[Antoninus]

Second, this woman, Nancy Small, did not in any way state, insinuate, or hint that she is a pro-abort. Maybe she isnm, maybe she isn;t, but it wasn't in the article. To label that way on no evidence whatsoever is slander.

They have become excellent at covering their tracks because the issue is so disqualifying for most Catholics. But dig around a little:

CELEBRATING OUR TRIUMPHS, COMMITTING OURSELVES TO CHANGE

See about 3/4 of the way down:

"My second example is Nancy Small. Between 1995 and 2001, Nancy was executive director of the nation’s largest Catholic peace organization, Pax Christi USA. While at Pax Christi USA Nancy led that 97% white organization in confronting its own racism. In 2001, she also spearheaded the group’s decision to cancel its annual assembly rather than un-invite its keynote speaker when ordered to do so by the Catholic university where the meeting was to occur. Though on record as opposing abortion as part of its consistent ethic of life, the group had invited as its keynoter a major figure in the civil rights and non-violence movements without realizing that he was also publicly pro-choice. In declining to drop the speaker, Nancy noted that it was the practice of Pax Christi USA not to make judgments about the moral fitness of individuals based on any single issue.

[Mrs. Don-o]

So they actually cancelled the Pax Christi USA annual assembly rather than uninvite the pro-abort keynoter?

It seems they (under Ms Small’s leadership) didn’t actually
“get” that for the “consistency thing” being pro-abort would be as disqualifying as being, for instance, pro-nuclear-war.

Good sleuthing. Thanks for sharing that info.

[Mrs. Don-o]

So they actually cancelled the Pax Christi USA annual assembly rather than uninvite the pro-abort keynoter?

It seems they (under Ms Small’s leadership) didn’t actually
“get” that for the “consistency thing” being pro-abort would be as disqualifying as being, for instance, pro-nuclear-war.

Good sleuthing. Thanks for sharing that info.