Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Stupak Condemns Amendment

I personally hope that the Health Care Bill as it stands does not pass, because even with a good Pro-Life amendment that prevents tax payer funded abortions, it has so much else that is wrong with it that would be very bad for America. But if it is inevitable that the bill pass, then AT LEAST let it include an amendment that clearly and absolutely prevents tax payer funding of abortion, and this is what I prefer to tell our Senators.

The Stupak-Pitts Amendment is the only one that prevents tax payer funded abortions. Therefore, please see this important message and take a few moments to follow the link and sign the letter to your Senators. The following letter is from Marjorie Dannenfelser, President, Susan B. Anthony List. She said:

The Senate approved an end to the debate on the Manager's Amendment that finalizes abortion funding in the Senate Health Care Reform Bill. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) praised the Senate bill, describing it as having "abortion language that is completely different from the House -- thank God."

One thing is clear to me. Nancy Pelosi sees the chance to replace the pro-life Stupak-Pitts Amendment in the House with the pro-abortion Manager's Amendment.

Tell your Senators and Representative to oppose any bill that includes this pro-abortion Manager's Amendment:

http://www.sba-list.org/c.ddJBKJNsFqG/b.5424609/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?aid=13545&msource=c4alerts


Bart Stupak (D-MI) called the Manager's Amendment "unacceptable" and said, "We are going to hold firm and make sure that the Stupak-Pitts language stays when this amendment is brought back to us. We will not vote for the bill if that language is not there."

If Nancy Pelosi strips the Stupak Amendment out of the House Health Care Reform Bill and dares Bart Stupak to defeat the bill on the final vote, we need him to know that we have been with him every step of the way.

Go here to tell your elected Members of Congress that anything less than the Stupak-Pitts Amendment is unacceptable:

http://www.sba-list.org/c.ddJBKJNsFqG/b.5424609/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?aid=13545&msource=c4alerts

For Life,
Marjorie Dannenfelser
President, Susan B. Anthony List
http://www.sba-list.org/

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Fuzzy language - Video: The Truth About the Senate Bill

Hi all,

Please read this brief email I received from Emily Buchanan, Executive Director, Susan B. Anthony List, and see the VIDEO included that helps to further cut through the slick language used to hide abortion funding in health care legislation. Ms. Buchanan writes:

George,

Fuzzy language.

Wild Claims.

And lots of loopholes.

This is what we've been dealing with in the debate on abortion in health care.

We know that part of the strategy of those pushing health care reform is to use vague and confusing language to pass the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe.

Take a look at Marjorie's most recent video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUVW1z3BB70&msource=c4alerts) to see exactly how they are doing that in the Senate.

Then forward the video to your friends and family to encourage them to take action.

We can't let Congress sneak taxpayer funded abortions into health care with fuzzy language.

Sincerely,
Emily Buchanan
Executive Director, Susan B. Anthony List
www.sba-list.org

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Abortion in health care legislation? "Don't worry about it." says Rep. Eric J.J. Massa (NY-29)

Hi everyone,

I received this email from Marjorie Dannenfelser, President, Susan B. Anthony List. She speaks about the attitude of a certain Rep., pertaining to the concern Pro-Life people have about the danger of abortion coverage in the new health care legislation. Here is what she writes:

Don't worry about it.

That's what Rep. Eric J.J. Massa (NY-29) tells his constituents when it comes to abortion in health care legislation.

In a letter to an SBA List activist, he said, "I would invite you to assess HR3200 on its merits, without this decision swinging on the issue of abortion."

He thought that he would allievate the concerns of a pro-life constituent by asking her to ignore the issue?

Does he think we will just go away?

I have news for him and all the other Members of Congress who think this issue may just go away.

In this, our battle with the proponents of the culture of death, we will never, ever stop fighting to protect the unborn!

We will fight them on health care. We will fight them in the courts. We will fight them in political campaigns. We will fight them in Congress. We will fight them in the media. And we will never stop fighting them while even one innocent life is threatened.

Even mainstream news outlets recognize that the abortion issue is refusing to go away. The New York Times ran an article titled, "Abortion Fight Complicates Debate on Health Care." And it certainly has! Now, the issue of abortion is now one of the main reasons Obama's plan for radical health care overhaul is slipping away.

Over the past few months, this issue has been our top priority and top spending item. With a month to go until the vote, we know the attempt to put abortion funding in health care reform is running on fumes and frankly so is the SBA List.

Through your past support, you have helped build the reach and power of the Susan B. Anthony List so that at this time, when we are facing the greatest assault on unborn life and women since Roe, we can leverage all of our time, talent, and resources to win this battle.
God bless you and your family.

For Life,
Marjorie Dannenfelser
President, Susan B. Anthony List
http://www.sba-list.org/

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Show your friends and family what’s at stake in the health care reform battle

In an email I received from Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D. President & CEO of Americans United for Life (AUL), the following information is provided for material developed by legal experts at AUL to help show what’s at stake in the health care reform battle. At the following link you can download the “Understand the Abortion Mandate” chart to see how all the health care reform bills currently in Congress would mandate abortion funding.

http://www.realhealthcarerespectslife.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/AUL-abortion-mandate-flow-chart-final-PDF.pdf

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Premature baby allowed to die in a hospital in England, while mother watched

This is from an email I received from Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life. It is outrageous and is the kind of thing we could expect to see more of even in America if the "health care reform" is passed without explicit language against coverage of abortions. As Fr. frank wrote:

"If Congress passes "health care reform" without explicit protections for vulnerable human beings,

...it will institutionalize the culture of death in America!
 
Have you heard about Sarah Capewell and her son Jayden? You need to because their story is the story of what could happen to countless thousands of tiny boys and girls in America.

Not long ago Jayden Capewell was born prematurely at a hospital in Gorleston, England. At the time of his birth he was but 21 weeks, five days old and weighed just a few ounces.

But rather than give Jayden the medical care he needed in order to live - or even transfer him to a hospital that could take care of him - the doctors and nurses did nothing to help him because little Jayden was TWO DAYS under the limit set by the British government's National Health Service (NHS) rationing guidelines.You can just picture Jayden's mother frantically crying out for someone to help her baby. But no one did.

So for two hours Sarah rocked her tiny little boy ... until he finally died in her arms.

Make no mistake:

That scene will be repeated in hospitals all across America if health care reform passes without significant revisions!"

Saturday, September 19, 2009

URGENT petition to Father Jenkins, Notre Dame president: Please drop the charges

Hi all,

I received this email from America Needs Fatima concerning 88 pro-life advocates who face up to one year in jail and thousands of dollars in fines. Please follow the link in this email and sign the petition.

September 19, 2009

Please ask Father Jenkins at Notre Dame to drop the charges against 88 pro-life advocates who face up to one year in jail and thousands of dollars in fines.

Sign the "Drop the Charges" petition http://www.tfpstudentaction.net/campaigns/index.php?option=com_chronocontact&chronoformname=protest_1002

The 88 outspoken pro-lifers peacefully walked onto Notre Dame's campus in May to be the voice of the unborn -- when pro-abortion president Obama was honored there – and were arrested for trespassing.

Among those arrested were Fr. Norman Weslin, several nuns, Norma McCorvey, the "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade, and Ambassador Alan Keyes.

Lifesitenews.com reports:

"While witnesses say pro-Obama protesters were allowed to roam free, the arrested individuals were singled out for displaying any pro-life message -- including slogans on the sanctity of life, photographs of aborted children, a large wooden cross, and images of Mary."

The double standard is rather shocking, isn't it?

You see, the University of Notre Dame, as the original complainant, has the choice to drop the charges pending against the 88 pro-lifers.

So kindly ask Notre Dame to drop the charges – sign here http://www.tfpstudentaction.net/campaigns/index.php?option=com_chronocontact&chronoformname=protest_1002

Your signature is very important right now because, according to reports, the president of the University of Notre Dame "has repeatedly refused to seek such leniency or even answer the pro-lifers' requests for dialogue." (Lifesitenews.com: 09-04-09)

If you have any comments, please send them along.

Until next time, thank you very much for joining this urgent petition and feel free to pass it along, post it on Facebook, on blogs, and help get the word out.

Sincerely,

Robert E. Ritchie, Executive Director

Friday, September 18, 2009

Please sign this petition!

Today I received an email from the ACLJ (American Center for Law and Justice), which reported that, "Congress is back in session, and there's troubling news to report: Congressional leaders have blatantly rejected our concerns regarding proposed health care reform legislation - the abortion exclusion and the public option amendments were voted down in committee. The only choice now is to kill the bill entirely - all five proposed versions in their current form." Please follow this link and sign the petition.

www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?&ac=1&Zip=*Zip&sc=3480

They Say, We Say

This is a congressional update from the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), issued on Friday, September 18, 2009, at 4 PM EDT. Please forward this update to any appropriate pro-life lists. For further information, visit the NRLC website at:

http://www.nrlc.org/ and http://www.stoptheabortionagenda.com/

They say, we say:Recent NRLC rebuttals to misinformationabout the pro-abortion health care bills

WASHINGTON (September 18, 2009) -- The pro-abortion public relations machine is in full throttle in support of the abortion-related components of the health care bills that are being pushed by the White House and top congressional Democrats.

1. A detailed outline of Senator Max Baucus' proposed health care bill was released on September 16. The proposal has many objectionable components pertaining to both abortion and rationing. The initial NRLC statement on the bill is here. A follow up release on the "death spiral" provision is here.

2. Over the last few days, a number of websites, including Huffington Post, The Hill, and RHRealityCheck.org, have published an essay by Congresswoman Lois Capps (D-Ca.) titled, "The Truth About the Capps Amendment." We recommend that you read the piece on RHRealityCheck.org, here. That site has a permissive comment policy, and NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson has challenged Rep. Capps in a detailed rebuttal.

3. The Baltimore Sun ran (twice!) an op ed by Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) President Cecile Richards, titled, "Plan Wouldn't Fund Abortion," most recently on September 13. A rebuttal by NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson titled "Planned Parenthood's Hidden Agenda on Health Reform" was submitted to the Sun but ignored. However, on September 16, the Winona (Mn.) Daily News, which also ran the original Richards piece, published the rebuttal, under the title "What Does Cecile Richards Really Want?," here.

4. Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus did her bit for the Capps Amendment in a column that ran in the Post on September 9, and subsequently in some other papers. National Review Online published a rebuttal by NRLC's Douglas Johnson here, also on September 9.

5. Laurie Rubiner, vice president for public policy and advocacy for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), posted an essay titled "Bridging the Divide on Health Care for Women," dated September 9, 2009, on Daily Kos, and on RHRealityCheck.org, where a detailed rebuttal by NRLC's Douglas Johnson was posted, here.

6. Veteran pro-abortion activist Frances Kissling posted an essay on several websites, "Exploiting the Health Care Debate to Restrict Abortion." The thrust of Kissling's essay was that the pro-abortion side had already compromised enough and that no further concessions should be made to the right-to-life side. A rebuttal by NRLC's Douglas Johnson was posted on RHRealityCheck.org on September 16, here.

7. On September 11, http://www.politifact.com/ examined in detail, and rated as "True," the following statement by House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-Oh.): "During his quest for the presidency, now-President Obama declared that everyone deserves access to reproductive health care that includes abortion, and vowed that this 'right' would be at the heart of his health care reform plan if elected president." It is here.

8. In light of some of the press coverage of recent days, it is evident that NRLC's September 8 "duped media" advisory remains timely and should be required reading for journalists who are covering the congressional fight.

Saturday, September 12, 2009

On "the gap between Obama’s claims [about health care] and the agenda his administration is pursuing in Congress"

In a letter written by Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D., President & CEO of Americans United for Life (AUL), she talks about President Obama's speech before Congress where he claims that no federal money will be used to fund abortions. But as Ms. Yoest points out, "he is throwing his support behind legislation that will equate abortion with basic health care."

Also in her letter she says the following:

"We reported on the President’s speech as it happened on the AUL Blog. Afterwards, we posted an official statement detailing the gap between Obama’s claims and the agenda his administration is pursuing in Congress, (emphasis mine) including this observation from AUL Action Staff Counsel Mary Harned:

"No matter how President Obama and Congress change the structure of the health care reform proposals — whether there is a public option, co-op, exchange, or the like — any legislation that provides government funding for health care must contain explicit language that excludes abortion. (emphasis mine)""

For more about this letter and the above mentioned blog please see the rest of her post at: http://action.aul.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=3181.0&dlv_id=6861

GET THE FACTS: Abortion IS funded by the federal government through proposed health care reform legislation

Health Care Bill - Government-Funded Abortion: How Congress gets from A to B

Send your friends, family, and co-workers this chart to show how government money will pay for abortions if the current health care reform legislation passes.

http://www.stoptheabortionmandate.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/chart.pdf

VOID the Abortion Mandate


Help prevent U.S. government money from funding abortions through health care reform

Help keep abortion OUT of health care. Tell Congress to “Void the Abortion Mandate”. Follow this link and make your voice heard. http://stoptheabortionmandate.com/


Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Keep Abortion Out of Health Care

Please add your name to the Keep Abortion Out of Health Care petition and then let your friends know about efforts to mandate taxpayer-funded abortions as part of current health care proposals.

Keep Abortion Out of Health Care

Shared via AddThis

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

A good Pro-Life link showing the progress of development of a baby in the womb.

This is a great website with facts about the first 9 months of a baby's life in the womb, when life begins, foetal surgery and foetal pain, the baby's heartbeat, video clips and more.

http://www.justthefacts.org/clar.asp

Thursday, September 3, 2009

PETITION TO STOP AN ABORTION MANDATE

From the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). Please sign this important petition, which will be sent to your senators.

Congress: Remove abortion services from mandatory coverage!

'There’s a new and very troubling legislative development underway on Capitol Hill. Congress is pushing for national health care coverage — including mandatory coverage for abortions. Abortion would be considered a “health benefit” in both government and private insurance plans. This is outrageous! The American Center for Law and Justice is mobilizing and demanding that Congress insert a critical exemption — REMOVE abortion services from mandatory coverage. Stand with the ACLJ to keep abortion services out of national health care legislation. Please read the form below carefully and declare your membership with the ACLJ by adding your name to our Petition to Stop an Abortion Mandate.'

PETITION TO STOP AN ABORTION MANDATE:
https://www.aclj.org/Petition/Default.aspx?&ac=1&Zip=*Zip&sc=3466

Thursday, August 27, 2009

More about abortion in Health Care

Here is an excerpt from an article with more information about abortion being covered in the health care bill proposed by Obama. Following the excerpt is a link to the full article which a lot of good information.

"...both President Obama and White House Director of Domestic Policy Melody Barnes claimed last week at a teleconference that the health care bill would not allow for federally funded abortions. And that those of us arguing otherwise are "bearing false witness." President Obama then repeated the claim in his Saturday Weekly Address, which was devoted to busting the "outrageous myths about health care."

If he wants to truly set aside these growing anxieties, it's not that hard. All he has to do is insist any legislation he signs explicitly prohibits abortion funding."

Please read the rest here: http://action.aul.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=3041.0&dlv_id=6761

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Subject: Fr. Pavone: Response to Problems with Health Care Reform is Elections

Priests for Life Announces Formation of Political Responsibility Teams for 2010, 2012

Washington, DC – Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, the Catholic
Church’s largest pro-life ministry, stated today, “The reason for the mess we are in with the health care reform debate is the elections of 2008, and the way out of the mess will be the elections of 2010 and 2012.”

Priests for Life has announced the formation of “Political Responsibility Teams” in communities across America. The purpose of such teams will be to educate and activate citizens to exercise their responsibility to participate in the electoral process in a way that is informed rather than impulsive, and based on principle rather than mere personal advantage.

“Churches provide our greatest opportunity to mobilize and educate voters,” Fr. Pavone explained, “and activating Churches for the pro-life cause is the primary mission of Priests for Life. But Churches can also become the biggest obstacle if they choose the path of fear and hide behind paranoid interpretations of the Internal Revenue Code as an excuse for not talking about politics. We have a lot more to fear from our silence than we do from speaking out.”

For information, visit http://www.facebook.com/l/;www.PoliticalResponsibility.com

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Let's hear it again!

I want to re-post this particular section of my previous post from the letter I got from the NRLC, which provided a link to an unedited video of Obama’s response on YouTube
(http://youtube.com/watch?v=Cqww8jmizug&eurl=http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=3127987&s=99624509=player_embedded) which shows Obama's stance that so-called "reproductive health care" is, as he put it, "essential care....basic care", and he goes ont o say that it is "at the center and at the heart of the plan" that he proposes. Although he uses the term "reproductive health care", this is of course another way of referring to abortion. If that isn't enough, pay attention to the end of the video when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked in April 2009, about the Obama Administration's definition of "reproductive care". She clearly says that "reproductive care includes access to abortion."

Learn more about how to take action at www.nrlactioncenter.com

Monday, August 24, 2009

FactCheck.org Says NRLC Correct on Abortion in Obama Health Bill

WASHINGTON (August 24, 2009) -- This is an update from the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) in Washington, D.C. (Federal Legislation Department). For further information regarding the effect of health care reform legislation on federal abortion policy, or to send messages to your representatives in Congress, visit the NRLC website at http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=3127976&s=99624509. You can also reach the Federal Legislation Department by e-mail at Legfederal@aol.com.

Please forward this e-mail to any appropriate lists.

In recent weeks, NRLC has seen a wave of "factcheck" commentaries in various mainstream news media, denying that the health bills being advanced by President Obama and top Democratic congressional leaders would result in government funding of abortion. Some of these articles assert that government funding of abortion would be prevented by a federal law called the "Hyde Amendment," some assert that it would be prevented by an amendment adopted in a House committee called the Capps Amendment, and some assert that President Obama himself has said that he agrees with a "tradition" that the government should not fund abortions. Regrettably, all three of those assertions are demonstrably false.

On August 19, 2009, President Obama himself said that it is "not true" and a "fabrication" to say that his health plan will "mean government funding of abortion." NRLC immediately challenged Obama's statement in a press release (http://.nrlc.org/press_releases_new/Release081909.html), in which NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson said, "President Obama today brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component of the health care legislation that his congressional allies and staff have crafted. . . . the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions."

In response to the Obama-NRLC exchange, the independent FactCheck.org, affiliated with the Annenberg Public Policy Center, examined the issue. On August 21, FactCheck.org issued its analysis, written by FactCheck.org Director Brooks Jackson, titled, "Abortion: Which Side is Fabricating?" We quote here briefly from FactCheck.org's conclusions:

". . . it’s likely that any new federal insurance plan would cover abortion unless Congress expressly prohibits that. Low- and moderate-income persons who would choose the ‘public plan’ would qualify for federal subsidies to purchase it. Private plans that cover abortion also could be purchased with the help of federal subsidies. Therefore, we judge that the president goes too far when he calls the statements that government would be funding abortions ‘fabrications.’ . . . The NRLC’s Johnson said ‘the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions.’ And our analysis shows that Johnson’s statement is correct."

NRLC is in general agreement with the FactCheck.org analysis, except we think that FactCheck.org is in error in the way it uses the term "public funds." The House bill backed by the White House contains language (the Capps Amendment) that explicitly authorizes the federal agency that administers the "public option" to collect an additional amount of premium funds specifically to cover the costs of elective abortions, and no one would be allowed to enroll in the "public option" without paying this abortion surcharge. NRLC asserts that once the government collects these funds, they are "public funds" (or "federal funds"), and when the government uses these funds to write payment checks to abortionists, that is government funding of abortion.

The complete FactCheck.org appears below. Copyright 2009 by FactCheck.org. Reproduced in accord with the terms of the FactCheck.org copyright policy (http://factcheck.org/about/copyright-policy/). Original URL: http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=3127980&s=99624509

Abortion: Which Side Is Fabricating?

Despite what Obama said, the House bill would allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans.
August 21, 2009

Summary

Will health care legislation mean "government funding of abortion"?

President Obama said Wednesday that’s "not true" and among several "fabrications" being spread by "people who are bearing false witness." But abortion foes say it’s the president who’s making a false claim. "President Obama today brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component" of health care legislation, said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee. So which side is right?

The truth is that bills now before Congress don’t require federal money to be used for supporting abortion coverage. So the president is right to that limited extent. But it’s equally true that House and Senate legislation would allow a new "public" insurance plan to cover abortions, despite language added to the House bill that technically forbids using public funds to pay for them. Obama has said in the past that "reproductive services" would be covered by his public plan, so it’s likely that any new federal insurance plan would cover abortion unless Congress expressly prohibits that. Low- and moderate-income persons who would choose the "public plan" would qualify for federal subsidies to purchase it. Private plans that cover abortion also could be purchased with the help of federal subsidies. Therefore, we judge that the president goes too far when he calls the statements that government would be funding abortions "fabrications."

Analysis

Obama’s "Fabrications" Remark

Obama’s remarks Wednesday came during a telephone conference call to thousands of listeners, organized by religious organizations supporting his health care proposals. He said that "there has been a lot of misinformation in this debate, and there are some folks out there who are frankly bearing false witness." And then he lumped in abortion coverage at the end of a list of claims that he branded as untrue:

Obama, Aug. 19: We are closer to achieving that reform than we have ever been. And that’s why we’re seeing some of the divisive and deceptive attacks. You’ve heard some of them. Ludicrous ideas. Let me just give you one example, this notion that we are somehow setting up "death panels" that would decide on whether elderly people get to live or die. That is just an extraordinary lie. This is based on a provision in the House legislation that would allow Medicare to reimburse you if you wanted counseling on how to set up a living will or other end of life decisions. Entirely voluntary, it gives you an option that people who can afford fancy lawyers already exercise. That’s the kind of distortion that we’ve been hearing too much of out here.

We’ve heard that this is all designed to provide health insurance to illegal aliens. That’s not true. There’s a specific provision in the bill that does not provide health insurance for those individuals. You’ve heard that there’s a government takeover of health care. That’s not true. You’ve heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion. Not true. This is all, these are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation, and that is that we look out for one another, that I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper. And in the wealthiest nation on earth right now, we are neglecting to live up to that call.

The White House did not post any transcript of the president’s words, but sponsors of the conference call, a coalition of faith-based groups supporting an overhaul of the health insurance system, posted the full audio of the president’s call (http://www.faithforhealth.org/join-the-call) on its Web site. His words come near the very end of the recording, and we transcribed them from the recording.

Abortion foes quickly denounced Obama’s statement (http://nrlc.org/press_releases_new/Release081909.html) as untrue. The NRLC’s Johnson said "the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions." And our analysis shows that Johnson’s statement is correct. Though we of course take no position on whether the legislation should allow or not allow coverage for abortions, the House bill does just that.

The House leadership’s bill (H.R. 3200) (http://www.thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:) actually made no mention of abortion when it was introduced. Johnson refers to an amendment to the bill adopted by the House Energy and Commerce Committee July 30. Abortion rights proponents characterize it as a compromise, but it hasn’t satisfied the anti-abortion side. Offered by Democratic Rep. Lois Capps of California, the amendment was approved narrowly by the committee, 30 - 28, (http://www.energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090730/hr3200_capps_1.pdf) with most but not all Democrats voting in favor and no Republicans backing it. The Capps amendment (http://www.energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090730/hr3200_capps_1.pdf) states that some abortions "shall" be covered by the "public option" plan, specifically those types of abortions that Congress allows to be covered under Medicaid, under the so-called "Hyde Amendment," which has been attached regularly to appropriations bills for many years. These are abortions performed in cases or rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.

As for other types of abortions, the Capps amendment leaves it to the secretary of Health and Human Services to decide whether or not they will be covered. It says, "Nothing in this Act shall be construed as preventing the public health insurance option from providing" abortion services that would not be legal for Medicaid coverage. Says the NRLC’s Johnson: "The Capps Amendment MANDATES that the public plan cover any Medicaid-fundable abortions, and AUTHORIZES the secretary to cover all other abortions. … [F]rom day one, she [Secretary Kathleen Sebelius] is authorized to pay for them all. And, she will."

We can’t say what anyone will do in the future. But Obama himself said on July 17, 2007, that "[i]n my mind, reproductive care is essential care" and would be covered by his public insurance plan. He was addressing Planned Parenthood:

Obama, July 17, 2007: We’re going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don’t have health insurance. It will be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services, as well as mental health services and disease management services, because part of our interest is to make sure that we’re putting more money into preventive care.

Obama did not use the word "abortion," but a spokesman for the campaign said later that abortion would be included, according to the Chicago Tribune. (http://www.archives.chicagotribune.com/2007/jul/18/news/chi-dems18jul18) The NRLC has posted an unedited video of Obama’s response on YouTube (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Cqww8jmizug&eurl=http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=3127987&s=99624509=player_embedded) along with some comments which are the group’s opinions and not necessarily those of anyone at FactCheck.org).

Public Funds

The Capps amendment does contain a statement – as we noted in an earlier article (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/surgery-for-seniors-vs-abortions) – that prohibits the use of public money to pay for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother. That would still allow the public plan to cover all abortions, so long as the plans took in enough private money in the form of premiums paid by individuals or their employers. The Capps language also would allow private plans purchased with federal subsidies ("affordability credits" for low-income families and workers) to cover abortion.

Broader language was contained in an amendment offered by Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan (http://www.energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090731/hr3200_stupak_1.pdf) the day after the Capps amendment was approved. The Stupak amendment would have overruled Capps and prohibited government funding of "any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion," except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. The Stupak amendment was rejected by the committee 27 - 31 (http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090731/hr3200_stupak_1_rc.pdf).

Supporters of abortion rights argue that this would cause some women who now have abortion coverage to lose it, by forcing private insurance companies to drop abortion coverage from plans so that they can be purchased with the help of federal subsidies. For example, NARAL Pro-Choice America states (http://blogforchoice.com/archives/2009/08/the-truth-about.html):

NARAL: Anti-choice members of Congress aren’t satisfied with the Capps compromise. They want to impose a new nationwide abortion ban in the private health-insurance market by prohibiting such coverage in the new health-care system – thus taking away coverage from women who already have it.

We can’t predict how many insurance plans might be affected by the Stupak language. And we take no stand on whether all abortions should or should not be covered.
As for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a "public plan" and newly subsidized private plans to cover all abortions.

– by Brooks Jackson

Sources

U.S. House. "H.R. 3200 (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h3200ih.txt.pdf)." (as introduced 14 Jul 2009.)

National Right to Life. "Obama Says ‘Government Funding of Abortion’ is ‘Fabrication,’
(http://nrlc.org/press_releases_new/Release081909.html)

But the White House-Backed House Bill Explicitly Authorizes It
(http://nrlc.org/press_releases_new/Release081909.html)." press release. 19 Aug 2009.

Capps amendment to H.R. 3200
(http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090730/hr3200_capps_1.pdf) . House
Energy and Commerce Committee. 30 Jul 2009.

Stupak amendment to H.R. 3200 (http://www.energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090731/hr3200_stupak_1.pdf). House
Energy and Commerce Committee. 31 Jul 2009.

NARAL Pro-Choice America. "The Truth About Abortion and Health Reform (http://blogforchoice.com/archives/2009/08/the-truth-about.html)." Blog for Choice. 14 Aug 2009.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Subject: Hearts and Laws Should Change

Some people say that the solution to the abortion problem is to change people’s hearts.

In fact, changing people’s hearts is the solution to every problem that the world faces.

But that doesn’t mean that we don’t have laws. The fact is that while there are people around whose hearts are not in the right place, there have to be laws to restrain their heartless activities. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, the law cannot get the white man to love me, but it can stop him from lynching me.We also should not overlook the power that laws have to shape minds and hearts. When our children learn in school that something is legal, they are learning that such a thing is right. Whether regarding abortion or anything else, both hearts and laws must be changed.

–Fr. Frank Pavone (Priests for Life)

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Friend, you need to ACT NOW to stop stealth-FOCA!

Hi everyone,

Here is another very important message from Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life with urgent information about FOCA. Please read this and take immediate action.


Friends,

This is without question among the most urgent messages I’ve ever sent you.

Unless you want to pay for abortionists to kill the youngest members of our human family, you must take these two actions immediately:

1. Contact your lawmakers in Washington!

In case you don’t know, under the guise of "health care reform" Congress is about to pass a stealth version of the Freedom of Choice Act! And to make matters worse, they will force YOU to pay for the killings that will follow!

Make no mistake. The "health care reform" bills being finalized in Congress will set off a chain reaction that will result in a massive expansion of abortion!

That’s because unless Congress explicitly states that abortion is excluded, it will be regarded as "an essential benefit" for Americans. Once that’s done, insurance companies would be forced to cover elective abortions which would in turn force local health networks to recruit and hire abortionists.

And to make matters even worse, because these would be federal mandates …
… state laws that now restrict abortion will probably be overturned!

As I said, this is FOCA in disguise!

Which is why it is so critically important that you:

Contact your lawmakers in Washington … RIGHT NOW!

Your action is needed because Barack Obama and the Abortion Congress want to ram this through Congress BEFORE the people of life can rise up to stop it.

And they will succeed unless YOU take action. Don’t leave this up to "someone else." Call your two U.S. Senators and your House Representative and urge them to explicitly exclude abortion funding from health care reform legislation.

I know we can win this fight. We proved that earlier this year when we helped mobilize the people of life to oppose the Freedom of Choice Act.

We won that battle … and we can win this one, too.

But only if we ACT NOW and make our voices heard in Washington. Time is of the essence!
Obama is putting enormous pressure on Congress to pass his "health care reform" as quickly as possible. He originally wanted it passed before lawmakers left on their August recess. Only fast action by Priests for Life and other pro-life activists kept that from happening.

Stung by that setback, the pro-abortion leaders of Congress are now out there selling the "health care reform" package to voters. But one thing they aren’t telling anybody is how this measure will all but mandate abortion-on-demand … and force you and every other taxpayer to pay for it!

So we’ve got to sound the alarm far and wide and convince our fellow Americans to DEMAND that Congress keep any "health care reform" bill abortion-neutral!

Priests for Life is sparing no expense to do just that. We are using every means of communication at our disposal to rally pro-life America to action: TV, radio, Internet, parish visits, resources for clergy, newspaper articles, tele-conferences, letter writing campaigns, postcards … you name it.

To be successful it is critically important that you TAKE THESE THREE ACTION NOW:

1. Contact your two U.S. Senators and Representative. You can either click here: www.capwiz.com/nrlc/issues/alert/?alertid=13157881&type=CO to send them an email, or call them, or both. You’ll need to make three calls: One to your Representative in the House (switchboard 202-225-3121) and one to each of your two U.S. Senators (switchboard 202-224-3121). Ask the operator to connect you to the appropriate lawmaker’s office.

2. Click here www.priestsforlife.org/prayercampaign to join our prayer campaign. Let’s join prayer power to our lobbying voices, and let us know on this page that you have contacted your lawmakers and that you will say the daily prayer we’ve prepared. In this way, when I visit our lawmakers in Washington, I will know how many of our Priests for Life family members have already contacted Congress.

Again, though, the key is for you TAKE ACTION NOW … before you move on to your next email. Believe me, there is nothing that is more important for you to do right now than this.
And if I may ask you one more favor. Each year I survey our supporters to learn how we can serve their needs more effectively. Would you take a moment and fill out the short survey I’ve placed at www.priestsforlife.org/survey. It is very important to me to know what you’re thinking about our ministry!

Thank you and God bless.
Fr. Frank Pavone

National Director, Priests for Life and Gospel of Life Ministries

PS. In case you think I’m exaggerating the situation, pro-life Congressman Chris Smith calls Obama’s so-called "health care" plan the "greatest threat to the unborn since Roe v. Wade." He is so concerned, in fact, that he sent a letter to his fellow Congressmen in which he cited quotes from pro-abortion groups that state their goal of using health care reform as a tool to expand access to abortion. He also quoted Barack Obama from a Q&A session at a Planned Parenthood Action Fund Event in July 2007: "In my mind reproductive care is essential care, basic care so it is at the center, the heart of the [health care] plan that I propose." Now that you know the truth … TAKE ACTION!

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Ask Your Senators to Vote Against Sotomayor

I received this important email from the Americans United for Life (AUL) and I hope anyone who sees this will also respond. The letter says:

Dear George,

Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to send the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the next Justice on the US Supreme Court to the full Senate for a vote. That vote is expected to happen in the next few days. During the hearings on her nomination, I hoped that she would repudiate the radical views of the pro-abortion legal advocacy group on whose board she sat for 12 years - the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund (PRLDEF).

During that time, the PRLDEF filed six amicus briefs before the Court arguing that any limitation on abortion should be struck down.Unfortunately, Judge Sotomayor did not offer any reassurance that she will be anything other than a strong promoter of abortion if confirmed to the Supreme Court.So, I provided testimony before the Committee and explained why it was necessary for us to oppose her confirmation to the Court.Now, I need you to join your voice with mine.

Will you contact your Senators and ask them to vote against the confirmation of Judge Sotomayor to be the next Justice on the US Supreme Court?
http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=OJfN08Hz9-h9BSZCXWwVjg

We've set up a page on the AUL Action web site that makes it easy to do. And then, please ask your friends and family to do the same.
http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=gQ8ZUu2vw960KNhxeYofEg

This is a crucial time.

Thank you for helping.

For life,
CharmaineCharmaine Yoest, Ph.D.
President & CEO
AUL Action

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Stop TheAbortion Mandate

I received this in an email today and want to share it here. Please forward this to all those you know might be interested.

Please join me at StopTheAbortionMandate.com<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=Nahx2blIwrfm3kY8oovnzA..> this Thursday,July 23, at 9 p.m (Eastern) for a critical webcast.

Powerful abortion industry lobbyists and Washington bureaucrats have justlaunched a massive effort to mandate taxpayer-funded abortions as part oftheir proposed trillion-dollar healthcare takeover.

With this power grab, the abortion industry and its political allies intendto:

* Force taxpayers to fund a huge abortion-industry bailout --something the majority of Americans oppose, and certainly cannot afford inthese tough economic times

* Mandate that virtually every American be forced into a health planthat includes abortion coverage

* Require honorable medical providers to violate their consciences andperform abortions -- or risk losing their jobs

* Impose one of the cornerstones of the<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=2LNEonD4477rWnoXsquVdg..> "Freedom of ChoiceAct" (FOCA) by stealth

The New York Times just ran a prominent<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=G7AaStZv19Fs4oZIrV-Okg..> story confirmingthat an "administration official refused Sunday to rule out the possibilitythat federal tax money might be used to pay for abortions under proposedhealth care legislation.

"Put bluntly, these proposed measures could lead to the largest abortionexpansion since Roe v. Wade.

This abortion mandate must be stopped.

Learn what's at stake -- and discover how YOU can help to stop this abortionmandate by joining a one-time-only live webcast event this Thursday, July23, at 9 p.m. Eastern (6 p.m. Pacific, 7 p.m. Mountain, 8 p.m. Central.)
<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=2rLFGX3NJeWwesea4_2uAw..>
<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=2rLFGX3NJeWwesea4_2uAw..> Stop The AbortionMandate.com <http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=2rLFGX3NJeWwesea4_2uAw..>

To register for the webcast, go to: StopTheAbortionMandate.com<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=9CC1fdhLFm7j67fWw75_LA..>

The live event will be approximately 70 minutes long. There's no charge toparticipate. If you have access to the Internet -- even with a dial-upconnection -- you can listen in on the live webcast audio and submitquestions.

During this nationwide event, you will discover:

* The shocking facts about the sweeping legislation that the politicalpower brokers are trying to ram through before Congress goes on summerrecess

* The devastating implications of the proposed mandates -- facts theabortion industry doesn't want Americans to hear

* Why respected leaders, national organizations, and pro-life peopleare joining together in record numbers to challenge this power grab

* The exact action steps YOU can take to make a difference at thiscrucial moment

* And much more!

In an historic display of unity, pro-life and pro-family organizations arejoining together for the Stop the Abortion Mandate webcast. I will bespeaking along with other nationally known and respected leaders, including:

* Tony Perkins, Family Research Council
* Fr. Frank Pavone, Priests for Life
* Wendy Wright, Concerned Women for America
* Congressman Chris Smith, U.S. House of Representatives
* Kristan Hawkins, Students for Life of America
* Dr. Richard Land, Southern Baptist Convention Ethics and ReligiousLiberties Commission

* Congressman Joe Pitts, U.S. House of Representatives

The announcement of this important webcast is being sent out to hundreds ofthousands of pro-lifers across America, and there is limited space availablefor the live event, so you are strongly encouraged to register now. Reserveyour place at StopTheAbortionMandate.com<http://action.aul.org/site/R?i=ugWg8zZilxyZ_qB3y_BkKw..> .

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

I know that some would say that neither I nor any man has a right to speak on this issue, but what I'm saying is in agreement with what many women believe also. Even so, this is not merely a woman's issue; it is a human issue and concerns all of us, both men and women, old and young, and the unborn especially.

"Freedom of choice" vs. the right to life

Although many view this as a merely political issue, it is truly much greater than that. It is a spiritual and moral matter. But in the political environment, abortion is treated simply as a matter of a woman's right to do with her body as she chooses, and according to this they say that abortion should remain legal. But the choice to do what? The baby in the womb is not the woman's body, or even part of her body as if a mere appendage to be removed at her will. The baby in her womb is an individual person with the right to life. Whatever right a woman has to with her own body as she chooses, that right does not extend to doing what she would with someone else's body. The baby in the womb is not her body, but someone else's.

Some say that they are against abortion, but that they feel they cannot deny a woman the "right" to choose to have an abortion. But that is like someone saying "I believe slavery is wrong, I would never own a slave but I’m "pro-choice". I don’t want to impose my morality on anyone. Other people should have the right to own slaves." But all human beings have equal dignity and worth no matter what their race or religion, and that includes the child developing in the mother’s womb.

Abortion is the holocaust of our day. The personhood and right to life of unborn chidlren is denied. To deny a human beings personhood, or even to deny they are human at all has been a way to justify all kinds of crimes again God and humanity. The Nazis did it to the Jews and the disabled, and others have done it to indigenous people's throughout the world. The de-humanization tactic makes it easier to deny a person's rights and even to kill them when they become an incovenience. Unlike other oppressed people, the unborn cannot fight back; they cannot even speak up for themselves and proclaim their rights. We must raise our voices on their behalf.


The dark origins of Planned Parenthood

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, published articles in support of eugenics, a practice employed by the Nazis in Germany, with their plan to create a "master race" by eliminating those they deemed inferior.

Consider these quotes from Margaret Sanger:

From one of her publicaitons, Margaret Sanger said:

"The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.'' `Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race. -- Margaret Sanger, Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.

In a letter by Margaret Sanger to Dr. Clarence Gamble dated, December 19, 1939, she said:

"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful education approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if
it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." -- [Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.]

Margaret Sanger also said in the 'Birth Control Review', dated October 1921:

"As an advocate of birth control I wish ...to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the `unfit' and the `fit,' admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation...On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective." -- [Margaret Sanger. ``The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.'' Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.]

In the following quote, Margaret Sanger further advocates the evil aims of eugenics:

"The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics. -- [Margaret Sanger. ``The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.'' Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.]

Margaret Sanger also said:

"Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying ..... demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism .... . [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant ..... We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all." -- [Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on ``The Cruelty of Charity,'' pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.]

Margaret Sanger also makes herself judge of who is worthy to procreate when she says:

The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind. -- [Margaret Sanger, quoted in Charles Valenza. ``Was Margaret Sanger a Racist?'' Family Planning Perspectives, January-February 1985, page 44.]

The outrageous notions of Margaret Sanger are also made known when she says:

"The third group [of society] are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped." -- [Margaret Sanger. Speech quoted in Birth Control: What It Is, How It Works, What It Will Do. The Proceedings of the First American Birth Control Conference. Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-12, 1921. Published by the Birth Control Review, Gothic Press, pages 172 and 174.]

In another quote, Margaret Sanger poses the following choice for people she considers inferior:

"Give dysgenic groups [people with `bad genes'] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization." -- [Margaret Sanger, April 1932 Birth Control Review.]

I wonder if President Obama is aware that Planned Parenthood, to which he has made promises in support of abortion "rights", was founded by someone who would have considered him inferior because of the color of his skin. I wonder if other pro-abortion politicians who are also African-American are aware of the evil they support.

It doesn't excuse Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) to consider how it gave its Margaret Sanger award to the late Dr. Martin Luther King in 1966, or that one of its former presidents, Faye Wattleton, was black. Although Planned parenthood may appear benign today in the eyes of some, supposedly caring for the rights of women, the grim reality of abortion and birth control are interwoven with the dark beginnings of Planned Parenthood.


Irish Catholics and the fight for life

There is an article by Fr. Peter West, Priest Associate, Priests for Life. It is called "To Be True To Our Irish-Catholic Heritage is to Be Pro-Life". He wrote it after addressing the Pennsylvania State Convention of the Ancient Order of Hibernians.


After addressing the Pennsylvania State Convention of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, Fr. West reflected on his own Irish heritage and its connection to his pro-life convictions.

He tells about the Ancient Order of Hibernians being founded to defend the Catholic Church and her priests from attacks by British invaders, and how the Hibernians are called to defend the faith and build a culture of life and civilization of love, where each and every human life will be welcomed, protected, nurtured and loved from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death.

He also recalls St. Patrick, who came to bring the Catholic Christian Faith to the people of Ireland, and how the vision of St. Patrick helped to renew all of Europe in the midst of the Dark Ages. Irish monks helped to spread the Gospel throughout Europe, where people came to know the saving power of Christ, Who is the way, and the truth, and the life. And He Who is life said, "The thief cometh not, but for to steal and to kill and to destroy. I am come that they may have life and may have it more abundantly." (John 10:10)

The thief can manifest in different forms to attack the order of God and His designs, to prevent the truth from being known. In such disorder, good is called evil, and evil good. Those who work to protect the lives of even of the most helpless among us, are accused of denying freedom of choice to others, and those who would take these lives for their own convenience are protected and their actions are called "rights". Such a thing exists today in the form of legalized abortion. Whether legal or not, abortion is an attack on life and truth, and as Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life put it, "is the very oppsite of love".

Today in Europe, Ireland has some of the strictest laws limiting abortion. Yet today there are many pressures on Ireland to become like the rest of Europe and adopt practices alien to its faith. International Planned Parenthood Federation, based in London, promotes contraception, sterilization and abortion around the world. Some countries consider this a form of contraceptive imperialism and resent this intrusion into their native cultures and religions. Planned
Parenthood views the Catholic Church as their chief obstacle in promoting their anti-life agenda.

Irish Catholics as well as all Catholics and other Christians throughout the world have a duty to resist the encroaching culture of death and build a culture of life. As Fr. West says in his article, the pro-life movement in Ireland is alive and well, and leading the way are the Irish youth. The Pro-Life Campaign is the largest pro-life group in Ireland. It is led by young people in their twenties and thirties.

Irish Catholics in the United States can also make our greatest contribution to United States by remaining true to our faith and our Irish-Catholic heritage. Although there is already an enormous Irish-Catholic presence in the pro-life movement in the United States, the pro-life movement and America need more Irish-Catholic Americans to be actively involved in aiding pre-born children and women with unplanned pregnancies. Among some Irish-Americans involved in the Pro-Life movement are Fathers Quinn, Wilde, Hogan and Fr. West himself, who are involved with the group called Priests For Life.


The Witness of Sacred Scripture

Some who are reading this now are perhaps Christian, yet sadly even some Christians are "pro-choice". If you are, I want to speak to you from Sacred Scripture, which gives a strong witness to the sanctity of life even in the womb:

For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. (Luke 1:44)

Although still within the womb incapable of conscious reasonable thought, the baby is still alive and with a soul. Only a livng soul can experience the presense of joy.

Whereas unbelievers will deny this, there is no excuse for the Christian to support abortion, having been taught about things pertaining to the spiritual life. This being so, let's consider carefully what is said in the following passages of Holy Scripture:

Psalm 139:13 For thou didst form my inward parts, thou didst knit me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise thee, for thou art fearful and wonderful. Wonderful are thy works! Thou knowest me right well;
15 my frame was not hidden from thee, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.
16 Thy eyes beheld my unformed substance; in thy book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.

Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.

From these passages from the Book of Psalms and Jeremiah, it is seen that it is the Lord Himself Who forms the baby in the womb; His unseen hand guiding the course of nature, of which He is the Creator. He is Sovereign over all life, and yet many presume to unlawfully take the Lord's authority upon themselves and call the killing of the unborn a "right".

Just before Pope John Paul II left the United States in 1987 he said the following at Detroit Airport:

"Every human no matter how vulnerable or helpless, no matter how young or how old, no matter how healthy, handicapped, or sick no matter how useful or productive for society is a being of inestimable worth created in the image of God. This is the dignity of America, the reason she exists, the condition for her survival yes, the ultimate test of her greatness; to respect every human person, especially the weakest and most defenseless ones, those as yet unborn."

Dr. Albert Schweitzer once said "Whenever there is lost consciousness of the fact that every man is an object of concern for us just because he is a man, civilization and morals are shaken, and the advance to fully developed inhumanity is only a matter of time."


Church and state

There is much talk in America about the separation between Church and State, as if this excludes the possibility of outlawing abortion. But the First Amendment merely forbids the establishment of a state religion whether it be the Catholic Church or any other faith. The Founding Fathers didn't intend a separation of law and morality.

To those who make the claim that the government has no place in legislaitng morality, I agree to an extent. But there are things that most all can agree are gravely immoral and ought to be
outlawed, like rape, murder, theft, etc., and there are laws against them, although some would like to think that they have the "right" to do such things. So with certain limits, the government can and ought to pass laws which protect the people, even those still in the womb of their mothers.

Freedom of choice, does not include a "right" to kill someone because they are seen as an inconvenience. True freedom of choice respects the sanctity of life for all people.


The so-called Freedom Of Choice Act (FOCA)

While many are trying to call abortion a choice which should be protected, and which governments unfortunately support, there is the danger in America of taking away the rights of those of us who are Pro-Life.

Consider also the so-called Freedom Of Choice Act, which Barack Obama said he would sign when he became President. He made a promise to Planned Parenthood that he would sign the "Freedom of Choice Act." "The first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing I’d do.", said Obama. Although he has not done so, it is a promise which Planned Parenthood expects him to keep, and there remains the danger of it happening.

Among the things that the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" would do, would be to force faith-based hospitals and healthcare facilities to perform abortions. Right now there are laws which protect a right of conscientious objection to abortion, but under Obama's "Freedom Of Choice Act", the freedom of choice for pro-life doctors and nurses to abstain from committing abortions would be taken away.

U.S. Senator and practicing obstetrician Dr. Tom Coburn told CNSNews.com that he was willing to defy the law if President Obama tries to force pro-life doctors into doing abortions:

"I think a lot of us will go to jail. Let’s see them prosecute the first one of us for not doing that.", Dr. Tom Coburn said.

Americans United for Life (AUL) and AUL Action joined with allied groups to create the Freedom2Care coalition and fight back.

Also, FOCA would do away with state laws on parental involvement, on partial birth abortion, and on all other protections. Currently, thirty-six states across America require some form of parental notification or consent prior to an abortion involving a minor child. These laws are supported by 80% of the American people. In addition to the obvious reason that parents need to be involved when their child undergoes a medical procedure, these laws also protect young girls from sexual abuse. Why does President Obama oppose these parental involvement laws that protect children from sexual abuse?

The mainstream media has refused to ask these questions to Obama. Why has he promised Planned Parenthood that he would sign legislation which would eliminate ALL of the common-sense parental involvement laws across the country?

FOCA would also prevent states from enacting protective measures in the future. We must oppose [such actions which are a great threat to the unborn] so-called "pro-choice" politicians of any party. Our duty to uphold the right to life must not be superseded by any interest political or otherwise.

Whether you are American or not, we can all spread the word, and help each other know what's going on so that those who are able, may take action.

Beware also of FOCA-By-Stealth. Abortion advocates are counting on the economy and other pressing issues to divert the attention of the American people so they can surreptitiously and with little resistance advance their pro-abortion agenda. Read more about FOCA-By-Stealth at www.aul.org/FOCA_by_stealth


Abortion in the case of rape

When a woman becomes pregnant resulting from rape, whether by a stranger or someone the woman knows, it is said by some that it would be wrong and unreasonable, even inhumane, to refuse the woman access to an abortion, and that the baby would be a perpetual reminder of what happened to her.

Most certainly, the greatest care and compassion should be shown to all women who have been violated in such a terrible way, and her welfare should be of great concern. And in caring for the woman, we cannot overlook consideration for the baby's right to life, who did not ask to be conceived. Yet if the woman chooses to have an abortion, then the baby is killed because of the crime of the man.

A woman named Geri Riggs of Sturgis, South Dakota who became pregnant as the result of rape, asked the question: "How can we say that the innocent have to die for their father’s sins?" Speaking from personal experience, Geri also said:

"Being a victim of rape did not exempt me from the devastation of abortion. It added to it." She even went as far as to say that she could endure another rape if she had to but was emphatic that she "could NEVER, EVER survive another abortion."

Geri testifies of the deep mental, emotional and spiritual pain to which the abortion led. She says that it was through faith in God and the healing power of His mercy and forgiveness that she found healing through the Blood of Christ, Who washes away all sin.

Geri's story is not uncommon. There are many women who have had abortions and suffer deep emotional and spiritual trauma as a result; a trauma that those at Planned Parenthood do not warn them about, nor do most others who are pro-abortion, yet claim to care for the woman's well being.


The life of the mother

Another argument some people make is about when a woman's life is at risk. But what parent wouldn't give their own life to save the life of their child? That goes for women and men both. Again, I feel I should make the point that there are many women who say the same thing I'm saying about this.

The matter comes down to a simple question: Is the baby in the womb a living person with a soul from the first moment of conception or not? We believe that life does begin at conception. If someone doesn't believe life begins at conception, then can they prove it? If they cannot prove that life doesn't begin at conception, then they must admit that it might, which means that abortion might actually be killing living people.

To highlight the point of the personhood of pre-born babies, consider this scenario:

A mother is carrying her baby in her arms one day, and an assailant jumps in front of her with a gun and is about to shoot her. She holds the baby up in front of her to shield herself from the bullet to save her life; the baby dies, and she lives. What would be thought of such a mother? There would be outrage at what she did. Most would have shielded their baby from the gun with their own body, and rather die themselves instead of the baby.

Consider for a moment that the first woman had little time to consider what she was doing. She panicked and acted wrongly. But the woman who has an abortion has days, perhaps weeks and even months to consider whether or not to have an abortion to save her own life. Yet the first woman is condemned for her deed, while the woman who has an abortion to save her own life is accepted and her deed is considered a "right".

In any case, is it not the act of a mother who loves her children to give her life for the child? How is it then, that a mother can see fit to let the baby she carries in her womb be killed so that she may live? Whether it is the mother in the scenario above who let her baby take a bullet for her, or a mother who has an abortion to save her own life, in either situation, the mother holds the baby up to die to save herself.

Even still, some stick with the argument that it's merely about "choice", and that if someone chooses to give their life for annother that's their choice, but that no one has the right to force someone to give their life for another. In a certain way I would agree with that. For example, if a person sees someone about to be killed and is able to save the person by dying in their place, they may or may not choose to do so. It is their choice, but there is a difference. In one instance, a person may merely refrain from making that sacrifice, but in an abortion, a woman wilfully chooses not merely to refrain from making the sacrifice, but to kill the baby in order to save her own life.

Still more, some might say it is a matter of self defense. Although we certainly have the right to defend our lives, there is still a difference when it comes to abortion. In one case, we defend ourselves from an attacker who wilfully and maliciously attempts to kill, but in the case of an abortion, the baby has no intention of doing anyone harm at all, yet is killed to save one's own life. That cannot be rightly called self defense.


Harmful affects of abortion on the women to have them

Another reality that the liberal media seems to ignore is the negative impact that abortion has on the mental health of women.

It is known that abortion can cause physical injuries to the woman during the abortion procedure, even in so-called "safe", "legal" abortion "clinics". Abortion can even cause the death of the woman. There is increased risk of infertility and there is evidence that it can increase the risk of breast cancer. Not only is there danger to a woman's physical health, but the deep, emotional pain that results from abortion and its effect on the mental health of women is beginning to be recognized by some in the mental health community.


In Great Britain, the Royal College of Psychiatrists has recognized the mental health risks of abortion, and that women may be at risk of mental health breakdowns if they have abortions.

There is the tragically sad case of a woman in Cornwall who was a talented artist, and hanged herself because she was overcome with grief after aborting her twins. Emma Beck, age 30, left a note saying: "Living is hell for me. I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum. I want to be with my babies; they need me, no one else does."

How many women have to be tortured by such anguish, and exploited by Planned Parenthood, politicians and pro-abortion activists in general, before the world wakes up and realizes the horror of abortion? Abortion hurts and even kills women; the very women whose rights pro-abortion politicians and other activists claim to be defending.

It is a fact to which women have testified, that they deeply regret their abortions, and that regret led them to things like bitterness, marital conflict, permiscuity, substance abuse, thoughts of suicide, and other ills. Even aborting a baby conceived in rape can lead to deep regrets, as the case of Geri Riggs shows, and that of many other women who have experienced the same thing.


There is hope

Many women who have already had one or more abortions are suffering because of their decision and often feel there is no hope for them. But for these women, and men, who have been involved in abortion, there is hope. By God's grace they can find forgiveness and healing. Through prayer and putting one's trust in the Lord, they can find peace and even joy in living again.

For women who have had abortions and are suffering because of it, I want to tell you that there is hope, and that God loves you and wants to heal you.

There are organizations such as Rachel's Vineyard, which provide healing retreats that are offered throughout the year in locations across the United States and Canada, with additional sites internationally. Here, women and men who suffer post-abortion trauma, can find a place of compassion and understanding, and a ministry of God's mercy and reconciliation which can open doors for them which they may otherwise have despaired of ever finding again. One's mental and spiritual health need not continue to get worse. There is help, as a woman named Michelle testifies of an experience in prayer one night at a Rachel's Vineyard retreat:

"I cannot describe what happened that night. For the first time, I actually pictured children in heaven with God, and with my grandmother who passed away, and they were happy. They were drawing me in to God's love and forgiveness. That night, I knew God existed and that I am not a terrible person, and that I have already been forgiven by God and my children. It was overwhelming. Never had anything like this happened before in my life. I cannot begin to describe on paper, the wonderful sense of peace and love I felt that night. Nothing like that has ever happened to me before."

For women who are pregnant and don't know what to do, and are considering having an abortion, I want to tell you that there are alternatives. You don't have to be alone in this, and no one at all ever has the right to force you into an abortion... not even your own parents. If you are thinking of having an abortion for any reason at all, please know that it isn't going to help, however convenient or sensible it may seem right now, and there are many women out there who have had abortions who will tell you the same thing. There are options to abortion.

Organizations such as Priests for Life are active not only in the battle to end abortion, but also do what they can to help people connect with the people and resources which can make the choice for life a practical one, as well as a loving one for the woman and her baby, regardless of financial or social situation. At the end of this article are links for people suffering from post-abortion trauma as well as crisis pregnancy help, and information about pregnancy tests, STD's, adoption, parenting, medical referrals, housing, and many other issues. The toll-free number is available to callers 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

There are many obstacles to ending abortion and the struggle will take courage and determination, but the struggle to protect pre-born children is a winnable battle. May God help us.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sources

http://www.Priestsforlife.0rgwesthibernian.htm
http://www.fightfoca.com . FightFOCA website: A Project of AUL action
http://www.Aul.org - Americans United for Life
http://www.dakotavoice.com200611/guest/20061101GR.html - Guest column, The experience of rape (and abortion) survivor by Geri Riggs, Sturgis, South Dakota.

http://www.rachelsvineyard.org/emotions/stories.aspx - Stories: Retreat Stories

http://www.rachelsvineyard.org To find international locations for Rachel’s Vineyard retreats, go to Retreats>Find a Retreat>by Location>International.

More information about other Pro-Life organizations for help with post-abortion trauma, healing and crisis pregnancy, can be found in the Pro-Life section of my website at: http://www.solasanchroi.net/Pro-Life.html

No one can do everything, but everyone can do something to end the culture of death and build a culture of life.

One thing that can be done is to Sign the Fight FOCA Petition at http://www.fightfoca.com

To view the Priests for Life website you may see it at http://www.priestsforlife.org

Also, Health and Human Services is accepting comments about whether they should keep or rescind these important regulations protecting pro-life healthcare professionals. Whether you're a patient or healthcare professional, please send your message to HHS through the Freedom2Care.org website and tell them to keep the rules in place and prevent discrimination against pro-life doctors.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Catholic bioethics priest `cuts through spin' on stem-cell debate, By Jeff Graham

Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk is director of the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, Pa. In a talk he gave, he spoke about the position of the Catholic Church on embryonic stem-cell research. He affirmed that the Church is against embryonic stem-cell research (and rightly so) but that she supports adult stem-cell research. He also said whereas embryonic stem-cell research has not cured any diseases, adult stem-cell research has cured nearly 100.

Embryonic stem-cell research involves destroying emrbyos, which is killing a human being. However, adult stem-cells can be aquired from the nasal cavity, the hip and umbilical cord and does not involve killing.

Read this important article which highlights important facts about this matter at: http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=21666

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

The dark origins of Planned Parenthood

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, published articles in support of eugenics, a practice employed by the Nazis in Germany, with their plan to create a "master race" by eliminating those they deemed inferior.

Consider these quotes from Margaret Sanger:

The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.'' `Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race. -- Margaret Sanger, Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful education approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members. -- [Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.]

As an advocate of birth control I wish ...to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the `unfit' and the `fit,' admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation...On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective. -- [Margaret Sanger. ``The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.'' Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.]

The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics. -- [Margaret Sanger. ``The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.'' Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5.]

Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying ..... demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism .... . [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant ..... We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all. -- [Margaret Sanger. The Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Chapter on ``The Cruelty of Charity,'' pages 116, 122, and 189. Swarthmore College Library edition.]

The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind. -- [Margaret Sanger, quoted in Charles Valenza. ``Was Margaret Sanger a Racist?'' Family Planning Perspectives, January-February 1985, page 44.]

The third group [of society] are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped. -- [Margaret Sanger. Speech quoted in Birth Control: What It Is, How It Works, What It Will Do. The Proceedings of the First American Birth Control Conference. Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-12, 1921. Published by the Birth Control Review, Gothic Press, pages 172 and 174.]

Give dysgenic groups [people with `bad genes'] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization. -- [Margaret Sanger, April 1932 Birth Control Review.]

I wonder if President Obama is aware that Planned Parenthood, to which he has made promises in support of abortion "rights", was founded by someone who would have considered him inferior because of the color of his skin. I wonder if other pro-abortion politicians who are also African-American are aware of the evil they support.

I pray that the African-American community turn their attention to those who much better represent their interestss, such as Dr. Alveda C. King, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, who is Pro-Life and is a Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life. I made a post about her on this blog not too long ago where I showed a quote by the late Dr. Martin Luther King, which began a letter that his niece Dr. Alveda King wrote to the African-American community. Dr. Martin Luther King said:

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere…The Negro cannot win if he is willing to sacrifice the lives of his children for personal comfort and safety."- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
In the letter Dr. Alveda King wrote to the African-American community she said:

This is an open letter to appeal to all people who respect the work, life and teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. More specifically, it is a wake-up call to the African American community. As a mature, Black, female living in America, my heart weeps every time I hear or see stories about our youth cut down in acts of senseless violence. Time after time, I have asked the question, HOW CAN THE DREAM SURVIVE IF WE MURDER THE CHILDREN?

Dr. Alveda C. King, Pastoral Associate

Read more here.... http://priestsforlife.org/africanamerican/openletter.htm

Monday, May 18, 2009

Even if Muscular Dystrophy could be cured by using embryonic stem cell research, I wouldn't want it that way.

We hear politicians and others who promote embryonic stem-cell research speak of the diseases that could be cured by it, and how promising it is. We hear of Michael J. Fox who has Parkinson's disease, and of children with Diabetes and others whose illnesses they say could be cured by using embryonic stem cell research. And although there are people with various diseases who have unfortuntaely come to believe this, I want to make my own voice known about this also. I have Muscular Dystrophy, and I can assure you, that although I do want a cure to be found, I don't want it as a result of embryonic stem cell research, which involves the killing of human embryos. Fortunately, the Muscular Dystrophy Association is involved with research using adult stem cells, which has been shown already to be more promising, and has even developed therapies for various other conditions.

A fine job has been done in the world to condition people to think of a mere "mass of cells" when hearing the word "embryo". Many do not realise that a human embryo is actually a human being at a very early stage of development. Calling a human being who is only a few days old in the mother's womb an embryo, doesn't make that person less human. Yet their personhood is denied, and it is deemed by many to be acceptable to use human embryos for research, a practice that involves their destruction.

Joseph Mengele, a nazi scientist, experimented on Jews and this was deemed acceptable practice, and the nazis considered the Jews to be less than human also. When a persons humanity is denied, it becomes easy to kill them and do evil to them. Just as surely as it was evil to do to the Jews what the nazis did, it is evil also to consider human embryos as anything less than a human being with the right to life. They are as much human beings as the Jews, Asians, those of European descent and all others.

I want to make it known that niether politicians nor anyone else speaking in favor of embryonic stem-cell reseaerch speak for me or for many others with diseases who could supposedly benefit by such research. I don't want such evil to be promoted or advanced for any reason, including the supposed good it would do in finding cures for diseases. Research to cure diseases is a good thing and should continue, but there is a right way and a wrong way to go about things. We cannot abandon goodness in order to bring about good. The ends doesn't justify the means. Research to cure disease is in itself a positive and good act meant to help human beings, and it expresses, or ought to express, an innate respect for life. But when groups of human beings are regarded as less that human, and their right to life denied, then respect for life has disappeared and the value of human life is diminished.

If human life is not valued for the very reason than God created it and loves it Himself, then the value of each individual is diminished and endangered. The reasearch for cures and treament of disease comes to be at the mercy of those who lack the love and sense of value that every human person has as one who was created by Almighty God.

Some may say that they don't care what the motives are as long as a cure is found for their illness. But motives which are not grounded in what is good and true, can be more easily twisted towards evil ends, and those awaiting a cure may find themselves to be considered by others as useless members of society not worth keeping alive. In such a culture of death, the unthinkable becomes reality and it is already happening. A young woman named Terri Shiavo was killed in cold blood by dehydration and starvation and it allowed by a court right here in America. Such things are happening elsewhere in the world too, as the culture of death spreads its shadow over the minds of many. Only the light of Christ Jesus can enlighten our minds and hearts. We must turn to Him and be converted.

People claimed that she was a mental vegetable and had no awareness of her surroundings. Yet I went to a website dedicated to her and saw a video of her where a balloon was being passed over her face and her eyes followed its movement, which at the very least indicated awareness of her surroudnings. If it does not prove she was aware, even a skeptic must admit that it produces a reasonable doubt as to her state of awareness. This same reasonable doubt would prevent a court from sentencing a criminal to death. Why are criminals protected by such a reasonable doubt and yet a poor disabled woman in bed is not, and her family all the willing to take her home and care for her? But such is the state of things in our country today because respect for life has been lost, and evil is called good, and good evil.

As for the claim that embryonic stem cell research promises cures for diseases, there is much less promise in that area, whereas there are more success stories about adult stem cell treatments. More on this, I'll discuss in future posts.