Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Pro-life groups laud decision to block embryonic stem cell research

Washington D.C., Aug 23, 2010 / 06:19 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Pro-life groups lauded the decision of a federal court ruling on Monday which prevents the Obama administration from carrying out its embryonic stem cell research policy. One legal fund reacted by saying, the “American people should not be forced to pay for experiments – prohibited by federal law – that destroy human life.”

The ruling comes after the National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued new guidelines last year that permitted federal funding for research on stem cell lines that had already been created.

On August 23, however, a federal judge concluded that the policy likely violates a federal law known as the “Dickey/Wicker Amendment.” The amendment has been part of the annual appropriations bill for the Department of Health and Human Services every year since 1996.

The amendment bars federal funding for the creation of a human embryo for research purposes as well as for research in which a human embryo or embryos are “destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death.”

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth temporarily blocked the Obama administration on Monday from using federal dollars to fund expanded human embryonic stem cell research while a lawsuit against the NIH policy – filed last year by the Christian Medical Association (CMA) and Nightlight Christian Adoptions – proceeds.

Pro-life groups praised the ruling on Monday.

The Alliance Defense Fund, which helped represent CMA and Nightlight, saying that the “American people should not be forced to pay for experiments – prohibited by federal law – that destroy human life.”

“The court is simply enforcing an existing law passed by Congress that prevents Americans from paying another penny for needless research on human embryos,” continued ADF Senior Legal Counsel Steven H. Aden. “No one should be allowed to decide that an innocent life is worthless.”

“Experimentation on embryonic stem cells isn’t even necessary because adult stem cell research has been enormously successful,” Aden said. “In economic times like we are in now, it doesn’t make sense for the federal government to use precious taxpayer dollars for this illegal and unethical purpose.”

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins also weighed in on the ruling Monday, saying that the judge's decision was “a stinging rebuke to the Obama Administration and its attempt to circumvent sound science and federal law, which clearly prohibits federal funding for research that involves the destruction of human embryos.”

“Rather than fund additional embryo-destructive research, the government should focus its resources on adult stem cells that are already improving health and saving the lives of patients with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, spinal cord injury and many other conditions,” he added. “There is great potential in this country for stem cell research and treatments for many diseases, while maintaining ethical standards.”

This can be found at: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pro-life-groups-laud-decision-to-block-embryonic-stem-cell-research/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicnewsagency%2Fdailynews+%28CNA+Daily+News%29

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Abortion Practitioner James Pendergraft Loses Florida License a Fourth Time

Orlando, FL (LifeNews.com) -- Embattled Florida abortion practitioner James Pendergraft recently saw his medical license suspended for a fourth time by the Florida Board of Medicine. On Saturday, the board suspended his license for one year and placed it on probation for three years after that.

Pendergraft, who has subjected women to botched legal abortions, was ordered to pay a $10,000 fine and take a course on record keeping.

The medical board suspended his license after it found Pendergraft had allowed an unlicensed employee to order and administer drugs even though she was unqualified and had a known history of drug abuse. Pendergraft also was disciplined for prescribing steroids to her for unknown reasons.

"This is a case that should outrage everyone," said Operation Rescue president Troy Newman, who brought the suspension to the attention of LifeNews.com.

"Here is a proven quack that has served three previous license suspensions, yet continues to offend," he said. "Even a stint in prison hasn't helped Pendergraft amend his ways. Nevertheless, the Board will allow this man to continue the practice of medicine after he serves his fourth suspension. It is irresponsible to place women at repeated risk from this guy."

According to news reports, Aaron Liberman, the chairman of the Department of Health Management and Informatics at the University of Central Florida, agreed with Newman in objecting to the leniency the board showed the abortion practitioner.

"I think it's a wake-up call for us all when we have an individual who is allowed to practice medicine in a way that draws question as to both his credibility and capability," he said.

Pendergraft faced previous suspensions, one as recently as January, 2010, for botched legal abortions and illegal late-term abortions, and dispensing drugs without a license.

The first suspension was the result of a complaint filed April 14, 2008, that states Pendergraft illegally prescribed controlled substances without proper DEA licensing. The board also said Pendergraft committed medical malpractice in a botched abortion of a 19-week-old unborn child in February 2006.

The botched abortion saw Pendergraft inadequately dilating a patient's cervix for a D&E abortion. He then ruptured her uterus and shoved the unborn child's body into the abdominal cavity.

The mother was rushed to the hospital where she received an emergency hysterectomy along with the removal of the dead unborn child, who was missing an arm after the abortion attempt. OR indicates the arm was later found at Pendergraft’s EPOC abortion clinic.

The pro-life group maintains that Pendergraft's not reporting that he had removed the arm caused a delay in her care at the hospital as surgeons futilely attempted to locate the missing appendage.

The Board ruled on Saturday that Pendergraft's two active suspensions would run concurrently.

Pendergraft owns five abortion clinics in Florida. While on suspension, his abortion centers continue to operate with other abortion practitioners, at least one of which has had his own problems with the law.

Newman says abortion practitioner Randall Whitney has had his license suspended twice and placed on probation for violations according to the Florida Health Department.

"Pendergraft's clinics are a menace to the public. They should be closed, and perhaps if he was in another state, they would be. It is simply outrageous that these people who have proven that they cannot comport themselves within the law are allowed the opportunity to continue to prey on an unsuspecting public," he said.

"The Florida Board of Medicine seriously dropped the ball by not revoking Pendergraft and forcing the closure of his clinics," he concluded.

Last year, a Florida appeals court upheld the suspension of Pendergraft's license.

He was fined $10,000 and had his licensed revoked for one year over an illegal late-term abortion he did in 2005. The Florida Board of Medicine handed down the decision in December 2007.

this can be found at: http://www.lifenews.com/state5339.html

Monday, July 26, 2010

Kenya Residents Support New Pro-Abortion Constitution, Polling Results Show

Nairobi, Kenya (LifeNews.com) -- Two new polls released today reveal Kenya residents plan to support the proposed constitution on an August 4 vote. The constitution has become an international debate as the Obama administration has come under heavy criticism for spending as much as $23 million to support it.

The polling firm Synovate conducted a survey with more than 6,000 Kenyans and found 58 percent of those interviewed say they plan to vote for the constitution while just 22 percent said no and the rest were undecided or said they would not vote.

The poll also found just three percent of those surveyed worried violence would break out if the constitution is defeated, as happened the last time Kenyans rejected one at the polls. That appears to undermine some of the arguments government officials are using to request a Yes vote.

"The numbers are quite low, which therefore means that there is that level of tolerance of each other's position," said George Waititu, the managing director of the polling firm, told AP.

The new poll also found abortion is the main reason Kenyans cited for potentially voting no -- with 62 percent of those saying they will oppose the constitution naming abortion as the top reason.

Meanwhile, AP indicates a second poll conducted by the firm Infotrack with 1,200 people found 65 percent of Kenyans planned to vote Yes on the constitution and 25 percent said they would vote no, while the rest remained undecided.

Rev. Peter Karanja, the secretary general of the National Council of Churches of Kenya, told the Associated Press he thinks the numerous polls are part of the Yes campaign's plan to pressure Kenyans to vote Yes. AP notes Infotrack is believed to be owned and operated by associates of Prime Minister Raila Odinga.

"We really haven't had objective polls published," Karanja said. "Even some of the companies that conduct polls have more than a casual relationship with some of the key politicians who would want to manipulate opinions. We have been on the campaign trail all over Kenya ... and our impressions do not appear to relate in any way with the kind of figures we see published."

The results of the new surveys track with a prior poll conducted by Synovate in June showing 57 percent of Kenyans will support the pro-abortion constitution while 20 percent said they would vote No.

Although the draft contains language advocating the right to life for unborn children, it contains a section with a health exception that essentially opens the nation to unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason.

Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues director Marie Smith told LifeNews.com, “Regrettably, this final draft contains some of the most deceptive and dangerous language on abortion ever seen in a constitution."

"It presents constitutional protection for the unborn child by acknowledging in section 26 on Right to Life that 'Every person has the right to life' and that 'The life of a person begins at conception,'" she explained. “However, the next statement completely reverses protection for the unborn by allowing abortion when in the 'opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law.'”

Smith continues, “The reversal of previous policy on abortion- which required the opinion of two medical doctors who agreed that abortion was necessary for the life of the mother— will likely open the door to abortion on demand if the broad US definition of health is used in Kenya.”

Before the revised constitution can come into force, it must be approved by popular vote.

If Kenyans vote for the new constitution it won't be because they suddenly support abortion.

A poll conducted March 21–26 by Synovate, formerly known as Steadman, shows the citizens of Kenya are overwhelmingly pro-life.

“Thinking about abortion, which of the following is closest to your view?” the firm asked respondents.

Some 69 percent of Kenya residents are against legalizing abortions while just 9 percent support it. Another 16 percent say it doesn't matter while 6 percent said they had no opinion.

Answering the question, “When do you believe human life begins?” 77 percent of Kenyans stated that life begins at conception, while 19 percent stated that human life begins at the time of birth.

Scott Fischbach, the director of MCCL Go, an international pro-life outreach, provided the polling results to LifeNews.com.

"Currently, advocates of abortion are using the issue of maternal mortality and illegal abortions to argue for legalization of the procedure. However, the answer to illegal abortions and high maternal mortality rates is very simple: provide hope, opportunity and support for pregnant women by insuring a clean water supply, clean blood supply and adequate health care," he said.

"Kenya is a pro-life country and ought not to head toward an abortion-on-demand policy in its new Constitution," he added.

American lawmakers are seeking an investigation into the Obama administration to determine whether it violated federal law that says taxpayer dollars can't be used to lobby for abortion in other nations

this can be found at: http://www.lifenews.com/int1604.html

Friday, July 23, 2010

Obama Ambassador to Kenya Openly Endorses Proposed Pro-Abortion Constitution

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- After initially saying the Obama administration is not technically supporting the proposed pro-abortion constitution in Kenya and insisting it is merely supporting the voting process itself, United States Ambassador to Kenya Michael Ranneberger is now openly supporting it.

The Kenya Broadcasting Corporation issued a new report today saying Ranneberger has announced "his support for the proposed new constitution saying the document caters the needs of all Kenyans."

Ranneberger said the Obama administration will respect the outcome of the vote on the pro-abortion constitution on August 4, but he is now "under heavy criticism from the 'No' camp for his open support for the proposed law."

The envoy said, "We have made it clear that a new constitution is absolutely essential for the future, security and prosperity of this great nation."

"As our Vice President said during his recent visit, the country will only attract foreign investments unless the country deals with issues of corruption. This will only come about with a new constitution in place," Ranneberger added, applying economic pressure to Kenyans to approve the document.

"I therefore urge all Kenyans to take advantage of this opportunity. Kenya is poised at the most important moment of change since independence." he said.

Ranneberger said he will not be drawn into a political war of words with the No camp and the Kenyan elected officials and church leaders who are heading up its campaign against the constitution.

Nor will he respond to charges from pro-life Congressman Chris Smith and other members of Congress who have charged the Obama administration is illegally funding groups that are promoting the Yes vote, to the tune of $23 million.

"I have neither responded to the Congressmen nor to the opponents of the draft law nor do I plan to," he said.

Meanwhile, Kenya Catholic Church leaders say there is still time to remove the pro-abortion provisions from the document before it receives a vote next month.

"We, the Catholic bishops, have sought advice on legal and medical issues regarding the right to life, and are convinced that the constitution will result in liberalisation of abortion laws," said a statement from conference chairman John Cardinal Njue, according to AllAfrica.

They said they did not agree with political leaders who support the constitution and say it should be passed and then changed later.

They said they did not believe that a document that is fundamentally flawed should be passed "only with a vague hope that it will be amended later, especially when the process of amendment is more difficult after than before."

As LifeNews.com reported earlier this month, the United States embassy in Kenya issued a statement saying the administration of President Barack Obama is not spending taxpayer dollars funding a campaign to support a pro-abortion Constitution Kenya voters will consider at the polls next month.

But Smith, one of three U.S. lawmakers who have requested an investigation into U.S. activities leading up to the referendum, tells LifeNews.com he has evidence the Obama administration is funding the Yes campaign.

Smith says Obama is doing so by providing taxpayer dollars for the Yes campaign via organizations that are actively supporting it on the ground in Kenya.

“There is no doubt that the Obama Administration is funding the ‘yes’ campaign in Kenya,” he said. “By funding NGOs charged with obtaining ‘yes’ votes, the Administration has crossed the line."

"Directly supporting efforts to register ‘yes’ voters and ‘get out the yes vote’ means the U.S. government is running a political campaign in Kenya. U.S. taxpayer funds should not be used to support one side or the other," he added.

As part of ongoing discussions with the Office of the Inspector General of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Representatives Smith and Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and California Rep. Darrell Issa received a chart listing USAID funding recipients and a summary of their agreements.

Two organizations are receiving over $150,000 form the U.S. government to “contribute to an ‘overrepresentation’ of the Yes voters,” and five organizations have been charged with registering a total of 100,000 “for a Yes vote” at the referendum.

Other Kenyan groups are being given funding for similar Yes vote efforts, Smith said.

Smith said these Obama administration-funded grants for organizations actively involved in persuading Kenyan voters to adopt a constitution that will legalize abortions is inappropriate.

“The draft constitution, with its controversial provisions expanding access to abortion, is a matter for the Kenyan people to consider and decide,” Smith said. “The Obama Administration should immediately withdraw all U.S. taxpayer funding used to buy votes and influence the outcome on the referendum.”

While Obama and Vice President Joe Biden have lent their support to the voting process, they have carefully couched their language in terms of supporting the constitutional review process rather than urging support for the document itself.

The proposed new Kenyan constitution concerns pro-life and church groups both locally and around the world because provisions in it would overturn the current legal protections women and unborn children enjoy and would essentially authorize unlimited abortions despite the pro-life cultural views of most Kenyans.

The United States embassy in Nairobi said it is not providing financial support for the Yes campaign for the August 4 vote on the proposed constitution.

“These claims are categorically false, and those making such allegations are lying,” the statement said, according to APA News. “The US Government is supporting the constitutional review process as the centerpiece of the broad reform agenda agreed to following the post-election crisis."

That mirrors language coming last week from a representative of Biden.

After publishing a news story compiling the developments over the last two months that LifeNews.com has chronicled, Fox News received a response from Biden's office.

"Requests for comment sent to the vice president’s office were not initially returned, but following the original publication of this story, Biden's press secretary, in an e-mail, stressed that while in Kenya the vice president reiterated that it is up the people to decide about their country's constitution," the television news station indicated.

That came after Biden told prominent Kenya government officials that passage will "allow money to flow" to the African nation.

"The United States strongly supports the process of constitutional reform. ... Dare to reach for transformative change, the kind of change that might come around only once in a lifetime," he said. "If you make these changes, I promise you, new foreign private investment will come in like you've never seen."

Whether the Obama administration is directly supporting the constitution is a critical question because lobbying for or against abortion is prohibited under a provision of federal law known as the Siljander Amendment annually included in the State, Foreign Operations Appropriations Act.

The amendment reads, “None of the funds made available under this Act may be used to lobby for or against abortion,” and violations are subject to civil and criminal penalties under the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341."

Obama himself has promoted the new constitution in an interview in early June with the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC).

He called voting for the document a "singular opportunity to put the government of Kenya on solid footing" and urged Kenyans to"take advantage of the moment."

Obama tried to couch his language in neutral impartiality, saying "Regardless of whether they vote Yes or No I just want to make sure that they participate,' but he extolled the virtues of the document to the KBC saying it will promote human rights.

And in May, US Ambassador to Kenya Michael Ranneberger called on the African nation's political leaders to rally the people to pass the referendum.

Ranneberger issued a statement praising the Kenya parliament for passing the proposed constitution and urging President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga to rally support for it.

He also suggested the Obama administration would fund a national campaign to persuade the people to adopt the document.

Although the draft contains language advocating the right to life for unborn children, it contains a section with a health exception that essentially opens the nation to unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason.

Joseph Meaney of Human Life International weighed in on the constitution saying it violates the views of most Kenyans who are pro-life.

"Kenyans are pro-life," he said. "When we see the new articles added to the constitution and approved by parliament under heavy pressure from Western elites, we are seeing an assault on the very heart of the Kenyan people."

"Perhaps the greatest insult is that this attack is happening under the banner of 'improving women's health'. The only ones who believe that killing an unborn child is good for a woman's health are those who will profit from the slaughter, Western powers who are pouring untold millions of dollars into measures to keep Africa's children from being born," he told LifeNews.com.

"This is nothing but population control, an imperialist assault intended to rob Africa of its future by eliminating her children. It is a disgrace," he said.

A poll conducted March 21–26 by the polling firm Synovate, formerly known as Steadman, shows the citizens of Kenya are overwhelmingly pro-life.

“Thinking about abortion, which of the following is closest to your view?” the firm asked respondents.

Some 69 percent of Kenya residents are against legalizing abortions while just 9 percent support it. Another 16 percent say it doesn't matter while 6 percent said they had no opinion.

Answering the question, “When do you believe human life begins?” 77 percent of Kenyans stated that life begins at conception, while 19 percent stated that human life begins at the time of birth.

Respondents were also asked about their views concerning the new Kenyan Constitution and the question found only 19 percent support it as currently written, while a majority, 52 percent, want Parliament to revise the document before passage.

Scott Fischbach, the director of MMCL Go, an international pro-life outreach, provided the polling results to LifeNews.com.

"Currently, advocates of abortion are using the issue of maternal mortality and illegal abortions to argue for legalization of the procedure. However, the answer to illegal abortions and high maternal mortality rates is very simple: provide hope, opportunity and support for pregnant women by insuring a clean water supply, clean blood supply and adequate health care," he said.

"Kenya is a pro-life country and ought not to head toward an abortion-on-demand policy in its new Constitution," he added

This can be found at http://www.lifenews.com/int1602.html

Friday, July 16, 2010

Abortion clinic in Colombia closed for trafficking children

Bogotá, Colombia, Jul 16, 2010 / 05:47 pm (CNA).- A top health official in Colombia said this week that three abortion clinics in the capital city of Bogota have been closed, with the latest case involving the trafficking of children.

The district Secretary of Health, Hector Zambrano told Colombian radio that the latest clinic, shut down last weekend, “was not equipped to provide ultrasounds,” and “was hiding illicit activity such as illegal abortions and trafficking of minors.”

He added that the clinic also “employed unlicensed medical personnel.”

Zambrano noted that so far this year, officials have closed down three clinics, thanks to help from nearby residents.

In 2006, Colombia’s Constitutional Court legalized abortion in the country allowing it in three cases: rape, fetal deformation or to save the life of the mother

This can be found at: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/abortion-clinic-in-colombia-closed-for-trafficking-children/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicnewsagency%2Fdailynews+%28CNA+Daily+News%29

CHA declines comment on potential federal funding of abortion

Washington D.C., Jul 16, 2010 / 12:46 am (CNA).- Responding to reports that new federal high-risk insurance pool programs are covering abortions, the Catholic Health Association (CHA) said it would not comment on the issue. The organization referred inquiries to the federal government.

The CHA backed recent federal health care legislation over the objection of the U.S. Catholic bishops and other pro-life groups who said its abortion funding restrictions were insufficient. CHA president Sr. Carol Keehan also received one of the pens President Barack Obama used to sign the bill.

In a Thursday phone call, CNA spoke with Fred Caesar, special assistant to Sr. Keehan.

Asked CHA’s reaction to claims that high-risk insurance pools in Pennsylvania and New Mexico are covering abortions, Caesar referred CNA to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) statement on the issue.

When asked if he could comment on several questions, including what CHA will do if it is proven that abortion funding restrictions are not airtight, Caesar said he could not.

“We’ll pass,” he said.

The National Right to Life Committee has reported that Pennsylvania’s high-risk insurance pool program, created by the federal health care legislation passed earlier this year, says that it does not cover “elective abortions.” However, “elective abortion” is not defined and Pennsylvania law allows legal abortion if a physician believes that is “necessary” based on “all factors (physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman's age) relevant to the well-being of the woman.”

The New Mexico Medical Insurance Pool initially reported it would cover “elective termination of pregnancy.” This policy was changed following media attention.

HHS issued a statement on the issue saying “abortions will not be covered in the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan except in the cases of rape or incest, or where the life of the woman would be endangered.”

This can be found at: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/cha-declines-comment-on-potential-federal-funding-of-abortion/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicnewsagency%2Fdailynews+%28CNA+Daily+News%29

Saturday, July 10, 2010

Illinois professor fired for giving Catholic teaching on homosexuality

Champaign, Ill., Jul 9, 2010 / 06:20 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The University of Illinois has fired an adjunct professor for teaching in a class on Catholicism that homosexual acts violate natural moral law.

Dr. Kenneth Howell was informed that he could no longer teach in the university's department of religion. The decision came after a student complained that Howell's statements were “hate speech.”

In response to his firing, Howell wrote a letter to friends explaining the events surrounding his dismissal.

Howell said in the letter, which was obtained by CNA, that he first came to teach at the St. John's Catholic Newman Center in 1998. At the time, courses on the Catholic faith were taught through the Newman Center, he explained, but in 2000, an agreement was made with the University of Illinois' department of religion, and he became an adjunct professor in the department and taught classes on Catholicism.

“Since the Fall of 2001, I have been regularly teaching two courses in the department of religion,” Howell explained. One of the classes, “Introduction to Catholicism,” includes an explanation of Natural Moral Law as affirmed by the Church as well as an application of Natural Law Theory to a disputed social issue.

“Most of those semesters, my chosen topic was the moral status of homosexual acts,” he explained.

Howell said he taught the Catholic Church's position on homosexuality. He summed it up by saying, “A homosexual orientation is not morally wrong just as no moral guilt can be assigned to any inclination that a person has. However, based on natural moral law, the Church believes that homosexual acts are contrary to human nature and therefore morally wrong.”

To show how homosexual behavior would be considered under competing moral systems, Howell sent an e-mail to the students contrasting utilitarianism with natural moral law. “I tried to show them that under utilitarianism, homosexual acts would not be considered immoral whereas under natural moral law they would,” Howell said. “This is because natural moral law, unlike utilitarianism, judges morality on the basis of the acts themselves.”

A complaint about Howell's statement was sent in a May 13 e-mail to Robert McKim, head of the religion department. The e-mail was sent by a student who was not in Howell's class, but said he was writing on behalf of a friend who was in the class and wished to remain anonymous. The e-mail complained about Howell's statements on homosexuality, calling them “hate speech.”

"Teaching a student about the tenets of a religion is one thing," said the e-mail, according to The News-Gazette. "Declaring that homosexual acts violate the natural laws of man is another. The courses at this institution should be geared to contribute to the public discourse and promote independent thought; not limit one's worldview and ostracize people of a certain sexual orientation."

Howell said that at the end of the semester, he was called into Robert McKim's office and told that he would no longer be permitted to teach for the department. Howell objected that to dismiss him for teaching the Catholic position in a class on Catholicism was a violation of academic freedom and first amendment rights. “This made no difference,” he said. “After that conversation and a couple of emails, Professor McKim insisted that this decision to dismiss me stood firm.”

According to the local paper The News-Gazette, Howell said he has had students disagree with him in the past, but never in such a manner.

"My responsibility on teaching a class on Catholicism is to teach what the Catholic Church teaches," he said. "I have always made it very, very clear to my students they are never required to believe what I'm teaching and they'll never be judged on that."

The News-Gazette reported that Howell also said he was open with students about his own beliefs as a practicing Catholic. "It's not a violation of academic freedom to advocate a position, if one does it as an appeal on rational grounds and it's pertinent to the subject," he said.

Later, Howell said, Msgr. Gregory Ketcham, the current Director of the St. John’s Catholic Newman Center, informed him that the Center would not be able to continue employing him since there was no longer any teaching for him to do.

“I suggested that we work together to have courses on Catholicism taught at the Newman Center that could be accredited by a Catholic university and that could be transferred into the University of Illinois for credit,” Howell said. “In this way, the students whom we had been called to serve could continue to be instructed in the Catholic Faith.”

However, Monsignor Ketcham said that he had no interest in such a plan, according to Howell.

Howell is currently working with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) to seek legal redress.

David French, senior counsel for the ADF said in a written statement, "A university cannot censor professors' speech – including classroom speech related to the topic of the class – merely because some students find that speech 'offensive.' Professors have the freedom to challenge students and to educate them by exposing them to different views. The Alliance Defense Fund is working with Professor Howell because the defense of academic freedom is essential on the university campus."

this can be found at: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/illinois-professor-fired-for-giving-catholic-teaching-on-homosexuality/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicnewsagency%2Fdailynews+%28CNA+Daily+News%29