Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Print All Articles

14-year-old homeschooled girl receives death threats for defending marriage

by Ben Johnson Wed Feb 22 18:41 EST Comments (86)

 
Maryland State Senate

ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND, February 22, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com)—A 14-year-old homeschooler who testified before the Maryland state senate against a bill redefining marriage has been the subject of cyberbullying, vicious name-calling, and death threats.

Sarah Crank, 14, told the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee last month she believes children need a mother and a father. “ I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender,” she told the senators. “Even though some kids think it’s fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on.”

She continued, “People say that they were born that way, but I’ve met really nice adults who did change.”

“Today’s my 14th birthday, and it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote ‘no’ on gay marriage,” she said.

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

After audio of her uncharacteristically mature testimony was posted on YouTube, the story went viral on homosexual activist websites—and death threats quickly followed.

TFP Student Action, a Roman Catholic organization dedicated to traditional morality, recorded several of the most offensive threats in a press release. A commenter on the YouTube video wrote, “If I ever see this girl, I will kill her. That’s a promise.”

Other YouTube comments ranged from, “Her parents should be exterminated,” to, “Kill this child and his [sic] parent, for my 11 birthday would be a wonderful gift, thanks.”

A comment posted on LGBTNation.com said, ““And now everyone knows her name, so hopefully she will feel what its like to be harassed and bullied…” 

Since TFP issued its press release, the comments have not moderated. Supporters of same-sex “marriage” continue to wish violence, sexual assault, or censorship upon the girl. (Warning, profanity):

  • I hope you get raped by your married parents.—madisonen;
  • Stupid bi**h - I hope you die on your Bday!!!!!—geminiboi007;
  • A dumb way for a dumb bi**h to do dumb things. Stop talking nonsense that your Christian, Anti-Gay parents are force-feeding you through a thin straw, and learn to accept other people. Now shut up bi**h, before I smack you.—123adbnvcs;

“I really applaud and admire Sarah’s remarkable courage,” John Ritchie, director of TFP Student Action, told LifeSiteNews.com. “Her testimony against counterfeit same-sex marriage in Maryland was truthful and articulate. She spoke for the overwhelming majority of Americans – including many teenagers – who want to protect true marriage from being dishonored, redefined, and distorted.”

According to its website, TFP Student Action “networks with college students on more than 719 campuses,” promoting chivalry and a Christian ethical conduct.

“The homosexual movement only talks about ‘tolerance,’ but never really practices any,” Ritchie told LifeSiteNews.com. “Sin produces anger and disorder within souls,” he said. “Vice clouds reason.”

Ritchie had a different message for the Crank family. “I’m praying for you and your family, Sarah,” he said. “Stand strong. God will win. And Saint Michael will help you and help America.”

The full text of Sarah’s testimony follows:

Hi, I’m Sarah Crank. Today’s my 14th birthday, and it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote “no” on gay marriage. I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender. Even though some kids think it’s fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on. I don’t want more kids to get confused about what’s right and okay. I really don’t want to grow up in a world where marriage isn’t such a special thing anymore.

It’s rather scary to think that when I grow up the legislature or the court can change the definition of any word they want. If they could change the definition of marriage then they could change the definition of any word. People have the choice to be gay, but I don’t want to be affected by their choice. People say that they were born that way, but I’ve met really nice adults who did change.  So please vote “no” on gay marriage. Thank you.

Tags: sarah crank, tfp

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

BREAKING: Federal court: forcing pharmacists to distribute abortifacient drugs ‘unconstitutional’

by Ben Johnson Wed Feb 22 18:06 EST Comments (7)

 

TACOMA, WASHINGTON, February 22, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a decision that could impact the unfolding debate over the HHS mandate, today a federal court in Washington state upheld the First Amendment rights of pharmacists to refuse to distribute potentially abortifacient contraception and abortion-inducing drugs, such as Plan B and Ella, if doing so would violate their religious beliefs. The decision overturns Washington Board of Pharmacy rules approved in 2007 by pro-abortion governor Christine Gregoire, which lacked the exemption.

“The Board of Pharmacy’s 2007 rules are not neutral, and they are not generally applicable,” the court ruled in its decision. “They were designed instead to force religious objectors to dispense Plan B, and they sought to do so despite the fact that refusals to deliver for all sorts of secular reasons were permitted.” The court found the rules “unconstitutional” on First and Fourteenth Amendment grounds.

“Just as the Obama administration is trying to force religious institutions to provide insurance coverage for life-ending drugs against their conscience beliefs, a federal district court has ruled that such an action is unconstitutional,” Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, said in a statement e-mailed to LifeSiteNews.com. AUL submitted an amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and filed a statement with the board of pharmacy.

The ruling brings to an end a case filed nearly five years ago before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, after the state government passed regulations compelling pharmacists to stock and distribute abortifacient drugs. The regulation’s proponents could not find a single case in which someone went without the drugs because of a religious objection.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

“The court’s decision is a ringing affirmation that conscience and good health care are not only compatible, but inseparable,” senior ADF counsel Stephen Aden said in a statement.

“This is a significant win for Americans who have been concerned about their First Amendment rights,” Kristi Hamrick, a media spokeswoman for AUL, told LifeSiteNews.com. “This case says that pro-life pharmacists could not be forced against their conscience to distribute life-ending drugs,” she said. “So, how can you force people to pay for life-ending drugs?” 

ADF attorney Kirsten Waggoner said that because of the ruling, “Customers will receive prescribed drugs in the most efficient manner possible, while at the same time respecting the conscience rights of pharmacists, who should never be forced to participate in destroying human life just to be able to preserve their professional licenses.”

Attorneys with the Seattle law firm Ellis, Li & McKinstry, PLLC, who are allied with the Alliance Defense Fund, acted as co-counsel with The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty in the lawsuit, Stormans v. Selecky

An Illinois court upheld pharmacists’ conscience rights in a similar case last year.

“Two courts have now held that this type of coercion violates the very core of the Constitution,” said Dr. Yoest. “This highlights just how radical the Obama administration is in its unprecedented attempt to force religious institutions and all Americans to fund life-ending drugs.”

 

Tags: christine gregoire, washington state

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Alberta readies to impose ‘diversity’ education on homeschoolers

by Patrick B. Craine Wed Feb 22 17:56 EST Comments (23)

 
Education Minister Thomas Lukaszuk

EDMONTON, Alberta, February 22, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Homeschooling groups are sounding the alarm this week as the Alberta government prepares to pass a bill that they say threatens to mandate “diversity” education in the home.

The province’s new Education Act, re-tabled Feb. 14th by Alison Redford’s majority Progressive Conservative government to replace the existing Schools Act, stipulates in section 16 that all instructional materials in schools “must reflect the diverse nature and heritage of society in Alberta, promote understanding and respect for others and honour and respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Alberta Human Rights Act.”

But, in addition to publicly-funded school boards, the proposed Act defines “school” to include private schools and “a parent providing a home education program.”

Paul Faris of Canada’s Home School Legal Defence Association (HSLDA) says the law subjects homeschoolers’ entire families life to the Human Rights Act, the provincial version of “human rights” legislation that has been used to target Christians and conservatives across the country, particularly those espousing traditional views on homosexuality.

“Basically what it would mean is all learning that goes on in the home, all material that goes on in the home, would essentially be subject to the Alberta Human Rights Act,” Faris explained.

“At least when the child leaves the school and goes home it no longer applies, but for a homeschooling family they never get away from this,” he added.

Faris said Alberta already has some of the toughest regulations for homeschooling among the Canadian provinces. Parents have to register with a school board and submit a plan at the beginning of the year, followed by two visits from a certified teacher that normally occur in the home. He did note, however, that difficulties are somewhat mitigated by the fact that parents have some choice about which school board in which they register.

Kenneth Noster, father of six and director of Wisdom Home Schooling, said the Education Act would grant the government “quite a long reach of the arm into the home.”

Section 16 of the Act, he says, “essentially means that in order to run a school in the province you must be politically correct or you could risk being shut down.”

But, he said, “everything that they can impose on a school, they can impose on the home.” For homeschoolers, “getting up and doing morning chores and doing morning prayer and stuff is all part of your structured learning,” he noted. “So essentially, you could say, for all of that there has to be politically correct material.”

“At the same time, [the government] could insist that non-politically correct material such as Scripture and the [Catechism of the Catholic Church] could be deemed as offensive and not useable,” he added.

Under Alberta’s Human Rights Act, Red Deer pastor Stephen Boissoin was found guilty of ‘hate’ in 2008 after writing a letter to a local paper criticizing the homosexual agenda. He was forced to pay a fine, and ordered to personally apologize to the complainant and never again express his views on homosexuality publicly.

The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench overturned that ruling in 2009 saying the tribunal overstepped its constitutional bounds and took significant procedural liberties that would have never been permitted in a real court.

In 2005, Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary was taken before the tribunal after mentioning Catholic teaching on homosexuality in a pastoral letter to the Catholic faithful.

The Alberta Home Education Association (AHEA) says the Education Act as written “provides opportunities to impose curriculum and practises upon all schools in Alberta, whereby special interest groups will have leverage to actively promote alternate lifestyles.”

“Individuals or groups with special interest agendas could take action against home educating families by utilizing [section 16] of the Act,” they add.

Despite the criticism, Education Minister Thomas Lukaszuk has so far defended the inclusion of homeschoolers in the definition of ‘school’.

In a letter to AHEA, he wrote that “Home Education is included in the definition of ‘school’ because this definition addresses both the principle of a structured learning environment with expected educational outcomes and the principle of parent’ right and responsibility to make education choices for their children.”

Faris acknowledged that it is impossible to predict how the government will apply the law, and mentioned that government officials have suggested to them that they will not enforce it on homeschoolers.

“But living in a free country means that we don’t have to fear what someone will do with a new law. … What’s written is how it should be applied,” said Faris.

“If they’re not going to enforce it, why are they writing the law that way?” he asked.

The Progressive Conservatives have 67 of the 83 seats in the province’s legislature, so the bill’s passage is essentially assured. But Faris noted that the province is set for an election so the government may be open to changing its mind on the homeschooling aspect to avoid controversy.

The Home School Legal Defence Association is calling on Alberta citizens to contact the Education Minister and their elected representatives.

LifeSiteNews.com did not hear back from Alberta’s Ministry of Education by press time.


Contact Information:

Hon. Thomas Lukaszuk, Education Minister
423 Legislature Building
10800 - 97 Avenue NW
Edmonton, AB
Canada T5K 2B6
Phone: (780) 427-5010
Fax: (780) 427-5018
edmonton.castledowns@assembly.ab.ca

Premier Alison Redford
Office of the Premier
Room 307, Legislature Building
10800-97 Avenue
Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2B7
Phone: 780-427-2251
E-mail: Use this form.

Contact info for Alberta MLAs.

Tags: freedom, homeschooling

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Pro-aborts ‘completely made up’ vaginal ultrasound requirement in Virginia bill

by John Jalsevac Wed Feb 22 17:02 EST Comments (14)

 

February 22, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An ultrasound bill currently making its way through the Virginia legislature has become the object of a fierce campaign of opposition from the nation’s most powerful pro-abortion forces, who claim the bill would force women to undergo invasive transvaginal ultrasounds before an abortion – something that abortion lobbyists and legislators say amounts to “rape.”

Del. Charniele Herring (D) has slammed the bill as “akin to rape,” while fellow Democrat David Englin charged that “object sexual penetration is a serious sex crime in Virginia.”

The rhetoric against the bill became so heated that today pro-life Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell issued a statement, moments before the bill was set to undergo a final vote in the House of Delegates, saying that the bill should be amended to make it clear that it will not mandate transvaginal ultrasounds, but only an external ultrasounds.

Shortly after the governor released his statement, a version of the bill amended according the statement passed by a vote of 65-32. The bill now returns to the Senate.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

However, pro-life supporters of the bill say the campaign against the bill is based upon an objection that was pulled out of thin air, and point out that abortion clinics across the country already perform ultrasounds—including vaginal ultrasounds—as a matter of course.

In its original form, the bill did not require “any specific type of ultrasound,” Kristi Hamrick, media spokesperson for Americans United for Life, told LifeSiteNews.com. The notion that it required a transvaginal ultrasound “was completely made up by the pro-abortion advocates,” she said.

Instead the bill simply stipulated that an ultrasound must be performed before an abortion and that the mother be offered an opportunity to view the image and hear the heartbeat. It provided for the Virginia “standard of care,” leaving the choice for the kind of ultrasound to be administered in the hands of the patient and her doctor.

The amended version of the bill states, “If gestational age cannot be determined by a transabdominal ultrasound, then the patient undergoing the abortion shall be verbally offered other ultrasound imaging to determine gestational age, which she may refuse.”

Hamrick says that McDonnell’s statement today did nothing more than clarify and restate what the law already said.

“What the governor did today was say they were going to clarify this law to make sure this law is clear that they are not requiring” a transvaginal ultrasound. This “was not necessary,” Hamrick said, because the bill “didn’t before.”

In his statement, McDonnell said after discussing the bill with legislators and health care professionals, “It is clear that in the majority of cases, a routine external, transabdominal ultrasound is sufficient to meet the bills stated purpose—that is, to determine gestational age.”

“For this reason…I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily,” he said.

But perhaps most damning to the pro-abortion campaign against the bill is the revelation that the vast majority of abortion facilities already perform the “invasive” transvaginal ultrasound as a matter of course, especially prior to early-term medical and surgical abortions.

In one 2003 study, published in the journal Contraception, 83 percent of Planned Parenthood abortion facilities performing early surgical abortions said they “always” performed a vaginal ultrasound prior to performing the abortions. Sixteen percent said they did a vaginal ultrasound “sometimes,” and only 1 percent said they “never” did them.

“Vaginal ultrasound was very common before the medical abortion, with 37 (92%) sites reporting that they always performed it,” the study continued. “Vaginal ultrasound was always performed after early medical abortion in 35 (87%) sites, performed under certain conditions in 4 (10%) sites, and never performed in 1 (3%) site.”

The reason for performing the more accurate vaginal ultrasounds prior to early abortions is obvious, Hamrick told LifeSiteNews: they ensure that abortionists can pinpoint precisely the gestational age of the unborn child, to avoid the extreme risks involved in using the wrong methods to abort what may turn out to be a later-term child. 

Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest said that pro-abortion arguments against the bill amount to opposing “a basic standard of care.” She said the campaign is “clear evidence that a powerful abortion lobby is willing to sacrifice women’s health and safety for a radical abortion agenda.”

“It is absolutely false than any invasive ultrasound test is required by this bill. But at stake here is protecting women’s lives from a rush to abortion that may harm them,” Yoest said. “Informed consent about the status of a woman’s pregnancy, and whether she might be harmed, should be a concern for all people.”

It is unclear how the amendments added to the bill today will change its practical application, although the sponsor of the bill in the Senate, Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel, has reportedly said she will oppose it in its new form.

Prior to the passage of the bill in its amended form, the Family Foundation, a conservative organization in Virginia, had expressed concerns that proposed amendments might give abortionists a loophole to avoid doing vaginal ultrasounds in circumstances where they are clearly called for from a medical standpoint.

“If an abortionist is required to do a transabdominal ultrasound and, upon seeing no fetus, is then legally permitted to perform an abortion without any further proof of life, we have done a tremendous disservice to the health and safety of women of Virginia,” said the Foundation in a statement. 

“An abortion doctor can then begin an abortion, causing emotion distress and monetary cost to the woman, for no reason, as there may not even be a pregnancy.  It can also be unsafe, due to lack of knowledge of the gestational position and number of fetuses to be aborted.”

In the event the transabdominal ultrasound cannot determine fetal age, the amended version of the bill allows the mother the option of having a transvaginal ultrasound or declining it at will.

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Ultrasounds before abortions are standard care, so why are pro-aborts getting so worked up?

by Mailee Smith Wed Feb 22 15:58 EST Comments (11)

 

February 22, 2012 (AUL.org) - What happens when abortion providers don’t follow practices of standard medical care?

You get Kermit Gosnell.  Or Steven Brigham and Nicola Riley.  You get unsafe, unsanitary conditions.

You get a “back alley.”

In order to better protect the health and welfare of women seeking abortion, states regulate abortion clinics and require informed consent before obtaining an abortion.  For example, abortion clinic regulations and ultrasound provisions help ensure that women are treated in the manner they deserve.

A basic component of an ultrasound law is a required standard of care.  A “standard of care” is “a statement of actions consistent with minimum safe professional conduct under specific conditions, as determined by professional peer organizations.”  Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary (20th ed. 2005).  In the ultrasound context, this means that abortion providers are to perform an ultrasound in a professional manner consistent with the way ultrasound is performed across the abortion or obstetrics communities.

But abortion proponents are arguing against including a basic standard of care in ultrasound requirements.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

For example, ultrasound bills are currently making their way through the Virginia legislature.  Contained in these bills is a provision that the ultrasound “shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community.”  In other words, abortion providers must follow a basic standard of care.  They shouldn’t conduct the ultrasound haphazardly.  They shouldn’t throw an image of the woman’s gall bladder on the screen and claim that it is “products of conception.”

But without merit, abortion proponents are claiming that this standard of care provision requires a transvaginal ultrasound in the first trimester, comparing the technique to rape.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

These bills require abortion providers to perform ultrasound in the way it is performed in the community.  Do abortionists regularly use transvaginal ultrasound in the first trimester?  NO.  Do obstetricians regularly use transvaginal ultrasound in the first trimester?  NO.  To the contrary, the usual procedure is to perform an abdominal ultrasound.

Abortionists typically perform ultrasound (abdominally) before abortion.  So what is this all about?

It is about politics.  The Governor of Virginia is thought to be a potential Vice President candidate.  These ultrasound bills are moving through the legislature, making them targets.  And abortion proponents are using the welfare of women as a political pawn, sacrificing standard medical care on the altar of abortion on demand.

On Wednesday Governor Bob McDonnell voiced his support of ultrasound legislation, while saying that he would ask state legislators to “clarify” the bill so that external ultrasounds would be the focus of the pending law.

If abortion proponents succeed in removing the standard of care language in this bill, they will attempt to do so again, in other states and in other bills.  And when medical standards of care are removed, we are left with an industry of Kermit Gosnells.

This is also a last-ditch effort to thwart the passage of a commonsense bill aimed at the protection of women.  The abortion industry is reeling.  The American public is more pro-life than ever before.  And contained in the Virginia bills is a requirement that the abortion provider offer the woman an opportunity to see the image of her unborn child.  This is the last thing an abortion provider wants.

For too long, the abortion industry has been trying to hide information from women.  The most accurate, truthful information we can give to a woman is an ultrasound picture of her unborn child.

The abortion industry hates these bills because they allow a woman to see what abortion providers so fervently try to hide: life.

Mailee Smith is a staff counsel with Americans United for Life. This article is reprinted with permission from aul.org

Tags: abortion, kermit gosnell, ultrasound, virginia

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Urgent prayer request: Devoted pro-life student dying of Leukemia

by Victor Bermudez Wed Feb 22 13:37 EST Comments (25)

 

Dear Pro-life Family

This is one of the most important prayer requests I have ever sent out. A young, dedicated and fearless pro-life student from Franciscan University is dying of Leukemia. Neal Rylatt is a Franciscan Student that is devoted to the pro-life movement. Neal has leukemia and based on the progressing disease, Neal is not eligible for the haplo transplant, and the only possible curative treatment is a very high risk experimental phase I treatment in Minnesota with little chance of success, and a large chance of very harsh side effects. They decided to do palliative chemotherapy to give him the most time and best life quality of the time he has left.

We are not sure how long Neal has left depending on how he responds to his chemotherapy. He was told 3-5 months and we hope and pray he lives long enough to go to Lourdes, a dream of his. We will continue to pray for a miracle.

Neal has been a pro-life warrior for years and always sacrificed for the cause of life. Neal would wear pro-life t-shirts to school constantly even when the school questioned him about them offending others.

In 7th grade he said what he wanted for his birthday was more Catholic and pro-life shirts to wear to his school.

He prayed in front of planned parenthoods, went on face the truth tours, and he would cover many, many 40 Days for Life shifts when people wouldn’t show up.

He has never been afraid to be involved in the pro-life movement, and he has been harassed and assaulted for standing up for his beliefs.

He has had many sufferings including a headache that kept him awake for 3 straight days.

He has always offered up his sufferings for the unborn and mothers and fathers affected by abortion.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Neal has two sisters and a brother who will also need our prayers along with the rest of his family.

Several pro-life leaders are praying and asking all of you to please pray for Neal and his family:

“Friends, as we begin this Lenten season, let’s join together with intense prayers for Neal…for his healing, and that in his illness he may be a sign among us of the suffering of Christ, and also of a profound commitment to defend life.” — Fr Frank Pavone, Priests for Life.

“My heart goes out to the family and friends of Neal, I and my family will be praying for all of them in this rough time. We in the pro-life movement are so grateful for such a pro-life warrior as Neal.”  – Abby Johnson, Pro-life Activist

“I have always said that Franciscan University of Steubenville is my favorite school to speak at and that is because of students like Neal. He is a hero for the cause of life and I am proud to serve in the pro-life movement with such a warrior. Our prayers are with Neal and his family; for God’s love to fill their lives right now.” — Bryan Kemper, Youth Outreach Director of Priests for Life

“Students for Life of America is so thankful for continued dedication of Neal and for the lives he has saved, the women, men, and families his work has touched. We are so thankful to know him and are so proud of him. We keeping Neal and his entire family in our thoughts and prayers and look forward to standing beside him as he walks through this difficult journey.” — Kristan Hawkins, Students for Life of America

“The 40 Days for Life team is honored to have such an amazing young man like Neal as part of our pro-life outreach; he is an inspiration for all young people. We are praying for Neal, his family and friends; we are thankful to have had the opportunity to stand for life with Neal.” — David Bereit, 40 Days for Life

We have set up a Facebook and e-mail account for people to send their thoughts and prayers.

Facebook.com/prayersfornealrylatt

prayersforneal@gmail.com

Victor Bermudez,
President of Students for Life Franciscan University of Steubenville

Tags: abortion

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

The UN’s made-up up figures: now claims 200,000 die from illegal abortions in Brazil

by Julio Severo Wed Feb 22 13:15 EST Comments (13)

 
Eleonora Menicucci

February 22, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Last week Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff administration was pressed by the UN’s CEDAW (Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women) about an alleged 200,000 deaths of women each year because of illegal abortion in Brazil. The Brazilian representatives showed no willingness to question this patently inflated number.

Official data from the Brazilian government show that 146 women, whose pregnancies ended in abortion, died in 1996. In 2004, 156 women died.

Where did CEDAW get the extravagant figure of 200,000 deaths? From Brazilian feminist NGOs funded largely by U.S. pro-abortion institutions such as the MacArthur, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations, which usually sponsor the pro-abortion training of feminist leaders in Brazil, so that they may not be out of step with their American counterparts in maneuvers of language, statistics and political and legal actions.

After this training, they are ready progress to several government and non-government capacities, and many of them are today in the UN system echoing First World ideological insanities with a “Brazilian” voice.

CEDAW made Brazilian representatives give an accounting of this high figure, asking the question, “What are you going to do with this huge political problem?” It also made it clear that it believes criminalization of abortion is connected to high death rates.

This was a timely application of such “pressure”, because the Brazilian government has every willingness, ideological and otherwise, to solve “this huge political problem.” Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, a “former member of a communist terrorist organization that sought to overthrow the Brazilian government in the 1960s and 70s, is on record supporting the decriminalization of abortion before her presidential run”.

Yet, she found herself forced to sign a pledge not to introduce abortionist or homosexualist legislation during her presidential term to boost her sagging poll numbers after Christians began to alert the population to her record.

Because of this pledge, she has faced some difficulty in her effort solve “this huge political problem.” But it did not hinder her from appointing Eleonora Menicucci as the women’s minister. Menicucci, who led the Brazilian delegation to “face” CEDAW, is a friend of Rousseff and was incarcerated with her during the 1970s, when they were arrested for terrorism.

Menicucci was a member of a feminist group and trained, in Colombia, to do abortions. Even though abortion is illegal in Brazil (except in case of rape and life risk for mothers), she has bragged that she had two abortions.

It was no displeasure for her to meet her fellow feminists in CEDAW, which made it clear that CEDAW “cannot defend abortion.” Nevertheless, Magaly Arocha, of CEDAW, told the Brazilian delegation, “women are going to abort anyway. This is reality.”

The official UN document said, “Unsafe abortions in Brazil were an issue of great concern to that Committee [on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women], which had already recommended that Brazil decriminalize abortion.”

To calm down her UN abortion comrades, Menicucci’s report explained the government’s attempt to squelch a right-to-life bill called the Statute of the Unborn, which would prohibit the killing of unborn children in all circumstances.

CEDAW also complained to the Brazilian delegation that “discriminatory practices in… marriage could still be found in legislation and sought clarification.” But the official Brazilian response assured that the government has been taking measures to eliminate “inequalities”: “Important achievements had been made through judicial proceedings, especially of the Supreme Court, which allowed same sex couples to register their civil union.”

Wow! The priority of CEDAW, as a UN agency to “help” women, is to advance homosexual “marriage” and abortion! It is no surprise that the same CEDAW that is advancing a radical feminist ideology is a fierce enemy of Mother’s Day. CEDAW hates every original trace of feminine characteristics. It wants women in 50% of all traditionally male capacities, including military. It hates women in female roles.

CEDAW complained that Brazil has a small number of women in the Congress. The UN ideal, of course, would be 50%, but be assured that UN would not be pleased if such women resembled Mother Theresa of Calcutta. The ideal woman for UN is like Eleonora Menicucci, with a story of abortions, abortion training, communist terrorism, and a promiscuous sex life. With such women, the Brazilian Congress and Rousseff will nevermore have any problems to advance feminist, abortion, gay and other ideologies approved by UN.

So far the conservative views of most Brazilians, especially women, have hindered Rousseff and Menicucci from being free to impose their personal, ideological views on the all Brazilian women and other Brazilians. Similarly, the conservative views of most women and nations have hindered the UN from being free to impose its personal, ideological views on the rest of the world.

Even so, with word games and euphemistic language about “rights”, they hope to achieve what with honesty and correct figures they could never achieve.

Tags: abortion, cedaw, un

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

No case where abortion was ‘necessary to save mom’: Eminent Irish oncologist

by Hilary White, Rome Correspondent Wed Feb 22 12:04 EST Comments (26)

 
Dr. John Crown

DUBLIN, February 22, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An eminent Irish oncologist, professor and politician wrote today on his Twitter account that he has never encountered a situation in which abortion was needed to save a mother’s life.

Dr. John Crown, who has lectured in 40 countries and is the author of 150 research papers told Twitter followers that he had during his medical career faced some “hard decisions re: chemotherapy in pregnancy.”

However, he said, “I don’t think I ever had a case where abortion was necessary to save mom.”

The comments come at a crucial moment in Ireland as abortion advocates have launched a media campaign pressing for full legalization of abortion. Attempting to use the existing law and legal precedents to expand abortion, they claim that women are not being allowed “life-saving medical treatment” because of the abortion ban.

Those defending the law have countered that no woman in Ireland has ever been refused medical treatment that would have the unintended effect of killing her child but that would save her life. These cases are rare, and are largely confined to ectopic pregnancy and pregnant cancer patients undergoing surgery and chemotherapy.

Abortion, pro-life advocates have said, can never be regarded as medical treatment for the mother since its only purpose is the killing of an innocent human being.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Youth Defence and the Life Institute welcomed the comment, saying that Dr. Crown had simply bolstered other medical opinion that abortion can never be called a “life-saving treatment.”

The comments may prove especially weighty since by his own admission Crown is not pro-life, and therefore has no ideological axe to grind. “For me it’s all about functioning nervous system,” he said, and strongly criticized the pro-life position on the personhood of the human embryo, writing that the “idea that 16 cells has same rights as [a] baby [is] equaled only in absurdity by idea that [a] fully formed foetus with [an] intact nervous system has none.”

In an opinion piece published in The Independent, Dr. Crown said that “extremists” on both side of the issue should be confronted: “pro-abortion extremists who would deny the rights and humanity of what is clearly a small unborn child,” and those who advocate “the position that a fertilised egg, or an early embryo ... is as full a human being as is a new-born babe,” which he labelled a “theological” opinion.

Without playing his hand on exactly what his position is on abortion, Crown argued that “it is time for the medical profession to risk unpopularity from right and left, and to give society the best advice that we can on the issue of when an embryo becomes a person.”

Dr. Crown served as assistant professor at Weill Cornell Medical College of Cornell University until 1993, then took up the post of consultant at two Dublin hospitals, St. Vincent’s and St. Luke’s. He holds professorships in cancer research from Dublin City University and University College Dublin and was recently elected to the Irish Upper House, the Seanad Éireann or Senate.

Niamh Ui Bhriain, head of the Life Institute, wrote earlier this month that the abortion movement’s claim about “life-saving medical treatment” is a ruse to force the country to legalize abortion on demand. Youth Defence and other pro-life organizations in the country have denounced this campaign as an example of deliberate pro-abortion disinformation. 

Rebecca Roughneen of Youth Defence told LifeSiteNews.com that Dr. Crown’s statement was an important intervention “since it confirms what senior medical experts have always said: that abortion is never medically necessary.”

Abortion campaigners, she said, are brazenly engaging in “dishonest scaremongering” with the present media blitz.

“They’re repeating the same lie over and over again in an attempt to make the public believe that abortion is needed to save mothers’ lives. The fact is, as Dr Crown has just pointed out, that all the medical evidence says that’s not true.”

Niamh Uí Bhriain of the Life Institute also welcomed Dr. Crown’s statement which she said exposed the lie at the heart of the pro-abortion argument. “His statement is important at this time in particular since we’re seeing a really strident and well-funded push to see abortion legalised here on the grounds of preserving life.”

Recently a study was published by the World Health Organization, The UN Population Fund, UNICEF and the World Bank, a group of decidedly pro-abortion organizations, that showed Ireland, with its pro-life protections intact, enjoys one of the world’s lowest rates of maternal mortality in the world. 2008 statistics showed a rate of 3 maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births and 3.81 infant deaths per 1,000 live births. This places Ireland 202 out of 222 countries.

Ui Bhriain said that Ireland’s experience had shown that doctors did not need abortion to preserve women’s lives. “We’ve had a ban on abortion for almost 30 years and, in that time, not one woman has died because she couldn’t get an abortion in Ireland. The experts have spoken on this issue, and the most senior obstetricians and gynecologists in the country have publicly stated that abortion doesn’t cure any condition or preserve lives,” she said.

Tags: abortion, ireland

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Mysterious budget cuts end investigations into program that supplied Planned Parenthood volunteers

by Ben Johnson Wed Feb 22 09:29 EST Comments (1)

WASHINGTON, D.C., February 22, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Last year, the Corporation for National and Community Service’s (CNCS) office of inspector general discovered that the CNCS’s Americorps program had illegally supplied three volunteers to Planned Parenthood. Now Republican senators are opposing a budget cut that will lay off two-thirds of the inspector general’s employees and effectively end its oversight of the growing volunteer program.

This cut – from $7.7 million to $4 million – would require the investigative office to dismiss 26 of its 33 employees. Those inspector general employees who do not quit will receive reduction-in-force letters by March 17.

“The impact is profound,” said William Hillburg, who spoke on behalf of Acting Inspector General Kenneth Bach. “Come that date, our oversight — which has already slipped — will be over.”

Last May, the program removed two Americorps employees volunteering, at taxpayers’ expense, at Planned Parenthood of New York City (PPNYC).
 
Two members of the group’s affiliate New York City Civic Corps had worked for PPNYC for nine months, just one month short of their full, 10-month term.

Tacoma Community College placed a third volunteer as an “escort” at a Washington state Planned Parenthood abortion facility, shepherding women past pro-life protesters.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

The Wall Street Journal reported last May that 13 Americorps workers were placed at Planned Parenthood affiliates nationally.

The program was inadvertently tipped off last May when PPNYC President and CEO Joan Malin wrote a letter to the organization’s D.C. office praising the volunteers’ “amazing work” and detailing their illegal activities.

Federal legislation bars Americorps employees from “providing abortion services or referrals for such services,” as well as “organizing or engaging in protests, petitions, boycotts, or strikes.” CNCS’s inspectors concluded the volunteers’ duties violated the federal ban on political advocacy.

One of the New York “volunteers” worked in PPNYC human resources, recruiting other volunteers; the other worked in public affairs and on the “Activist Council.”

The letter added because of the Americorps members’ participation, PPNYC increased from two volunteers to more than 120.

A spokesman for New York City’s pro-abortion mayor, Michael Bloomberg, said private funds would pay the $1,270 monthly stipend and a $5,350 educational award instead of charging the federal government.

Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, R-NC, held congressional hearings on the issue last June. “AmeriCorps has indicated that it plans to increase its total number of participants to 250,000 within the next couple of years,” up from 80,000, she said. “How do you expect to properly monitor 250,000 people, when it does not appear as though we have been able to stop prohibited activity from a much smaller group?”

Last June Sens. Mike Enzi, R-WY, and Orrin Hatch, R-UT, wrote a letter praising Acting Inspector General Kenneth Bach’s prompt reaction to the Planned Parenthood issue and asking him to do a complete audit of all CNCS employees who may be involved in political advocacy. They suggest he punish infractions up to and “including referral for prosecution.”

However, slashing his office will end his oversight and investigative role.

A letter signed by Republican Senators Mike Enzi, Chuck Grassley, and Susan Collins states, because of the cuts, the office “will be substantially limited in performing the three statutorily required audits, and will have to discontinue all ongoing investigations of waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer resources.” 

“We simply do not understand what motivated this cut,” they wrote. 

USA Today reports, “it’s unclear who in Congress inserted the provision.” However, Sen. Tom Harkin says Republicans brought this on themselves, when some members of the House voted to eliminate the agency entirely.

The three senators recommended shifting $4 million from CNCS’s $830 million budget to the inspectors’ office. But Harkin spokeswoman Kate Cyrul, said, “It is unrealistic to think that Congress could reopen” the spending bill that originally included the cuts - although the three senators say this would be an unnecessary step.

President Obama raised eyebrows in June 2009 when he fired the last permanent CNCS inspector general, Gerald Walpin. Republicans said the president was unhappy about Walpin’s investigation of how the program’s volunteers were used to benefit the president’s political allies.

The White House fought back by stating that Walpin had been “confused, disoriented,” and engaged in “inappropriate conduct” at meetings.

The president’s lawyer, Norman Eisen, who called Walpin to fire him, told Congress he had conducted a thorough investigation of Walpin and the CNCS board unanimously supported his termination – although he later acknowledged both statements were false

Attempts to contact Congresswoman Foxx’s office were unsuccessful.

 

 

 

Tags: americorps, corporation for national and community service cncs, mike enzi, virginia foxx

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Judge defends forced abortion, sterilization ruling against mentally ill woman

by Ben Johnson Wed Feb 22 08:51 EST Comments (48)

 

BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, February 22, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Massachusetts judge who ordered a mentally ill woman to undergo a forced abortion and sterilization is defending her actions, after she says public backlash cost her a job at Boston University.

“I believed then, as I do now, that she would elect to abort the pregnancy to protect her own well-being,’’ former Norfolk Probate Judge Christina Harms told the Boston Globe. “She would want to be healthy.”

Harms ruled on January 6 that a 32-year-old woman, who is described only by the pseudonym “Mary Moe, could be “coaxed, bribed, or even enticed…by ruse” until she was sedated for an abortion, which Moe’s parents sought against her will.

The woman, who told the court she was “very Catholic,” suffers from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.  According to court documents, Moe had a psychotic breakdown after a previous abortion and “believed people were staring at her and stating that she killed her baby.”

A court-appointed specialist testified Moe would not choose an abortion if she were well. Citing no evidence, Judge Harms disagreed.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

The Massachusetts Department of Mental Health (DMH) initially doubled-down on its request for the abortion on behalf of her parents. They subsequently dropped their petition. Judge Judge Gregory V. Roach has sealed the court record.

Harms also ordered Moe sterilized, although no one had requested the procedure. “Certainly, the easy road for me as the trial judge would have been to avoid this topic and I did find this the most difficult part of an unrelentingly difficult decision,’’ Harms wrote. But she said the decision flowed from her “substituted judgment” in favor of the abortion.

Massachusetts Appeals Court Associate Justice Andrew Grainger threw out her sterilization order and remanded the decision over the forced abortion to another court.

Harms has asked to meet with the court’s chief justice, Philip Rapozo, about the decision’s “insulting tone.”

She said after the decision became public, Boston University refused to hire her for a job it was on the verge of formally offering.

“It was the reaction to the decision that gave us pause,’’ admitted BU spokesman, Stephen Burgay. “The more we learned about Judge Harms, the clearer it became that it was the wrong job fit.”

Harms said the university’s action “strikes at the heart of what judicial independence is about.”

Harms was appointed to the bench in 1989 by then-Governor Michael Dukakis. She retired from the bench last month.

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Obama admin ‘stonewalling’ freedom of information request on Planned Parenthood funding

by Ben Johnson Wed Feb 22 08:08 EST Comments (4)

 
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen

MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE, February 22, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Obama administration is “stonewalling” on a Freedom of Information Act request about why it chose to fund the local affiliate of Planned Parenthood after New Hampshire’s state government cut off state funds, according to a lawyer with the Alliance Defense Fund.

The New Hampshire Executive Council – a part of the state government’s executive branch – denied Planned Parenthood of Northern New England (PPNNE) a $1.8 million grant last June, while approving family planning contracts with nine institutions that do not provide abortions. Its members suggested the state “should find health centers who would be able to utilize these monies more effectively than Planned Parenthood, which was unwilling to give the Executive Council the proper assurances and documentation of how this money was going to be spent,” ADF-affiliated attorney Michael Tierney told LifeSiteNews.com.

Then, in August, the HHS informed state officials that it would open the Title X grant in 2012 to a competitive bid. However, a local clinic in Manchester says it never received a response about how to apply. Instead, U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH, announced she had written a letter urging Kathleen Sebelius to make a “direct grant” to Planned Parenthood. (ADF’s legal complaint records that Shaheen received $390,000 in political donations from Planned Parenthood, EMILY’s List, and NARAL Pro-Choice America in 2008.)

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

The Obama administration subsequently made a direct $1 million grant to PPNNE. Councilor David Wheeler said the action smacked of “arrogance,” saying, “Even though the state of New Hampshire turned down Planned Parenthood as a contractor, the Obama administration says you’re going to take it anyway, whether you like it or not.” Three councilors filed a formal complaint.

New Hampshire Right to Life filed an FOIA request to determine if HHS ever actually made the grant competitive, or received assurances PPNNE would not divert tax dollars to promoting abortion. It has yet to receive two-thirds of the documents it has requested.

According to the HHS website, “Under the FOIA program, agencies initially have 20 working days and may take an additional ten (10) working days to respond to the request.” Tierney said the process has taken 130 days, and the government has yet to give a deadline for compliance.

Federal officials repeatedly told the pro-life organization it had to change its wording or petition another agency of government before HHS could provide the documents, as required by law.

“I think it was a run-around,” Tierney told LifeSiteNews, adding that some of their explanations bordered on the “comical.”

New Hampshire RTL has received 465 of 1,225 requested pages – including many duplicates of the same document. “For example, the Susan B. Anthony List issued a press release on these Planned Parenthood grants. I think I’ve received that 30 times already,” Tierney told LifeSiteNews.com. Tierney added HHS officials sent him copies of e-mails he had sent them. “But Planned Parenthood’s grant application? I haven’t received even one copy of that.”

The New Hampshire House of Representatives voted last month to divest Planned Parenthood of state tax funds by a wide margin. That bill is now before the state senate, and Tierney thinks senators deserve information related to the grant process before casting a vote – particularly information relating to the Executive Council’s suspicions that PPNNE would not be able to assure Title X money would not be illegally used for abortion.

Such fears are not without basis. A compilation of state audits and whistleblower lawsuits assembled by the ADF uncovered an alleged $99 million in waste, abuse, and potential fraud by at least 20 percent of all national Planned Parenthood affiliates. 

Slow compliance from Washington is nothing new, Tom Fitton, president of the legal watchdog group Judicial Watch, told LifeSiteNews.com. 

New Hampshire Right to Life’s treatment adds corroboration to claims that the Obama administration has politicized the FOIA process to deny information to its perceived enemies, he said. FOIA requests filed by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, and National Public Radio were answered in less than the 20 working days – sometimes the same day – while requests filed by conservative institutions such as the Washington Times, Human Events, and the English First Foundation dragged on for months or were never answered. 
 
“You can’t treat people unequally based on where you think they’re coming from in terms of philosophy,” Fitton said. “This is what the administration seems to be doing.”

Fitton said the problem of federal evasion “goes way back” – and things are only getting worse. “Comparing [the Obama administration] to the Bush administration, which was supposedly the pinnacle of secrecy, it’s a lot worse,” Fitton told LifeSiteNews.com. “Administratively, they play more games, and in court they’re as hardcore.”

“You have an administration that is more secretive than the Bush administration,” he said.

Many of Judicial Watch’s investigations have requested documents about RU-486, the Plan Bmorning after pill,” and the Gardasil vaccine.

Fitton said Judicial Watch has sued the government at least 60 times to receive documents it has requested under the FOIA law.

“There’s a real problem with lawlessness in Washington,” Fitton said. “It’s about time we see this administration follow the law.”

Tags: judicial watch, new hampshire, title x

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

back to top