download pregnancy movies

 

 

ROCHESTERPROLIFE.org

 

 

ROCHESTERPROLIFE.org

Sunday, August 20, 2017
     Login   
 
 
 

 Source for locating a Center in your time of need!

 OPTION LINE HELP

Toll Free  1-800-712-HELP (4357) 

24/7

Locate a pregnancy help center here: Pregnancy Centers


 

 Source for locating a Center in your time of need!

 OPTION LINE HELP

Toll Free  1-800-712-HELP (4357) 

24/7

Locate a pregnancy help center here: Pregnancy Centers


 

Print  
American Life League 2009 - 5

    <Previous Page | Next Page>

Pro-Life Today | 13 July 2009

HEADLINES

Consuming Secondhand Steroids
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/bri/bri_01steroids.html
Life Issues
Few in the general public are aware that oral contraceptives ("the Pill"), levonorgestrel ("the morning-after pill"), and mifepristone, or RU-486 ("the abortion pill"), are also all steroids. In fact, they are the same sort of synthetic anabolic steroids that are illegal for professional athletes to take, but they are anabolic for female tissues (like breast tissue) rather than muscle.  In 2006, the World Health Organization acknowledged that the estrogen-plus-progestin drugs (birth control pills and combination hormone replacement drugs like Prem-Pro) cause cancers in the breast, cervix, and liver.

Obama Science Czar Holdren Called for Forced Abortions
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103707
World Net Daily
The man President Obama has chosen to be his science czar once advocated a shocking approach to the "population crisis" feared by scientists at the time: namely, compulsory abortions in the U.S. and a "Planetary Regime" with the power to enforce human reproduction restrictions.

Vatican Newspaper Publishes CDF Clarification on Abortion in Wake of Fisichella Controversy
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09071008.html
Life Site News
In response to damage caused by Archbishop Fisichella's article in L'Osservatore Romano, Pope Benedict XVI is believed to have ordered Cardinal Bertone to issue a statement reiterating Catholic doctrine on the sanctity of human life.

Online Advice Column Tells Men How to Coerce Their Girlfriends to Abort
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09071004.html
Life Site News
A men's advice column published on the sexually suggestive AskMen.com website, which describes a coercive plan of action for men on how to talk their pregnant girlfriends into aborting their unborn child, has prompted outrage from pro-life groups and commentators. The backlash over the column appears to have been so forceful that the site has now pulled the offending piece.

ALL Report: 'Tiller, Terror and TV Tilt'


American life League exposes the bias and hypocrisy in the "mainstream" media's coverage of late-term abortionist George Tiller's murder.

To view the latest ALL Report, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE

FEATURE STORY

THE VATICAN CORRECTS ARCHBISHOP FISICHELLA
By Judie Brown

As a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life, and as someone who begged its president to correct his statement regarding the nine-year-old Brazilian girl’s abortion, I am gratified to present, in its entirety, a report on the correction made by the Vatican’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. We praise God that the light of truth has prevailed and has publicly dispelled the confusion created by Archbishop Fisichella’s original statement.

Retractions. The Holy Office Teaches Archbishop Fisichella a Lesson
   
The congregation for the doctrine of the faith has released a "clarification" that in fact repudiates the article published in "L'Osservatore Romano" by the president of the pontifical academy for life, on the abortion performed on a Brazilian mother-child. Here's the document

by Sandro Magister

ROME, July 10, 2009 - This afternoon, at the very same time as Benedict XVI was meeting at the Vatican with the United States president Barack Obama, "L'Osservatore Romano" printed a "clarification" by the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, "on procured abortion."
The "clarification" is what many were waiting for after a controversial article published last March 15 by the same newspaper of the Holy See, signed by
Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the pontifical academy for life.

The clarification is printed on page 7 of the newspaper of the Holy See, and is announced on the front page.

Fisichella's article concerned the case of an extremely young Brazilian mother-child who was made to abort the twins she was carrying in her womb, and was interpreted by many as justifying the double abortion.

There followed a lively public controversy, which
www.chiesa related in two extensive articles ["Drifting Mines. In Africa the Condom, in Brazil Abortion" (March 23) and "The Recife Case. Rome Has Spoken, But the Dispute Has Not Ended" (July 7)].  But at the same time, the Vatican authorities received many protests and requests through private channels.

These included the step taken by 27 of the 46 members of the pontifical academy for life. On April 4, they wrote a joint letter to Fisichella, their president, asking him to correct the "mistaken" positions he had expressed in the article.

On April 21, Fisichella responded to them in writing, rejecting the request.

On May 1, 21 of the signers of the previous letter then went to Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, asking the congregation for a clarifying statement on the Church's teaching on the matter of abortion.

The letter was delivered on May 4, but did not receive any reply. The writers learned from an official at the congregation that the letter had been forwarded to the secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, "because Fisichella's article had been written at his request."

Two members of the pontifical academy for life then sent a dossier on the matter directly to the pope.

On June 8, Benedict XVI discussed the case with Bertone, and ordered that a statement be published reconfirming that the Church's teaching on abortion is unchanged.

The "clarification" published today in "L'Osservatore Romano," dated July 11, 2009, is precisely the fruit of this decision.

Here it is in its original form: 

On procured abortion

Clarification from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Recently a number of letters have been sent to the Holy See, some of them from prominent figures in political and ecclesial life, explaining the confusion that has been created in various countries, especially in Latin America, following the manipulation and exploitation of an article by His Excellency Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, on the sad affair of the "Brazilian girl."

In this article, which appeared in "L'Osservatore Romano" on March 15, 2009, the doctrine of the Church was presented, while still keeping in mind the dramatic situation of the aforementioned girl, who - as could be demonstrated afterward - had been accompanied with all pastoral delicacy, in particular by the archbishop of Olinda and Recife at the time, His Excellency Archbishop Joseph Cardoso Sobrinho.

In this regard, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reiterates that the Church's teaching on procured abortion has not changed, nor can it change.

This teaching has been presented in numbers 2270-2273 in the
Catechism of the Catholic. Church in these terms:

Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life â 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you' (Jer. 1:5). My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth (Psalm 139:15).

Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.

This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish (Didach, 2:2). God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crime (Vatican Council II, "Gaudium et Spes", 51).

Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," (Code of Canon Law, can. 1398), by the very commission of the offens (Code of Canon Law, can. 1314) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 1323-1324). The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation: "The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death... The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined... As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights. (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction "
Donum Vitae", III).

In the encyclical "Evangelium Vitae," Pope John Paul II reaffirmed this teaching with his authority as Supreme Pastor of the Church:

By the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church. (no. 62)

As for abortion procured in certain difficult and complex situations, the clear and precise teaching of Pope John Paul II applies:

It is true that the decision to have an abortion is often tragic and painful for the mother, insofar as the decision to rid herself of the fruit of conception is not made for purely selfish reasons or out of convenience, but out of a desire to protect certain important values such as her own health or a decent standard of living for the other members of the family. Sometimes it is feared that the child to be born would live in such conditions that it would be better if the birth did not take place. Nevertheless, these reasons and others like them, however serious and tragic, can never justify the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. (Encyclical "Evangelium Vitae", no. 58)

As for the problem of specific medical treatments intended to preserve the health of the mother, it is necessary to make a strong distinction between two different situations: on the one hand, a procedure that directly causes the death of the fetus, sometimes inappropriately called "therapeutic" abortion, which can never be licit in that it is the direct killing of an innocent human being; on the other hand, a procedure not abortive in itself that can have, as a collateral consequence, the death of the child:

If, for example, saving the life of the future mother, independently of her condition of pregnancy, urgently required a surgical procedure or another therapeutic application, which would have as an accessory consequence, in no way desired or intended, but inevitable, the death of the fetus, such an action could not be called a direct attack on the innocent life. In these conditions, the operation can be considered licit, as can other similar medical procedures, always provided that a good of high value, like life, is at stake, and that it is not possible to postpone it until after the birth of the child, or to use any other effective remedy. (Pius XII, "Speech to the Fronte della Famiglia and the Associazione Famiglie numerose," November 27, 1951)

As for the responsibility of medical workers, the words of Pope John Paul II must be recalled:

Their profession calls for them to be guardians and servants of human life. In today's cultural and social context, in which science and the practice of medicine risk losing sight of their inherent ethical dimension, health-care professionals can be strongly tempted at times to become manipulators of life, or even agents of death. In the face of this temptation their responsibility today is greatly increased. Its deepest inspiration and strongest support lie in the intrinsic and undeniable ethical dimension of the health-care profession, something already recognized by the ancient and still relevant Hippocratic Oath, which requires every doctor to commit himself to absolute respect for human life and its sacredness. (Encyclical "Evangelium Vitae", no. 89)  

 


Pro-Life Today | 10 July 2009

HEADLINES

Sotomayor Was Part of Legal Group that Argued Abortion is a Fundamental Right™
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=50812
CNS News
The right to an abortion is not different than any other fundamental right, according to a legal brief issued by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), in a case regarding Missouri state funding restrictions on abortion from 1988 when attorney Sonia Sotomayor was a member of the groups governing board. Sotomayor, now a U.S. court of appeals judge nominated by President Barack Obama to be an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, served on the board from 1980 to 1992, during which time the organization weighed in on five abortion cases. These included the 1988 case of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services and the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold confirmation hearings on Sotomayor next week.

Abortion Parties? - When Abortion Becomes a Lark
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070911.html
Life Site News
Despite the fact that throughout the West abortions continue to take place by the tens of thousands, abortion is still generally portrayed as a grave issue, not to be taken lightly, a difficult decision.  Hilary Clinton, one of the world's foremost advocates of abortion, herself has described abortion as a "sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."  For some, however, it seems that abortion is just another reason to throw a party.

Dead or Alive: 'Brain Death,' the Vulnerable, and the Slippery Slope
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=329
Catholic Culture
Nathaniel Turner had a short, painful life. His parents are divorced, and while they both live in Massachusetts, Nathaniel spent most of his young life with a grandmother in Alabama. But he was staying with his father-- a man with a record of criminal violence-- when he was brought to the emergency room, comatose, with bruises all over his little body. His father is now facing criminal charges for beating the boy nearly to death.

ALL Report: 'Tiller, Terror and TV Tilt'


American life League exposes the bias and hypocrisy in the "mainstream" media's coverage of late-term abortionist George Tiller's murder.

To view the latest ALL Report, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE

FEATURE STORY

FREE EXERCISE OF DESPOTISM: NINTH CIRCUIT TELLS CONSCIENTIOUS PHARMACISTS TO TAKE A HIKE
By Judie Brown

It's Friday, which usually means there must be some really bad news out there. Sure enough, what the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals did yesterday is about as bad as it can get. The news report that first caught my attention stated, The federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today overturned a lower court ruling that had temporarily put on hold a Washington State requirement that pharmacists dispense medications to which they are morally opposed. As a result, pharmacists may soon be forced to choose between dispensing abortifacients, including Plan B, or leaving the profession.

Mind you, the basic language and meaning of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is as clear as crystal. The
First Amendment states, â€œCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. That means that through its free exercise clause, the 1st Amendment protects the individuals right to freedom of conscience and free expression of religious beliefs.

But not so fast, pardner! The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals begs to differ.

We spent some time reading the actual Ninth-Circuit decision just to get a feel for this overbroad and impudent exercise of judicial power. The decision examines the
Washington State regulation  that sparked the original challenge. This regulation was challenged by a family-owned pharmacy and two individual pharmacists. A lower court agreed with the pharmacists argument, but maintained that a referral must be made when a pharmacist or pharmacy refuses to fill a particular prescription. However, now the Ninth Circuit has tossed out the lower court ruling, stating,

Under the rules, all pharmacies have a “duty to deliver all medications “in a timely manner. Neither regulation challenged in this case applies to refusals only for religious reasons. The new rules apply to all lawful medications, not just those that pharmacies or pharmacists may oppose for religious reasons. Pharmacies and pharmacists who do not have a religious objection to Plan B must comply with the rules to the same extent—no more and no less—as pharmacies and pharmacists who may have a religious objection to Plan B. Therefore, the rules are generally applicable.

The ruling opposes the lower courts reasoning by asserting,

The district court failed to give proper weight to the rules distinction between pharmacies and pharmacists. The rules do not prohibit individual pharmacists from refusing to dispense a medication for religious reasons. A pharmacist may refuse to dispense Plan B on a religious ground because ultimately it is the duty of the pharmacy, not the pharmacist, to deliver lawfully prescribed drugs. The record demonstrates that several different methods of accommodation are available. For example, the Board itself stated, in a post-adoption letter to pharmacists and pharmacy owners, that for females eighteen and over, [a] pharmacy technician can sell Plan B as an over-the-counter product, but the pharmacist must be available to provide the patient with consultation and advice if requested. It may also be sufficient to have a second pharmacist available by telephone if the onsite pharmacist objects to dispensing a medication or providing a requested consultation. Thus, the rules do not selectively impose an undue obligation on conduct motivated by religious belief because the rules actually provide for religious accommodation”an individual pharmacist can decide whether to dispense a particular medication based on his religious beliefs and a particular pharmacy may continue to employ that pharmacist by making appropriate accommodations.

The bottom line with the Ninth Circuit is quite clear. The Ninth Circuit denies that pharmacists with religious or ethical objections are being discriminated against and that their First Amendment rights are being violated.  Instead, it opines,

[A]ny refusal to dispense”regardless of whether it is motivated by religion, morals, conscience, ethics, discriminatory prejudices, or personal distaste for a patient”violates the rules. (emphasis added)

In other words, if a pharmacist objects to providing information or an actual prescription medication because he or she understands how the medication works and does not want to be a party to providing a chemical that could cause an innocent personâs death, that pharmacist could lose his or her job.

Further, the Ninth Circuit opines, [T]he purpose of the new rules was not to eliminate religious objections to delivery of lawful medicines, but to eliminate all objections that do not ensure patient health, safety, and access to medication [emphasis added]."

If you are getting the impression that this opinion pits the patient's desires against the pharmacists ethical concerns, then you are accurately understanding the Ninth Circuits mindset. The fact of the matter is really quite simple: If a patient is given a prescription for a deadly chemical and you, as a pharmacist, object to filling that prescription”on moral, ethical or religious grounds”you are wrong, because by refusing to accommodate the patient, you are not ensuring patient health, safety, and access to medication.

Drumming you out of the profession because you uphold your professionals proper ethical practices could be the end game. Time will tell. But as Wesley Smith, expert attorney and noted physician-assisted suicide opponent, has pointed out, there is more danger in the Ninth Circuits decision than first meets the eye.

Smith analyzed this decision in the context of Washington State's recent decriminalization of physician-assisted suicide. He noted that the state law does protect a physicians conscience rights, but cleverly leaves the barn door wide open when a pharmacist raises objections. He therefore concludes that the Ninth Circuits opinion puts pharmacists directly in the line of fire when
physician-assisted suicide is sought: 

That very narrow definition trickily takes away the non participation protection from pharmacists, since to participate only means to perform the duties of the attending (prescribing) physician, the consulting physician, or the mental health professional who consults in the case. It does not mean dispensing the lethal prescription or filling out the forms required of pharmacists.

Thus, under the reasoning of the court ruling, not only will pharmacists in WA have to dispense an overdose to patients knowing it is intended for use in suicide, even if they have a religious objection, but they will also have to perform the required bureaucratic functions. Ironically, one professional role pharmacists are supposed to play“which is why they do far more than merely count pills into bottles”is to protect patients from receiving prescriptions that could conflict with other prescribed drugs, resulting in their deaths.

We hope and pray that this ridiculous decision will be challenged immediately. For not only will pharmacists suffer dire consequences if the Ninth Circuits decision is allowed to stand, but many other health-care professionals could be pressured into actions they find morally objectionable. If they are required to leave their faith and ethical principles at the door, then leaving the profession will be their only alternative. And frankly, that is so un-American I can hardly fathom it.

When
Pope Benedict XVI spoke to Catholic pharmacists a couple of years ago, he told them in no uncertain terms, 

It is not possible to anesthetize the conscience, for example, when it comes to molecules whose aim is to stop an embryo implanting or to cut short someone's life... I invite your federation [of pharmacists] to consider conscientious objection which is a right that must be recognized for your profession so you can avoid collaborating, directly or indirectly, in the supply of products which have clearly immoral aims, for example abortion or euthanasia.

In fact, his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, was even more emphatic about this subject in The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae):

 To refuse to take part in committing an injustice is not only a moral duty; it is also a basic human right. Were this not so, the human person would be forced to perform an action intrinsically incompatible with human dignity, and in this way human freedom itself, the authentic meaning and purpose of which are found in its orientation to the true and the good, would be radically compromised. What is at stake therefore is an essential right which, precisely as such, should be acknowledged and protected by civil law. (section 74)

For the sake of every man or woman who has taken up the mantle of being a health-care provider with principles, we hope, pray and, in fact, will demand that everything possible be done to unravel this oppressive ruling.

 


Pro-Life Today | 09 July 2009

HEADLINES

Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-pill-ruling9-2009jul09,0,6469894.story
LA Times
Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the "morning after" contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.  In a case that could affect policy across the western U.S., a supermarket pharmacy owner in Olympia, Wash., failed in a bid to block 2007 regulations that required all Washington pharmacies to stock and dispense the pills.

Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg: I Thought Roe Would Help Eradicate Unwanted Populations Through Abortion
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070901.html
Life Site News
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems to have made a stunning admission in favor of cleansing America of unwanted populations by aborting them. In an interview (
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/magazine/12ginsburg-t.html?pagewanted=4) with the New York Times, the judge said that Medicaid should cover abortions, and that she had originally expected that Roe v. Wade would facilitate such coverage in order to control the population of groups "that we don't want to have too many of."  

Abortion Employee Runs into Pro-Lifer, Keeps Going at Bizarre Rockford Abortuary
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070807.html
Life Site News
The pattern of abuse at a Rockford abortion facility has continued after an employee allegedly struck with his car a homeless man praying with pro-life protesters, and drove away, according to witnesses at the scene.  The vehicle reportedly struck Scott Griffin on Wednesday as it drove into the driveway of the abortion facility, where pro-lifers say workers frequently drive recklessly in an apparent attempt to intimidate those praying and handing out pro-life literature.

FEATURE STORY

INESCAPABLE CONSEQUENCES BANISHED FROM PUBLIC DISCUSSION
By Judie Brown

Time and time again, we are called upon to respond to a question average Americans ask: “Why doesn't the media”conservative or liberal”show a picture of an aborted baby when they discuss abortion on the news? (My opinion is that they ask either because they do not understand why the conflict exists between pro-life and pro-death forces or because they have never heard of, thought about or seen the reality of abortion.)

I tell them that the biggest reason for the absence of documented pictures of aborted children is that the media does not want the public to see who dies during an abortion, or describe who dies during human embryonic stem cell research experiments, or discuss who suffers because he or she has facilitated an abortion. I go on to explain that there are as many reasons why the pictures and the facts remain unobserved as there are reporters. The bottom line is that orchestrated ignorance is best for the culture of death, and so the truth is simply not reported.

It might also be the case that abortion makes journalists uncomfortable, because somewhere in their past there is an abortion, or a child conceived inconveniently and ignored in the same way one might avoid admitting that his socks don’t match. Who knows?

What we do know, however, is that this ongoing rejection of the facts is killing people, numbing consciences and generally creating misery everywhere. There has been quite a bit of information in the alternative media recently, for example, that is astounding, frightening and yet unreported by major national news sources. 

How many national news outlets discussed even one of the following reports?

1. A Las Vegas
abortion mill has been ordered to stop “performing surgeries without a license because inspectors said they found medical equipment, medications and literature in a place where alleged abortions are being done. This is a place where women and children's lives were put at risk â many lives I might add and nary a national note of alarm was sounded. But if a single imprisoned terrorist had been “abused, nobody with a national reporting platform would have ignored the allegations, whether true or false, for a minute.

2. A new study has shown that women who have an abortion could be risking the health of their next baby. Those who
terminate a pregnancy are subsequently more likely to deliver their next child prematurely, thus placing the premature baby at greater risk for lung disease, cerebral palsy, blindness or deafness.   

While some physicians are claiming that this is debatable, the fact is major media outlets have not addressed it. If the subject had been whether or not a certain form of heart surgery resulted in a higher risk of death, every outlet in America would have been on top of the story, pointing accusatory fingers and possibly destroying medical careers in the process.

3. Dr. Priscilla Coleman, an associate professor at Bowling Green State University, has completed an analysis of various studies exposing the effects of
abortion on subsequent parenting. Her paper describes a number of ways that a previous abortion can affect a woman's relationship with her living children: 

- Increased depression and anxiety. Abortion has been linked to higher rates of maternal depression and anxiety before and after birth, which may affect the woman's relationship with her children. In addition, depression is a common predictor for child abuse.

- Sleep disorders and disturbances. Women who have had an abortion are more likely to experience sleep disorders compared to women who carry to term, and one survey found that many women attributed the sleep disorders to a past abortion. These sleep disturbances "could render the high energy demands of parenting more complicated," says Coleman.

- Substance abuse. Studies have found that women who had an abortion were more likely to engage in substance abuse, and also more likely to smoke or use drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Mothers who abuse drugs or alcohol are more likely to "engage in authoritarian and punitive parenting practices," and parental substance abuse increases the risk that the children will suffer abuse or neglect.

- Child abuse. Abortion has been associated with lower emotional support for one's children and with a higher risk of child abuse and neglect.

Abortion has also been linked to higher rates of suicide and to a wide range of mental health disorders. Coleman was also the lead author of a study published in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, which found that the children of women who had abortions have less supportive home environments and more behavioral problems than children of women without a history of abortion.

These findings are alarming and deserve to be reported. Yet the media remains silent. The sad fact is that if Dr. Coleman had been studying the possible harmful effects on living children whose parents smoke and drink, the press would have been flooded with reports, health warnings and possibly a federal study. Not so when the subject addressed is the harmful effects of abortion.

Remember, I asked you, how many national news outlets discussed even one of the reports I just noted? The answer is none.

On the other side of the coin, the media takes a completely different tack when covering the pro-abort Obama administration. For example, the Washington Posts coverage of President Barack Obama schmoozing Catholics with all kinds of rhetorical assurances—just before attending the G-8 summit and meeting with Pope Benedict XVI ”makes me ill.

The Post reports that Obama still favors a robust federal policy protecting health-care workers who have moral objections to performing some procedures and he is a believer in conscience clauses. However, the contrary is possibly what will happen. We all know how frequently the president can change his mind or alter his words to suit his audience. Just look at the federal debt!

And it does not take a Harvard graduate to figure out that someone as committed to abortion as Obamas Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, could also arbitrarily change the rules. With Sebelius overseeing how conscience is protected and for whom such protection is provided, it’s hard to say what could happen.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, who appears to be as concerned about Sebelius as we are, wrote this about her when it comes to abortion:   "It would be naive to assume, unless there is an explicit prohibition in the [Obama Health Insurance] bill, that [HHS] Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius will not use her discretion to fund abortions with taxpayers' money."

The news medias double standard boggles the mind! 

On one end of the spectrum, we confront mothers who have aborted their children and experienced all kinds of tragic consequences; yet nobody says a word or makes even the slightest suggestion that there is anything wrong with that “safe and legal procedure known as abortion. Forget about the truth, the pictures of dead children and images of the maimed mothers of those dead children.

On the other end, we find the very same media fawning over a president who, as his record makes abundantly clear, has done all he can to advance the agenda of the culture of death, while at the same time giving assurance after assurance that he really wants nothing more than to make abortion rare!

Fair and balance news coverage it is not. The sad fact is that human beings are suffering and dying as the cheerleaders for Obama move forward with nary a thought about whether they should bear any of the responsibility for the tragedy that is being left in their arrogant wake

 


Pro-Life Today | 08 July 2009

HEADLINES

Scientists claim sperm 'first'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8138963.stm
BBC
Scientists in Newcastle claim to have created human sperm in the laboratory in what they say is a world first.  The researchers believe the work could eventually help men with fertility problems to father a child.   But other experts say they are not convinced that fully developed sperm have been created. Writing in the journal Stem Cells and Development, the Newcastle team say it will be at least five years before the technique is perfected.  They began with stem cell lines derived from human embryos donated following IVF treatment.

British Sex Ed Drive DOUBLES Teen Pregnancies
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1198228/6m-drive-cut-teen-pregnancies-sees-DOUBLE.html#
Daily Mail
A multi-million pound initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies more than doubled the number of girls conceiving. The Government-backed scheme tried to persuade teenage girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex. But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the program, at a cost of 2,500 each, were 'significantly' more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programs who were not given contraception and sex advice.

Planned Parenthood targets Baltimore's black community through misleading advertisements
http://www.examiner.com/x-3108-Baltimore-Republican-Examiner~y2009m7d8-Planned-Parenthood-targets-Baltimores-black-community-through-misleading-advertisements
The Examiner
Planned Parenthood of Maryland revealed an advertising campaign earlier this year directed toward the city's black community. The Babies Born Healthy ads stress the need for black mothers to get plenty of folic acid, quit smoking, maintain a healthy weight, and plan their pregnancy since the death rate of black infants is almost nine times higher than white infants in their first year of life.

FEATURE STORY

POPE BENEDICT'S CHARITY IN TRUTH
By Judie Brown

It is always with more than a little trepidation that I begin the task of wading through a papal encyclical. In the case of Caritas in Veritate,  however, I could not put it down. Basing his insightful teaching about the requirements for a truly just and loving human community on the past legacy of not only previous popes, but Church Doctors as well, the pope blesses us with wisdom that surpasses anything I have read in a very long time.

While some of the passages in this encyclical will create a welcome debate among political conservatives and liberals, the underlying philosophy set forth should be readily agreed upon and welcomed by one and all. But rather than give you my opinion, I will set forth just a sample of my favorite sections, in the hope that once you read these few quotes, you will rush to the internet to read the 30,000-word document in its entirety.

In section 25, we read of the fundamental principle upon which all political and social policy should be based: "I would like to remind everyone, especially governments engaged in boosting the world’s economic and social assets, that the primary capital to be safeguarded and valued is man, the human person in his or her integrity: Man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and social life.

On the subject of poverty, he takes perfect aim at the culture of death, writing,

Not only does the situation of poverty still provoke high rates of infant mortality in many regions, but some parts of the world still experience practices of demographic control, on the part of governments that often promote contraception and even go so far as to impose abortion. In economically developed countries, legislation contrary to life is very widespread, and it has already shaped moral attitudes and praxis, contributing to the spread of an anti-birth mentality; frequent attempts are made to export this mentality to other States as if it were a form of cultural progress.

Some non-governmental Organizations work actively to spread abortion, at times promoting the practice of sterilization in poor countries, in some cases not even informing the women concerned. Moreover, there is reason to suspect that development aid is sometimes linked to specific health-care policies which de facto involve the imposition of strong birth control measures. Further grounds for concern are laws permitting euthanasia as well as pressure from lobby groups, nationally and internationally, in favour of its juridical recognition.

Openness to life is at the centre of true development. When a society moves towards the denial or suppression of life, it ends up no longer finding the necessary motivation and energy to strive for man’s true good. If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of a new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away. The acceptance of life strengthens moral fibre and makes people capable of mutual help. By cultivating openness to life, wealthy peoples can better understand the needs of poor ones, they can avoid employing huge economic and intellectual resources to satisfy the selfish desires of their own citizens, and instead, they can promote virtuous action within the perspective of production that is morally sound and marked by solidarity, respecting the fundamental right to life of every people and every individual. (section 28)

On the specific challenges created by population controllers in conjunction with a culture of selfishness and sexual saturation, he writes,

 The notion of rights and duties in development must also take account of the problems associated with population growth. This is a very important aspect of authentic development, since it concerns the inalienable values of life and the family. To consider population increase as the primary cause of underdevelopment is mistaken, even from an economic point of view. Suffice it to consider, on the one hand, the significant reduction in infant mortality and the rise in average life expectancy found in economically developed countries, and on the other hand, the signs of crisis observable in societies that are registering an alarming decline in their birth rate. Due attention must obviously be given to responsible procreation, which among other things has a positive contribution to make to integral human development. The Church, in her concern for man's authentic development, urges him to have full respect for human values in the exercise of his sexuality. It cannot be reduced merely to pleasure or entertainment, nor can sex education be reduced to technical instruction aimed solely at protecting the interested parties from possible disease or the risk of procreation. This would be to impoverish and disregard the deeper meaning of sexuality, a meaning which needs to be acknowledged and responsibly appropriated not only by individuals but also by the community.

Morally responsible openness to life represents a rich social and economic resource. Populous nations have been able to emerge from poverty thanks not least to the size of their population and the talents of their people. On the other hand, formerly prosperous nations are presently passing through a phase of uncertainty and in some cases decline, precisely because of their falling birth rates; this has become a crucial problem for highly affluent societies. The decline in births, falling at times beneath the so-called “replacement level, also puts a strain on social welfare systems, increases their cost, eats into savings and hence the financial resources needed for investment, reduces the availability of qualified labourers, and narrows the “brain pool” upon which nations can draw for their needs. Furthermore, smaller and at times miniscule families run the risk of impoverishing social relations, and failing to ensure effective forms of solidarity. These situations are symptomatic of scant confidence in the future and moral weariness. It is thus becoming a social and even economic necessity once more to hold up to future generations the beauty of marriage and the family, and the fact that these institutions correspond to the deepest needs and dignity of the person. In view of this, States are called to enact policies promoting the centrality and the integrity of the family founded on marriage between a man and a woman, the primary vital cell of society, and to assume responsibility for its economic and fiscal needs, while respecting its essentially relational character. (section 44)

Pope Benedict tells the world why the United Nations must be reformed, explaining that an organization with the type of authority that would reflect authentic justice toward the human person (#67) “would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth.

In addition to these weighty topics, each of which he addresses with amazing intellectual and spiritual prowess, here are a few of my favorite quotes from elsewhere in this encyclical:

To defend the truth, to articulate it with humility and conviction, and to bear witness to it in life are therefore exacting and indispensable forms of charity. (section1)
Deeds without knowledge are blind, and knowledge without love is sterile. (section 30)
Reason and faith can come to each other's assistance. Only together will they save man. Entranced by an exclusive reliance on technology, reason without faith is doomed to flounder in an illusion of its own omnipotence. Faith without reason risks being cut off from everyday life.  (section 74)
A prosperous society, highly developed in material terms but weighing heavily on the soul, is not of itself conducive to authentic development. The new forms of slavery to drugs and the lack of hope into which so many people fall can be explained not only in sociological and psychological terms but also in essentially spiritual terms. The emptiness in which the soul feels abandoned, despite the availability of countless therapies for body and psyche, leads to suffering. There cannot be holistic development and universal common good unless people's spiritual and moral welfare is taken into account, considered in their totality as body and soul. (section 76)

The pundits will no doubt have a field day with this encyclical, and the debates and various interpretations of the pope's alleged political views will be more numerous perhaps than blades of grass on a golf course, but the truth contained in this most recent letter to the world cannot be denied. If mankind is ever to experience a world in which there is genuine solidarity, justice and charity, we must first admit the obvious:

Christians long for the entire human family to call upon God as “Our Father!  In union with the only-begotten Son, may all people learn to pray to the Father and to ask him, in the words that Jesus himself taught us, for the grace to glorify him by living according to his will, to receive the daily bread that we need, to be understanding and generous towards our debtors, not to be tempted beyond our limits, and to be delivered from evil (cf. Mt 6:9-13). (section 79)

 


Pro-Life Today | 07 July 2009

HEADLINES

Wisconsin Gov. signs bill to expand birth control, chemically induced abortions 'at taxpayer expense'
http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topstories/457244
The Capital Times
Not many people seem to have noticed yet, but buried among the new measures signed into law last week as part of Gov. Jim Doyle's budget is a trio of family planning initiatives that are expected to expand access to birth control and contraceptive education in Wisconsin. Advocates who had fought for previous versions of the controversial measures over the past years, only to see them get beat back repeatedly by the Republican-controlled Legislature, are thrilled at the relative ease with which the measures passed this year.

Pro-life mom sues school over freedom of speech violation
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/070709_student_sues_over_pro_life_shirt
FOX News
A California mom says her public school administrators violated her daughter's First Amendment rights when they ordered the seventh-grader to take off her pro-life T-shirt. Anna Amador has gone to court on behalf of her daughter, who she says was ordered by her principal to change her shirt on "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." The shirt the girl was wearing displays two graphic pictures of a fetus growing in the womb.

At meeting, NEA declines to remain neutral on abortion
http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=30833
The Baptist Press
The National Education Association, the nation's largest labor union, voted July 5 to reject a proposal officially to remain neutral on the issues of abortion and family planning.

FEATURE STORY

EXPERIMENTERS OR EVILDOERS?
By Judie Brown

The news from the Obama administration late yesterday did not surprise those of us who understand President Obama's penchant for saying one thing while doing quite another behind the scenes”usually something dastardly. We still confront those supposed pro-lifers who claim that the president is pro-life, but the facts defy such arguments. Yesterday's announcement on human embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) was but another nail in the coffin of respect for human dignity and the credibility of the president's alleged “pro-lifeness.

The Obama administrations head honcho at the
National Institutes of Health issued new rules regarding the use of human embryonic stem cells and couched the announcement in the most curious of words. The Associated Press report explains that the new rules stipulate that taxpayer-funded human embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) can utilize only science that uses cells culled from leftover fertility clinic embryos “ ones that otherwise would be thrown away. A second news report fills in the details, explaining that the new rules allow funding for research using human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos that are created by in vitro fertilization, or IVF, for reproductive purposes and are no longer needed - a departure from the policy of the administration of Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush.

The National Institutes of Health, or NIH, guidelines are slightly less restrictive than those outlined in a draft document released in April in that they allow the use of existing stem cell lines, in addition to new ones derived from IVF procedures.

The rules, the agency said, lay out which research is eligible for federal funding and help "ensure that NIH-funded research in this area is ethically responsible, scientifically worthy and conducted in accordance with applicable law.

There are two points to be made about the government's new rules for ESCR.

The first is that the rules confirm, in black and white, that human beings who are created in a laboratory by in vitro fertilization are now considered mere products that, if no longer needed, left over, or destined to be thrown away, can also be destroyed in a laboratory. Nary a word has been heard from those who made this decision acknowledging that such research kills human beings, because they do not recognize the humanity of the human embryo.

The Obama administration is dedicated to making empty promises to suffering Americans”over the dead bodies of embryonic children created through technology. The fact that these human embryos are indeed human beings who have parents and have the right to be raised in the same way as other children has failed to make any impact on the new rules’ authors, including the president of the United States. Denial has overtaken reality.

Second, the new rules confirm the long-held fear many of us have had regarding the inherent wickedness of IVF. We have known for years that such practices would spawn the worst horrors ever imagined. The proof of that is now all too evident. With the help of our tax dollars, scientists will now be using human beings for research that will kill them. And America will witness such practices being permitted under guidelines touted as “ethically responsible, but which are instead morally bankrupt and evil in every way.

However, this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been watching and monitoring reproductive technology over the years. The science of reproductive technology is, after all, based on the idea that some human beings are not actually people, but rather are inferior or defective matter that must be rejected and/ or exploited in a variety of macabre ways.

Earlier this year,
Margaret Somerville wrote an article about artificial reproduction in which she called IVF conception through reproductive technologies. The use of such language suggests that scientists are indeed a legitimate replacement for God Himself. Furthermore, the same sort of language frequently assuages the ethical qualms some couples have about IVF as they consider what to do about their diagnosed infertility.

While Somerville is arguing in defense of the rights of children who are conceived in the laboratory, she opines that “the state has ethical obligations, in particular, to ensure the protection and wellbeing of the future children who will result from those activities. This is undoubtedly a pie-in-the-sky position, since IVF routinely produces extra children who are frozen, flushed down a drain or transferred somewhere else for research and experimentation. If the state viewed itself as having an ethical obligation to protect these children, we would never be discussing ESCR.

Not only that, but when news began to emerge suggesting that
IVF itself entails genetic risks for human embryonic children and future generations, few paid any attention. As one article made clear,

some studies indicate that there may be some abnormal patterns of gene expression associated with IVF and a possible increase in rare but devastating genetic disorders that appear to be directly linked to those unusual gene expression patterns. There also appears to be an increased risk of premature birth and of babies with low birth weight for their gestational age.

Were the headlines then filled with warnings that prospective parents might want to take these concerns seriously and opt for adopting, instead of submitting to IVF procedures? No, of course not! There is no money in telling the truth, if that truth might result in less income for fertility labs. We learned this by paying attention to the studies and learning that when OctoMom came on the scene, one of the medias findings was that  “fewer than 20 percent of U.S. clinics follow professional guidelines on how many embryos should be used for younger women.

Forget about it. The facts do not surface when the technology is about money, regardless of whether or not that technology is murderous from its beginning to its end. The report about clinics being irresponsible and unregulated provoked
David Gushee, writing in the Associated Baptist Press, to suggest that the in vitro fertilization industry was out of control. No kidding!

Gushee correctly stated that while Roman Catholic ethics flatly reject IVF or any type of technological intervention in the procreative process, Protestant ethics have been much less clear. But I would suggest to Gushee that while it is true that Catholic ethics are outstanding on the subject, Catholic people are, by and large, as unschooled on this as are our Protestant brothers and sisters. This is a large part of the reason why the Obama announcement will probably go by without a whisper from most pulpits in the nation”Catholic, Protestant or otherwise.

In fact, today I would venture to guess that human embryos who are created in a laboratory stand a very good chance of being subjected to quality testing techniques such as
Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH),  or stored in a freezer until the embryonic child's parents decide the kid is better off being used in research, or until the extras are shipped off without a word from Mom and Dad.

This all sounds grotesque, I know, but it is already happening every day in this country. The push to use human embryos for research and experimentation has been ongoing for some years now, and the only difference the Obama regulations are going to make is that the government will be paying attention to this scientific race against truth and funding it out of the surplus cash we have in the U.S. Treasury. Somehow, even though this nation is in debt up to its eyeballs, I am confident Obama and his cronies will find the money to do the killing and the experiments, and create the spin necessary for advancing the agenda of death.

God save us from what is in store.


Judie Brown is president of American Life League and a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Respond to Judie
http://www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog_response.php?id=2669

 


  PRO-ABORTION VIOLENCE ON RISE AFTER MEDIA BUILD-UP, ALL REPORTS

Washington, DC (02 July 2009) – Pro-abortion violence is on the rise in recent weeks, according to a new video report from American Life League.

On June 24, 40-year-old Matthew Haver tried to run over a pro-life protester with his SUV. On July 1, a man pulled a gun on a pro-life woman in Arizona.

These are just two of 8,519 documented acts of violence perpetrated against pro-life advocates.

The video report documents media rhetoric after the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller.

"The media has pulled out all the stops to paint us as terrorists and extremists," Hichborn said. "The media's alleged purpose is to report the news. Instead their pro-abortion vitriol has put pro-life advocates' lives in danger."

The video, "Tiller, Terrorism and TV Tilt," chronicles reports from some of the industry's lead journalists.

Among the most prominent, talk show host Alan Colmes accused Jenn Giroux of Women Influencing the Nation of sharing responsibility for Tiller's death. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann named prominent nurse and pro-life blogger Jill Stanek "The Worst Person in the World."

Consequently, both women have been issued death threats in the last month.

"While the pro-life movement has patiently dealt with these threats of violence," Hichborn says in the video, "we do so for one reason. A culture of life rejects the culture of violence that has consumed so many lives - 51 million as of today."

American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death.  For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942. 
 
 

Catholic News Agency: Man in SUV attempts to run over 60-year-old pro-life demonstrator  (01 July 2009)
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=16424

AZ Family: Man pulls gun on protester at Planned Parenthood  (01 July 2009)
http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopstory/stories/phoenix-news-070109-planned-parenthood-gun.26ca02b1.html

 


  

EL PASO PLANNED PARENTHOOD GOES OUT OF BUSINESS

Washington, DC (30 June 2009) – In 1937, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger personally visited her gleaming new Planned Parenthood offices in El Paso, Texas. Today, American Life League will join local pro-life activists in celebration of another major victory, as all seven of the Planned Parenthood of El Paso facilities permanently close their doors.

“We expect many more closures in the days to come, as people become aware of Planned Parenthood’s sex-crazed birth control and abortion business,” said Rita Diller, director of American Life League’s STOP Planned Parenthood project.

After 72 years in operation, PP of El Paso cited financial concerns as the reason for closing down. Only months ago, PP was seen as a permanent fixture in the city.

“What happened to Planned Parenthood of El Paso is part of a larger trend,” Diller said. “One by one, with hard work and prayer, these facilities are closing down, no matter how entrenched Planned Parenthood may seem to be in a particular community.”

The closures come only one month after Rita Diller joined American Life League to head up the STOPP project. Diller and Bishop John Yanta, in conjunction with STOPP, exposed PP’s sordid business in the Amarillo area. Diller saw all 19 PP facilities in the Texas Panhandle close.

STOPP consults with pro-life groups throughout the nation to shed light on PP. STOPP representatives visited El Paso to instruct and encourage pro-life advocates in 1996 and 2001, at the request of Rev. Rick Thomas, S.J., a priest best known for his work with the poorest of the poor, who reside in and glean their living from the trash dumps of El Paso.

American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death.  For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.
 

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

American Life League: STOP Planned Parenthood
http://stopp.org/

El Paso Times: Planned Parenthood to Shutter El Paso Offices (27 June 2009)
http://www.elpasotimes.com/health/ci_12701705

Michigan Messenger: Clinic Closing Ends Tumultuous Era (17 June 2008)
http://www.elpasotimes.com/health/ci_12718665

  


    FOR MORE INFORMATION:

American Life League: Tiller, Terror and TV Tilt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE

Human Life Internation: "Pro-Choice Violence"
http://abortionviolence.com/

  

You can view the ALL Report by clicking the image or by going to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE 

   


 

    <Previous Page | Next Page>

Pro-Life Today | 13 July 2009

HEADLINES

Consuming Secondhand Steroids
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/bri/bri_01steroids.html
Life Issues
Few in the general public are aware that oral contraceptives ("the Pill"), levonorgestrel ("the morning-after pill"), and mifepristone, or RU-486 ("the abortion pill"), are also all steroids. In fact, they are the same sort of synthetic anabolic steroids that are illegal for professional athletes to take, but they are anabolic for female tissues (like breast tissue) rather than muscle.  In 2006, the World Health Organization acknowledged that the estrogen-plus-progestin drugs (birth control pills and combination hormone replacement drugs like Prem-Pro) cause cancers in the breast, cervix, and liver.

Obama Science Czar Holdren Called for Forced Abortions
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103707
World Net Daily
The man President Obama has chosen to be his science czar once advocated a shocking approach to the "population crisis" feared by scientists at the time: namely, compulsory abortions in the U.S. and a "Planetary Regime" with the power to enforce human reproduction restrictions.

Vatican Newspaper Publishes CDF Clarification on Abortion in Wake of Fisichella Controversy
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09071008.html
Life Site News
In response to damage caused by Archbishop Fisichella's article in L'Osservatore Romano, Pope Benedict XVI is believed to have ordered Cardinal Bertone to issue a statement reiterating Catholic doctrine on the sanctity of human life.

Online Advice Column Tells Men How to Coerce Their Girlfriends to Abort
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09071004.html
Life Site News
A men's advice column published on the sexually suggestive AskMen.com website, which describes a coercive plan of action for men on how to talk their pregnant girlfriends into aborting their unborn child, has prompted outrage from pro-life groups and commentators. The backlash over the column appears to have been so forceful that the site has now pulled the offending piece.

ALL Report: 'Tiller, Terror and TV Tilt'


American life League exposes the bias and hypocrisy in the "mainstream" media's coverage of late-term abortionist George Tiller's murder.

To view the latest ALL Report, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE

FEATURE STORY

THE VATICAN CORRECTS ARCHBISHOP FISICHELLA
By Judie Brown

As a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life, and as someone who begged its president to correct his statement regarding the nine-year-old Brazilian girl’s abortion, I am gratified to present, in its entirety, a report on the correction made by the Vatican’s Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. We praise God that the light of truth has prevailed and has publicly dispelled the confusion created by Archbishop Fisichella’s original statement.

Retractions. The Holy Office Teaches Archbishop Fisichella a Lesson
   
The congregation for the doctrine of the faith has released a "clarification" that in fact repudiates the article published in "L'Osservatore Romano" by the president of the pontifical academy for life, on the abortion performed on a Brazilian mother-child. Here's the document

by Sandro Magister

ROME, July 10, 2009 - This afternoon, at the very same time as Benedict XVI was meeting at the Vatican with the United States president Barack Obama, "L'Osservatore Romano" printed a "clarification" by the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, "on procured abortion."
The "clarification" is what many were waiting for after a controversial article published last March 15 by the same newspaper of the Holy See, signed by
Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the pontifical academy for life.

The clarification is printed on page 7 of the newspaper of the Holy See, and is announced on the front page.

Fisichella's article concerned the case of an extremely young Brazilian mother-child who was made to abort the twins she was carrying in her womb, and was interpreted by many as justifying the double abortion.

There followed a lively public controversy, which
www.chiesa related in two extensive articles ["Drifting Mines. In Africa the Condom, in Brazil Abortion" (March 23) and "The Recife Case. Rome Has Spoken, But the Dispute Has Not Ended" (July 7)].  But at the same time, the Vatican authorities received many protests and requests through private channels.

These included the step taken by 27 of the 46 members of the pontifical academy for life. On April 4, they wrote a joint letter to Fisichella, their president, asking him to correct the "mistaken" positions he had expressed in the article.

On April 21, Fisichella responded to them in writing, rejecting the request.

On May 1, 21 of the signers of the previous letter then went to Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, asking the congregation for a clarifying statement on the Church's teaching on the matter of abortion.

The letter was delivered on May 4, but did not receive any reply. The writers learned from an official at the congregation that the letter had been forwarded to the secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, "because Fisichella's article had been written at his request."

Two members of the pontifical academy for life then sent a dossier on the matter directly to the pope.

On June 8, Benedict XVI discussed the case with Bertone, and ordered that a statement be published reconfirming that the Church's teaching on abortion is unchanged.

The "clarification" published today in "L'Osservatore Romano," dated July 11, 2009, is precisely the fruit of this decision.

Here it is in its original form: 

On procured abortion

Clarification from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Recently a number of letters have been sent to the Holy See, some of them from prominent figures in political and ecclesial life, explaining the confusion that has been created in various countries, especially in Latin America, following the manipulation and exploitation of an article by His Excellency Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, on the sad affair of the "Brazilian girl."

In this article, which appeared in "L'Osservatore Romano" on March 15, 2009, the doctrine of the Church was presented, while still keeping in mind the dramatic situation of the aforementioned girl, who - as could be demonstrated afterward - had been accompanied with all pastoral delicacy, in particular by the archbishop of Olinda and Recife at the time, His Excellency Archbishop Joseph Cardoso Sobrinho.

In this regard, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reiterates that the Church's teaching on procured abortion has not changed, nor can it change.

This teaching has been presented in numbers 2270-2273 in the
Catechism of the Catholic. Church in these terms:

Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life â 'Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you' (Jer. 1:5). My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth (Psalm 139:15).

Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.

This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish (Didach, 2:2). God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crime (Vatican Council II, "Gaudium et Spes", 51).

Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," (Code of Canon Law, can. 1398), by the very commission of the offens (Code of Canon Law, can. 1314) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 1323-1324). The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation: "The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death... The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined... As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights. (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction "
Donum Vitae", III).

In the encyclical "Evangelium Vitae," Pope John Paul II reaffirmed this teaching with his authority as Supreme Pastor of the Church:

By the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church. (no. 62)

As for abortion procured in certain difficult and complex situations, the clear and precise teaching of Pope John Paul II applies:

It is true that the decision to have an abortion is often tragic and painful for the mother, insofar as the decision to rid herself of the fruit of conception is not made for purely selfish reasons or out of convenience, but out of a desire to protect certain important values such as her own health or a decent standard of living for the other members of the family. Sometimes it is feared that the child to be born would live in such conditions that it would be better if the birth did not take place. Nevertheless, these reasons and others like them, however serious and tragic, can never justify the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. (Encyclical "Evangelium Vitae", no. 58)

As for the problem of specific medical treatments intended to preserve the health of the mother, it is necessary to make a strong distinction between two different situations: on the one hand, a procedure that directly causes the death of the fetus, sometimes inappropriately called "therapeutic" abortion, which can never be licit in that it is the direct killing of an innocent human being; on the other hand, a procedure not abortive in itself that can have, as a collateral consequence, the death of the child:

If, for example, saving the life of the future mother, independently of her condition of pregnancy, urgently required a surgical procedure or another therapeutic application, which would have as an accessory consequence, in no way desired or intended, but inevitable, the death of the fetus, such an action could not be called a direct attack on the innocent life. In these conditions, the operation can be considered licit, as can other similar medical procedures, always provided that a good of high value, like life, is at stake, and that it is not possible to postpone it until after the birth of the child, or to use any other effective remedy. (Pius XII, "Speech to the Fronte della Famiglia and the Associazione Famiglie numerose," November 27, 1951)

As for the responsibility of medical workers, the words of Pope John Paul II must be recalled:

Their profession calls for them to be guardians and servants of human life. In today's cultural and social context, in which science and the practice of medicine risk losing sight of their inherent ethical dimension, health-care professionals can be strongly tempted at times to become manipulators of life, or even agents of death. In the face of this temptation their responsibility today is greatly increased. Its deepest inspiration and strongest support lie in the intrinsic and undeniable ethical dimension of the health-care profession, something already recognized by the ancient and still relevant Hippocratic Oath, which requires every doctor to commit himself to absolute respect for human life and its sacredness. (Encyclical "Evangelium Vitae", no. 89)  

 


Pro-Life Today | 10 July 2009

HEADLINES

Sotomayor Was Part of Legal Group that Argued Abortion is a Fundamental Right™
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=50812
CNS News
The right to an abortion is not different than any other fundamental right, according to a legal brief issued by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF), in a case regarding Missouri state funding restrictions on abortion from 1988 when attorney Sonia Sotomayor was a member of the groups governing board. Sotomayor, now a U.S. court of appeals judge nominated by President Barack Obama to be an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, served on the board from 1980 to 1992, during which time the organization weighed in on five abortion cases. These included the 1988 case of Webster v. Reproductive Health Services and the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold confirmation hearings on Sotomayor next week.

Abortion Parties? - When Abortion Becomes a Lark
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070911.html
Life Site News
Despite the fact that throughout the West abortions continue to take place by the tens of thousands, abortion is still generally portrayed as a grave issue, not to be taken lightly, a difficult decision.  Hilary Clinton, one of the world's foremost advocates of abortion, herself has described abortion as a "sad, even tragic choice to many, many women."  For some, however, it seems that abortion is just another reason to throw a party.

Dead or Alive: 'Brain Death,' the Vulnerable, and the Slippery Slope
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=329
Catholic Culture
Nathaniel Turner had a short, painful life. His parents are divorced, and while they both live in Massachusetts, Nathaniel spent most of his young life with a grandmother in Alabama. But he was staying with his father-- a man with a record of criminal violence-- when he was brought to the emergency room, comatose, with bruises all over his little body. His father is now facing criminal charges for beating the boy nearly to death.

ALL Report: 'Tiller, Terror and TV Tilt'


American life League exposes the bias and hypocrisy in the "mainstream" media's coverage of late-term abortionist George Tiller's murder.

To view the latest ALL Report, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE

FEATURE STORY

FREE EXERCISE OF DESPOTISM: NINTH CIRCUIT TELLS CONSCIENTIOUS PHARMACISTS TO TAKE A HIKE
By Judie Brown

It's Friday, which usually means there must be some really bad news out there. Sure enough, what the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals did yesterday is about as bad as it can get. The news report that first caught my attention stated, The federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals today overturned a lower court ruling that had temporarily put on hold a Washington State requirement that pharmacists dispense medications to which they are morally opposed. As a result, pharmacists may soon be forced to choose between dispensing abortifacients, including Plan B, or leaving the profession.

Mind you, the basic language and meaning of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is as clear as crystal. The
First Amendment states, â€œCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. That means that through its free exercise clause, the 1st Amendment protects the individuals right to freedom of conscience and free expression of religious beliefs.

But not so fast, pardner! The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals begs to differ.

We spent some time reading the actual Ninth-Circuit decision just to get a feel for this overbroad and impudent exercise of judicial power. The decision examines the
Washington State regulation  that sparked the original challenge. This regulation was challenged by a family-owned pharmacy and two individual pharmacists. A lower court agreed with the pharmacists argument, but maintained that a referral must be made when a pharmacist or pharmacy refuses to fill a particular prescription. However, now the Ninth Circuit has tossed out the lower court ruling, stating,

Under the rules, all pharmacies have a “duty to deliver all medications “in a timely manner. Neither regulation challenged in this case applies to refusals only for religious reasons. The new rules apply to all lawful medications, not just those that pharmacies or pharmacists may oppose for religious reasons. Pharmacies and pharmacists who do not have a religious objection to Plan B must comply with the rules to the same extent—no more and no less—as pharmacies and pharmacists who may have a religious objection to Plan B. Therefore, the rules are generally applicable.

The ruling opposes the lower courts reasoning by asserting,

The district court failed to give proper weight to the rules distinction between pharmacies and pharmacists. The rules do not prohibit individual pharmacists from refusing to dispense a medication for religious reasons. A pharmacist may refuse to dispense Plan B on a religious ground because ultimately it is the duty of the pharmacy, not the pharmacist, to deliver lawfully prescribed drugs. The record demonstrates that several different methods of accommodation are available. For example, the Board itself stated, in a post-adoption letter to pharmacists and pharmacy owners, that for females eighteen and over, [a] pharmacy technician can sell Plan B as an over-the-counter product, but the pharmacist must be available to provide the patient with consultation and advice if requested. It may also be sufficient to have a second pharmacist available by telephone if the onsite pharmacist objects to dispensing a medication or providing a requested consultation. Thus, the rules do not selectively impose an undue obligation on conduct motivated by religious belief because the rules actually provide for religious accommodation”an individual pharmacist can decide whether to dispense a particular medication based on his religious beliefs and a particular pharmacy may continue to employ that pharmacist by making appropriate accommodations.

The bottom line with the Ninth Circuit is quite clear. The Ninth Circuit denies that pharmacists with religious or ethical objections are being discriminated against and that their First Amendment rights are being violated.  Instead, it opines,

[A]ny refusal to dispense”regardless of whether it is motivated by religion, morals, conscience, ethics, discriminatory prejudices, or personal distaste for a patient”violates the rules. (emphasis added)

In other words, if a pharmacist objects to providing information or an actual prescription medication because he or she understands how the medication works and does not want to be a party to providing a chemical that could cause an innocent personâs death, that pharmacist could lose his or her job.

Further, the Ninth Circuit opines, [T]he purpose of the new rules was not to eliminate religious objections to delivery of lawful medicines, but to eliminate all objections that do not ensure patient health, safety, and access to medication [emphasis added]."

If you are getting the impression that this opinion pits the patient's desires against the pharmacists ethical concerns, then you are accurately understanding the Ninth Circuits mindset. The fact of the matter is really quite simple: If a patient is given a prescription for a deadly chemical and you, as a pharmacist, object to filling that prescription”on moral, ethical or religious grounds”you are wrong, because by refusing to accommodate the patient, you are not ensuring patient health, safety, and access to medication.

Drumming you out of the profession because you uphold your professionals proper ethical practices could be the end game. Time will tell. But as Wesley Smith, expert attorney and noted physician-assisted suicide opponent, has pointed out, there is more danger in the Ninth Circuits decision than first meets the eye.

Smith analyzed this decision in the context of Washington State's recent decriminalization of physician-assisted suicide. He noted that the state law does protect a physicians conscience rights, but cleverly leaves the barn door wide open when a pharmacist raises objections. He therefore concludes that the Ninth Circuits opinion puts pharmacists directly in the line of fire when
physician-assisted suicide is sought: 

That very narrow definition trickily takes away the non participation protection from pharmacists, since to participate only means to perform the duties of the attending (prescribing) physician, the consulting physician, or the mental health professional who consults in the case. It does not mean dispensing the lethal prescription or filling out the forms required of pharmacists.

Thus, under the reasoning of the court ruling, not only will pharmacists in WA have to dispense an overdose to patients knowing it is intended for use in suicide, even if they have a religious objection, but they will also have to perform the required bureaucratic functions. Ironically, one professional role pharmacists are supposed to play“which is why they do far more than merely count pills into bottles”is to protect patients from receiving prescriptions that could conflict with other prescribed drugs, resulting in their deaths.

We hope and pray that this ridiculous decision will be challenged immediately. For not only will pharmacists suffer dire consequences if the Ninth Circuits decision is allowed to stand, but many other health-care professionals could be pressured into actions they find morally objectionable. If they are required to leave their faith and ethical principles at the door, then leaving the profession will be their only alternative. And frankly, that is so un-American I can hardly fathom it.

When
Pope Benedict XVI spoke to Catholic pharmacists a couple of years ago, he told them in no uncertain terms, 

It is not possible to anesthetize the conscience, for example, when it comes to molecules whose aim is to stop an embryo implanting or to cut short someone's life... I invite your federation [of pharmacists] to consider conscientious objection which is a right that must be recognized for your profession so you can avoid collaborating, directly or indirectly, in the supply of products which have clearly immoral aims, for example abortion or euthanasia.

In fact, his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, was even more emphatic about this subject in The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae):

 To refuse to take part in committing an injustice is not only a moral duty; it is also a basic human right. Were this not so, the human person would be forced to perform an action intrinsically incompatible with human dignity, and in this way human freedom itself, the authentic meaning and purpose of which are found in its orientation to the true and the good, would be radically compromised. What is at stake therefore is an essential right which, precisely as such, should be acknowledged and protected by civil law. (section 74)

For the sake of every man or woman who has taken up the mantle of being a health-care provider with principles, we hope, pray and, in fact, will demand that everything possible be done to unravel this oppressive ruling.

 


Pro-Life Today | 09 July 2009

HEADLINES

Pharmacists can't refuse Plan B pill, appeals court says
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-pill-ruling9-2009jul09,0,6469894.story
LA Times
Pharmacists are obliged to dispense the Plan B pill, even if they are personally opposed to the "morning after" contraceptive on religious grounds, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.  In a case that could affect policy across the western U.S., a supermarket pharmacy owner in Olympia, Wash., failed in a bid to block 2007 regulations that required all Washington pharmacies to stock and dispense the pills.

Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg: I Thought Roe Would Help Eradicate Unwanted Populations Through Abortion
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070901.html
Life Site News
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems to have made a stunning admission in favor of cleansing America of unwanted populations by aborting them. In an interview (
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/magazine/12ginsburg-t.html?pagewanted=4) with the New York Times, the judge said that Medicaid should cover abortions, and that she had originally expected that Roe v. Wade would facilitate such coverage in order to control the population of groups "that we don't want to have too many of."  

Abortion Employee Runs into Pro-Lifer, Keeps Going at Bizarre Rockford Abortuary
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070807.html
Life Site News
The pattern of abuse at a Rockford abortion facility has continued after an employee allegedly struck with his car a homeless man praying with pro-life protesters, and drove away, according to witnesses at the scene.  The vehicle reportedly struck Scott Griffin on Wednesday as it drove into the driveway of the abortion facility, where pro-lifers say workers frequently drive recklessly in an apparent attempt to intimidate those praying and handing out pro-life literature.

FEATURE STORY

INESCAPABLE CONSEQUENCES BANISHED FROM PUBLIC DISCUSSION
By Judie Brown

Time and time again, we are called upon to respond to a question average Americans ask: “Why doesn't the media”conservative or liberal”show a picture of an aborted baby when they discuss abortion on the news? (My opinion is that they ask either because they do not understand why the conflict exists between pro-life and pro-death forces or because they have never heard of, thought about or seen the reality of abortion.)

I tell them that the biggest reason for the absence of documented pictures of aborted children is that the media does not want the public to see who dies during an abortion, or describe who dies during human embryonic stem cell research experiments, or discuss who suffers because he or she has facilitated an abortion. I go on to explain that there are as many reasons why the pictures and the facts remain unobserved as there are reporters. The bottom line is that orchestrated ignorance is best for the culture of death, and so the truth is simply not reported.

It might also be the case that abortion makes journalists uncomfortable, because somewhere in their past there is an abortion, or a child conceived inconveniently and ignored in the same way one might avoid admitting that his socks don’t match. Who knows?

What we do know, however, is that this ongoing rejection of the facts is killing people, numbing consciences and generally creating misery everywhere. There has been quite a bit of information in the alternative media recently, for example, that is astounding, frightening and yet unreported by major national news sources. 

How many national news outlets discussed even one of the following reports?

1. A Las Vegas
abortion mill has been ordered to stop “performing surgeries without a license because inspectors said they found medical equipment, medications and literature in a place where alleged abortions are being done. This is a place where women and children's lives were put at risk â many lives I might add and nary a national note of alarm was sounded. But if a single imprisoned terrorist had been “abused, nobody with a national reporting platform would have ignored the allegations, whether true or false, for a minute.

2. A new study has shown that women who have an abortion could be risking the health of their next baby. Those who
terminate a pregnancy are subsequently more likely to deliver their next child prematurely, thus placing the premature baby at greater risk for lung disease, cerebral palsy, blindness or deafness.   

While some physicians are claiming that this is debatable, the fact is major media outlets have not addressed it. If the subject had been whether or not a certain form of heart surgery resulted in a higher risk of death, every outlet in America would have been on top of the story, pointing accusatory fingers and possibly destroying medical careers in the process.

3. Dr. Priscilla Coleman, an associate professor at Bowling Green State University, has completed an analysis of various studies exposing the effects of
abortion on subsequent parenting. Her paper describes a number of ways that a previous abortion can affect a woman's relationship with her living children: 

- Increased depression and anxiety. Abortion has been linked to higher rates of maternal depression and anxiety before and after birth, which may affect the woman's relationship with her children. In addition, depression is a common predictor for child abuse.

- Sleep disorders and disturbances. Women who have had an abortion are more likely to experience sleep disorders compared to women who carry to term, and one survey found that many women attributed the sleep disorders to a past abortion. These sleep disturbances "could render the high energy demands of parenting more complicated," says Coleman.

- Substance abuse. Studies have found that women who had an abortion were more likely to engage in substance abuse, and also more likely to smoke or use drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Mothers who abuse drugs or alcohol are more likely to "engage in authoritarian and punitive parenting practices," and parental substance abuse increases the risk that the children will suffer abuse or neglect.

- Child abuse. Abortion has been associated with lower emotional support for one's children and with a higher risk of child abuse and neglect.

Abortion has also been linked to higher rates of suicide and to a wide range of mental health disorders. Coleman was also the lead author of a study published in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, which found that the children of women who had abortions have less supportive home environments and more behavioral problems than children of women without a history of abortion.

These findings are alarming and deserve to be reported. Yet the media remains silent. The sad fact is that if Dr. Coleman had been studying the possible harmful effects on living children whose parents smoke and drink, the press would have been flooded with reports, health warnings and possibly a federal study. Not so when the subject addressed is the harmful effects of abortion.

Remember, I asked you, how many national news outlets discussed even one of the reports I just noted? The answer is none.

On the other side of the coin, the media takes a completely different tack when covering the pro-abort Obama administration. For example, the Washington Posts coverage of President Barack Obama schmoozing Catholics with all kinds of rhetorical assurances—just before attending the G-8 summit and meeting with Pope Benedict XVI ”makes me ill.

The Post reports that Obama still favors a robust federal policy protecting health-care workers who have moral objections to performing some procedures and he is a believer in conscience clauses. However, the contrary is possibly what will happen. We all know how frequently the president can change his mind or alter his words to suit his audience. Just look at the federal debt!

And it does not take a Harvard graduate to figure out that someone as committed to abortion as Obamas Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, could also arbitrarily change the rules. With Sebelius overseeing how conscience is protected and for whom such protection is provided, it’s hard to say what could happen.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, who appears to be as concerned about Sebelius as we are, wrote this about her when it comes to abortion:   "It would be naive to assume, unless there is an explicit prohibition in the [Obama Health Insurance] bill, that [HHS] Secretary
Kathleen Sebelius will not use her discretion to fund abortions with taxpayers' money."

The news medias double standard boggles the mind! 

On one end of the spectrum, we confront mothers who have aborted their children and experienced all kinds of tragic consequences; yet nobody says a word or makes even the slightest suggestion that there is anything wrong with that “safe and legal procedure known as abortion. Forget about the truth, the pictures of dead children and images of the maimed mothers of those dead children.

On the other end, we find the very same media fawning over a president who, as his record makes abundantly clear, has done all he can to advance the agenda of the culture of death, while at the same time giving assurance after assurance that he really wants nothing more than to make abortion rare!

Fair and balance news coverage it is not. The sad fact is that human beings are suffering and dying as the cheerleaders for Obama move forward with nary a thought about whether they should bear any of the responsibility for the tragedy that is being left in their arrogant wake

 


Pro-Life Today | 08 July 2009

HEADLINES

Scientists claim sperm 'first'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8138963.stm
BBC
Scientists in Newcastle claim to have created human sperm in the laboratory in what they say is a world first.  The researchers believe the work could eventually help men with fertility problems to father a child.   But other experts say they are not convinced that fully developed sperm have been created. Writing in the journal Stem Cells and Development, the Newcastle team say it will be at least five years before the technique is perfected.  They began with stem cell lines derived from human embryos donated following IVF treatment.

British Sex Ed Drive DOUBLES Teen Pregnancies
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1198228/6m-drive-cut-teen-pregnancies-sees-DOUBLE.html#
Daily Mail
A multi-million pound initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies more than doubled the number of girls conceiving. The Government-backed scheme tried to persuade teenage girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex. But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the program, at a cost of 2,500 each, were 'significantly' more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programs who were not given contraception and sex advice.

Planned Parenthood targets Baltimore's black community through misleading advertisements
http://www.examiner.com/x-3108-Baltimore-Republican-Examiner~y2009m7d8-Planned-Parenthood-targets-Baltimores-black-community-through-misleading-advertisements
The Examiner
Planned Parenthood of Maryland revealed an advertising campaign earlier this year directed toward the city's black community. The Babies Born Healthy ads stress the need for black mothers to get plenty of folic acid, quit smoking, maintain a healthy weight, and plan their pregnancy since the death rate of black infants is almost nine times higher than white infants in their first year of life.

FEATURE STORY

POPE BENEDICT'S CHARITY IN TRUTH
By Judie Brown

It is always with more than a little trepidation that I begin the task of wading through a papal encyclical. In the case of Caritas in Veritate,  however, I could not put it down. Basing his insightful teaching about the requirements for a truly just and loving human community on the past legacy of not only previous popes, but Church Doctors as well, the pope blesses us with wisdom that surpasses anything I have read in a very long time.

While some of the passages in this encyclical will create a welcome debate among political conservatives and liberals, the underlying philosophy set forth should be readily agreed upon and welcomed by one and all. But rather than give you my opinion, I will set forth just a sample of my favorite sections, in the hope that once you read these few quotes, you will rush to the internet to read the 30,000-word document in its entirety.

In section 25, we read of the fundamental principle upon which all political and social policy should be based: "I would like to remind everyone, especially governments engaged in boosting the world’s economic and social assets, that the primary capital to be safeguarded and valued is man, the human person in his or her integrity: Man is the source, the focus and the aim of all economic and social life.

On the subject of poverty, he takes perfect aim at the culture of death, writing,

Not only does the situation of poverty still provoke high rates of infant mortality in many regions, but some parts of the world still experience practices of demographic control, on the part of governments that often promote contraception and even go so far as to impose abortion. In economically developed countries, legislation contrary to life is very widespread, and it has already shaped moral attitudes and praxis, contributing to the spread of an anti-birth mentality; frequent attempts are made to export this mentality to other States as if it were a form of cultural progress.

Some non-governmental Organizations work actively to spread abortion, at times promoting the practice of sterilization in poor countries, in some cases not even informing the women concerned. Moreover, there is reason to suspect that development aid is sometimes linked to specific health-care policies which de facto involve the imposition of strong birth control measures. Further grounds for concern are laws permitting euthanasia as well as pressure from lobby groups, nationally and internationally, in favour of its juridical recognition.

Openness to life is at the centre of true development. When a society moves towards the denial or suppression of life, it ends up no longer finding the necessary motivation and energy to strive for man’s true good. If personal and social sensitivity towards the acceptance of a new life is lost, then other forms of acceptance that are valuable for society also wither away. The acceptance of life strengthens moral fibre and makes people capable of mutual help. By cultivating openness to life, wealthy peoples can better understand the needs of poor ones, they can avoid employing huge economic and intellectual resources to satisfy the selfish desires of their own citizens, and instead, they can promote virtuous action within the perspective of production that is morally sound and marked by solidarity, respecting the fundamental right to life of every people and every individual. (section 28)

On the specific challenges created by population controllers in conjunction with a culture of selfishness and sexual saturation, he writes,

 The notion of rights and duties in development must also take account of the problems associated with population growth. This is a very important aspect of authentic development, since it concerns the inalienable values of life and the family. To consider population increase as the primary cause of underdevelopment is mistaken, even from an economic point of view. Suffice it to consider, on the one hand, the significant reduction in infant mortality and the rise in average life expectancy found in economically developed countries, and on the other hand, the signs of crisis observable in societies that are registering an alarming decline in their birth rate. Due attention must obviously be given to responsible procreation, which among other things has a positive contribution to make to integral human development. The Church, in her concern for man's authentic development, urges him to have full respect for human values in the exercise of his sexuality. It cannot be reduced merely to pleasure or entertainment, nor can sex education be reduced to technical instruction aimed solely at protecting the interested parties from possible disease or the risk of procreation. This would be to impoverish and disregard the deeper meaning of sexuality, a meaning which needs to be acknowledged and responsibly appropriated not only by individuals but also by the community.

Morally responsible openness to life represents a rich social and economic resource. Populous nations have been able to emerge from poverty thanks not least to the size of their population and the talents of their people. On the other hand, formerly prosperous nations are presently passing through a phase of uncertainty and in some cases decline, precisely because of their falling birth rates; this has become a crucial problem for highly affluent societies. The decline in births, falling at times beneath the so-called “replacement level, also puts a strain on social welfare systems, increases their cost, eats into savings and hence the financial resources needed for investment, reduces the availability of qualified labourers, and narrows the “brain pool” upon which nations can draw for their needs. Furthermore, smaller and at times miniscule families run the risk of impoverishing social relations, and failing to ensure effective forms of solidarity. These situations are symptomatic of scant confidence in the future and moral weariness. It is thus becoming a social and even economic necessity once more to hold up to future generations the beauty of marriage and the family, and the fact that these institutions correspond to the deepest needs and dignity of the person. In view of this, States are called to enact policies promoting the centrality and the integrity of the family founded on marriage between a man and a woman, the primary vital cell of society, and to assume responsibility for its economic and fiscal needs, while respecting its essentially relational character. (section 44)

Pope Benedict tells the world why the United Nations must be reformed, explaining that an organization with the type of authority that would reflect authentic justice toward the human person (#67) “would need to be regulated by law, to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, to seek to establish the common good and to make a commitment to securing authentic integral human development inspired by the values of charity in truth.

In addition to these weighty topics, each of which he addresses with amazing intellectual and spiritual prowess, here are a few of my favorite quotes from elsewhere in this encyclical:

To defend the truth, to articulate it with humility and conviction, and to bear witness to it in life are therefore exacting and indispensable forms of charity. (section1)
Deeds without knowledge are blind, and knowledge without love is sterile. (section 30)
Reason and faith can come to each other's assistance. Only together will they save man. Entranced by an exclusive reliance on technology, reason without faith is doomed to flounder in an illusion of its own omnipotence. Faith without reason risks being cut off from everyday life.  (section 74)
A prosperous society, highly developed in material terms but weighing heavily on the soul, is not of itself conducive to authentic development. The new forms of slavery to drugs and the lack of hope into which so many people fall can be explained not only in sociological and psychological terms but also in essentially spiritual terms. The emptiness in which the soul feels abandoned, despite the availability of countless therapies for body and psyche, leads to suffering. There cannot be holistic development and universal common good unless people's spiritual and moral welfare is taken into account, considered in their totality as body and soul. (section 76)

The pundits will no doubt have a field day with this encyclical, and the debates and various interpretations of the pope's alleged political views will be more numerous perhaps than blades of grass on a golf course, but the truth contained in this most recent letter to the world cannot be denied. If mankind is ever to experience a world in which there is genuine solidarity, justice and charity, we must first admit the obvious:

Christians long for the entire human family to call upon God as “Our Father!  In union with the only-begotten Son, may all people learn to pray to the Father and to ask him, in the words that Jesus himself taught us, for the grace to glorify him by living according to his will, to receive the daily bread that we need, to be understanding and generous towards our debtors, not to be tempted beyond our limits, and to be delivered from evil (cf. Mt 6:9-13). (section 79)

 


Pro-Life Today | 07 July 2009

HEADLINES

Wisconsin Gov. signs bill to expand birth control, chemically induced abortions 'at taxpayer expense'
http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topstories/457244
The Capital Times
Not many people seem to have noticed yet, but buried among the new measures signed into law last week as part of Gov. Jim Doyle's budget is a trio of family planning initiatives that are expected to expand access to birth control and contraceptive education in Wisconsin. Advocates who had fought for previous versions of the controversial measures over the past years, only to see them get beat back repeatedly by the Republican-controlled Legislature, are thrilled at the relative ease with which the measures passed this year.

Pro-life mom sues school over freedom of speech violation
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/070709_student_sues_over_pro_life_shirt
FOX News
A California mom says her public school administrators violated her daughter's First Amendment rights when they ordered the seventh-grader to take off her pro-life T-shirt. Anna Amador has gone to court on behalf of her daughter, who she says was ordered by her principal to change her shirt on "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." The shirt the girl was wearing displays two graphic pictures of a fetus growing in the womb.

At meeting, NEA declines to remain neutral on abortion
http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=30833
The Baptist Press
The National Education Association, the nation's largest labor union, voted July 5 to reject a proposal officially to remain neutral on the issues of abortion and family planning.

FEATURE STORY

EXPERIMENTERS OR EVILDOERS?
By Judie Brown

The news from the Obama administration late yesterday did not surprise those of us who understand President Obama's penchant for saying one thing while doing quite another behind the scenes”usually something dastardly. We still confront those supposed pro-lifers who claim that the president is pro-life, but the facts defy such arguments. Yesterday's announcement on human embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) was but another nail in the coffin of respect for human dignity and the credibility of the president's alleged “pro-lifeness.

The Obama administrations head honcho at the
National Institutes of Health issued new rules regarding the use of human embryonic stem cells and couched the announcement in the most curious of words. The Associated Press report explains that the new rules stipulate that taxpayer-funded human embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) can utilize only science that uses cells culled from leftover fertility clinic embryos “ ones that otherwise would be thrown away. A second news report fills in the details, explaining that the new rules allow funding for research using human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos that are created by in vitro fertilization, or IVF, for reproductive purposes and are no longer needed - a departure from the policy of the administration of Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush.

The National Institutes of Health, or NIH, guidelines are slightly less restrictive than those outlined in a draft document released in April in that they allow the use of existing stem cell lines, in addition to new ones derived from IVF procedures.

The rules, the agency said, lay out which research is eligible for federal funding and help "ensure that NIH-funded research in this area is ethically responsible, scientifically worthy and conducted in accordance with applicable law.

There are two points to be made about the government's new rules for ESCR.

The first is that the rules confirm, in black and white, that human beings who are created in a laboratory by in vitro fertilization are now considered mere products that, if no longer needed, left over, or destined to be thrown away, can also be destroyed in a laboratory. Nary a word has been heard from those who made this decision acknowledging that such research kills human beings, because they do not recognize the humanity of the human embryo.

The Obama administration is dedicated to making empty promises to suffering Americans”over the dead bodies of embryonic children created through technology. The fact that these human embryos are indeed human beings who have parents and have the right to be raised in the same way as other children has failed to make any impact on the new rules’ authors, including the president of the United States. Denial has overtaken reality.

Second, the new rules confirm the long-held fear many of us have had regarding the inherent wickedness of IVF. We have known for years that such practices would spawn the worst horrors ever imagined. The proof of that is now all too evident. With the help of our tax dollars, scientists will now be using human beings for research that will kill them. And America will witness such practices being permitted under guidelines touted as “ethically responsible, but which are instead morally bankrupt and evil in every way.

However, this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been watching and monitoring reproductive technology over the years. The science of reproductive technology is, after all, based on the idea that some human beings are not actually people, but rather are inferior or defective matter that must be rejected and/ or exploited in a variety of macabre ways.

Earlier this year,
Margaret Somerville wrote an article about artificial reproduction in which she called IVF conception through reproductive technologies. The use of such language suggests that scientists are indeed a legitimate replacement for God Himself. Furthermore, the same sort of language frequently assuages the ethical qualms some couples have about IVF as they consider what to do about their diagnosed infertility.

While Somerville is arguing in defense of the rights of children who are conceived in the laboratory, she opines that “the state has ethical obligations, in particular, to ensure the protection and wellbeing of the future children who will result from those activities. This is undoubtedly a pie-in-the-sky position, since IVF routinely produces extra children who are frozen, flushed down a drain or transferred somewhere else for research and experimentation. If the state viewed itself as having an ethical obligation to protect these children, we would never be discussing ESCR.

Not only that, but when news began to emerge suggesting that
IVF itself entails genetic risks for human embryonic children and future generations, few paid any attention. As one article made clear,

some studies indicate that there may be some abnormal patterns of gene expression associated with IVF and a possible increase in rare but devastating genetic disorders that appear to be directly linked to those unusual gene expression patterns. There also appears to be an increased risk of premature birth and of babies with low birth weight for their gestational age.

Were the headlines then filled with warnings that prospective parents might want to take these concerns seriously and opt for adopting, instead of submitting to IVF procedures? No, of course not! There is no money in telling the truth, if that truth might result in less income for fertility labs. We learned this by paying attention to the studies and learning that when OctoMom came on the scene, one of the medias findings was that  “fewer than 20 percent of U.S. clinics follow professional guidelines on how many embryos should be used for younger women.

Forget about it. The facts do not surface when the technology is about money, regardless of whether or not that technology is murderous from its beginning to its end. The report about clinics being irresponsible and unregulated provoked
David Gushee, writing in the Associated Baptist Press, to suggest that the in vitro fertilization industry was out of control. No kidding!

Gushee correctly stated that while Roman Catholic ethics flatly reject IVF or any type of technological intervention in the procreative process, Protestant ethics have been much less clear. But I would suggest to Gushee that while it is true that Catholic ethics are outstanding on the subject, Catholic people are, by and large, as unschooled on this as are our Protestant brothers and sisters. This is a large part of the reason why the Obama announcement will probably go by without a whisper from most pulpits in the nation”Catholic, Protestant or otherwise.

In fact, today I would venture to guess that human embryos who are created in a laboratory stand a very good chance of being subjected to quality testing techniques such as
Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH),  or stored in a freezer until the embryonic child's parents decide the kid is better off being used in research, or until the extras are shipped off without a word from Mom and Dad.

This all sounds grotesque, I know, but it is already happening every day in this country. The push to use human embryos for research and experimentation has been ongoing for some years now, and the only difference the Obama regulations are going to make is that the government will be paying attention to this scientific race against truth and funding it out of the surplus cash we have in the U.S. Treasury. Somehow, even though this nation is in debt up to its eyeballs, I am confident Obama and his cronies will find the money to do the killing and the experiments, and create the spin necessary for advancing the agenda of death.

God save us from what is in store.


Judie Brown is president of American Life League and a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Respond to Judie
http://www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog_response.php?id=2669

 


  PRO-ABORTION VIOLENCE ON RISE AFTER MEDIA BUILD-UP, ALL REPORTS

Washington, DC (02 July 2009) – Pro-abortion violence is on the rise in recent weeks, according to a new video report from American Life League.

On June 24, 40-year-old Matthew Haver tried to run over a pro-life protester with his SUV. On July 1, a man pulled a gun on a pro-life woman in Arizona.

These are just two of 8,519 documented acts of violence perpetrated against pro-life advocates.

The video report documents media rhetoric after the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller.

"The media has pulled out all the stops to paint us as terrorists and extremists," Hichborn said. "The media's alleged purpose is to report the news. Instead their pro-abortion vitriol has put pro-life advocates' lives in danger."

The video, "Tiller, Terrorism and TV Tilt," chronicles reports from some of the industry's lead journalists.

Among the most prominent, talk show host Alan Colmes accused Jenn Giroux of Women Influencing the Nation of sharing responsibility for Tiller's death. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann named prominent nurse and pro-life blogger Jill Stanek "The Worst Person in the World."

Consequently, both women have been issued death threats in the last month.

"While the pro-life movement has patiently dealt with these threats of violence," Hichborn says in the video, "we do so for one reason. A culture of life rejects the culture of violence that has consumed so many lives - 51 million as of today."

American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death.  For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942. 
 
 

Catholic News Agency: Man in SUV attempts to run over 60-year-old pro-life demonstrator  (01 July 2009)
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=16424

AZ Family: Man pulls gun on protester at Planned Parenthood  (01 July 2009)
http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopstory/stories/phoenix-news-070109-planned-parenthood-gun.26ca02b1.html

 


  

EL PASO PLANNED PARENTHOOD GOES OUT OF BUSINESS

Washington, DC (30 June 2009) – In 1937, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger personally visited her gleaming new Planned Parenthood offices in El Paso, Texas. Today, American Life League will join local pro-life activists in celebration of another major victory, as all seven of the Planned Parenthood of El Paso facilities permanently close their doors.

“We expect many more closures in the days to come, as people become aware of Planned Parenthood’s sex-crazed birth control and abortion business,” said Rita Diller, director of American Life League’s STOP Planned Parenthood project.

After 72 years in operation, PP of El Paso cited financial concerns as the reason for closing down. Only months ago, PP was seen as a permanent fixture in the city.

“What happened to Planned Parenthood of El Paso is part of a larger trend,” Diller said. “One by one, with hard work and prayer, these facilities are closing down, no matter how entrenched Planned Parenthood may seem to be in a particular community.”

The closures come only one month after Rita Diller joined American Life League to head up the STOPP project. Diller and Bishop John Yanta, in conjunction with STOPP, exposed PP’s sordid business in the Amarillo area. Diller saw all 19 PP facilities in the Texas Panhandle close.

STOPP consults with pro-life groups throughout the nation to shed light on PP. STOPP representatives visited El Paso to instruct and encourage pro-life advocates in 1996 and 2001, at the request of Rev. Rick Thomas, S.J., a priest best known for his work with the poorest of the poor, who reside in and glean their living from the trash dumps of El Paso.

American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death.  For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.
 

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

American Life League: STOP Planned Parenthood
http://stopp.org/

El Paso Times: Planned Parenthood to Shutter El Paso Offices (27 June 2009)
http://www.elpasotimes.com/health/ci_12701705

Michigan Messenger: Clinic Closing Ends Tumultuous Era (17 June 2008)
http://www.elpasotimes.com/health/ci_12718665

  


    FOR MORE INFORMATION:

American Life League: Tiller, Terror and TV Tilt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE

Human Life Internation: "Pro-Choice Violence"
http://abortionviolence.com/

  

You can view the ALL Report by clicking the image or by going to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzYIQxmjVUE 

   


 

Print  
Home  |  About Us / Focus PHC  |  Aborted Baby Photos  |  Abortion Pill Info  |  American Life League  |  National Pro Life Orgs  |  National Right to Life  |  ProLife Events
Copyright © 2007 by RochesterProLife.org    Terms Of Use   Privacy Statement