The Live Action Debate Goes On - But Why??

I posted yesterday about the rather strange debate encircling the Live Action stings of Planned Parenthood and whether or not the actors engaged in lying in the sinful sense.  Well, this debate still continues, with ever-so-scholarly criticisms being lobbed at Live Action.  I cannot help but suspect that George Soros and his hench-people are taking great delight as they watch these folks carry on and on.  By the way - my mention of George Soros is one key reason why I look askance upon this "theological debate".  As I mentioned in the last post (and in the comment sections of other blogs), I cannot help but think that the timing of all this theological hullabaloo, with the entrance of George Soros into the Live Action / Planned Parenthood saga, is more than just a coincidence.  Why just now are all these theologians getting all atwitter, when pro-lifers have been doing "stings" now for many years without the theologians uttering nary a peep?

The proceeds of this debate on one blog, as well as the comments therein, really reinforces my suspicions of subtle and nefarious agents in all this debate. 
Mind you, I don't question the integrity of the blog-owner, but I do wonder if he/she is being naive in not reading the comments posted on their blog.  The blog is called "Mirror of Justice".  The particular post with comments is here.  I ask you to take note of the comments of someone called "David Nichols".  Yesterday at 10:07am, he said and I quote, "And I think it should be remembered that the Planned Parenthood personnel who were targeted in this sting were not abortion providers. The services they were in charge of were STD testing, pap smears, and other health-related gynecological services."  He states he is against the lying.  However, as we read his statement, we do see lack of truth therein.  Those Planned Parenthood personnel were most certainly abortion providers.  They are directly involved in the abortion procedure at the preparatory, counseling and dare I say, selling stage.  Also what does he think these "other health-related gynecological services" are?  Surely he's heard of contraception, Plan B, etc.  He sounds like quite the shill for Planned Parenthood.  I hope he is naive; else, Mr Nichols may himself be guilty of the very sin he purports to denounce.  By the way - Matt Bowman, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, was also commenting on this blog.  He called out Nichols on that questionable statement.

Nichol's verbal gaffes continue.  At 10:51, he lets this loose: "It is, of course, true that the federal government does not fund abortions with tax dollars to Planned Parenthood."  Anyone with half an idea of how non-profits and other organizations budget know damned well that yes indeed, our tax dollars do pay for the murder of babies.  That's why the current proceedings in the US House of Representatives are so crucial.

And he continued on.  It seems he was more interested in defending Planned Parenthood more than debating the Live Action tactics.  In responding to another who said that the behavior of the PP employees was typical, he came back with (at 12:53pm), "If this is indeed the case, why did Planned Parenthood report the visits to the FBI? I really doubt that Planned Parenthood deals with people who let on that they are pimps, prostitutes, and sex traffickers in their day-to-day business."  Again Matt Bowman shot that down: "PP didn't report those visits to the FBI until many days after, when at headquarters they realized that this may have been a sting done at several clinics. A normal perosn would have walked out of the room and called the FBI then and there. These videos show that PP does deal with such people regularly, by the nonchalance and free facilitation that PP offered these actors."

Now enter "sd", the moniker of another commenter.  He/she also sallied forth to the defense of Planned Parenthood at 1:22pm: "This whole discussion of the ethics of lying leaves out another moral problem with what Live Action is doing in these cases - the problem of temptation. The fact is that the Live Action actors went into clinics, looked in the eyes of human beings who are created in the image and likeness of God and whose eternal salvation is being worked out in real time across the span of their days, and told lies with the expectation that it would cause the workers to commit a sin - indeed likely a mortal sin. The fact that these same workers presumably commit mortal sins regulalrly in the normal course of assiting the business of PP is of no matter. Christians/Catholics should not be in the business of playing games with other peoples' eternal souls."  He/she sounds like one of those liberals who believes that they and their ilk can never take responsibility for their own actions or choices; always is someone else to blame.  Fortunately Matt didn't let that slide; neither did Brian Hudson, who replied just after Matt, "As was shown in each of these videos, Planned Parenthood clearly knew the protical for each of these instances where keeping sex work quiet was condusive to a happy client. Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood director, who was in the employ of Planned Parenthood for 8 years, for a very large clinic in Texas, has testified to this fact. She is now a pro-life spokesperson who Planned Parenthood tried to silence in court in the fall of 2009."

Now I know this next little tid-bit will get me into trouble, but here goes.  As you read this you'll notice that Dr. Robert George is coming down on the side of those who disapprove of Live Action's methods.  If the name sounds a bit familiar, it should.  He is one of the authors of the morally-flawed Manhattan Declaration - a reputed "statement of principles" for social conservatives.  It mentions most of the social and moral ills of our present culture.  I said "most" because of one glaring omission.  There is not one mention of a foundational evil - contraception.  The very silence of the Manhattan Declaration regarding contraception screems volumes about its complicity with the Culture of Death.  Robert George, a Catholic, affixed his name to this.  Yet he has the unmitigated gall to chide Live Action?

Now here's another brain-teaser from the Old Testament.  Please read Genesis, chapters 42 - 44.  This deals with Joseph and his brothers.  Obviously Joseph deceived his brothers by keeping his identity hidden.  Did he sin by so doing?  Here's another one, this time from Genesis 22:1-2 (I'm reading from the Douay-Rheims). "After these things, God tempted Abraham, and said to him: Abraham, Abraham.  And he answered: here I am.  He said to him: Take thy only begotten son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and go into the land of vision: and there thou shalt offer him for an holocaust.."  Most of us know the rest of the story, that just as Abraham had raised the knife, God restrained his arm and Isaac lived.   But..did God lie to Abraham?