,000,000 post-abortive mothers currently alive.


Each baby aborted by its mother had a father. Although in the case of multiple abortions it is not always the case that the same boy or man fathered the babies, let us go with 40,000,000 fathers currently alive. For Fathers and others, we are going to assume that some number of them are aware of the abortion; and that each of them will, someday, realize they have another child, grandchild, sibling, niece, nephew, etc. And that all of them will be deprived of life with the child here on this earth.


Each baby killed had two grandfathers. Of the original 116,000,000 grandfathers, let us be conservative and go with 40,000,000 alive today.


Each baby killed had two grandmothers. Of the original 116,000,000 grandmothers, let us be conservative and go with 40,000,000 alive today.


Continuing with a conservative outlook, let us go with 1.0 siblings per dead baby. That means there have been about 58,000,000 siblings. Again assuming some of them have gone to the next life naturally, let us go with 29,000,000 brothers and sisters.



Aunts, Uncles, Cousins

Again being conservative, let us assume each dead baby had a total of 2.0 aunts, uncles and cousins. Discounting for natural death, let us go with 116,000,000 close relatives.

 Daily Post-Abortion

And each day there are, plus or minus, 3800 more abortions here; which means that the number of post-abortive Americans rises daily.  Daily, 3800 more post-abortive mothers; 3800 more post-abortive fathers;  7600 more post-abortive granddads; 7600 more post-abortive grandmoms; and so on down the family line of post-abortive brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles cousins.

Just taking into account family members, this is a total  – without discounting for death – of over 728,000,000 people.  Discounted for non-abortion death, using extremely conservative estimates, the number of post-abortive persons in America currently alive is about 305,000,000. The estimate of the current United States population is 325,000,000.  Accepting that not only mothers can be impacted after an abortion, the odds are, therefore, very high that each and every  American is post-abortive – which means that as a country, America itself is post-abortive.

You who are reading this are post-abortive. Even if you severely discount the number of the post-abortive who are unaware of the abortion, who will never know the child on this earth, there are thousands of persons who are aware of the abortions and who can suffer post-abortion trauma, post-abortion effects, and post-abortion despair.


In real terms, in human terms, this means:

Mothers will not help these daughters with their make-up on prom night.

Fathers will not show these teenage sons how to avoid cutting themselves when they shave.

Grandads will not get to dance with these granddaughters standing on their feet.

Grandmas will not get to cook Christmas cookies with these granddaughters.

Brothers will not wrestle with these brothers and yell and cry in agony and then laugh joyously.

These Sisters will not sneak into bed together and go to sleep hugging each other.

Uncles will not get to tell their nieces how pretty their moms were when they were eight years old.

Aunts won’t get to tell their nephews that their Dad was their mom’s favorite.

And Cousins will not dance the chicken dance at family reunions with these cousins.

And most importantly this means that in the future many persons in America will end their lives without a family member who cares for them and they will die alone. The aborted baby who would have been at their side will not be there.


Post Traumatic Stress (PTSD, PAS, PASS)

We do not know how many of these post-abortive persons suffer and will suffer Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), but we do know that for many abortion is a stress, a traumatic stress. Nevertheless, many of those who are proabortion or who are part of the abortion industry either want to deny this or to ignore the persons who suffer this type of PTSD.  It is a reality in America today that many do have the post-abortion form of PTSD – called Post Abortion Syndrome (PAS) or post-abortion stress syndrome (PASS).

“Post Abortion Stress Syndrome (PASS) is the name that has been given to the psychological aftereffects of abortion, based on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) . . . any event that causes trauma can indeed result in PTSD, and abortion is no exception.” (Click here for full article.)

“Post Abortion Syndrome is a form of post-traumatic stress disorder. The process of making an abortion choice, experiencing the procedure and living with the grief, pain and regret is certainly, at it’s very core, traumatic. As with any trauma, individuals often try to “forget” the ordeal and deny or ignore any pain that may result. Many simply don’t relate their distress to the abortion experience. At some point, however, memories resurface and the truth of this loss can no longer be denied. During these moments, the pain of post-abortion syndrome reveals itself in the hearts of millions of lives.” (Read more here.)

For the Americans who suffer PASS, especially, but not solely, post-abortive mothers, it can result in: guilt, survival guilt, anxiety, avoiding children, avoiding women, feeling numb, depression, suicidal thoughts, anniversary syndrome, re-experiencing the abortion, fear of infertility, an inability to bond with children, fear that children will die, eating disorders, alcohol use,  drug use, deterioration of self-esteem, disruption of personal relationships, reduced motivation sleep disorders.

And it must be noted that teenagers who have abortions are critically sensitive to PASS.

“Teenagers who have abortions are especially vulnerable to PAS because they are at a critical developmental period of their life most deeply affected by abortions, they are also likely to be the least expressive about their doubts and pains. Instead of being encouraged to accept the consequences of her choices, and to mature through the responsibilities of parenthood, she is encouraged to ‘mature’ through infantile destruction.” (Lynn D. Wardle and Mary Ann Wood, A Lawyer Looks at Abortion, 1982, p.117, and Saltenberger, Every Woman, p.152, cited in Reardon p.133.)


There are tens of millions of mothers and hundreds of millions of family members who are post-abortive. It is a national crisis that millions of them will suffer some negative impact of an abortion, and many of them will suffer some form of PASS.  As by so many feminists and so many in the abortion industry, are these persons to be ignored? Told brusquely to “put your big girl panties on?”


The left’s science censors and the liberal’s politically-correct science police do not want the existence of PASS even admitted, much less discussed, even less be given the imprimatur of peer-reviewed research. Still, all one need do is search terms as those that follow to know that PASS is for real: post-abortion grief, post-abortion risks, post-abortion trauma, post-abortion emotional sequelae, post-abortion complications, and post-abortion psychological illness.


Just as physicians in the 19th century saw “hysterical” women as not “true women,” and wanted them kept from the public eye by commitment to asylums, today proabortion feminists want post-abortive women who are suffering from PASS to somehow be ignored, diminished, questioned, and dismissed. These modern-day hysterics are judged against the standards of Katha Pollit’s Free, Autonomous, Equal (FAE) women – free to autonomously have promiscuous sex with no consequences (i.e. no babies) as do their rutting male counterparts. (Pollitt, Pro: Reclaiming Abortion Rights).  Judged by these feminist dogmas and standards, women who engage in and then regret Pollitt’s FAE sexcapades and say they suffer from PASS are heretics and/or hysterics. But these women will not be silenced.


Despite the attempts to hide the truth, and promote the abortion agenda and abortion businesses, there are a plethora of professionals, caregivers,  counselors, clergy, coalitions, and groups that assist post-abortive persons dealing with the effects of PASS. Help exists in milieus and therapies called: post-abortion syndrome therapy, post-abortion coping strategies, post-abortion counseling, post-abortion group therapy, and post-abortion psychological and psychiatric treatment.


PASS is the PTSD that will not go away. It remains to be seen if recognition of and treatment of PASS will be outlawed, as reparative therapy has been in California.


As with peer-reviewed research that proves the ABC (abortion-breast-cancer) Connection  and peer-reviewed research that shows children are raised healthier by a mother and father, it remains to be seen if the left, the liberals, the proabortion feminists, the academic elite, and the exponents of the abortion businesses will successfully stifle the research about PASS.


Care is available for individuals suffering from the negative impacts of abortion and there are effective therapies for those suffering from PASS. Many of these assume that bodily death is not the end of human existence, that there is an eternity to be enjoyed with our loved ones, that repentance, redemption, and salvation are possible, and that a mother, a father, a family member can be with an aborted child again, forever.


But what about therapy for a post-abortive country? America is post-abortive. Can America heal? Is it possible? If so, how?



















Breaking The “Theological Silence” on  Racially Targeted Abortion

Guy McClung, J.D., Ph.D.

Catholic Lane    September 14,  2015

In the article “Has the Silence Been Broken? Catholic Theological Ethics and Racial Justice” in Theological Studies Journal (March, 2014), Father Bryan Massingale, Ph.D., of Marquette University discusses what he calls “the theological silence” about racism in America. Fr. Massingale uses phrases like “deafening and appalling silence,” “embarrassed silence” and “shocking theological silence” regarding racism in the United States.

There is no reference to, much less discussion of, the well-documented, racially-targeted abortion businesses in the United States. There is no mention of the deaths of over 12,000,000 minority babies since the Roe decision. There is no general theological condemnation of those public officials and political parties that advocate or promote policies which empower the killings.

Minority mothers, especially black and Latino mothers, are purposefully targeted for abortion. Black activists, including many organized groups, are publicly trying to combat racially-targeted abortion, referring to it as “black genocide.”

For several reasons, the “theological silence” regarding racially-targeted abortions is more shocking than the silence about racism in general. If our social order “treats the bodies of poor women with disdain,” as stated in the article, it treats the bodies of poor women’s babies with utter contempt: the contempt shown the Holy Innocents, the contempt Jesus endured on the Way of the Cross, and the contempt shown to him when he was crucified on Calvary. “Demonic contempt” is the only way to describe how babies are treated by Planned Parenthood in its harvesting and selling of baby parts, baby organs, and intact entire babies who have been left to die before they are sold.

The article refers to white “Christians” who lynched nearly 5,000 black men and women between 1889 and 1940 and describes lynching as “brutally savage, extrajudicial, sadistic torture” and “killing.” No less horrible, and in some cases more horrible, are the painful deaths of minority unborn babies targeted for abortion simply because of their race. Unlike aborted babies, the bodies of the victims of lynching were never sold, nor were their organs harvested for profit. In any given single week in the United States, the number of minority abortions is well in excess of 5,000.

Like those in the past who were involved in lynchings, many involved in today’s killing call themselves “Christian.” They are abortionists, their nurses, support staff and business employees. Unlike the “Christian” lynch mobs of the past, these contemporary “Christian” killers are not exclusively white, but are themselves black, Latino and every other race.

What the Ku Klux Klan and other racists could not achieve (Margaret Sanger’s dream of ridding America of the black, brown and yellow “human undergrowth”) abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood and its political supporters have and are achieving in beyond-Holocaust scale. As heinous and evil as the Klan lynchings were, the actions of Planned Parenthood have produced an entirely new level of evil, a heretofore unknown paradigm of the demonic.

Fr. Massingale’s article refers to an agenda that includes “a renewed understanding of both conscience and the challenge of conscience formation.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church, beginning at paragraph 1783, teaches us that a well-formed conscience is “informed” and “enlightened.” We are taught,  “The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.” Since he has written on this subject, could it be suggested that Fr. Massingale has a well-formed conscience on racism? Yet, in his article he ignores racially-targeted abortion. This seems to be part of a greater pattern of behavior on the part of Catholics in general.

Isn’t it a sin for a Catholic with a well-formed conscience to vote for someone who would allocate tax dollars to kill minority unborn babies? Isn’t it a sin for someone with a well-formed conscience to vote for someone who supports baby organ harvesting and sale, and the sale of intact babies’ bodies? In the face of such facts, the so-called “seamless garment” argument, used in the past to justify voting for a pro-abortion candidate, ends up in tattered, blood-stained shreds. In the face of such evil, pastors and bishops can no longer justify voting for Democrats and others who promote these evils by saying “Catholics are not single issue voters.”

The silence of theologians and of many others, including many in authority in the Church, regarding racially-targeted abortions is more “appalling,” “shocking” and “deafening” than the theological silence regarding racism in general. If theologians have been exhorted to break the silence about racism, they should be required to break the silence about racially-targeted abortions. Otherwise they should be forever silent themselves about anything to do with theology, be mute forever about anything regarding Theologos.













Does God Hear the Theological Silence About Racism in Abortion?

by Guy McClung, J.D., Ph.D.


Catholic Lane; Dec. 8, 2015


For some time now, a group of theologians has opined about “Theological Silence About White Racism.” In words of accusation that could not be stronger or more vigorous, this sin is condemned as injustice, institutional violence, group dehumanization, troubling social evil, social subjugation, race-based wrongdoing, social sin, habitus of white superiority, tragedy, social inequity, unjust privileging, structural sin, Christian complicity, ecclesial complicity, and ethical failure.

I addressed this issue in an earlier article.

Now another article in the Theological Studies Journal raises the issue of theological silence about racism. And again the theological silence about abortion and about Racial Eugenic Targeted Abortion (RETA) is deafening. In “Redeeming Conscience,” in the March 2015 issue, James F. Keenan’s main point is that the recent Synod in Rome was silent about conscience. Further, Keenan asserts that conscience is so ineffective in America because of the history of slavery. He does not mention the effect of 60,000,000 abortions on conscience, nor does he extend his principles to RETA’s effect.

Keenan ignores 1800 minority babies’ deaths each day, but he is concerned about the treatment of illegal aliens: “With diminished capacity the Christian conscience has accommodated a racism that now engenders a paralysis as we face critical immigration issues.” No issue deals with more death than the abortion issue. The scope of Kennan’s statement can be enlarged: With diminished capacity the Christian conscience has accommodated abortion to the extent that this now engenders a paralysis as we face critical life issues.

Keenan refers to slavery, torture, rape, lynching, heinous conduct, sexual assault, radical evil, killing, domestic violence, and bullying. But why is the word “abortion” not in his article?  (Fr. Bryan Massingale also had the same glaring omission, which I discussed in my last article.) With the consideration of so many evils and their connection to racism, why don’t 17,000,000 African-Americans children killed in abortions matter? Why are 12,000,000 dead Hispanic babies invisible and insignificant?

These theologians note the enduring injuries to present-day African-Americans and the on-going traumas of white racism. For example, they posit that several thousand lynchings in centuries past continue to have far-ranging, systemic, damaging effects on African-Americans today. While their conclusions are logical, these same theologians ignore the ongoing, destructive effects of Post-Abortion Stress Syndrome (PASS). PASS is a form of PTSD. It affects not only the mothers of babies killed, but their fathers, siblings, family, and the whole society. And although minority mothers are impacted disproportionately, every mother and every father, non-white and white, can suffer PASS.

Massingale, Keenan, and this entire group of theologians know that all whites today are guilty, all. According to an asserted “Complicity” theory, all whites today are condemned for the “social sin” of racism, including whites who “consciously and unconsciously participate in” racism. As Massingale says: “Complicity better captures the (at times) involuntary and inadvertent entanglement with oppression and sinful social structures that arises from a more cultural understanding of racism.”

In discussing the work of Mikulich, Cassidy, Pfeil, Teel, and Pramuk, Massingale refers to “white habitus,” “pervasive cultural malformation,” “the code of whiteness,” “willful [white] ignorance,” “white racial identity,” “needed personal conversion,” and the “moral conundrums of whiteness.” None of these descriptors is limited. This applies to all whites. Every white person living today.

Without argument, accepting the all-encompassing white ambit of this particular application of Complicity Theory, and applying its principles as these theologians do, in light of RETA, everyone, not just all whites, everyone in America is guilty of the sin of RETA. Every single one of us, of all colors, every citizen, every voter, every taxpayer, every mother, every father, every office holder, every theologian, of all ages, we are all complicit in RETA.

Why is Keenan, why are all of this particular group of theologians, in their discourse and search for truth about racism, silent about abortion and about racial eugenic targeted abortion? This kind of global, institutional, across-the-coterie silence is no accident. What is going on here? Is there an unspoken agenda? What are these “theo-logos” people afraid of?

Perhaps some of these facts provide an answer for the silence of these theologians:

  1. RETA is a fact. Of all abortions in the USA, about half are of minority babies, but their mothers account for less than thirty percent of the population. For one abortion business, about eighty percent of its retail locations are purposefully in or near minority neighborhoods. “Black genocide” is a fact. See, for example, Maafa, or Dr. Alveda King, Dr. Martin Luther King’s niece, speaks often about the modern-day black genocide of abortion.
  2. The Democrat Party has become the Party Of Death due, among other things, to its position on abortion, including government provision of abortions and taxpayer funding of abortion. The party platform is crystal clear: “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.” That is, the court-created right to abortion is absolute for Democrats and no Democrat who wants party support can say otherwise. The pressure is there to vote the party line on abortion, on taxpayer-funded abortion, and on legislative support for Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses which implement RETA.
  3. Abortion businesses receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding. Campaign contributions from abortion businesses like Planned Parenthood and their directors and employees, amounting to millions of dollars, go to office holders and candidates of all parties, but, overwhelmingly to Democrat candidates. The retail realization by Planned Parenthood from the sale of ten well-preserved baby brains removed by splitting a baby’s face open equates with a campaign contribution of $10,000.
  4. Despite the now-publicized barbaric acts of these abortion businesses, their doctors, their nurses, their technicians, and their administrators, acts worse than the 1930’s National Socialists ever dreamed of, Democrats from the Democrat President and the front-running Democrat candidate down to the local level all “stand by” the crimes of these abortion businesses. Although other parties have no “Abortion Only” litmus test, members of other parties and some independents are also pro-abortion, pro-Planned Parenthood, and pro-tax-funded abortions.
  5. The Catholic bishops have told voters there are two, only two, intrinsic evils: racism and abortion. This means that nothing, no other consideration, outweighs these evils. The “seamless garment” subterfuge cannot cover, excuse, outweigh, or nullify the evils of racism and abortion.

Turning over the bushel basket hiding these facts, and considering RETA in all its evil and implications, no other conclusion can be drawn: For a person with a well-formed conscience, it is a sin to vote for any person so that RETA will become the law of the land or so that abortion businesses can continue to operate with a RETA policy.

Could this be why these theologians are silent about RETA?

Undeniably, a serious consideration of racism requires a consideration of, discussion of, and then appropriate action regarding racially eugenic targeted abortion. Moreover, I would also ask these theologically silent thinkers if they will speak for the 200,000,000 million little girls worldwide who are now killed and forever silenced by sex-selection abortions? I would ask M. Shawn Copeland (whose work is mentioned in the Massingale and Keenan articles) for whom race and gender are “co-constitutive,” two questions: 1. If Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ of God, cannot be an option for unborn little girls, can He be an option for anyone? and 2. Is not solidarity “intelligent, active, compassionate love for the other” with these unborn little girls a task of the highest ethical priority, a task that demands hearing, demands confrontation, demands action?

I find discussions of sin and death, suffering and injustice, and even laughter in the December 2015 issue of Theological Studies Journal. I find no mention of racial eugenic targeted abortion. For that matter, I find no in-depth discussion of abortion, period. But there is a short review by Professor Jon Nilson of Jennifer Harvey’s book, Dear White Christians: For Those Still Longing For Racial Reconciliation, in which the case is made for reparations today from white people to African-American people. I would ask them both: What reparations are due for RETA? Who will pay these reparations to whom? And, although Planned Parenthood can tell you what it charges for individual organs, single or multiple body parts, or an intact entire baby body, what is the value for reparations of a human being?

In conclusion, I paraphrase and expound on the words of Massingale and of Keenan. A la Massingale: Concern for racial eugenic targeted abortion should emerge as both a central omission in Catholic theology’s past and a challenge for its future. There must be a deeper engagement regarding RETA. Much remains to be done. The still unfinished task is that of “breaking the silence” with regard to the social evil and sin of racial eugenic targeted abortion.

A la Keenan: Some Catholic theologians have not promoted a collective conscience that finally, as happened in Europe, acknowledges the horrific nature of racial eugenic targeted abortion. One reason conscience is so pathetically ineffective here is that it has been so utterly damaged by abortion and by racial eugenic targeted abortion.




By Guy McClung



Voting For Hitler -Berlin: 1942  

Dear Friends in Christ,  We encourage all faithful believers to vote in the upcoming elections which are so important to the future of our cities and of our beloved country which was once a shining star in Christendom.  


You can in good conscience vote for Adolf Hitler, but you cannot vote for him for the wrong reasons, which would be a mortal sin. You, as we all do, know that his government has killed millions of people, and millions of Jews, including thousands of Jewish babies, and that this will continue for the foreseeable future since he has told us this will be so and this is his Party’s publicly stated policy. If you vote for him and his government because you want them to kill Jews, that would be a mortal sin.  You cannot vote for Hitler so that more Jewish babies will be killed, that would be a mortal sin.  


If you vote for him and his Jew-Killing government, it must be for good reasons. If you like the fact that they have made the trains run on time, and do not vote for him so Jews will be killed, that will be not only morally permissible, it will be an act of virtue. If you vote for him, not because more Jewish babies will die horrible deaths if he is elected (which, of course, is absolutely certain), knowing your own tax dollars are paying for the killing,  but because he has increased employment here in the Fatherland and will continue to do so, that will be a civil good in accord with your moral duty as a good citizen. If you vote for Hitler because he has all but eradicated poverty and hunger (by his focus on preparing for the war that is now inevitable), in accord with the Savior’s Sermon on the Mount and the Gospel’s clarion call to social justice –  you can proceed in good faith to vote for him and any Nazi Party candidate for any office, knowing you have followed your conscience and you will have no sin to confess. We all know that our tax money funds the Nazis killing programs, provides the money to run the Death Camps, pays for the ovens that cook away most of  the evidence of the dead bodies, and pays for the fuel for the trains that bring the people to the camps. You cannot pay your taxes with the intent that these things be done. If however you  pay your taxes, as all good citizens should, so that children (the children of good Germans) will be properly educated or, for example so that foreign workers here are properly housed and fed, then you can in good conscience pay your taxes and win merit in heaven for doing so.

Also, you can vote for any member of the Nazi party, some of whose soldiers wear the Death’s Head Symbols, especially those Nazis who say they do not support the intrinsic evils of death and of racism that the Party has espoused for years and has made a reality here. You will know who they are if they say things like: “Yes, The Nazi Party has done and will continue to do these atrocities, but I am personally opposed to such atrocities;” or “I am personally opposed to gassing Jews so vote for me;” “It is their right to choose to kill Jewish babies, but this is against my personal conscience;”  “I can keep my personal views on holocausts private, and vote for the common good of all citizens;” or “My religion, whose principles are explicitly contrary to those of the Nazi Party, will remain a private thing for me.”  


Pay attention: if a candidate says he is personally opposed to Hitler or he is personally opposed to Jewish genocide, you can in good conscience vote for such a candidate and we encourage this; even if such a candidate takes part in the public rallies with their clear quasi-religious message in support of Hitler. If a candidate says he is personally opposed to your tax money funding killing, paying for gas chambers, and buying the furnaces at Dachau, Buchenwald, Auschwitz and other locations, and you know what they are used for, you can still vote for such a candidate.    


If a candidate says he is personally opposed to denying your religious liberty, even though you know the Party will continue through legislation to do this, it will be an act of virtue to vote for such a candidate.   


Yours in Christ,


German & Austrian Church Leaders


Ps: Be of good cheer – Hitler has given us his personal assurance that our religious liberties will always be recognized and protected under his regime. He said this in his pubic speech at the Catholic University of Germany last month when he received an honorary Doctorate in Humanities. Wasn’t it wonderful that CUG was again this year the national football champion?












Prostitution Politics

Guy McClung

Catholic Lane April 24, 2015




Prostitution Politics

I live in a brothel,
But I am not a whore.
Personally opposed to impurity,
I’m chaste to the core.

I help with the auctions,
But no slaves are mine.
Opposed to such servitude,
I try to be kind.

Working at Auschwitz,
Folks arrive every day.
Personally opposed to holocaust,
What else can I say?

In a warm den of thieves,
I spend most of my time.
Opposed to all thievery,
I commit no such crime.

I party with death,
But never would harm a child.
I am personally opposed to killing
And to all murder most vile.

I dance with the devil,
But I’m untouched, in the lead.
Opposed to all evil,
I’m not self-deceived.

I live in a brothel,
But no whoring I know.
Opposed to defilement,
I’m pure as the snow.

Copyright © Guy McClung 2014




Baby Bump? Blob?

By Guy McClung

Catholic Lane Feb. 24, 2015

Baby Bump? Blob?

The rulers have babies;
The ruled, warts and blobs.
Preborn ruler babies,
‘Til birth, sweet heartthrobs.

The princess, with child;
The peasants, cell masses.
Children are frowned on
For the low lower classes.

Preborn white scion daughter,
So good for the nation.
Why not budding black blobs?
Location, location, location.

Patrician  in utero,
Rejoice, adulation.
Why not brown tissue clumps?
Location, location, location.

With God, glory.
With Satan, damnation.
Eternity’s difference,
Location, location, location.



Copyright © Guy McClung 2014












Wonder Love

By Guy McClung

Catholic Lane June 12, 2015



When I softly sing a lullaby alone to you,
I wonder if in heaven you can hear.
When I whisper that I love you love you now,
I wonder if you’ll ever want me near.

When I try to touch your tiny cheeks and hands,
I wonder if in heaven you can feel.
When I try to put my finger on your lips,
I wonder if I’ll ever really heal.

When I say my love’s now there alive in you,
I wonder if in heaven you can know
That now I want to be so much with you,
And your love, your child-like love, can make it so.

If my falling tears could cascade upon your smile,
I wonder if you’d know each hour I grieve.
If once again with me you could live,
Will you wonder why I ever made you leave?

When my long and well-earned penance has been done,
I wonder if you’ll say “I forgive.”
When our Father tells you I have new life from His Son,
I hope you’ll say “Mama, you can live.”

Copyright © Guy McClung 2015


















Voting Democrat called mortal sin

Brownsville Herald

Posted: Thursday, October 9, 2014




Imagine 11 million more Hispanic voters in America. Imagine 1 million more Hispanic voters in Texas. The reason this is mere imagination and not reality is because of the racist eugenic abortion program of the Democrats and their president.


Obama and the Democrats have made it clear that they will use all their power to promote abortion; to fund abortions with taxpayer money and outlaw any restrictions on the court-created right to abortion, even those concerned with the health and safety of a mother.

The Democrats and their president have advocated for, enacted and enforced racial eugenic targeted abortion (Reason Enough to Act) funded with tax dollars, which has resulted in the death of millions of minority babies, primarily black and Hispanic children. Of 56 million dead babies since the Supreme Court invented the right to abortion, an inordinate percentage are black and Hispanic babies, almost 60 percent — although their mothers account for less than a third of the population.


What the KKK failed to do, Planned Parenthood has achieved far beyond its founder Margaret Sanger’s dreams of ridding the USA of what she called human undergrowth.

Echoing Archbishop Raymond Burke: The Democratic Party is now the party of death.

No other issues morally trump issues of intrinsic evil such as racism and abortion — not immigration, poverty or war. Today a Catholic voter who has learned the facts about the Party of Death, and who votes for any Democrat, necessarily has the intent to support abortion and RETA, and formally cooperates in grave evil, committing a mortal sin.


This is detailed in the document Virtuous Citizenship 2014 available at


Guy McClung

San Antonio

























Address: City Council, San Antonio


Mr. Guy McClung addressed the San Antonio City Council during the Citizens to Be Heard session on June 17th.

     Council Members and (newly elected) Mayor Taylor, thank you for the courtesies you have shown me when I have spoken to you in the past and thank you for this opportunity to speak to you this evening.  Mayor Taylor, the pro-life voters of San Antonio have elected you out of hope. This is why the pastors and priests of San Antonio, the Texas Leadership Coalition, the San Antonio Family Association and others endorsed (and supported) you, in hope that you will remain the voice of families in San Antonio and that you will become a strong effective voice for all the children of San Antonio, including San Antonio’s unborn children.

    It is the pro-life vote that handed you this victory. Your opponent’s hypocrisy in calling herself a Roman Catholic and then by her official actions and words subverting the teaching of her own Church were clear to the pro-life voters. Her key support of Wendy Davis did not go unnoticed; nor did the clear applicability to her of Jesus’ own words “hypocrite.”

     The 1857 Supreme Court Dred Scott decision held that Dred Scott, his wife, and their unborn child were not human beings, but were property to be bought and sold. Ironically Chief Justice Roger Taney, a Democrat, born on a tobacco slave plantation, former slave owner, who handed down the Dred Scott decision, was also a Roman Catholic. Abraham Lincoln and the US Congress not only defied Taney and the Supreme Court, they refused to obey the decision. And then we had a Civil War over this. In the summer of 1863 in the costliest of battles in terms of loss of life, over 50,000 soldiers from both sides died at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. If we continue in San Antonio, the number of dead children here will exceed the number of dead at Gettysburg. In the Fall of 1863 President Lincoln went to dedicate a cemetery to the dead soldiers.  The words he spoke there have become known as the “Gettysburg Address.” Here is The San Antonio Address: 

The San Antonio Address

(In Honor of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address)

Almost a dozen score  years ago our forefathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men, women, and children are created equal, and founded on the principle that they are all endowed by their Creator with the inalienable right to life.

Now we are engaged in a great civil conflict, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met at great battlefields of that conflict, in San Antonio, the city with the new killing chambers of Planned Parenthood, with the final solutions of Whole Women’s Health Services, and the death dealers of Alamo Women’s Reproductive Center. We have come to dedicate a portion of this city as the final resting place of thousands of innocent children; to dedicate their unmarked graves, the dumpsters, the toilets,  the biological waste incinerators, and the garbage cans that receive their remains.  It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate , we cannot hallow the ground here in San Antonio where they have died and where more will die. The dead children, who struggle, suffer, cry out with silent screams, and die here have consecrated it and will consecrate it, far above our poor power to add or detract.

The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget that they have been and will continue to be killed here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which the children who die here have thus far so nobly advanced, the work they have begun in their small way, dying  with their tiny voices unheard. But we will hear them.

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead children we take increased devotion to that cause for  which  they give the last full measure of devotion,  that we here insure that no more children’s lives are taken in this city of St. Anthony, St. Anthony  who was gifted to hold the infant Jesus in his arms . That we here highly resolve that these dead children, and all the dead children of America shall not die in vain  in this American Holocaust– that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, including all the people, even the smallest people now warm and happy within their mothers’ wombs, that this nation, these people, and these children shall not perish from the earth.





































Guy McClung says:

August 17, 2015

One of the primary reasons for the creation of the “seamless garment” argument was that the hierarchical alinskyites like Bernardin saw immediately that the prolife position was spot on in accord with Catholic doctrine and that the faithful’s advocacy on behalf of unborn babies would strengthen orthodox Catholicism and, perhaps most significantly, provide the basis for the first time in history for saying a good Catholic cannot vote for a Democrat, for any Democrat at any level of government. And so the scheme and subterfuge of “we must care about all ‘Life’ issues” was compassionately promulgated by liberals and dissenters. The US bishops via the USCCB could have written a single page that says that Democrats are Death Dealers and their party has fulfilled Cardinal Burke’s prophecy that they are become the Party Of Death, but instead they provide every four years a voluminous document in whose text is submerged the words stating that there are two intrinsic evils – abortion and racism – i.e. evils so bad, so heinous, so evil that no consideration outweighs them. It is clear that AB Bern Cupich’s attempt to morally equate abortion and some so-called “social justice” issues – his resurrection of the theologically debunked “seamless garment” cover up – tells us we must be approaching another election cycle and the liberal dissenters, forsaking their jobs as shepherds, are again shilling for the Democrat Party Of Death. The time for dialogue, the time for being nice, and the time for discussion ended decades ago when we in America began killing thousands of babies each day – tens of thousands in the archdiocese that AB Bern Cupich (thinks he) rules. Yes is yes, no is no, Democrats are Monsters, Democrats are evil, Democrats are demonic, and, without simile or analogy, Democrats Are Planned Parenthood – no strong memo to follow. The only reason not to say this this plainly is to play the deadly game of the prelates who do not want the faithful to vote for candidates other than Democrats. And they are not fools- they see the flood of new Democrats, now over 42,000,000 of them illegally here, who, if they learn the truth that it is a mortal sin to vote for a Democrat, will sway the balance of political power in this country once they are legalized by executive order.

Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas









Are We a Nazi Nation?

Guy McClung


COURAGEOUS PRIEST – November 1, 2015



Please, you are besmirching the legacy of Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler and Dr. Mengele by comparing these National Socialists* to Planned Parenthood, Cecile Richards, PP Board members, PP Abortionists, those who vote for Democrats, and those who contribute to Democrat campaigns [“Planned Parenthood et al”]. Planned Parenthood et al have done things the National Socialists* never dreamed of doing: harvesting human organs from living babies, cutting out human body parts and selling them, splitting open [very carefully] a baby’s face to get a fresh whole brain for sale, pulling babies feet first out of their mohters to maximize salable parts and organs before the baby is dead, and selling entire intact human bodies. Godwin’s Law of Moral Discussion is that if the discussion goes on long enough, someone will compare an immoral act to acts of the National Socialists*. Now there is McClung’s Corollary: If people today do things worse than what the National Socialists* did, more heinous, nore bloodthirsty, more diabolical, they will be compared to Planned Parenthood et al, Cecile Richards, and the ghoulish barbarians who pass themselves off as PP doctors.

Guy McClung, San Antonio, Texas

ps: Yes, they were “socialists” – nicknamed “Nazis.”




























Prostitution Politics

Written in 2014, this poem applies even today to the politics we watch unfold in our state and national headlines daily.


Prostitution Politics

I live in a brothel,
But I am not a whore.
Personally opposed to impurity,
I’m chaste to the core.

I help with the auctions,
But no slaves are mine.
Opposed to such servitude,
I try to be kind.

Working at Auschwitz,
Folks arrive every day.
Personally opposed to holocaust,
What else can I say?

In a warm den of thieves,
I spend most of my time.
Opposed to all thievery,
I commit no such crime.

I party with death,
But never would harm a child.
I am personally opposed to killing
And to all murder most vile.

I dance with the devil,
But I’m untouched, in the lead.
Opposed to all evil,
I’m not self-deceived.

I live in a brothel,
But no whoring I know.
Opposed to defilement,
I’m pure as the snow.

Copyright © Guy McClung 2014