Countering PP’s Promotion of Promiscuity

ChelseaAbortion, Contraception, Family, Love, Marriage, Sex, Sexuality, video, VocationLeave a Comment

This edition of the American Life League Report is all about Planned Parenthood using your tax dollars to promote recreational sex. Why the push for promiscuity? PP is a for profit organization that thrives on its customers having active and unrestricted sex lives. That is, unrestricted by a marital covenant and committment to procreation – the only proper place for sexual activity. That is why PP must be countered not only by “abstinence education”, but through a proper understanding of the human body. Our society’s misunderstanding of the human body is the underlying cause of some of the gravest moral evils of our time – homosexual acts, abortion, contraception, pornography and even suicide bombings which is the use of the human body as a weapon.

The body is not only biological, but it is also theological. The body is a theology that teaches us about the hidden mystery of God.

The body, in fact, and it alone, is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and divine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the world, the mystery hidden since time immemorial in God, and thus to be a sign of it. (JPII, Feb. 20, 1980)

Chastity is more than just “not doing it” until you’re married, or repressing your sexual desire. It means having purity of heart – to see and reclaim the goodness of the human body and never daring to defile it – and it extends into Marriage. Sexual desire is good, but it must be ordered according to the will of God. We can overcome our disordered sexual desires and learn to love as God loves. THAT is true sexual freedom – sexuality free from the slavery of lust! And that’s “sex education” that can start at a young age.

In the final analysis, the abortion debate may not really be about when life begins, but the meaning of sex and the human body.

Obama and Infanticide

Chelsea2008 Election, Abortion, Infanticide2 Comments

He’s charming, attractive, articulate, and he supports the murder of newborn children. Terence P. Jeffrey on Barack Obama and his refusal to vote for an Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act (h/t: Jill Stanek):

“Number one,” said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, “whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a 9-month old — child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it — it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute.”

In 2001 Obama voted no (or “present”) on the bill. Later that year a similar bill passed the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 98-0, with an amendment stating:

“Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being born alive as defined in this section.”

Pro-abortion Sen. Barbara Boxer declared that the bill would in no way attack Roe v. Wade and pro-abortion Harry Reid even called for the bill to be unanimously approved in 2002, and it was.

When criticized in 2004 while he was running for US Senate Obama said that he would have supported the federal bill “because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe v. Wade.” Nevermind the fact that in 2003 the Born Alive Protection bill came up again in Illinois with an identical amendment to the one on the federal bill and Obama held it in his committee, never allowing a vote on it.

So much for Hillary claiming to be the most pro-abortion candidate.

More:
Read Jill Stanek’s testimony on live birth abortions
Abortion Has Progressed to Infanticide

Other pro-abortion candidates:
Hillary Clinton
Rudy Giuliani

At the Risk of Repeating Myself

Chelsea2008 Election, Abortion, Adoption, Cloning, Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Politics3 Comments

With the Republican nomination still up for grabs, I can’t let this go. I found this at another conservative blogger‘s website:

As the perceived threat of terrorism recedes, the question of social values has come to the fore in Rudy’s campaign. Rudy tackled those issues head on in his speech to the Value’s Voters Summit in October, and I won’t hear any criticism of him on those issues from persons who haven’t read excerpts from that speech.

He reminded his audience: “Ronald Reagan had a great way of summarizing it. He used to say my 80 percent friend is not my 100 percent enemy.” Rudy is not the enemy of values voters. He is their friend. Adoptions soared in New York and abortions declined on Rudy’s watch as mayor. Can Mike Huckabee say the same about his time as Governor of Arkansas?

First of all, abortions fell in NY to the same extent that they fell nationwide during his terms as Mayor of NY and had nothing to do with his Adoption policy. Some facts from FactCheck:

* Adoptions more than doubled in the five years prior to Giuliani.
* Adoptions had already increased by 257 percent in the seven years prior to creation of ACS [Administration for Children’s Services, which Giuliani created in 1996 to protect children and encourage adoption], the agency Giuliani credits with increasing adoptions.
* Adoptions initially peaked, then declined by 26 percent between
the time ACS was created and the end of Giuliani’s tenure.
* Adoptions declined in five of the mayor’s last six years.
* Adoptions have continued to decline thereafter, and in the most recent fiscal year were half what they were when ACS was created.

read more

I have already said this, but I’ll say it again; from the beginning of his candidacy, Giuliani has been artfully trying to appease pro-life voters (promising to support parental notification, a ban on partial birth abortion (which he never supported in the past), and to veto attempts to weaken the Hyde Amendment (see the video below on his support for public abortion funding) and the Mexico City Policy, not to mention his dubious Supreme Court promises) while never wavering in his belief that a women have a constitutional right to kill their unborn children (BTW, I question the constitutional judgment of a man who finds a “constitutional right” to abortion and his ability to pick judges who would interpret the document correctly as well). For some, these promises are enough, but I have learned first hand not to trust a politician who vows to support legislation that would weaken a cause which he believes in. As mayor of NYC, Rudy Giuliani was an ardent supporter of abortion rights and has not yet backed off from that position in the midst of his many promises to pro-lifers. Don’t forget that Giuliani himself has stated that we wishes the Republican party would “get beyond issues like (abortion).” If he is nominated, that is exactly what will happen. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

When it comes to politics, the issue of life (especially for us “values voters”) is not just about Roe v. Wade or the Supreme Court. It’s about the Constitution and the foundation of American freedom and democracy as laid out in our Declaration of Independence – the self evident truth that all men are “created equal” and endowed with the “unalienable…right to Life.”

Many pro-lifers appreciated the braveness and honesty of Giuliani’s address at the values voters summit (yes I read it). But as long as abortion is still legal and politicians are itching to expand funding for ESC research and slip in bills allowing unrestricted research on cloned human embryos (disguised as cloning bans) we’re looking for a real leader in Washington on the pro-life front. One who is willing to stand strong in defense of the weakest members of our society and the principles on which our country was founded. For that, Giuliani definitely does not qualify.

A video extra, Giuliani on public funding for abortions at the Women’s Coalition for Giuliani event, 11/3/89:

If you listen closely at the end he says he opposed Pres. Bush’s veto of public funding for abortions. He also defended this position as recently as April of 2007:

Question: do you still support taxpayer, public funding for abortions?

Giuliani: “Yes…If it would deprive someone of a constitutional right, If that’s the status of the law, yes.”

Why do I vote pro-life?
Preserving America’s Freedom

The Forgotten Abortion Victims

ChelseaAbortion, Family, MenLeave a Comment

Quite often during pregnancy men are viewed as disconnected sperm donors, whose journey of fatherhood really only begins after birth – should it be allowed to occur. However, from the moment of conception both parties involved are changed from being simply man and woman to mother and father – whether they choose to accept the roles or not. Here Geoffrey Moore describes what happened to him at the news of his wife’s pregnancy:

In a matter of seconds, I became a new man. I added to my roles of son, brother and husband the brand new role of being a father. I now knew I was charged with raising and teaching a precious little baby about how to be a responsible, productive, honest, decent and upright individual.

Since abortion destroys this good and natural response to fatherhood, it is not hard to imagine the impact it could have on men after the fact. From the LA Times, Changing abortion’s pronoun, a growing number of men are experiencing post abortion pain and regret:

Baier, 36, still longs for the child who might have been, with an intensity that bewilders him: “How can I miss something I never even held?”

These days, he channels the grief into activism in a burgeoning movement of “post-abortive men.” Abortion is usually portrayed as a woman’s issue: her body, her choice, her relief or her regret. This new movement — both political and deeply personal in nature — contends that the pronoun is all wrong.

“We had abortions,” said Mark B. Morrow, a Christian counselor. “I’ve had abortions.”

Many of these men hope to find a place for themselves at the March for Life in Washington this month alongside the women of Silent No More who also regret their abortions.

Even though abortion rights activists recognize that abortion is a tough and even heart wrenching decision for most men and women, few will acknowledge that there might be lasting emotional or psychological effects after a final decision in favor of abortion. The battle cry is that there is not enough psychiatric “evidence” to support that such a phenomenon might exist apart from a few anecdotes here and there. Unfortunately abortion has become so political we may never get a final answer to the question of “post abortion syndrome”. Gov. Blunt has attempted to seek an answer to this problem here in Missouri, but has met much criticism for putting together what opponents call a bias task force as Blunt is an abortion opponent.

Men and Abortion
The Impact of Abortion on Men
Post Abortion Stress Syndrome for Men
Fatherhood Begins at Conception

When Technical Progress Becomes a Threat

ChelseaAbortion, Cloning, Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Euthanasia, Religion, Science3 Comments

pope-benedict-xviedit.jpgI have been reading Pope Benedict’s latest encyclical, Spe Salvi, which I am surprisingly enjoying (I wasn’t sure if it would be too philosophical and intellectual for me – I have never read anything of his before). It is actually very reader friendly and insightful.

At one point he is discussing the transformation of Christian faith-hope in the modern age (16-23) and a new era that has emerged through the discovery of America and the new technical achievements that made it possible. He calls it “faith in progress” as encouraged by the 16/17th century English philosopher Francis Bacon:

“through the interplay of science and praxis, totally new discoveries will follow, a totally new world will emerge, the kingdom of man…As the ideology of progress developed further, joy at visible advances in human potential remained a continuing confirmation of faith in progress as such.” (17)

This got me thinking about those who advocate for the progress of unrestricted scientific research, morality and ethics be damned, such as Don Rubin of the Missouri Coalition for Life Saving Cures who once opined in the Springfield NewsLeader that, “[t]hose who threaten to repeal Missourians’ access to stem cell research should step back and allow scientists to conduct the work necessary to achieve the goals that I hope we all share.”

But is it really progress to go forward with some scientific research when certain ethical concerns arise (such as the destruction of human embryos) that compromise its inherent “goodness” for the future of mankind?

“If technical progress is not matched by corresponding progress in man’s ethical formation, in man’s inner growth (cf. Eph 3:16; 2 Cor 4:16), then it is not progress at all, but a threat for man and for the world.” (Spe Salvi, 22)

We must progress spiritually and morally as well as technically and scientifically. This means establishing some clear moral and ethical boundaries and rejecting any technical “advancements” which cross those lines. The intentional creation and destruction of human life, through cloning and ESC research violates the inherent dignity of all human life (at any stage). To go forward with such research then is not real progress but a serious threat for man and the world. The same can be said for euthanasia, abortion and a host of other technical or societal “advancements” in our world today. Yet our modern notion of freedom is a release from the shackles of any semblance of faith or morality – at least to the extent that it might challenge our ability to do whatever we want.

If progress, in order to be progress, needs moral growth on the part of humanity, then the reason behind action and capacity for action is likewise urgently in need of integration through reason’s openness to the saving forces of faith, to the differentiation between good and evil. Only thus does reason become truly human. It becomes human only if it is capable of directing the will along the right path, and it is capable of this only if it looks beyond itself. Otherwise, man’s situation, in view of the imbalance between his material capacity and the lack of judgement in his heart, becomes a threat for him and for creation. Thus where freedom is concerned, we must remember that human freedom always requires a convergence of various freedoms. Yet this convergence cannot succeed unless it is determined by a common intrinsic criterion of measurement, which is the foundation and goal of our freedom…Reason therefore needs faith if it is to be completely itself: reason and faith need one another in order to fulfil their true nature and their mission. (23)

Huckabee Wins Iowa

Chelsea2008 Election, Prayer, Pro Life1 Comment

I don’t know what that means for the rest of the primaries, but let’s pray that the best candidate for our party and our country will get nominated this year. My pro-life prayer for our country:

“Most merciful Jesus, I beseech You through the intercession of Your dearest Mother who nurtured You from childhood, bless my native land. I beg You, Jesus, look not on our sins, but on the tears of little children, on the hunger and cold they suffer. Jesus, for the sake of these innocent ones, grant me the grace that I am asking of You for my country.”

This has become a favorite prayer or mine since I found it in the Diary of St. Faustina a few month’s ago.

Keeping Up With the Cloners

ChelseaAdult Stem Cell Research, Cloning, iPSC Breakthrough, Science2 Comments

The dishonesty of the Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures did not end with Amendment 2 and Wesley Smith has been doing an excellent job of keeping up with their lies and false accusations. See, More Lies from Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures and The Mendacity of Missouri Coalition for Life Saving Cures

Lately the chairman of MCLC has been using his voice to hail the the recent iPSC breakthrough (because, after all, they support “all forms of stem cell research”) and at the same time arrogantly assert that Amendment 2 opponents would have somehow prevented this breakthrough from happening, if they had their way (see here and here):

If anti-embryonic stem cell research groups had their way, this outstanding science would not have been possible. They would have blocked the very groundwork that led to the reprogramming of ordinary human skin cells into embryonic-like stem cells. If they get their way now, they will block the important research required to bring this new technique to its full lifesaving potential…Those who threaten to repeal Missourians’ access to stem cell research should allow scientists to conduct the work necessary to achieve the goals that I hope we all share: to cure disease and improve the lives of patients and families.

This is absolutely ludicrous since what we’re trying to ban here is human cloning, which had absolutely nothing to do with the iPSC discovery. Either Don Rubin is incredibly ignorant of the scientific facts surrounding the work done on iPSCs, or he is intentionally muddling the truth to advance his own agenda. Based on the nature of his Amendment 2 campaign, my guess, unfortunately, would be the latter. From Smith:

But more to the point of this post, if the opponents of Amendment 2 in MO had gotten 100% of their way, it would not have stopped the development of the new reprogrammed cells, the ESCR theoretical “heart patch,” or the drug testing. None of that work directly or indirectly involved stem cells derived from human cloning (somatic cell nuclear transfer), which has not yet been done in humans. ESCR per se is not the subject of a proposed initiative to outlaw all human cloning in MO and hence all of the research successes Rubin mentions would have been unaffected. Those are scientific facts, not opinion.

It’s a dirty job keeping up with the cloners, but somebody’s got to do it. Thanks Wesley!

Action, Prayer and Fasting for Super Tuesday

Chelsea2008 Election, Abortion, Politics, Pro Life, video3 Comments

Rudy GiulianiWith this New Year comes many early Primary presidential votes, leading up to the big “Super Tuesday.” I find great comfort in the fact that Mr. Giuliani’s campaign seems to be fizzling already. But perhaps we should participate in this, just in case…

From today – December 28, until February 5 – the staff and associates of The Society for Truth and Justice begin 40 days of activism, prayer, and fasting aimed at the demise of Rudy Giuliani’s Presidential campaign.

From the beginning of his candidacy, Giuliani has been artfully trying to appease pro-life voters (promising to support parental notification, a ban on partial birth abortion, and to veto attempts to weaken the Hyde Amendment and the Mexico City Policy, not to mention his dubious Supreme Court promises) while never wavering in his belief that a women have a constitutional right to kill their unborn children. For some, these promises are enough, but I have learned first hand not to trust a politician who vows to support legislation that would weaken a cause which he believes in. As mayor of NYC, Rudy Giuliani was an ardent supporter of abortion rights and has not yet backed off from that position in the midst of his many promises to pro-lifers. Don’t forget that Giuliani himself has stated that we wishes the Republican party would “get beyond issues like (abortion).” If he is nominated, that is exactly what will happen.

What many do not understand is that, when it comes to politics, the life issue is not just about Roe v. Wade and the Supreme Court. It’s about the Constitution and the foundation of American freedom and democracy as laid out in our Declaration of Independence – the self evident truth that all men are “created equal” and endowed with the “unalienable…right to Life.” Any candidate who does not believe in that, regardless of party affiliation, is not fit for office, period.

NARAL political director, Elizabeth Shipp on Republicans and a Giuliani nomination/presidency:

“The Republican Party used to be about the conservative principles of limited government intervention in private life. It seems to me if they went back to that and stood out from the rigid mainstream, anti-choice agenda, I think yeah, it would be good for the (pro-choice) movement.”

Previous posts:
Rudy’s Position Bad for Republicans/Conservatives
Giuliani Makes it Official
Giuliani in His Own Words
Can’t Trust Rudy
Pro-Life Republicans Beware
Giuliani ’08 the Movie

Who will you support this year? I was a Brownback supporter early on and, since his departure, I have come to like Duncan Hunter better than the rest. I have backed off of Thompson (my original 2nd choice) somewhat because of his refusal to support a human life amendment – I do not believe abortion is a “state issue” – though, truthfully I don’t find any of the other candidates much better. I suppose, though, I would accept any one of them over Rudy Giuliani.

The Holy Family

ChelseaFamily, Marriage, Pro Life, Religion, VocationLeave a Comment

holy-family.jpgToday the Church celebrates the feast of the Holy Family – a model of perfection for all families. Pope Paul VI on Nazareth and family life:

May Nazareth serve as a model of what the family should be. May it show us the family’s holy and enduring character and exemplifying its basic function in society: a community of love and sharing, beautiful for the problems it poses and the rewards it brings; in sum, the perfect setting for rearing children – and for this there is no substitute.

There is no doubt that the family is under attack in today’s society. I don’t have time for much of a post here – I was cooking all day and we had a little Christmas party to attend this evening. But I would like to offer you two documents written by the late JPII on the family and how it is the “fundamental cell of society.”

From his Letter to Families :

Every effort should be made so that the family will be recognized as the primordial and, in a certain sense “sovereign” society! The “sovereignty” of the family is essential for the good of society. A truly sovereign and spiritually vigorous nation is always made up of strong families who are aware of their vocation and mission in history. The family is at the heart of all these problems and tasks. To relegate it to a subordinate or secondary role, excluding it from its rightful position in society, would be to inflict grave harm on the authentic growth of society as a whole.

There is also his Apostolic Exhortation: Familiaris Consortio:

28. With the creation of man and woman in His own image and likeness, God crowns and brings to perfection the work of His hands: He calls them to a special sharing in His love and in His power as Creator and Father, through their free and responsible cooperation in transmitting the gift of human life: “God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.'”(80)

Thus the fundamental task of the family is to serve life, to actualize in history the original blessing of the Creator-that of transmitting by procreation the divine image from person to person.(81)

Helping Disabled Children to Live

ChelseaAbortion, Disabled, Embryo Screening2 Comments

nullWhat a concept. Doctors should be encouraging things like this for disabled infants instead of trying to wipe them off the planet through abortion referrals after amniocentesises, or advocating to kill such infants after birth:

Dec. 21, 2007 — With a 6-month-old at the controls, researchers at the University of Delaware are encouraging underage driving. Their ultimate goal is to help immobile, disabled children move and explore.

He and the other researchers believe the robot, dubbed UD1, holds the promise of opening up new horizons for disabled infants, especially those with orthopedic problems or muscular dystrophy. Wheeled robots could enable them to move and explore the world around them, which studies suggest is critical to their development.

Researchers in the United Kingdom have been working for years on powered mobility for toddlers. However, Galloway said, conventional wisdom has held that because of safety issues, children aren’t considered ready for that until age 4 or 5; the earliest age doctors might recommend powered mobility is age 3.

That means too many children are at risk of losing out on the important early link between mobility and their overall development, he said…

Sunil Agrawal, a professor of mechanical engineering at the university, has been working for years on wheeled robots with infrared and sonar sensors that can avoid obstacles. A prototype based on those models is being used in studies involving about a dozen typically developing infants and a smaller number who have special needs.

Related:
Lives Not Worth Living
Lives Not Worth Living, Take II
Cancer Free Children
People With Disabilities Can Live “Normal” Lives
Hope in the Midst of Suffering