I don’t think one can start a blog on the importance of respecting life without talking about the two powerhouses for life, Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa. In my own church family in the Anglican tradition, there are none so eloquent or so unwavering as were those two giants. This first post is in loving memory of John Paul II and Blessed Teresa of Calcutta for their lifetime of work and love and for their shining light. I honor them.
OTTAWA, May 10, 2016 (Lianne Laurence for LifeSiteNews) — Twenty-one-year-old James Schutten volunteers at a nursing home a few days a week and helps out at an elementary school.
But he also requires “someone to set up my feeding tube, suction my trach, turn me over in bed, take me to the bathroom, and scratch my head,” he told the House of Commons justice committee last week.
“I’m not telling you this to make you feel sorry for me. I don’t feel sorry for myself,” added Schutten, who at age two was diagnosed with spinal muscular atrophy, a degenerative neuromuscular disorder that affects motor muscles and weakens the respiratory system.
“But you need to know that these professionals and family members need to care about my life and whether I live or die.”
The House justice committee heard public testimony on suggested amendments to the Liberals’ controversial euthanasia law last week, and Monday evening began its clause-by-clause study of Bill C-14, which passed second reading May 4.
The bill is intended to amend the Criminal Code to conform with the Supreme Court’s February 2015 Carter decision, which struck down the prohibition against assisted suicide and euthanasia as unconstitutional, and takes effect June 6.
Schutten, who voiced his worries about Bill C-14 on behalf of the Association of Reformed Political Action Canada (ARPA), said that he’s “gone to the hospital because of illness, and medical staff questioned whether extreme measures were worth it.”
“This makes me very nervous because I feel like I’m not worth the trouble. Thankfully, my family has my back to speak with the doctors on my behalf,” he said.
“I have anxiety now. How much more if Bill C-14 comes into effect?”
“With this right to die, it makes me feel like
society thinks I should choose to die.”
Schutten asked the committee to amend Bill C-14 to require “that palliative care is meaningfully made available to the patient.”
“I’m one of those people who the Supreme Court of Canada thinks should have this right to doctor-assisted death,” he noted. And “with this right to die, it makes me feel like society thinks I should choose to die.”
“But what if instead I had the right to palliative care or resources to help me continue to be a productive member of society?” he asked.
“What if society started from the perspective that I do have value? What if people didn’t view me as a burden for others to carry?” Schutten added.
“Look past my wheelchair and see that I am an asset in my community.”
Schutten has been volunteering at his brother’s elementary school since 2014, and at a nursing home in Ancaster since last September, at the invitation of a friend who works there.
“I really enjoy it,” he told LifeSiteNews in an email. “I found that because I’m in a wheelchair the elderly felt they were helping me, not vice versa. An example would be when they play bingo, they all want to help ME with my bingo card.”
Or people will “think they are pushing me to activity but actually I am just driving slow in my power chair,” related Schutten, a member of the Ancaster Canadian Reformed Church.
“In a crazy way I have purpose, and I give them purpose.”
Pieter Harsevoort, who was diagnosed with spinal muscular atrophy on his first birthday, also spoke to the committee May 3 along with James, and friend André Schutten, ARPA Canada’s director of law and policy and general legal counsel.
Harsevoort, aged 32, told LifeSiteNews in an email that “since Bill C-14 will affect my future I was happy to accept André’s invitation to voice my concerns.”
He added: “In general, I’m concerned with the way the ruling devalues the lives of the disabled and aged, and how any legalization of euthanasia leads to abuse of the most vulnerable members of society.”
A special-ed teacher at a Hamilton Christian school, who described himself on a past blog as “a crooked man on a straight path,” Harsevoort told the committee that Bill C-14 lacks “precision in language” and is “dangerously dependent on euphemisms.”
Bill C-14 uses the term “medically assisted dying” to refer to what is actually “physician assisted suicide,” he said, adding that palliative care is, in fact, medically assisted dying.
“I urge you to please use accurate terminology so that termination of life is not confused with palliative medicine,” he said, noting that the bill requires amendments “to ensure that physicians don’t approve euthanasia for vulnerable persons like James and myself in moments of weakness.”
Bill C-14 allows euthanasia or assisted suicide for competent adults who have a grievous and incurable illness, disease or disability which causes them enduring physical or psychological suffering that is intolerable to them and cannot be relieved under conditions they consider acceptable, who are in an advanced state of irreversible decline, and whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable.
“The reality is that intolerable suffering is relative,” Harsevoort told the committee. “Suffering is modified by many diverse factors.”
He recommended the bill be amended to require the euthanasia and assisted suicide be approved on “reasonable proof” the person meets the eligibility criteria rather than “mere opinion” they do, and eligibility based on a “specific prognosis” rather than on “reasonably foreseeable death.”
And the bill should include specific oversight to ensure people can revoke their request, he told the committee.
While these amendments to the bill “will improve the situation for the disabled and ill,” Harsevoort said, the “only true protection of the sanctity of life is a ban on euthanasia.”
“Instead of investing money into a bill which normalizes the choice of death, our country should invest time and money into giving people with illness, disabilities, and old age a will to live,” Schutten observed earlier.
“I don’t believe that anyone has the right to choose exactly when to die, but God alone decides,” he told the committee.
“And He does not make mistakes. He has a purpose for everything.”
UN rights chief tells Catholic countries to legalize abortion over Zika virus: bishops and cardinal react
Article Author: Pete Baklinski, LifeSiteNews
GENEVA, February 5, 2016 — The United Nations, following the lead of international abortion activists, is now urging Latin American countries hit by the mosquito-borne Zika virus to lift restrictions on abortion for pregnant women who have contacted the virus and whose pre-born children may be at risk for birth defects, including having smaller than normal heads.
The UN human rights office said today that it is not enough for South American countries to urge women to postpone pregnancy without also offering them abortion as a final solution.
“How can they ask these women not to become pregnant, but not offer… the possibility to stop their pregnancies?” UN spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told reporters.
UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said that governments should make available contraception and abortion services.
“Laws and policies that restrict (women’s) access to these services must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” he said.
But Brazil’s bishops strongly asserted yesterday that efforts should be made to eradicate the virus, not the people who may be infected by it.
The disease is “no justification whatsoever to promote abortion,” they said in a statement, adding that it is not morally acceptable to promote abortion “in the cases of microcephaly, as, unfortunately, some groups are proposing to the Supreme Federal Court, in a total lack of respect for the gift of life.”
Honduras Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga has also come out strongly against the notion of “therapeutic abortions” as a response to the problem. Unlike Brazil where abortion is legal in the case of rape or health of the mother, abortion remains entirely illegal in Honduras.
“We should never talk about ‘therapeutic’ abortion,” the cardinal said in a homily at a February 3 Mass in Suyap. “Therapeutic abortion doesn’t exist. Therapeutic means curing, and abortion cures nothing. It takes innocent lives,” he said.
While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an international public health emergency February 1 on account of concerns over the virus, critics have pointed out, however, that not one death as resulted from the virus. Even on WHO’s own website the virus is described in mild terms.
“It causes mild fever and rash. Other symptoms include muscle pain, joint pain, headache, pain behind the eyes and conjunctivitis. Zika virus disease is usually mild, with symptoms lasting only a few days,” the website states. “To date, there have been no reported deaths associated with Zika virus,” it added.
Critics suspect that the crisis is being manipulated to advance an anti-human agenda on the pre-born.
“Is Zika, actually, a hideous virus that threatens to spread uncontrollably across the world creating an army of disabled children with tiny heads and low IQ’s? Or might this be a willful misinterpretation of the scarce data to manipulate public opinion and legislatures?” wrote pro-life critic Mei-Li Garcia earlier this week.
“It becomes very clear that the publicity surrounding this story has a very little to do with medicine and a lot to do with a convenient crisis that is being used by those pushing for the legalization of abortion around the world,” she wrote.
The March for Life, which began in 1974 in Washington, D.C, has inspired a worldwide March for Life movement. Hundreds of thousands have attended these peaceful events, which are a celebration of life, around the globe.
The March for Life, whatever country it is, can be so powerful because often people feel alone. But there is something of the power and the unity, and the solidarity, and in the message that we are going to keep working until every human life is protected from conception until natural death.
America’s youth are standing strong for the protection of life at all stages of development. Generation LIFE is fighting for the unborn. Be proud of this great generation that reaches out in love to protect babies.
Offer a prayer in thanksgiving for Generation LIFE and all those participating in the March for Life 2016
The women fighting for Life in the U.S. Congress have a message for young women across America!
Rep. Ann Wagner (MO)
Rep. Mimi Walters (CA)
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL)
Rep. Virginia Foxx (NC)
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA)
Rep. Diane Black (TN)
Sen. Deb Fischer (NE)
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (MO)
This video is a project of Susan B. Anthony and March for Life, funded by the Knights of Columbus.
You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say.
– Martin Luther
I start this personal testimony with great trepidation. Fortunately I’ve never been in a position of having to make a “choice.” I was raised in a very conservative family and I, likewise, hold very conservative opinions. This does not mean I am argumentative or mean. I have a close friend who is just as liberal as I am conservative and we have lovely conversations because we know we each want what’s best for people and society – it’s just our methodologies are vastly different.
I started this blog on life issues and yes, it’s definitively pro-life. It will also be pro-adoption and anti-euthanasia, but let me first mention a couple things.
When I was about 15 I walked out of my high school and had a pamphlet shoved in my hand, which I made the grave mistake of dutifully reading. It was anti-abortion and as I recall was okay on the outsides but when I opened the leaflet I was confronted with the fetal porn, as you put it. I felt abused and I was so angry that what had been seen could never be unseen. I felt like somebody vomited all over me and I could do nothing to wash it off. I hated those people who wrenched me out of my blissfully ignorant teenage cocoon. Now, I understand more of the reasoning, but I still hate the tactic.
Even though I have remained absolutely anti-abortion, I refused to discuss the matter for almost 30 years, as I’m now 44. That’s what that person produced in me – total shutdown. I saw the protest of the early 1990’s and knew those people were virtually criminals – especially the ones who were definitely criminals for killing and maiming folks. I could never reconcile myself to such behavior.
Then something happened. I was convicted by the Lord to speak out on life issues after 1) the horrible Gosnell case became known; 2) 55 million deaths milestone was reached after the 40th Anniversary of legalized abortion in the USA; 3) President Obama was the first president to serve as keynote speaker for the annual Planned Parenthood gathering. This trifecta of what I call “darkness” disheartened me so much I felt I should see what I could do personally and what my church was doing. I feel especially close to the issue as so many millions of my fellow Generation X babies were killed in this act labeled as choice; I could no longer remain silent.
I was scared to death. I didn’t like talking about it, I don’t like the fetal porn and I refuse to use it on my new site or in the information I pass along. That’s important to ME. In poking around on YouTube and the inner-webs (a small joke), I slowly started to educate myself on the issues. If I was going to speak about it – what could I say? I’ve never had an abortion – statistically I’m probably related to or friends with a woman who has had one, but they’ve never discussed it with me. Does that mean I have nothing to contribute to the discussion? Of course not.
I’ve read that one of the hardest tasks a pro-life person could do is stand out at a clinic and try to engage anyone in a conversation. To me, that’s the true trenches, another being college campuses where people are shouted at and knocked around and sometimes targeted with frightening rage. I told my husband that if I ever was to be present at a clinic I probably wouldn’t try to speak to anyone – I would just pray. At most I would hold a sign saying there is love and forgiveness in Jesus. That, if you find after your “choice” a sadness, anger or desperation, there are women and men who have have had to make the same choices. You are not alone.
The young twenty-three year old man doing sidewalk counseling who says the same script over and over does so because many of us who sincerely want to be supportive, are scared shitless of what to say. We ARE ignorant of what to say. We DO feel embarrassed about coming off as a religious nut, and yet we feel if we help just ONE woman who maybe just wanted a prayer before going in, even that small act would be worth hours of our time. Ministry is often not rewarding in conjunction with our time-frame. Most often we may never expect to know if we’ve said or done something that truly meant something to someone. We have to just let it go. It’s not for us to know.
Men aren’t always the greatest communicators, but when I hear about that young man at your clinic, it makes me smile that someone is trying to do *something*. Many may disagree with his actions, but he has love in his heart and not contempt. Maybe it’s not meant for you to see, but if he helps one woman to be a bit braver about her choice, wouldn’t that be worth it?
I end with a quote by Martin Luther.
“I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God.”
(CNSNews.com) — A study  published this month in the Journal of Medical Ethics examined the “deliberate” euthanasia of patients in Belgium without their explicit, voluntary consent as required by law.
The study’s author, Raphael Cohen-Almagor, a professor of philosophy and ethics at the United Kingdom’s Hull University, found that life-ending drugs were used “with the intention to shorten life and without explicit request” in 1.7 percent of all deaths in Belgium in 2013.
In 52.7 percent of these cases, the patients were 80 years of age or older. The decision to euthanize was not discussed with the patient in 77.9 percent of the cases because he/she was comatose, had dementia, or “because discussion would have been harmful to the patient’s best interest,” according to the study.
Belgium passed the Euthanasia Act  in 2002, which states that only voluntary euthanasia is legally permissible.
“At the heart of this legislation is the free will of the patient who asks for euthanasia,” Cohen-Almagor noted. “It is worrying that some physicians take upon themselves the responsibility to deliberately shorten patients’ lives without a clear indication from the patients that this is what they would want.”
According to the law, the patient must request euthanasia, and such a request must be “voluntary, well-considered, and repeated and…not the result of any external pressure.” The patient must also be “an adult or an emancipated minor, capable and conscious at the time of his/her request.”
Although annual euthanasia cases are steadily multiplying in Belgium, growing from 235 in 2003 to 1,807 in 2013, Cohen-Almagor noted that instances of euthanasia without explicit consent from the patient have actually decreased since 1996, when they accounted for 3.3 percent of all deaths.
He gives three possible explanations:
1) Gained experience in practicing euthanasia might allow more physicians to involve the patient in the decision-making process;
2) Physicians often use methods such as terminal sedation, which is not reported as euthanasia; and
3) Physicians might not be “well acquainted with the labelling of all the medical practices at the end of life.”
The Belgian Society of Intensive Care Medicine Council released a paper  in 2014 discussing the use of sedatives “with the direct intention of shortening the dying process of terminal palliative care in patients with no prospect of a meaningful recovery.”
This document, which applies to both children and adults, holds that “suffering should be avoided at all times,” adding that the process of withdrawing treatment and increasing the doses of “sedative/opioids” to fatal levels in patients in intensive care “must not be interpreted as killing.”
“Shortening the dying process by administering sedatives beyond what is needed for patient comfort can be not only acceptable but in many cases desirable,” the council document stated.
Although end-of-life decisions should be discussed with the patient’s relatives, the statement noted that the final decision is “made by the care team and not by the relatives.”
A 2010 research study  conducted in Flanders revealed that only one out of every two euthanasia cases was reported to Belgium’s Federal Control and Evaluation Committee because most non-reporting physicians did not view the active hastening of their patients’ deaths as euthanasia.
Unreported cases were also generally handled less carefully than reported cases and “the lethal drugs were often administered by a nurse alone, not by a physician,” the study noted.
“Whether deliberately or not, the physicians were disguising the end-of-life decision as a normal medical practice,” Cohen-Almagor pointed out.
Written by Jeremy Kee
Recently while walking down Bath House Row in Hot Springs, Arkansas with two friends of mine, nurses both, I found myself involved in a conversation regarding the matter of assisted suicide, personified by the recent case of Ms. Brittany Maynard, who elected to end her own life prematurely so as to avoid the suffering and perceived indignity that would come to her terminally ill body. In her final statement to the world, she stated that her reasons were motivated in equal parts from a desire to avoid the pain of further deterioration, and to spare her family and friends from remembering her in such a state of disrepair. As Wesley Smith points out in his article at First Things, her decision to end her life was based entirely on the potentiality of living through the worst-case scenario.
The Brittany Maynard case, and indeed the entire euthanasia movement, disturbs me to my very soul, and I quite believe the reason it shakes so me is because it presupposes that life is only for those who can live it to the fullest, thereby rendering the quality of one’s life subjective; no longer is the purpose of life to reflect God’s glory onto a fallen world. It now becomes to earn money, take vacations, marry, have children, and so forth. These are all great things, and indeed comprise an overwhelming portion of what we are called to do in this life, but if one is rendered incapable of doing these things, can he no longer serve an edifying purpose for the Kingdom? It neglects the fact that a life spent in immense pain and suffering can serve a far greater purpose than the life spent on one’s feet. The euthanasia movement denies the great dignity, and I would here say the greatest dignity one can know, that can only be experienced through suffering.
I cannot help but to wonder if anyone has ever seriously suggested that Jesus should have taken His own life rather than suffer the indignity of the death towards which He marched. After all, there is nothing dignified about dying naked and splayed on a tree, a crown of thorns digging into your brow, with the pain of your lungs collapsing, slowly, and the heat of the sun baking what remains of your torn and tattered flesh. More dignified would it be to die by one’s own choosing, surely, in a comfortable place surrounded by loved ones.
And yet, Jesus chose His death. He chose it through not seeking another way, through allowing the will of the Father to be manifest. God the Father ordained this death, and Jesus knew full well that which awaited His brief odyssey in the flesh. While He certainly asked the Father for another, easier way out, he left that up to God to decide. “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup form me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done,¹” He uttered in Gethsemane, and His prayer was answered. He was crucified because God was not willing to “remove this cup,” for to do so would remove also Christ’s purpose. God’s will was done, and Jesus accepted it because He understood that it was the will of the Father, and therefore it was good. It is no insignificant point that Jesus references Psalm 22 when He cries out, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” – “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?²” So, too, does David lament in the 22nd Psalm, before declaring the goodness and the glory of the Lord.
He went to His death because He knew what we seem to be forgetting, namely that death, like life, has a purpose. It is not an isolated event that one must get through. It is not without meaning. In truth, it is a challenge to find a more meaningful event in one’s life than one’s death. As with one’s birth, in one’s final moments he is at his most vulnerable. In these moments, all pretension vanishes and what is left is the person in his most basic and true form. In our dying breath we are found to be our most genuine and honest self. Without His death, the sinner is still crimson stained.
What’s more, His death illustrates what it means to follow the Lord – it is not something that will always end well. If the lives of the Apostles are any indicator (and I believe that they are), then the life of a Christian is not meant to resemble a metaphorical walk through the garden. Jesus died when He could have lived. He died when He, as a third of the Trinity, could have just as easily found another way for salvation to be offered to man. He died because His death, and indeed all death, was and is the natural end to life. He died because God called Him to death.
If Christ endures a death under duress, why not we as well? Aren’t we called to take up our Cross and follow the Christ, even unto death? To “die with dignity,” which is the manner in which Ms. Maynard has been portrayed, seems to now exclude a natural death under less-than- beautiful conditions. It is, evidently, not considered dignified to allow God to determine when the man shall breathe his last. It is not dignified to place one’s trust in the Lord that one’s suffering in life will be naught but a distant and unfamiliar memory when we reach the Ever-after. No, to die with dignity now seems to mean only that death which is chosen by the individual, a “designer death”, if you will. The precedent this sets is dangerous, as the normalization of choosing how one’s life shall end opens the door for all manner of rationalized suicide. How many depressives, for example, who have considered in their darkest moments taking their own life, would have done so had the option been legally and readily available to them?
The argument that death was for Ms. Maynard inevitable is null and void, for all humans will sooner or later die. To suggest that she was right to end her life due to the suffering she was and would continue to experience not only mocks all the saints who could have ended their life rather than suffer at the hands of men, but also throws mud in the face of all who have died a prolonged death from the natural perversions of cancer. To end one’s own life is to suggest that God is not in control, that He is not with you and that you are left to take care of yourself.
I think about Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who spent his final days in a series of Nazi prisons and concentration camps. He must have known that his fate had been sealed given the crimes for which he was accused, and yet he lived joyfully. The morning of his death, he is said to have lead a sermon for his fellow condemned. Even in his final moments, naked on the gallows as our Lord was naked on the Cross, he is said to have been in prayer and unafraid.
I think of St. Stephen, who as he was being publically stoned to death in Jerusalem, “gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. And he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the son of Man standing at the right hand of God.³” And then he fell asleep. To have one’s body crushed by the weight and velocity of the stones seems most undignified, and yet in these horrible final moments, all Stephen could see or feel was the comfort of the Lord.
The scriptures tell us many times through that Jesus, had He so chosen, could have turned stones to bread, could have thrown himself from the top of the temple without worry, and that he could have summoned legions of angels at his arrest to upend the evil done by Judas and the Pharisees, and yet Christ walked to His death. He did not do so joyfully, but the fact remains that Jesus turned His eyes towards the Cross and allowed it to happen.
The quality of one’s death has nothing to do with the circumstances in which he finds himself, and has everything to do with the heart, and the manner in which he finds his rest.
¹ Luke 22.42, ESV
² Mark 15.34, ESV
³ Acts 7.55-6, ESV
Jeremy Kee is a Graduate Student in Counseling at Dallas Baptist University. He does research in Theology, Philosophy, Human Rights and Liberalism and has interests in many centers of study including Cosmopolitanism, Equality, Ethics, Theological Ethics, Christian Ethics, Political Science, Political Philosophy, Social Contract Theory, Education, History, Psychology, Economics, Theodicy, Book of Job, Theology of Suffering and Evil and International Relations Theory. Find other compelling written pieces from Jeremy at academia.edu/JeremyKee.
As reported on Tue 17/03/2015 by Colin Clapson at FlandersNews.be
Almost one in 20 people in northern Belgium died using euthanasia in 2013, more than doubling the numbers in six years, a study released Tuesday showed.
The number of people undergoing euthanasia in Belgium has doubled in only six years. In 2007 only 2% of deaths were attributed to euthanasia. By 2013 the figure had jumped to 4.6% according to figures produced by a research group linked to the Universities of Ghent and Brussels (VUB).
Researchers from the Care Research Group see two grounds for the rise: more and more people are requesting the procedure, while more and more doctors are prepared to carry it out.
In only six years the number of people requesting euthanasia soared from 3.5% of the number of deaths in 2007 to 6% in 2013. In 2013 three-quarters of requests were met, while in 2007 the figure was only half.
The researchers point to growing acceptance of euthanasia in society at large. Researcher Luc Deliens: “For the first time the figures are higher in Belgium, though the Netherlands has a longer history with the practice.”
6,000 doctors, signatories of death certificates, were quizzed as part of the research, the results of which are published in an article of New England Journal of Medicine.
Susan B. Anthony was passionate and logical in her arguments against abortion. The Revolution was her brainchild, co-founded with Elizabeth Cady Stanton as a weekly women’s rights newspaper that acted as the official voice of the National Woman Suffrage Association and in which appeared many of her writings alongside those of her like-minded colleagues. Most logical people would agree, then, that writings signed by “A” in a paper that Anthony funded and published were a reflection of her own opinions.
In one house editorial, signed “A”, she wrote:
“Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; but oh, thrice guilty is he who… drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!“
[The Revolution, 4(1):4 July 8, 1869]
Further, as one becomes familiar with Anthony’s compatriots and their thoughts on the issue, it is clear and consistent that these early women leaders did not believe abortion was a good thing for women. Courtesy of the SBA List
Priests for Life and the American Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists hosted a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Mon. February 23rd to spread the word that a simple and safe medical protocol has been developed that is saving babies whose mothers have taken the first drug of the two-drug procedure known as “RU-486.”
Priests for Life Medical Advisor Dr. Matt Harrison did the first-ever reversal in 2007. The child he saved is now a beautiful and healthy 7-year-old girl.
The video shows Father Frank with Priests for Life Medical Advisor, Dr Matt Harrison and doctors who have saved 127 babies by reversing RU486 abortions. 49 of those babies are still in the womb, and one of them was there with them at the National Press Conference, proving the success of the RU-486 reversal protocol!
For additional information, see Fr. Frank’s article HERE.
Published: 02/13/2015 at 7:50 PM
Original Article from WND.com
It was a blog post so revolting it sent reverberations across the ocean and shocked even ardent leftists. It was so brazenly horrifying some called it a hoax. Internet traffic was so high it caused the website to crash for a day or so.
It seems a feminist going by the name “Lana” wrote about aborting her baby at five months for no other reason than he was a boy. Her logic? “I couldn’t bring another monster into the world. We already have enough enemies as it is.”
What’s so appalling about this incident isn’t just that she ripped an innocent child from her womb for no other excuse than its gender. What is truly shocking is Lana’s scathing, dripping hatred of men, despite the requirements of what it took to get pregnant in the first place.
“In the spring of 2012, I found out that I was pregnant,” wrote Lana on Injustice Stories. “I had a good idea who the donator was, but money wasn’t really an issue, and I knew that I would be a good mother-like figure for the child by myself. I have always believed in the right for all women to have a choice in terminating their pregnancy, but when I confirmed the diagnosis about a month into it, I decided that I WAS ready to have this child.”
(She had a “good idea” who the “donator” was. Holy cow, how many of those “monstrous” donators was she sleeping with?)
And then, while flying to San Francisco to join an Occupy Wall Street rally, poor widdle Lana had a life-changing experience: After telling the man sitting next to her on the plane of her destination (in other words, confirming she’s a social leach), he zinged back with a one-line insult that left her feeling “verbally and emotionally raped.” “By the time we landed, my outlook had changed. I could no longer depend on men to be an ally of the cause,” she wrote.
OK, fine. Whatever. Life went on. Her baby grew. Lana dreamed of “teaching my daughter from a young age tolerance [cough cough] and feminist ideals. Choosing the right all-girls daycare, then elementary school, all so that she could grow up and thrive in an environment where women are told that they can do anything that they want to do. No man will be around to hurt her progress, no boys there to demean her or call her names.” [Cough. Sorry, had to clear my throat there.]
And then – the horror – Lana learned she was carrying a boy. “I started crying, weeping at the thought of what I was about to curse the world with.”
(Yes, those “cursed” men. The kind she willingly slept with in such quantity that she couldn’t even definitively name the “donator.”)
Once the shock of the baby’s gender wore off, Lana knew what she had to do: get rid of it. “My fetus became my warden,” she wrote, and so she toddled off to kill it. After the “procedure,” she said: “My body’s betrayal was no more, I was free, and for the first time since the airplane incident, I felt strong. I had done something positive, something that would actually make a difference, something good. …”
And then – get this – Lana was surprised by the outrage over her decision, to which she wrote, “I don’t care. … Most of you reading probably have no idea what it is like to go through the process of debating whether or not to abort a pregnancy, let alone the actual experience of it. To me, the experience was liberating, the emotions I felt when deciding what I should do, and after learning my fetus was male was something I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. Coming out of it a liberated woman though was more than worth it. … I stand by my decision to abort my baby because it was a male. … If the curse returns, I would do the exact same thing all over again.”
Pay attention to the language this woman uses. Monster. Worst enemy. Curse. Aborting a boy is positive. Good. Freeing. Liberating.
This, my friends, is what extreme feminism is all about: a seething hatred of anything with a Y chromosome and contempt for the “patriarchy.” Even helpless unborn babies are not immune to this hatred. Even one’s own flesh and blood is not immune.
“I don’t hate men,” Lana claims. [Cough cough] “I hate the patriarchy, what men, and even some women, turn into, I wasn’t going to let that happen with my offspring. The chances were greater that it would with a male, it was unacceptable.”
Well, good news, Lana: Your offspring will never contribute to that patriarchal oppression because you chose to rip him apart and flush him down a toilet. You literally sacrificed your son on the altar of feminism. Congratulations. You’re a Real Woman.
Alleging surprise at the fury that rolled toward her, Lana replied, “I cannot believe some of the emails that have been forwarded to me. Do people really exist who want to see me dead because of what I chose to do with my own body? Those are the minds of mentally disturbed individuals.”
No, Lana; people aren’t mad because of what you did to your own body. They’re livid because of what you did to your son’s body.
Lana has no legitimate, logical “excuse” for her abortion. She cannot plead poverty, since at the beginning of her post she says “money wasn’t really an issue.” She also wrote that “carrying the banner of the Feminist Movement” meant eschewing a career, suggesting a degree of financial independence.
Nor can she plead medical reasons, since apparently she was in blooming health during her pregnancy. Nor can she plead birth defects, since she admits her baby was “progressing in a healthy manner.”
No, she’s merely ticked off because an unknown “suit jockey” on an airplane several months before gave her a one-line insult. For this, she kills her own innocent baby.
Is it sane and normal to loathe half of the earth’s population merely for possessing a Y chromosome? Tell me, who is mentally disturbed?
Lana’s taunting lack of remorse and pride in her actions are what apparently shocked people. “If the curse returns, I would do the exact same thing all over again.” There’s a certain tone of “Nyah nyah, you can’t stop me!” that is both childish and odious.
As one commenter put it, “She committed a hate crime with her child as the victim.” Another man wrote, “You have topped every horrible thing I’ve ever seen during my three deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. It takes quite a bit to shock me these days, and you managed to do it.”
I’ve often lamented the evils feminism has wrought on our society. It’s clear Lana is extreme even by leftists standards, but I don’t hear many feminists protesting about abortion (excuse me, reproductive health) in general or sex-selective abortions in particular. Therefore I must conclude they tacitly approve.
Face it, Lana. You killed your son because you are a petulant brat who isn’t mature enough to handle a stranger’s insult. You took it out on the innocent baby you conceived by slutting around. You are not a feminist; you are a gender terrorist. Pray for forgiveness. Pray very very hard.
And please … stop having sex. Or at least get sterilized, lest you conceive another “monster.”
February 11, 2015
The percentage of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome before birth and who eventually become victims of abortions is outlandishly high. Studies show
somewhere in the neighborhood of 70-90 percent of unborn babies with Down syndrome are victimized by abortions.
North Dakota eventually became the first state in the United States to ban abortions on babies diagnosed with Down Syndrome. With the governor’s signature on the ban in 2013, Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple took that state in a decidedly pro-life direction.
Eventually a judge dismissed a legal challenge abortion activists brought against the legislation.
Now, the state of Ohio is considering a similar ban on abortions of babies with Down syndrome. Naturally, abortion backers have no problem with aborting babies simply because they have the disability.
Only one U.S. state, North Dakota, has a ban on abortions after the discovery of a fetal anomaly. Indiana lawmakers introduced a similar bill last month, although a bill much like it died in 2013.
Anti-abortion activists aren’t trying to prohibit women from receiving fetal diagnoses through amniocentesis, said Stephanie Ranade Krider, executive director of Ohio Right to Life. But they fear women are making decisions to terminate pregnancies after receiving only a preliminary screening, even before they have amnio.
“We’re never opposed to people having as much information as they can have about their baby,” Krider said. Many times, Krider said, “Those are just screening tests,” citing a December investigation by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting.
“We think there’s a lot of misinformation out there,” she said.Abortion rights activists condemned the proposal as over-reaching.
At the time North Dakota adopted its bill, Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest praised it.
“A civil society does not discriminate against people – born and unborn – for their sex or for disability. We should be celebrating diversity, not destroying it,” she said. “Women in particular have been targeted for death in the womb, and we’ve also seen dramatic abortion rates for children with disabilities which put them at risk for extinction. Gov. Jack Dalrymple, Rep. Bette Grande and the legislators in North Dakota have shown courageous humanity in passing this legislation.”
Yoest said that, while federal and state laws protect women and the disabled from discrimination, the unborn are not similarly protected.
The principle that all patients must always receive humane care is under pronounced assault in bioethics, Indeed, some bioethicists now argue that nursing homes should be required to starve Alzheimer’s patients to death–even if they willingly eat, and presumably even if the patient begs for food–if so instructed in an advance medical directive.
To show you how the culture of death corrupts, spoon feeding isn’t a medical treatment. It is basic humane care–akin to keeping clean, warm, or turning to prevent bed sores. Just as the latter three would never be withheld regardless of an advance directive, neither should food and water!
But suicide pushers now teach people how to kill themselves by starvation, called “voluntary stop eating and drinking” (VSED) in the culture of death trade. So, these bioethicists say that those who aren’t competent to commit VSED, should have the right to have others kill them slowly by refusing to provide them food and waterwhen they are capable of eating and drinking by mouth.
“VSED-by-proxy” is supported increasingly in high places. For the second time (that I know of), a supportive article was published in the prestigious Hastings Center Report. From, “Controlling the End Game of Dementia,” by Paul T. Menzel and M. Colette Chandler-Cramer:
Advance directives to withhold food and water by mouth add an important option not contingent on happening to need life-sustaining treatment. Existing U.S. law does not provide such directives a bright green light, but it provides considerable logical support.
Competent patients already have the legal right to die by stopping eating and drinking, as well as the legal right to direct refusal of treatment in advance, including treatments absolutely necessary for continued life. So if becoming incompetent doesn’t cause someone to lose her rights but only means the rights have to be invoked by a proxy, why should becoming incompetent cause someone to lose the right to die by refusing to eat and drink?
Understand: This is not refusing a feeding tube–which is deemed medical treatment and can be refused by advance directive. Ditto, antibiotics, etc…
Rather, to repeat myself so that the point is sure to sink in–it would force nursing homes and care facilities to starve patients to death who willingly eat and drink!
The advocacy strategy here, of course, is to allow lethal injecting Alzheimer’s patients, e.g., “Why should we be forced to starve these people when we could easily inject them?” The answer is: We shouldn’t starve them!
The way things are going, the only people allowed in medicine will be those willing to kill. How scary is that?
I recently came across a young woman who is an abortion clinic escort. She asked why someone would stand outside an abortion clinic and preach. She calls him “A.”
>> “A” is a regular and is known for his attempts to connect with clients and companions in his approach of ‘I was just like you. I understand you. I care for you.’ This is “A.”
In this clip below, he is talking to clients and companions waiting by the entrance for the doors to open. (Note: video of minister was changed to audio only by blog owner)
“A” increases his volume after the clients enter the clinic, but his message is always the same. Escorts have heard him so many times, they can recite the story he shares on the sidewalk. ‘I wasted my life until I was 23. Then I read the Bible. My friends said they would find out about Jesus later. One died in a car wreck. He didn’t have time to find out. You never know what is going to happen. You need to find out about Jesus today.’
One of the interesting things about “A” recently is how he speaks about his wife’s pregnancy. When he first started saying, “My baby is 19 weeks old,” we thought he was talking about a born baby. No, he was talking about his wife’s pregnancy. Recently, “A” let us know his baby was 26 weeks old, adding that the baby recently became legally safe from abortion doctors. An escort observed, “I wonder if he thinks that abortion doctors do drive-by abortions and will randomly attempt an abortion if his wife gets too close to a clinic?”
My question is if he cares for the clients and companions so much, why does he speak words meant to shame and harass them for their decision? I know that is a rhetorical question and won’t be answered, but it doesn’t matter if you scream your words or softly speak them. You are still there to interfere with a legal, medical decision by any way you can. <<
I will be referring to this post in an upcoming Part 2 post which will also be one of personal testimony.
My concern with the legalization of assisted suicide is the psychological impact on the rest of society. I am writing from my personal experience.
I have dealt with depression for almost 50 of my 63 years. I have been suicidal on numerous occasions and at one point, within the past ten years, I experienced active suicidal ideation for a continuous six-month period almost 24 hours per day. I even carried a knife in my handbag, just waiting for the right moment to stab myself.
When I learned of the assisted suicide story of the Canadian woman who went to Switzerland, I personally heard the message that my life was not worth living. That assisted suicide death gave me the message that when things get really bad and there doesn’t seem to be any hope, I should give up my struggle. Being actively suicidal is often a terminal illness.
I have been struggling during the past 35 years, in particular, through multiple varieties of therapy and medication and through hospitalizations.
Adults are role models. No amount of denial will change that fact of human nature. Children imitate what they see their parents, teachers, idols and even their peers doing.
I am a parent and I want to show my children that one can grow through the struggle. I watched my own parents leading very unhappy lives and living in an unhappy marriage. They were not good role models for me, but I also understand that they tried their best, in spite of their limitations. My father was diagnosed with a ‘nervous disorder’ in the 1950’s and was treated with barbiturates. Looking back, I can see that he was seriously depressed much of the time and he was unable to work because of his illness. My mother’s depression was never diagnosed, nor acknowledged by anyone, but I saw her endless tears. When one is ill or depressed, one is very often also angry, even if the anger is involuntary, and I witnessed for many years my parents’ anger, especially towards each other. My own depression developed in my early teenage years and I modeled my parents’ anger during the next decades of my life.
I am a role model for my children, even though they are now adults. I have warned them of the strong family history of depression and that they should be alert to its signs and symptoms in themselves, in order to get help early. I want my children to see and believe that life involves struggle, pain, grief, illness and growing old. I need to grow old with dignity and even with joy, just to prove to my children that it is possible to do so. I want them to grieve for me at my natural death. If I were to die by my own hand or with the intentional involvement of someone else, I know that my children would have a much more difficult time not taking their own lives when facing a serious trial in life.
With the prevalence of suicide in our society, especially among the young, how can we endorse this truly devastating role-modeling of assisted suicide? How can we dare to call it anything other than suicide?
The idea of “dying with dignity” is being deliberately presented in a romantic manner to the public, as suggested by the image of a person dying in the arms of a loving spouse. Those who are contemplating suicide are most often very depressed, feeling hopeless, alone, isolated, and often unloved.
When the suicidal thoughts overtake me, I feel completely alone, unable to communicate, I lose any sense of personal identity and I want to scream from the severity of the mental pain.
The image of dying in the arms of one who loves you is very painful to behold by one who is suicidal and feeling unloved, and increases their feelings of worthlessness. If someone wants to die who is loved, how much more does one want to die who is not loved.
Those with serious depression and suicidal tendencies need encouragement to live and grow into healthier attitudes. They do not need societal inducement to give it all up. Unfortunately, they are also usually unable to speak publicly on their own behalf.
Patricia Russo writes for the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.
Hilton Griswold reads the prayer Pastor Joe Wright prayed in the Kansas State legislature on January 23, 1996.
CAUTION: There are some images of aborted babies shown in this video.
Join Anglicans for Life in Marching for Life
Anglicans for Life and Anglican bishops will be marching in Washington DC and San Francisco, CA in January. Will you?
March for Life – Washington DC – Thursday January 22nd, 2015
12th St, National Mall, Washington DC
Rally: 12:00 Noon
March: 1:00 PM
Silent No More Testimonies at the steps of the Supreme Court after the March
Walk for Life – San Francisco, CA – Saturday January 24th, 2015
Civic Center Plaza
Silent No More Awareness Testimonies – 10:30 AM to 12:15 PM
Rally: 12:30 to 1:30 PM
Walk 1:30 PM
To Join AFL, email Georgette@AnglicansforLife.org or call 412-749-0455.
It is one of my closest held beliefs that women deserve better options than abortion. For many women it is a devastatingly traumatic event they often carry with them the rest of their lives. Below is a long quote detailing just one woman’s experience with abortion. This is credited to Clinic Quotes, which published the original post on September 14, 2012.
Today I have a blog recommendation for you – Keep Life Legal, written by Rev. K.H. Marple, and providing pro-life news, commentary and ministry. She has put her finger directly on an issue I believe central to pro-life ministry and support within the Christian Church.
“The Church, as a whole, has been woefully inadequate in getting the Message of Life out. The Church has stood by silently while millions of children have died these past 40 years. The Church typically stands on the excuse that the abortion issue is political. Political? Is it political that innocent children die every day to the tune of at least 4000 per day in the United States?” original text
At Southwestern Women’s Options in Albuquerque, abortions are offered until birth.
“Just sit on the toilet” New Mexico abortionists send women to hotel rooms alone to await room-service abortions
An unnamed counselor at the facility advises Live Action’s 27-week-pregnant investigator:
If we can’t catch it [delivery of the dead baby – the final stage of the abortion procedure] early enough, which has happened… then you’ll want to unlock the door to the hotel room, get your cell phone, and just sit on the toilet. You don’t have to look at anything … you can stay on the phone with us until the doctor and nurse get there[.]
A 25-year-old abortion counselor has revealed why she decided to film herself having an abortion.
My response to this young lady – Not so positive if you’re the baby being ripped apart.
Now I spotlight a rebuttal to Emily’s abortion story from the ProLife Society.
(CNSNews.com) – Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for external medical affairs at the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, says in a video that the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted disease that everyone will contract.
“In terms of sexually transmitted diseases, expect to have HPV once you become sexually intimate,” says Cullins, who is an obstetrician and gynecologist. “All of us get it.”
As reported on TownHall.com:
Gosnell Movie reached its fundraising goal of $2.1 million today with four days to spare. Filmmakers Ann McElhinney, Phelim McAleer and journalist Magdalena Segieda are now assured to receive at least that sum in order to make the film a reality.
The movie is not a documentary, unlike other films produced by McElhinney and McAleer, but rather will be a scripted television film about convicted murderer and serial killer Kermit Gosnell. Gosnell was found guilty of three counts of first degree murder and one count of involuntary manslaughter, but slaughtered hundreds (if not thousands) of newborn babies in supposedly “botched” illegal late term abortions. Gosnell has been stripped of his medical license and was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
Gosnell’s trial was largely ignored by the mainstream media, and was described as just a “local crime story” by a journalist from the Washington Post. (She later admitted she was incorrect in that assessment.) The movie seeks to inform the public about Gosnell’s atrocities.
The project was funded on crowdfunding website IndieGoGo in order to bypass the internal Hollywood politics that the filmmakers claim would have prevented the movie from receiving funds.
The fundraising was truly a grassroots effort. The vast majority of the 23,471 donors contributed amounts of $100 or less. Only 72 people claimed the “perks” from donating over $1,000.
There has not yet been a timeline set for the movie’s production or release.
There are just two additional days to contribute to this worthy movie.
UPDATE (7/29/14) – The contribute link is no longer valid as they received full funding for the project thanks to conscientious folks like you. For updates on the process of the movie, check their website, Gosnell Movie, America’s Biggest Serial Killer.
The Team of Four are:
1. Archbishop Eamon Martin. Armagh, Ireland
2. Mickey Harte. Gaelic Football Team Manager Co. Tyrone, Ireland
3. Bernadette Goulding, Rachel’s Vineyard, Ireland.
4. Mary Fitzgibbon. Nurse – Midwife Lecturer
In this shocking video, Life Dynamics Inc., a national pro-life organization located in Denton, Texas compares unborn babies murdered inside American abortion clinics to those killed from American wars.
From 1973 through 2011, at least 55 million unborn children have been slaughtered in the womb in our nation.
Mark Crutcher, president of Life Dynamics in explaining why they created this video said, “We did this video because it’s very easy to talk about 55 million dead babies but no one can fully wrap their minds around those numbers. This will help America understand just how overwhelming these numbers are and demonstrate the magnitude of abortion in the United States.”
To learn more about Life Dynamics and our hard-hitting investigations, visit: http://www.lifedynamics.com
Pope Francis greets pilgrims with disabilities and senior citizens after celebrating Mass for Evangelium Vitae Day June 16, 2013. The day called attention to care for the aged, the unborn, the sick and those with disabilities. (CNS photo/Paul Harding)
My other blog is on King Baudouin I of the Belgians and his wife, Queen Fabiola. They were a magnificent couple with deep springs of faith rooted in the Roman Catholic tradition. A recent post I wrote for the Baudouin & Fabiola blog deals with the King’s steadfast belief in the sanctity and value of life.
I stumbled upon a YouTube video which changed me forever.