A federal court just ordered something that is Planned Parenthood’s worst nightmare


In 2015, Planned Parenthood was caught red-handed selling body parts of aborted babies illegally for profit.

Their executives were caught on camera spilling the details of the bloody operation, with one executive saying she would buy a Lamborghini with all the profits.

But now Planned Parenthood is in trouble after a federal court ordered them to do this one thing.

Planned Parenthood has been ordered to answer questions about the sale of “fetal tissue” and “organs” according to the Life Legal Defense Foundation.

It is currently illegal against both state and federal law to make a net profit from the sale of fetal tissue.

And attorneys on the case have mounting evidence that Planned Parenthood and its affiliates may have been illegally profiting from the sale of aborted babies.

Several Planned Parenthood affiliates will have to answer questions about the nature of the “profit” they were making from selling the baby parts.

Christian Headlines writes:

A court has ordered four Planned Parenthood affiliates to answer questions regarding the profits they earned from the procurement and sale of fetal tissue.

According to Life Legal Defense Foundation, Planned Parenthood along with several of its affiliates filed suit against the Center for Medical Progress some three years ago claiming that CMP had lied about Planned Parenthood’s involvement in the sale of organs and tissue from aborted babies. CMP had sent investigators into various Planned Parenthood clinics and events to investigate the organization’s involvement with fetal tissue sale and procurement, where they caught several high-level Planned Parenthood employees on tape discussing the illegal sales.

Throughout the course of the lawsuit, investigators have also found more evidence that could implicate the largest abortion clinic in the country.

According to the Life Legal Defense Foundation, investigators uncovered that the four most prominent affiliates who worked with Planned Parenthood, kept no records of their allowable costs while still receiving payments from fetal tissue brokers. In other words, this discovery begs the question of was Planned Parenthood and or its affiliates making a profit off of the sale and trade of aborted babies’ fetal tissue – an action that violates both state and federal law.

This could be a major step for the pro-life movement’s goal of defunding Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood hid from the controversy and outrage over the 2015 videos by lobbying their cause as “more than abortions.”

They even spread the lie that abortions are “only 3 %” of what they do.

But their new president Leana Wen let the truth slip that “expanding abortion” is their core mission.

And their own numbers show that they performed 11,000 more abortions in 2016-2017 than 2017-2018. 332,757 abortions.

But now they could be trapped in a corner with no way out.

Millions of Americans are ready to see Planned Parenthood be defunded of their taxpayer dollars.

And the first step is to expose Planned Parenthood for the blood thirsty abortionists that they are.

Do you think Planned Parenthood should be defunded? Let us know what you think in the comments below.


  1. Planned Parenthood should absolutely receive no taxpayer dollars to fund their hideous murdering of God’s miracle creations. They’re all murderers and will have to answer before God one of these days.

        • Oh, there is NO doubt in my mind that they DO know what they are doing and I certainly do not hope God to have mercy on their souls, THEY HAVE NO SOULS TO BEGIN WITH!!!

          • I agree, criminals that kill most often show NO remorse. If given the chance
            Planned Parenthood would just continue business as usual & the greed for money & power wd. be greater than any desire that they could possibly fend off. These sick people are most probably addicted to killing at this point!!

      • Our babies suffer with pai being murder and a criminal killer is put too sleep. This Country run by the Woodstock crown is on a down in slide with Satin steering the train!!!!!👺👹

          • Well no wonder you think we are sliding – satin is indeed a slippery fabric. Satan however, is the make- believe fellow you are likely referring to. I have to keep all you folks straight – even when it is just about your spelling!!

      • Yes they do know what they are doing..and profiting from it to boot…they are murderers and should be in jail forever. And they have the nerve to brag about the money they make on this horrible practice…and yet the government continues to give them our tax dollars to pay for their actions.

      • amen Premeditated murder does not get you a free pass into heaven later in life. Premeditation is not a oh I’ll kill now and on my own death bed get a minister to pray with me so I get to heaven. Premeditation is not the same. It is against Gods wishes and if you willingly murder and think it will be okay later, think again.

    • Yes, they should be defunded! They don’t care how far into the pregnancy a woman is, they’ll perform an abortion. Some women actually use abortion as a means of birth control. It’s murder no matter how you you look @ it!

    • Did you know that Planned Parenthood is receives large “Donations” from the “Open Borders Foundation”?
      Founded by Mr. George Soros in 1985, and to date he has given about $40 Billion to his foundation?
      Soros will do ANYTHING to make money! I’ve seen pics of aborted babies in pails on the roof of the clinic, some appeared to be intact and full term. That is why I have asked, but can’t get details of what they do with the aborted babies. Do you have any “Facts”???

    • All those little souls are now with our creator and in a better place away from this ugly world.
      How sad people are willing to make money(the root to all evil) from the death of another human-so sick.

      • May I remind you that “money isn’t the root of all evil”. It is the “love of money” that is the root of all evil and I believe that is biblical also!! And I supposed that you were a bible reader!!

    • Just read there was an aborted fetus with his heart beating when it was delivered intact. They cut the face it said from the chin up through the front of the face to preserve all. I am truly sick to hear and read such atrosities that have happened and continue to do so..

    • I compare planned parenthood to the Nazi’s. They are just as bad, and to think that our tax dollars are funding the murders that take place there daily.

  2. PLANNED PARENTHOOD is a murderous organization for the sole purpose of killing unwanted babies……

    THEY ARE MURDERERS AND EVIL TO THE CORE….they should all be sentenced to being burned alive at the stake…….

    the EVIL of this organization and it’s managers is pure SATAN…….

    • Well, then how about the woman that said she was going to buy a “Lamborghini” with the profits??? I think Soros funds PP to make money? He doesn’t donate, but “Buys” something for the money he gives. Why do you think he went to Hillary’s home while she was running for POTUS and gave her an $8 Million check? Or why he paid Obama to become president? Barry was broke when he graduated, yet flew to the middle east for the summer! Came back “Barack Hussein Obama”! Did you know Soros foundation funds over 2,300 liberal groups like PP? I’d rather they be convicted of treason, lose their citizenship, and be deported to Venezuela.

  3. I agree. Democrats worry about Immagrants but yet condone killing our own citizens babies. They pay for illeagals to keep them in god health but kill babies. Planned parenthood is how to teach birth control and that is a responsibility of both the man and woman.

    • Yeah! Richard. They also say that it is their choice what they do with their own bodies. I wish one of these Godless killers would explain to me if it were about choice, how in the world did they get pregnant? All of the choices they have already made have been wrong. They chose to have sex, when to have it, where to have it, who to have it with, how to have it. How many choices do they think is enough? What they end up with is called consequences and that is where the decision to kill the results of their many poor choices comes about. Their total irresponsibility is readily apparent.

      • Oh yes – it’s always blame the woman!! Seems like there was a man involved in there somewhere. What about the man taking the proper measures to not get the woman pregnant?? He had a choice in there too. Or do you still believe in immaculate conception??

        • Even when I was a teenager in the ’60’s, the judge asked the girl to drop a clothes pin into a milk bottle. Which she did, the second time he moved the bottle! Since she said she “Just laid there and let the four boys do it.”.
          With all the options available to women, it isn’t 100% the guys responsibility.
          After all, in Toronto most single women only let you “Spend the nite” if you spend over $500 on them.

          • And again you have let the man off “scot-free”. I remember the phrase, “just lay back and enjoy it”, referring to rape. We were told to not fight back but just let the boy/guy/man go ahead with the rape.
            That way we wouldn’t get hurt. That has always been the attitude by men toward women. Men have always felt that they were entitled to sex with women, whether the woman wanted it or not. This is what we were told in the 50’s and this attitude still prevails today. So just moving the milk bottle wasn’t the answer then and it still isn’t the answer today. Men still have the same responsibility to prevent pregnancy as they always have. Shame on you for trying to prove otherwise!!

        • And again you seem to forget the man has no say if he wants the child to be born. So please preach to some other idiot that believes your nonsense.

  4. Think of this, we, Americans, kill our own children. As a people, we have become the most evil society that has ever existed.

  5. We need legislatures who are not afraid of PP and the abortion lobby. And we need Justices who will recognize murder for exactly what it is.
    I am hoping we even have someone smart enough and brave enough to sue New York for it’s murderous attack on those who have no voice of their own; yet!

    • You will have to take on Mr. George Soros, he makes money by funding PP. Thru his foundations. He is the head of the “European Union”, by the way. So he can market fetal tissue easily.

  6. The Dems consider the US as the dumping ground for the worlds garbage and then bust their buns to throw the aborted little ones on top of them.Excuse me I think I’m going to be sick

  7. What a bunch of murdering criminals. They weren’t satisfied with $500,000,000 of our taxpayer money,but the greedy criminals had to sell aborted babies for parts. Not to mention the amount of money they collected from women (and children). for their abortions. How do they justify that kind of money. I hope when Trump has the chance to replace Ginsburg ( planned parenthood’s biggest fan) on the Supreme Court, that he puts the woman that’s on the Court of Appeals (sorry I can’t remember her name, but she is like Gorsuch & Kavanaugh) and she is at the top of the Presidents list for nomination. We all need to pray that justice will be done, and she can withstand the onslaught from the criminally insane Democrats. There’s no telling how far they will go to thwart her getting on the High Court.

  8. Hideous murderers laughing over their profit for personal extravagance, and selfish gains. Did these young women know their babies limbs were being sent to different places from their hearts and brains? Shameful! And we give these managers our taxes? NO, enough!

  9. Planned Parenthood are nothing but HABITUAL MURDERS. They need to be
    CLOSED DOWN permanently. And anyone affiliated with them needs to
    PROSECUTED to the full extent of the LAW..

  10. They are not going to overturn Roe V. Wade but it will go a long way creating a better life for needy children if Planned Parenthood was defunded. Get them off the Govt. dole. With Planned Parenthood supporters having lots of money, my tax dollars can be used for a better purpose, like giving children a better life. I do not mean DACA children, but kids that are abandoned or abused.

  11. Throw the murderers in jail and let all of us go by and throw eggs at them every day. They are the Lowest creeps on earth ! I wouldn’t give any of them a bottle of water. Scum of the earth!

  12. Planned parenthood should be defunded. We should not have to pay for doctors to kill other women’s babies. In fct, they should be totally shut down. What they are doing is murder and population control not what is best for women but what they want.

  13. They should be defunded immediately plus arrested and convicted of crime of murder and illegal sale of the innocent babies ‘ body parts! Makes me sick. They are laughing in the face of God! Judgement day is coming to these evil people!

  14. I’m not Catholic and haven’t commented on anything before, but I agree with one of the Bishops that spoke out recently who said maybe it is time for the people in the USA to follow the people in France’s example and have 100″s of thousands of people to March against the government and states like New York to stop the insanity that is going on in this country.

    • You are right. We are lazy and don’t fight as hard as the Democrats. They go out marching for everything and they rally with speeches to get others involved. Even bring them in by the bus loads. Our country is being destroyed from within!

  15. This makes me SICK aborting these poor defenseless babies and selling their organs, tissue and limbs for tons of money. I hope YOU ALL ROT IN HELL. STOP FUNDING THESE PLACES ITS DISGUSTING!!!!!!!

    • There is no god and even if there were, he wouldn’t be paying attention to Planned Parenthood. Or anyone or anything else here. If there were even a real god he would surely get rid of tRumpy first!!

  16. There is coming a day when all of these people including all politicians that agree to murdering babies,will be judged by God almighty. God said it would be better if people like this were never born,that hurt Gods little ones.God have mercy on their souls.

  17. STOP all federal funding of Planned Parenthood. For a number of reasons. 1 They give moneys to political parties. 2. That the Tax Payer ought not have to pay for some one else sexual misconduct. 3. The death rate per year is 60K. The government has spent large sums of money teaching sexual education. Keeps those that are sexually active from being responsible for their actions. 4. Abortion is an issue that the male and female need to decide personal out come. 5. they call themselves non profit, when the money spent per year per abortion show they are for profit look at the saleries of the staff. and the office spaces totally.


  19. What SOB has the Sadistic mind as to cut a baby apart to buy a car. Jail is way too good for these people, I am incensed!!! How dare they, How could they. THIS is what America has become. Shame and Horror, and this is legal!!!!!!!!!!! Something Must be Done, Help, these places need to be taken out of existence!!!!

  20. I believe if there wasn’t a need for abortion there wouldn’t be a need abortionists or an organizations like planned parenthood. young people today need to be more responsible and learn more about birth control and how and when to use it. for example a lot of women do not know that certain medications can interfere with birth control pills like antibiotics they can keep the pill from working. and it is best to check with your doctor (gynecologist) to find out what meds block the action of birth control pills. a lot of women have gotten pregnant due to taking antibiotics and other meds and thnking that their birth control pill is still working. And whatever happened to putting an unplanned baby up for adoption? Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is just an irresponsible action as well as pure evil. murder is murder and the term abortion is just a way to keep people from admitting that what they are doing is commiting murder!

    • Deb – you are right as far as your first few statements, but you then went off the tracks. Of course today’s young people need to learn more about birth control, but there is always an outcry when the subject is brought up. What is the right age to start? Many say that if you teach kids about sex and babies then they will have to go and try it. And if you teach them about birth control, then they will REALLY have to try it. So when and where do you start? Abortion is still necessary – are you even a Registered Nurse (RN), so that you even know that there are good medical reasons for abortion? I don’t understand the outcry over making all these “babies” available for adoption, when foster homes are simply overloaded with kids waiting and needing to be adopted!! This country sure needs to get its’ collective head together and prioritize things.

  21. This is nothing more than the murder of the most helpless. God said I knew you in the womb. Hell is real and it is hot! Doesn’t matter whether you believe in it or not. Your unbelief won’t change it. If I’m wrong I lose nothing. If you’re wrong you’ve lost it all!

  22. God’s heart breaks a little more every time one of his precious creations is aborted. How precious are these babies to Him. He declares that they are a gift to us. Planned Parenthood is an instrument in Satan’s hands. We are made in God’s image! The enemy of our souls comes to kill, steal and destroy! We are commanded to forgive those who trespass against us for they don’t know what they are doing, and bless them. Our prayers are our weapons against this horrible agenda. God will avenge! Matthew 18:6- Woe to those who cause one of his children harm! Better that a millstone be hung around their necks, and cast into the sea. They are messing with the “apple of His eye!

  23. Abortion is plain and simple murder. That is supposed to be against the law. We need someone to follow through with prosecution

  24. It is a felony to kill or mistreat a pet, but perfectly ok to kill a child in the womb. They say it is not a baby till born. But the baby has a heart beat. Funny you are considered dead when your heart stops beating. Wouldn’t that mean that since a baby has a heart beat shortly after conception they are a living person?. God will never honor anyone killing children no matter what the law says. They will someday stand before the ultimate judge of the universe and they will be without an excuse for murder. Tax payers should not have to support anything that has to do with murder. One way to not get pregnant is not have sex. Abortion should never been allowed for birth control. KEEP YOUR PANTYS ON!!!!!!

  25. Why are the baby killers at Planned Parenthood still receiving our tax money. Who is the Government going to give our tax money to next? Tke KKK?

  26. These sorry bastards should have never, never received any tax payer, or for that matter, any other dollars to begin with. They should be on death row for murder.

  27. p.p. pays our congress to vote to fund them.. That is one of the perks of some in congress. i looked it up on internet. it listed the names of who they pd off and the amts. if i remember right they were all dems..

  28. GOD said “Thou Shalt not Kill” that includes unborn babies. Period ! If you are choosing to have sex you know the risk. Abstence is the answer. Waiting for the right person . Or using protection! Period !

  29. You’d think the unborn-right-to-lifers would immediately understand the animal-right-to-lifers! Anti-abortion protesters often engage in sidewalk counseling, or face buffer zones around abortion clinics, etc.

    The Seamless Garment Network (SGN) is a coalition of peace and justice organizations on the religious left. Animal rights, like ecology, nuclear power, gun control, or the drug war, is a topic of serious discussion among SGN members. His Holiness the Dalai Lama has signed the SGN Mission Statement.

    “We are committed to the protection of life, which is threatened in today’s world by war, abortion, poverty, racism, the arms race, the death penalty and euthanasia. We believe these issues are linked under a consistent ethic of life. We challenge those working on all or some of these issues to maintain a cooperative spirit of peace, reconciliation, and respect in protecting the unprotected.”

    Carol Crossed, then Executive Director of the SGN, wrote in 1994:

    “In the last 27 years, I have engaged in civil disobedience and risked arrest in over twenty demonstrations around issues as varied as civil rights in Washington, DC; anti-Vietnam War actions; and sleeping outside the City Hall in Rochester, NY to call attention to the plight of the homeless. Most recently, I was arrested in opposition to the Gulf War. Five of these arrests were in opposition to aborting children. Rescues are not a monolithic expression by a single group. Many participants, even leaders, are feminists, Quakers, and Pacifists from Catholic Worker communities.”

    On January 21, 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the sanctions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) could be applied to anti-abortion protesters.

    According to Carol Crossed, “It is an inescapable fact that activists today engage in acts of civil disobedience remarkably similar to some of the acts of pro-life protesters which NOW (the National Organization for Women) would like to transform into federal felons…

    “Environmentalists chain themselves to trees; plowshares activists damage warheads; and animal rights activists sit in at stockyard feed lots. A current bill (HR 1815) called ‘Hunter Harassment’ is under consideration which would not only criminalize actions against hunters—assaults, seizing guns, blocking entrances to hunting grounds, etc.—but speech directed at hunters as well.

    “A Washington Post editorial ‘Shouting and Shooting’ (12/3/93) says, ‘The point of picketing, protests, demonstrations and boycotts is to make people who are targets so uncomfortable that they will change their politics or behavior. So it is with the opponents of hunting, as it has been with civil rights, labor unions and abortion protesters.’”

    When the RICO decision was issued, Carol Crossed saw it as a threat to the whole range of nonviolent protest, and warned others of the threat that the RICO decision posed to all forms of nonviolent protest and peaceful dissent.

    Signers of a newspaper ad protesting the decision included Erwin Knoll, editor of The Progressive; Daniel Berrigan, SJ; Philip Berrigan; Liz McAlister; Leonard Peltier, American Indian Movement; Joseph Lowery, President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference; civil rights leader Will Campbell; environmentalist Wendell Berry and others.

    Organizations signing included the International Black Women’s Network; the Fund for Animals; Koininea Partners; People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA); Sojourners and others.

    How is the left (representing labor unions, working class Democrats, now calling for a $15/hr minimum wage, Medicare for All, etc.) shutting down free speech when the right refuses to give fair and balanced coverage of animal issues, and discriminates against animal advocates on the basis of religious identity (like pro-lifers faced in past decades)?

    The ancient eastern reincarnationist religions Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism all predate Christianity, all oppose abortion, all teach ahimsa, or nonviolence towards humans and animals alike to the point of vegetarianism, all are vegan-friendly, and all teach that abortion and war are the karma for killing animals, and that therefore, we cannot end abortion nor bring about world peace until first we abolish the killing of all animals.

    David Daleiden is a hero to conservatives for his undercover investigations of Planned Parenthood trafficking in unborn human body parts, but many of these same conservatives are trying to pass “Ag-gag” legislation to prevent animal activists from doing likewise on factory farms, fur farms, circuses, rodeos, vivisection (animal experimentation) labs, etc.

    • Vasu…Human life takes precedence over animals. God created us above the animals and humans are more precious to him. Animals have no rights. Nowhere in the Bible or our Constitution are animals given rights. It doesn’t matter how many religions predate Christianity. There is ONE God and Jesus is HIs Son and the ONLY way to get to Heaven. Having said that, I totally agree with you that animals should be protected from abuse. Animals do not have rights, but HUMANS have the responsibility to take care of them. God gave us the responsibility to take care of what He gave us and never meant there to be animal cruelty. As for factory farming, which I am totally against, check out Humane Farming Association.

        • You will know the moment you die that God is very real. You can know that now, but you have rejected the great love Jesus has for you. That is on you. You will join satan, who has you very brainwashed.

          • I will absolutely know now that god isn’t real – simply the product of your over-active imagination!! Just give it up – and try to do some real good in this world, and while you are alive and still have a chance!!

    • Vegetarianism is at the heart of Christianity. Jesus insisted upon the moral standards given by God in the beginning (Matthew 5:31-32, 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18), and this did not go unnoticed by early church fathers such as St. Basil and St. Jerome.

      One of the greatest theologians in the early Christian church, Tertullian, or Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, was born in Carthage about AD 155-160. Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage, called him the “Master.”

      Tertullian was one of four early church fathers who wrote extensively on the subject of vegetarianism. According to Tertullian, flesh-eating is not conducive to the highest life, it violates moral law, and it debases man in intellect and emotion.

      Responding to the apparent permissiveness of Paul, Tertullian argued: “and even if he handed over to you the keys of the slaughterhouse… in permitting you to eat all things… at least he has not made the kingdom of Heaven to consist in butchery: for, says he, eating and drinking is not the Kingdom of God.”

      Tertullian similarly scorned those who would use the gospel to justify gratifying the cravings of the flesh:

      “How unworthily, too, do you press the example of Christ as having come ‘eating and drinking’ into the service of your lusts: He who pronounced not the full but the hungry and thirsty ‘blessed,’ who professed His work to be the completion of His Father’s will, was wont to abstain — instructing them to labor for that ‘meat’ which lasts to eternal life, and enjoining in their common prayers petition not for gross food but for bread only.”

      Tertullian made his case for moderate eating by referring to the history of the Israelites (Numbers 11:4-34): “And if there be ‘One’ who prefers the works of justice, not however, without sacrifice—that is to say, a spirit exercised by abstinence — it is surely that God to whom neither a gluttonous people nor priest was acceptable — monuments of whose concupiscence remain to this day, where lies buried a people greedy and clamorous for flesh-meats, gorging quails even to the point of inducing jaundice.

      “It was divinely proclaimed,” insisted Tertullian, “’Wine and strong liquor shall you not drink, you and your sons after you.’ Now this prohibition of drink is essentially connected with the vegetable diet. Thus, where abstinence from wine is required by the Deity, or is vowed by man, there, too, may be understood suppression of gross feeding, for as is the eating, so is the drinking.

      “It is not consistent with truth that a man should sacrifice half of his stomach only to God—that he should be sober in drinking, but intemperate in eating. Your belly is your God, your liver is your temple, your paunch is your altar, the cook is your priest, and the fat steam is your Holy Spirit; the seasonings and the sauces are your chrisms, and your belchings are your prophesizing…”

      Tertullian sarcastically compared gluttons to Esau, who sold his birthright in exchange for a meal. “I ever recognize Esau, the hunter, as a man of taste and as his were, so are your whole skill and interest given to hunting and trapping… It is in the cooking pots that your love is inflamed—it is in the kitchen that your faith grows fervid — it is in the flesh dishes that all your hopes lie hid… Consistently do you men of the flesh reject the things of the Spirit. But if your prophets are complacent towards such persons, they are not my prophets…Let us openly and boldly vindicate our teaching.

      “We are sure that they who are in the flesh cannot please God…a grossly-feeding Christian is akin to lions and wolves rather than God. Our Lord Jesus called Himself Truth and not habit.”

      In general, Tertullian railed against gluttony, and taught that spiritual life consists of simple living. He explained, “if man could not follow even a simple taboo against eating one fruit, how could he be expected to restrain himself from more demanding restrictions? Instead, after the Flood, man was given the regulation against blood; further details were length to his own strength of will.”

      According to Tertullian, the entire creation prays to God:

      “Cattle and wild beasts pray, and bend their knees, and in coming forth from their stalls and lairs look up to heaven. Moreover the birds taking flight lift themselves up to heaven and instead of hands, spread out the cross of their wings, while saying something which may be supposed to be a prayer.”

      Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-220), or Titus Flavius Clemens, founded the Alexandrian school of Christian Theology and succeeded Pantaenus in AD 190. In his writings, he referred to vegetarian philosophers Pythagoras, Plato, and even Socrates as divinely inspired. But the true teachings, he insisted, are to be found in the Hebrew prophets and in the person of Jesus Christ.

      Clement taught that a life of virtue is one of simplicity, and that the apostle Matthew was a vegetarian. According to Clement, eating flesh and drinking wine “is rather characteristic to a beast and the fumes rising from them, being dense, darken the soul… Destroy not the work of God for the sake of food. Whether ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God, aiming after true frugality. For it is lawful for me to partake of all things, yet all things are not expedient…neither is the regimen of a Christian formed by indulgence… man is not by nature a gravy eater, but a bread eater.

      “Those who use the most frugal fare are the strongest, the healthiest and the noblest…We must guard against those sorts of food which persuade us to eat when we are not hungry,” warned Clement, “bewitching the appetite…is there not within a temperate simplicity, a wholesome variety of eatables — vegetables, roots, olives, herbs, fruits…?

      “But those who bend around inflammatory tables, nourishing their own diseases, are ruled by a most licentious disease which I shall venture to call the demon of the belly: the worst and most vile of demons. It is far better to be happy than to have a devil dwelling in us, for happiness is found only in the practice of virtue. Accordingly the apostle Matthew lived upon seeds, fruits, grains and nuts and vegetables, without the use of flesh.”

      Clement acknowledged the moral and spiritual advantages of the vegetarian way of life:

      “If any righteous man does not burden his soul by the eating of flesh, he has the advantage of a rational motive… The very ancient altar of Delos was celebrated for its purity, to which alone, as being undefiled by slaughter and death, they say that Pythagoras would permit approach.

      “And they will not believe us when we say that the righteous soul is the truly sacred altar? But I believe that sacrifices were invented by men to be a pretext for eating flesh.”

      St. Basil (AD 320-79) taught, “The steam of meat darkens the light of the spirit. One can hardly have virtue if one enjoys meat meals and feasts… In the earthly paradise, there was no wine, no one sacrificed animals, and no one ate meat. Wine was only invented after the Deluge…

      “With simple living, well being increases in the household, animals are in safety, there is no shedding of blood, nor putting animals to death. The knife of the cook is needless, for the table is spread only with the fruits that nature gives, and with them they are content.”

      St. Basil prayed for universal brotherhood, and an end to human brutality against animals:

      “The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness
      Thereof. Oh, God, enlarge within us the
      Sense of fellowship with all living
      Things, our brothers the animals to
      Whom Thou gavest the earth as
      Their home in common with us

      “We remember with shame that
      In the past we have exercised the
      High dominion of man and ruthless
      Cruelty so that the voice of the earth
      Which should have gone up to Thee in
      Song, has been a groan of travail.

      “May we realize that they live not
      For us alone but for themselves and
      For Thee and that they love the sweetness
      Of life.”

      According to St. Gregory Nazianzen (AD 330-89):

      “The great Son is the glory of the Father
      and shone out from Him like light…
      He assumed a body
      to bring help to suffering creatures…

      “He was sacrifice and celebrant
      sacrificial priest and God Himself.
      He offered blood to God to cleanse
      the entire world.”

      “Holy people are most loving and gentle in their dealings with their fellows, and even with the lower animals: for this reason it was said that ‘A righteous man is merciful to the life of his beast,’” explained St. John Chrysostom (AD 347-407). “Surely we ought to show kindness and gentleness to animals for many reasons and chiefly because they are of the same origin as ourselves.”

      Writing about the Christian saints and ascetics, Chrysostom observed: “No streams of blood are among them; no butchering and cutting of flesh… With their repast of fruits and vegetables even angels from heaven, as they behold it, are delighted and pleased.”

      Chrysostom considered flesh-eating a cruel and unnatural habit for Christians: “We imitate the ways of wolves, the ways of leopards, or rather we are worse than these. For nature has assigned that they should be thus fed, but us God hath honored with speech and a sense of equity, yet we are worse than the wild beasts.”

      St. John Chrysostom taught: “We the Christian leaders practice abstinence from the flesh of animals to subdue our bodies… the unnatural eating of flesh-meat is of demonical origin… the eating of flesh is polluting.” He added that “flesh-meats and wine serve as materials for sensuality, and are a source of danger, sorrow, and disease.” And St. John Chrysostom recommended the “prayerful invocation of the name of God,” which he said should be “uninterrupted.” (I Thessalonians 5:17)

      The orthodox, 4th century Christian Hieronymus connected vegetarianism with both the original diet given by God and the teachings of Jesus:

      “The eating of animal meat was unknown up to the big Flood, but since the Flood they have pushed the strings and stinking juices of animal meat into our mouths, just as they threw quails in front of the grumbling sensual people in the desert. Jesus Christ, who appeared when the time had been fulfilled, has again joined the end with the beginning, so that it is no longer allowed for us to eat animal meat.”

      St. Jerome (AD 340-420) wrote to a monk in Milan who had abandoned vegetarianism:

      “As to the argument that in God’s second blessing (Genesis 9:3) permission was given to eat flesh—a permission not given in the first blessing (Genesis 1:29)—let him know that just as permission to put away a wife (divorce) was, according to the words of the Saviour, not given from the beginning, but was granted to the human race by Moses because of the hardness of our hearts (Matthew 19:1-12), so also in like manner the eating of flesh was unknown until the Flood, but after the Flood, just as quails were given to the people when they murmured in the desert, so have sinews and the offensiveness been given to our teeth.

      “The Apostle, writing to the Ephesians, teaches us that God had purposed that in the fullness of time he would restore all things, and would draw to their beginning, even to Christ Jesus, all things that are in heaven or that are on earth. Whence also, the Saviour Himself in the Apocalypse of John says, ‘I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.’ From the beginning of human nature, we neither fed upon flesh nor did we put away our wives (divorce), nor were our foreskins taken away from us for a sign. We kept on this course until we arrived at the Flood.

      “But after the Flood, together with the giving of the Law, which no man could fulfill, the eating of flesh was brought in, and the putting away of wives was conceded to hardness of heart… But now that Christ has come in the end of time, and has turned back Omega to Alpha… neither is it permitted to us to put away our wives (divorce), nor are we circumcised, nor do we eat flesh.”

      St. Jerome was responsible for the Vulgate, or Latin version of the Bible, still in use today. He felt a vegetarian diet was best for those devoted to the pursuit of wisdom. He once wrote that he was not a follower of Pythagoras or Empodocles “who do not eat any living creature,” but concluded, “And so I too say to you: if you wish to be perfect, it is good not to drink wine and eat flesh.”

      From history, too, we learn that the earliest Christians were vegetarians as well as pacifists. For example, Clemens Prudentius, the first Christian hymn writer, in one of his hymns exhorts his fellow Christians not to pollute their hands and hearts by the slaughter of innocent cows and sheep, and points to the variety of nourishing and pleasant foods obtainable without blood-shedding.

      It’s possible historically that Christianity, like Buddhism, began as a pacifist and vegetarian religion, but was corrupted over the centuries, beginning, perhaps, with the apostle Paul. Secular scholar Keith Akers writes in his as of yet unpublished manuscript, Broken Thread, The Fate of the Jewish Followers of Jesus in Early Christianity:

      “The ‘orthodox’ response to vegetarianism has been somewhat contradictory… The objection to meat consumption has been taken as evidence of heresy when Christians have been faced with outsiders; however, vegetarianism met with a kinder reception among the monastic communities… Vegetarianism does attain a certain status even in orthodox circles.

      “Indeed, a list of known vegetarians among the church leaders reads very much like a Who’s Who in the early church. Peter is described as a vegetarian in the Recognitions and Homilies. Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius, said that James (the brother of Jesus) was a vegetarian and was raised as a vegetarian. Clement of Alexandria thought that Matthew was a vegetarian…

      “According to Eusebius, the apostles — all the apostles, and not just James — abstained from both meat and wine, thus making them vegetarians and teetotalers, just like James. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, and Tertullian were all probably vegetarians, based on their writings… they themselves are evidently vegetarian and can be counted on to say a few kind words about vegetarianism. On the other hand, there are practically no references to any Christians eating fish or meat before the council of Nicaea.

      “The rule of Benedict forbade eating any four-legged animals, unless one was sick. Columbanus allowed vegetables, lentil porridge, flour, and bread only, at all times, even for the sick. A fifth-century Irish rule forbids meat, fish, cheese, and butter at all times, though the sick, elderly, travel-weary, or even monks on holidays may eat cheese or butter, but no one may ever eat meat.

      “The Carthusians were especially strict about vegetarianism. The origin of their order is related by the story of St. Bruno and his companions, who on the Sunday before Lent are sitting before some meat and are debating whether they should eat meat at all.

      “During the debate, numerous examples of vegetarians among their monastic predecessors are mentioned–the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Macharius, and Arsenius, are all cited as vegetarian examples. After much discussion, they fall asleep — and remain asleep for 45 days, waking up when Archbishop Hugh shows up on Wednesday of Holy Week! When they wake up, the meat miraculously turns to ashes, and they fall on their knees and determine never to eat meat again.

      “It is true that the church rejected the requirement for vegetarianism, following the dicta of Paul. However, it is interesting under these circumstances that there are so many vegetarians. In fact, outside of the references to Jesus eating fish in the New Testament, there are hardly any references to any early Christians eating meat.

      “Thus vegetarianism was practiced by the apostles, by James the brother of Jesus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, Tertullian, Bonaventure, Arnobius, Cassian, Jerome, the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Machrius, Columbanus, and Aresenius — but not by Jesus himself!

      “It is as if everyone in the early church understood the message except the messenger. This is extremely implausible. The much more likely explanation is that the original tradition was vegetarian, but that under the pressure of expediency and the popularity of Paul’s writings in the second century, the tradition was first dropped as a requirement and finally dropped even as a desideratum.”

      In her 2004 book, Vegetarian Christian Saints: Mystics, Ascetics & Monks, Jewish scholar Dr. Holly Roberts (she has a Master’s degree in Christian theology) documents the lives and teachings of over 150 canonized vegetarian saints:

      St. Anthony of Egypt; St. Hilarion; St. Macarius the Elder; St. Palaemon; St. Pachomius; St. Paul the Hermit; St. Marcian; St. Macarius the Younger; St. Aphraates; St. James of Nisibis; St. Ammon; St. Julian Sabas; St. Apollo; St. John of Egypt; St. Porphyry of Gaza; St. Dorotheus the Theban; St. Theodosius the Cenobiarch; St. Sabas; St. Fugentius of Ruspe; St. Gerasimus; St. Mary of Egypt; St. Dositheus; St. Abraham Kidunaja; St. John the Silent; St. Theodore of Sykeon; St. Lups of Troyes; St. Lupicinus; St. Romanus; St. Gudelinis; St. Liphardus; St. Maurus of Glanfeuil; St. Urbicius; St. Senoch; St. Hospitius; St. Winwaloe; St. Kertigan; St. Fintan; St. Molua; St. Amatus; St. Guthlac; St. Joannicus; St. Theodore the Studite; St. Lioba; St. Euthymius the Younger; St. Luke the Younger; St. Paul of Latros; St. Antony of the Caves of Kiev; St. Theodosius Pechersky; St. Fantinus; St. Wulfstan; St. Gregory of Makar; St. Elphege; St. Theobald of Provins; St. Stephen of Grandmont; St. Henry of Coquet; St. William of Malavalle; St. Godric; St. Stephen of Obazine; St. William of Bourges; St. Humility of Florence; St. Simon Stock; St. Agnes of Montepulciano; St. Laurence Justinian; St. Herculanus of Piegaro; St. Francis of Assisi; St. Clare of Assisi; St. Aventine of Troyes; st. Felix of Cantalice; St. Joseph of Cupertino; St. Benedict; St. Bruno; St. Alberic; St. Robert of Molesme; St. Stephen Harding; St. Gilbert of Sempringham; St. Dominic; St. John of Matha; St. Albert of Jerusalem; St. Angela Merici; St. Paula; St. Genevieve; St. David; St. Leonard of Noblac; St. Kevin; St. Anskar; St. Ulrich; St. Yvo; St. Laurence O’Toole; St. Hedwig; St. Mary of Onigines; St. Elizabeth of Hungary; St. Ivo Helory; St. Philip Benizi; St. Albert of Trapani; St. Nicholas of Tolentino; St. Rita of Cascia; St. Francis of Paola; St. John Capistrano; St. John of Kanti; St. Peter of Alcantara; St. Francis Xavier; St. Philip Neri; St. Mary Magdalen of Pazzi; St. Jean-Marie Vianney; St. Basil the Great; St. Jerome; St. Ephraem; St. Peter Damian; St. Bernard; St. Catherine of Siena; St. Robert Bellarmine; St. Peter Celestine; St. Olympias; St. Publius; St. Malchus; St. Asella; St. Sulpicius Severus; St. Maxentius; St. Monegundis; St. Paul Aurelian; St. Coleman of Kilmacduagh; St. Bavo; St. Amandus; St. Giles; St. Silvin; St. Benedict of Aniane; St. Aybert; St. Dominic Loricatus; St. Richard of Wyche; St. Margaret of Cortona; St. Clare of Rimini; St. Frances of Rome; St. James de la Marca; St. Michael of Giedroyc; St. Mariana of Quito; St. John de Britto; St. Callistratus; St. Marianus; St. Brendon of Clonfert; St. Kieran (Carian); St. Stephen of Mar Saba; St. Anselm; St. Martin de Porres; St. Procpius; St. Boniface of Tarsus; St. Serenus.

      In the (updated) 1986 edition of A Vegetarian Sourcebook, Keith Akers similarly observes:

      “But many others, both orthodox and heterodox, testified to the vegetarian origins of Christianity. Both Athanasius and his opponent Arius were strict vegetarians. Many early church fathers were vegetarian, including Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Heironymus, Boniface, and John Chrysostom.

      “Many of the monasteries both in ancient times and at the present day practiced vegetarianism… The requirement to be vegetarian has been diluted considerably since the earliest days, but the practice of vegetarianism was continued by many saints, monks, and laymen. Vegetarianism is at the heart of Christianity.”

      According to Father Ambrose Agius:

      “Many of the saints understood God’s creatures, and together they shared the pattern of obedience to law and praise of God that still leaves us wondering. The quickest way to understand is surely to bring our own lives as closely as possible into line with the intention of the Giver of all life, animate and inanimate.”

      The Reverend Alvin Hart, an Episcopal priest in New York, says:

      “Many Georgian saints were distinguished by their love for animals. St. John Zedazneli made friends with bears near his hermitage; St. Shio befriended a wolf; St. David of Garesja protected deer and birds from hunters, proclaiming, ‘He whom I believe in and worship looks after and feds all these creatures, to whom He has given birth.’ Early Celtic saints, too, favored compassion for animals. Saints Wales, Cornwall and Brittany of Ireland in the 5th and 6th centuries AD went to great pains for their animal friends, healing them and praying for them as well.”

      St. Benedict, who founded the Benedictine Order in AD 529, permitted meat only in times of sickness, and made vegetarian foods the staple for his monks, teaching, “Nothing is more contrary to the Christian spirit than gluttony.” The Rule of St. Benedict itself is a composite of ascetic teachings from previous traditions, such as St. Anthony’s monasticism in Egypt, which called for abstinence from meat and wine.

      According to E. Eyre-Smith, in an article from The Ark (a bulletin published by the Catholic Study Circle for Animal Welfare), “Montalembert’s Monks of the West records in Vita Columbani, the Chronicler Jonas, writing within 25 years of the death of St. Columba, relates that this saint spent long periods in solitary contemplation and communion with the wild creatures of the forest, and insisted on his monks living, like himself, on the fruits of the earth, herbs and pulses. This indicates that in making rules for his followers in regard to non-meat eating, he was moved by his love and regard for the rest of God’s creation.”

      Aegidius (c. 700) was a vegetarian who lived on herbs, water and the milk of a deer God sent to him. Boniface (672-754) wrote to Pope Zacharias that he had begun a monastery which followed the rules of strict abstinence, whose monks do not eat meat nor enjoy wine or other intoxicating drinks. St. Andrew lived on herbs, olives, oil and bread. He lived to be 105.

      St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) “was moved to feelings of compassion for animals, and he wept for them when he saw them caught in the hunter’s net.” St. Richard of Wyche, a vegetarian, was moved by the sight of animals taken to slaughter. “Poor innocent little creatures,” he observed. “If you were reasoning beings and could speak, you would curse us. For we are the cause of your death, and what have you done to deserve it?”

      Vegetarian writer Steven Rosen (Satyaraja dasa) explains:

      “…over the centuries, there has arisen two distinct schools of Christian thought. The Aristotelian-Thomistic school and the Augustinian-Franciscan school. The Aristotelian-Thomistic school has, as its fundamental basis, the premise that animals are here for our pleasure—they have no purpose of their own. We can eat them, torture them in laboratories—anything… Unfortunately, modern Christianity embraces this form of their religion.

      “The Augustinian-Franciscan school, however, teaches that we are all brothers and sisters under God’s Fatherhood. Based largely on the world view of St. Francis and being platonic in nature, this school fits in very neatly with the vegetarian perspective.”

      It is said that St. Francis of Assisi (1182-1226) bought two lambs from a butcher and gave them the coat on his back to keep them warm; and that he bought two fish from a fishwoman and threw them back into the water. He even paid to ransom lambs that were being taken to their death, recalling the gentle Lamb who willingly went to slaughter (Isaiah 53:7; John 1:29) to pay the ransom of sinners.

      “Be conscious, O man, of the wondrous state in which the Lord God has placed you,” instructed Francis in his Admonitions (4), “for He created and formed you to the image of His beloved Son —and (yet) all the creatures under heaven, each according to its nature, serve know, and obey their Creator better than you.” St. Francis felt a deep kinship with all creatures. He called them “brother,” and “sister,” knowing they came from the same Source as himself.

      Francis revealed his fraternal love for the animal world during Christmas time 1223: “If I ever have the opportunity to talk with the emperor,” he explained, “I’ll beg him, for the love of God and me, to enact a special law: no one is to capture or kill our sisters the larks or do them any harm. Furthermore, all mayors and lords of castles and towns are required to scatter wheat and other grain on the roads outside the walls so that our sisters the larks and other birds might have something to eat on so festive a day.

      “And on Christmas Eve, out of reverence for the Son of God, whom on that night the Virgin Mary placed in a manger between the ox and the ass, anyone having an ox or an ass is to feed it a generous portion of choice fodder. And, on Christmas Day, the rich are to give the poor the finest food in abundance.”

      Francis removed worms from a busy road and placed them on the roadside so they would not be crushed under human traffic. Once when he was sick and almost blind, mice ran over his table as he took his meals and over him while he slept. He regarded their disturbance as a “diabolical temptation,” which he met with patience and restraint, indicating his compassion towards other living creatures.

      St. Francis was once given a wild pheasant to eat, but he chose instead to keep it as a companion. On another occasion, he was given a fish, and on yet another, a waterfowl to eat, but he was moved by the natural beauty of these creatures and chose to set them free.

      “Dearly beloved!” said Francis beginning a sermon after a severe illness, “I have to confess to God and you that… I have eaten cakes made with lard.”

      The Catholic Encyclopedia comments on this incident as follows: “St. Francis’ gift of sympathy seems to have been wider even than St. Paul’s, for we find to evidence in the great Apostle of a love for nature or for animals…

      “Francis’ love of creatures was not simply the offspring of a soft sentimental disposition. It arose from that deep and abiding sense of the presence of God. To him all are from one Father and all are real kin…hence, his deep sense of personal responsibility towards fellow creatures: the loving friend of all God’s creatures.”

      Francis taught: “All things of creation are children of the Father and thus brothers of man… God wants us to help animals, if they need help. Every creature in distress has the same right to be protected.”

      According to Francis, a lack of mercy towards animals leads to a lack of mercy towards men: “If you have men who will exclude any of God’s creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men.”

      St. Bonaventure was a scholar and theologian who joined the Franciscan Order in 1243. He wrote The Soul’s Journey into God and The Life of St. Francis, the latter documenting St. Francis’ miracles with animals and love for all creation. Bonaventure taught that all creatures come from God and return to Him, and that the light of God shines through His different creatures in different ways:

      “…For every creature is by its nature a kind of effigy and likeness of the eternal Wisdom. Therefore, open your eyes, alert the ears of your spirit, open your lips and apply your heart so that in all creatures you may see, hear, praise, love and worship, glorify and honor your God.”

      St. Bridget (1303?-1373) of Sweden, founder of the Brigittine Order, wrote in her Revelations:

      “Let a man fear, above all, Me his God, and so much the gentler will he become towards My creatures and animals, on whom, on account of Me, their Creator, he ought to have compassion.”

      She raised pigs, and a wild boar is even said to have left its home in the forest to become her pet.

      “The reason why God’s servants love His creatures so deeply is that they realize how deeply Christ loves them,” explained St. Catherine of Siena (1347-1380). “And this is the very character of love to love what is loved by those we love.”

      “Here I saw a great unity between Christ and us…” wrote Julian of Norwich (1360-?), “for when he was in pain we were in pain, and all creatures able to suffer pain suffered with him.”

      Christian mystic, Thomas A’ Kempis (1380-1471) wrote in his devotional classic, The Imitation of Christ, that the soul desiring communion with God must be open to seeing, respecting and learning from all of God’s creatures, including the nonhumans:

      “…and if thy heart be straight with God,” he wrote, “then every creature shall be to thee a mirror of life and a book of holy doctrine, for there is no creature so little or vile, but that showeth and representeth the goodness of God.”

      St. Filippo Neri spent his entire life protecting and rescuing other living creatures. Born in Florence in 1515, he went to Rome as a young man, and tried to live as an ascetic. He sold his books, giving away the money to the poor. He worked without pay in the city hospital, tending to the sick and the poor. He gave whatever he possessed to others.

      St. Filippo loved the animals and could not bear to see them suffer. He took the mice caught in traps away from people’s homes and set them free in the fields and stables. A vegetarian, he could not endure walking past a butcher shop. “Ah,” he exclaimed. “If everyone were like me, no one would kill animals!”

      St. Martin de Porres was born in 1579 in Lima, Peru, as the child of a Spaniard and Ana Velasquez, a black washerwoman. He joined the Dominican Order at the age of 24, and later established orphanages, hospitals and other charitable institutions. On one occasion, he told his superior, “charity knows no rules!” St. Martin’s compassion extended to the lower animals, including even rats and mice. St. Martin healed and cared for stray dogs, cats, a mule, and even a vulture. He sometimes allowed the mosquitos to bite him, so that they might be fed, saying, “They, too, are God’s creatures.”

      The Trappist monks of the Catholic Church practiced vegetarianism from the founding of their Order until the Second Vatican Council in the late 1960s. According to the Trappist rules, as formulated by Armand Jean de Rance (1626-1700), “in the dining hall nothing is layed out except: pulse, roots, cabbages, or milk, but never any fish… I hope I will move you more and more rigorously, when you discover that the use of simple and rough food has its origin with the holy apostles (James, Peter, Matthew).

      “We can assure you that we have written nothing about this subject which was not believed, observed, proved good through antiquity, proved by historians and tradition, preserved and kept up to us by the holy monks.”

      Roman Catholic Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-90), wrote in 1870 that “cruelty to animals is as if a man did not love God.” On another occasion, he asked:

      “Now what is it that moves our very heart and sickens us so much at cruelty shown to poor brutes? I suppose this: first, that they have done us no harm; next, that they have no power whatever of resistance; it is the cowardice and tyranny of which they are the victims which make their sufferings so especially touching… there is something so very dreadful, so satanic, in tormenting those who have never harmed us and who cannot defend themselves; who are utterly in our power.”

      Cardinal Newman compared injustices against animals to the sacrifice, agony and death of Christ upon the cross:

      “Think of your feelings at cruelty practiced upon brute animals and you will gain the sort of feeling which the history of Christ’s cross and passion ought to excite within you. And let me add, this is in all cases one good use to which you may turn any… wanton and unfeeling acts shown towards the…animals; let them remind you, as a picture of Christ’s sufferings. He who is higher than the angels, deigned to humble Himself even to the state of the brute creation…”

      Another cardinal, Henry Edward Manning (1808-92), spoke out against cruelty to animals, especially experimentation upon animals. In a letter dated July 13, 1891, he wrote: “We owe ourselves the duty not to be brutal or cruel; and we owe to God the duty of treating all His creatures according to His own perfections of love and mercy.”

      Bishop Westcott wrote, “Animals are in our power in a peculiar sense; they are committed by God to our sovereignty and we owe them a considerate regard for their rights. No animal life can be treated as a THING. Willful disrespect of the sanctities of physical life in one sphere bears its fruit in other and higher spheres.”

      Cardinal Francis Bourne (1861-1934) told children in Westminster Cathedral in April 1931: “There is even in kindness to animals a special merit in remembering that this kindness is obligatory upon us because God made the animals, and is therefore their creator, and, in a measure, His Fatherhood extends to them.”

      Cardinal Arthur Hinsley (1865-1943), the former archbishop of Westminster, wrote that “the spirit of St. Francis is the Catholic spirit.” According to Cardinal Hinsley, “Cruelty to animals is the degrading attitude of paganism.”

      Reverend Jean Gautier, a doctor in canon law, a director of the Grand Seminary in Paris (St. Sulpice), and a noted French authority on Roman Catholic philosophy, wrote in his book A Priest and his Dog: “For cruelty to defenseless beings we shall one day have to answer before Him who trieth the heart and the reins. Not with impunity is the weakness of animals abused.”

      In his 1957 book, The Status of Animals in the Christian Religion, author C.W. Hume wrote that the catechism children use for their first Communion and for their confirmation in France contains the answer, “it is not permissible for me to cause suffering to animals without good reason, to hurt them unnecessarily is an act of cruelty.” British Jesuit Father John Bligh observed, “A man is not likely to be much of a Christian if he is not kind to animals.”

      A Roman Catholic priest, Msgr. LeRoy McWilliams of North Arlington, New Jersey, testified in October 1962 in favor of legislation to reduce the sufferings of laboratory animals. He told congressional representatives:

      “The first book of the Bible tell us that God created the animals and the birds, so they have the same Father as we do. God’s Fatherhood extends to our ‘lesser brethren.’ All animals belong to God; He alone is their absolute owner. In our relations with them, we must emulate the divine attributes, the highest of which is mercy. God, their Father and Creator, loves them tenderly. He lends them to us and adjures us to use them as He Himself would do.””

      Msgr. McWilliams also issued a letter to all seventeen thousand Catholic pastors in the United States, calling upon them to understand “what Christianity imposes on humans as their clear obligation to animals.”

      Reverend Basil Wrighton, the chairman of the Catholic Study Circle for Animal Welfare in London, wrote in a 1965 article entitled, “The Golden Age Must Return: A Catholic’s Views on Vegetarianism,” that a vegetarian diet is not only consistent with, but actually required by the tenets of Christianity. He concluded that the killing of animals for food not only violates religious tenets, but brutalizes humans to the point where violence and warfare against other humans becomes inevitable.

      In 1969, Reverend Kevin Daley, as chairman of the CSCAW in London, wrote that “the work of animal welfare” is an “essential part of the work of a Christian.”

      A strong condemnation of cruelty towards animals appeared in the March 10, 1966 issue ofL’Osserevatore della Domenica, the official Vatican weekly newspaper. Written by the respected theologian, Msgr. Ferdinando Lambruschini, it read in part:

      “Man’s conduct with regard to animals should be regulated by right reason, which prohibits the infliction of purposeless pain and suffering on them. To ill treat them, and make them suffer without reason, is an act of deplorable cruelty to be condemned from a Christian point of view. To make them suffer for one’s own pleasure is an exhibition of sadism which every moralist must denounce.”

      In his 1970 book God’s Animals Reverend Don Ambrose Agius wrote: “It is a moral obligation for every Christian to fight cruelty to animals because the consequences of cruelty are destructive to the Christian order… The Bible… tells us that cruelty to animals is wicked and that it is opposed to God’s will and intention…The duty of all Christians (is) to emulate God’s attributes, especially that of mercy, in regard to animals. To be kind to animals is to emulate the loving kindness of God.”

      In his foreword to Reverend Agius’ book, Cardinal John Heenan wrote: “Animals… have very positive rights because they are God’s creatures. If we have to speak with absolute accuracy, we must say that God has the right to have all His creatures treated with respect… Only the perverted are guilty of deliberate cruelty to animals or, indeed, to children.”

      Vladimir Lossky wrote about “Cosmic Awareness” and the teachings of St. Maximus in a 1973 religious text: The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. According to Lossky, the limitations of the creation are part of its intrinsic nature:

      “…they are problems to be resolved, obstacles to be surmounted on the way towards union with God. Man is not a being isolated from the rest of creation; by his very nature, he is bound up with the whole of the universe, and St. Paul bears witness that the whole creation await the future glory which will be revealed in the sons of God (Rom. viii, 18-22). This cosmic awareness has never been absent from Eastern spirituality, and is given expression in theology as well as in liturgical poetry, in iconography and, perhaps above all, in the ascetical writings of the masters of the spiritual life of the Eastern Church…

      “In his way to union with God, man in no way leaves creatures aside, but gathers together in his love the whole cosmos disordered by sin, that it may at last be transfigured by grace.”

      Father Thomas Berry, a Catholic priest, author, and founder of the Riverdale Center of Religious Research in New York, endorsed Steven Rosen’s 1987 book Food for the Spirit: Vegetarianism and the World Religions: “Vegetarianism is a way of life that we should all move toward for economic survival, physical well-being, and spiritual integrity.”

      Clive Hollands of the St. Andrew Animal Fund in England, wrote in a 1987 paper entitled “The Animal Kingdom and the Kingdom of God” that animal rights “is an issue of strict justice,” and one that calls for Christian compassion:

      “As Christians we believe that God gave us dominion over His Creation and we used that authority, not to protect and safeguard the natural world, but to destroy and pollute the environment and, worse, we have deprived animals of the dignity and respect which is due to all that has life.

      “Let us then thank God for the unending wonder of the created world, for the oneness of all life–for the Integrity of Creation. Let us pray for all living creatures, those in the wild that may never even see man and in whose very being worship their Creator.

      “Let us think and pray especially for all those animals who do know man, who are in the service of man, and who suffer at the hands of man. Let us pray to the God who knows of the fall of a single sparrow, that the suffering, pain and fear of all animals may be eased.

      “Finally, let us pray for all those who work to protect animals that their efforts may be rewarded and the time may come when animals are granted the dignity and respect which is their due as living beings created by the same hand that fashioned you and me.”

      The Glauberg Confession is a theological statement of faith made before a God whose love extends to all His creatures. It reads as follows:

      “We confess before God, the Creator of the Animals, and before our fellow Men; We have failed as Christians, because we forgot the animals in our faith.

      “As theologians we were not prepared to stand up against scientific and philosophical trends inimical to life with the Theology of Creation. We have betrayed the diaconical mission of Jesus, and not served our least brethren, the animals.

      “As pastors we were scared to give room to animals in our churches and parishes.

      “As the Church, we were deaf to the ‘groaning in travail’ of our mistreated and exploited fellow-creatures.

      “We justify the Glauberg Confession theologically.

      “We read the statements in the Bible about Creation and regard for our fellow-creatures with new eyes and new interest. We know how tied up we are with Nature, linked with every living thing–and under the same threat.

      “The rediscovery of the theology of Creation has also turned our regard upon the animals, our poorest brothers and sisters. We perceive that as theologically thinking and working Christians we owe them a change of attitude.

      “We justify our Confession pastorally.

      “For years many people actively engaged in animal welfare have been waiting for us ministers of religion to take up the cause of animal rights. Many of them have quit the Church in disappointment because no clear witness was given for the animals in the field of theology, in the Church’s social work or in the parishes, either in word or in deed. The task of winning back the trust of these people who dedicate their time, money, energy and sometimes their health to reconciliation with the animals, is a pastoral challenge to us.”

      Reverend Marc Wessels of the International Network for Religion and Animals (INRA) says of The Glauberg Confession:

      “It speaks simply but eloquently on behalf of those who have determined that they will no longer support a theology of human dictatorship that is against God’s other creatures…

      “This brief statement was written during the spring of 1988 and was signed by both Roman Catholic and Protestant clergy who participated in its framing.

      “It was signed by men and women of religious orders, as well as by laity. Both academics and average church members have indicated their support for the document by signing it.

      “Growing numbers of people around the globe are also adding their own personal declaration of support by forwarding their names to the covenors of the confession.”

      In an editorial that appeared on Christmas Day, 1988, Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy, a Catholic vegan, observed:

      “A long raised but rarely answered question is this: If it was God’s plan for Christ to be born among animals, why have most Christian theologians denied the value and rights of animals? Why no theology of the peaceable kingdom?… Animals in the stable at Bethlehem were a vision of the peaceable kingdom. Among theology’s mysteries, this ought to be the easiest to fathom.”

      In the winter of 1990, INRA’s Executive Director, the Reverend Dr. Marc A. Wessels wrote: “As a Christian clergyman who speaks of having compassion for other creatures and who actively declares the need for humans to develop an ethic that gives reverence for all of life, I hope that others will open their eyes, hearts and minds to the responsibility of loving care for God’s creatures.”

      In a pamphlet entitled “The Spiritual Link Between Humans and Animals,” Reverend Wessels writes: “We recognize that many animal rights activists and ecologists are highly critical of Christians because of our relative failure thus far adequately to defend animals and to preserve the natural environment. Yet there are positive signs of a growing movement of Christian activists and theologians who are committed to the process of ecological stewardship and animal liberation.

      “Individual Christians and groups on a variety of levels, including denominational, ecumenical, national and international, have begun the delayed process of seriously considering and practically addressing the question of Christian responsibility for animals. Because of the debate surrounding the ‘rights’ of animals, some Christians are considering the tenets of their faith in search for an appropriate ethical response.”

      According to Reverend Wessels, “The most important teaching which Jesus shared was the need for people to love God with their whole self and to love their neighbor as they loved themselves. Jesus expanded the concept of neighbor to include those who were normally excluded, and it is therefore not too farfetched for us to consider the animals as our neighbors.

      “To think about animals as our brothers and sisters is not a new or radical idea. By extending the idea of neighbor, the love of neighbor includes love of, compassion for, and advocacy of animals. There are many historical examples of Christians who thought along those lines, besides the familiar illustration of St. Francis. An abbreviated listing of some of those individuals worthy of study and emulation includes Saint Blaise, Saint Comgall, Saint Cuthbert, Saint Gerasimus, Saint Giles, and Saint Jerome, to name but a few.”

      Reverend Wessels notes that: “In the Bible, which we understand as the divine revelation of God, there is ample evidence of the vastness and goodness of God toward animals. The Scriptures announce God as the creator of all life, the One responsible for calling life into being and placing it in an ordered fashion which reflects God’s glory. Humans and animals are a part of this arrangement. Humanity has a special relationship with particular duties to God’s created order, a connection to the animals by which they are morally bound by God’s covenant with them.

      “According to the Scriptures, Christians are called to respect the life of animals and to be ethically engaged in protecting the life and liberty of all sentient creatures. As that is the case, human needs and rights do not usurp an animal’s intrinsic rights, nor should they deny the basic liberty of either individual animals or specific species. If the Christian call can be understood as being a command to be righteous, then Christians must have a higher regard for the lives of animals.

      “Jesus’ life was one of compassion and liberation;” concludes Reverend Wessels, “his ministry was one which understood and expressed the needs of the oppressed. Especially in the past decade, Christians have been reminded that their faith requires them to take seriously the cries of the oppressed.

      “Theologians such as Gutierrez, Miranda, and Hinkelammert have defined the Christian message as one which liberates lives and transforms social patterns of oppression. That concept of Christianity which sees God as the creator of the universe and the One who seeks justice is not exclusive; immunity from cruelty and injustice is not only a human desire or need–the animal kingdom also needs liberation.”

      A growing number of Christian theologians, clergy and activists are beginning to take a stand in favor of animal rights. In a pamphlet entitled Christian Considerations on Laboratory Animals Reverend Marc Wessels notes that in laboratories animals cease to be persons and become “tools of research.” He cites William French of Loyola University as having made the same observation at a gathering of Christian ethicists at Duke University–a conference entitled “Good News for Animals?”

      On Earth Day, 1990, Reverend Wessels observed:

      “It is a fact that no significant social reform has yet taken place in this country without the voice of the religious community being heard. The endeavors of the abolition of slavery; the women’s suffrage movement; the emergence of the pacifist tradition during World War I; the struggles to support civil rights, labor unions, and migrant farm workers; and the anti-nuclear and peace movements have all succeeded in part because of the power and support of organized religion. Such authority and energy is required by individual Christians and the institutional church today if the liberation of animals is to become a reality.”

      Mother Teresa, honored for her work among the poor with the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize, wrote in 1992 to Marlene Ryan, a former member of the National Alliance for Animals. Her letter reads:

      “I am praying for you that God’s blessing may be with you in all that you are doing to create concern for the animals which are often subjected to much cruelty. They, too, are created by the same loving Hand of God which created us. As we humans are gifted with intelligence which the animals lack, it is our duty to protect them and to promote their well being.

      “We also owe it to them as they serve us with such wonderful docility and loyalty. A person who shows cruelty to these creatures cannot be kind to other humans also. Let us do all we can to become instruments of peace—where we are—the true peace that comes from loving and caring and respecting each person as a child of God—my brother—my sister.”

      In an article entitled “The Primacy of Nonviolence as a Virtue,” appearing in Embracing Earth: Catholic Approaches to Ecology (1994), Brother Wayne Teasdale wrote: “One key answer to a culture’s preoccupation with violence is to teach, insist on, and *live* the value of nonviolence. It can be done successfully, and it has been done for more than 2,500 years by Jains and Buddhists.

      “Neither Jainism nor Buddhism has ever supported war or personal violence; this nonviolence extends to all sentient beings. Christianity can learn something valuable from these traditions. This teaching on nonviolence has been incarnated in the lives of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Fourteenth Dalai Lama with significant results…”

      According to Teasdale: “…it is necessary to elevate nonviolence to a noble place in our civilization of loving-compassion because nonviolence as ahimsa in the Hindu tradition, a tradition that seems to possess the most advanced understanding of nonviolence, IS love! Love is the goal and ultimate nature of nonviolence as an inner disposition and commitment of the heart. It is the fulfillment of love and compassion in the social sphere, that is, in the normal course of relations among people in the matrix of society.”

      The Seamless Garment Network (SGN) is a coalition of peace and justice organizations on the religious left. The SGN takes a stand against war, abortion, poverty, racism, the arms race, the death penalty and euthanasia. Animal rights, like ecology, nuclear power, gun control, or the drug war, is a topic of serious discussion among SGN members. His Holiness the Dalai Lama has signed the SGN Mission Statement.

      “We are committed to the protection of life, which is threatened in today’s world by war, abortion, poverty, racism, the arms race, the death penalty and euthanasia. We believe these issues are linked under a consistent ethic of life. We challenge those working on all or some of these issues to maintain a cooperative spirit of peace, reconciliation, and respect in protecting the unprotected.”

      Mary Rider, a practicing Catholic, a vegetarian, arrested for protesting abortion and the death penalty, and Executive Director of the SGN, wrote in Harmony: Voices for a Just Future in 2002:

      “So we teach our children to walk softly on the earth and to embrace nonviolence as the only legitimate means of conflict resolution, on both a personal and a global level.

      “We are aware of the excessive, privileged life we lead as educated, first world U.S. citizens and of the responsibilities to which our privilege calls us. We try to live simply. We eat low on the food chain. We try to buy nothing new…

      “We try to respect all life and carry that message forward in all we do… Because we value people and relationships over things… First world consumption kills people around the world…

      “Pollution, environmental devastation, corrupt governments, war, sweatshops… all are a are a result of our desire to buy more at a lower price…

      “We believe each person has a right to live a valued and respected life free from hunger and discrimination…”

      Christians looking for the spiritual dimension to vegetarianism and animal rights, should read Every Creature a Word of God by Annika Spalde and Pelle Strindlund. (Vegetarian Advocates Press, Cleveland, OH, 2008)

      “This book is beautifully written and carefully argued. It would be the perfect book for a Bible study or church study group,” writes Stephen Webb, professor of Religion and Philosophy at Wabash College, and author of Good Eating and On God and Dogs: A Christian Theology of Compassion for Animals.

      The authors, Annika Spalde and Pelle Strindlund, are married antinuclear and animal activists involved in the Lutheran Church in Sweden. They write:

      “This is a book about being Christian in a world shared with other beings. We do not live here alone. We have brothers and sisters. ‘The animals,’ wrote the American monk Thomas Merton (1915-68), ‘are the children of God.’ What does a spirituality that affirms God’s love for all creatures look like? That is the central question of this book.

      “The animal rights movement is a recent development, but Christian concern for animals is not. We see it in the stories of medieval monks who helped hares and deer escape from hunters, and of desert hermits who offered water to thirsty donkeys. In these pages you will discover the rich history of animal-friendly living and theology within the Christian tradition…

      “This book is a result of years of reflection on our relationship to other species… over coffee in church halls, fellow worshippers have challenged us: Haven’t we been given animals for our use? Didn’t Jesus eat meat? Such questions have forced us to ask if and how compassion for animals can be an embodiment of the Christian faith. The book is also an answer to the question we have received from many of our friends in the peace movement: How can you focus on animals when so many humans are suffering?”

      Annika Spalde is an ordained deacon of the Church of Sweden (Lutheran) and a founding member of the Swedish Christian Vegetarian Movement. Her work for nonviolence and justice has included participation in the Trident Ploughshares campaign to abolish the British nuclear arsenal; organizing against the Swedish arms industry; serving as an Edumenical Accompanier in Israel/Palestine; working as an assistant nurse in Paraguay; and living with homeless at a Catholic Worker house in Duluth Minnesota. Pelle Strindlund holds an MA in Religious Studies and is a founding member of The Rescue Service, a Swedish animal rights organization.

      And in School of Compassion, Deborah M Jones engages with the Catholic Church’s contemporary attitude towards animals. This is the fullest sustained study of the subject in that faith tradition. It begins by exploring the history of the Church’s ideas about animals. These were drawn largely from significant readings of Old and New Testament passages and inherited elements of classical philosophies.

      Themes emerge, such as the renewal of creation in the apocryphal legends, in the Desert Fathers, and in Celtic monasticism. The spirituality of St Francis of Assisi, the legal status of animals, and liturgies of the Eastern Catholic Churches also shed light on the Church’s thinking.

      The British Catholic tradition – which is relatively favorable to animals – is considered in some detail. The second part of the book provides a forensic examination of the four paragraphs in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which relate particularly to animals. Finally, major contemporary issues are raised – stewardship, anthropocentrism, and gender – as well as key ethical theories. The book revisits some teachings of Aquinas, and explores doctrinal teachings such as that of human beings created in the ‘image of God’, and, with a nod to the Orthodox Tradition, as the ‘priests of creation.’ These help form a consistent and authentically Catholic theology which can be viewed as a school of compassion towards animals.

      Deborah M Jones is general secretary of the international organization Catholic Concern for Animals and a Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, with a doctorate in animal theology. She has also worked as editor of the Catholic Herald, deputy editor of Priests & People, as a writer and lecturer, and diocesan adviser for adult religious education.

      For Love of Animals: Christian Ethics, Consistent Action offers the reader an introduction to animal rights ethics within Christianity alongside directly related sanctity-of-life issues, like the possible rights of unborn children. The book’s foreword is written by Mary Eberstadt, senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, DC, a devout Catholic who identifies herself as “Pro-Animal, Pro-Life.”

      Author Charles Camosy responds to criticisms from academicians Peter Singer and Lynn White, Jr., that the Christian misinterpretation of “human dominion” (versus compassionate stewardship) is responsible for the current ecological crisis. Camosy indicates that Christianity cannot be blamed if humans with their imperfections distort their own religious teachings, that Christianity did not give rise to the industrial revolution, and that real Christianity — as it was meant to be practiced — is at odds with market-driven ethics and mass consumerism (a point made decades ago by liberal Protestant theologian Dr. Harvey Cox).

      Camosy discusses the the moral status of animals in the Bible from Genesis to the Peaceable Kingdom in Isaiah 11:6-9, reconciling animal sacrifices and Jesus’ miracles like the multiplication of loaves and fishes with the vegetarian view, and downplaying the apostle Paul’s dim view of animals by contrasting Paul’s words on animals with those of Jesus. Camosy discusses early Christian saints and other great figures in the Christian tradition. Camosy discusses current Christian teachings on animals, including animal-friendly statements by recent Popes. Subsequent chapters discuss factory farming, eating meat, research, hunting, and pets.

      In 1992, my pro-life friends in Life Chain couldn’t understand my bringing up the issue of animal rights among pro-lifers, and trying to show that the Bible and the Christian tradition support the vegetarian way of life. They compared it to the Pharisees trying to trap Jesus in his own words, whereas I, having researched the long history of animal advocacy and vegetarianism within Christianity, saw it as reasonable and mainstream as someone from a pro-life Christian denomination discussing sanctity-of-life issues with someone from a pro-choice Christian denomination.

      The logical conclusion Charles Camosy comes to in his 2013 book is: “About ten years ago I became convinced that, if I wanted to be authentically and consistently pro-life, I should give up eating meat.”

      The International Network for Religion and Animals (INRA) was founded in 1985, and since then dozens of books have been written on Christianity and animal rights. There is enough of a long history of concern for animals and vegetarianism in Christianity to provide the basis for Christians to be “Pro-Animal, Pro-Life,” but Camosy merely provides an overview of animal rights and animal ethics within Christianity.

      “Animals are God’s creatures, not human property, nor utilities, nor resources, nor commodities, but precious beings in God’s sight… Christians whose eyes are fixed on the awfulness of crucifixion are in a special position to understand the awfulness of innocent suffering. The Cross of Christ is God’s absolute identification with the weak, the powerless, and the vulnerable, but most of all with unprotected, undefended, innocent suffering.”

      –Anglican priest Reverend Andrew Linzey, from the PETA website, http://www.jesusveg.com

      In Christianity and the Rights of Animals, Reverend Andrew Linzey, an Anglican priest, notes that “In some ways, Christian thinking is already oriented in this direction. What is it that so appalls us about cruelty to children or oppression of the vulnerable, but that these things are betrayals of relationships of special care and special trust? Likewise in the case of animals who are mostly defenseless before us.”

      Christians have found themselves unable to agree upon many pressing moral issues–including abortion. Exodus 21:22-24 says if two men are fighting and one injures a pregnant woman and the child is killed, he shall repay her according to the degree of injury inflicted upon her, and not the fetus. On the other hand, the Didache (Apostolic Church teaching) forbade abortion.

      “There has to be a frank recognition that the Christian church is divided on every moral issue under the sun: nuclear weapons, divorce, homosexuality, capital punishment, animals, etc.,” says Reverend Linzey. “I don’t think it’s desirable or possible for Christians to agree upon every moral issue. And, therefore, I think within the church we have no alternative but to work within diversity.”

      I understand there are conservative Christians who fear veganism… which is kind of like being afraid of nonsmoking, nondrinking, or recycling. Ronald J. Sider of Evangelicals for Social Action, in his 1977 book, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, pointed out that 220 million Americans were eating enough food (largely because of the high consumption of grain fed to livestock) to feed over one billion people in the poorer countries.

      While humans are starving, half the world’s grain is fed to livestock! Aren’t feeding the hungry; treating the body as a temple of God which should not be defiled nor dishonored through antibiotics, hormones, pesticides, poisons and other unhealthy toxins and unhealthy food in general; the institutionalized killing of billions of animals being directly responsible for global hunger, global warming, the energy, environmental, population and water crises; treating animals humanely, and compassionate stewardship over the environment, over all of God’s creation, all biblical issues? The editors of the Green Bible, which highlights environmentally-friendly biblical passages might think so.

      The institutionalized killing of billions of animals has led to global hunger, global warming, the energy, environmental, population and water crises. Why is it so hard to accept that there’s a slippery slope, a connection between the killing of animals and the killing of human beings?

      The ancient eastern reincarnationist religions Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism all predate Christianity, all teach ahimsa, or nonviolence towards humans and animals alike to the point of vegetarianism, all are vegan-friendly, all oppose abortion, and all teach that abortion and war are the karma for killing animals, and that therefore, we cannot end abortion nor have peace on earth until first we abolish the killing of all animals.

      “The vegetarian movement,” wrote Count Leo Tolstoy, “ought to fill with gladness the souls of all those who have at their heart the realization of God’s kingdom on earth.”

        • Vasu – thank goodness you don’t know about christianity and god. It is a total lie and simply created to keep the “peasants” in line so they would not revolt against the king. Modern day counterpart is to keep us subject so we won’t revolt against tRumpy!! Please carry on about vegan and veganism. Love to read your commentaries.

          • Nancy Alexander–are you a social worker? You sound just like one. You speak like you are angry at the world for not looking at it the same way you do. I agree with you that men should assume some responsibility for pregnancy, but I still will put the woman at first responsibility simply because she is the one who will suffer the consequences. If men were given a chance in the abortion issue, maybe, with some, it would be a little different. But they aren’t given a choice, not even a married man. Is that fair? I don’t think so. I agree with the others that abortion is murder, at any stage. I also believe in God and feel sorry for you that you don’t. Your attitude tells a lot about you.

  30. Defunding Planned Parenthood is one of my goals… I believe AMERICA should NOT BE FUNDING MURDER OF CHILDREN… IF PP wants to murder children..then let them..but NOT ON AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS…I don’t agree with abortions but since people are willing to incur the wrath of GOD …it is all on their heads!

  31. They need to lose every penny.

    Not only are their actions pitiful, it’s almost as appalling that so many people came to their defense. Shows how far we’ve fallen as far as morals. Had they been caught a decade or two earlier, we’d be talking about them in the past tense right now.

  32. I will say this one last time, Planned Parenthood should never have started receiving taxpayer money, just another example of how evil and corrupt the federal judicial system has been and still is.

  33. I hope you Psychotic PETA members are listening animals may have souls but even if they do I believe every text categorized as religious states animals are here to serve the needs of men, so trying to insert your heathenistic beliefs into this discussion is irrational and insulting.

    • Craig…God gave us the responsibility to take care of what He gave us, not abuse them. But PETA does not care about animals at all, just the power and control they can have over us. And, no, animals do not have souls.

    • French philosopher and mathematician Rene Descartes (1596-1650) taught that animals are simply machines, without souls, reason or feeling. The cry of a dog in pain, according to Descartes, is merely a mechanical noise, like the creak of a wheel. His beliefs found acceptance in ecclesiastical and scientific circles. Science was progressing quite rapidly in the 17th century; Descartes effectively removed all moral objections to animal experimentation.

      One voice of objection was that of Henry More (1614-1687), a Cambridge Platonist. In a series of letters with Descartes, More wrote that no one can prove animals lack souls or experience an afterlife. He regarded animal souls and immortality as consistent with the inherent goodness of God. He wrote that people deny the animals souls and an afterlife out of “narrowness of spirit, out of overmuch self-love, and contempt of other creatures.”

      More wrote further that this world was not made for man alone, but for other living creatures as well. He taught that God loves the animals and is concerned about their welfare and happiness. More believed that humans were meant to rule over the animals with compassionate stewardship. He quoted Proverbs 12:10 from the Old Testament: “The good man is merciful to his beasts.”

      A distinguished philosopher and an eloquent writer, More believed unrestrained human violence and abuse towards animals would cause humans to likewise deal with one another. “I think that he that slights the life or welfare of a brute Creature,” wrote More, “is naturally so unjust, that if outward laws did not restrain him, he would be as cruel to Man.”

      In 1776, Dr. Humphrey Primatt, an Anglican priest, published A Dissertation on the Duty of Mercy and the Sin of Cruelty to Brute Animals. This may have been the first book devoted to kindness to animals. Dr. Primatt believed that cruelty towards animals leads inevitably to human violence: “if all the barbarous customs and practices still subsisting amongst us were decreed to be as illegal as they are sinful, we should not hear of so many shocking murders and acts as we now do.”

      According to Primatt, “Love is the great Hinge upon which universal Nature turns. The Creation is a transcript of the divine Goodness; and every leaf in the book of Nature reads us a lecture on the wisdom and benevolence of its great Author… upon this principle, every creature of God is good in its kind; that is, it is such as it ought to be.”

      Primatt drew no distinction between the sufferings of animals and those of men: “Pain is pain, whether it is inflicted on man or on beast; and the creature that suffers it, whether man or beast, being sensible of the misery of it whilst it lasts, suffers Evil…”

      Primatt wrote with a vision of universal emancipation: “It has pleased God the Father of all men, to cover some men with white skins, and others with black skins; but as there is neither merit nor demerit in complexion, the white man, nonwithstanding the barbarity of custom and prejudice, can have no right, by virtue of his colour, to enslave and tyrannize over a black man.

      “Now, if amongst men, the differences of their powers of the mind, and of their complexion, stature, and accidents of fortune, do not give any one man a right to abuse or insult any other man on account of these differences; for the same reason, a man can have no natural right to abuse and torment a beast, merely because a beast has not the mental powers of a man.

      “For, such as the man is, he is but as God made him; and the very same is true of the beast. Neither of them can lay claim to any intrinsic Merit, for being such as they are; for, before they were created, it was impossible that either of them could deserve; and at their creation, their shapes, perfections or defects were invariably fixed, and their bounds set which they cannot pass.

      “And being such, neither more nor less than God made them, there is no more demerit in a beast being a beast, than there is merit in a man being a man; that is, there is neither merit nor demerit in either of them.

      “We may pretend to what religion we please,” Primatt concluded, “but cruelty is atheism. We may boast of Christianity; but cruelty is infidelity. We may trust to our orthodoxy; but cruelty is the worst of heresies.

      “The religion of Jesus Christ originated in the mercy of God; and it was the gracious design of it to promote peace to every creature on earth, and to create a spirit of universal benevolence or goodwill in men.

      “And it has pleased God therein to display the riches of His own goodness and mercy towards us; and the revealer of His blessed will, the author and finisher of our faith, hath commanded us to be merciful, as our Father is also merciful, the obligation upon Christians becomes the stronger; and it is our bounded duty, in an especial manner, and above all other people, to extend the precept of mercy to every object of it. For, indeed, a cruel Christian is a monster of ingratitude, a scandal to his profession and beareth the name of Christ in vain…”

      One widespread rationalization in Christian circles, often used to justify humanity’s mistreatment of animals, is the erroneous belief that humans alone possess immortal souls, and only humans, therefore, are worthy of moral consideration. The 19th century German philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer, condemned such a philosophy in his On the Basis of Morality.

      “Because Christian morality leaves animals out of account,” wrote Schopenhauer, “they are at once outlawed in philosophical morals; they are mere ‘things,’ mere means to any ends whatsoever. They can therefore be used for vivisection, hunting, coursing, bullfights, and horse racing, and can be whipped to death as they struggle along with heavy carts of stone. Shame on such a morality that is worthy of pariahs, and that fails to recognize the eternal essence that exists in every living thing, and shines forth with inscrutable significance from all eyes that see the sun!”

      According to the Bible, animals have souls. Texts such as Genesis 1:21,24 are often mistranslated to read “living creatures.” The exact Hebrew used in reference to animals throughout the Bible is “nephesh chayah,” or “living soul.” This is how the phrase has been translated in Genesis 2:7 and in four hundred other places in the Old Testament.

      God breathed the “breath of life” into man, and caused him to become a living soul. (Genesis 2:7) Animals have the same “breath of life” as do humans. (Genesis 7:15, 22) Numbers 16:22 refers to the Lord as “the God of spirits of all flesh.” In Numbers 31:28, God commands Moses to divide up among the people the cattle, sheep, asses and human prisoners captured in battle and to give to the Lord “one soul of five hundred” of both humans and animals alike. Psalm 104 says God provides for animals and their ensoulment:

      “O Lord, how innumerable are Thy works; in wisdom Thou hast made them all! The earth is full of Thy well-made creations. All these look to Thee to furnish their timely feed. When Thou providest for them, they gather it. Thou openest Thy hand, and they are satisfied with good things. When Thou hidest Thy face, they are struck with despair. When Thou cuttest off their breath, in death they return to their dust. Thou sendest Thy Spirit and more are created, and Thou dost replenish the surface of the earth.”

      Similarly, the apocryphal Book of Judith praises God, saying, “Let every creature serve You, for You spoke and they were made. You sent forth Your Spirit and they were created.” Job 12:10 teaches that in God’s hand “is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.”

      Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 says humans have no advantage over animals: “They all draw the same breath…all came from the dust, and to dust all return.”

      The verse that immediately follows asks, “Who knows if the spirit of man goes upward, and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth?” The exact Hebrew word for “spirit,” “ruach,” is used in connection with animals as well as humans. Ecclesiastes 12:7 concludes that “the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.”

      This position was taken by Paul, who called himself an apostle to the gentiles. Paul spoke of God as the “giver of life and breath and all things to everyone.” (Acts 17:25) In his epistle to the Romans 8:18-25, Paul wrote that the entire creation, and not just mankind, is awaiting redemption.

      Revelations 16:3 also refers to the souls of animals: “The second angel poured out his bowl upon the sea, so that it turned to blood as of a corpse, and every living soul that was in the sea died.” The exact Greek word for soul, “psyche,” was used in the original texts.

      Jesus repeatedly spoke of God’s tender care for the nonhuman creation (Matthew 6:26-30, 10:29-31; Luke 12:6-7, 24-28). Jesus taught that God desires “mercy and not sacrifice.” (Matthew 9:10-13, 12:6-7; Mark 2:15-17; Luke 5:29-32) The epistle to the Hebrews 10:5-10 suggests that Jesus did not come to abolish the Law and the prophets (which Paul, and not Jesus, regarded as “so much garbage”), but only the institution of animal sacrifice, as does Jesus’ cleansing the Temple of those who were buying and selling animals for sacrifice and his overturning the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple. (Matthew 21:12-14; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46; John 2:14-17)

      Jesus not only repeatedly upheld Mosaic Law (Matthew 5:17-19; Mark 10:17-22; Luke 16:17), he justified his healing on the Sabbath by referring to commandments calling for the humane treatment of animals!

      When teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath, Jesus healed a woman who had been ill for eighteen years. He justified his healing work on the Sabbath by referring to biblical passages calling for the humane treatment of animals as well as their rest on the Sabbath. “So ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham… be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath?” Jesus asked. (Luke 13:10-16)

      On another occasion, Jesus again referred to Torah teaching on “tsa’ar ba’alei chayim” or compassion for animals to justify healing on the Sabbath. “Which of you, having a donkey or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?” (Luke 14:1-5)

      Jesus compared saving sinners who had gone astray from God’s kingdom to rescuing lost sheep. He recalled a Jewish legend about Moses’ compassion as a shepherd for his flock.

      “For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost. What do you think? Who among you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he finds it?

      “And when he has found it,” Jesus continued, “he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbors saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!’

      “I say to you, likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance …there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.” (Matthew 18:11-13; Luke 15:3-7,10)

      “The compassionate, sensitive heart for animals is inseparable from the proclamation of the Christian gospel,” writes the Reverend Andrew Linzey in Love the Animals. “We have lived so long with the gospel stories of Jesus that we frequently fail to see how his life and ministry identified with animals at almost every point.

      “His birth, if tradition is to be believed, takes place in the home of sheep and oxen. His ministry begins, according to St. Mark, in the wilderness ‘with the wild beasts’ (1:13). His triumphal entry into Jerusalem involves riding on a ‘humble’ ass (Matthew 21). According to Jesus, it is lawful to ‘do good’ on the Sabbath, which includes the rescuing of an animal fallen into a pit (Matthew 12). Even the sparrows, literally sold for a few pennies in his day, are not ‘forgotten before God.’ God’s providence extends to the entire created order, and the glory of Solomon and all his works cannot be compared to that of the lilies of the field (Luke 12:27).

      “God so cares for His creation that even ‘foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.’ (Luke 9:58) It is ‘the merciful’ who are ‘blessed’ in God’s sight and what we do to ‘the least’ of all we do to him. (Matthew 5:7, 25:45-46) Jesus literally overturns the already questionable practice of animal sacrifice. Those who sell pigeons have their tables overturned and are put out of the Temple (Mark 11:15-16). It is the scribe who sees the spiritual bankruptcy of animal sacrifice and the supremacy of sacrificial love that Jesus commends as being ‘not far from the Kingdom of God.’ (Mark 12:32-34)

      “It is a loving heart which is required by God, and not the needless bloodletting of God’s creatures,” concludes Reverend Linzey. “We can see the same prophetic and radical challenge to tradition in Jesus’ remarks about the ‘good shepherd’ who, unlike many in his day, ‘lays down his life for the sheep.’ (John 10:11)”

      English theologian Joseph Butler (1692-1752), a contemporary of John Wesley’s, was born in a Presbyterian family, joined the Church of England, and eventually became a bishop and dean of St. Paul’s. In his 1736 work, The Analogy of Religion, Bishop Butler became one of the first clergymen to teach the immortality of animal souls. “Neither can we find anything in the whole analogy of Nature to afford even the slightest presumption that animals ever lose their living powers, much less that they lose them by death,” he wrote.

      The Reverend John George Wood (1827-89) was an eloquent and prolific writer on the subject of animals. A popular lecturer on the subject of natural history, he wrote several books as well, such as My Feathered Friends and Man and Beast–Here and Hereafter. Wood believed most people were cruel to animals because they were unaware that the creatures possessed immortal souls and would enjoy eternal life.

      One of the most scholarly studies on the issue of animal souls was undertaken by Elijah D. Buckner in his 1903 book The Immortality of Animals. He concluded: “…The Bible, without the shadow of a doubt, recognizes that animals have living souls the same as man. Most of the quotations given are represented as having been spoken by the Creator Himself, and he certainly knows whether or not He gave to man and lower animals alike a living soul, which of course means an immortal soul.”

      Influenced by Aristotle, Augustine and Aquinas, the Church of Rome maintained for centuries that animals lack souls or divinity, even though such a doctrine contradicts many biblical passages. Previously, during the Synod of Macon (585 AD), the Church had debated whether or not *women* have souls! Women in the Western world (in the East, the situation is worse!) are finally being recognized as persons in every sense of the word–social, political and spiritual. Animals have yet to be given the same kind of moral consideration.

      Jewish writer Mark Matthew Braunstein writes in his 1981 book, Radical Vegetarianism:

      “Pope Innocent VIII of the Renaissance required that when witches were burned, their cats be burned with them; Pope Pius IX of the 19th century forbade the formation of an SPCA in Rome, declaring humans had no duty to animals; Pope Pius XII of World War II stated that when animals are killed in slaughterhouses or laboratories, ‘…their cries should not arouse unreasonable compassion any more than do red-hot metals undergoing the blows of the hammer;’ and Pope Paul VI in 1972, by blessing a battalion of Spanish bullfighters, became the first Pope to bestow his benediction upon one cruelty even the Church had condemned. ‘

      In his 1987 book, Christianity and the Rights of Animals, the Reverend Andrew Linzey, an Anglican priest, responds to the widespread Christian misconception that animals have no souls by taking it to its logical conclusion:

      “But let us suppose for a moment that it could be shown that animals lack immortal souls, does it follow that their moral status is correspondingly weakened? It is difficult to see in what sense it could be. If animals are not to be recompensated with an eternal life, how much more difficult must it be to justify their temporal sufferings?

      “If, for an animal, this life is all that he can have, the moral gravity of any premature termination is thereby increased rather than lessened… In short, if we invoke the traditional argument against animals based on soullessness, we are not exonerated from the need for proper moral justification.

      “Indeed, if the traditional view is upheld, the question has to be: How far can any proposed aim justify to the animal concerned what would seem to be a greater deprivation or injury than if the same were inflicted on a human being?”

      “Mark Twain remarked long ago that human beings have a lot to learn from the Higher Animals,” writes Unitarian minister Gary Kowalski, in his 1991 book, The Souls of Animals. “Just because they haven’t invented static cling, ICBM’s, or television evangelists doesn’t mean they aren’t spiritually evolved.”

      Kowalski’s definition of “spiritually evolved” includes “the development of a moral sense, the appreciation of beauty, the capacity for creativity, and the awareness of one’s self within a larger universe as well as a sense of mystery and wonder about it all. These are the most precious gifts we possess…

      “I am a parish minister by vocation,” Kowalski explains. “My work involves the intangible and perhaps undefinable realm of spirit. I pray with the dying and counsel the bereaved. I take part in the joy of parents christening their newborns and welcoming fresh life into the world.

      “I occasionally help people think through moral quandaries and make ethical decisions, and I also share a responsibility for educating the young, helping them realize their inborn potential for reverence and compassion. Week after week I stand before my congregation and try to talk about the greatest riddles of human existence. In recent years, however, I have become aware that human beings are not the only animals on this planet that participate in affairs of the spirit.”

      Kowalski notes that animals are aware of death. They have a sense of their own mortality, and grieve at the loss of companions. Animals possess language, musical abilities, a sense of the mysterious, creativity and playfulness. Animals possess a sense of right and wrong; they are capable of fidelity, altruism, and even self-sacrifice.

      “Animals, like us, are microcosms,” says Kowalski. “They too care and have feelings; they too dream and create; they too are adventuresome and curious about their world. They too reflect the glory of the whole.

      “Can we open our hearts to the animals? Can we greet them as our soul mates, beings like ourselves who possess dignity and depth? To do so, we must learn to revere and respect the creatures, who, like us, are a part of God’s beloved creation, and to cherish the amazing planet that sustains our mutual existence.

      “Animals,” Kowalski concludes, “are living souls. They are not things. They are not objects. Neither are they human. Yet they mourn. They love. They dance. They suffer. They know the peaks and chasms of being.”

  34. Planned Parenthood should not be supported by Government funding! Planned Parenthood has gone totally rouge and is now all out for abortion so they can reap the profits from baby parts and tissue. It’s all about money now.

  35. I think they should be abolished and made to pay back all the illegal money to the taxpayers and spend twenty years in solitary confinement but that is just wishful thinking as people who kill others spend less time in jail then a person who kills a cat. or their own child. Just look at the clintons back ground.

  36. The Center for Medical Progress (CMP) is the organization that brought to the public’s attention the undercover videos that revealed officials of Planned Parenthood (PP) meeting with who they thought were prospective buyers of fetal tissue, but were in fact CMP reps. We should all applaud their efforts, and hopefully PP will be held accountable.

    • Those purported videos were all made up and you know it!! People who made them even admitted to it. So stop spreading your falsehoods and lies!!

      • Ms. Alexander:
        You are incorrect, these videos have been proven legitimate and accepted in a court of law. It is understandable why those who support Planned Parenthood and abortion, refused to face the ugly truth. And that is, abortion is a nasty and brutal business and has very little to do with the health of a woman.

        • You are still wrong – so stop pushing your lying christian agenda. You only want to punish the pregnant woman and let the male off scot free!! Your continued protestations only serve to show how desperate you are.

          • Ms. Alexander:
            You’ve just revealed your true feelings, and let the cat out of the bag. You are biased toward Christianity, but I will not condemn or rebuke you, you are to be pitied and shown compassion.

          • No pity, thanks!! I still want to know why you won’t answer me about why you continue to blame the woman and let the man off scot free???

  37. They should have never been supported with our money. they are killing babies, selling body parts and using government money to break the law. They should be jailed and made to pay back money with interest.

  38. WE THE PEOPLE, should not give FEDERAL FUNDING to these THUGS.. There should be a LAW requires them to find a LOVING Couple that
    are able to have Children and let them Adopt them if the baby has
    Nothing wrong with it at the mother doesn’t want it .. But babies that
    have problems like down Syndrome or other problems then Abort it.
    Why would you want to right MURDERE Baby for the HELL of it..
    Planned Parenthood is the origination on Earth they are the BUTCHER’S FROM HELL !!

  39. Largely.. and as usual, ‘confounding’ the fact is what PP did in testimony, ‘confounding’ was what was accepted by congressional members.
    In every ‘Abortion’ procedure there are requirements beforehand, consider, PP claims 3-4%’, is abortion’, while ignoring each abortion must be accompanies by, blood test, pre-counseling, likely anti-biotics, follow up visits, some post counselling………. to say, ‘3-4% suddenly doubles in charges based on the abortion, then triples, quadruples.. and on and on for every test and procedure possible… PP isn’t counting these other items that would NOT happen without Abortion. Then there is the fact that Liberal donators pay the most of PP costs to operate- yet the Liberals are not made aware either, that every procedure and cost possible is piled on… because the cost and funding is Generalized. TO Say, PP is screwing every source of funding while it kills the unborn…. and if one consider ><2/3rds of PP centers are in Black Neighborhoods and the selling of baby parts are for 'study(lots are for T-cell advances) and by far the benefits of T-cells from Black babies will go into white people.. well then….. PP is screwing over the bulk of its patients….. whom have no clue where their babies T-Cells are going!

  40. God forbids the taking of innocent lives. the supreme court decided that privacy and reproductive rights was more important than human life. Murder Inc/planned parenthood has taken between 44 and 54 million lives. They also profit from selling human fetal tissue, plus the 500 million they receive in federal funding. I do not wish to be forced to contribute money thru taxes to Murder Inc/planned parenthood. Now New York and Virginia passed laws that allow termination of full term babies after birth. We are a wicked nation and we will be punished.

  41. I, as a US taxpayer, never gave permission for them to use MY tax dollars for planned parenthood to murder our future! We the people ought to file suit against planned parenthood and the federal government for using it in such!!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here