Archive for the ‘Contraception’ Category

“42″ Stirs the Heart and the Conscience

Friday, April 19th, 2013





three headed monster

While I’m often accused of finding Pro-Life messages behind every tree, it can’t be denied that “42″ brings an inherent message of courage, compassion and composure that prevailed in the lives of Jackie and Rae Robinson as well as Dodgers Manager Branch Rickey. These same principles are needed so much in the ongoing heated moral debates of our time.

While the skin color/racism devil is somewhat subdued today, it still rears its ugly head. Then we are also contending with moral questions surrounding the sanctity of natural life and marriage. This “three headed monster” of racism, anti-procreative liberty and sexual perversion has crept into our lives with the intent of leading us further astray.

This is why the movie 42 is so inspiring; and the themes of racial unity, nonviolence, marital fidelity and Christianity are so very refreshing. They apply to our present day struggles; while they stir our hearts and rouse our conscience.

Today, we are fraught with unjust laws such as legal abortion – the killing of human babies in the womb. Where is the justice for the babies?

Uncle M. L., Jackie and Rae Robinson and Branch Rickey challenged the immoral unwritten laws of their day. We cannot afford to do less in Century 21. Uncle M. L. once said “a just law squares with the law of God.”

God’s Word is God’s law. The Bible charges us to love each other, and that law transcends human efforts to redesign God’s plan for continuity.

Jackie Robinson left the Dodgers the year after Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat in Montgomery. Yet that wasn’t the end of the baseball great’s mission to advance civil rights. He became a statesman and defender of my uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

I know that Robinson was a super ball player and Rickey was a phenomenal businessman. But they were so much more than that. They dealt with the human issues if their day.

The movie 42 has heart. We could all learn a lot from their examples of courage, composure and compassion.

42-blog






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Court to Priests for Life: “You have to wait”

Monday, April 15th, 2013





Priests for Life

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: April 15, 2013

Contact: Leslie Palma
347-286-7277

Judge dismisses case for now, but protects Priests for Life from HHS Mandate; Priests for Life to re-file.

On Friday, April 12, in Federal Court for the Eastern District of New York, Judge Frederic Block issued an order granting the government’s motion to dismiss the case, Priests for Life vs. Sebelius, on grounds of “lack of ripeness.”

Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, issued this statement:

“The Court’s decision Friday does not mean that we are being forced to obey the mandate now. In fact, this same court protected us from having that happen, by having the government stipulate back in December, in writing, that it would not enforce the mandate against Priests for Life in 2013.

“Moreover, the dismissal does not mean we’ve ‘lost the case;’ it means the court is not ready to decide on the case. The court is not saying we are wrong in our arguments with the Obama Administration and the HHS. Rather, it is issuing a procedural, technical ruling saying that we have to wait before the court decides on the merits of those arguments. The reason for the wait is the Administration’s promise of further changes to the mandate, changes expected by August of this year. The Court is saying, ‘Wait and see if, once the changes to the mandate come, you still want to challenge it.’

“In Judge Block’s order on Friday, he states, ‘The proposed regulations are not fit for review since they are still being formed…If Priests for Life is not content with the ultimate regulations, it may renew its legal challenge at that point.’ This is what has happened in over 20 other cases by similar organizations.

“What do we think of this?

“The Administration has already announced proposed changes, all of which are unacceptable and do not address our legal or moral concerns. The Administration is delaying the inevitable resolution of the legal challenge, and then arguing that the delay itself is grounds for dismissing the challenge. These are cowardly games which show that the Administration just wants these lawsuits to go away. The Administration should not do this and the court should not allow it.

“Moreover, the fact is that the mandate, as it stands now, is law. Its promises about the future are not law. Nor is there any indication that these future changes in any way will constitute exemption from the coerced coverage of objectionable activities.

“What we are saying is simple: the law, as it is now, infringes on our rights, and we only have temporary protection from the damage it does. Right now, the government is momentarily ceasing its illegal conduct so that the legal challenge to it is dismissed, only to return to the conduct later. That is why we are petitioning, and will continue to petition, the courts to declare the mandate unconstitutional. And we have every confidence that we will be successful.”

Robert J. Muise, Esq., American Freedom Law Center, stated, “While we disagree with the court’s ruling, it is not a ruling on the merits of our legal challenge to the HHS mandate. Consequently, as soon as the government ‘finalizes’ its implementing regulations in August, we will be right back in court, challenging the mandate and protecting religious freedom.”

Charles S. LiMandri, also a lead attorney for Priests for Life in the case, stated, “We are pleased that we were successful in securing a Stipulation from the Department of Justice and an Order from the court that guarantees that Priests for Life will not have the current unconscionable HHS Mandate enforced against it. The Department of Justice has further represented in court that final amended rules concerning the HHS Mandate will be in effect by August 2013. If, as we expect, the final HHS regulations continue to be morally objectionable, Priests for Life will still have five months in which to initiate further legal proceedings before they would have to comply with them. We are confident that unless the HHS Mandate is amended to include acceptable conscience protections, that the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately hold that it violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

For more details, see www.priestsforlife.org/hhsmandate

Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Judge’s Decision Is Dangerous For Our Children

Tuesday, April 9th, 2013





ella

As a mother and grandmother I shudder to consider the harm this will bring to young girls and subsequent grief to parents and loved ones.

Many contraceptives like ELLA, the morning after pill, have side effects and possible outcomes including strokes, heart attacks, sterility, etc.

USA Today is editorializing against a federal judge’s decision to require that “morning after” pills be made available over the counter to anyone of any age. In supporting the Obama administration’s original policy to require that girls under 17 obtain prescriptions for such drugs, USA Today writes, “The greater good is to leave decisions about the medical treatment of children in their parents’ hands.”

Read the whole article HERE!






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Today is the Last Day to Voice Your Support for Religious Freedom

Monday, April 8th, 2013





Action_Alert_Flag

The HHS contraception mandate has received “more comments than any other regulatory proposal on any subject government-wide” according to the Sunlight Foundation. Today is the final day for public comment on the proposal to require businesses and non-profit charities of more than 50 employees to provide health insurance coverage for abortion-causing “contraceptives” and sterilization.

To make your voice heard please click HERE






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Remembering Uncle M. L.: Alveda King reflects on the death of the Dreamer

Thursday, April 4th, 2013





MLK Collage

Forty-five years ago today, my Uncle M.L., the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. was murdered by an assassin’s bullet. Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if that shot had never been fired; what our nation would be like if that bullet had missed. Many are the times I wish he were here.

But though Uncle M.L. is no longer with us on earth, his voice lives on in the words he used to change our nation in the cause of justice.

We are a more just society today because of Martin Luther King, Jr. Not because he brought new ideas into the public consciousness, but because he reminded us of fundamental, eternal truths – truths that needed to be restated and lived out. He once asked and answered this question: “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust?” He went on to explain:

“A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: ‘An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.” Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

These timeless truths must be restated again today.

Remember Reverend Martin Luther King – let us not forget that he was an ordained Baptist minister and preacher of the Word of God – taught that we are to respect the law. But he also taught that there is a law higher than man’s. There are no commands more deserving of obedience than God’s.

Those commands caused Uncle M. L. to look beyond city ordinances, state statutes, or even federal law for guidance. He believed that those ordinances, statutes, and laws were to be respected, but that they were to be weighed against God’s law or what some would term natural law to determine if they were just.

The same is true today. But some still look to themselves to determine right and wrong.

We are told by the Obama administration that it is “unjust” that women should have to buy their own birth control pills, so everyone else must reach into their pockets to pay for them.

We are told by abortion advocates that it is “unjust” that some women cannot afford to abort their babies, so tax dollars must be used to finance the killing of those children.

We are told by same-sex “marriage” advocates that it is “unjust” that men cannot marry other men and women cannot marry other women, so 2,000 years of wisdom must be abandoned.

And yet, the Bible tells us that human life is sacred. We are thereby to choose life over abortion. The Bible teaches us that natural marriage between one man and one woman is part of the procreative process. We are thereby compelled to choose holy and procreative matrimony.

In forgetting our heritage, in distancing ourselves from God’s moral rules, we are doing Uncle M. L. a disservice, and we are in danger of coming face to face with disaster. So, in remembering Uncle M. L. today, I urge America and the world to remember that he was a servant of God who, though imperfect, tried to point people to the truth.






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






More On The Girl Scouts – A Follow-Up

Thursday, March 14th, 2013





SPACER

Girl-Scouts-300x256This article was sent to me by another pro-lifer. It has a lot of good information that again gives me reason for caution when dealing with the Girls Scouts. As Edmund Burke said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” The abortion industry is welcome in the Girl Scouts organization and even though they should know better, the Girl Scouts are allowing the abortion/contraceptives industry’s ugly and intrusive presence. In their own words, the Girl Scouts “Does not take a position” on sexuality, birth control, or abortion. By not taking a position, they are allowing others to define their agendas. Parents should rise up and demand that so called friends of our daughters stop pretending to help girls while they are destroying them.

Article by Mary Hasson
March 11, 2013

The Girl Scouts’ Law insists that Girl Scouts be “responsible for what I say and do.” When it comes to abortion, however, the Girl Scouts USA “says” the magic words that keep pro-life members in the fold (i.e. that Girl Scouts “does not take a position” on sexuality, birth control, or abortion).

What they “do” behind the scenes is another story.

GSUSA’s hefty brand power—and funding—continue to fuel the pro-abortion advocacy of the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (“WAGGGS”). And the Girl Scouts have refused once again to take responsibility for that.

I recently exchanged emails with two Girl Scouts USA spokespersons, Joshua Ackley and Michelle Tompkins, asking them to clarify the Girl Scouts’ “no position” stance in light of WAGGGS’ leadership on the pro-abortion Bali Global Youth Forum Declaration (December, 2012). Their responses highlight GSUSA’s corporate unwillingness to take any actions to distance themselves from WAGGGS’ global advocacy for youth “sexual rights” and abortion—even though WAGGGS claims to speak for all its members, including GSUSA.

First, realize how radical the Bali Youth Declaration really is: it asserts “sexual rights” for youth (including 10 year-olds) on nearly every page and demands, over a dozen times, youth access to “abortion” or “reproductive rights” and services. It marginalizes families—decrying parental consent and “age of consent” restrictions in sexual and reproductive matters—and casts religious objections to LBGT lifestyles as “religious intolerance.” Not surprisingly, the pro-abortionchorus embraces the Declaration.

There’s more to know about the Bali Declaration, but what’s most relevant here are the architects behind its design.

The Declaration reflects the handiwork of the Global Youth Forum’s International Steering Committee, a group stacked with abortion providers and abortion-advocacy groups, such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the Youth Coalition.

Who else’s fingerprints are all over the Declaration? WAGGGS.

WAGGGS was heavily invested in formulating the Declaration. Its leaders,including WAGGGS’ Senior Advocacy Coordinator, not only served on the Forum’s Steering Committee, but also worked for six months on the Taskforcesthat shaped the conference agenda, the resulting Declaration, and follow-up activities. At the Bali summit, WAGGGS representatives facilitated breakout sessions and presented youth “recommendations” to the plenary sessions. Now WAGGGS promotes the Declaration and advocates for its implementation.

So that leaves the Girl Scouts with a problem.

In light of their officially neutral position on abortion, it should have been a no-brainer for the Girl Scouts to repudiate the radical, pro-abortion Bali Declaration. Or at least to clarify that WAGGGS’ does not speak for GSUSA when it advocates on sexual and reproductive matters, including the Bali Declaration.

GSUSA refused to do either.

Full Article HERE






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Thank God Crystal Kelley Chose Life, But Can We Talk?

Friday, March 8th, 2013





Crystal Kelley

“Choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!” – Deutoronomy 30:19

In VitroCrystal Kelley was a surrogate mother for a couple who wanted to have another child, their fourth. She entered into a contract to carry the couple’s baby for $22,000. When it was discovered that there were medical problems with the pregnancy, the parents offered Crystal $10,000 to terminate the pregnancy (have an abortion).

The temptation of lots of money to a single mother almost caused Crystal to make a deadly decision for the baby. When the parents refused her counteroffer of $15,000, Crystal was relieved as she knew she could not abort the baby growing inside her in opposition to the insistence of the parents.

As reported by CNN, “They said they didn’t want to bring a baby into the world only for that child to suffer,” Kelley said. “They said I should try to be God-like and have mercy on the child and let her go. I told them it wasn’t their decision to play God.”

First of all, let’s be very clear on this point. Being “God-like” would not mean killing a baby. If that is what God would do He would not have sent His Son, Jesus, into the world to suffer and die on the cross for our sins in order that we may be saved. Likewise, we are called to join our suffering with Christ’s for the salvation of souls, not eliminating the suffering by killing each other.

Crystal was right to say that it wasn’t the parents’ decision to play God. Life is for God to create and to take and no one else’s.

But the real problem in this surrogacy debate begins before the contract is signed. Like the abortion debate, although the choice whether to choose life or death is vital, the real problem begins before the pregnancy.

Both examples above involve seeking our own wills and not God’s will. If we as a people would choose to follow God’s design we would make different choices.

When we begin to “play God” we get ourselves into a whole lot of trouble as is evident in our culture today. We believe we know what is better for us than God does. The problem is that God acts out of agape love while we act out of selfishness.

God’s designs is that life would enter the world through conjugal love. Conjugal love has two components; procreative and unitive. To go against either is to go against God’s design.

We go against God’s design for procreative conjugal love when we choose to use contraception. Instead of following God’s design for love and marriage, abstaining from sex until we get married and then being responsible through natural family planning, we follow our desires and self-gratification and engage in sex, sometimes casually, sometimes with multiple partners, all the while contracepting in order to avoid the natural consequences of our action. And when the contraceptives fail, as is often the case, we further complicate the situation by killing the life which God created, again turning away from God’s will. That life that we are now trying to abort was not created accidentally by God but is a part of God’s design. But we know better, don’t we?

With surrogacy we want to have a child so bad that is our own that we go to any measure to make that happen. But are we thinking about ourselves or are we thinking about the baby. In the perfect surrogacy situation, the parents each contribute their 23 chromosomes and they are implanted into the surrogate and with any luck, God will permit life to be created. This leaves out the unitive aspect of conjugal love. Additionally, I can think of a host of problems that could arise from the whole process, like the surrogate falling in love with the baby she feels kicking and moving in her womb; like the parents having marital problems and divorcing while the surrogate is still pregnant; like the surrogate becoming greedy and demanding more money to continue the pregnancy; and so on.

Whether you think abortion is right or wrong; whether you think surrogacy is right or wrong, I believe we all are, as a whole, good honest people trying to live our lives the best we can; the best we know how. In doing so, sometimes our compassion is misplaced. Like the parents of the baby in the surrogate story, I believe they really wanted to be compassionate to their baby girl whom “they didn’t want to bring . . . into the world only for that child to suffer.”

Life is difficult and we have many difficult decisions to make throughout our lifetime. Thank God He left us a manual to follow when we don’t know what to do. Really, say, “Thank you God for giving us your Word, the Bible.” Through the Bible we can do the right thing even when our emotions are telling us to do something different.

I applaud Crystal Kelley for defending the life within her womb. It took courage to stand up for that life and trust that she would find adoptive parents willing to care for a medically fragile baby.

I also applaud all the other pro-life warriors who don’t make the headlines but are out there just the same on the frontlines fighting for unborn babies, some medically fragile, some not.

And I thank God for the Bible which gives me the courage to speak up for those that cannot speak for themselves.

When will humans ever learn? Movies like Gattaca cleverly depict the fallacies of gene pooling.

To God be the glory!






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Breast Cancer Among Young Women Almost Doubled From 1976 To 2009

Thursday, February 28th, 2013





SPACERtoo-many-mammograms-20130221By Monte Morin, Los Angeles Times
February 26, 2013

Rebecca Johnson was 27 years old and had just graduated from medical school when she got the diagnosis: breast cancer. She thought she was a rare case, but then a few of her friends got it too. So did some friends of friends.

Was it all just a coincidence, or was breast cancer becoming more common in younger women?

“I really wondered,” said Johnson, now 44 and the director of the Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology program at Seattle Children’s Hospital. So she examined decades’ worth of data from the National Cancer Institute and made a disturbing find: Cases of younger women with advanced breast cancer have increased about 2% each year since the mid-1970s and show no signs of abating.

The results, published in Wednesday’s edition of the Journal of the American Medical Assn., confirmed the suspicions of many oncologists who had noticed an uptick in patients younger than 40 with cancer that had spread to the bones, brain or lungs.

In 1976, 1.53 out of every 100,000 American women 25 to 39 years old was diagnosed with advanced breast cancer, the study found. By 2009, the rate had almost doubled to 2.9 per 100,000 women in that age group — a difference too large to be a chance result.

“Most studies have failed to show an absolute increase,” said Dr. Benjamin Paz, a City of Hope Cancer Center surgeon who was not involved in the study. “Now, looking at a longer period of time, this study shows there’s clearly been an increase. It’s the first to do so.”

Read the full story HERE

One most often overlooked breast cancer link is contraceptives. A possible cause not mentioned in the article is the increased number of abortions, a warning that many in the pro-life movement have been alluding to for years. Number of breast cancer increases with increased number of abortions.

If you understand the effects of abortion on your body, you will understand why this study is of no surprise to me. An article by Dr. Gerard Nadal published over two years ago explains it in easy to understand language.

I bet that you can probably guess the age group of women that have the most abortions. According the the Guttmacher Institute, “More than half of American women obtaining abortions are in their 20s. Women aged 20–24 have the highest abortion rate of any age-group.” Given this information, it’s no wonder that breast cancer is on the rise in women 25-39.

Abortion Hurts Women! This is just another good example.






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






You’re Teaching My Child What?

Thursday, February 21st, 2013





SPACERYoureTeachingMyChildWhatA recent article from the UK caught my eye this week. It talked about the corruption of our current generation. The sexualisation of our young people is something I‘ve blogged about and something that needs to be re-visited.

The article is written by a child psychologist who states, “I see the signs that are familiar to every parent: the eight-year-olds who are already worried about their figures; the ‘too-sexy too-soon’ 12-year-olds who won’t go out without make-up; the magazines aimed at 10 to14-year-olds that discuss oral sex.”

As a parent I understand the need to shelter our children from learning some things too early in life, like sex. As a pro-life activist, one of the areas we try to shelter our children from is learning about abortion and those images of aborted babies. In a perfect world the teaching of our children would be left up to the parents.

Once source that is trying to do the educating and stick its nose where it doesn’t belong is the abortion industry and Planned Parenthood in particular. Planned parenthood has gotten the foot in the door in many of our children’s schools to “educate” them in the area of sexual education. Talking about a conflict of interest.

Planned parenthood makes millions of dollars by performing abortions. They have a vested interested in making sure your child is sexually active and with any luck, and a lot of help from them, they’ll end up pregnant and in need of their services.

A recent video from American Life League demonstrates the role Planned Parenthood is playing to accomplish this end.

No condomAnother tactic the abortion industry uses to make sure your children need abortions is to use contraception that they knew will fail as admitted by Carol Everett, former independent abortion clinic owner, in the documentary film Bloodmoney available HERE.

We as a society need to not be afraid to speak the truth but first you must know the truth.

Parents, your children are learning about sex at an earlier age these days and the information they are getting is not always accurate or morally correct. And they’re not being told the truth about abortion and the harm it will do to their lives.

Parents, educate yourselves about abortion. Learn what they don’t want you to know and then teach your children. The life you save may be your grandchild’s.






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.






Fr. Pavone: Only Acceptable Change To HHS Mandate Is To Rescind It

Friday, February 1st, 2013





Priests for Life

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: February 1, 2013

Contact: Leslie Palma
347-286-7277

STATEN ISLAND, NY — Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, responded to the announcement on contraception coverage from HHS with the following statement:

“The HHS is giving the public an opportunity to provide its feedback to the proposed rules. I first of all want to urge the public to take advantage of this opportunity.

“Moreover, we at Priests for Life remind the Administration that religious liberty does not just belong to religious groups and individuals; it belongs to all Americans. Objections to contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs aren’t based just on dogmas and Bibles, but on adverse health consequences and the fact that human beings, no matter how small, should not be killed.

“We see only one acceptable change regarding the mandate: rescind it completely.”

Priests for Life was one of the first organizations to launch a federal lawsuit against the HHS mandate last year.

Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.






Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.