Monday, April 2, 2012

Print All Articles

Obama admin drops lawsuit, agrees to pay $120,000 to pro-life activist’s attorney

by Ben Johnson Mon Apr 02 17:26 EST Comments (10)

Susan Pine, vindicated.

WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, April 2, 2012, ( – The Justice Department has dropped charges against a Florida pro-life activist and agreed to pay $120,000 in attorney’s fees just days after Attorney General Eric Holder filed an appeal against a lower court’s ruling in favor of the pro-lifer.

Susan Pine, the president of the non-profit organization FACE Life, told that she learned federal charges had been dropped on March 23. “They dismissed it with prejudice, which means they won’t be able to use it against me in the future, and they also paid my attorneys $120,000,” Pine said.

The Obama administration accused Pine of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance (FACE) Act on November 19, 2009 – the anniversary of her own abortion – after a vehicle chose to stop and receive a pro-life pamphlet from her in front of the Presidential Women’s Center (PWC) in West Palm Beach, Florida. After allowing the clinic to destroy its surveillance tape of the incident, the Justice Department took Pine to court.

Her attorney and many others argued that the Obama administration’s sharp increase in FACE Act charges were intended to silence pro-life leaders like Pine.

The prosecuting attorneys repeatedly offered plea bargains in exchange for Pine to agree to end her witness for the unborn. “For awhile they wanted $10,000,” Pine said. “Then they decided would drop the $10,000 if I didn’t go in front of any [abortion] clinic in the country.”

“There was no question that I would fight it. I didn’t want to make any kind of deals like they had suggested during mediation,” she said.

According to Pine, the pressure made her more resilient than ever. “I didn’t stop,” Pine said. “I continued to do exactly what I had been doing for the past 20 years and didn’t change anything.”

In a press release this afternoon, Congressman Steve Pearce, R-NM, said, “It is clear that Holder’s actions were politically motivated.” Pine’s “actions and her courage to stand up for what is right have led to the saving of innocent lives, and the DOJ’s decision is a victory for those fighting for our fundamental freedom of speaking out and voicing our opinions.”

U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp wrote in a scathing ruling in favor of Pine in January that he was “at a loss as to why the Government chose to prosecute this particular case in the first place.” “The Court can only wonder whether this action was the product of a concerted effort between the Government and the PWC, which began well before the date of the incident at issue, to quell Ms. Pine’s activities rather than to vindicate the rights of those allegedly aggrieved by Ms. Pine’s conduct,” the judge mused.

Harry Mihet, senior counsel for Liberty Counsel, told, “It’ not everyday that a federal judge accuses the Justice Department of a full-blown conspiracy.”

Eric Holder appealed the case to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on March 13.

Pine said she “didn’t look at that as a bad thing” but “as an opportunity for new case law to be written – and it could have helped pro-lifers across the country.”

Just ten days later, Holder reversed course and dropped the charges.

Mathew Staver, the president of Liberty Counsel, said, “It is irresponsible for the U.S. Department of Justice to place politics above principle when deciding to prosecute, and thus attempt to silence, a pro-life sidewalk counselor without any evidence of wrongdoing.”

Pine said with the threat of prosecution behind her, she will continue to counsel young women against making a catastrophic mistake. Her organization, FACE Life, offers pregnancy tests, post-pregnancy assistance, and other services to expectant mothers.

She encouraged others who would face trumped-up charges not to cave in. “We can fight these cases,” she said. “There’s organizations like Liberty Counsel who will defend you for free.”

Pine told LifeSiteNews the best part of her sidewalk ministry is the “lives that have been saved and women that we have helped. That makes it all worthwhile.”

Tags: face act, susan pine

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

On 7th anniversary of death, Mass commemorates Terri Schiavo: Priest compares her killing to 9-11

by John-Henry Westen Mon Apr 02 17:10 EST Comments (19)

Terri Schiavo's mother and brother and sister were all present at the mass.

AVE MARIA, FL, April 2, 2012 ( - The 7th anniversary of the death of Terri Schiavo was commemorated by a Mass at the Ave Maria Oratory at Ave Maria University Friday evening. Terri’s remaining family - her mother Mary Schindler, brother Bobby and sister Suzanne - were all in attendance, along with pro-life leaders and activists from across North America.

Homilist Fr. Denis Wilde, Associate Director of Priests for Life, vividly recalled the “crisis period that gripped our nation leading up to the final week of March 2005 in Pinellas Park.” It involved, he recalled, “day and night media, Florida’s legislature, state, and federal and courts to Washington, with the intervention of both Governor Bush and President Bush, and then the courts, and the country then riveted on Terri’s plight.” 

“I am afraid many have forgotten the impact of your keeping the flame of life and hope flickering,” he said. “Not just for Terri, but as it turns out for the country as well.”

“But we haven’t forgotten and we never will forget, will we!” he exclaimed.

The priest said that the weeks leading up to Terri’s death were a time of “terror on all sides,” which he described as “no less than the terror visited upon our nation on ‘9-11.’”

“Both were about murder,” he said, “and both carried deep social implications, and still do.  One came from a foreign manifestation of murder, the other from within our very courts from whom the responsibility to follow God’s law is greatest.”

“I vividly remember offering Holy Mass on that street in front of the facility where Terri was kept in a room with shades and blinds covered, along with others praying on that Tuesday of Holy Week - people from all over the country and Canada - for an end to this court-imposed travesty and a hoped-for, decent return to sanity. I remember a young boy was arrested among others and cuffed for trying to bring a glass of water to Terri.

Fr. Wilde also recalled that Pope John Paul, “who you will remember knew about Terri, his fellow sufferer in Florida,” had “released his spirit before the throne of the Father’s Mercy two days after Terri’s death.”

On behalf of her family Suzanne Schindler expressed her heartfelt thanks to attendees following the Mass.  A reception was held at Ave Maria University.

Tags: terri schiavo, terri schiavo life & hope network

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

Pro-abort Catholic politician complains bishop disinvited her at Planned Parenthood rally

by Kathleen Gilbert Mon Apr 02 16:57 EST Comments (45)


AUSTIN, Texas, April 2, 2012 ( - A Catholic Texas state politician complained at a Planned Parenthood rally last month that “the far-right” had taken over the Catholic Church, pointing out as evidence the fact that a local bishop had disinvited the lawmaker from speaking at a parish due to her stance in favor of abortion and contraception.

Rep. Dawnna Dukes had been disinvited from speaking at Holy Cross Catholic Church in Austin, her home parish, where she had been slated to speak at a Black History Month celebration, according to a local report. “We avoid as much as possible any semblance of a church endorsing a particular candidate or a particular party,” Rev. Msgr. Michael Sis, the Vicar General of the Diocese of Austin, told KEYE TV.

Dukes, an 18-year veteran of the Texas legislature, has twice voted down an ultrasound bill for abortion-bound women, and has excoriated Republicans for attempting to repeal the federal health care law, under which the HHS birth control mandate has been issued, as an attempt to “roll back the clock on women’s health.”

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

At a Planned Parenthood rally speech on March 13 unearthed by, Dukes elicited boos from the audience when she described being shut out from her family church “because I support contraceptives.”

“I’m not ready to make nice. I’m not ready to back down. I’m mad as hell,” said Dukes.

“We should be burning mad that the far-right would go to my Church and try to dictate what we can do. We should be mad that they would try to take away the rights that we have had – and the argument has been over for a very long time – to have the right to choose.”

The rally was orchestrated to promote funding for Planned Parenthood in the wake of Texas’ decision to cut funding to the abortion organization through the state Medicaid-run Women’s Health Program. After the Obama administration threatened Texas to include Planned Parenthood once more, federal officials gutted the entire program, prompting the state to file suit against the administration.

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

What can the pro-life movement learn from Andrew Breitbart?

by Jonathon van Maren Mon Apr 02 16:43 EST Comments (4)


April 2, 2012 ( - I first heard of Andrew Breitbart in February of 2010, while I was attending the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington DC with a like-minded friend from Simon Fraser University. While perusing our conference schedules to decide which speeches and lectures to attend, we spotted Andrew Breitbart’s name. As two fresh faced university students, we both asked the same question: Who is Andrew Breitbart?

We soon found out. In the conference hall of the Marriott Hotel, Andrew Breitbart pounded the podium and declared war on the traditional media. He revelled in the recent ACORN sting, in which he had helped renegade investigative journalists Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe take down a corrupt pro-Obama organizing group. He read random bits of articles from his phone, and announced to the crowd that the Breitbart websites were going to circumvent the media and give conservatives a voice like they had never had.

That weekend, Breitbart seemed to be everywhere. He was two tables over at breakfast, talking intensely to some lucky student journalist. He was in the hall, facing down Max Blumenthal, a reporter that had made the mistake of calling him a racist. Breitbart had a message to bring, and he was making sure that everyone he ran into heard it: We don’t need the media. We can get our message out without them. The evidence? He was doing it.

This is a message that brings hope to us in the pro-life movement. Only days before I heard Breitbart speak in DC, I had been in Florida, engaging in my very first real pro-life activism at the Genocide Awareness Project with the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) and their American counterparts. One of the first things I learned about the strategy that these groups adhered to was that there was always an implicit understanding that the media would ignore the reality of abortion—unless they were forced to cover it.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

When I joined CCBR in January of 2011, and subsequently began to work in the area of communications, I soon realized that an online presence that was able to attract sufficient attention to either offset the traditional media or force them to cover it as well was essential. And so, I picked up Andrew Breitbart’s book “Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World.”

This book will not be for everyone. At a few points it is a tad crude—although if taken in context, the remarks are quite forgivable. However, for those who desire to gain an understanding of how the media works, and how the media can be circumvented or forced to address issues they would prefer to ignore, it is magnificent.

Breitbart’s book isn’t merely a step-by-step plan. He takes the reader through the history of how the censorship-minded took over the media, how he realized it, and how he realized how to effectively combat it. His “Big” websites now attract millions of readers, because Breitbart realized something essential: You have to understand your opponents to effectively combat them. The best pro-life examples of the strategies he espouses are Lila Rose’s investigative stings against Planned Parenthood, and the impressive success of the pro-family news agency LifeSiteNews.

The pro-life movement is the first social reform movement facing open hostility from the mainstream media. Exposing what abortion does to pre-born North Americans is essential to winning the fight against this hidden injustice. As Andrew Breitbart points out, on the Internet we have a level playing field. His book Righteous Indignation should become a must-read for pro-lifers seeking to highlight the injustice of the pre-born in the face of widespread censorship and apathy.

Reprinted with permission from

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

New Hampshire house passes slew of pro-life bills

by Christine Dhanagom Mon Apr 02 16:31 EST Comments (0)

CONCORD, April 2, 2012 ( - Pro-life advocates in New Hampshire are celebrating a slew of recent legislative victories in the state’s House of Representatives, including an informed consent bill and a ban on late term abortions.

The “Women’s Right to Know Act,” perhaps the most hotly debated of the recent laws, was passed late last week after some of its more controversial provisions had been removed. In its current form, the bill requires that a woman seeking an abortion be provided with a description of the proposed abortion method and information about the medical risks of abortion including infection, hemorrhage, and cervical or uterine perforation.  The clinic is also required to tell her about abortion alternatives.

The bill had originally included breast cancer among the medical risks attending an abortion, and included a lengthy defense of the link between abortion and breast cancer.

According to the Huffington Post, the proposed language noted that it was “scientifically undisputed that full-term pregnancy reduces a woman’s lifetime risk of breast cancer,” since the tissue that grows in the breast during pregnancy develops into “mature cancer resistant cells” after the 32nd week of gestation.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

The proposal went on to explain: “When an abortion ends a normal pregnancy, the woman is left with more immature breast tissue than she had before she was pregnant. In short, the amount of immature breast tissue is increased and this tissue is exposed to significantly greater amounts of estrogen – a known cause of breast cancer.”

The provision was eventually removed, over the protests of the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Jeanine Notter of Merrimack. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee also removed a provision allowing doctors who violate the law to be charged with a felony.

A twenty-four hour waiting period requirement did survive the final mark-up, however, despite vigorous opposition from opponents.

“Twenty-four hours is not too long to wait when we are talking about the life of another human being,” said co-sponsor Rep. Tammy Simmons, according to the Concord Monitor.

The bill passed the House last Wednesday by a vote of 178-152. The legislative body also passed a ban on abortions after twenty weeks gestation the next day.

The late term abortion ban is based on what the proposal calls “substantial evidence” that unborn babies are capable of experiencing pain by twenty weeks. The bill notes, however, that “even before 20 weeks after fertilization, unborn children have been observed to exhibit hormonal stress responses to painful stimuli.”

Both pieces of legislation come on the heels of abortion restrictions enacted earlier this year. A bill passed out of the House at the end of January would prohibit the use of public funds to subsidize abortions either “directly or indirectly.” The bill is currently being considered in the Senate, where it is scheduled for a hearing later this week.

Additionally, the House passed a partial birth abortion ban on March 14th by a vote of 224-110. While partial birth abortion is illegal under federal law, the proposed legislation asserts that the federal ban requires supplementation on the state level since it is “narrowly tailored to reach only those partial-birth abortion procedures that implicate Congress’ power to regulate interstate or foreign commerce.

The bill also asserts that partial birth abortion is never medically necessary, and calls the procedure “gruesome and inhumane.”

Tags: abortion, new hampshire

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

As a former Madam and woman who was prostituted, I know why prostitution must be made illegal

by Tania Fiolleau Mon Apr 02 15:54 EST Comments (19)

Former prostitute and madam Tania Fiolleau

Editor’s note: Tania Fiolleau, a former victim of prostitution and former Madam who employed over five hundred women, warns Canadians that they are “headed for a catastrophe” with last week’s ruling in Ontario that legalized brothels. Special to LifeSiteNews.

April 2, 2012 ( – There are many reasons why prostitution and brothels should be made illegal in Canada.

First, it cruelly subjugates vulnerable migrant women into the dreadful darkness of sex-slavery. Migrant trafficking is an estimated $32 billion business, annually exceeding the sales of Google, Starbucks and Nike combined. Prostitution in Vancouver, B.C. accounts for roughly 16,000 people arriving illegally through Vancouver ports per year, making the city a major hub for human trafficking. This goes a lot deeper than your typical prostitute on the street corner soliciting drivers. People from all different nationalities are trafficked into Canada each week under the guise of being a ‘visitor’ or having a ‘work permit’ and then are sold into prostitution for the profit of criminal organizations. Many of these women are ‘tricked’ into coming on work visas under false pretenses and then forced into prostitution. These women are forced to work in brothels disguised as therapeutic massage centers, nail pedicure places, karaoke clubs, etc. These women do not want to become prostituted. They did not grow up with dreams of one day becoming a sex slave or being pimped.

Another reason why prostitution should be illegal in Canada is that sex consumers demand the flesh of young naive girls. The average age of entry into prostitution in Canada is 13 to 14 years old. Customers prefer the services of adolescents for their own sick reasons. This preference is partially formed by the perception that younger prostitutes are more clean and less likely to harbor sexually transmissible diseases. Young vulnerable teens are unwittingly recruited into prostitution by friends who are already part of the ‘human flesh trade’ or by pimps who target youths who have run away from broken or abusive homes. Young unsuspecting girls are preyed upon by prostitution recruiters at malls or even on Facebook. Teens from broken homes are especially susceptible to a pimp’s offer of shelter, food, and emotional support. While young girls are usually tricked into prostitution, it is not uncommon for them to be forced into the practice through brutal beatings.

A further reason to make prostitution illegal is that it utterly destroys the mental and even physical integrity of the prostituted woman. Approximately 80% of women entering into prostitution have been victims of rape. Prostituted persons, however, are literally raped multiple times daily, as much as 8 to 10 times per day. They are the most raped class of women in human history. One study found that prostituted women exhibited many of the same characteristics as soldiers returning traumatized from war. More than 75% of prostitutes surveyed in the study met the criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The average number of prostitutes suffering PTSD from sex slavery was seen to be 14% higher than the average number of soldiers suffering PTSD after returning from intense combat on the front lines.

As a forward-moving nation, we Canadians should make prostitution illegal. We should not, however, make the laws as tough for women caught prostituting as we should for the pimps, Johns, and recruiters, since most women caught in prostitution did not choose that lifestyle nor can they easily escape from it. Where there is a demand, there will always be a supply. To reduce the demand for the prostitutes, we need to throw the book at the Johns, recruiters and the pimps. Making stiff laws for the Johns, recruiters and pimps will greatly lower the number of prostitutes.

Canada should follow the Nordic model, which proved very effective in cutting down prostitution in Sweden by approximately 45%, with hardly any of the trade going underground. The buyer was one who was criminalized. As prostitution dropped in Sweden, so did the accompanying social ills of human trafficking, drug use, and organized crime.

The recent ruling in Ontario legalizing brothels really makes our cities and our government into pimps. Brothels in Canada are charged roughly $4400 annually for business licenses, money that fills the treasury of the city and the government. Most other businesses are charged approximately $176 per year. The city and the government knows that there is big money in prostitution and they want their slice of the pie. Legalizing brothels just puts more tax money in the government’s pocket, which really makes the government the biggest pimp of all. Of course to make Canadian’s swallow the legalization of brothels, the new business title for a pimp will be entrepreneur, body-guard, or driver. Canada needs to wake up about how the government with its laws is not only sanctioning, but benefitting, from the sexual slavery of vulnerable women in legalized brothels.

Some people think that legalizing brothels will make the prostituted women safer and allow them to lead better lives. This is far from the truth. Many of the women working in brothels have already been abused by human trafficking, enslavement to pimps, or by being controlled by criminal organizations through fear and oppression.

Whether brothels are legal or not, a prostituted woman will always be the one who loses out in the end. The vast majority of prostituted women that work in brothels eventually end up working on the street. This happens once the signs of a woman’s sex slavery start to show on the outside of her body. She become too worn out and haggard-looking to appeal to the Johns that frequent the brothels. Not being able to keep up with the younger sexier recruits, she is eventually cast out on the street like garbage. Many brothel managers will throw out a prostitute when her drug addiction becomes too much for her to handle. Legalizing brothels does nothing for the problems faced by street prostitutes as virtually no brothels will hire drug addicted street walkers. Research shows that less than 3% of prostituted women ever get out of the sex industry.

A staggering two-thirds of children born to prostituted women end up imitating their mother’s lifestyle or entering into a life of crime. For the sake of protecting children alone, brothels and prostitution should be made illegal.

Approximately 80% of all prostitutes murdered are killed by their Johns, pimps, or through the abuse of drugs. Most prostitute homicides are never resolved and the Johns and pimps are never brought to justice.

By legalizing brothels, we are only enabling a serious social problem to fester and grow worse for our future generations and entire nation. Making brothels legal will only act as an incentive for women who are lured by the prospect of easy money. The number of women entering the so-called ‘sex trade’ will climb higher every day. Once they enter the trade, it become almost impossible to exit. The prostituted woman becomes addicted to the fast money, the comfort provided by the pimp, and to the drugs. The younger ones who lack education hardly stand a chance of ever getting out. I know this first hand as an ex-prostitute who works tirelessly to rescue these poor abused women from their dire situations.

In a 1998 report of prostituted persons across five countries, 92% of women said they wanted to escape prostitution immediately if they had the resources. Women who sell themselves are often coerced, forced or drugged into it—sometimes even at gunpoint. They feel they have no other skills or abilities to succeed in life. The thought of trying to escape is often not a reality when fears of being caught and killed or severely beaten start to kick in. Many times the exploited and demoralized women simply lack the self confidence or education to think and act for themselves.

Many of these girls that come on working visas, and then are forced into sex slavery, can’t go to the police for help for fear that their families will be murdered back home. It is very hard to escape the industry, since most girls have no sense of purpose other than what they do. They are ashamed. Without resources or knowing where to go, these women become society’s lost women.

We live in a country where women are very important. Many women are honourable doctors, chief executives, lawyers and judges. Legalizing brothels and calling prostitution a ‘trade’ has done nothing to elevate the status of women in this country. It has only demeaned them and turned them into expendable chattel that can be bought and sold.

In reality, prostitution is not a trade. It is a criminal enterprise. We need to keep our young women in school and encourage and empower them to strive towards good careers instead of taking the fast, easy approach of prostitution whereby they become uneducated and spiral down in a dehumanizing pattern that can only end in their ultimate desolation. Sadly, most women are liberated from the slavery of prostitution through death.

The diseases that are spread through prostitution are vast. Although the law will make the prostituted women undergo testing for diseases, this will only keep the Johns safe, not the prostitutes. Our Pharmacare system, which is also government run, stands to make a large profit from the medications used by prostitutes that become ill from their sex-slavery as they develop drug habits, succumb to AIDS, STDs, depression, or other mental illnesses. Legalizing prostitution only fosters the growth of sex slavery rather than doing anything to eliminate it.

Shame on you Justice Susan Himel and your entire court of appeal. You are the real criminals for authorizing the sexual slavery of women and children who are at many times forced into their abject situation of misery and suffering through no fault of their own.

We don’t need laws permitting brothels. We need laws that instill the fear of long jail sentences and stiff penalties into the pimps and brothel owners who are making dirty money off of vulnerable women and children. Many brothels lure unsuspecting women through advertisements such as: “Female owned and operated. Earn up to $2000.00 daily. Fun friendly, safe environment”. This is how I got lured into it. It is all a lie that conceals the horror of the trade in human flesh for sexual exploitation.

Let us not forget that prostitution includes young girls and boys being sold for sex to pedophiles, something that we rarely hear in the mainstream media.

In conclusion, it is a tragedy for any young girl or women to enter into the hell of prostitution. They become our nation’s lost women. They become victims of a dark and sinister sex enslavement. Their life is one of agony and horror. Jail-time and social humiliation is too little of a punishment for those who engage in or perpetrate the crime against women that is now to be legally sanctioned in brothels by Justice Susan Himel.

What we need is more organizations to help women exit prostitution. As a society, we need to drastically focus on prevention. We need serious legal deterrents for the Johns and pimps. We need to raise awareness on the effects prostitution has on society. We need to get into the high schools and colleges to do preventative work with our nation’s children before it is too late.

The women of our country are worth it. Our young girls are worth it. The future of our nation — which now stands at a cross road — is worth it. Legalized Brothels and prostitution cannot be an option.

Tania Fiolleau, foundress of Save The Women, is looking for financial support to continue her important work in helping women leave prostitution. You can find out more about her work and her ministry at

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

I hate abortion: saying otherwise would imply it’s acceptable

by Nancy Flanders Mon Apr 02 15:35 EST Comments (6)

I hate abortion: for what it does to babies and for what it does to women. Abortion hurts whole families.

April 2, 2012 ( - I hate abortion. I hate the word. I hate the “procedure.” Obviously, I hate that it’s legal. It’s heartbreaking and distressing that both people and the courts deny the unborn their personhood. The pro-aborts have so much innocent blood on their hands that it must be oozing from their pores. Yet those who call themselves pro-life but think abortion should be legal in cases of rape or when there’s a fetal abnormality or threat to the mother’s health are just as culpable.

Let me be clear: there isn’t a single acceptable reason why abortion should be legal.

Saying abortion is desirable in certain circumstances is akin to saying child abuse is at times acceptable. It makes absolutely no sense. You can’t admit that a fetus is a human being–and therefore abortion is murder–and then say that the murder of that fetus is justifiable based on who her father is or because she might have a disability. To do so is discrimination.

Equally discriminating is to say that a child should die because her life is a threat to her mother’s health. Any woman who sacrificed her child to save herself, whether for her physical health or financial health, would be charged with homicide or sent to a psychiatric hospital. Yet it happens every day with the support of our president and millions of cheering fans. None of the fear of financial burden, worry about college, or the stress over being an unwed parent can change the fact that an unborn baby is a baby. Therefore, to end the life of that baby by any rationale is murder.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Then there are those who advocate for abortion as if it is a basic right, a gift, and a blessing. They devote their lives to the fight for legal all-access abortion while ignoring or denying the existence of human life within the womb. They use sly language in an attempt to emotionally detach women from their unborn children. They refer to the unborn as a clump of cells in order to desensitize the world to the cruelty of abortion, all the while knowing that abortion stops a beating heart by ripping arms and legs off precious, defenseless bodies.

Extreme pro-aborts actually believe that tearing apart a baby and suctioning her out of her mother’s womb is good, caring work. They see the unborn as nothing short of the unfortunate side-effect of a good time. Pro-aborts refer to fathers as simply “the man who impregnated” them during what is implied to be recreational, nameless sex. Their deceitful behavior is unmistakable, yet people believe them. Abortion is pure evil that pro-aborts try to disguise as apparent good.

What happens after the abortion is equally abhorrent. We’ve all heard the stories about the bodies of aborted babies found in trash receptacles or tiny body parts sold to research labs for companies including Pepsi and Kraft. However, those babies are also used as health care. One company injects fetal brain stem cells into the eyes of patients with macular degeneration. A shocking investigative look into the world of fetal body part trafficking exposed how some babies survive abortion attempts, but instead of receiving care and comfort, they are left to die or be harvested while still alive. Pakalert Press reports the following disturbing information admitted by former abortion clinic technician Dean Alberty:

Alberty told of seeing babies wounded but alive after abortion procedures, and in one case a set of twins ‘still moving on the table’ when clinicians from AGF (Anatomic Gift Foundation) began dissecting the children to harvest their organs. The children, he said, were ‘cuddling each other’ and ‘gasping for breath’ when medics moved in for the kill.

Every day the United States, a champion of civil rights worldwide, brutally slaughters 4,000 babies just like these sweet twins. With each moment we spend in silence, each blind eye we turn, and each vote we cast for a pro-choice politician, we might as well be holding the curette ourselves. Imagine the world without the destruction of the Nazi regime or legal slavery. If not for the courage and unwavering dedication of a few bold individuals, these atrocities would still exist, just as the massacre of the unborn will continue without the unified rising of anti-abortion voices.

I hate abortion, and I am proud to say it. Where do you stand?

Reprinted with permission from

Tags: abortion

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

Alberta judge upholds ‘truth about homosexuality’ activist’s free speech rights

by Thaddeus Baklinski Mon Apr 02 15:03 EST Comments (18)

Bill Whatcott

CALGARY, April 2, 2012 ( - Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Paul Jeffrey has dismissed a Crown appeal of a decision from a lower court that acquitted Bill Whatcott of trespassing charges for distributing “Truth about homosexuality” pamphlets at the University of Calgary in 2008.

On Friday, March 30, Jeffrey upheld the November 2011 ruling by provincial court Judge John D. Bascom that stated the University of Calgary infringed on Whatcott’s Charter rights to freedom of expression when campus security arrested and detained him for distributing a pamphlet that addressed the “harmful consequences” of homosexuality.

The university had argued that the Charter only applied to “government actors and government actions,” not to the university itself since it was a private entity.

Bascom ruled, however, that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies to the University of Calgary since “the University is not a Charter free zone,” in that it carried out “specific” governmental work by providing post-secondary education to the public in Alberta, making its actions subject to scrutiny under the Charter.

“Mr. Whatcott entered the university property with a purpose to distribute his literature to students, staff and public,” said the judge, adding, “His activity was peaceful and presented no harm to the university structures or those who frequented the campus. … Although Mr. Whatcott’s pamphlet is not scholarly, freedom of speech is not limited to academic works.”

Bascom concluded that “the means used by campus security halted Mr. Whatcott’s distribution of these flyers and violated his right of free expression.”

The judge also lifted the University’s ban against Whatcott that would have indefinitely prohibited him from setting foot on the campus again, stating that the ban was “arbitrary and unfair.”

In Friday’s hearing Crown prosecutor Andrew Barg argued that Judge Bascom “erred in law in ruling that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applies in the circumstances of this case,” according to a Calgary Herald report.

Justice Jeffrey rejected the argument and dismissed the appeal.

Defense lawyer, Dale Fedorchuk, told the Calgary Herald that “Judge Bascom’s decision has been effectively upheld and remains good law.”

“I’m very happy with the decision,” Whatcott told LifeSiteNews, “and my lawyer and I believe that it is now illegal for universities in Alberta to try to shut down peaceful protests and literature distributions that offends their pro-abortion, pro-homosexual sensibilities.”

“The precedents set in Alberta and Saskatchewan,” Whatcott added, “will make it almost impossible for any university in Canada to secure a conviction against a pro-lifer who speaks up on campus.”

In 2010 Whatcott won an appeal in Saskatchewan when Justice Darla Hunter of Saskatchewan’s Court of Appeal overturned a 2006 Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal ruling that found him guilty of violating the province’s human rights code by publicly criticizing homosexuality through a series of flyers he distributed in Saskatoon and Regina in 2001 and 2002.

The tribunal had ordered Whatcott to pay $17,500 and imposed a “lifetime” ban on his freedom to publicly criticize homosexuality.

In her decision Justice Hunter ruled that Whatcott did not violate section 14(1)(b) of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code by distributing flyers to oppose the teaching of homosexuality in Saskatoon’s public schools.

“It is acceptable, in a democracy, for individuals to comment on the morality of another’s behaviour. ... Anything that limits debate on the morality of behaviour is an intrusion on the right to freedom of expression,” Justice Hunter had remarked.

“My advice to universities,” Mr. Whatcott concluded, “is forget about imposing their leftist ideologies and go back to teaching much needed skills and knowledge to enable young people to make a successful living and contribute to our economy.”

Tags: bill whatcott, homosexuality

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

I think it’s cute how much Jezebel loves being wrong about things

by Kristen Walker Hatten Mon Apr 02 14:27 EST Comments (68)

"Which bad decision is right for me?"

April 2, 2012 ( - Walk with me down this path of rational thought, won’t you?

People who have sex for fun are having sex for recreation. That’s what doing something for fun is. I enjoy bowling, weaving, kayaking, and such. Some people enjoy sex. Whatever.

Recreational activities should not be covered for free under any health care plan.

“But I could get an STD having sex without condoms!”

Yes, and I could bust my toe open bowling. Insurance plans will pay for my busted toe care and your shot of penicillin. But insurance won’t – and shouldn’t – pay for steel-toed bowling shoes. Why? Because bowling is a recreational activity, and so is non-procreative sex.

Do you have a right to have sex? Sure! Why not? I have a right to bowl, eat spaghetti, drive a tractor, and thumb-wrestle with my coworkers during lunch. But no employer, taxpayer, or anybody other than me has the obligation to provide preventive “care” to make sure I can do those things without any repercussions which I may deem negative. This is why I have to buy my own bowling shoes, spaghetti bib, tractor…helmet?, and thumb-wrestling…cape. Yeah, cape.

It all seems so simple!

But what Sandra Fluke and others are screaming about is that women use birth control pills for things other than preventing pregnancy, such as regulating periods and correcting hormonal imbalances. Now, I know a little something about hormonal imbalances. I won’t go into detail, but I experienced hormonal imbalance so severely that I experienced “that time of the month” non-stop for 18 months. (Looky there, I just went into detail.) I became severely anemic and very sick. I was diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome, metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, and adrenal fatigue, among other things.

I went to a few doctors. They all suggested birth control pills. I said no to all of them. My past experience with birth control pills led me to believe they were a temporary hormone Band-Aid that could correct my symptoms for a while but wouldn’t fix the underlying problems. One doctor even smilingly suggested uterine ablation – a procedure that would have left me infertile. At the time I was 28 and had told the doctor I wanted children. I realized I was going to have to do my own research, and I did. I spent months reading and talking to other women with my symptoms and eventually found that proper nutrition was the key to my problems. Four years later, I am 60 pounds lighter and much healthier.

I also finally found a pro-life doctor, the only one I know of in my city – Dr. Joseph Behan in Dallas – who said he had never prescribed birth control pills and never would. He is also an infertility specialist and has helped lots of women regulate their cycles and get pregnant using natural methods. He has been a godsend for me.

It is my firm opinion, based on personal experience, years of research, and countless conversations with women, that oral contraceptives and IUDs are not helpful to women – they are harmful. No, I am not a health care professional, but I am the one who ended up helping me – not the several doctors I desperately visited. Sometimes amateurs have it figured out in a way that professionals don’t. Or, as the saying goes: amateurs built the ark; professionals built the Titanic.

I’m afraid birth control pills have become a fall-back position for lazy doctors. Don’t wanna get knocked up? Don’t ask yourself questions about whether you should be having sex with the person; just take a pill. Bleeding uncontrollably? Take a pill. Cramping so badly you want to die? Irregular as all get-out? Missed your period for three months, but you’re not pregnant? Pill, pill, pill!

This argument that women need birth control pills to be healthy irks me. First, it is false. Second, it is a dishonest ploy to keep getting other people to pay for their fun sexy sex lives. Third, it is another attempt at social engineering: forcing other people to subsidize your behavior no matter their moral objections to it.

That’s why I thought Arizona’s proposed bill was a good idea. It said, basically: fine, if you need birth control for health reasons, we’ll pay for it. So prove you need it for health reasons. What is the big screaming deal?

Let the towering intellects at Jezebel tell you!

t’s a little hypocritical for a political party that purports to be all about freeing the citizenry from the tyranny of government [to] actively work to subject the citizenry to the whims of their employers. And asking women to show their prescriptions to their bosses so their boss’s feelings aren’t hurt is a little much, even for conservatives.

Let me explain this to you people again in very small words, very slowly:

You. Don’t. Get. To. Have. It. Both. Ways.

If you want other people to pay for your crap, you thereby invite people into your crap. What about that is so hard to get?

You’re not asking them to pay for your heart pills. You’re asking them to pay for your birth control. So if you’re gonna claim it’s for your lady plumbing health and not consequences-free shagging, prove it. I think that’s a perfectly sound idea.

Republicans have been accused of waging a “war on women,” and they’re backing off hard by assuring everyone that contraception is safe, don’t worry; we’re not gonna touch your pills, ladies. And I believe them.

Unfortunately, down the road, I’m afraid all of us as pro-lifers – and that includes Protestants, atheists, and everybody else – are going to have to take a good hard look at oral contraceptives and their abortifacient effects. If we truly believe that life begins at conception, a birth control pill is a little Russian roulette ball that could land on death anytime. I know that’s a difficult fact to face, and we don’t want to look like scary extremists, but the truth is the truth, and if we don’t own up to it, we are doing ourselves, this movement, and the unborn a great disservice.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Reprinted with permission from

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

‘Heart-rending’: Young Slovakian sculptor captures post-abortion pain, mercy and forgiveness

by Dan Zeidler Mon Apr 02 14:02 EST Comments (85)


April 2, 2012 ( - As an art student, Martin Hudáček of Slovakia was moved to create a sculpture to draw attention to the devastation abortion can bring to the woman, and to the fact that through the love and mercy of God, reconciliation and healing are possible.

The sculpture shows a woman in great sorrow grieving her abortion. The second figure in the work is the aborted child, presented as a young child, who in a very touching, healing way, comes to the mother, to offer forgiveness.

Martin, who named the work “Memorial for Unborn Children,” said the sculpture also “expresses hope which is given to believers by the One who died on the cross for us, and showed how much He cares about all of us.”

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Praised by many as an extremely effective representation of post-abortion trauma, the work sensitively communicates this reality, and draws out many emotions and interpretations.

Dr. Martha Shuping, M.D., a psychiatrist with more than 20 years experience in helping women with abortion recovery, says, “I believe this beautiful image will resonate in the hearts of many women who have had abortions. It illustrates powerfully their experience.”

“This presents a very beautiful image of a core component of post abortion healing,” comments Kevin Burke, LSW, of Rachel’s Vineyard Ministries, “that the very child that was lost to abortion with God’s grace is now instrumental in calling the wounded mother and father to repentance and healing in Christ.”

Julie Thomas of Atlanta, who has personally experienced abortion and is now active with the Operation Outcry post-abortion program, commented,  “I love that the little girl is not a baby - we often talk about that during our Bible study and for some reason a lot of us believe that when we get to Heaven that our children will be a toddler as the child is here.

“I also like the child being ‘transparent’ almost angel-like in appearance. The mother appears to be in anguish, which is so very real. I love that the child is reaching out to touch the mother’s head. I can imagine the mother sensing the touch and believe that she will stand up, taller than before. I believe that this image is very strong and touching, possibly leading to the first step of healing for the mother who has aborted her children.”

A Latin American post-abortive woman who was helped in the healing process by the Proyecto Esperanza (Project Hope) program says the sculpture “is simple…marvelous. I got emotional and I stopped to take the time to look at it…I felt many things…the woman with all her pain being concentrated in her face held in her hands. Shame is also conveyed…And the daughter who blesses her, reaching up to touch her, to me indicates the height of forgiveness, the height of that child’s forgiveness, through the love of God. The transparency of the child means she comes from a pure place. It talks to me of the forgiveness we feel after we have worked through the grief… Precious…really precious.”

“I find this a heart-rending sculpture,” says experienced post-abortion retreat leader, Fr. William Kurz, S.J. of Marquette University in Milwaukee.  “It’s a message of forgiveness and healing needed by the grieving post-abortive mother even some years after her abortion ...  It speaks directly and beautifully both to the intense and profound grief of the mother, and to the dignity of the aborted baby.” 

Several people interviewed for this article stressed that promoting this powerful image should also be accompanied by referral possibilities for anyone who senses they need help and reconciliation. For that reason, it is recommended that contact information be included for programs such as Project Rachel and Rachel’s Vineyard.

Marek Hudáček, brother of Martin, says both he and his brother were extremely surprised by the positive reactions from all over the world to the sculpture, “We did not expect it… The main intention of my brother to do the sculpture was not to be famous, but to speak about the important value of human life and the necessity to protect it from conception.”

For more information, and to download a mini-poster with this image, go here.

Dan Zeidler is president of Family Life Council, Inc., ,

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

Brazilian court acquits child molester: says victims were ‘far from being innocent’

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Mon Apr 02 13:37 EST Comments (10)


April 2, 2012 ( - A Brazilian federal appeals court has ruled that a child molester who committed sex acts with three twelve-year-old girls was not guilty of rape because, “the victims were far from innocent.”

The case, whose exact number is being withheld from the public, has provoked outraged responses from human rights officials and civil organizations.

According to the federal Superior Tribunal of Justice, the three victims had been engaged in prostitution for some time, and therefore were capable of giving consent to the acts in question. The ruling upheld a lower court decision that affirmed: “The proof offered during the proceedings demonstrates, overwhelmingly, that the victims, at that time, lamentably, were already far from being innocent, naive, ignorant and uninformed regarding sex.”

“However immoral and reprehensible was the conduct practiced by the accused, the types of penalties for which he was denounced do not remain relevant,” the court added.

The Superior Tribunal agreed with the lower court’s reasoning, adding that “an act that has not truly violated the juridical good under protection - sexual freedom - cannot be considered a crime, the proceedings having shown that the minors had already been prostitutes for some time.”

It also rejected the idea that there is an “absolute presumption” of lack of consent on the part of twelve-year-old girls.

“For the third section of the Superior Tribunal of Justice, the presumption of violence in the crime of rape has a relative character, and can be eliminated in particular circumstances,” the court’s news service reports.  The decision applies to the law in effect when the sexual abuse occurred, in 2002.

Brazil’s human rights minister, Maria do Rosario Nunes, reacted with outrage to the decision, noting that it implies that “the human rights of children and adolescents can be relativized,” and asked federal prosecutors to appeal the decision.

“With this sentence, a man was declared innocent of the accusation of rape of three vulnerable people, which in practice means impunity for one of the most serious crimes committed against Brazilian society,” she said in a press communiqué.

“To relativize the rights of children and judge them according to their social origin, if they were already in the streets, is to judge a child who was a victim of sexual abuse, treating her as responsible for the violence that she suffered, is without a doubt an act of perversity that goes against all of the legislative protection of the rights of children and adolescents in Brazil,” she also stated.

The National Association of Federal Prosecutors denounced the decision as an affront to “the principle of absolute protection, guaranteed by the Brazilian constitution, to children and adolescents, and indicates a tolerance of that nefarious practice, instead of discouraging it.”

“We are going to carry out a joint campaign involving public institutions and social organizations to combat the sexual exploitation of minors ... This decision goes against the necessity of the protection of citizens,” the organization also stated.

The decision comes at a moment that federal legislators are considering a reform of the penal code that would reduce the age of sexual consent in existing law from 14 to 12 years of age. The same reform would reduce penalties of infanticide following birth, and eliminate penalties for abortion in a variety of cases.

Tags: brazil

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

Notre Dame continues listing pro-abort ‘internship opportunities’: prof calls pro-lifers ‘monsters’

by Kathleen Gilbert Mon Apr 02 12:44 EST Comments (25)


NOTRE DAME, Indiana, March 30, 2012 ( - The University of Notre Dame has stood by its decision to publish a list of “internship opportunities” on its website that includes pro-abortion and leftist organizations, while one professor at the school has lashed out at members of the conservative group petitioning against the listing, calling them “monsters.”

TFP Student Action, the conservative watchdog group that is leading a 10,000-strong petition against the school’s inclusion of pro-abortion groups on an internship web page, reported Friday that not only had Notre Dame kept the listings, but that the school was found to have funded some of the problematic internships.

The school’s Department of Political Science continues to link to groups such as Emily’s List, Feminist Majority Foundation, and the United Nations Population Fund as “Summer Internship Programs.” Since TFP’s petition was launched, however, a sentence has been added to the top of the page stating: “Listing here does not constitute an endorsement of the mission of agenda of these organizations by the department or the University.”

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Notre Dame officials had initially criticized TFP for “misrepesenting” the internship listings as a school-sponsored offer, arguing that it was simply a listing of previous internships attended by Notre Dame students. A later message from the office of the president to a TFP supporter posted by the group emphasized that the group’s initial statement, which had been amended by TFP to accommodate the correction, was “false” and “unsubstantiated.”

However, the groups writes: “Those live links are still listed as ‘opportunities.’  And what are students expected to understand from the term ‘opportunity’ other than just that – opportunity?”

Meanwhile, one member of the university’s faculty gave vent to anger at the petitioners: an email from the professor forwarded to told TFP to “back off, you monsters” and defended organizations such as Emily’s List as doing “fabulous work.”

“You should be ashamed of yourselves, with your bullying ‘oral’ tactics. Wake up. Do you think only Christians like you have a purchase on morality?” the professor continued. “Remember the Inquisition. Remember the Holocaust when your Pope refused to protect Jews and collaborated with the Nazi [sic]. Remember your priests who even today choose to fondle little boys with no choice in the matter. ... Back off with your morality. You wouldn’t know what it was iof [sic] it was poured over your head.”

“Clearly, not all professors at Notre Dame respect the Catholic faith or the right to life,” remarked TFP on its website.

The group also pointed to the discovery of blogger Kathy Schiffer at that the school had in fact funded internships to questionable groups, including the National Organization for Women in 2008, the Anti-Defamation League of Boston in 2009, and the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, which destroys leftover embryos from in-vitro fertilization to conduct some of its research.

TFP Student Action says that it will continue to peacefully petition the school to remove the “internship opportunity” links, which they called “misleading and morally confusing.”

“The fact that Notre Dame students have served as interns for pro-abortion organizations in the past should cause embarrassment, not pride,” said the group.

Contact information:

The University of Notre Dame
Fr. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., President
400 Main Building
Notre Dame, IN 46556
Phone: 574.631.3903

Tags: abortion

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

‘Noisy’ pro-abort protest fails to disrupt London 40 Days for Life event with bishop

by Hilary White, Rome Correspondent Mon Apr 02 11:36 EST Comments (3)

The crowd of pro-lifers at Friday's 40 Days for Life event in London.

LONDON, April 2, 2012 ( – An attempt to disrupt a pro-life prayer vigil attended by a Catholic bishop in London Friday night failed as peaceful pro-lifers calmly carried on praying while abortion advocates tried to drown them out.

With pro-life activists becoming ever more effective recently, the UK’s abortion industry is resorting to increasingly aggressive tactics. Plans by the popular Catholic bishop Alan Hopes of Westminster to attend the 40 Days for Life prayer vigil in London Last Friday particularly incensed abortion advocates, who staged a “noisy” counter protest, promoted by the far-left Guardian newspaper.

The plan backlashed, however, as the publicity stirred up interest among pro-lifers, but failed to win equal enthusiasm from London’s abortion supporters. Attendees said that, despite claims by the Press Association, the pro-lifers far out numbered the abortion advocates, with several hundred pro-lifers showing up.

“The large number of people who attended the prayer vigil shows that increasing numbers are opposed to our society’s ‘culture of death’ and are horrified that in 2010 almost 190,000 abortions took place in England and Wales,” said Bishop Hopes.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Paul Smeaton, 24, who works for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children and volunteers with the Catholic youth organization Juventutum London, attended the event and told that it was “both uplifting and a wake-up call.”

“It was uplifting and wonderful to be amongst so many people praying for an end to abortion. Uplifting because of the courage of Bishop Hopes in leading the vigil in the face of such hostility.

“But the aggression of the opposition served as a wake-up call and a reminder of the urgency of the pro-life cause,” he added.

The counter demonstration was organized by the ad hoc group Bloomsbury Pro-Choice Alliance, who said they wanted to show the “tiny but vocal” pro-life groups that there is a “pro-choice majority in this country”.

They accused groups like 40 Days for Life of “increasingly mimicking the tactics of hardline US groups,” that have largely succeeded in bringing out significant reductions in the number of abortions in the U.S., and the permanent closure of hundreds of abortion facilities around the country.

Of particular concern to BPAS was the possibility that women who are approached by pro-life people might change their minds and opt out of abortion. “If bishops are getting behind this then I can’t see how it’s morally justified especially when women have already made up their minds,” Abigail Fitzgibbon, policy manager for BPAS told media last month.

Bishop Hopes, however, praised such outcomes, saying that the vigil “has enabled some women considering an abortion to change their minds.

“Such a change of heart that leads to the saving of the life of an unborn child, is a demonstration of God’s grace – an outcome to be welcomed.”

Citing the work of pregnancy charity Good Counsel network, Bishop Hopes added, “It is also important that practical help and assistance is provided for women who decide against having an abortion.”

According to its charter, BPAS’s purpose is to advocate and to provide the means “to prevent or end unwanted pregnancies with contraception or by abortion.” As Britain’s busiest abortionist group, BPAS is responsible for the great majority of Britain’s 200,000 abortions each year, and 80 percent of the late term abortions.

Last year, BPAS almost succeeded in its lobbying attempt to change the legal definition of medical “treatment” to allow women to abort their children using the deadly RU-486 drug at home without medical supervision. More recently, the group issued a statement defending the practice, apparently widespread in their facilities, though technically illegal, of sex-selective abortions.

Paul Smeaton commented, “None of the aggression mustered outside the abortion centre on Friday can compare to the violence of abortion. The vigil on Friday showed the strength of the pro-life movement when roused into action, and our great potential to powerfully oppose this violence.

“It is crucial for the sake of unborn babies and mothers that we continue to increase in determination to end abortion in England.”

Many pro-life attendees wrote about the experience on their blogs, and most were heavily critical of the “sloppy” handling of the event by the mainstream press. One, who blogs under the title “A Reluctant Sinner,” singled out the Press Association coverage that claimed the numbers were even on both sides, with “about 500”.

“In this age of mounting concern over press irresponsibility, it is quite depressing to see a once respected agency publishing an article that doesn’t seem to have been checked or corroborated,” he wrote.

“In fact, it only took me a few minutes to discover that many acts of intimidation attributed to members of the pro-life vigil by the PA, had, in fact, been directed towards them by the pro-abortionists.”

A photograph taken of the counter-protest by Dr. Joseph Shaw, a professor of philosophy at Oxford University and head of the nation’s Latin Mass Society, shows a small group of protesters swamped, and almost surrounded by praying pro-life people.

Published on the LMS blog, the photo (see above) shows the pro-abortion protest on the far right of the large crowd of pro-life people.

Dr. Shaw commented on his photo, “See that line of white posters people are holding up? That marks the front edge of the counter demo. That’s where the heads of the ‘pro-choice’ crowd ends and the pro-lifers begin.”

Read more of Dr. Shaw’s comments on the Press Association coverage

Tags: 40 days for life, abortion, uk

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

40 Days for Life ends with at least 668 babies saved from abortion

by Shawn Carney, 40 Days for Life Campaign Director Mon Apr 02 09:58 EST Comments (5)


April 2, 2012 ( - Today is “Day 41.” We take time now to look back at the blessings God has provided during the 40 Days for Life campaign that just ended, of course. But just as importantly, we also look to the future.

For this campaign, we have received reports of 668 babies spared from abortion — that we know of!

Many of the local campaigns are still compiling reports, so it’s highly likely that this number will increase as the national team receives more of their updates.

Praise God!


Cyndy had the opportunity to talk with a couple on the sidewalk outside the abortion center in Reno. The wife had been told that she needed an abortion because she and the child could die if she continued the pregnancy.

“Cyndy gave them our resource list,” said Carol Marie in Reno, “and thank God, they used it.” They were referred to the emergency room. “The following day, rather than returning to the abortion site, they visited the local pregnancy center for life-affirming help,” Carol Marie said. “Praise God!”


Abortion is not legal in Ireland – but there are agencies that encourage women to travel to England to abort their babies.

Carolyn in Dublin says the vigil “is so far successful, thank God.” They are able to refer women for pro-life assistance – and away from abortion. “We have confirmation of one baby saved,” she said, “and we are in regular contact with the couple.”


As Rich was praying at the 40 Days for Life vigil in Poughkeepsie, he noticed a red SUV enter the Planned Parenthood parking lot. One of the volunteers walked over to talk – and to offer some information, which the driver accepted.

The car then parked close to the entrance, and the prayer team could see if was a mother and her two teenage daughters. After a while, Rich said, “The mother came over to us and told us that her daughter was not going to have the abortion. She was very strong on that.”


Mary in Little Rock says a couple from Memphis came for an abortion on the advice of four doctors, who all said the baby would die and possibly the mother.

The volunteers told them there were other options to consider. The woman was referred to a pro-life ob/gyn who specializes in high-risk pregnancies. “Against all odds,” Mary said, “their baby continues to live. She is 7 months along … we are praying for a miracle.”

God has granted many miracles in this campaign. We can always join in praying for one more!

Here’s the link to today’s devotional

There’s no way I can really express the appreciation I have for everything you’ve done during this campaign — your prayers, your participation, your persistence. You provide tremendous HOPE for our future!

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on

New York Cardinal Dolan says Church failed to teach against contraception

by Patrick B. Craine Mon Apr 02 09:07 EST Comments (93)


NEW YORK, April 2, 2012 ( - As the Catholic Church in America fights Obama’s contraceptive mandate—perhaps its most vigorous defense of Catholic sexual teaching in decades—the Cardinal Archbishop of New York has admitted that the Church has failed to teach the faithful Catholic teaching on contraception, and so “forfeited the chance to be a coherent moral voice when it comes to one of the more burning issues of the day.”

In a frank interview with the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who heads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and is increasingly being billed as America’s leading Catholic cleric, says the Church has failed to communicate its moral teachings in the area of sexuality.  He says further that the fault lies with Church leaders.

“I’m not afraid to admit that we have an internal catechetical challenge—a towering one—in convincing our own people of the moral beauty and coherence of what we teach. That’s a biggie,” said Dolan.

“We have gotten gun-shy . . . in speaking with any amount of cogency on chastity and sexual morality,” he added.

The Church’s own failure to communicate its teachings on contraception has been one of the leading tools used against it in its fight against Obama’s mandate, with critics repeatedly pointing out that the majority of Catholic women are using some form of contraception.

The Cardinal told Taranto that the problem arose in the “the mid- and late ‘60s, when the whole world seemed to be caving in, and where Catholics in general got the impression that what the Second Vatican Council taught, first and foremost, is that we should be chums with the world, and that the best thing the church can do is become more and more like everybody else.”

The “flash point,” he said, was Humanae vitae, Pope Paul VI’s prophetic 1968 encyclical reiterating the Church’s opposition to contraception.

Humanae vitae “brought such a tsunami of dissent, departure, disapproval of the church, that I think most of us—and I’m using the first-person plural intentionally, including myself—kind of subconsciously said, ‘Whoa. We’d better never talk about that, because it’s just too hot to handle’,” said Dolan.

“We forfeited the chance to be a coherent moral voice when it comes to one of the more burning issues of the day,” he added.

Dolan went to explain that the sex abuse scandal “intensified our laryngitis over speaking about issues of chastity and sexual morality, because we almost thought, ‘I’ll blush if I do. . . . After what some priests and some bishops, albeit a tiny minority, have done, how will I have any credibility in speaking on that?’”

But he said the youth are now demanding that the Church speak authoritatively on issues of sexuality. “They will be quick to say, ‘By the way, we want you to know that we might not be able to obey it. . . . But we want to hear it. And in justice, you as our pastors need to tell us, and you need to challenge us.’”

In the interview, published on Saturday, Cardinal Dolan described his meeting with President Obama in November, at which the president promised to protect religious freedom.

The Cardinal says President Obama told him in November that he has great respect for the Church’s work in health care, education, and charity, and had no desire to impede it. The president, he said, asked him to communicate that to the nation’s bishops.

“So you can imagine the chagrin,” said Dolan, “when he called me at the end of January to say that the mandates remain in place and that there would be no substantive change, and that the only thing that he could offer me was that we would have until August.”

“I said, ‘Mr. President, I appreciate the call. Are you saying now that we have until August to introduce to you continual concerns that might trigger a substantive mitigation in these mandates?’ He said, ‘No, the mandates remain. We’re more or less giving you this time to find out how you’re going to be able to comply.’ I said, ‘Well, sir, we don’t need the [extra time]. I can tell you now we’re unable to comply.’”

Then, on February 10th, the president called him the morning he announced the modified mandate, which purports to have insurance companies pay the cost of the abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations, and contraception, rather than employers.

The bishops and pro-life leaders have rejected this “accommodation,” however, saying it merely repackages the original mandate because insurance companies will simply up the employers’ fees to cover the “free” contraceptive coverage.

On the phone that morning on February 10th, when Cardinal Dolan asked the president if he was open to his input, the president told him the modified mandate was set in stone.

In his interview with Taranto, Cardinal Dolan insisted again that the bishops’ main concern is religious freedom rather than contraception.

“We find it completely unswallowable, both as Catholics and mostly as Americans, that a bureau of the American government would take it upon itself to define ‘ministry,’” he said. “We would find that to be—we’ve used the words ‘radical,’ ‘unprecedented’ and ‘dramatically intrusive.’”

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on