LifeSiteNews.com Life, Family and Culture News

MINNEAPOLIS July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Although many may claim that striving after sexual purity is passé, the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis is taking a stand behind the unpopular virtue. Under the episcopal leadership of Archbishop John C. Nienstedt, a 9-day novena “for a Rebirth of Chastity and Purity”, beginning today, is being offered throughout the archdiocese.

The novena is being offered for the pope and clergy, teachers, doctors, the married and unmarried, divorced, broken families, the infertile, and “all those who pray and labor for a rebirth of chastity and purity in the world.”

The novena prayer for July 20th says:  “we pray especially for those souls who bear the cross of homosexuality. Lead them to embrace chastity and may your most Precious Blood deliver them from the deceit and the lies of the evil one.”

Likewise, on the 22nd, the prayer says: “Free from the bonds of slavery all those addicted to pornography and all those involved in prostitution.”

The novena comes only a few months after Archbishop Nienstedt and 12 other American bishops met with Pope Benedict XVI in Rome, where the pope discussed issues of sexual morality and “the contemporary crisis of marriage and the family”.

According to TheCatholicSpirit.com Archbishop Nienstedt highlighted the importance of the pope’s message at the time, saying that the most important point was that it is “a question of justice” that we uphold, for society and for future generations, “the traditional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.” 

The Archdiocese of Saint Paul & Minneapolis website states that the novena for purity is in preparation for the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB)’s Natural Family Planning Awareness Week. According to the USCCB website, the dates of NFP Awareness Week highlight the 45th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae, the encyclical that “articulates Catholic beliefs about human sexuality, conjugal love and responsible parenthood.”

Regarding the Church’s stand on sexual purity, Archbishop Nienstedt declared in March, during his visit to Rome: “The church doesn’t say ‘no’ because she’s trying to be authoritarian or she’s trying to make life difficult for us.  She’s saying ‘no’ because in her wisdom through all these ages, through these 2,000 years of experience, she knows what is best for us and how best to call us to Christ.”

AUCKLAND, New Zealand, July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In a dramatic and perhaps surprising turn of events, an attempt to shut down a pro-life club at Auckland University has failed after students turned out in droves to vote down the motion put forward by the executive of the university’s student association.

The motion to ban the club was voted down 227-125.

All members of the Auckland University Student Association had been invited to attend the Special General Meeting to determine the status of the club. The AUSA’s executive had called the meeting with the goal of denying Prolife Auckland the right to exist as an affiliated club.

President of ProLife Auckland, philosophy student Amy Blowers, said it was heartening to be vindicated by the wider student body.

“We had support from many students who are not members of our club and have no intention of joining. But clearly they recognized that freedom of expression is a right worth protecting for everyone, in particular in a university setting where academic freedom must be paramount,” Blowers told LifeSiteNews.

Ms Blowers said the AUSA had based its motion on a single anonymous complaint received in relation to a pamphlet called “Right to Know,” which the club’s members had distributed on campus. The pamphlet advocates for the right of women to know about health risks associated with abortion and the alternatives available to them when faced with an unplanned or crisis pregnancy.

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!

Ms Blowers said ProLife Auckland and its many supporters had been surprised that AUSA’s response to the matter had not included the obvious step of informing the club that a complaint had been received. She said the club believes that denying them the right to make any kind of response to the complaint was unjust.

Ms Blowers said the club is very pleased with today’s result.

“Ironically, this attempt to shut us down has given us the chance to reach a far wider audience with our message, and that’s the whole reason that we exist as a club,” she concluded.

Contact info:

Amy Blowers, President of ProLife Auckland
Email: president.auckland@prolife.org.nz
Phone: 021 029 36778

Auckland University Students Association
Arena Williams, President
Email: president@ausa.org.nz
Phone: 021 309 0789 ext 373

ATLANTA, Georgia, July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Baptist president of fast food chain Chick-Fil-A is facing renewed claims of “homophobia” after confirming his organization’s stance against same-sex “marriage.”

“Guilty as charged,” Dan Cathy told the Baptist Press on Monday of his company’s support for the traditional family.

“We are very much supportive of the family—the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that,” said Cathy, whose father started the business in 1946.

Homosexual activists have been calling for boycotts against the chain, which operates 1,608 restaurants across the U.S. with annual sales last year in excess of $4 billion, because it has made substantial corporate donations to pro-family groups.

Earlier this year, college activists launched a petition calling for the chain to be removed from campuses across the country, alleging that it is out of sync with their universities’ “open and inclusive” nature.

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

Chick-Fil-A had been deflecting questions on the issue, but now Cathy has confirmed the company’s stance and insists they have no intention of backing down.

“We intend to stay the course,” he said. “We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles.”

IRS documents show that the company’s charitable foundation, WinShape, donated about $2 million in 2009 to groups such as the Marriage & Family Legacy Fund, Focus on the Family, Exodus International, and the Family Research Council.

The foundation began as a college scholarship program but eventually “morphed into a marriage program in conjunction with national marriage ministries,” said Cathy.

He says the company is founded on “biblical principles” and that he considers their work as a mission field. “If you’re obedient to God you are going to be evangelistic in the quality of the work you do, using that as a portal to share [Christ],” he explained.

Significantly, the company maintains a policy of remaining closed on Sunday. According to Cathy, malls and other proprietors have allowed the exception because “we’ve had a track record that we were generating more business in six days than the other tenants were generating in seven [days].”

WASHINGTON July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The U.S. House Judiciary Committee voted 18-14 Wednesday in favor of a measure that would ban abortions in the nation’s capital past the point when an unborn child can feel pain.

The vote took place after a survey by The Polling Company, Inc./WomanTrend this week showed American adults supporting a ban on abortion after 22-weeks of pregnancy, except to save a mother’s life, by more than a 2-1 margin.

When asked, “Would you be more or less likely to vote for a Member of Congress who votes in favor of this bill?” 58 percent said more likely, while 27 percent said less likely.

In response to a separate poll question, adults favored, by a 3-to-1 margin, a policy of not permitting abortion anywhere “after the point where substantial medical evidence says that the unborn child can feel pain,” unless it is “necessary to save a mother’s life.”

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!

The District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803) is sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Az.) and has 214 House cosponsors, including every Republican member of the Judiciary Committee. A Senate companion bill, S. 2103, has 30 cosponsors. Similar legislation has been enacted in seven states. The city council in D.C. has repealed its legal restrictions on abortion, making the procedure legal for any reason up until birth.

“In the District of Columbia, abortion is now legal, for any reason, until the moment of birth,” said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. “Under the Constitution, Members of Congress, and the President, are ultimately accountable for this extreme policy. A vote against this bill amounts to a vote to ratify the current policy in the nation’s capital, which is legal abortion for any reason until the moment of birth.”

In the bill, Congress adopts findings that by at least 20 weeks after fertilization, the unborn child has the capacity to experience great pain. The bill then prohibits abortion after that point, except when an acute physical condition endangers the life of the mother.

IRVING, Texas, July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a statement issued July 17 the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) reaffirmed its longstanding policy of protecting youth by not allowing homosexuals to serve as leaders, and confirmed that the decision is final.

“After careful consideration of a resolution asking the Boy Scouts of America to reconsider its longstanding membership standards policy, today the organization affirmed its current policy, stating that it remains in the best interest of Scouting and that there will be no further action taken on the resolution,” said the organization.

The BSA policy on homosexuality states that the organization does not grant membership to those “who are open homosexuals or who would engage in a behavior that would distract from the mission of the Boy Scouts.”

BSA national spokesman, Deron Smith, told The Associated Press that an 11-member special committee, formed by top Scout leaders in 2010, “came to the conclusion that this policy is absolutely the best policy for the Boy Scouts.”

The BSA statement said the committee’s review included candid conversation and extensive research and evaluations – both from within Scouting and from outside the organization.

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

“The vast majority of the parents of youth we serve value their right to address issues of same-sex orientation within their family, with spiritual advisers, and at the appropriate time and in the right setting,” said Bob Mazzuca, chief scout executive of Boy Scouts of America.

“While a majority of our membership agrees with our policy, we fully understand that no single policy will accommodate the many diverse views among our membership or society,” he said.

American homosexual activists have been targeting the Boy Scouts since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2000 that affirmed the organization’s right to ban homosexuals from leadership positions.

Two members of the BSA national executive board, Jim Turley, CEO of the accounting services firm Ernst & Young, and Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T, have both said they intend to continue to push Scouting to accept homosexuals and will work from their positions within the BSA to accomplish their aims.

“I support the meaningful work of the Boy Scouts in preparing young people for adventure, leadership, learning and service, however the membership policy is not one I would personally endorse,” Turley said in a statement released by his company in June.

The BSA statement upholding the ban on homosexuals addressed the dissension of the pro-homosexualists on the national executive board.

“Scouting believes that good people can personally disagree on this topic and still work together to achieve the life-changing benefits to youth through Scouting,” the statement said. “While not all board members may personally agree with this policy, and may choose a different direction for their own organizations, BSA leadership agrees this is the best policy for the organization.”

According to the AP report, homosexual activists say they will deliver a petition to BSA headquarters in Irving, Texas, condemning the Boy Scouts’ policy.

The BSA statement affirming membership standards is available here.

To contact the Boy Scouts of America:

Mr. Robert “Bob” Mazzuca
Chief Scout Executive
Boy Scouts of America
PO Box 152079
Irving, Texas 75015-2079
Phone: 972-580-2000
Email: PR@scouting.org

WARSAW, July 19, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Poland’s Bishops’ Conference and numerous pro-life and pro-family groups have denounced a Council of Europe convention that purports to address violence against women but has been criticized as an ideological attack on religion, tradition and culture. The organizations are urging the Polish government not to ratify the convention.

“The Presidium of the Polish Episcopal Conference notes with great concern the announcement of the Prime Minister that the Polish government will sign without reservation the proposed Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. This is in contradiction to the earlier announcement of the Prime Minister, that a public debate is needed on the Convention and the consequences of its signature and ratification,” the Polish bishops said in a statement issued last week.

The convention redefines gender as a social construct, rather than as a distinction grounded in biology, and suggests violence towards women is systemic with roots in religion and culture.

According to the “Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence” which was publicized in April, 2011, gender “shall mean the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men.”

This new “social construct” definition is at odds with the definition in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court - which this new convention cites.  The Rome Statute states that, “For the purposes of this Statute, it is understood that the term “gender” refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term ‘gender’ does not indicate any meaning different from the above.”

“The Polish Episcopal Conference supports the protection of women against violence, but does not agree with the ideological assumptions of the Council of Europe Convention,” the Polish bishops declared.

“It should be emphasized that the Convention, although it is devoted to the major issue of violence against women, is built on ideological and false assumptions that are in no way acceptable. It suggests that violence against women is systemic, and its source is religion, tradition and culture,” the bishops wrote, noting that Article 12 of the convention obliges signatories to “dismiss the achievements of civilization,” which are considered “as a threat and a source of violence.”

“A particular concern,” the bishops continued, “is the imposition of the signatories’ obligation to education (in Article 14) and promotion of “non-stereotypical gender roles,” meaning, therefore, homosexuality and transsexualism. Linking the legitimate principle of preventing violence with a dangerous attempt to interfere with the educational system, and the moral values professed by millions of parents in Poland, is a very worrying sign.”

The bishops also point out that Polish legislation already has sufficient tools to deal with violence, including violence against women, and that the government should focus on initiatives to “strengthen the role of families, improve health care for women and girls, support the professional education of women, to pursue educational programs, based on mutual respect and cooperation of both sexes, including the preparation for life in the family.”

“Undertaking such measures,” the bishops concluded, “rather than signing the controversial Convention, it can actually prevent and help combat all violence, even that against women.”

Pro-family groups in Poland have issued numerous statements calling on the government not to ratify the convention.

A spokeswoman for the right wing “Solidarity Poland” party, Marzena Wróbel, issued a statement saying, “The convention of the Council of Europe, which PM Donald Tusk and the Civic Platform party want to ratify, is yet another attack on family and its values.”

Wróbel equated the convention with the promotion of homosexuality and transsexuality, saying it makes the definition of manhood and womanhood relative and independent of biological facts.

“In the light of this convention, every person who wants to be a woman, can be a woman. This is against reality,” Wróbel stated.

She also pointed to Article 12 of the convention, which says that culture, heritage, religion, tradition or “so called honor” must not be “used as justification of any acts of violence as defined by this convention.”

“Poland’s tradition has always been that violence against women is unacceptable and, in accordance with our culture, a woman is always given special respect. Poland was, after all, one of the first countries in the world to give women the right to vote,” Wróbel said.

In an open letter to the government, the authorities of Centrum Służby by Rodzinie (Center for Service to the Family), an organization based in the city of Łódź that helps families and victims of domestic violence, and runs Poland’s largest non-state-funded home for single mothers, said, “The Convention would introduce into the Polish law a definition of sex based on the ideology of “gender”. The Convention has a characteristic pejorative attitude to culture, tradition and the heritage of nations. It seems that the authors of the convention must have realized that it would raise controversy.”

“Sadly, the Convention in its present form seems to be a social and political manifesto, and not an instrument for the protection of victims of violence. In this document, women have become a tool of hidden interests, once again they have been objectified and abused. Let us not connect the protection of abused women with the need to adopt the gender doctrine, or any other ideology.”

Mariusz Dzierżawski, founder of the Warsaw-based PRO foundation and one of Poland’s most prominent and active pro-life leaders, told LifeSiteNews he believes the Polish prime minister is being pressured by radical feminists to sign the convention.

“The feminists are pushing for a quick ratification of the convention by Poland. The Prime Minister is yielding to the pressure,” Dzierżawskii said.

“The convention itself contains articles suggesting that it is the traditional view on family and gender issues that actually causes violence against women. So, there are reasons to suspect that the convention will be used as a tool to deconstruct family and destroy moral norms.”

“The convention’s advocates are using moral blackmail,” Dzierżawski observed, “implying that if you are against the convention, then you must approve of violence against women. They can’t see (or maybe they just pretend no to see) that it’s the family and moral norms that really protect the dignity of women. A hundred years ago a similar kind of project was implemented in Bolshevik Russia. I haven’t heard about women being too happy about it.”

Joanna Najfeld, a Polish journalist and pro-life commentator, noted the complicity of the liberal mainstream media in Poland in promotion of the convention that she labelled “ridiculous beyond belief.”

“Nobody in this country, or in any other sane, democratic society, would agree to it if it was being introduced through democratic channels, like a popular vote or a referendum,” Najfeld told LifeSiteNews.

“The mainstream liberal media silence, downplay, or manipulate the subject totally, so it can be ratified quietly by those in power in Poland now, and soon used against the Polish nation. The European Union uses the back door to impose these absurd, and extremely dangerous ideas on us.”

“We are a traditional nation,” Najfeld declared. “Traditional, meaning sane, rational and conservative.”

Comparing the imposition on Poland of the Council of Europe’s gender ideology to Communist oppression, Najfeld said, “the liberal ‘elites’ use lies, coercion, and supranational powers to perform yet another - excuse my strong language - rape on our society. Communism oppressed us and now European institutions are a new oppressor.

“What they are doing is abuse on our nation. We are like a beaten woman, abused by somebody stronger, in her own home,” Najfeld asserted.

Contact information:

Polish President Bronis?aw Komorowski
E-mail: via website

Prime Minister Donald Tusk
E-mail: kontakt@kprm.gov.pl

The Polish Conference of Bishops
E-mail: skep@episkopat.pl

The Parliamentary Committee for Social Policy and Family
Online form

BRUSSELS, July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Alozj Peterle, the Slovenian MEP responsible for the passage of an EU resolution condemning a much-publicized case of forced abortion in China, gave an interview today with Vatican Radio, saying that public funding should not be allocated to coercive “family planning” measures in China. 

The resolution condemned the practice of forced or financially coerced abortion, saying it “constitutes inhuman and degrading treatment in that it denies the autonomy of choice for couples”.

The resolution was passed earlier this month following the revelation of a case in which a 23-year-old Chinese mother was forced to undergo an abortion by state “family planning” authorities. Although the Chinese government claims that such cases are a thing of the past, investigators say they continue to be common. The case of Feng Jianmei caused an international furore when a photo was circulated on the internet of Feng and her dead seven-month-old baby in the hospital following the late-term abortion.

Officials had demanded that she and her family pay a 40,000 yuan “social maintenance fee,” roughly equivalent to US $6,280, or abort the child. Such fines for extra children have garnered the government billions of yuan since 1980.

The EU resolution noted that the case would not have come to light at all had it not been for the watchfulness of internet bloggers and small-scale online news agencies.

Peterle summarized the case for Vatican Radio, calling it a “flagrant violation of human rights” and said the “emergency resolution” was specific only to this individual case. But he said that the EU should ensure for the future that EU money does not go to support such coercive programs which, he said, are opposed to “European values”.

Article 20 of the Chinese family planning policy states that “spouses at childbearing age shall deliberately take the contraception measures of family planning, and accept the preferred techniques of family planning”. This language, Peterle says, means that abortion is regarded by the Chinese government as a “preferred technique of family planning” and is encouraged as a form of birth control, a concept formally opposed by many MEPs.

The requirement to use contraception, he said, violates the provisions of the Convention to End Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) which grants men and women “the same rights to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children.”

The resolution says that the intention of “family planning” is to “enable couples and individuals to make free, responsible and informed decisions about childbearing and to make available a full range of safe, effective and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice, and any form of coercion has no part to play”. It promises that the topic of forced abortion would be raised at the next meeting between EU officials and the Chinese government.

During the debate over the resolution, Peterle had said, “European taxpayers must know where their money is going. The Commission must set up a full-scale investigation of the organizations and programs that receive its funding for reproductive health and family planning purposes in China.”

Pro-life advocates in Britain have long criticized their government for heavily funding international population control and abortion groups like Marie Stopes and International Planned Parenthood Federation to conduct abortion and sterilization programs at the request of the Chinese communist government.

Peterle wrote in an op ed for the webpage of Public Service Europe, “Certain international organisations, such as International Planned Parenthood Federation and Marie Stopes International, provide family planning services in China. At the same time, the European Commission and other international bodies provide both structural and project funds for these organisations.

“Both have entered into public partnerships with the commission in the implementation of projects in China, which raises concern as to whether European funds are being used to fund coercive practices.”

He quoted Article 18 of the Chinese law on population and family planning which encourages a birth regulation policy in which couples “marry and bear a child at a late age” and “advocates that one wife bear only one child”.

“This case,” he wrote, “is the tip of the iceberg of a policy that has cost the lives of 300 million babies since 1979.”

“State and regional governments have created an environment of mistrust between family planning officials, subject to strict birth control targets, and couples, who cannot afford the fines imposed by the regional authorities.”

While the Chinese government continues to insist that forced abortion is against the law, independent researchers have urged the U.S. government to step up pressure against what investigations have proved is an ongoing and common practice. Earlier this month, Steven Mosher told the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Programs, chaired by Rep. Christopher Smith, of the human rights abuses perpetrated by the UNFPA and their communist partners in China. These include forced abortions, involuntary sterilization and the kidnapping and overseas sale of “illegally born” children.

Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, urged http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/hearings/view/?1452 the U.S. government to permanently halt funding to the global population control agencies. “China’s one-child policy constitutes the longest-running and most far-reaching violation of human rights the world has ever seen. Four hundred million Chinese children are missing because of this policy,” Mosher said.

July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A convicted sex abuser who has filed a one million dollar suit against the pro-family group Mass Resistance suffered a setback last week when his motion for a preliminary injunction to silence the group was rejected by the presiding judge.

“Maine may not punish, through criminal sanction, an individual’s actions that are protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,” wrote District Judge Patricia G. Worth in her decision, signed on July 11.

Meanwhile, a police chief that Adam E. Flanders has repeatedly claimed supported his lawsuit and described his sex abuse charge as akin to “stealing a candy bar” has disputed Flanders’ account of events in a LifeSiteNews (LSN) interview. LSN has also learned that in addition to the sex abuse charge, Flanders has been convicted of assaulting a minor with whom he had a sexual relationship, as well as the boy’s father, with a knife.

Flanders, a Belfast, Maine homosexual who was convicted in 2008 of sexual abuse of a minor and sentenced to three months in jail, has been seeking to force Mass Resistance to remove from its website a copy of a letter Flanders wrote in 2007, accusing a local homosexual “youth group” of facilitating the sexual abuse and exploitation of minors. It also describes Flanders’ own relationships with minors in the group after he had turned 18.

The letter, which was sent to the Maine Christian Civic League and quoted in whole or in part by local newspapers, has been on the Mass Resistance website since 2007 as evidence of the destructive nature of homosexual “youth groups,” which Mass Resistance President Brian Camenker says often facilitate abusive contact between adults and minors.

Flanders’ campaign to remove the letter and all references to him on the Mass Resistance website has included a successful motion for a restraining order against Camenker, granted by the same Judge Worth in June of this year, although Camenker says that he has never seen nor met Flanders, and was not permitted by Worth to testify in his defense. Flanders has also filed suit against Camenker in Maine district court for $1 million for “defamation,” “harassment,” and “stalking” by means of the posts.

While acknowledging the restraining order that she had recently approved against Camenker, Worth was not willing to muzzle Mass Resistance, noting, “An individual’s right to free speech loses its protection when the speech uttered constitutes libel, a true threat, or fighting words,” adding the “Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate ... that the writings rise to the level of fighting words (inciting an immediate, violent reaction). or a. ‘true . ..threat.’”

Flanders claims in his suit that Camenker is exaggerating the seriousness of his sex abuse conviction, which is a class D misdemeanor in Maine, and writes in his complaint that Belfast Police Chief Michael McFadden has called it equivalent to “stealing a candy bar.” He also claims that he has protected minority status in Maine due to state anti-discrimination laws, implies that Camenker is guilty of “hate crimes” against homosexuals, and requests that “Defendants’ online conduct be limited, that the Defendant refrain from further harassment and stalking against individuals based on their sexual orientation…”

Flanders also successfully shut down the Mass Resistance website last month after threatening the organization’s web hosting service, according to Camenker, who has since found a new hosting service that is not intimidated by Flanders’ threats.

In addition to Mass Resistance, Flanders recently threatened Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH) with legal action for posting his letter and recounting Flanders’ actions against Mass Resistance. Flanders has also threatened LifeSiteNews with legal action if it does not remove a previous article written about the case and cease to write about the matter.

Belfast police chief distances himself from Flanders

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com on Monday, Belfast Chief of Police Michael McFadden distanced himself from Flanders’ claim that he had said Flanders’ offense was no worse than “stealing a candy bar,” explaining that police often make such statements in an attempt to elicit a confession from a suspect.

Although he acknowledged that a recording that Flanders has of him making the statement is real, he added that “there could be a lot of things I said in that interview with him that were designed and are used by investigators nationwide to encourage people to talk about certain things. It might not be the way I feel, but it usually works in terms of getting people to confess to a criminal act.”

Asked if he regarded the actions of Flanders in the sex abuse case as morally equal to stealing a candy bar, McFadden answered: “Absolutely not, holy cow, no, but if I start my interview and say ‘what you’ve done is heinous, and horrible, and how could you?’ do you really think I’m going to get this person talking to me about it? No, of course, not. So you try and minimize these things as an investigator.”

McFadden also denied the claim made by Flanders in his suit that McFadden had said that he was “attempt[ing] to find some way to criminally charge Brian Camenker,” or that he had advised Flanders to sue, and noted that restraining orders such as the one imposed by Judge Worth don’t generally apply to people in other states.

“I can tell you that, I had a conversation with Adam Flanders, and if those are the things he quoted out of that conversation, not only has he taken what I said out of context, but he also misquoted me,” said McFadden, who also stated that “Adam Flanders is not a paid or unpaid spokesperson for the Belfast police department. He’s got no inside information.”

Although McFadden said his department has a strict policy of not verifying the existence or non-existence of investigations, he noted violations of restraining orders do not include activities in another state.

“You can’t have contact with someone long distance, unless you’re calling them on the phone I guess would be one way, emailing them, but you know if its happening in a different state, I don’t know that our protection orders would give us jurisdiction in another state, to curb the activity of someone in a different state,” he said, and affirmed that “to my knowledge there has been no violation of this particular [restraining] order” against Camenker.

McFadden says that he has received “threatening emails here at the police department, and very unflattering emails” in response to his perceived support of Flanders in his actions against Camenker, which he attributed to Camenker’s statements about him on his website, adding that “I don’t think those statements are fair or accurate.”  He said he was not taking sides in the dispute between Flanders and Camenker.

Flanders’ extensive criminal record revealed

LifeSiteNews has also learned that Flanders has a long list of convictions for which he expresses little remorse, and is seeking to erase from his record as he finishes a degree in biology.

In addition to his 2007 conviction for sexual abuse of a minor, which earned him a three-month jail sentence and put him on the state’s sex offender registry for ten years, Flanders was also convicted of assaulting one of the boys with whom he had had a sexual relationship at the youth club exposed in his letter, as well as the boy’s father, in 2008.  Flanders assaulted both victims with a knife, although the severity of their wounds is not clear.

According to the Bangor Daily News, Flanders was convicted on a host of counts related to the case, including “two counts aggravated assault, jail five years, all but nine months suspended each count, probation three years; two counts criminal threatening with dangerous weapon, jail nine months each count; protective order from harassment violation, jail 90 days; two counts violating condition of release, jail 90 days each count; tampering with witness, informant, juror or victim, jail two years six months, suspended, probation three years; two counts violating condition of release, jail two years six months each count, suspended.”

In toto, Flanders received over twelve years of jail time, all of which apparently was suspended except for nine months, of which he says on his blog that he only served part due to good behavior.

The Daily News also reports that Flanders was convicted again in late 2011 on two counts of violating the terms of his release and sentenced to yet another two-and-a-half-years in jail, which was also suspended in favor of probation.

Flanders claims that his convictions were due to the withholding of exculpatory evidence and says on his weblog that he is appealing the convictions. He refused to talk to LifeSiteNews when an interview was requested of him, and instead threatened LifeSiteNews with legal action, in a “CEASE AND DESIST notice to refrain from further publications about me.” He also indicated that he had contacted LifeSiteNews’ s Internet service provider in an apparent attempt to shut down its website.

“I demand that you remove the current publication about me,” wrote Flanders. “I will pursue litigation if you do not remove the offending material and/or continue to publish material about me. You are in violation of your web host’s Terms of Use and I have already been in touch with them concerning this matter and they are currently investigating your organization’s harassment and defamation. They indicated that your contract will likely be terminated and your website be removed in its entirety due to your violations.”

LifeSiteNews.com has been advised by legal counsel that nothing that LifeSiteNews has written regarding Flanders is actionable under American defamation law.

July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - “Your husband isn’t with you?” The doctor looked concerned.  Hannah Boland had decided to go alone for her follow-up appointment.

Only a short while before, a pregnancy had ended in a miscarriage. But this pregnancy was different. They were out of the danger zone. The baby was already twenty weeks gestation. Alison and Harry, Hannah’s two toddlers, aged three and two respectively, were going to have another sibling.

“I like having the husband or partner present in these sorts of situations. We detected a problem with your baby’s scan,” the doctor continued. “There seems to be a problem with his brain.”

An information sheet was pushed in front of Hannah. 

The baby’s brain had not developed, the doctor explained. The condition could not be altered. It was unlikely he would be born alive. If he survived birth, he would have a few, short, painful moments to live. 

“I was in total shock,” Hannah told LifeSiteNews, “This sort of thing happens to other people.” 

Hannah and her husband, Michael, both devout Christians, raise their family in a semi-rural area outside Sydney, Australia. Michael is the sole breadwinner, working as a mechanic who specializes in elevators.  Hannah is a stay-at-home mom, who was taking care of their two toddlers at the time of the diagnosis. 

This diagnosis put her faith to the test. 

The couple’s main struggle was how to cope with the uncertainties that lay ahead. But Hannah says the Bible gave them hope.  She clung to the passage, “He will not tempt you beyond your strength.”

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!

Abortion was never an option for the Bolands.  “With our first child, we went through those questions because they can do prenatal testing.”  Those tests were “a waste of time,” she said. “We knew that that was not something God would want us to do…Who are we to say that that person is not worthy to live?” 

Almost every doctor they met recommended an abortion. Hannah says one doctor said at a consultation, “Tell me why I am here?  I don’t even know why I am here. There is no hope for your baby.  No.  None.  There is a 99.9 per cent chance of your baby dying right after he is born.  It is likely that he will just gurgle a little and then die.  I won’t even be present at his birth; there is no point.”

The doctors also thought there was no point in giving the baby oxygen in the event that he lived after birth.  One doctor suggested simply letting the baby starve.

Prayers and tears were all the couple was left with.  They loved their son and wanted what was best for him.  They had to decide on their own what that would mean. 

In the end they decided to feed, love and serve him.  The one real struggle was resuscitation.  Was it in his best interest to bring him back? Their final decision: “We would not do anything intentionally to end Stephen’s life.”

The birth took three days.  When Stephen was born, “he stunned the theater staff with his loud, healthy cry.  It was a far cry from the gurgling, dying cry they had expected to see,” Hannah recounted in a book she later published about her son. 

Their son looked healthy and beautiful.  Tears rolled down Michael’s cheek and family members trickled in and out to meet and cuddle the new baby.  Stephen’s brother and sister were excited to meet him, but too young to fully process what was going on.  They only understood that he was very sick.

Hours later, Stephen began to fuss, a signal that it was feeding time.  The nurses inserted a feeding tube through Stephen’s nose.  It seemed to nourish and settle him. 

“He was feeding.  He was well.  I was going to be able to bring him home and take care of him!” Hannah wrote. 

However, the initial signs were misleading.  Stephen began spitting up his food and it became apparent that he was not assimilating any nutrition.  It was only a matter of time. 

Hannah recounts being tired and frazzled, not knowing how to handle a child that was slipping away.  Her husband showed her how.  He gently took his son and said, “Well, mate, you’re still here for a reason.  And as long as you are still here, I am going to serve you as best I can.” He cradled him and swabbed his dry lips. 

It was a time to be completely selfless, which Hannah admits was difficult especially after the long labor.  She is ashamed to recount, “Here was my son dying, suffering, and once again all I could think about was how it was hard on me.”

During short intervals Stephen stopped breathing, but would revive again and again.  After several hours of cradling Stephen, Michael turned to his wife. Their son was gone.  He slipped away in the arms of his father, close to his mother.  He had arrived at his final destination.  In some ways, their journey had only just begun. 

This month marks the one-year anniversary of Stephen’s birth.  Hannah has written an account of his life, 47 Hours with a Prince, and is training to be a Christian Counselor. 

“I want to help people in the way I have been helped,” she says, explaining that a Christian Counselor helped her though the many months of grieving that followed the death of Stephen.  She hopes to help those with emotional illness, noting, “the emotional side of us is just as prone to illness as any part of us.”

There are many messages she wants to give, and one is about acceptance. “We have to look at things through God’s eyes or you are going to make decisions that you are going to regret.”

As for the book, it has met with success in Hannah’s mind.  “I have non-Christian friends coming away saying they will give deep consideration to it.”

MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, July 18, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Target is now selling greeting cards for gay ‘marriages,’ as of the middle of June, adding to their previous support for the homosexual agenda.

The cards, produced by Carlton Cards, include phrases like “Mr. & Mr.” and “Two very special women, one very special love.”

“Target is focused on diversity and inclusivity,” spokesperson for Target Molly Snyder said, adding that they offer “wedding cards relevant for everyone,” including lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender couples.

Target faced some backlash from homosexual political groups in 2010 after they gave $150,000 to MN Forward, a political group that supported Tom Emmer, the pro-life, pro-marriage Republican candidate for governor of Minnesota.

However, Target has been supporting gay pride events in Minneapolis for a number of years, and in May sold gay pride t-shirts and gave the proceeds to the Family Equality Council, a homosexual political advocacy group.

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

After the MN Forward flap, the company also vowed to donate $500,000 to the homosexualist cause. However, Target’s advocacy has not satisfied some gay activists.

Last week the retail company was criticized by homosexualist activists for choosing not to sell an album by R&B singer Frank Ocean, who recently came out as homosexual. The company said their decision was simply because the album was being sold on ITunes for a week before it would be released in stores.

July 18, 2012 (LiveActionNews.org) - Amanda Marcotte, a radical pro-abortion blogger whose career peaked when she resigned in disgrace from Sen. John Edwards’ presidential campaign (think about that for a second) amidst criticism for filthy anti-Christian writing, isn’t exactly known for persuasive argument.

But her latest post at Raw Story, titled “The Reality of Abortion,” takes the sophistry to a gruesome new level. Marcotte uses the image on the right to “counter all the pictures of late-term fetuses — many of which are faked — that anti-choicers use to imply that a typical abortion is much later in the pregnancy than it is”:

So, for your edification, this is what your average abortion actually looks like […] This is an important image to hang on to for the next time you have an anti-choicer wanking about how this is “killing babies”. Ask them to find the baby in this picture, if they’re just so certain.

First, I would ask Amanda to take a good look at a fetal development gallery and reconsider her suggestion that only the late-term fetuses look like babies, and note that regardless of when most abortions take place, most of her side is just as committed to preserving the “right” to butcher those late-termers as they are the younger ones. And what’s this about faked images?

Second, the jar’s contents may not be recognizable as human remains, but considering that it still looks pretty bloody, I kind of doubt that displaying it will have the intended effect with as many people as Marcotte expects it to.

More to the point, outward appearance isn’t what defines humanity. That’s determined by whether an organism is genetically human, alive or dead, and genetically and functionally distinct from his or her mother – questions that are all answered with a resounding yes for the unborn at every stage after fertilization.

Make no mistake: despite trying to frame the discussion with talk of pro-life “misinformation” and pro-choice “edification,” Marcotte is trying to appeal to people’s sense of what’s superficially intuitive in order to derail them from thinking about or investigating the matter more deeply. Indeed, if you want to know how deep her own grasp of embryology is, just read the post’s comment section, where she says, “We were also all sperm and egg cells once. So every man who masturbates is committing genocide.”

Wrong again. So remind me: which is the side that values reason, science, and evidence?

Note well that humanity has a long history of judging one another based on outward appearance, and using those judgments to justify treating certain people differently. It’s not something most of us are proud of. The unborn are merely the latest in what Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft calls “the category [we] invented to justify the killing.”

Mankind has worked hard and sacrificed much to stamp out the vile practice of exploiting superficial differences to exclude classes of people from the human family. Amanda Marcotte and her fellow travelers want to keep it alive. That is the reality of abortion.

Reprinted with permission from LiveActionNews.org

Sometimes it may seem that we at LifeSiteNews are simply cataloging the demise of all that is noble, sacred, lovable, and true in Western civilization.

But the truth is, not all our stories are so bleak. Far from it.

In fact, we deliberately strive every single day to bring to you stories that highlight that not all is lost, that there are tons of amazing people who are making a difference, helping in a thousand different ways to turn the tide in this desperate fight against the culture of death.

Take for instance the story of Tony Maas, CEO of JTM Food Group. He and his brothers deliver great-tasting prepackaged meals with a pro-life flair. On the rear panel of their semitrailers, they display a “prodigious image of a beautiful smiling baby with the words ‘Life, what a beautiful choice.’”

The reaction to this story was overwhelming:

This story literally went viral on social media overnight with thousands of people rejoicing in this message of hope.

The truth is, we at LifeSiteNews want to bring our readers even more of these types of stories (We call them “Culture of Life” stories). The problem is that they often involve pretty intensive research and in-depth interviews, and we don’t have the manpower to follow up on even a fraction of the amazing news tips we receive!

We at LifeSiteNews know that there are a lot of terrible things happening in the world against life and family, and that it’s our job to report them. But we don’t report these for their own sake, but so that people will be armed with the knowledge needed to take a stand and defend what is true and good.

Our Culture of Life stories are written so that we will never lose sight of what is true and good in the midst of so much error and falsehood.

Another example is our recent story of two babies who shared one heart and who momentarily “brought heaven to earth” for their parents.

Parents’ Luci and Chris Klare were in the presence of their precious daughters for only 46 minutes, but in that time, they discovered that their whole universe suddenly revolved around “treasuring the fragile gift of their tiny children.”

Many in their situation might have made a much different ‘choice’ which would have resulted in a very different, very tragic ending to the story of these precious little girls.

Here are some of the reactions to the story:

As many LSN readers literally wept their way through the story, they learned from conjoined twins Hope and Grace about the beauty of each and every life, that no life is second-class, dispensable, or futile, and that if you have love, you have everything that matters.

We at LifeSiteNews love and cherish the entire spectrum of human life, from young life in a mother’s womb to elderly life in a manner or hospital. That is why we bring you so many abortion related stories and so many euthanasia related stories.

Ultimately, it’s our love for life that inspires us to bring you so many Culture of Life stories.

When I write these stories, I keep in my heart the old Eastern adage: “It’s better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.”

With each Culture of Life story LifeSiteNews publishes, we are lighting a bright beautiful candle that pierces the darkness and dispels the gloom.

It is our hope that these stories will ignite the spirit of our readers and that they will not be afraid to let their own lights shine.

But we cannot continue to light these candles without your financial gift today.

Join us today with your financial gift that will help cast your light upon the earth.

Pete Baklinski
Journalist
LifeSiteNews.com

July 18, 2012 (LiveActionNews.org) - Like most women, I’m concerned about my health. That’s why I recently made an appointment to see an OB/GYN.

As I talked with my new doctor, I shared my history of severe menstrual cramps. As a remedy, she suggested I take birth control pills. I politely told her I was “adamantly opposed” to the pill; I took it as a teenager to alleviate cramps, though it proved ineffective. Aside from that, I’m aware of the history of Planned Parenthood, which was formerly known as the American Birth Control League. I mentioned that Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist who plotted to use birth control as a means to decrease the black population.

The doctor informed me that she had researched Sanger as well, yet she didn’t refute what I said. Instead, she remarked, “So you don’t take birth control because of principle.” Yes, I replied, but also because of the negative effects it has on a woman’s body. I mentioned there is a connection between birth control and breast cancer. Quickly the doctor denied that claim. She said research had proven those assumptions false. She told me the birth control pill could actually help prevent ovarian cancer. Then she said, “If you could take something that prevents cancer, wouldn’t you want to?”

Although my OB/GYN claimed the birth control/breast cancer risk was false, other doctors would disagree. The National Cancer Institute admits “A number of studies suggest that current use of oral contraceptives (birth control pills) appears to slightly increase the risk of breast cancer, especially among younger women. However, the risk level goes back to normal 10 years or more after discontinuing oral contraceptive use.” Their website has a fact sheet titled “ Oral Contraceptive and Cancer Risks“, which references studies and research on the topic.

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!

Dr. Kathleen T. Ruddy is a breast cancer surgeon, Founder and Medical Director of the Breast Service at Clara Mass Medical Center in Belleville, New Jersey. Dr.Ruddy has been in practice as a breast surgeon for over fifteen years. In a 2011 article she writes:  In 2007, the World Health Organization, after having reviewed the world’s literature, determined that oral contraceptives were Group I carcinogens, capable of causing several cancers in women, including breast cancer.

As for the pill reducing ovarian cancer, there is research that shows women who use birth control for ten years or more may be less likely to contract that type of cancer. However the pills could increase their chance of getting cervical cancer.  The American Cancer Society’s website declares: ‘There is evidence that taking oral contraceptives (OCs) for a long time increases the risk of cancer of the cervix. Research suggests that the risk of cervical cancer goes up the longer a woman takes OCs, but the risk goes back down again after the OCs are stopped. In one study, the risk of cervical cancer was doubled in women who took birth control pills longer than 5 years, but the risk returned to normal 10 years after they were stopped.”

I mentioned the other side-effects of the pill (mood swings, blood clots, risk of infertility) to my doctor but she didn’t respond. She admitted it was refreshing to see someone who strongly stands for what she believes in. Yet she simultaneously continued to push me to change those beliefs. She insinuated that I got my research from unreliable websites, shared some “myths” against birth control, and finally warned me in her exact words to not “cut off my nose to spite my face.” Or, as she further explained, “don’t do destructive things for the sake of principle.”

After talking with some married friends, I realized that they also have felt pressure at their OB/GYN appointments. One of my friends went in for a checkup after finding out she was pregnant again. She became pregnant with her second eleven months after her first. The doctor’s response to her exciting news was, “We’ve got to get you on birth control!” Another friend told me she went to her doctor for a prenatal exam with her second child. During the exam, her doctor spent 5 minutes of her 8-minute appointment telling her how to avoid getting pregnant in the future and asked her if she was interested in terminating the pregnancy or wanted to be sterilized postpartum. My friend switched physicians as she wondered, “Where is the celebration of life?”

I live in Connecticut. The landmark case Griswold v. Connecticut struck down an 1879 law that stated, ”[A]ny person who uses any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purposes of preventing conception shall be fined not less than forty dollars or imprisoned not less than sixty days.” The law also said that “any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principle offender.” Prior to 1965 in my state, it was illegal for married couples to use forms of birth control.

During that time, Estelle Griswold,  the executive director of Planned Parenthood of CT,  was arrested and found guilty for providing illegal contraception. She appealed to the Supreme Court and won her case.

I’m not arguing that selling birth control should be illegal again. However, I am commenting on the extreme change in mindsets and public opinion that has taken place over a relatively short amount of time. In just 47 years, we have gone from birth control being illegal for married couples to abortion on demand being legal.  My doctor told me I was being “destructive” because I am opposed to birth control. Yet I am quite sure she wouldn’t have argued with me if I told her I was pregnant and considering an abortion. If we want to label something as destructive, I’d start with Roe v. Wade, which has led to over 55 million abortions in our nation.

As pro-lifers, we must be armed with knowledge, bold, and unapologetic in our convictions. We can’t always depend on our doctors, politicians, pastors, or even the president to help us make good decisions. We have to stand up for what we know is true, no matter what the cost. I kindly told my doctor that while I valued her opinion, I wasn’t going to be changing mine.

July 18, 2012 (LiveActionNews.org) - Last week, a rumor that former Bush Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was a finalist for Mitt Romney’s vice presidential pick swept the internet. Pro-lifers took umbrage at the news, since Rice does not share her former boss’s support for the right to life, and her selection would reignite concerns about Romney’s own reliability on abortion.

Fortunately, the rumor seems to be all but debunked. First, Romney has already repeatedly pledged that his running mate will be pro-life. Second, National Review’s John Fund and Robert Costa have both reported, with a great deal of confidence, that their sources in the Romney campaign tell them there’s no chance Rice will be the pick. Third, Rice herself, already known to have little taste for politics, has reiterated that she’s not interested in the VP slot.

Even if the Romney campaign was ever seriously considering Rice, the backlash seems to have been sufficient to change their mind. And this may not have ever been a genuine trial balloon anyway – it’s possible that somebody floated this as a bit of misdirection, to get people discussing something other than the Obama campaign’s attacks on Romney’s time at Bain Capital. Or it could have been some ex-Bush personnel wishfully thinking about how nice it’d be to make it back to the White House, trying to generate buzz for a pick that would get them there.

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!

Whatever the inside scoop may be, quashing it is for the best. Though clearly an intelligent and accomplished public servant, Secretary Rice’s public commentary reveals some very serious logical gaps. She describes her position as “mildly pro-choice” – she supports parental notification and banning late-term abortion, opposes federal abortion funding, and thinks we “need to have a culture that respects life,” but she doesn’t want to see “the federal government in a position where it is forcing its views on one side or the other.”

To be fair, there is a principled pro-life school of thought that believes that abortion should be decided entirely at the state level. But people who hold that view don’t describe themselves as “pro-choice,” mild or not, and they would apply that standard to early- and late-term abortions alike.

Besides, further comments reveal that Rice’s position isn’t very federalist after all – she also says she doesn’t want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, because “it’s an area that I worry about the government being involved in.” But we don’t get an explanation of why we should worry about government involvement, aside from some weak, fuzzy talk of women not making the choice lightly. Some do, some don’t, and neither factor has any bearing on the injustice of killing a baby. Further, Roe is federal government involvement in the area – it’s the deprivation of every state’s right to vote on the issue for themselves.

Condoleezza Rice comes across as someone whose support for legal abortion is primarily emotional or instinctive, who frames her position as moderately as possible because she’s uncomfortable discussing it. No candidate is well-served on the campaign trail by unsound principles or the unwillingness to explain positions frankly and clearly.

Reprinted with permission from LiveActionNews.org

In a blow to religious liberty, a federal judge has dismissed a federal lawsuit in which Nebraska and six other states along with a number of other plaintiffs tried to block part of the federal health care law that requires contraception coverage.

But Emily Hardman of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty told The Cardinal Newman Society that this ruling does not affect other cases brought against the HHS mandate by the Becket Fund, with plaintiffs including Belmont Abbey College, Colorado Christian University, Ave Maria University, and EWTN. “This ruling is completely irrelevant to our cases,” said Hardman.

U.S. District Judge Warren Urbom of Lincoln dismissed the case Tuesday, saying among other reasons that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the action challenging the HHS mandate because it hadn’t gone into effect yet.

“Today’s decision completely disregards the federal government’s continued shell game when it comes to this rule,”  Attorney General Jon Bruning told The Journal Star. “Essentially, this decision asks millions of Americans to watch and wait for their religious liberties to be violated. Obviously, we’re disappointed with the ruling, and we will consult with our co-plaintiffs to assess our next steps.”

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

Co-plaintiffs include Pius X Catholic High School, Catholic Social Services, The Catholic Mutual Relief Society of America and private citizens Stacy Molai and Sister Mary Catherine, CK, according to a statement by Bruning’s office.

“This regulation forces millions of Americans to choose between following religious convictions and complying with federal law,” Bruning reportedly said in February.  “This violation of the 1st Amendment is a threat to every American, regardless of religious faith. We will not stand idly by while our constitutionally-guaranteed liberties are discarded by an administration that has sworn to uphold them.”

But Judge Urbom, a Nixon appointee, sided with the U.S. Justice Department because he said the mandate hasn’t gone into effect yet so there aren’t any damages as of yet.

“Although the rule that lies at the heart of the plaintiffs’ complaint establishes a definitive, final definition of ‘religious employer,’ the ACA’s contraceptive coverage requirements are not being enforced against non-exempted religious organizations, and the rule is currently undergoing a process of amendment to accommodate these organizations,” Urbom said.”The plaintiffs face no direct and immediate harm, and one can only speculate whether the plaintiffs will ever feel any effects from the rule when the temporary enforcement safe harbor terminates. This case clearly involves ‘contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all,’ … and therefore it is not ripe for review.

Updates to follow…

This article originally appeared on the website of the Cardinal Newman Society and is reprinted with permission.

Sometimes it may seem that we at LifeSiteNews are simply cataloging the demise of all that is noble, sacred, lovable, and true in Western civilization.

But the truth is, not all our stories are so bleak. Far from it.

In fact, we deliberately strive every single day to bring to you stories that highlight that not all is lost, that there are tons of amazing people who are making a difference, helping in a thousand different ways to turn the tide in this desperate fight against the culture of death.

Take for instance the story of Tony Maas, CEO of JTM Food Group. He and his brothers deliver great-tasting prepackaged meals with a pro-life flair. On the rear panel of their semitrailers, they display a “prodigious image of a beautiful smiling baby with the words ‘Life, what a beautiful choice.’”

The reaction to this story was overwhelming:

This story literally went viral on social media overnight with thousands of people rejoicing in this message of hope.

The truth is, we at LifeSiteNews want to bring our readers even more of these types of stories (We call them “Culture of Life” stories). The problem is that they often involve pretty intensive research and in-depth interviews, and we don’t have the manpower to follow up on even a fraction of the amazing news tips we receive!

We at LifeSiteNews know that there are a lot of terrible things happening in the world against life and family, and that it’s our job to report them. But we don’t report these for their own sake, but so that people will be armed with the knowledge needed to take a stand and defend what is true and good.

Our Culture of Life stories are written so that we will never lose sight of what is true and good in the midst of so much error and falsehood.

Another example is our recent story of two babies who shared one heart and who momentarily “brought heaven to earth” for their parents.

Parents’ Luci and Chris Klare were in the presence of their precious daughters for only 46 minutes, but in that time, they discovered that their whole universe suddenly revolved around “treasuring the fragile gift of their tiny children.”

Many in their situation might have made a much different ‘choice’ which would have resulted in a very different, very tragic ending to the story of these precious little girls.

Here are some of the reactions to the story:

As many LSN readers literally wept their way through the story, they learned from conjoined twins Hope and Grace about the beauty of each and every life, that no life is second-class, dispensable, or futile, and that if you have love, you have everything that matters.

We at LifeSiteNews love and cherish the entire spectrum of human life, from young life in a mother’s womb to elderly life in a manner or hospital. That is why we bring you so many abortion related stories and so many euthanasia related stories.

Ultimately, it’s our love for life that inspires us to bring you so many Culture of Life stories.

When I write these stories, I keep in my heart the old Eastern adage: “It’s better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.”

With each Culture of Life story LifeSiteNews publishes, we are lighting a bright beautiful candle that pierces the darkness and dispels the gloom.

It is our hope that these stories will ignite the spirit of our readers and that they will not be afraid to let their own lights shine.

But we cannot continue to light these candles without your financial gift today.

Join us today with your financial gift that will help cast your light upon the earth.

Pete Baklinski
Journalist
LifeSiteNews.com