Special to WorldTribune.com, September 28, 2021
Commentary by Joe Schaeffer
Question: What is this woman doing on the Board of Directors for the flagship publication of the Jesuit Order in the United States?
The Fuller Project is dedicated to promoting radical feminism under the guise of “journalism.” From its about page:
The Fuller Project is the nonprofit newsroom dedicated to groundbreaking journalism about women to raise awareness, expose injustice and spur accountability.
O’Hagan’s bio at Fuller reveals a highly connected progressive establishment pedigree (bold added throughout this column):
Sarah is a former journalist and a long-time strategic advisor in the fields of refugee and women’s rights. Sarah is a trustee of Johns Hopkins University; and former Chair of the Board of Advisors of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (JHU-SAIS), where she and others built SAIS Women Lead. As co-Chair of the International Rescue Committee (IRC) from 2010-2016, Sarah has traveled frequently to visit programs.
And then there is this:
She also serves on… the Board of Directors of America Media, the leading provider of editorial content for thinking Catholics.
Nice smug swipe at Roman Catholics who do not reside in the progressive fold.
We’ve written about the International Rescue Committee before. It is one of the most influential, destructive and highly funded NGOs helping to flood the nations of the West with Third World migrants in existence today.
O’Hagan is still listed as a member of IRC’s Board of Advisors. Another member of that same board is Vera Blinken, second wife of Donald Blinken, Biden administration Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s father. Donald Blinken was a close personal associate of notorious progressive globalist billionaire George Soros for decades.
Dots. It’s all about connecting dots.
Here’s where things get scandalous for the Jesuits.
The Fuller Project is rabidly pro-abortion. The bio of its editor in chief Khushbu Shah boasts:
Her reporting exposes injustices impacting women, ranging from abortion access in the South to immigration and inequality across Latin America.
That’s right, promoting and celebrating (we’re not kidding, keep reading) abortion is a core part of Fuller’s journalistic mission. Shah sickeningly authored a 2019 article for UK leftist establishment newspaper The Guardian in which she reported on the spot from inside an abortion clinic in Alabama:
Another mother, D, who has driven her daughter to the clinic, peeked through a camouflage curtain, briefly putting down her cigarette. The slight 52-year-old drove an hour to bring her own 25-year-old daughter to her procedure. She’s five and a half weeks and knew right away she didn’t want to have the child.
“She has her priorities and she’s trying to get her career going,” she began.
Here is another wonderful article from Fuller. It’s title: “How to Make Abortion Great Again”:
Natalia said many women who call feel the need to justify themselves, explaining, perhaps as much to themselves as to her, why they must have this abortion. But the Dream Team doesn’t so much offer absolution as radical acceptance, and unwavering support.
“It’s not that we have to understand everyone, because it’s just impossible,” said Karolina. “It’s your life. What can I do for you?”
If you need more evidence, here are a couple of over-the-top examples, one focusing on the misery experienced by babies not killed by abortion in Kenya and another claiming Donald Trump would kill African women by denying financial aid for abortion on the continent.
To no one’s surprise, the Fuller Project is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This agenda is right up the Gates’ population control alley.
O’Hagan has tweeted that she is “very proud” to be a part of Fuller’s reporting. The attached video sketchily references “reproductive health care” but leaves out the brazen abortion advocacy entirely. Wonder why?
— Sarah O'Hagan (@sohagan10) July 29, 2020
In 2017, O’Hagan penned an article for Newsweek that defended abortion rights, blasted new President Trump’s “anti-women” policies and praised the radical Women’s March on Washington.
She also bashed Trump that same year for restricting U.S. financial support for abortion overseas:
Not a woman in sight as POTUS with overly male team signs order scrubbing women's access globally to family planning https://t.co/xQOHAYKh9D
— Sarah O'Hagan (@sohagan10) January 24, 2017
But here is where things get truly surreal. The woman who claims to value working on a Jesuit-run magazine for “thinking Catholics” is an enthusiastic member of an organization that engages in full-blown anti-Catholicism.
In 2019, the Fuller Project conducted and the Associated Press and Washington Post ran a “journalistic” “expose” on Catholic hospitals that refused to perform abortions, denouncing them as a dire threat to women’s health:
Fuller Project contributing editor Rikha Sharma Rani partnered with Wisconsin Watch’s Parker Schorr to publish a series about limitations on reproductive healthcare in Catholic hospitals in Wisconsin and their impact on women, particularly Black women and women of color. The series, published by Wisconsin Watch and The Cap Times and picked up by The Washington Post, spotlighted Wisconsin’s heavy reliance on Catholic healthcare. Catholic hospitals are subject to regulations imposed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that limit access to some reproductive procedures — abortion, contraceptive care, in vitro fertilization and tubal ligation, for example. Black people in low-income neighborhoods are disproportionately affected by these limitations.
From the article. This is about as blatant and ugly as anti-Catholic “reporting” can be:
In most ways, these Catholic hospitals, which treat one in every seven patients in the United States, differ from secular ones in name only. Yet, critics say, in a small but important corner of reproductive care, Catholic ethics can trump medical best practice, bishops can wield more influence than physicians, and patients can be denied care they desire or need.
Along with The Washington Post, USA Today also picked up on the Fuller series. It took the additional twisted step of quoting Planned Parenthood’s ludicrously labeled “nonpartisan” research partner to bash traditional Catholic dogma:
A report by the Guttmacher Institute, a nonpartisan health think tank that supports reproductive rights, found that 98% of sexually experienced Catholic women had used birth control at some point in their lives, suggesting that even Catholic women want access to at least some services banned by the church.
As Catholic hospital systems grow bigger, the prospects of partnering will become increasingly attractive for secular hospitals. Intended or not, reproductive rights advocates say such partnerships could reduce access to abortion and other reproductive services without a single ruling from the courts.
Let’s get back to the Jesuits and complete the circle. Why is a woman closely associated with anti-Catholic journalistic activism on the board of the Catholic order’s flagship magazine?
Well, first we have the fact that the Jesuits are deeply entwined with the ruling progressive establishment themselves. Look no further than Jesuit-run Georgetown University.
Hillary Clinton founded her own academic program at the university, the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security.
And then there is ACLU National Legal Director David Cole, who recently made headlines by co-authoring an infamous op-ed in the New York Times in which he and a fellow high-ranking ACLU official argued that vaccine mandates “actually further civil liberties” rather than suppress them.
Before becoming national legal director for the ACLU in 2016, Cole had been a professor at Georgetown, teaching constitutional law and criminal justice there since 1990.
There is also the modern Jesuit Order’s renowned radical leftist orientation. The order’s most prominent public face in the United States today is Father James Martin. Martin is a tireless advocate on behalf of the ruling progressive establishment and its cultural Marxist social causes du jour. He doesn’t seem to mind in the least that he often comes across as ridiculous while doing so.
Here is Martin making a fool of himself in January 2019 by jumping the gun and defaming innocent teen Nicholas Sandmann:
I am as disgusted by the contemptuous laughter of the mass of students as I am moved by the quiet dignity of the solitary man who continues to chant. Those students could learn much from this elder, if they had chosen to. Or if they choose to. https://t.co/6i2buMmI8w
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) January 19, 2019
And here he is in July spouting aggressive pro-vaccine propaganda dressed up in the lamest of religious trappings:
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) July 30, 2021
This is where things get truly ugly. For we can connect the abortion radicalism of America Magazine’s board member and the pro-vaccine shilling of its leading public prelate in the most gruesome way.
The Jesuits have used America Magazine to make the repulsive argument that not getting the coronavirus vaccine is worse than the act of abortion itself:
“The case of using vaccines produced using cells from aborted fetuses runs like this: Vaccinating oneself against a deadly disease is usually part of good stewardship of one’s health,” Lisa Fullam, a professor of moral theology at the Jesuit School of Theology of Santa Clara University in Berkeley, Calif., told America over email.
“The moral remoteness of the question of receiving a vaccine grown on cells derived from an abortion decades ago compared to the moral urgency of stopping spread of the Covid-19 pandemic with a safe and effective vaccine makes it permissible at least, and perhaps even obligatory,” Fullam commented. “Even more will die if we refuse a vaccine for reasons other than safety or efficacy. While some might refuse a vaccine or other treatment on ‘pro-life’ grounds, in fact many more will die if we refuse a vaccine that will be produced despite those who object to its provenance—and that is not being pro-life.“
More than 60 million babies have been murdered via abortion in America alone since 1973. Around the world, the number is astronomical.
But a higher point is missing here:
Whatever happened to the confident knowledge once possessed by Christians that you can’t get good juice from poisonous grapes? That something derived from evil will NOT produce results that are personally good for you.
Christians, and indeed all moral people of good will, used to instinctively understand this with a stout sense of certainty.
Now, driven by fear, many have been led to truly believe that human life cannot be sustained without injecting a mega-corporate product created via the harvesting of fetal cells into their bodies.
And the Jesuits are helping to stoke this fear.
This religious order appears to have found a new master to serve.
Joe Schaeffer is the former Managing Editor of The Washington Times National Weekly Edition. His columns appear at WorldTribune.com and FreePressInternational.org.