Why Abortion Is Preeminent

Since high school theology teacher Rich Raho decided to call out Bishop Strickland, I decided to give him a little attention. (Before I start – parents, if you have kids in his school, find another school, your money is wasted.) I don’t mean to besmirch Raho’s educational accomplishments, but a BA in Psych and a Master of Divinity don’t make him equal in knowledge of the Faith to the likes of Bishop Strickland. So, when I see Raho trying to take Bishop Strickland to task, I have no choice but to point out that he is not in the same league.

Raho has fallen prey to pride in the same way as the America Magazine or National catholic Reporter folks. They’re trying desperately to quiet those who champion an end to abortion, and in doing so try to paint those who do as somehow opposed to Pope Francis.

Let’s first take a look at Raho’s latest folly:


My response?


Let me help Rich out and explain the whole “preeminent” language voted on by the USCCB, because he really doesn’t seem to have a clue. Sadly, Cardinal Cupich and Bishop McElroy have aided and abetted his confusion, too.

“Preeminent” has nothing to do with valuing one life more than another. This is what the dissenting liberals (who really couldn’t care less about stopping abortion) try to tell you. “Preeminent” has every thing to do with who is in the most danger of death at the time. Barring a miraculous event, ever single baby who goes through whatever abortion procedure is chosen will die if that procedure takes place and they cannot fight for their lives. This is not the same for any other tragedy, although I suspect out and out euthanasia is on the horizon. Does this mean that any life is worth less than any other? Nope. It means that the danger of death is assured for this evil like no other. Homelessness, hunger, poverty, etc., etc., etc., are all tragedies, but death is not assured. Should we fight to help all? Absolutely! But, seriously, it is ridiculous to downplay the fact that thousands of children are being killed every day in this country simply because there are other tragedies going on.

Rich would have some serious issues proving the “preeminent” wording of the USCCB is in any way deficient or falling short of anything. Always wonder if he actually knows what the definition is.




  1. surpassing all others; very distinguished in some way:

Being proximate to death makes abortion THE preeminent issue of our world. Rich hasn’t answered my little question to him on Twitter, though. Why? He knows he can’t, because I’m pretty darn sure he might have a heart and would save the child in danger of death first. That admission blows his lame argument out of the water. I’m pretty sure Pope Francis would do the same in that instance. That’s the reality of abortion.


16 thoughts on “Why Abortion Is Preeminent

  1. If you cannot make it out of your moms womb alive the churches teaching on so called social justice does not mean a hill of beans etc.. WHILE Other Problems ,Suicides, Drugs Poverty and crime are important.. Just without pro life the other problems while serious at Moot compared that.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Watching the news in the uk last night…golden globe awards… when at the very least the the host told them…” don’t come up here giving political speech’s ..no on wants your opinion “…then up pops a lovvvvvie to tell us that… I could not get this award without the use of abortion….our lady queen of peace pray for us

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Not sure what to make of this fellow. His shtick as over-the-top Team Francis sycophant has caused some to wonder if he’s a parody account. A few Google searches are revealing. Perhaps he’s intentionally trolling conservative Catholics with the ambition of being “doxxed” and claiming his 15 minutes of fame (à la Judge Smolensky).


  3. Wonder if Mr. Raho ever taught this little tidbit by Pope St. JPII?

    “The inviolability of the person, which is a reflection of the absolute inviolability of God, finds its *primary and fundamental expression* in the inviolability of human life. Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights—for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture—*is false and illusory* if the *right to life*, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not *defended with maximum determination*.” (Christifideles Laici, 38, § 2, stars added for emphasis)

    Just askin’. ;^)

    God bless you, OMM! Happy New Year to you and yours.

    Catechist Kev


    1. And I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you. An infant cannot in anyway defend itself from one that is intent on taking its life. It is an innocent, pure and defenseless life and it is our duty and responsibility to defend those that are unable to defend themselves when ever possible.

      Marriage on the other hand is indeed in dire straits as an institution but it is entered freely and without coercion by two adults who can either say yes or no. Their mortal lives are not in danger in either case. I agree that marriage is under attack and has been for a long time and it has suffered for it, but babies are made whether a marriage exists or not and their lives are of the utmost importance. Babies have no choice on whether they live or die. Two adults do have a choice to marry or not.


  4. 1) I am the LORD your God. You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve.
    2) You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
    3) Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.
    4) Honor your father and your mother.
    5) You shall not kill.
    6) You shall not commit adultery.
    7) You shall not steal.
    8) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
    9) You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
    10) You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

    God disagrees with you. Mom, unless you redact, I am done with your blog.


    I doubt you are going to, so I will say good bye now and wish you the best.



    1. Well, i guess it’s bye,Karl. I’m not really sure how the 10 Commandments makes a supportive argument for you here. While i have zero problem championing valid, healthy marriages, i still wouldn’t seek to intervene in a marriage first if a child was about to be murdered next to the unhappy couple. Again, i think you miss what the word preeminent means.

      Sent from my iPhone



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s