Skip to main content

Reverence for Life

We hold life sacred from conception to natural death. We support policies and services that assist pregnant women to make life-affirming choices.  We advocate for restrictions on the practice and public funding of abortion. We support stem cell research that does not destroy or clone human embryos. We support patient-focused, quality end-of-life care and oppose legalizing assisted suicide. We oppose the use of the death penalty.

Download a backgrounder on Reverence for Life

November 23, 2011 End of Life: Legal and Policy Issues, Reverence for Life

A 45-page PowerPoint that teaches about public policy, reviews the history of suicide/euthanasia, outlines Church teaching, reviews the current state of the law, and discusses current efforts in California to block the legalization of physician-assisted suicide.  (Download 1.3 Mb)

End of Life: Legal and Policy Issues, Reverence for Life

On June 9, 2016, in what the Bishops of California have called a “travesty of compassion,” physicians in California will legally be allowed to prescribe a lethal dose of drugs to a patient.

Despite bi-partisan opposition and being defeated in the regular legislative session, the End-of-Life Option Act was passed in a special, abbreviated session with limited hearings and altered committee membership.

Death Penalty, Reverence for Life

The Catholic Mobilizing Network (CMN) has announced a new publication presenting the Catholic Church’s teaching on the death penalty and restorative justice. Entitled Renewing a Culture of Life: The Death Penalty, Restorative Justice, and Catholic Social Teaching, the booklet was produced by CMN in close collaboration with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Department of Peace, Justice & Human Development.

End of Life: Legal and Policy Issues, Reverence for Life

Debate on physician-assisted suicide (PAS) has once again surfaced following the tragic suicide of Brittany Maynard.   But, as is usually the case, media coverage tends to misstate Catholic teaching on end-of-life issues and some proponents deliberately twist our teachings to confuse the debate.

Proponents continue to focus on emotional elements and ignore the very significant and dangerous policy implications of PAS. But the discussion must be much deeper and the potential consequences for the elderly, disabled and disenfranchised members of society from PAS made much clearer.

Pages