Thursday, June 10, 2021

Why Did Maryland Catholic Conference Side With NARAL Against Maryland Right To Life?

In the lead article of the latest edition for Defend Life's newsletter (in which I regularly write a column), one is led to ask that question as the MCC supported a bill in the Maryland State Legislature that would allow Planned Parenthood into schools for easy access to school-aged kids.

I needn't rehash the excellent Defend Life piece but rather, I'd suggest you read it yourselves.  Some things need to be highlighted about the MCC's support for HB 401.  First, two local pro-life groups opposed it.  Didn't Molly Sheahan think it might have been wise to inquire why the other two groups opposed it?  I would think it should have been a part of some "due-diligence" research on her part.  Second, NARAL, existing only to promote abortion, favored it.  I might have thought  that might raise a red flag or two as to whether or not HB 401 was really beneficial.  Defend Life staff questioned Sheahan about these matters, only to receive an evasive response.

So now the question must be asked.  What, or maybe, who urged Sheahan to disregard the voices of others in the pro-life community and stand side by side with rabid pro-aborts in support of HB 401?  I would not be surprised if those directives came from chanceries.  Recall that all three Maryland prelates sit on the Board of Directors of the MCC.

The Archdiocese of Washington has displayed some strange behavior towards pro-life activists.  I touched a bit on it three years ago.  Might our prelates have been willing to support HB 401 in exchange for some other favor?  We don't know.  Suffice it to say that Sheahan most likely would not have supported that bill without obtaining at least the permission of the MCC board of directors - that is, the area bishops.  I regret this episode might be more than just an error of judgment.


  1. To support this measure that allows 'planned barrenhood' into schools to teach little children the ways of sin and perversion is in itself SIN.

  2. How much does abortion offend Wilton Gregory?

  3. Maybe this is cynical, but in my opinion I think that the MCC supports the bill, or is quiet about the three red flags because they don't want to upset the General Assembly.

    There hasn't been a serious bill in the Maryland GA regarding rolling back statute of limitations regarding claims of sexual abuse. As far as I know the GA has not voted or even really given serous debate to one. So I think the MCC doesn't want to upset the apple cart in that they believe that if they don't make a lot of negative noise regarding HB401/SB438 they will dodge very expensive sexual abuse claims.


Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.