---

SHARE THIS PAGE: E-mail  Print

---

---

HLI Leader Says: "I don't believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job"

Washington Archbishop Wuerl Won't Discipline or Deny Communion to Pro-Abortion Speaker Pelosi

By John-Henry Westen

WASHINGTON, DC, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Perhaps it was a bad omen when at the installation Mass for the new Archbishop of Washington Donald Wuerl last June, pro-abortion Democratic Senator John Kerry was given Holy Communion and caught on camera in the act.  During the entrance procession, Archbishop Wuerl shook hands with Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy. (see coverage: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/06062605.html ) 

Now, Archbishop Wuerl, who replaced Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, has said publicly that he would not discipline or direct priests to deny communion to pro-abortion Catholic politician Nancy Pelosi who was just made speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Despite her staunch stands in favour of abortion, embryonic stem cell research and same-sex 'marriage' Pelosi went on a publicity stunt in early January to portray herself as an Italian Catholic mother. Part of that campaign was her publicized attendance at a Mass at her alma mater, Trinity University, on January 3.  Prior to that Mass, American Life League had urgently requested that Archbishop Wuerl intervene to halt the public scandal that would ensue.  Archdiocesan spokesman Susan Gibbs told LifeSiteNews.com that the Archbishop did not intervene in the Trinity Mass.  She said the University, although within the archdiocese, was under the control of a religious order, the Sisters of Notre Dame. (see coverage: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jan/07010811.html )

Pope Benedict, prior to his election to the pontificate, intervened in the US Bishops deliberation on the question of Holy Communion for pro-abortion politicians.  The intervention letter titled "Worthiness to receive Holy Communion" pointed out that obstinately pro-abortion Catholic politicians, after being duly instructed and warned, "must" be denied Communion (see the document: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/apr/050419a.html).

On Saturday, California Catholic Daily reporter Allyson Smith conducted a brief taped interview with Archbishop Wuerl focussing on the new pro-abortion speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi.  LifeSiteNews.com has reviewed the tape and can confirm this accurate transcription of the main portion of the interview:

Smith: "Did you make any statement about Nancy Pelosi last week going to Mass at Trinity University?" Did you issue any statement about that?

Wuerl: "That was a matter between the university and Nancy. They were offering their location, and the Mass was celebrated by a priest with faculties, and there was no, there was no reason to make any comment about it."

Smith: "Do you intend to discipline her at all for being persistent and obstinate about supporting abortion and same-sex marriage?"

Wuerl: "I will not be using the faculty in that, in the manner you have described."

Smith: "Will you issue a statement to your priests and deacons, I'm sorry, to priests and deacons to warn her not to allow her to receive if she presents herself for Communion?"

Wuerl: "You're talking about a whole different style of pastoral ministry. No thank you."

Smith: "No? Okay. Thank you."

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Judie Brown of American Life League reacted to Archbishop Wuerl's statements saying, "One of the reasons why we asked Archbishop Wuerl to take definitive action with the speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is because of the scandal she is creating and the souls that she is literally jeopardizing by her refusal to adhere to Church teaching and yet use her Catholic identity in a way that is in fact scandalous."  Brown continued, "I am appalled that Archbishop Wuerl not only is not going to do anything about this but has publicly said so, I find that absolutely outrageous." 

The position of the Catholic Church on the matter is defined in canon law. Following the Scriptural principle found in 1 Corinthians 11:27, the Church's canon law states at canon 915 that those "who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion."

Brown conluded, "I mean no disrespect to the Archbishop at all, but as an Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church he has an obligation to enforce canon law and I simply do not understand this."

Human Life International President Fr. Tom Euteneuer concurred.  Fr. Euteneuer told LifeSiteNews.com, that rather than 'pastoral style', "In actual fact we are talking about the exercise of Episcopal oversight.  I don't believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job.  The clear directives from the Vatican in addition to canon law indicate that a woman whose (pro-abortion) position is of a high profile nature is a public scandal to the faith. Not only should she be refused Communion by the legitimate authority of the diocese, but she should be excommunicated. Period." 

The new Archbishop of Washington is, in this respect, following in the footsteps of his predecessor.  In 2004, as the US Bishops were discussing the matter of Communion for pro-abortion politicians, Pelosi told the media that she would continue to take Holy Communion despite her pro-abortion position.  She went so far as to misrepresent the Catholic faith as supporting her pro-abortion stance.  "I believe that my position on choice is one that is consistent with my Catholic upbringing, which said that every person has a free will and has the responsibility to live their lives in a way that they would have to account for in the end," she said.

Responding in the media, Cardinal McCarrick who was heading up the bishops' task force on the communion question, said, "I have not gotten to the stage where I'm comfortable in denying the Eucharist."  In fact, Cardinal McCarrick has been on something of a campaign to conceal Rome's insistence that pro-abortion politicians be denied Holy Communion. (see coverage: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/oct/06102310.html )

McCarrick has even spoken of Pelosi in his retirement.  In comments to the Catholic News Service last week, Cardinal McCarrick said he considered Pelosi, "a very thoughtful and committed defender of human rights." (see coverage: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0700087.htm )

Commented Fr. Euteneuer,  "I don't have words for that."

Calls to the Archdiocese of Washington for clarification were not returned by press time. 

See the original California Catholic story at http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=dbc84fb0-aacd-4dad-bfb5-2b27...;

To contact Vatican Offices

CONGREGATION FOR BISHOPS
Piazza Pio XII 10
00193
Rome, Italy
Phone: 011.39.6.69.88.42.17
Fax: 011.39.6.69.88.53.03

 Back to Top

---

Interview With Judie Brown on Pro-life Hope From Dramatic Georgia Bill

President of ALL makes appeal for unity by among pro-life supporters

By Peter J. Smith

ATLANTA, Georgia, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – As the Georgia House of Representatives prepares to debate a bill designed to challenge Roe v. Wade, pro-life groups in Georgia are mobilizing constituencies to create a groundswell of support for the proposed total ban on abortion. In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Judie Brown, president of American Life League, spoke about House Bill 1 sponsored by pro-life champion Rep. Bobby Franklin in the upcoming pro-life battle for Georgia and the bill’s potential for success especially in how it responds to Roe v. Wade.

LifeSiteNews: What is your reaction to this new direct challenge coming out of Georgia to Roe v. Wade and how hopeful are you for its chances?

Brown: “We are quite enthusiastic about Rep. Franklin’s bill because he has faced opposition for the last three years and has persisted in reintroducing the bill. Each time that he does he gains more support, so now in the state of Georgia, there is more interest among pro-family groups than ever before in supporting this bill and it quite possibly could pass the legislature this time.”

LifeSiteNews: Would Governor Perdue sign the bill if passed by the General Assembly?

Brown: “You know there is a big question mark about the governor, and I’m really not sure. I believe that prudentially if the governor saw passage of the bill through the Georgia legislature, he would feel nearly compelled because of all the debates that have gone on about this bill over the last three years. If I were he in the political position he’s in, I would sign it because it would be clear after all this legislative debate that the legislature has finally decided there should be no abortion in the state of Georgia.”

LifeSiteNews: What seems to make this bill unique is that it establishes an unborn child as a person under the 14th Amendment?

Brown: “That is correct. [It is] the recognition of personhood [for the preborn] under the 14th amendment of the Constitution, which is ultimately is [sic] the goal of the entire pro-life movement, and which is why every single organization in the pro-life movement should be supporting rep Franklin and his efforts.”

LifeSiteNews: Can you explain how Rep. Franklin’s bill directly responds to the reasoning of Justice Harry Blackmun in the 1973 Roe v Wade decision?

Brown: “When Roe v. Wade came down, Blackmun said, if the fetus is ever established as a person under the 14th Amendment, this decision will fail.”

LifeSiteNews: How did Blackmun use the exception in the Texas abortion law in justifying Roe?

Brown: “Blackmun took exception to the exception in the bill in Texas, because he said that clearly, if the people of Texas had truly wanted to outlaw all abortions they would not have included an exception for the life of the mother. Therefore he found the bill contradictory. That haunts us even today, because the partial birth abortion bill contains an exception, and I’m positive the Supreme Court will say the same thing.”

LifeSiteNews: So really one of the strengths of the Georgia bill is that it does not have an exception?

Brown: “Absolutely, if you want to establish protection for a specific class of human beings, you cannot exclude some of them from that protection. You either will establish protection for that class of human beings or you won’t. It would be similar to saying that we want to protect all African-Americans under the 14th Amendment except those living in a particular county. You can’t do that, you have to be consistent in your approach or your approach will fail.”

LifeSiteNews: How is the Georgia bill different from the initiative that failed last election in South Dakota?

Brown: “The difference in the initiative in the two bills is that the bill passed by the South Dakota legislature outlawed all medical abortions and outlawed all surgical abortions. It did not outlaw any abortion that occurred prior to implantation.”

LifeSiteNews: What lessons may pro-life groups have learned from South Dakota for this next fight in Georgia?

Brown: “The lesson to be learned as far as the pro-life movement is concerned is that when there is any division in the movement over the principle of whether or not to protect all innocent babies - even if its just a specific type of abortion - we will lose, and we will lose because the people of this country are already in favor of exceptions. If the pro-life movement does the very same thing that the public is doing, they’re contradicting their goal and they are bound to lose. One of the reasons why we failed in South Dakota was because some pro-life groups, National Right to Life in particular, would not support the South Dakota bill because it did not contain exceptions.”

LifeSiteNews: How do you expect American Life League and other pro-life groups to respond to this bill?

Brown: “I think that there should be unanimous support for the bill in Georgia, and I am hoping that every pro-life group with a constituency in the state of Georgia does everything they possibly can to muster the grassroots people to pressure their elected officials in Georgia to pass this bill.”

LifeSiteNews: Are you aware of any latest developments in Bobby Franklin’s HB 1?

Brown: “The latest development that I’m aware of is the February 10 rally that will be held in Atlanta. We are participating in that and we are coordinating with people right there in the state.”

LifeSiteNews: Thank you once again, do you have any final comment you’d like to give LifeSite readers?

Brown: “My closing comment on this bill would be that every one who reads the interview should immediately contact Rep. Franklin in Georgia and thank him for standing up for all innocent preborn children in Georgia without exception; he’s a very heroic man.”

HB1 sponsored by Rep. Bobby Franklin recognizes an unborn child as a person from the moment of conception, deserving rights and due process of law guaranteed under the 14th amendment. It would ban all abortions as a felony equivalent to homicide, and cites the tremendous personal, societal, and financial costs incurred in 34 years of legal abortion. The bill makes no exceptions to abortion, but does guarantee "if a physician makes a medically justified effort to save the lives of both the mother and the fetus and the fetus does not survive, such action shall not be an abortion."

Rep. Franklin has indicated the bill will pass if it reaches the House floor for a vote, however Cindy Coates of Georgia4Life Coalition, the group leading the push for HB1, told LifeSiteNews.com both high attendance at the rally and a costly media battle will be necessary to convince House representatives to allow the bill to come to a vote.

Information for the February 10 rally in Atlanta, Georgia as well as ways to contribute to the media campaign can be found at:

Cindye Coates of Georgia4Life Coalition


Web address of Georgia4Life
http://www.georgia4life.org/

Contributions can be sent to the following address:

Georgia4Life
1557 Hascall Dr
Marietta, Georgia 30064

To contact Rep. Bobby Franklin:

Room 402
Coverdell Legislative Office Building
Atlanta, Georgia 30334

Telephone: 404.656.5087
E-mail:

See LifeSiteNews coverage:
Georgia Prepares to Battle Roe v. Wade
House bill challenges Roe by establishing personhood of unborn
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jan/07011507.html

HB 1 in PDF format can be found here:
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007_08/pdf/hb1.pdf

 Back to Top

---

Catholics in UK Carrying ID Cards Asking Not to be Starved to Death in Hospitals

By Gudrun Schultz and John-Henry Westen

LONDON, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Observer in the UK reported Sunday that Catholics in the UK have taken to carrying special ID cards informing doctors that they do not wish to be deprived of food and fluids in the case of admission to hospital.

In a growing worldwide trend, doctors in the UK consider what used to be routine care--administration of nutrition and hydration, by artificial means if necessary--to be "treatment" which can be refused or denied.

The UK's Association of Catholic Women (ACW) which produced the ID cards, had sold nearly 26,000 by 2005.

"We were greatly concerned that ANH (artificial nutrition and hydration) was considered as 'treatment', and could be withdrawn if the patient was deemed to have a 'poor quality of life,' thus leading to death by starvation/dehydration," explained a spokesperson for the ACW.

The card is a simple blue card stating: "In case of my admission to hospital please contact a Roman Catholic priest. I would like my nursing care to include fluids - however administered."

Food and water, once considered basic humane care to be offered to every patient, now have increasingly been relegated to “medical treatment” and considered optional depending on a patient’s likelihood of recovery and/or future quality of life.

UK doctors were warned in November that they may face prison sentences if they refuse to withdraw food and fluids from patients who have previously indicated they do not want medical treatment.

Dr. Peter Saunders, head of the Christian Medical Fellowship, said at the time that the new government guidelines were not a concern for dying patients whose bodies could no longer assimilate nutrition.

“But we are concerned that patients will make unwise and hasty advance refusals of food and fluids without being properly informed about the diagnosis. It is too easy for patients to be driven by fears of meddlesome treatment and ‘being kept alive’, into making advance refusals that later might be used against them.”

Dr Jacqueline Laing of London Metropolitan University, who called the measures an obvious “cost-saving” effort on behalf of the National Health, said the Act “inverts good medical practice by criminalizing medical staff who intervene to save the lives of their patients with simple cures and, in certain cases, even food and fluids.”

Carrying a card requesting food and water in the event of hospitalization may not guarantee protection from the changing policies, as a 46 year-old British man suffering from a degenerative disease found last year.

Leslie Burke, who has a neurological disorder that will eventually leave him paralyzed and unable to speak, was concerned that he would be denied  food and water once his disease progressed to the point that he could no longer speak for himself.

The General Medical Council opposed Burke’s request for a guarantee that he would receive food and fluids until natural death occurred, saying it must reserve the right to withhold food and water from patients at a doctor’s discretion.

Burke took his battle to the European Court of Human Rights after the British court system refused to grant him legal protection. The EU Court ruled against Burke’s request, saying there were adequate protections in place in British law that would prevent the premature removal of food and water.

Alex Schadenberg, head of Canada’s Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told LifeSiteNews.com at the time that the European court “erred significantly” in the decision, putting patients all over Europe at risk.

Although doctors have always had the authority to determine if further treatment would be burdensome and futile, Schadenberg said, doctors are now being given the freedom to make such decisions based on cost effectiveness and patient “quality of life”, instead of purely medical considerations.

“Modern bioethics philosophy has rejected the concept of purely medical futility. The treatment is not considered futile; the patient is considered futile,” Schadenberg said.

See related LifeSiteNews coverage:

UK Doctors Face Jail if They Refuse to Euthanize Patients
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/nov/06112102.html

UK Man Goes to European Court Asking that He not be Starved to Death in Hospital
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/may/06050301.html

Euro Court Refuses To Guarantee Ill British Man Won't Be Dehydrated to Death
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/aug/06080903.html

 Back to Top

---

Breakthrough Research Shows Hope for Bone Marrow Transplants Using Adult Stem Cells

By Gudrun Schultz

MINNESOTA, United States, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Researchers at the University of Minnesota have successfully used adult stem cells to replace the immune system and bone marrow of mice, in one of the most significant discoveries of the recent acceleration in adult stem cell research breakthroughs.

The research technique isolated adult stem cells (multipotent adult progenitor cells, or MAPCs) from the bone marrow of adult mice. The cells were reproduced in the lab, and then transplanted into mice that had no immune system due to radiation treatments.

“The cells not only survived when transplanted but they completely repopulated the blood system of the mice," said Catherine Verfaillie, director of the University’s Stem Cell Institute, in a  statement released by the University of Minnesota.  The cells did not differentiate into other cell types, such as liver or brain cells, nor did they form tumors in any animals, a common problem when using stem cells obtained from embryos.

Verfaillie was responsible for first identifying the existence of MAPCs in 2001. Difficulties in growing the cells and in reproducing the research results in other labs led to skepticism in the scientific community. Now, however, four different scientific publications support the current research, showing the results are consistent and replicable.

“These experiments point to potential precursors of blood forming stem cells in an unexpected population of cultured cells," said Irving Weissman, who directs Stanford's Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine.

"Scientists must now understand that mouse MAPCs can make normal blood, and we need to explore how they do it," said Weissman, who was initially highly skeptical of the research proposal. "It is very important to note that MAPCs were not themselves radioprotective, thus they alone could not be used in patients in whom the bone marrow is totally eliminated due to radiation or chemotherapy, but it is still remarkable that they can give rise to blood cells."

Further research is underway on animals more physically similar to humans, to prepare for potential treatments on people in the future. MAPCs have been isolated from bone marrow in humans, mice, rats and pigs.

In further developments, a team of researchers including participants from Spain, Belgium and the University of Minnesota showed the ability of the cells to differentiate into two types of cells that line the walls of blood vessels, known as endothelial cells. Scientists were able to make human MAPCs differentiate into cells for both arterial and secondary veins, in both lab tests and in mice.

“This work provides the first evidence that human MAPCs can be induced to differentiate into the different types of cells needed to form arteries," Felipe Prosper, M.D., of Spain said in a study published in the journal Blood, November 2006. "This may suggest future clinical applications for MAPCs in diseases and conditions such as stroke and heart attack."

Further research, published in the December 2006 issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation, showed that the cells are capable of producing smooth muscle cells in the laboratory.

"While previous research has demonstrated that various types of stem cells can turn into cells tha t [sic] express the proteins consistent with smooth muscle, this is the first study that shows that the cells we generated have the same functional properties as smooth muscle, as well as express the same proteins," said Jeffrey Ross, Ph.D., research associate at the Stem Cell Institute.

The research has potential for the future laboratory generation of  working tissue, such as blood vessels for use in bypass surgery.

See full release published on Eurekalert:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-01/uom-uom011207.php

See related LifeSiteNews coverage:

Adult Stem Cells Successfully Regenerate Pig Teeth, New Study Finds
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jan/07010502.html

Adult Stem Cell Research: True Potential Sacrificed for Other Possibilities Says Biotech Writer
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/06061311.html

Human Liver Grown from Cord Blood Stem Cells--Media Ignores UK Breakthrough
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/nov/06110105.html

Adult Stem Cells Used to Treat Emergency Heart Attack Patients
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/nov/06110809.html

 Back to Top

---

Catholic World Youth Day Message focuses on Sex

By Gudrun Schultz

SYDNEY, Australia, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Human sexuality is the focus of this month’s edition of the 2008 World Youth Day newsletter ePILGRIMAGE, inviting young people to examine the questions raised about sexuality in modern society in the light of Catholic teaching.

“This ePILGRIMAGE explores various ways that [the] very positive message about human bodily life and love have been expressed in the Catholic tradition…” wrote Bishop Anthony Fisher, coordinator of World Youth Day 2008.

“There are many voices in the modern world that overestimate the importance of sex--as if no-one could be happy who had not had sex in the last few hours--or trivialize or underestimate its power--as if it were no more humanly significant than any other bodily function.

“But deep down most people know the body, sexuality and fertility are precious and important things which can be used to express some of the noblest things about human relationships, or which can be used instead to hurt and exploit.”

The edition provides young people with an overview of the foundations of Catholic teaching on the meaning of sexuality and the sacrament of marriage, beginning with the old testament Song of Songs and leading to Pope Benedict XVI‘s encyclical on love, Deus Caritas Est.

“This sacrament [of Christian marriage] becomes not only a good relationship, but a deepening and “saving mystery” which reveals to each other, their children, their relatives and their society an intimate and concrete “communion” and God’s unconditional love,” Bishop Fisher writes. “Their love tells the story of Jesus’ total self-giving to the Church; and Jesus’ fidelity to his bride the Church shows them how to live with generosity, forgiveness, self-satisfaction and intimacy.

“All this helps to explain why Christians take sex so seriously and have such high ideals for what they do in their bodily lives.

As an example of the vocation of Christian marriage lived out with beauty and grace, the edition highlights Luigi and Maria Beltrame Quattrocchi, the first modern married couple to be beatified together.

Successful in their individual work in social reform and involvement in Catholic lay groups, the couple “considered their real vocations began when they found each other” the newsletter states. “Their family home in Via Depretis in Rome became the centre of deepening faith, their social apostolate and charity work.”

Maria’s last pregnancy was a life-threatening one. Her doctors pressured her to have an abortion to save her life. The couple refused and dedicated their daughter, Enrichetta, to God in a vigil of prayer. Both mother and baby survived.

The couple’s home became a drop-in centre for people in need during the Second World War. Later, they worked to rebuild Italy in the post-war years, Luigi becoming the deputy attorney general for the nation and Maria helping to found the Sacred Heart Catholic University in Rome.

See full January 2007 edition of ePILGRIMAGE:
http://www.wyd2008.org/index.php/en/wyd08_pilgrims/epilgrimage__1

See related LifeSiteNews coverage:
Look Who's Quarterbacking World Youth Day 2008 in Australia - a 6'7" Football Star
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/dec/06121904.html

 Back to Top

---

New Brunswick Feminists Pushing for Abortion on Demand, Not Women’s Health

Will Use Charter arguments to try to have government forced to pay for private clinic abortions

By Hilary White 

MONCTON, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – As LifeSiteNews.com reported yesterday, a group of feminist activists is planning to launch a lawsuit to attempt to force the province of New Brunswick to lift funding restrictions on abortion. The group wants the province to pay for abortions committed by general practitioners outside hospitals and to lift the requirement for approval from two doctors.

Pierre Trudeau’s Charter is being exploited to give activist judges another opportunity to force elected representatives to implement a leftist social agenda item. Moncton lawyer, feminist and same-sex marriage activist Michélle Caron claims the funding restrictions in New Brunswick’s Medical Services Payment Act contradict section seven of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

It will be interesting to see if they succeed again under this federal Conservative government that has eliminated the Court Challenges Program and slashed the budgets of Status of Women and the Law Commission of Canada.

The names of both hospitals still aborting New Brunswick children were made public when Caron identified them today to Canada East Online. Two gynaecologists at George L. Dumont Regional Hospital in Moncton and the Chaleur Regional Hospital in Bathurst, she said, are the last in the province doing abortions at tax-payer expense.

Caron complained that women who cannot travel to either of these must pay for it themselves. Including travel and accommodation costs, the expenses for having their unborn children killed at the Morgentaler facility in Fredericton or in another province can be prohibitive.

Peter Ryan, of New Brunswick Right to Life Association, responded in today’s National Post saying the existing restrictions are appropriate, especially considering the province’s declining population and low birth rate.

Ryan said the lawsuit is a thinly veiled stratagem for public funding of abortion on demand by militant abortion activists who are not legitimate advocates of women’s health. Abortion on demand, he said, has never been mandated or required by any Canadian court or legislation.

In New Brunswick, publicly funded abortions must be certified as “medically necessary” by two doctors and be committed in a hospital by a gynaecologist obstetrician.

While the province will not pay for them, there are no legal restrictions on abortions at private facilities such as that of Henry Morgentaler in Fredericton, which may abort babies on demand for a fee.

“What they propose is based on a jaded cold-heartedness toward unborn children and blindness to the adverse health impact of abortion on women’s health,” Ryan said.
 
Ryan said that the activists’ single-minded focus on abortion, in fact, ignores genuine concerns for women’s health. “The activists are blind to the wealth of new medical data from peer-reviewed journals showing the safety problems abortion poses for women. To mention just two, abortion greatly increases the risk of depression and subsequent miscarriage.”

A spokesman for the provincial health department responded today that there are no plans to alter the abortion funding requirements.

A longstanding dispute between the province and the federal government over the funding of abortion was closed with the election of a Conservative federal government. Tony Clement, the federal Health Minister, told the Telegraph-Journal the issue is "off the radar."

Hospital Contact Information:

Chaleur Regional Hospital
1750 Sunset Drive
Bathurst, New Brunswick  E2A 4L7
(506) 544-3000
http://www.santeacadie-bathursthealth.ca

Dr. Georges L. Dumont Regional Hospital
330 Université Avenue
Moncton, NB E1C 2Z3
(506) 862-4000

See related stories:

Winnipeg’s Museum For Human Rights: Canada’s $300 Million Temple of Ideology
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jul/050701a.html

Conservative’s May Blow $100 Million Plus $12 Million Annual Costs for Trudeau Museum
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/dec/06122001.html

 Back to Top

---

German Court: Teachers’ Dress Must Conform to “Western Christian” Values

By Hilary White

MUNICH, January 16 2007, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Constitutional Court in the strongly Catholic region of Bavaria upheld a state law January 15 banning the headscarf after the country’s Islamic organization mounted a court challenge to the law. The court ruled that application of the law neither violated religious freedom nor was discriminatory.

Catholic sisters wearing habits with veils, an increasingly rare sight in Europe, does not contradict the ruling, the court added, because such clothing represents “Christian and western” values.

The Bavarian law, introduced in November 2004, prohibits teachers from wearing clothes that represent views “incompatible with the basic values of the constitution and its educational goals including western Christian educational and cultural values.”

One Christian value the court ruled could not be imparted by a woman wearing Islamic headdress is the equality of the sexes. A teacher wearing a headscarf “isn't in the position credibly to mediate and embody constitutional educational goals, particularly the equal treatment of men and woman,” the court said.

On the same day, Spiegel magazine’s online edition, in an article hostile to the resurgence of religious faith in Europe, both Christian and Islamic, affirmed that many secularized Europeans are starting to view the headscarf as a symbol of the growing power of Muslim fundamentalism.

Wolfgang Bosbach, a federal lawmaker for Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union, said in a television interview that the Islamic head scarf represented a “deliberate separation from western values, and that is not compatible with our constitution.”

A lawyer for the Islamic Religious Community said some of its members were considering taking their case to the Federal Constitutional Court, Germany's highest court.

 Back to Top

---

SHARE THIS PAGE: E-mail  Print

---

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.