A Movie For Our Times
Please watch this.
Showing posts with label Pro-Life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pro-Life. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Friday, September 9, 2011
Life is Precious
From Australian X Factor - Choosing Life
Keep your head back from your keyboard. Don't want to short out your computer should this video hit you in the tear ducts.
Keep your head back from your keyboard. Don't want to short out your computer should this video hit you in the tear ducts.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
PRO-LIFE CLUB SUES CARLETON UNIVERSITY
Carleton Lifeline Seeks Restitution
The young are leading the Pro-Life fight. Just see my earlier article where Lila Rose is highlighted, and now this. The Pro-Life group at Carleton University is not taking it anymore, and good for them. Bullies have to be swatted down hard.
Here is a press release from them:
The young are leading the Pro-Life fight. Just see my earlier article where Lila Rose is highlighted, and now this. The Pro-Life group at Carleton University is not taking it anymore, and good for them. Bullies have to be swatted down hard.
Here is a press release from them:
Carleton Lifeline, the pro-life club at Carleton University, has sued the University and its administration for the discriminatory treatment they have been subjected to during the 2010-2011 academic school year.
“We believe that the behaviour of the University is actionable. We have suffered discrimination and intimidation, we have been arrested and threatened and we are seeking restitution”, said Ruth Lobo, President of Carleton Lifeline. “The University’s discriminatory actions are shocking, to say the least. We want to ensure, through law, that this behaviour is not repeated at Carleton University ever again.”
Lifeline is asking the Court to declare that Carleton University and its administration have breached their own internal policies regarding freedom of expression, academic freedom and discrimination. As such, Lifeline is also requesting that the University is ordered to comply with these internal policies.
On October 4, 2010, Carleton University had members of Lifeline handcuffed, arrested, charged and fined with trespassing for attempting to display an exhibit that the University administration deemed disturbing and offensive due to the graphic nature of the display. In November 2010, Carleton University’s administration provided Lifeline with an ultimatum regarding the expression of their opinions and threatened further arrests.
“Carleton University has allowed other exhibits using graphic images on campus” commented Albertos Polizogopoulos, Carleton Lifeline’s lawyer. “Clearly the University opposes Lifeline’s message and not its medium. This is censorship and viewpoint discrimination and it violates Carleton University’s internal policies."
To view a copy of the Statement of Claim, please visit http://www.carletonlifeline.wordpress.com/
For more information, please call Carleton Lifeline at 613-600-4791 or Lifeline’s lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos at 613 -241-2701 Ext: 243
The Truth Will Set You Free
Live Action and the Fight to End Abortion
For the past several years, Lila Rose and a committed group of young pro-life advocates have been working to use new and social media to bring the truth of (expose really) Planned Parenthood's practices in abortion out into the open. They have created videos and posted them to raise awareness of what goes on behind closed doors.
These videos have been created by having young people present themselves as underage pregnant girls, as pimps and other sex workers, at many of the PP clinics in the US, where they have produced consistent videos of the actions of staff at these clinics, actions that appear to be highly illegal, and actionable, actions that are meant to further the real aims of PP, or so they must since they are so consistent.
Live Action did not make up the scenarios that they have gone in and presented for the purpose of getting their videos. They have researched the actions of PP, and have been very aware that even when PP has been brought before the courts in particular cases, or sufficient smoke has been raised as to their actions, the Main Stream Media has turned a blind eye to PP and their deeds and misdeeds, and this has gone on for years and years.
And so, Lila Rose and her band of young people have found their voices in alternative media, and their videos of misdeeds have been viewed by many, many people. Eyes are being opened to the evil of abortion as never before.
What has come as a surprise to me is that some in the pro-life movement have spoken against the methods of Live Action. Doctor Peter Kreeft, a noted Catholic writer and teacher has spoken out in support of them here. As he writes, those against the actions of Live Action are dealing more in moral legalism than the truth.
Jesus spoke to us in parables, that were made up stories to prove a point. Were they lies? They certainly were not factually true. Last night millions of North Americans watched NCIS on television. In that series Mark Harmon portrays Jethro Gibbs, an NCIS Special Agent. It is a work of fiction, from beginning to end, like most other shows on television. Yet, we enjoy these shows and do not think of them as lies.
So, why do some of us get indignant when a group of young and very courageous pro-life advocates research scenarios about the actions of PP and then present themselves in similar roles to discern the truth.
Please watch what Glenn Beck reported on his show last week. This YouTube video has been seen by over 20,000 people as of this morning, and deserves to be seen by more.
For the past several years, Lila Rose and a committed group of young pro-life advocates have been working to use new and social media to bring the truth of (expose really) Planned Parenthood's practices in abortion out into the open. They have created videos and posted them to raise awareness of what goes on behind closed doors.
These videos have been created by having young people present themselves as underage pregnant girls, as pimps and other sex workers, at many of the PP clinics in the US, where they have produced consistent videos of the actions of staff at these clinics, actions that appear to be highly illegal, and actionable, actions that are meant to further the real aims of PP, or so they must since they are so consistent.
Live Action did not make up the scenarios that they have gone in and presented for the purpose of getting their videos. They have researched the actions of PP, and have been very aware that even when PP has been brought before the courts in particular cases, or sufficient smoke has been raised as to their actions, the Main Stream Media has turned a blind eye to PP and their deeds and misdeeds, and this has gone on for years and years.
And so, Lila Rose and her band of young people have found their voices in alternative media, and their videos of misdeeds have been viewed by many, many people. Eyes are being opened to the evil of abortion as never before.
What has come as a surprise to me is that some in the pro-life movement have spoken against the methods of Live Action. Doctor Peter Kreeft, a noted Catholic writer and teacher has spoken out in support of them here. As he writes, those against the actions of Live Action are dealing more in moral legalism than the truth.
Jesus spoke to us in parables, that were made up stories to prove a point. Were they lies? They certainly were not factually true. Last night millions of North Americans watched NCIS on television. In that series Mark Harmon portrays Jethro Gibbs, an NCIS Special Agent. It is a work of fiction, from beginning to end, like most other shows on television. Yet, we enjoy these shows and do not think of them as lies.
So, why do some of us get indignant when a group of young and very courageous pro-life advocates research scenarios about the actions of PP and then present themselves in similar roles to discern the truth.
Please watch what Glenn Beck reported on his show last week. This YouTube video has been seen by over 20,000 people as of this morning, and deserves to be seen by more.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Does This Image Offend You? - I Didn't Think So. Me Either
What Makes Us Take Offense?
A while back, I posted an image of an aborted child. It was real and it was graphic, as that child had been torn limb from limb during an abortion, which is what happens in an abortion. It is the taking of an innocent life.
One young woman who I know and respect very much wrote me personally to tell me that the image offended her (as I hoped it might) and explained her reasons for feeling offense. I respect that she had the courage to personally tell me what she felt, rather than trying to carry on as if I never posted it and she never saw it.
We should be offended by that image, though we will be offended for different reasons, but should that image be censored for some reason?
How about this image?
This is an image from the Holocaust, the murder of over 6,000,000 Jews, mainly by the German armed forces during World War II. This is historical fact. It cannot be denied. Many people did terrible things to others whose only sin was being Jewish, which most of us do not know to be a sin. (It isn't, by the way.)
This image is publicly available, and is horrible in what it depicts. Yet, we are not offended by it. And we do not hate German people because of the sins of their fathers. When we see something like this picture, we want to be sure that nothing like it ever happens again. It is almost too horrible to imagine.
But, since Roe v. Wade, and other events that have propelled abortion into the prominence that it now has, we have seen abortion rise to an epidemic. 14,000,000 million American unborn children have been murdered in the last decade, and probably 1,400,000 or so Canadian unborn children.
If the numbers of the unborn who are killed are not staggering on their own, and the images not graphic enough for you and me to scream out that this must stop, what then will it take for us to demand an end to abortion in our countries.
Here is a picture of the man who was most responsible for the murder of 6,000,000 Jews.
Does anybody in their right mind want to praise this man, give him the Order of Canada, or give him accolades? I thought not.
Yet, here is another man, who by fighting for the decriminalization of abortion, and running a series of abortion clinics, has led the charge that has resulted in the taking of the lives of so many unborn Canadian children.
This man, born in Poland 1923, and being Jewish, spent time in his youth, in a prison camp. If any man on earth should know about Holocaust, he should. He has been given the Order of Canada, for his work on behalf of Women.
Do we live in a wacky world or what?
Saturday, January 22, 2011
We Are all Pro-Choice - As For Me, I Choose Life
A recent attempt at debate on abortion over at Father Tim Moyle's Where the Rubber Hits the Road got into semantics as these debates always seem to do. Those who favour a woman having the right to abort her unborn child prefer to call themselves pro-choice, which is at least euphemistically easier to swallow than pro-abortion.
Pro as used in words like pro-choice and pro-life is a prefix that quite simply means "favouring or in support of". No mystery there. Anti on the other hand, which pro-choicers use to attempt to tarnish their adversaries in this debate is a prefix used to mean "opposing, against or the opposite", so in this case, when Pro-choice folks call pro-life folks anti-choice, they mean opposing choice. So, to say that those who are against abortion are anti-choice is at first blush ingenuous, and is meant to be pejorative.
Jared Loughner was pro-choice a few weeks ago here in Tucson, Arizona. He went to a polite political gathering with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and many of her constituents, and firmly expressed his choice that she and several of her supporters did not deserve to continue to live. It was, after all, his choice to believe that. To prove his point, he pulled a Glock 9 gun out and shot Ms. Giffords point blank in the head, and shot an additional 18 other people, 6 of whom died from their wounds. Not one Pro-Choice organisation came out in favour of Jared Loughner's right to choose to shoot those people. Not one. So, those groups calling themselves pro-choice are not pro every choice, just particular choices.
People make choices every day. I chose to drink a cappuchino just a few minutes ago. I might have chosen a chai latte, or a cup of decaf, but, no, I chose a cappuchino. I exercised my right to choose. Yet, those who favour abortion call me anti-choice, because I do not believe that it is a woman's right to impose her will on an unborn child that she helped create, usually complicitly.
In the debate that waged over at Father Tim's, those favouring a woman's right to have an abortion were attempting to say that organisations offering abortion as an alternative to a live birth of an unborn child are not really pro-abortion organisations.
They were in particular writing about NARAL. That organisation's official name today is NARAL Pro-Choice America. It's original name when it was established in 1969 was National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws. After Roe v.Wade, it changed its name to National Abortion Rights Action League, then to National Abortion & Reproductive Rights Action League. Finally in 2003, the long form was reduced to the current moniker. In that time, only one major change happened. Where the second "A" in the short form NARAL stood for Abortion early on, it jumped up to the first position in the later names.
One commenter over at Father Tim's blog post, who is pro-choice quoted this from the NARAL web site:
Yes, they have that one sorta right. 1 for 1, except for calling pro-life people anti-choice. Those people who identify with the pro-life cause are FOR all human life from conception to natural death. We cared about Terry Schiavo, when she was killed by her husband removing her feeding and starving her to death. We are against Dr. Death (Jack Kevorkian) and euthanasia. We are against placing a score on a human life that makes it more valuable than another, or less valuable than another human life. We are against a choice that would terminate a human life chemically, surgically or otherwise, and that particularly includes abortion in its many shapes and forms. So I guess it is not really 1 for 1.
So, how about this next piece:
That is a highly charged statement. "Stop at nothing". Really!! Almost to a one, pro-life people are fighting this battle on their knees. The Catholics pray the Rosary, pray prayers of intercession for the babies, their parents, abortion providers, and others caught in this web of deceit. And they do target the doctors, by picketing peacefully in front of their abortion mills, and do so with more vigour during the 40 Days for Life programmes twice a year in most major cities in the US and Canada.
Let's move on to the tactics attributed to those mean anti-choice folks:
Some anti-choicers actually enter restricted zones to tell young women that they are praying for them and to beg them not to abort their unborn child. I'll bet that the truth does intimidate people. It does me, when I am off the reservation.
Here's the next 3:
There is no abortion method that is safe for the unborn child, and the number of cases where unsafe abortion practices are coming to the fore is reprehensible, in light of such a declaration. What particular need do low income women and young women have for abortion? If you keep it zipped up, there is no need for abortion. If you value the child that you created, you do not have a need for abortion either. There is also no evidence to suggest that an abortion protects a woman's health. In fact, the evidence of post abortion mental and physical health issues is heading for an epidemic. See what former abortionist Joy Davis has to say, or read the stories of these other former abortion providers.
How about this one:
Crisis pregnancy centers take in young women and help them to deliver safely the babies that they have in their wombs. These babies are often put up for adoption, though a mother who realizes that she wants to keep her baby is encouraged to do so. How's that for misleading?
This one is actually true:
We of the pro-life belief hold that an infant in the womb is a person from conception, and deserves to have all rights that other persons have. One pundit, who is a Catholic, though one must question his sincerity on this particular point, proclaimed a couple of times on his show that a child in the womb is a "potential human being". A baby in the womb is as much a potential human being as a 2 year old is a potential teenager.
Or this one:
The only distortion of science is by the pro-choice crowd, who keep trying to insist that a baby is not a baby, but fetal tissue, able to be aborted at least until it leaves the womb. That does not even make sense.
This is no surprise and is absolutely true:
Pro-life folks are absolutely in favour of a complete ban on RU 486. Why is pretty simple? RU 486 causes an abortion of a live fetus early in its gestation. By the way, many instances of birth control pills also cause spontaneous abortions, preventing the fetus from implanting.
The last one is pretty rich:
There is no pro-life follower who is interested in denying any woman basic health services, but abortion is not a basic health service. It can easily be argued that abortion is hazardous to a woman's health.
So, NARAL wants you to believe that they are not a pro-abortion organisation. I, for one, do not believe it for an instant. The above from NARAL is all rhetoric and baffle gab, intent on misrepresenting facts to show a false front.
It would be appropriate to read what Abby Johnson, a former abortion clinic director, says on her web site. in her new book "Unplanned," which is available on Amazon or from her web site.
The truth is painful. It usually is, but it sure beats the lies that have been floated to trap women into surrendering the children in their wombs.
Pro as used in words like pro-choice and pro-life is a prefix that quite simply means "favouring or in support of". No mystery there. Anti on the other hand, which pro-choicers use to attempt to tarnish their adversaries in this debate is a prefix used to mean "opposing, against or the opposite", so in this case, when Pro-choice folks call pro-life folks anti-choice, they mean opposing choice. So, to say that those who are against abortion are anti-choice is at first blush ingenuous, and is meant to be pejorative.
Jared Loughner was pro-choice a few weeks ago here in Tucson, Arizona. He went to a polite political gathering with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and many of her constituents, and firmly expressed his choice that she and several of her supporters did not deserve to continue to live. It was, after all, his choice to believe that. To prove his point, he pulled a Glock 9 gun out and shot Ms. Giffords point blank in the head, and shot an additional 18 other people, 6 of whom died from their wounds. Not one Pro-Choice organisation came out in favour of Jared Loughner's right to choose to shoot those people. Not one. So, those groups calling themselves pro-choice are not pro every choice, just particular choices.
People make choices every day. I chose to drink a cappuchino just a few minutes ago. I might have chosen a chai latte, or a cup of decaf, but, no, I chose a cappuchino. I exercised my right to choose. Yet, those who favour abortion call me anti-choice, because I do not believe that it is a woman's right to impose her will on an unborn child that she helped create, usually complicitly.
In the debate that waged over at Father Tim's, those favouring a woman's right to have an abortion were attempting to say that organisations offering abortion as an alternative to a live birth of an unborn child are not really pro-abortion organisations.
They were in particular writing about NARAL. That organisation's official name today is NARAL Pro-Choice America. It's original name when it was established in 1969 was National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws. After Roe v.Wade, it changed its name to National Abortion Rights Action League, then to National Abortion & Reproductive Rights Action League. Finally in 2003, the long form was reduced to the current moniker. In that time, only one major change happened. Where the second "A" in the short form NARAL stood for Abortion early on, it jumped up to the first position in the later names.
One commenter over at Father Tim's blog post, who is pro-choice quoted this from the NARAL web site:
Our SolutionOf course, if there is a solution offered, it is appropriate to know the problem that is being solved, so here it is direct from NARAL's site:
We will always have to fight to keep abortion safe and legal. This means defeating attacks in Congress and in the states.
We also believe in reducing the need for abortion. This means we support improving access to birth control and teaching young people comprehensive sex education.
Finally, we always are sure to separate anti-choice myths from facts.
-NARAL's page on Abortion, 1/20/11 (emphasis added.)
The ProblemSo, this sounds like a lot of rhetoric to me, but let's break it down a little piece by piece, starting with the Problem.
Anti-choice people want to outlaw abortion, regardless of the woman's situation. They will stop at nothing to make it harder for women to access abortion. They even target the doctors who provide abortion care.
Anti-choice people use many of the following tactics to reach their goals:
Violent tactics that intimidate doctors and patients
Bans on safe abortion methods that protect women's health
Restrictions on low-income women's access to abortion and other health care
Dangerous laws that jeopardize young women's health and safety
"Crisis pregnancy centers" that intentionally mislead women
"Personhood" measures that would ban abortion
Distortions of science to instill fear
Restrictions on women's access to RU 486
Refusal clauses that deny women basic health services.
"Anti-choice people want to outlaw abortion, regardless of the woman's situation."
Yes, they have that one sorta right. 1 for 1, except for calling pro-life people anti-choice. Those people who identify with the pro-life cause are FOR all human life from conception to natural death. We cared about Terry Schiavo, when she was killed by her husband removing her feeding and starving her to death. We are against Dr. Death (Jack Kevorkian) and euthanasia. We are against placing a score on a human life that makes it more valuable than another, or less valuable than another human life. We are against a choice that would terminate a human life chemically, surgically or otherwise, and that particularly includes abortion in its many shapes and forms. So I guess it is not really 1 for 1.
So, how about this next piece:
They will stop at nothing to make it harder for women to access abortion. They even target the doctors who provide abortion care.
That is a highly charged statement. "Stop at nothing". Really!! Almost to a one, pro-life people are fighting this battle on their knees. The Catholics pray the Rosary, pray prayers of intercession for the babies, their parents, abortion providers, and others caught in this web of deceit. And they do target the doctors, by picketing peacefully in front of their abortion mills, and do so with more vigour during the 40 Days for Life programmes twice a year in most major cities in the US and Canada.
Let's move on to the tactics attributed to those mean anti-choice folks:
Violent tactics that intimidate doctors and patients
Some anti-choicers actually enter restricted zones to tell young women that they are praying for them and to beg them not to abort their unborn child. I'll bet that the truth does intimidate people. It does me, when I am off the reservation.
Here's the next 3:
Bans on safe abortion methods that protect women's health
Restrictions on low-income women's access to abortion and other health care
Dangerous laws that jeopardize young women's health and safety
There is no abortion method that is safe for the unborn child, and the number of cases where unsafe abortion practices are coming to the fore is reprehensible, in light of such a declaration. What particular need do low income women and young women have for abortion? If you keep it zipped up, there is no need for abortion. If you value the child that you created, you do not have a need for abortion either. There is also no evidence to suggest that an abortion protects a woman's health. In fact, the evidence of post abortion mental and physical health issues is heading for an epidemic. See what former abortionist Joy Davis has to say, or read the stories of these other former abortion providers.
How about this one:
"Crisis pregnancy centers" that intentionally mislead women
Crisis pregnancy centers take in young women and help them to deliver safely the babies that they have in their wombs. These babies are often put up for adoption, though a mother who realizes that she wants to keep her baby is encouraged to do so. How's that for misleading?
This one is actually true:
"Personhood" measures that would ban abortion
We of the pro-life belief hold that an infant in the womb is a person from conception, and deserves to have all rights that other persons have. One pundit, who is a Catholic, though one must question his sincerity on this particular point, proclaimed a couple of times on his show that a child in the womb is a "potential human being". A baby in the womb is as much a potential human being as a 2 year old is a potential teenager.
Or this one:
Distortions of science to instill fear
The only distortion of science is by the pro-choice crowd, who keep trying to insist that a baby is not a baby, but fetal tissue, able to be aborted at least until it leaves the womb. That does not even make sense.
This is no surprise and is absolutely true:
Restrictions on women's access to RU 486
Pro-life folks are absolutely in favour of a complete ban on RU 486. Why is pretty simple? RU 486 causes an abortion of a live fetus early in its gestation. By the way, many instances of birth control pills also cause spontaneous abortions, preventing the fetus from implanting.
The last one is pretty rich:
Refusal clauses that deny women basic health services
There is no pro-life follower who is interested in denying any woman basic health services, but abortion is not a basic health service. It can easily be argued that abortion is hazardous to a woman's health.
So, NARAL wants you to believe that they are not a pro-abortion organisation. I, for one, do not believe it for an instant. The above from NARAL is all rhetoric and baffle gab, intent on misrepresenting facts to show a false front.
It would be appropriate to read what Abby Johnson, a former abortion clinic director, says on her web site. in her new book "Unplanned," which is available on Amazon or from her web site.
The truth is painful. It usually is, but it sure beats the lies that have been floated to trap women into surrendering the children in their wombs.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
You May Find This Offensive
Me Too
This is the picture of an aborted baby. You can call it tissue, a fetus, a blob, or whatever you like, to salve your own conscience, but this is a picture of an unborn child that someone did not want, and so they killed him.
Tonight, you will watch NCIS on TV, and see someone murdered, and then the story of the solving of the murder. The scene of the murder will be pretty graphic, as will the scenes in the autopsy room where Doctor Mallard performs his necropsy. If you watch NCIS Los Angeles after that, there will be a murder there too, or several maybe, and there will be shooting and gore abounding, in the midst of some salving witty repartee, akin to NCIS.
Or maybe you will watch the fights, where there is a possibility that a hockey game will break out. You will see guys crashing each other into the boards or into the net, and you might see a high stick cut someone for several stitches.
Maybe you will stay up and see the news. There you will see gore from tragic traffic accidents, and violence and mayhem from around the world.
None of those things will offend you, though you may "tut tut" for a moment at the senseless violence on the news. Senseless violence in a hockey game, or on a TV serial show is not so tut tutable.
But, you will take offence at the graphic image of a baby who has been aborted by its mother, severed limb from limb by a person claiming to be a doctor, who I always thought was supposed to save lives.
Ever wonder why you find that offensive, but not the other things?
What I find offensive is the lengths that people will take to prevent those who value life from showing these pictures of the worst genocide our society has ever seen to the world, such as recently at Carleton University, latest here, and here.
We cry out over the slaughter of our Jewish brothers and sisters during the second world war, but want to pretend that abortion is a procedure, and that there is not a life at stake (more than one in the long run).
Yes, I take offense too.
This is the picture of an aborted baby. You can call it tissue, a fetus, a blob, or whatever you like, to salve your own conscience, but this is a picture of an unborn child that someone did not want, and so they killed him.
Tonight, you will watch NCIS on TV, and see someone murdered, and then the story of the solving of the murder. The scene of the murder will be pretty graphic, as will the scenes in the autopsy room where Doctor Mallard performs his necropsy. If you watch NCIS Los Angeles after that, there will be a murder there too, or several maybe, and there will be shooting and gore abounding, in the midst of some salving witty repartee, akin to NCIS.
Or maybe you will watch the fights, where there is a possibility that a hockey game will break out. You will see guys crashing each other into the boards or into the net, and you might see a high stick cut someone for several stitches.
Maybe you will stay up and see the news. There you will see gore from tragic traffic accidents, and violence and mayhem from around the world.
None of those things will offend you, though you may "tut tut" for a moment at the senseless violence on the news. Senseless violence in a hockey game, or on a TV serial show is not so tut tutable.
But, you will take offence at the graphic image of a baby who has been aborted by its mother, severed limb from limb by a person claiming to be a doctor, who I always thought was supposed to save lives.
Ever wonder why you find that offensive, but not the other things?
What I find offensive is the lengths that people will take to prevent those who value life from showing these pictures of the worst genocide our society has ever seen to the world, such as recently at Carleton University, latest here, and here.
We cry out over the slaughter of our Jewish brothers and sisters during the second world war, but want to pretend that abortion is a procedure, and that there is not a life at stake (more than one in the long run).
Yes, I take offense too.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Greg And Earlene and their Daughter
Abortion Kills and Then It Kills Some More
Here is a video, the story, in brief, of a mother and father who thought their pregnant daughter should have an abortion, so she could get on with her life. Apparently, the best laid plans of mice and men are oft gang aglee.
Where joy was, sadness now lives. Where life reigned, it languishes.
Here is a video, the story, in brief, of a mother and father who thought their pregnant daughter should have an abortion, so she could get on with her life. Apparently, the best laid plans of mice and men are oft gang aglee.
Where joy was, sadness now lives. Where life reigned, it languishes.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Transformational Canadians, ObamaCare and Abortion
I Am Disgusted
In Canada, we have a newspaper, the Globe and Mail, that pretends to speak for all Canadians. As newspapers go, it probably is up there. But, remember that it is a newspaper, and print mainstream media is dying a natural death, or so we can hope. When I saw one particular article recently, I realised why many Canadians call it the Grope and Flail.
The Globe, with its partners in this endeavour, is seeking nominations for 25 Transformational Canadians. They are defining them as:
We can remain hopeful that there will be a hue and cry about this nomination, though the award he is nominated for is meaningless, and I would not have been aware of it had not an American Internet friend brought it to my attention. There are a few real transformers in the list of nominees though such as Craig and Marc Keilburger of Me to We, and so we might also hold out hope that this meaningless award will at least be given to people who have done good with the gifts they have been given.
The Globe wrote him up the other day like he was a conquering hero, not the mass murderer and conspirator in the mass murder of our unborn children and grandchildren that he is. Yes, he himself is a holocaust survivor, though he survived to champion a holocaust that makes the one he survived pale by comparison.
Here is the introduction to the laudatory article:
We, of course, hope that the aborted unborn enjoy the Beatific Vision, and that their parents, and those involved in this heinous business, and those who stand by idly will be drawn to conversion of hearts and minds, and one day enjoy it too.
Warning to our American friends. Don't think for a moment that Obama Care will not produce similar results. In fact, this video might give you pause, as to how soon federally funded abortion will be happening in your land of the free and home of the brave, but not of the unborn.
So, what are we to do? Here in Canada, we can ignore the meaningless award should Dr. Morgentaler be one of its recipients, and cluck our way to indignation. Really, this potential award pales when compared to him having received already the Order of Canada, Canada's highest civilian honour in 2008. A few Canadians displayed outrage at the OofC award for Dr. M., and another 10 previous recipients of the award returned their OofC's in protest.
Here is my greatest concern as voiced by Mother Theresa many years ago:
This dear reader is a spiritual battle, more than it is a physical battle, and as long as we have breath, we must pray for the unborn, and for those involved in the destruction of their lives, for it not only destroys their lives, but the lives of us all.
Dear Lord, we trust in Your Love for all of your children, including the unborn and their parents, and those who would do them harm, or stand idly by while harm is done. We beg of you to cause this travesty to Your Sacred Heart to be brought to an end, and that we would all seek Your Face, and Your Mercy.
In Canada, we have a newspaper, the Globe and Mail, that pretends to speak for all Canadians. As newspapers go, it probably is up there. But, remember that it is a newspaper, and print mainstream media is dying a natural death, or so we can hope. When I saw one particular article recently, I realised why many Canadians call it the Grope and Flail.
The Globe, with its partners in this endeavour, is seeking nominations for 25 Transformational Canadians. They are defining them as:
...25 living citizens who have made a difference by immeasurably improving the lives of others. Readers were invited to nominate Canadians who fit this description. Over several weeks, a panel of six judges will select 25 Transformational Canadians from among the nominees.One of the nominees is Dr. Henry Morgentaler, the 87 year old abortionist and figurehead of the death to the unborn crowd. Dr. M. is alleged to have improved the lives of others. They say he fought tirelessly to decriminalize abortion, like it's a good thing. Since the unborn don't have a say, and since those thousands of women who have lost their dignity by disposing of their unborn children are too traumatized to speak out, or have consumed the Kool Aid, there is a distinct possibility that Dr. Morgentaler will be left standing at the end of the process.
We can remain hopeful that there will be a hue and cry about this nomination, though the award he is nominated for is meaningless, and I would not have been aware of it had not an American Internet friend brought it to my attention. There are a few real transformers in the list of nominees though such as Craig and Marc Keilburger of Me to We, and so we might also hold out hope that this meaningless award will at least be given to people who have done good with the gifts they have been given.
The Globe wrote him up the other day like he was a conquering hero, not the mass murderer and conspirator in the mass murder of our unborn children and grandchildren that he is. Yes, he himself is a holocaust survivor, though he survived to champion a holocaust that makes the one he survived pale by comparison.
Here is the introduction to the laudatory article:
In Canada, a woman can have an abortion without fear of prosecution or imprisonment – for the simple reason that there is no abortion law. For more than 20 years, that state of affairs has set us apart from the rest of the developed world. Canadian women enjoy the right to safe and legal abortions largely because Henry Morgentaler fought a long battle on their behalf.Yes, Canada has no laws against abortion, and so it is a free for all, where we the taxpayer get to pay for this "procedure". Dr. Morgentaler is responsible in some way for this. It was the case against him that in 1984 was used by the Supreme Court of Canada to strike down protection for the unborn. So, Canadian women ENJOY the right to safe and legal government funded abortions, while their unborn children do not enjoy anything here on earth, and do not have similar rights, or any rights for that matter.
We, of course, hope that the aborted unborn enjoy the Beatific Vision, and that their parents, and those involved in this heinous business, and those who stand by idly will be drawn to conversion of hearts and minds, and one day enjoy it too.
Warning to our American friends. Don't think for a moment that Obama Care will not produce similar results. In fact, this video might give you pause, as to how soon federally funded abortion will be happening in your land of the free and home of the brave, but not of the unborn.
So, what are we to do? Here in Canada, we can ignore the meaningless award should Dr. Morgentaler be one of its recipients, and cluck our way to indignation. Really, this potential award pales when compared to him having received already the Order of Canada, Canada's highest civilian honour in 2008. A few Canadians displayed outrage at the OofC award for Dr. M., and another 10 previous recipients of the award returned their OofC's in protest.
Here is my greatest concern as voiced by Mother Theresa many years ago:
Mother Teresa said, "What is taking place in America is a war against the child. And if we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
This dear reader is a spiritual battle, more than it is a physical battle, and as long as we have breath, we must pray for the unborn, and for those involved in the destruction of their lives, for it not only destroys their lives, but the lives of us all.
Dear Lord, we trust in Your Love for all of your children, including the unborn and their parents, and those who would do them harm, or stand idly by while harm is done. We beg of you to cause this travesty to Your Sacred Heart to be brought to an end, and that we would all seek Your Face, and Your Mercy.
Stop Fetal Abuse
Seize the Day with Gus Lloyd
Gus Lloyd is a radio announcer, among other things Catholic, on XM Radio's Catholic Channel on Channel 117 of that Service. It is also available on Sirius Radio at Channel 159.
I have lived all my life without satellite radio, and never figured to need it, want it, or to listen to it if I could. My stepson put a receiver in his car a few years ago, and raved about it. That did not convince me. But, about two months ago, we purchased a new Honda Accord, and there, built in, was XM Radio. My initial thought was that I would never listen to it, but then My Dear Wife discovered the 60's channel, which played 24 hours a day of 60's music. That started to reel me in.
Soon I discovered the Catholic Channel, and while I was alone in Tucson for a few weeks, I played only Channel 117. I love satellite radio, and I love the Catholic Channel. It is good from beginning to end, but my favourite radio personality is Gus Lloyd, and his take on that faith that sustains those of us who profess to be Catholic Christians.
Yesterday, he was speaking about a conference call that was led by the Assistant Secretary of Education about bullying in American schools. During the call, the AS (for Republican supporters, that one S is not a typo) spoke of the intention of the Department of Education to take a firmer stand on bullying in the schools, and stated that his Department would look to pull funding of boards and schools that appeared to tolerate bullying in any form.
This led the Spirit filled Mr. Lloyd to ponder on the issue of bullying, and he came to a revelation that there is an instance of bullying that has gone unchecked in America, and sadly in Canada, and many other nations as well. That bullying is of the unborn child, who can be torn from his/her mother's womb at any time, with no recourse to the Department of Education, Department of Health, or to anybody but Our Saviour, who I assure you is not amused.
So, he came up with a slogan "Stop Fetal Bullying." I fully support this and intend to flesh it out myself in the future. For the moment, I leave it for you to ponder as Gus is doing, and as am I. But let me leave you also with a modified version of an old saying we knew in grade school:
Gus Lloyd is a radio announcer, among other things Catholic, on XM Radio's Catholic Channel on Channel 117 of that Service. It is also available on Sirius Radio at Channel 159.
I have lived all my life without satellite radio, and never figured to need it, want it, or to listen to it if I could. My stepson put a receiver in his car a few years ago, and raved about it. That did not convince me. But, about two months ago, we purchased a new Honda Accord, and there, built in, was XM Radio. My initial thought was that I would never listen to it, but then My Dear Wife discovered the 60's channel, which played 24 hours a day of 60's music. That started to reel me in.
Soon I discovered the Catholic Channel, and while I was alone in Tucson for a few weeks, I played only Channel 117. I love satellite radio, and I love the Catholic Channel. It is good from beginning to end, but my favourite radio personality is Gus Lloyd, and his take on that faith that sustains those of us who profess to be Catholic Christians.
Yesterday, he was speaking about a conference call that was led by the Assistant Secretary of Education about bullying in American schools. During the call, the AS (for Republican supporters, that one S is not a typo) spoke of the intention of the Department of Education to take a firmer stand on bullying in the schools, and stated that his Department would look to pull funding of boards and schools that appeared to tolerate bullying in any form.
This led the Spirit filled Mr. Lloyd to ponder on the issue of bullying, and he came to a revelation that there is an instance of bullying that has gone unchecked in America, and sadly in Canada, and many other nations as well. That bullying is of the unborn child, who can be torn from his/her mother's womb at any time, with no recourse to the Department of Education, Department of Health, or to anybody but Our Saviour, who I assure you is not amused.
So, he came up with a slogan "Stop Fetal Bullying." I fully support this and intend to flesh it out myself in the future. For the moment, I leave it for you to ponder as Gus is doing, and as am I. But let me leave you also with a modified version of an old saying we knew in grade school:
Sticks and stones may break my bones,
But, saline and suction will kill me.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Let Me Live
David Parkes
On Father Tommy Lane's web site, came a link to this song, which he gave with permission from Jim and Margaret Byrne of Navan, in County Meath, Ireland, who wrote the lyrics and music and own the copyright. It is in the middle of the page linked above.
It is sung by David Parkes, and is a pro-life song sung by a baby who is about to be aborted, asking us to PLEASE LET ME LIVE. I have reproduced the lyrics below, but have linked to a video of Mr. Parkes singing it, and explaining what it means to him.
There will be no dawn or sunset for this child to see,
For today his short existence will have ceasd to be.
Unborn, unknown, and undefended,
For it has been decided that his life should be ended.
But, in my dreams I can hear him say:
Please let me live. Please let me stay.
Maybe I'll have eyes of blue and hair of gold so softly curled.
Maybe I could look like you. Please let me see this great big world.
Maybe I'm a little boy, with laughing eyes and tears of joy,
Someone who'll be there to smile, when you can say: "Twas all worthwhile."
Please let me live to share with you
Be there with you when sorrow comes.
Please let me live to cry with you,
For all of us tomorrow comes.
Maybe I could be a king,
To save the world from greater sin.
Do you think I'm just a friend?
To die for you, is this the end?
Lonely beats this heart of mine.
but sure we'll meet somewhere, sometime.
Thought perhaps you'd say hello
I know you'll never let me go.
Please let me live to share with you.
Be there with you when sorrow comes.
Please let me live to laugh with you,
For all of us tomorrow comes.
Please let me live to share with you.
Be there with you when sorrow comes.
Please let me live to laugh with you,
For all of us tomorrow comes.
On Father Tommy Lane's web site, came a link to this song, which he gave with permission from Jim and Margaret Byrne of Navan, in County Meath, Ireland, who wrote the lyrics and music and own the copyright. It is in the middle of the page linked above.
It is sung by David Parkes, and is a pro-life song sung by a baby who is about to be aborted, asking us to PLEASE LET ME LIVE. I have reproduced the lyrics below, but have linked to a video of Mr. Parkes singing it, and explaining what it means to him.
There will be no dawn or sunset for this child to see,
For today his short existence will have ceasd to be.
Unborn, unknown, and undefended,
For it has been decided that his life should be ended.
But, in my dreams I can hear him say:
Please let me live. Please let me stay.
Maybe I'll have eyes of blue and hair of gold so softly curled.
Maybe I could look like you. Please let me see this great big world.
Maybe I'm a little boy, with laughing eyes and tears of joy,
Someone who'll be there to smile, when you can say: "Twas all worthwhile."
Please let me live to share with you
Be there with you when sorrow comes.
Please let me live to cry with you,
For all of us tomorrow comes.
Maybe I could be a king,
To save the world from greater sin.
Do you think I'm just a friend?
To die for you, is this the end?
Lonely beats this heart of mine.
but sure we'll meet somewhere, sometime.
Thought perhaps you'd say hello
I know you'll never let me go.
Please let me live to share with you.
Be there with you when sorrow comes.
Please let me live to laugh with you,
For all of us tomorrow comes.
Please let me live to share with you.
Be there with you when sorrow comes.
Please let me live to laugh with you,
For all of us tomorrow comes.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
WAKE UP
Women Against the Killing and Exploitation of Unprotected Persons
If the video below does not bring you to tears or touch your heart, then I urge you to get a new heart.
Missy Smith and 4 friends created an organisation called WAKEUP - Women Against the Killing and Exploitation of Unprotected Persons. Her own testimony of how abortion touched her personally is mentioned in the video below, but is available in more detail on the web site here.
The focus of the video itself is the shocking selling of the body parts of aborted babies, a quiet industry that obviously must believe that these are real persons, if they are in need of these body parts.
Her testimony touches on something very important for the many, many women who have had abortions and for the men who have forced them, coerced them, pushed them to have abortions, or who have stood by seemingly helpless to save the life of their unborn child. There is healing for those abortive parents, through the blood and love of Jesus Christ. Though Missy herself will always carry the memory of her abortion of her unborn children, God is having her circumstances turn to good, as she trusts in Him.
Sacred Heart of Jesus, I trust in your love for all those involved in WAKE UP. Sacred Heart of Jesus, fill them with your blood. Mother Mary, surround them with your mantle of protection and frustrate the powers of Satan. St. Michael and their guardian angels, come defend them in the battles that they encounter against Satan and the powers and forces darkness.
If the video below does not bring you to tears or touch your heart, then I urge you to get a new heart.
Missy Smith and 4 friends created an organisation called WAKEUP - Women Against the Killing and Exploitation of Unprotected Persons. Her own testimony of how abortion touched her personally is mentioned in the video below, but is available in more detail on the web site here.
The focus of the video itself is the shocking selling of the body parts of aborted babies, a quiet industry that obviously must believe that these are real persons, if they are in need of these body parts.
Her testimony touches on something very important for the many, many women who have had abortions and for the men who have forced them, coerced them, pushed them to have abortions, or who have stood by seemingly helpless to save the life of their unborn child. There is healing for those abortive parents, through the blood and love of Jesus Christ. Though Missy herself will always carry the memory of her abortion of her unborn children, God is having her circumstances turn to good, as she trusts in Him.
Sacred Heart of Jesus, I trust in your love for all those involved in WAKE UP. Sacred Heart of Jesus, fill them with your blood. Mother Mary, surround them with your mantle of protection and frustrate the powers of Satan. St. Michael and their guardian angels, come defend them in the battles that they encounter against Satan and the powers and forces darkness.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Melanie Pritchard - A Miracle in the Works
h/t My Chocolate Heart
When a Pro-life Heroine gave birth this past Thursday, she almost passed away as a result. This created a groundswell of prayer support for her and for her family, and today, Melanie Pritchard lives, back from the edge of death.
Catholic Online has a report from her friend Mark Henry, a frequent writer at CO, about this. Is it a miracle? As Mr. Henry notes, it is not for him to say, but it sure does look like it.
It looks like it to me too, because our God tends to do things up right, and sometimes in a very big way. As a result of the request for prayers, there is evidence that some folks are returning to the practice of the faith, and that those directly involved have been girded up by the prayers around the world that have been lifted to the heavens for them and particularly for Melanie.
When a Pro-life Heroine gave birth this past Thursday, she almost passed away as a result. This created a groundswell of prayer support for her and for her family, and today, Melanie Pritchard lives, back from the edge of death.
Catholic Online has a report from her friend Mark Henry, a frequent writer at CO, about this. Is it a miracle? As Mr. Henry notes, it is not for him to say, but it sure does look like it.
It looks like it to me too, because our God tends to do things up right, and sometimes in a very big way. As a result of the request for prayers, there is evidence that some folks are returning to the practice of the faith, and that those directly involved have been girded up by the prayers around the world that have been lifted to the heavens for them and particularly for Melanie.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Linda Gibbons - A Real Pro-Life Hero
H/t Big Blue Wave and Socon or Bust
Linda Gibbons. Remember that name. She is a pro-life heroine, and I am ashamed to say that until yesterday I had never heard of her. This woman goes to jail regularly because she believes in the sanctity of life. Makes her a hero for the unborn in my book, and that of many others.
Linda Gibbons. Remember that name. She is a pro-life heroine, and I am ashamed to say that until yesterday I had never heard of her. This woman goes to jail regularly because she believes in the sanctity of life. Makes her a hero for the unborn in my book, and that of many others.
Karla Holmolka is Canada's most notorious female criminal. The crimes she committed could only be described as heinous. She was incarcerated in 1995, and released in 2005, serving ten years of jail time. Ten years for the brutal slaying of three innocent girls.
Linda Gibbons has been in and out of jail for the past fifteen years. When you add it up, her jail time totals over seven years now. This last session has been a long one, with Linda in jail for over 570 consecutive days. So, what is Linda's grave crime?
Linda is guilty of praying in front of abortion clinics and for offering counsel to the women who are about to undergo an abortion. Many of you will be astounded to learn that this is a crime in Canada. But it is the truth.
In 1994, Ontario NDP Premier Bob Rae and Attorney General Marion Boyd decided to clamp down on pro-life picketing by passing an injunction that would not allow pro-life people inside a 60 foot "bubble zone" around specific abortion clinics in Ontario. It was no secret that Bob Rae's NDP government of the day was adamantly pro-abortion.
Pro-lifers were upset by the injunction. They felt duty-bound to attempt to counsel women to reconsider their decision to abort. Pro-lifers wanted to be present outside the abortion clinics, to be a prayerful and peaceful presence. The injunction forced pro-lifers across the street from the clinics, where they were virtually ineffective.
Linda Gibbons believes that she must answer to a higher authority than the provincial government when it comes to the issue of abortion. She thinks the legislation is shortsighted, as it does not allow women the opportunity for last minute assistance and it does not allow pro-lifers the opportunity to offer that assistance.
Linda is not willing to stand, ineffectively, across the street from the abortuary. Furthermore, she believes that sidewalks are public space.
And so, Linda's epic battle against the provincial government of Ontario began on September 2, 1994 when she was first arrested for violating the bubble zone injunction. Linda has been arrested many times in the intervening fifteen years. She refuses to sign the conditions that will allow her bail, i.e. not to appear within the bubble zone. She does her jail time, and then goes back to the streets to continue her pro-life efforts.
Many of you will wonder what motivates Linda. Many of you will think her actions are futile. Or foolish.
She calls it a "street ministry" and firmly believes that "we need to maintain our witness in front of abortuaries." Linda's guide is her bible, which clearly states, "We ought to obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29) Through all her jail time, Linda's bible has been her support and comfort. She has also been sustained by the outpouring of mail that she receives daily, from around the world.
Linda does not hide the fact that her own life was touched by abortion. She wants to spare women and men the pain that she experienced. The guilt that she feels because of her abortion motivates her to help others. She stands outside the abortion clinic, and offers to talk to the women going in. No hard sell and no heckling. Her manner is prayerful and peaceful.
But it is not lawful for Linda Gibbons to stand on the sidewalk and offer comfort, and so she is quickly re-arrested and returned to jail.
Slowly but surely, Linda's plight is gaining public attention. Mainstream media have no ink to spare for a simple grandmother who refuses to accept the legality of a 1994 provincial injunction. Unless it’s from a “pro-choice” perspective, abortion is not a story that the mainstream media likes to visit anyway. But Linda's persistence and perseverance are so extraordinary, that the story is gaining ground. Pro-life blogs mention her name frequently, and her story appeared, albeit briefly, in a recent National Post article.
Not many of us would be willing to go to jail to maintain our personal principles. Linda Gibbons is putting her pro-life beliefs on the line, willing to do serious jail time. Many consider Linda to be a pro-life heroine, a prisoner of conscience. REAL Women agrees with them.
To send a note of encouragement to Linda Gibbons, write:
Vanier Center for Women,
655 Martin Street, Box 1040,
Milton, ON, L9T 5E6
Saturday, June 12, 2010
A Woman Doesn't Have a "Right to Choose"
Thoughtcrime of the Day
Over at Orwell's Picnic, Hilary Jane Margaret White has this to say about the Pro-Choice sloganeering. Pur your thinking caps on dear readers, and have at it. Go Hilary!!
Over at Orwell's Picnic, Hilary Jane Margaret White has this to say about the Pro-Choice sloganeering. Pur your thinking caps on dear readers, and have at it. Go Hilary!!
because there is no such thing.
Here's a new series.
Pro-Life 101: abortion slogans debunked.
"She had not a thought in her head that was not a slogan, and there was no imbecility, absolutely none, that she was not capable of swallowing if the Party handed it out to her."
Orwell, 1984.
For a brief time a few years ago, I gave talks to students in Catholic schools about the life issues. It was fun, sometimes. One of the things I did was to ask them to tell me what they heard in the media or wherever, about abortion. What is the first, the very first thing that pops into people's heads when they hear about abortion in the news or in movies or TV?
It was always interesting to see that, like everyone else, they had heard all the slogans and more or less accepted them, but never actually thought about what they meant. Very often, the kids would have their eyes opened after we had taken a closer look. I think it helped them think more clearly about other things too.
The first one they invariably came up with was the old "right to choose" chestnut, which while being the most pervasive, is probably the easiest one to knock down.
I used to explain this to students: it's simple grammar. You don't even have to get into discussing rights or medicine or law. The slogan itself doesn't make sense grammatically.
"Choose" is a transitive verb, which (...I then invariably had to explain...) means it requires an object. There are two kinds of verbs; transitive and intransitive.
You can't just "choose" in the same way you can just run, or work or cook. You have to choose a particular thing. There has to be an object. You choose a career. You choose a husband. You choose a colour for your bathroom. You choose things all the time. But you don't, and can't, just choose.
So whether you have a "right" to choose something, depends entirely upon what the thing, the missing object of the slogan, is.
The sloganeers were pretty clever with this one because it sounds good. Of course you have a right to choose which university to attend. You have a right to vote (unfortunately). You have all kinds of natural rights to choose things. What the Newspeakers have done with this slogan, by knocking the object off the sentence, is to imply that anyone who opposes them is trying to take all rights of choice away from women.
Gramatically, "A woman has a right to choose," means that she has a right to choose absolutely anything. It is a statement of total solipsistic license and as such, is more or less the operating principle of The New Society we, or I should say our parents and grandparents, launched in the 1960s.
This little manifesto of the New World came from the website of an artist and more or less sums up the whole package:
The “right to choose’ means women control our own bodies. We will decide to have a baby or not–even if we’re young, single, or poor! To really “choose” we need abortion services, health care, and child care! Many states have Parental Notification laws. They try to stop teens from having abortions by making us tell our parents first. What’s up with that? Teen sex is healthy and natural. We need birth control and safe sex information. We demand health care and child care for teen moms. Abortion must be safe, legal, and affordable for women of all ages. Fight to keep abortion legal! Not all women think abortion is cool for themselves, but all women have the right to make their own choice.
Do your own thing, man. Groovy.
And more to the point, shout down, bully, and silence anyone who tries to tell you different.
We have been so programmed in the last 50 years to think only of our rights and freedoms (licenses) that the idea of someone opposing the total liberty to do anything and everything one wants all the time is utterly anathema. In the all-or-nothing new world any restriction on any action is an affront. Anyone making a such a suggestion must simply be beyond the realm of rationality and can be instantly dismissed as either a crank with severe mental problems or as an evil megalomaniac bent on destroying everyone's fun.
I recommended to the kids that any time they heard anyone repeating this slogan they should ask "choose what?"
Orwell taught us that slogans work not by giving information but by taking it away. A slogan is not an expression of an idea but a noise meant, with a certain amount of training, to elicit a powerful emotional response either of outrage or shame. A response strong enough to overwhelm rational thought. A person who opposes the sloganeer is supposed to be cowed with shame at his opposition, as many people were who did not agree with the legalisation of abortion.
Believe it or not, I have heard a lot of pro-life people (or perhaps simply people who are generally afraid of rocking the boat in either direction,) say "How can we oppose women's rights?" This is the response of shame that prompts the weasel position, "I don't like abortion but I wouldn't impose my opinion on anyone else." (This, btw, leads directly to the Stockholm Syndrome Pro-lifer of which I have written extensively elsewhere. It turns you into a turncoat, but more on that later.)
An effective slogan is not meant to arouse discussion, but to squash it. It is not meant to be analysed or discussed. It is meant for one thing alone: to whip up a mob. And on abortion, (as well as so many other things) the mob won.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Authentic Christianity
Compare the Two Accounts Below
First from Catholic Online, via LifeSiteNews, is the brief story of Deacon Paul Schenk, born a Reformed Jew, converted to Christianity, ordained an Epicopalian Minister, then converted to Roman Catholicism, within Christianity, and then last year ordained a transitional deacon on the way to this year's ordination into the Catholic priesthood. Oh, and by the way, this man is a real pro-life hero, having been the co-founder of Operation Rescue, and is also founder and chairman of the National Pro-Life Action Center in Washington, DC. Busy man! But not too busy to give all glory and honour to God, and to seek Him in the Catholic Church.
Though it is filled with factual errors, consistent with the agenda of its author, to save Catholics from the Whore of Babylon, the Roman Catholic Church, it has remained in circulation. Regrettably, many former Catholics "have seen the light" and adopted it holus bolus, since it works with their interpretation of sacred scripture.
However, it does not bear any similiarity in its alleged dissection of the Catholic faith to the truth, and has been refuted by too many Catholic apologists to name. A short list of appropriate apolagetics resources would include Karl Keating's web site, Catholic Answers, as well as his scholarly Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" written in 1988, John Salza's 2005 book, The Biblical Basis for the Catholic Faith, as well as his web site, Scripture Catholic. Of course Messrs. Keating and Salza are both cradle Catholics, and so they might be refuted as indoctrinated into the Whore of Babylon by those fundamentalists who like to spew this stuff.
If so, then maybe a better example of Catholic Apologetics is the 1993 by Scott and Kimberley Hahn entitled Rome Sweet Home, about their journey to the Catholic Church from pretty serious fundamentalism.
Deacon Paul Schenck's journey of faith inspires me to live my faith and to grow in my faith. The commenter over at WTRHTR, not so much.
Lord, please save me from those who would save me from the Church that you founded here on earth. Continue to feed me with the Eucharistic meal of your body and blood, and fill me more and more with your Holy Spirit.
First from Catholic Online, via LifeSiteNews, is the brief story of Deacon Paul Schenk, born a Reformed Jew, converted to Christianity, ordained an Epicopalian Minister, then converted to Roman Catholicism, within Christianity, and then last year ordained a transitional deacon on the way to this year's ordination into the Catholic priesthood. Oh, and by the way, this man is a real pro-life hero, having been the co-founder of Operation Rescue, and is also founder and chairman of the National Pro-Life Action Center in Washington, DC. Busy man! But not too busy to give all glory and honour to God, and to seek Him in the Catholic Church.
WASHINGTON, DC (LifeSiteNews.com) - Following a journey from Reform Judaism through the Episcopal Church, pro-life hero Deacon Paul Schenck, who was involved in founding Operation Rescue, is soon to be ordained a Catholic priest.
"I consider the most important pro-life battlefield to be religious indifference," he told LifeSiteNews. "I hope that as a Catholic priest, I'll help to awaken Catholics and all people of conscience from the slumber of indifference to authentic concern and effort to defend innocent lives."
Together with his brother Robert, Schenck was raised as a Reform Jew on Grand Island, New York. Both brothers converted to Christianity in 1974, when Paul was 16.
In addition to his involvement in founding Operation Rescue, Schenck has been arrested multiple times for his pro-life activities. He was also the lead plaintiff in the landmark case Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York in 1997.
This case found that the 15-foot "floating buffer zones" indiscriminately applied to all clients and vehicles entering abortion facility property were an unconstitutional violation of freedom of speech. The court ruled that such "zones would restrict the speech of those who simply line the sidewalk or curb in an effort to chant, shout, or hold signs peacefully." The same case found, however, that fixed buffer zones were constitutional.
Schenck is founder and chairman of the National Pro-Life Action Center in Washington, DC.
He became a minister of the Reformed Episcopal Church before converting to Catholicism in 2004 with his family.
"The pro-life movement drew me toward reunion with the Catholic Church," he told. "I saw that coherent moral theology, Christian unity and spiritual authority were essential to success."
He continued: "Most people believe in God, most of them believe God gave them their lives, and most believe taking an innocent life is morally wrong. But most are indifferent towards the victims of abortion."
"If most Catholics, most Christians and most believers of any type overcame their indifference and personally opposed killing innocents by abortion, the struggle for the right to life would be won."
As a transitional deacon in the diocese of Harrisburg, he has acted as director of the Respect Life Office, and conducts pro-life ministry in Annapolis and throughout the country.
"I'm blessed beyond expression by this generous and gratuitous privilege of being ordained a priest, an 'alter Christi' [another Christ]" he told LSN.
He will be ordained on June 12 at 10:00am in St. Joseph's Church at 2935 Kingston Road, York, Pennsylvania 17402.Second, over at Where the Rubber Meets the Road, a well meaning findamentalist commenter to Father Tim Moyle's thoughtful blog, claiming to be a reformed ex-Catholic had this to say after Father Tim returned from a fishing vacation with two of his Protestant minister buddies the other day.
- - -
LifeSiteNews.com is a non-profit Internet service dedicated to issues of culture, life, and family. It was launched in September 1997. LifeSiteNews Daily News reports and information pages are used by numerous organizations and publications, educators, professionals and political, religious and life and family organization leaders and grassroots people across North America and internationally.
There are many ecumenists in the world who have been deceived by the devil into believing the RC system is actually a true church. Better read Loraine Boettner's book to find out the truth. I wonder where these two Protestant ministers you went fishing with stand. Do they believe the RCC is a true church or do they warn you, with love, about the false church and the false gospel? As they are ministers, one would think they know the truth about the RCC. But in these days of great deception and apostasy on every hand, many ministers you would think otherwise of, are badly deceived themselves and going about deceiving others. Tragic indeed. Who is left contending for the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude)Loraine Boettner, who has been deceased for 20 years, and who we hope and pray is living eternally with Jesus, wrote a book in 1962, which he updated in 1966, and purported by many fundamentalist Christians, to be the anti-Catholic bible, called Roman Catholicism.
Though it is filled with factual errors, consistent with the agenda of its author, to save Catholics from the Whore of Babylon, the Roman Catholic Church, it has remained in circulation. Regrettably, many former Catholics "have seen the light" and adopted it holus bolus, since it works with their interpretation of sacred scripture.
However, it does not bear any similiarity in its alleged dissection of the Catholic faith to the truth, and has been refuted by too many Catholic apologists to name. A short list of appropriate apolagetics resources would include Karl Keating's web site, Catholic Answers, as well as his scholarly Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" written in 1988, John Salza's 2005 book, The Biblical Basis for the Catholic Faith, as well as his web site, Scripture Catholic. Of course Messrs. Keating and Salza are both cradle Catholics, and so they might be refuted as indoctrinated into the Whore of Babylon by those fundamentalists who like to spew this stuff.
If so, then maybe a better example of Catholic Apologetics is the 1993 by Scott and Kimberley Hahn entitled Rome Sweet Home, about their journey to the Catholic Church from pretty serious fundamentalism.
Deacon Paul Schenck's journey of faith inspires me to live my faith and to grow in my faith. The commenter over at WTRHTR, not so much.
Lord, please save me from those who would save me from the Church that you founded here on earth. Continue to feed me with the Eucharistic meal of your body and blood, and fill me more and more with your Holy Spirit.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Father Euteneuer Does Not Believe President Obama
Human Life International President Writes to President
Father Thomas Euteneuer is a pretty sane individual. As President of Human Life International, he firmly believes in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death. It is a Catholic belief, though it is a natural law belief as well.
But here, he takes off on the President in a letter that has nothing to do with the sanctity of life directly, but deals with his opinion of the President's competency relative to recent events. It is interesting reading, and warrants thought.
Father Thomas Euteneuer is a pretty sane individual. As President of Human Life International, he firmly believes in the sanctity of life from conception to natural death. It is a Catholic belief, though it is a natural law belief as well.
But here, he takes off on the President in a letter that has nothing to do with the sanctity of life directly, but deals with his opinion of the President's competency relative to recent events. It is interesting reading, and warrants thought.
Dear President Obama,
Every citizen with a modicum of insight into public affairs would say that America is now at a crossroads of decision about what kind of future we want for our nation - and, by extension, for the rest of the world. Whether we like it or not, you are the one who is designated by a vote of the electorate to lead us in that decision-making process. You have asked for the job, and you have proposed yourself as being competent for it. History will judge your Administration on its own merits when your term is complete, but we, the citizens of this country, must judge it for what we see happening before our very eyes. Quite frankly, the picture isn't pretty, and you haven't earned our respect as a leader.
The reason for this, Mr. President, is that we can't believe what you say, and frankly, what you do is utterly unbelievable at times.
The recent Gulf Coast oil spill disaster is indicative of your utter carelessness with the onerous burden of governance. Not only did you dis the families of the 11 workers killed in the disaster, but you also attended fundraisers in CA, a trip to the golf course and several state parties in the White House during the whole time the Governor of Louisiana has been screaming frantically for your attention. How can you expect us to believe that you were actually "in charge" of handling the disaster? In six weeks we have seen hardly a shred of evidence to convince us of that. A leader who says he is in charge of something and then conducts a systematic campaign of blaming, dodging, obfuscating, ignoring and even now prosecuting the others involved - instead of fixing the problem - will hardly go down in the record books as the savior he proposed himself to be when he was elected. You are the Commander-in-Chief who has gone AWOL on a truly national crisis.
On top of all that, you basically blew off a sacred national holiday, Memorial Day, for the sake of a vacation to gangsterland. That slap in the face to our military men and women was not lost on anyone, nor was the narcissistic disregard for American history or anything other than what fits your extreme political agenda. These are appalling traits for the one who holds the highest political office in our land, and only a fawning and dishonest media allows you to get away with this negligence in office.
Speaking of which, what are we to make of your pathetic excuse for the crime of attempting to bribe Congressman Sestak to bow out of the Senate race against Arlen Specter? Do you really think Americans believe the utterly implausible story about offering him a "non-paying" position on some presidential panel? Your Administration's explanation, issued on the afternoon of a holiday weekend, rings hollow, and everyone knows it. "Hollow" is an adequate word to describe your Administration, your political theatre and your rhetoric. Even some of your staunchest ideological supporters admit that it is getting increasingly hard to believe that you mean anything you say.
In the midst of all this domestic incompetence and dishonesty, we have seen no realistic response to North Korean, Iranian or Turkish aggression on the world scene. Foreign politicians know you are a leftist lightweight, and so we can expect more of the same from the rogue nations of the world, further destabilizing the security of our nation and the world. We have, however, seen you and your inept band of political marauders pander to foreign dictators and exploit the Mexican President to abuse us and our national deliberations on serious issues. We have seen your ideological hacks take over whole industries, plunder the private sector, abuse the good will of states and consume sound American institutions as if they were your enemies and with a ferocity that would befit only those who we would call our true national enemies.
Like the Gulf oil spill, your Administration is out of control, and every day is another step closer to disaster. As the oil continues to pollute, kill and damage the external beauty and economy of a whole region, you and your team are doing the same with the trust of the people who built this great country.
We deserve better, Mr. President, and it's time you start doing your job.
Sincerely,
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer,
President, Human Life International
Friday, June 4, 2010
Abortion Kills
Catholic Insight Online Newsletter - Fr. Alphonse de Valk
This insightful piece arrived in my inbox this morning. It comes from Catholic Insight, a thoughtful publication spearheaded by Fr. Alphonse de Valk. There continues to be a lot of misinformation about abortion and its effects on the mothers, and the obvious effect on the baby. But, there are those in the pro-life movement who are prepared to put their mouth and their money together and speak out about the evil of abortion.
There are human lives involved here, folks. This is not about inconveniences. This is about human beings. God loves each and every one of them.
Newsletter No. 5
June 4, 2010
Dear Friends,
Abortion has suddenly become a hot topic in the Canadian press, not because there is a serious political debate about it, but because certain parties think abortion should be promoted by the G-8 powers meeting in Canada this coming June.
Please remind your friends and acquaintances that abortion has grave physical and mental consequences for those involved, not to mention the deaths of the babies.
The Toronto Star continues its harassment of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. On Saturday, May 22, it published an article entitled, “No new abortion law planned, PM insists.” On Tuesday morning, May 25, it followed up with, “Tories ignore abortion advice” and “Oda won’t comment on CIDA notes.”
In an earlier article, Catholic Insight drew attention to the Star’s recent pre-occupation with abortion (“Anti-life Left panics over pro-life activism” website, May 17; printed edition, June, pp. 9-11). The Star sees abortion as a necessary ingredient for the G-8 maternity welfare policy. Prime Minister Harper does not. He wants to help poor women and their babies with food, milk, water and medical assistance that will aid them to survive the births of their babies and have those babies live, too. The Star wants the overseas advisors in Africa and Asia to advise parents to kill their babies in what it constantly refers to as “safe abortions.”
Canadian Press discovered in January of this year that “briefing papers” from CIDA (the Canadian International Development Agency for International Co-operation) had suggested that “safe abortion services could save numerous lives” (deadly for babies, of course, but presumably “safe” for their mothers). Needless to say, the “experts” of CIDA drew figures out of a hat, such as that “500,000 women die annually during pregnancy.”
Feminists have been doing this for the last five decades. They and pro-abortion journalists like Star columnist James Travers (“Access to safe abortions is an essential of any effective international strategy,” May 24) do not know what they are talking about.
Polling firms like Ipsos Reid suffer from the same problem. They poll people who know nothing about the subject. For most people, abortion is an abstraction. It means nothing. When these firms “poll” Canadians, they present abortion stripped of all reality (no family; no father, brothers and sisters; no mental or physical consequences to the mother; no financial costs to society). Hence to the question: should abortion be permitted? 46 per cent of Canadians easily say, “The government should leave things as they are” (National Post, Saturday, May 22, 2010).
We, however, should raise questions about these “safe” abortions. Are they really safe?
First, go to the statistics on the subject provided by Toronto’s de Veber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research: “The physical and mental consequences of abortion on women’s health.” The original is available from the Institute, 103 Jane Street, Toronto, Website: www.deveber.org. Telephone (416) 256-0555.
It was also reprinted in Catholic Insight, October 2008, pp. 19 and 20 and is on the web at: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+physical+and+mental+consequences+of+abortion+on+women%27s+health-a0187426337.
The following is a summary of the main points, with the technical data about sources omitted.
Suicide
Within 12 months of the abortion or live delivery, Scandinavian women who aborted experienced a suicide rate of 34.9 per 1,000, compared to a suicide rate of 5.9 per 1,000 for women who delivered their babies. This is a suicide rate nearly six times greater.
A similar study in Wales discovered that women who aborted experienced a suicide rate 3.25 times greater.
Another study in the U.S. found a suicide rate 2.6 times greater.
Mental Health
A study sponsored by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario found that after three months, aborted women had a hospitalization rate of 5.2 per thousand for psychiatric problems, compared to a rate of 1.1 per thousand for the control group.
Recently (November 2006), a rigorously neutral study from New Zealand uncovered a strong correlation between induced abortion and subsequent mental health problems. Whether it is major depression, anxiety disorder, suicidal ideation, alcohol dependence, illicit drug dependence or mean number of mental health problems, those who ended their pregnancies by abortion suffered much higher rates of disorder than those who were never pregnant and those who were pregnant but did not abort.
Prematurity
The average is 33 weeks’ gestation among women with previous first-trimester abortions and there is a 267 per cent increased risk of premature delivery among women with previous second-trimester abortions.
Two large multi-centre, case-control studies were conducted in Europe. Both studies revealed that previous induced abortion was associated with increased risk for every preterm delivery.
Prematurity in turn is associated with an enormous increase in the risk of cerebral palsy and other health problems.
Lower fertility after abortion
Women who undergo abortions experience 6 per cent lower fertility than women who do not.
Abortion and STDs
Women with a history of induced abortion were found to be 3.15 times more likely than women without a history of induced abortion to be seropositive for the organism causing pelvic inflammatory disease (PID).
Chlamydia is a major cause of post-abortion PID.
Abortion and breast cancer
Out of 37 studies up to the year 2003 on the link between induced abortion and subsequent breast cancer, 23 of them showed a 30 per cent increased risk of breast cancer among women who experienced induced abortion.
Since 2003, five studies have been published showing no link between abortion and breast cancer. However, these studies are either underpowered or use a control group with the same risk characteristics as the women who have had induced abortion.
The National Cancer Institute denies any link between induced abortion and breast cancer. However, the Institute has itself sponsored two major studies that discovered a 50 and 137 per cent greater risk respectively of breast cancer among women who aborted their pregnancies.
Complication rates
A study conducted by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario shows that after induced abortion, there is a four-time increase in medical admissions and a five-time increase in surgical admissions to hospital.
For a comprehensive examination of these issues, based on over 500 studies, see Elizabeth Ring Cassidy and Ian Gentles, Women's Health after Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence (Toronto: The de Veber Institute for Bioethics, 2nd edition, 2003.) Some of the material above will appear in the forthcoming third edition of the book.
Another source of detailed information can be found at www.abortionfacts.com/effects/effects.asp. It contains a list of various effects on women’s health. One of them, for example, discusses a factual look at the number of maternal deaths that have been reported and the real numbers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)