The second video is the extended version of the investigation:
I thought PP claimed they distanced themselves from the ideas of their racist founder. Apparently this isn't true.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Rick Santorum On Obama
The Elephant in the Room: Obama: A harsh ideologue hidden by a feel-good image
John McCain's campaign and conservative pundits have listed the numerous times in Obama's short Senate career where he sided with the extremes in his party against broadly supported compromises on issues such as immigration, ethics reform, terrorist surveillance and war funding. Fighting on the fringe with a handful of liberals is one thing, but consider his position on an issue that passed both houses of Congress unanimously in 2002.
That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.
The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right" of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn't intruding on Roe v. Wade.
Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.
And this makes Obama worthy of the highest office in the US for what reason? Because he supports infanticide?
Those who can read this, and still vote for him because they believe he's good for the country are either lying to themselves or delusional. To say they're misguided would be dishonest.
John McCain's campaign and conservative pundits have listed the numerous times in Obama's short Senate career where he sided with the extremes in his party against broadly supported compromises on issues such as immigration, ethics reform, terrorist surveillance and war funding. Fighting on the fringe with a handful of liberals is one thing, but consider his position on an issue that passed both houses of Congress unanimously in 2002.
That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.
The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right" of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn't intruding on Roe v. Wade.
Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.
And this makes Obama worthy of the highest office in the US for what reason? Because he supports infanticide?
Those who can read this, and still vote for him because they believe he's good for the country are either lying to themselves or delusional. To say they're misguided would be dishonest.
Pro-Life Leaders Close Out Black History Month With Condemnation of Abortion
Article here
A group of highly touted African-American pro-life leaders closed out Black History Month with a press conference at the Family Research Council headquarters in Washington. The event drew pastors, parents, leaders, and activists from across America to call on abortion advocates to stop preying on the black community.
Notice how this event garnered zero media coverage. Gee, I wonder why?
A group of highly touted African-American pro-life leaders closed out Black History Month with a press conference at the Family Research Council headquarters in Washington. The event drew pastors, parents, leaders, and activists from across America to call on abortion advocates to stop preying on the black community.
Notice how this event garnered zero media coverage. Gee, I wonder why?
Kids Vaccine Linked to Fever, Seizures
Children suffered higher rates of fever-related convulsions when they got a Merck & Co. combination vaccine instead of two separate shots, according to a new study presented Wednesday.
The results prompted a federal advisory panel on vaccines to water down their preference for the combo vaccine ProQuad, which protects against measles, mumps and rubella as well as chickenpox.
In the study of children ages 12 months through 23 months, the rate of seizures was twice as high in toddlers who got ProQuad, compared with those who got one shot for chickenpox and one for the three other diseases.
The risk translates to about one extra case of convulsion for every 2,000 doses of ProQuad given said Dr. Nicola Klein, who lead the federally funded study. She presented the data at a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
The study focused on children who develop fevers and then go into convulsions — an occurrence that frightens parents but usually has no lingering consequences. There were no deaths in the new study.
I'm happy no children died because of this vaccine.
I'm also happy to have family physicians who refuses to push vaccines on us. On the contrary, they strongly recommend against giving dd the boosters that are allegedly required to be "healthy".
As one told me: if you knew what was in the vaccines, you'd faint. I take his word for it. I don't want to know :-(
The results prompted a federal advisory panel on vaccines to water down their preference for the combo vaccine ProQuad, which protects against measles, mumps and rubella as well as chickenpox.
In the study of children ages 12 months through 23 months, the rate of seizures was twice as high in toddlers who got ProQuad, compared with those who got one shot for chickenpox and one for the three other diseases.
The risk translates to about one extra case of convulsion for every 2,000 doses of ProQuad given said Dr. Nicola Klein, who lead the federally funded study. She presented the data at a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
The study focused on children who develop fevers and then go into convulsions — an occurrence that frightens parents but usually has no lingering consequences. There were no deaths in the new study.
I'm happy no children died because of this vaccine.
I'm also happy to have family physicians who refuses to push vaccines on us. On the contrary, they strongly recommend against giving dd the boosters that are allegedly required to be "healthy".
As one told me: if you knew what was in the vaccines, you'd faint. I take his word for it. I don't want to know :-(
EU Split Over Abortion
Rare European Union Split at UN Over Attempt to Shift Agenda to Include Abortion
On Thursday afternoon, the head of Malta’s mission to the UN, Ambassador Saviour F. Borg said, “Malta would like to clarify its position with respect to the language relating to sexual and reproductive health and rights in the [EU] statement. Malta firmly continues to maintain that any position taken or recommendations made regarding women’s empowerment and gender equality should not in any way create an obligation on any party to consider abortion as a legitimate form of reproductive health rights, services or commodities.”
The split in the European Union is significant because the EU hardly ever splits on questions of social policy at the UN. Even countries that are generally anti-abortion go along with the more radical approach taken by the United Kingdom, France and Germany. They do this as an agreement that the EU will always work out their differences behind closed doors and present a united front at UN negotiations.
It looks like the EU is beginning to crumble. The pro-life nations are probably tired of "going with the flow".
On Thursday afternoon, the head of Malta’s mission to the UN, Ambassador Saviour F. Borg said, “Malta would like to clarify its position with respect to the language relating to sexual and reproductive health and rights in the [EU] statement. Malta firmly continues to maintain that any position taken or recommendations made regarding women’s empowerment and gender equality should not in any way create an obligation on any party to consider abortion as a legitimate form of reproductive health rights, services or commodities.”
The split in the European Union is significant because the EU hardly ever splits on questions of social policy at the UN. Even countries that are generally anti-abortion go along with the more radical approach taken by the United Kingdom, France and Germany. They do this as an agreement that the EU will always work out their differences behind closed doors and present a united front at UN negotiations.
It looks like the EU is beginning to crumble. The pro-life nations are probably tired of "going with the flow".
Thursday, February 28, 2008
PP Leaves Lehigh University
Lack of Interest Forces Planned Parenthood to Leave University
Lehigh University isn't exactly a bastion of conservatism. It is probably one of the more liberal universities in this area. PP is losing its grip on its own base, and that is a good thing.
Lehigh University isn't exactly a bastion of conservatism. It is probably one of the more liberal universities in this area. PP is losing its grip on its own base, and that is a good thing.
Writer votes for Obama, defends his choice saying, “Bishops be damned”
Joe Feuerherd: "Bishops Be Damned"
A writer who wrote a Washington Post op-ed piece arguing against the U.S. bishops’ criticism of voters who support pro-abortion politicians and ended his article with a curse of the bishops could face canonical penalties for inciting hatred against the bishops.
Joe Feuerherd, a correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, attacked the bishops’ statement “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” in the Sunday edition of the Washington Post. In their statement, the bishops noted that voters’ political decisions could affect their salvation.
Feuerherd also criticized the bishops’ efforts to ensure the worthy reception of Holy Communion in the case of pro-abortion politicians who attend Mass.
The entire article can be read at the link above.
The bishops aren't the ones who are going to be damned.
A writer who wrote a Washington Post op-ed piece arguing against the U.S. bishops’ criticism of voters who support pro-abortion politicians and ended his article with a curse of the bishops could face canonical penalties for inciting hatred against the bishops.
Joe Feuerherd, a correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, attacked the bishops’ statement “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” in the Sunday edition of the Washington Post. In their statement, the bishops noted that voters’ political decisions could affect their salvation.
Feuerherd also criticized the bishops’ efforts to ensure the worthy reception of Holy Communion in the case of pro-abortion politicians who attend Mass.
The entire article can be read at the link above.
The bishops aren't the ones who are going to be damned.
JAMA: Adult Stem Cells Are Helping Patients
Video from the Journal of the American Medical Association here
Adult stem cells are the standard for cancer patients.
Adult stem cells = success
Embryonic stem cells = 0% success
Adult stem cells are the standard for cancer patients.
Adult stem cells = success
Embryonic stem cells = 0% success
Transcript Of Obama's Speech To PP
Transcript of Obama's Speech to PP July 2007 here
Video of the speech here
Hillary Clinton also spoke to PP on the same day. Her video can also be viewed above.
Video of the speech here
Hillary Clinton also spoke to PP on the same day. Her video can also be viewed above.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
More On Margaret Sanger
Youtube video, narrated by Katherine Hepburn, whose mother was part of the "birth control movement":
Part 1
Part 2
March 1988 article on Katherine Hepburn and her family's ties to PP
Mrs. Hepburn was keenly aware of the interrrelationship of birth control and abortion, which was widespread.
''Abortions would be unnecessary if birth control were practiced,'' she asserted in 1936. ''It would eliminate the causes of abortions, of which there are some 500,000 every year in the United States.''
Her daughter has long been an outspoken supporter of abortion rights, about which she has never entertained doubts. ''None at all,'' Ms. Hepburn said firmly. ''The people who are alive are the ones who interest me. I'm not particularly interested in the next world, because I have no control over it at all.
How lovely :-(
Part 1
Part 2
March 1988 article on Katherine Hepburn and her family's ties to PP
Mrs. Hepburn was keenly aware of the interrrelationship of birth control and abortion, which was widespread.
''Abortions would be unnecessary if birth control were practiced,'' she asserted in 1936. ''It would eliminate the causes of abortions, of which there are some 500,000 every year in the United States.''
Her daughter has long been an outspoken supporter of abortion rights, about which she has never entertained doubts. ''None at all,'' Ms. Hepburn said firmly. ''The people who are alive are the ones who interest me. I'm not particularly interested in the next world, because I have no control over it at all.
How lovely :-(
UK Commons Committee to "Investigate" Catholic Bishop for "Fundamentalism"
Last month, LifeSiteNews.com reported that a British Parliamentarian had threatened to "investigate" what he called an increase in "fundamentalism" among British Catholic bishops in regulations for Catholic schools. This week, the Independent reports that MP Barry Sheerman, the chairman of a Commons select committee, is going ahead with the investigation.
The Independent reports that the Children, Schools and Families Committee will "call Catholic bishops to account" for recent isolated attempts to re-install genuine Catholic doctrine on moral and sexual teaching into the schools' curriculum. The reaction from Parliament comes in response to a document issued by Lancaster Bishop Patrick O'Donohue, "Fit for Mission: Schools," an instruction to revamp Catholic education in the diocese of Lancaster based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The entire article can be read on the title link above.
Catholic schools in Britain aren't allowed to teach authentic Church doctrine? This tells me the state of affairs for Catholics across the pond are far worse off than I imagined.
They (the schools) could easily solve their problem by refusing state funding for their support.
The Independent reports that the Children, Schools and Families Committee will "call Catholic bishops to account" for recent isolated attempts to re-install genuine Catholic doctrine on moral and sexual teaching into the schools' curriculum. The reaction from Parliament comes in response to a document issued by Lancaster Bishop Patrick O'Donohue, "Fit for Mission: Schools," an instruction to revamp Catholic education in the diocese of Lancaster based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The entire article can be read on the title link above.
Catholic schools in Britain aren't allowed to teach authentic Church doctrine? This tells me the state of affairs for Catholics across the pond are far worse off than I imagined.
They (the schools) could easily solve their problem by refusing state funding for their support.
Senate Approves Ban on Abortion Funding in Indian Health Care Bill
The Senate voted 52 to 42 for the Vitter amendment and pro-life Republicans relied on the support of several Democrats to approve it.
“This is an important victory for the cause of life,” pro-life Sen. Sam Brownback told LifeNews.com after the vote.
“In the midst of the national debate about abortion, we have come to some fundamental agreements. We should not be using American tax dollars to fund abortion," he added.
Almost all of the Senate Republicans other than Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe and Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter voted for the amendment.
They were joined by Democrats Evan Bayh of Indiana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Robert Casey of Pennsylvania, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Harry Reid of Nevada, and Ken Salazar of Colorado.
The three senators running for president, abortion advocates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and John McCain, who opposes abortion, were not present for the vote.
I'm not surprised by Specter's vote. He has proven time and again he is nothing more than a RINO.
“This is an important victory for the cause of life,” pro-life Sen. Sam Brownback told LifeNews.com after the vote.
“In the midst of the national debate about abortion, we have come to some fundamental agreements. We should not be using American tax dollars to fund abortion," he added.
Almost all of the Senate Republicans other than Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe and Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter voted for the amendment.
They were joined by Democrats Evan Bayh of Indiana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Robert Casey of Pennsylvania, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Harry Reid of Nevada, and Ken Salazar of Colorado.
The three senators running for president, abortion advocates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and John McCain, who opposes abortion, were not present for the vote.
I'm not surprised by Specter's vote. He has proven time and again he is nothing more than a RINO.
Barack Obama Would Take Back Vote Helping Terri Schiavo Avoid Euthanasia
Article here:
During the Tuesday debate, Obama said he should have stood up against the life-saving legislation.
“It wasn't something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped,” Obama said.
“And I think that was a mistake, and I think the American people understood that that was a mistake. And as a constitutional law professor, I knew better,” he added.
This isn't the first time Obama has said the biggest mistake he made as senator was voting to help try to stop Terri from being euthanized.
During an April 2007 debate, Obama said, "I think professionally the biggest mistake that I made was when I first arrived in the Senate. There was a debate about Terri Schiavo, and a lot of us, including me, left the Senate with a bill that allowed Congress to intrude where it shouldn't have.”
And this is what people want in a president????? Truly sickening!
During the Tuesday debate, Obama said he should have stood up against the life-saving legislation.
“It wasn't something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped,” Obama said.
“And I think that was a mistake, and I think the American people understood that that was a mistake. And as a constitutional law professor, I knew better,” he added.
This isn't the first time Obama has said the biggest mistake he made as senator was voting to help try to stop Terri from being euthanized.
During an April 2007 debate, Obama said, "I think professionally the biggest mistake that I made was when I first arrived in the Senate. There was a debate about Terri Schiavo, and a lot of us, including me, left the Senate with a bill that allowed Congress to intrude where it shouldn't have.”
And this is what people want in a president????? Truly sickening!
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Commentary: In Defense of Phill Kline
Defending Phill Kline:
In 2003, Phill Kline, then Attorney General of Kansas, began an investigation of the Johnson County Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. Using subpoenaed medical records, Kline uncovered evidence that seemed to prove that Planned Parenthood had willfully neglected to report instances of child rape, had forged their viability reports, and had performed illegal late-term abortions. (The records had the names and other personal information carefully redacted to protect the women's privacy.)
Planned Parenthood decided to ignore the charges. As court hearings began, PP's army of lawyers relied on procedural ploys to delay and squelch the case. In the public arena, no attempt was made to counter the charges or even to acknowledge their existence. Planned Parenthood, it turned out, wasn't interested in defending itself against the charges. Instead, it had decided to destroy Attorney General Kline's reputation.
The abortion giant put out a press release which suggested that his charges, which they repeatedly referred to as "baseless," were pure political posturing. They accused him of "further[ing] his political ambition of making abortion illegal by using unethical tactics." "No health care provider should be threatened with felony convictions," said PPKM CEO Peter Brownlie, "simply because elected officials oppose legal abortion."
Following the lead of Planned Parenthood's formidable PR machine, dozens of newspapers, blogs, and public figures all went for the jugular. "Kline just personifies the abortion debate," ABC News contended in October of 2007. "This is a guy who has never tried any cases and has a very marginal record as an attorney, and so it is very much seen, I think, even by the pro-life people, that Kline's personal beliefs are his No. 1 priority." This preposterous claim comes straight out of Planned Parenthood's talking points. Apparently ABC's zeal for abortion is more important than its commitment to truth.
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, predictably called Kline "one of the most extreme anti-choice politicians." But then she went on to make the totally false claim that he was "invading people's most private medical information." The records, as I mentioned above, had been carefully purged of any identifying information.
The New York Times also parroted Planned Parenthood's official line, calling him "an anti-abortion zealot who gained national notoriety by misusing his office to further his ideology," while gliding over the charges themselves, which they wrongly characterized as a "gross assault on privacy and legal rights."
Someone who annoys PP and the NYT is someone worth listening to. Keep up the good work Phill Kline!
In 2003, Phill Kline, then Attorney General of Kansas, began an investigation of the Johnson County Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. Using subpoenaed medical records, Kline uncovered evidence that seemed to prove that Planned Parenthood had willfully neglected to report instances of child rape, had forged their viability reports, and had performed illegal late-term abortions. (The records had the names and other personal information carefully redacted to protect the women's privacy.)
Planned Parenthood decided to ignore the charges. As court hearings began, PP's army of lawyers relied on procedural ploys to delay and squelch the case. In the public arena, no attempt was made to counter the charges or even to acknowledge their existence. Planned Parenthood, it turned out, wasn't interested in defending itself against the charges. Instead, it had decided to destroy Attorney General Kline's reputation.
The abortion giant put out a press release which suggested that his charges, which they repeatedly referred to as "baseless," were pure political posturing. They accused him of "further[ing] his political ambition of making abortion illegal by using unethical tactics." "No health care provider should be threatened with felony convictions," said PPKM CEO Peter Brownlie, "simply because elected officials oppose legal abortion."
Following the lead of Planned Parenthood's formidable PR machine, dozens of newspapers, blogs, and public figures all went for the jugular. "Kline just personifies the abortion debate," ABC News contended in October of 2007. "This is a guy who has never tried any cases and has a very marginal record as an attorney, and so it is very much seen, I think, even by the pro-life people, that Kline's personal beliefs are his No. 1 priority." This preposterous claim comes straight out of Planned Parenthood's talking points. Apparently ABC's zeal for abortion is more important than its commitment to truth.
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, predictably called Kline "one of the most extreme anti-choice politicians." But then she went on to make the totally false claim that he was "invading people's most private medical information." The records, as I mentioned above, had been carefully purged of any identifying information.
The New York Times also parroted Planned Parenthood's official line, calling him "an anti-abortion zealot who gained national notoriety by misusing his office to further his ideology," while gliding over the charges themselves, which they wrongly characterized as a "gross assault on privacy and legal rights."
Someone who annoys PP and the NYT is someone worth listening to. Keep up the good work Phill Kline!
PP Promotes Pornography To Teens
Planned Parenthood Web Site Promotes Porn to Teens
PP is disgusting. No other comments are necessary.
PP is disgusting. No other comments are necessary.
Pope Strongly Condemns all Forms of Euthanasia
Article here:
All society "is called to respect the life and dignity of the seriously ill and the dying", said the Holy Father. "Though aware of the fact that 'it is not science that redeems man', all society, and in particular the sectors associated with medical science, are duty bound to express the solidarity of love, and to safeguard and respect human life in every moment of its earthly development, especially when it is ill or in its terminal stages.
"In more concrete terms", he added, "this means ensuring that every person in need finds the necessary support through appropriate treatments and medical procedures - identified and administered using criteria of therapeutic proportionality - while bearing in mind the moral duty to administer (on the part of doctors) and to accept (on the part of patients) those means for preserving life which, in a particular situation, may be considered as 'ordinary'".
As for forms of treatment "with significant levels of risk or that may reasonably be judged to be 'extraordinary', recourse thereto may be considered as morally acceptable, but optional. Furthermore, it will always be necessary to ensure that everyone has the treatment they require, and that families tried by the sickness of one of their members receive support, especially if the sickness is serious or prolonged".
All society "is called to respect the life and dignity of the seriously ill and the dying", said the Holy Father. "Though aware of the fact that 'it is not science that redeems man', all society, and in particular the sectors associated with medical science, are duty bound to express the solidarity of love, and to safeguard and respect human life in every moment of its earthly development, especially when it is ill or in its terminal stages.
"In more concrete terms", he added, "this means ensuring that every person in need finds the necessary support through appropriate treatments and medical procedures - identified and administered using criteria of therapeutic proportionality - while bearing in mind the moral duty to administer (on the part of doctors) and to accept (on the part of patients) those means for preserving life which, in a particular situation, may be considered as 'ordinary'".
As for forms of treatment "with significant levels of risk or that may reasonably be judged to be 'extraordinary', recourse thereto may be considered as morally acceptable, but optional. Furthermore, it will always be necessary to ensure that everyone has the treatment they require, and that families tried by the sickness of one of their members receive support, especially if the sickness is serious or prolonged".
Pro-Life Editorial
Editorial: My Heated E-Mail exchange with a Pro-life Doctor
An excerpt:
The Doctor:
“That no one calling themselves Catholics should vote for anyone who supports baby killing. That Catholics can control any election if only Catholics ceased voting for members of the Democratic Party, which has in their party platform a clause that supports the killing of unborn children”.
My Response:
On this, I am in substantial agreement. It is obvious that the Doctor has not read much of what I have written over these many years. Even a cursory reading of my writings would make it very clear that I am disillusioned with the Democratic Party on issues of life and marriage.
However, I am also aware of the growth of groups like “Democrats for Life” who seek to return that Party, which once prided itself on hearing the cry of the poor, back to its roots in order to move forward.
The Democratic Party was stolen by the current leadership. I long for the day when Democrats,along with Republicans, recognize our youngest neighbors,children in the womb, as having not only a right to be born but a right to live a full life until natural death.
In other words, I long for the day when we live in a Nation where both major Parties accept the truth that killing innocent children in the womb is intrinsically evil and they make it illegal. Perhaps then we could have a true debate over many, many other vital issues.
I don't believe the Democratic Party will ever be redeemed. The Republican Party, otoh, can be saved, if politicians like Giuliani are driven out (remember he was once a Democrat). It will take time, but it can be done.
An excerpt:
The Doctor:
“That no one calling themselves Catholics should vote for anyone who supports baby killing. That Catholics can control any election if only Catholics ceased voting for members of the Democratic Party, which has in their party platform a clause that supports the killing of unborn children”.
My Response:
On this, I am in substantial agreement. It is obvious that the Doctor has not read much of what I have written over these many years. Even a cursory reading of my writings would make it very clear that I am disillusioned with the Democratic Party on issues of life and marriage.
However, I am also aware of the growth of groups like “Democrats for Life” who seek to return that Party, which once prided itself on hearing the cry of the poor, back to its roots in order to move forward.
The Democratic Party was stolen by the current leadership. I long for the day when Democrats,along with Republicans, recognize our youngest neighbors,children in the womb, as having not only a right to be born but a right to live a full life until natural death.
In other words, I long for the day when we live in a Nation where both major Parties accept the truth that killing innocent children in the womb is intrinsically evil and they make it illegal. Perhaps then we could have a true debate over many, many other vital issues.
I don't believe the Democratic Party will ever be redeemed. The Republican Party, otoh, can be saved, if politicians like Giuliani are driven out (remember he was once a Democrat). It will take time, but it can be done.
Monday, February 25, 2008
MLK's Niece Upset With PP
Dr. Martin Luther King's Niece Upset Abortion Business Using Uncle's Image
PP tries to give the appearance he would be supporting them today. I seriously doubt he would stand firmly with PP, given they have been advocating the murder of black children at a rate that far exceeds the rate of white ones.
PP tries to give the appearance he would be supporting them today. I seriously doubt he would stand firmly with PP, given they have been advocating the murder of black children at a rate that far exceeds the rate of white ones.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Editorial: Infanticide Goes Mainstream and Why Prolife Arguments Need an Update
Article here:
What really struck me, however, as I was reading the Hastings Center piece (besides, of course, the hard-to-ignore fact that the authors were defending killing newborn infants, including those who weren't suffering yet, but probably would suffer in the future) is how ill prepared we are to respond to the arguments presented by the authors. It seems to me that the pro-life movement is somewhat behind the times in its approach to responding to the core principles of the Culture of Death, especially in its newest incarnations.
While much of the pro-life movement continues to desperately try to prove to the opposition that the fetus is human, by showing pictures of the unborn child, or proving that the fetus can feel pain, the whole pro-death movement has moved on. With the advent of embryonic research, immoral reproduction technologies, and now infant euthanasia, the pro-life movement has simply attempted to adopt and adapt old arguments for a whole new fight, which calls to mind that old Scripture quote about new wine in old wineskins.
"Human life," we point out time after time, "is a continuity that begins at conception and continues through to the moment of natural death, and since it is wrong to kill an adult, it is also wrong to kill a child, born or unborn."
But this just won't do any more.
The cameras inserted into the womb have proven beyond a doubt that the uterus is not a twilight zone that suddenly transforms a formless blob of inhuman tissue into a hearty, healthy baby at the moment of birth. And hence it is somewhat condescending to our opponents to assume that the they are just so plain stupid that they can't tell that the fetus looks, acts, and feels like a human, and is a human, albeit in its nascent stage of development.
What we seem to have failed to recognize, therefore, at least with the necessary clarity, is that the humanity or inhumanity of the fetus is often no longer the issue - at least, not within the elite spheres of the pro-death movement. The pro-death movement has evolved into a subtler, more radical, and much more dangerous form, a form that requires new intellectual weapons to fight.
Unfortunately, that is what we are up against today. Formulating an argument against the pro-death group, without hysteria and emotionalism, will be the only way to end this holocaust. They are cunning with their use of language. We need to learn from them, and take what is necessary to defeat them at their own game.
What really struck me, however, as I was reading the Hastings Center piece (besides, of course, the hard-to-ignore fact that the authors were defending killing newborn infants, including those who weren't suffering yet, but probably would suffer in the future) is how ill prepared we are to respond to the arguments presented by the authors. It seems to me that the pro-life movement is somewhat behind the times in its approach to responding to the core principles of the Culture of Death, especially in its newest incarnations.
While much of the pro-life movement continues to desperately try to prove to the opposition that the fetus is human, by showing pictures of the unborn child, or proving that the fetus can feel pain, the whole pro-death movement has moved on. With the advent of embryonic research, immoral reproduction technologies, and now infant euthanasia, the pro-life movement has simply attempted to adopt and adapt old arguments for a whole new fight, which calls to mind that old Scripture quote about new wine in old wineskins.
"Human life," we point out time after time, "is a continuity that begins at conception and continues through to the moment of natural death, and since it is wrong to kill an adult, it is also wrong to kill a child, born or unborn."
But this just won't do any more.
The cameras inserted into the womb have proven beyond a doubt that the uterus is not a twilight zone that suddenly transforms a formless blob of inhuman tissue into a hearty, healthy baby at the moment of birth. And hence it is somewhat condescending to our opponents to assume that the they are just so plain stupid that they can't tell that the fetus looks, acts, and feels like a human, and is a human, albeit in its nascent stage of development.
What we seem to have failed to recognize, therefore, at least with the necessary clarity, is that the humanity or inhumanity of the fetus is often no longer the issue - at least, not within the elite spheres of the pro-death movement. The pro-death movement has evolved into a subtler, more radical, and much more dangerous form, a form that requires new intellectual weapons to fight.
Unfortunately, that is what we are up against today. Formulating an argument against the pro-death group, without hysteria and emotionalism, will be the only way to end this holocaust. They are cunning with their use of language. We need to learn from them, and take what is necessary to defeat them at their own game.
Suffering Infants Better Off Dead
Newborns Who Suffer are "Better off Dead" - "World's Most Prestigious" Bioethics Journal
In 2005 the world was horrified when it was revealed that in the Netherlands doctors were not only openly admitting that they had killed disabled newborn infants, but that the medical institution was actively promoting child euthanasia through the so-called Groningen Protocol. The protocol - the full name of which is The Groningen Protocol for Euthanasia in Newborns - lays out a set of guidelines that must be followed in making and executing the decision to kill a newborn infant.
The revelation that newborn euthanasia was both common and acceptable in the Netherlands was greeted with harsh criticisms from around the world, with one Italian Minister going to far as to accuse the Netherlands of Nazism. Others expressed their disgust that many of the children who were being euthanized by Dutch doctors were children with Spina Bifida, a condition with which many people have lived well into adulthood and had fulfilling lives.
And this:
As the authors explain, there are three classes of newborns that can be euthanized under the Groningen Protocol, including: 1) Those who have no chance of survival, 2) those who "may survive after a period of intensive treatment but expectations for their future are very grim;" and 3) those "who do not depend on technology for physiologic stability and whose suffering is severe, sustained, and cannot be alleviated."
How sickening there are "doctors" out there who think killing newborns is necessary.
In 2005 the world was horrified when it was revealed that in the Netherlands doctors were not only openly admitting that they had killed disabled newborn infants, but that the medical institution was actively promoting child euthanasia through the so-called Groningen Protocol. The protocol - the full name of which is The Groningen Protocol for Euthanasia in Newborns - lays out a set of guidelines that must be followed in making and executing the decision to kill a newborn infant.
The revelation that newborn euthanasia was both common and acceptable in the Netherlands was greeted with harsh criticisms from around the world, with one Italian Minister going to far as to accuse the Netherlands of Nazism. Others expressed their disgust that many of the children who were being euthanized by Dutch doctors were children with Spina Bifida, a condition with which many people have lived well into adulthood and had fulfilling lives.
And this:
As the authors explain, there are three classes of newborns that can be euthanized under the Groningen Protocol, including: 1) Those who have no chance of survival, 2) those who "may survive after a period of intensive treatment but expectations for their future are very grim;" and 3) those "who do not depend on technology for physiologic stability and whose suffering is severe, sustained, and cannot be alleviated."
How sickening there are "doctors" out there who think killing newborns is necessary.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Man Tells Off Wife, Rouses Her From Coma
Dom's stern words managed to penetrate through the near-fatal coma and Yvonne even remembers him making the impassioned speech, admitting that she "never liked getting told off".
Dom held Yvonne's hand and demanded: "You start fighting, don't you dare give up on me now. I've had enough, stop mucking around and start breathing. Come back to me."
Incredibly, just two hours later, she steadily began to start breathing again.
Within five days, they were able to switch her ventilator off, and she regained consciousness for the first time to see Dom standing beside her.
Yvonne said hearing her husband shouting gave her the strength to pull through.
In fact, Yvonne has made such a recovery that she is back running dance classes and looking after her eight-year-old son.
She said: "I can't remember exactly what he said but I never liked getting told off by Dom. Something inside me just clicked and I began to fight again.
My dad did something similar to my uncle in 1991, after he had suffered a massive stroke. The doctors told my dad Uncle J. was gone, they couldn't detect any brain waves, and were taking off life support immediately. Dad told the doctors to leave the room, and told off my uncle. He yelled at him to wake up, otherwise he was going to die. Knowing my dad, I'm sure he was cussing at Uncle J. to get him angry. Sure enough, several hours later he woke from his coma.
My uncle does not remember the stroke, but he hasn't fully recovered and is permanently disabled. Doctors should not be so hasty in making these kinds of life and death decisions. The woman in the article and my uncle are living proof of how wrong they can be.
Dom held Yvonne's hand and demanded: "You start fighting, don't you dare give up on me now. I've had enough, stop mucking around and start breathing. Come back to me."
Incredibly, just two hours later, she steadily began to start breathing again.
Within five days, they were able to switch her ventilator off, and she regained consciousness for the first time to see Dom standing beside her.
Yvonne said hearing her husband shouting gave her the strength to pull through.
In fact, Yvonne has made such a recovery that she is back running dance classes and looking after her eight-year-old son.
She said: "I can't remember exactly what he said but I never liked getting told off by Dom. Something inside me just clicked and I began to fight again.
My dad did something similar to my uncle in 1991, after he had suffered a massive stroke. The doctors told my dad Uncle J. was gone, they couldn't detect any brain waves, and were taking off life support immediately. Dad told the doctors to leave the room, and told off my uncle. He yelled at him to wake up, otherwise he was going to die. Knowing my dad, I'm sure he was cussing at Uncle J. to get him angry. Sure enough, several hours later he woke from his coma.
My uncle does not remember the stroke, but he hasn't fully recovered and is permanently disabled. Doctors should not be so hasty in making these kinds of life and death decisions. The woman in the article and my uncle are living proof of how wrong they can be.
A Calling To Care
Bethlehem woman inspired by Mother Teresa founds nonprofit to help build wells in Africa.
On Saturday, the missionary from Bethlehem begins a trip that will take her to Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, among the 30 least developed countries in the world, according to the United Nations Human Development Report. She said this time she is working with another Catholic charity, Apostles of Jesus, to provide wells for villages in those countries.
Benner said travel to Africa is essential to her vocation -- fundraising is only half the job: ''I feel the biggest part of my mission work is going there and being a witness.''
Recent events such as violent protests in Kenya over a disputed election do not deter Benner.
''This is how I know it is God's will and not my will: There's no fear,'' Benner said. ''When I fly, I am alone. If it were my will, I would be scared to travel into these countries.''
Picture of Holly Benner from 2007:
Praying for her in her quest to provide life to the people of Africa.
On Saturday, the missionary from Bethlehem begins a trip that will take her to Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, among the 30 least developed countries in the world, according to the United Nations Human Development Report. She said this time she is working with another Catholic charity, Apostles of Jesus, to provide wells for villages in those countries.
Benner said travel to Africa is essential to her vocation -- fundraising is only half the job: ''I feel the biggest part of my mission work is going there and being a witness.''
Recent events such as violent protests in Kenya over a disputed election do not deter Benner.
''This is how I know it is God's will and not my will: There's no fear,'' Benner said. ''When I fly, I am alone. If it were my will, I would be scared to travel into these countries.''
Picture of Holly Benner from 2007:
Praying for her in her quest to provide life to the people of Africa.
Clarification On Georgia Right To Life Bill
The clarification of the problems with HR536 can be found here.
The rest of us in the other 49 states should learn a little about what happened in Georgia. We need to present a united front in our individual states, and not get bogged down in every little detail.
The rest of us in the other 49 states should learn a little about what happened in Georgia. We need to present a united front in our individual states, and not get bogged down in every little detail.
Pro-Homosexual Booklet to Be Distributed to All 16,000 US School Districts
Book specifically instructs teacher to "avoid" discussing the idea that homosexual inclinations can be changed
At the same time that news has come out that the Toronto Catholic School board has refused to participate in pro-homosexual activities, homosexual activists are making significant inroads in US schools, as a booklet titled, "Just the Facts about Sexual Orientation and Youth," is set to be distributed to all 16,000 school districts in the country.
The 24-page booklet by the National Education Association and American Psychological Association, tells students that homosexuality is a "normal expression of human sexuality".
"What's so scary and dogmatic about this report is that it communicates that religious-based viewpoints are harmful, and even dangerous," said Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family Action.
From the twisted viewpoint of the NEA and the APA, homosexuality is "normal" and religious viewpoints are "harmful and dangerous". We live in the days of what is good is evil and what is evil is good.
I wonder if I called any of the four districts in Monroe county, would they admit they have or are getting this booklet? I'm sure they would all deny it. Another one of the million reasons why I continue to homeschool.
At the same time that news has come out that the Toronto Catholic School board has refused to participate in pro-homosexual activities, homosexual activists are making significant inroads in US schools, as a booklet titled, "Just the Facts about Sexual Orientation and Youth," is set to be distributed to all 16,000 school districts in the country.
The 24-page booklet by the National Education Association and American Psychological Association, tells students that homosexuality is a "normal expression of human sexuality".
"What's so scary and dogmatic about this report is that it communicates that religious-based viewpoints are harmful, and even dangerous," said Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family Action.
From the twisted viewpoint of the NEA and the APA, homosexuality is "normal" and religious viewpoints are "harmful and dangerous". We live in the days of what is good is evil and what is evil is good.
I wonder if I called any of the four districts in Monroe county, would they admit they have or are getting this booklet? I'm sure they would all deny it. Another one of the million reasons why I continue to homeschool.
Catholic School Board Refuses to Conduct Survey Meant to Detect "Homophobia"
Article here:
So the proof that the Catholic school system in Toronto is homophobic is the mere refusal to participate in the survey? This is the common cry in the gay "community". Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice (if there was a gay "gene", it would have been found by now).
Their argument is others must be accepting of their choices, hence the "inclusive" curriculum they want to push on unsuspecting children. Homosexuals are called to be celibate, which is also one of their reasons to accuse others of "homophobia". We hate the sin, but love the sinner. That does not mean we condone their behavior, which is clearly part of the culture of death.
So the proof that the Catholic school system in Toronto is homophobic is the mere refusal to participate in the survey? This is the common cry in the gay "community". Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice (if there was a gay "gene", it would have been found by now).
Their argument is others must be accepting of their choices, hence the "inclusive" curriculum they want to push on unsuspecting children. Homosexuals are called to be celibate, which is also one of their reasons to accuse others of "homophobia". We hate the sin, but love the sinner. That does not mean we condone their behavior, which is clearly part of the culture of death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
