The article mentions that she was a congresswoman from California and that while serving in that capacity she attended Mass at St Joseph Church on Capitol Hill. The Standard mentions nothing more of her career as a congresswoman or the positions she espoused and votes she cast. The Catholic Standard excels at lobbing "soft-ball questions" at those to whom the chancery and USCCB would kiss up, but I digress! The fact is, while she claims that her faith motivates her, her voting record tells a different story. The following is some research that the Catholic Standard should have done -assuming it takes its journalistic responsibilities seriously.
Now think. She's a Democratic congresswoman from California. Knowing that, her voting record on abortion, as reported by On The Issues, reveals Ms Solis to be another flaming pro-abortion supporter. To wit:
- She voted repeatedly to support embryonic stem cell research.
- Like her boss, she voted against the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.
- She voted for all manners of abortion funding.
- She was endorsed by Emily's List and has a 100% rating from NARAL.
Moreover, in 2004 she was one of several CINO pro-abortion congresspeople who sent a letter to Cardinal McCarrick almost insisting that he not deny them Holy Communion because they promote abortion. Women for Faith and Family has that letter archived on their site. It did originally appear on the official website of Rosa DeLauro but that has since been taken down. I do have two side comments to make about that letter:
- By now they must realize that they need not have bothered to write that letter, as His Eminence never did have any intention of obeying Canon 915, as subsequent behavior has so amply demonstrated.
- Look down the list of signers. In light of the Obamacare passage of March 2010, does one name stand out? Bart Stupak! He never was "pro-life". Don't the events of March 2010 make sense now?
One wonders just what favor the chancery might be trying to curry from Ms. Solis. Else, why would the Standard content itself with such a simplistic, shallow piece of happy-pap-crap in place of a news article. In just 30 minutes I did research that the Standard should have done. I now report it, but the Standard should have done so too - if it's interested in being a real journalistic enterprise. My fellow blogger reported last week that big changes were afoot at the Standard. Now all can see yet another piece of evidence why I look askance at these changes.