---

SHARE THIS PAGE: E-mail  Print

---

---

House's Final Version of Massive Health Care Bill Poised to Instigate Government-Funded Abortion

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Democratic House leadership yesterday unveiled the final version of the health care overhaul on Thursday, one that keeps intact language to immediately initiate government funding for elective abortions. 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced at a press conference Thursday the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962), which Democrats expect to keep closed from further emendation.

"We are about to deliver on the promise of making affordable quality health care available for all Americans, laying the foundation for a brighter future for generations to come," Pelosi announced on the steps of the Capitol. "We have listened to the American people, we are putting forth a bill that reflects our best values and addresses our greatest challenges."

The massive bill - 1,990 pages long, and estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to cost about $1.055 trillion - creates a government-run health insurance option to compete with private insurers, and would require Americans to buy health insurance by 2013 or else pay a fine.

Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) called the bill "another freight train of big government."

"This really is a goverment takeover of health care in America," Pence told CNN Thursday.  "I think as the American people dig into this, it's going to become more obvious that this is a massive new bureaucracy."

As per the Energy and Commerce Committee's Capps amendment, the bill requires funds collected from the public plan to be used to cover abortions.  In addition, taxpayer subsidies will be directed to insurance providers that cover abortions, and every region in the U.S. will be required to have at least one abortion-covering insurance plan available.

The bill also includes the infamous end-of-life planning provisions - known to some as the "death panels" - that the Senate Finance Committee's version of the bill had dropped. 

Leaders on both sides of the health care debate have acknowledged that the abortion issue, which has come to the fore on a grassroots level, could be a possible deal-breaker for the whole bill.  Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) told The Hill that abortion, as well as immigration, "are seen as potentially very decisive."

Douglas Johnson of National Right to Life warned in a statement Thursday that "a vote for this bill is a vote to establish a federal government program that will directly fund abortion on demand, with federal funds."

"The White House and top Democratic congressional leaders are trying to smuggle federal government funding of abortion into law, behind smokescreens of misleading, contrived language," said Johnson.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life commented following the bill's debut: "Now, more than ever, pro-life members of Congress must demand the opportunity to vote on the Stupak/Pitts Amendment to prohibit abortion funding.  Explicit language must be added to this health care bill to prevent unprecedented federal funding of abortion."

The fight against abortion expansion in the House depended largely in recent weeks to the efforts of Michigan Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak, who has vowed to try to block the House rules vote with 40 like-minded Democrats if leadership continues to insist agaist allowing a vote on a pro-life amendment.  Stupak and other pro-life lawmakers have lobbied unsuccessfully for the addition a pro-life amendment designed to secure traditional federal prohibitions on federal abortion funding.

Rep. Stupak recently indicated, however, that he would not necessarily vote against the bill in the end, even if it still contained the abortion funding.  In a town hall video published Wednesday by the Heritage Foundation blog, Stupak is shown telling local Michiganers that he "probably would not" vote against the bill if the House had a chance to vote down the pro-life amendment. 

Following the relase of the final bill yesterday, Stupak said he was "disappointed" that it still contained the Capps Amendment.  "Language in the bill still does not do enough to prevent federal funding from going to abortion services," he said.  "I will continue to work with leadership to find satisfactory language on this issue." 

 Back to Top

---

Stupak Pushes Ahead with Abortion Demands - Though "Could Accept" Amendment Loss

Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek said she believes pro-lifers should "remain calm" about Stupak

By Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan clarified his goals for the health care bill in a column for The Hill Thursday, saying he would keep pushing hard for a chance to vote on a pro-life amendment on the House floor. However, he said, he was not aiming to kill the bill over the issue, and ultimately "could accept" an abortion-expanding bill if the whole House voted to keep it that way.

"I have not made unreasonable demands. I have simply asked that there be a straight up-or-down vote on my amendment reflective of current laws," wrote Stupak. "If we had a clean vote on this amendment and lost, I could accept that. My pro-life colleagues and I simply want, and deserve, a chance to vote our conscience." http://thehill.com/opinion/letters/65297-i-am-not-trying-to-kill-health-reform-abortion-issue-is-key

The column was published just after Foundry, the Heritage Foundation's blog, published a video of Stupak at a Cheboygan, Mich. town hall meeting giving voters a similar message.

"If everything I want [is] in the final bill, I like everything in the bill except you have public funding for abortion, and we had a chance to run our amendment and we lost. OK, I voted my conscience, stayed true to my principles, stayed true to the beliefs of this district, could I vote for healthcare? Yes I still could," Stupak said in the video.

Stupak's effort to introduce the Hyde amendment, which would halt the bill's mandated federal abortion funding, was rejected in the Energy and Commerce Committee in July. Since then, he has taken a leading role in the House's pro-life pushback by demanding an opportunity for the full House to vote on the Hyde amendment language.



If Democrat leadership refused the vote, Stupak says he has enough Democrats on his side to block the bill by "bringing down the rule," - that is, voting against the rule for the bill, which must be approved before the bill is introduced.

In July, Stupak and 19 other Democrats issued a letter to House leadership that stated of the health care overhaul: "Plans to mandate coverage for abortions, either directly or indirectly is unacceptable."

LifeSiteNews.com asked Rep. Stupak's office whether he would ultimately vote for the bill, assuming other aspects of the bill were satisfactory, even if his bid to force a vote on the pro-life amendment were to fail.

In an email response, Michelle Begnoche, Rep. Stupak's Press Secretary, stated: "The Congressman has said that he wants a clean vote on the inclusion of Hyde language in the health care reform legislation. If he gets a clean vote on Hyde language and if for some reason that language is not adopted, then the Congressman will consider the bill in its totality and may well vote for the bill if he feels the pros outweigh the cons."

Begnoche said Stupak is "hopeful and cautiously optimistic that an equitable solution on the issue of abortion funding will be reached prior to a vote on final passage out of the House."

"Nobody has fought harder to ensure that federal funding is not provided for abortion coverage in health care reform than Congressman Stupak," said Begnoche. "He will continue whipping his colleagues to oppose bringing the bill to the floor for a vote until a clean vote on his amendment is allowed."

Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek said she believes pro-lifers should "remain calm" about Stupak, pointing out that the Congressman, and his opposition, are both certain that the pro-life amendment would win if offered - making his hypothetical scenario impossible.

"This is a very, very tenuous time, not the prudent moment for pro-lifers to start attacking Stupak, IMO [in my opinion]," wrote Stanek. "He has enough enemies as it is. He is taking on his House leader Nancy Pelosi. He is taking on Obama. Stupak is under immense pressure."

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Stupak Town Hall Video: I Would Ultimately Vote for Abortion-Expanding Health Bill

 Back to Top

---

USCCB Launches All-Out Campaign against Abortion-Funding Healthcare

By James Tillman

WASHINGTON, DC, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has launched a bold and sweeping nation-wide campaign against the abortion funding mandate included in healthcare reform legislation currently making its way through Congress. Pro-life leaders are applauding the campaign, with American Life League's Judie Brown describing it as "unprecedented."

USCCB Pro-Life Activities Secretariat Tom Grenchik this week sent an email to parishes across the US, detailing the contents of the plan. At the same time, Cardinal Francis George and other members of the USCCB leadership have asked every cardinal, archbishop, and bishop in the United States for their personal leadership in ensuring that health care reform does not include funding for abortion.

Much of the campaign involves direct action by parishes and pastors. Grenchik's email states that a pro-life insert should be included in parish bulletins, placed on pews, or distributed at church entrances "as soon as possible."  The insert also says that the health-care bills currently being considered by Congress are "seriously deficient on the issues of abortion and conscience," and directs readers to www.usccb.org/action, where they may send emails to their congressmen through the action center of the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment.

The U.S. bishops have also asked that a special announcement be made at every parish at two separate Sunday Masses.  Their announcement tells laymen to contact their representatives and senators "immediately" and to "urge them to fix these bills with pro-life amendments," so that "health care reform will be about saving lives, not destroying them."

A special "Prayer of the Faithful" to be used during Mass has also been distributed, which asks both for "health care reform [that] will truly protect the life [and] dignity" of all and that Catholics will raise their "voices to protect the unborn and the most vulnerable and to preserve our freedom of conscience."

The efforts of the USCCB extend beyond church walls, however.

The USCCB has started an ad campaign aimed both at congressmen and at the grassroots.  The campaign uses online advertising on various websites such National Review Online, Catholic Match, and Beliefnet, to urge people to oppose the pro-abortion health care bill.  The information distributed to US parishes also includes an ad that may be run in Catholic papers.

The bishops themselves are opposing the health care legislation by personal action.  Cardinal Francis George, president of the USCCB, with the chairmen of three USCCB committees engaged in health care, has written to the American bishops and asked for their "active and personal leadership" and to "redouble [their] efforts" to ensure that health care does not include abortion.

Cardinal George's letter reads in part that "the outcome [of this debate] will depend not primarily on advocacy done in Washington, but on what we do in our own dioceses and states to make the case clearly and persuasively to influence how our Senators and Representatives vote."

He goes on to ask bishops to personally contact the senators and representatives who serve their diocese, whether by letter, email, personal meeting, or phone, and to tell them that if an amendment is not added to the bill eliminating the possibility of government-funded abortions, that they then must oppose the final bill when it comes to a vote.

Such decisive action has few parallels, according to the American Life League's Judie Brown.
In a statement issued yesterday, Brown said that "We applaud the USCCB's unprecedented action in its national campaign to mobilize parishes against the current versions of the health care bill."

"It has taken an important first step in activating Catholics to take back our health care system and our country from the radical pro-aborts in the legislature and sometimes even in the pulpits."

However, Brown said the USCCB should also point out the other troubling aspects of the bill, such as "its potential to fund Planned Parenthood, to use our tax dollars to indoctrinate children with sex education in schools, to fund euthanasia, in vitro fertilization, human embryonic stem cell research, contraception and health care rationing."

"All of these things are present in all of the current versions of the health care bill. None of these are acceptable according to Catholic teaching," she said.

The USCCB's campaign may be seen as the fulfillment of what they said in letter delivered to Congress on October 8th, in which the bishops said that unless their concerns were relieved they would be forced to strongly oppose the health care bill.

"We sincerely hope that the legislation will not fall short of our criteria," the bishops wrote at the time. "However, we remain apprehensive when amendments protecting freedom of conscience and ensuring no taxpayer money for abortion are defeated in committee votes. If acceptable language in these areas cannot be found, we will have to oppose the health care bill vigorously."
Before this current push, the USCCB had opposed an abortion-funding health care bill through various public statements, but had not made a great effort to move Catholic laymen to oppose it.

See related stories on LifeSiteNews:

USCCB Pro-Life Office: No Health Care Reform while Abortion Mandate Remains

USCCB Pro-Life Office: No Health Care Reform while Abortion Mandate Remains 

Head of USCCB Meets with Obama: Also Releases Video Saying Decision on Conscience Protection a Move Towards "Despotism"

 Back to Top

---

Texas Bishops Threaten "Vigorous" Opposition to Abortion-Funding Healthcare

By James Tillman

AUSTIN, TX, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- The bishops of the Texas Catholic Conference have issued a statement criticizing the health care reform bill's abortion-funding Capps amendment, while calling for "reform of our nation's health care system in ways that respect the lives of all human persons."

The bishops began by stating their commitment to improving the United States' health care, saying they were "hopeful that such reform legislation will someday be enacted into law."

Nevertheless, "true health care reform must maintain longstanding public policies that restrict funding for abortion and respect the consciences of health care providers."

"The language in the Capps amendment, which is part of several proposed bills, does not adequately ensure the protection of all human life," they said.

The Capps amendment, which would permit the federal subsidizing of abortion in healthcare, was preserved in the new version of the House bill released yesterday. 

"We will be a committed partner in advancing reform on this life-and-death issue," the bishops said, "but if the final form of the legislation does not include acceptable language in these areas then we will have to oppose it vigorously."

They concluded: "We will continue to pray that our national leaders will place the poor and those most vulnerable first, for only when they do will our nation achieve genuine health care reform."

The Texas bishops' letter comes at the same time as the USCCB has launched an all-out, nation-wide campaign against abortion-funding healthcare.

See related stories on LifeSiteNews.com:

Showdown: Democrat Rep. Stupak Locked in Dead Heat with House Leadership over Pro-Life Health Amendment 

Dem Leaders Plan to Block Vote on Pro-Life Health Amendment, Fearing It Otherwise "Certain to Prevail": AP

U.S. Bishops Will "Vigorously" Oppose Health Care if Abortion Concerns Not Addressed 

 Back to Top

---

"Death Panels" Return: House Bill Has Potential Physician-Assisted Suicide Loophole

By Peter J. Smith

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - They're back. The provisions on advanced-planning directives labeled "death panels" by concerned observers have re-emerged in the final version of the US House of Representatives health-care reform bill. Moreover, the bill also lacks protective language that would prevent reimbursement of physicians counseling assisted suicide as a legitimate "end-of-life" option in states like Washington and Oregon.

Section 240 of H.R. 3962 "Affordable Health Care for America Act" requires insurance companies offering a "qualified health benefits plan" on the health insurance exchange to provide information related to "end-of-life planning" to enrolled individuals.

Although the section stipulates that advance directives "shall not promote suicide, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing," none of the terms are defined in the bill. That poses a problem since some states like Oregon and Washington have laws legalizing physician-assisted suicide, but these states employ different terms.

Oregon instead has opted for the terms "physician-assisted death" or "physician aid in dying" as substitutes for "physician assisted suicide" after the pro-euthanasia group Compassion & Choices (the former Hemlock Society) asked the state's health and human services department for the language change. The state of Washington has also followed suit.

On that basis, a huge loophole could emerge through H.R. 3962, by which the distribution of "end of life" materials could also include information about assisted suicide options in states such as Oregon and Washington. The bill makes clear that nothing in that section should be construed to preempt a patient's decision to "withhold or withdraw of medical treatment or medical care" or to "withhold or withdraw of nutrition or hydration." The bill also makes clear that sec. 240 shall not be "construed to preempt or otherwise have any effect on State laws regarding advance care planning, palliative care, or end-of-life decision-making."

Compassion & Choices was revealed earlier in the summer as a major player behind incorporating the "advanced directives" language and as the only resource on an advanced directives manual for Veterans Hospital patients which critics warned appeared designed to lead patients to the conclusion that their "life is not worth living."

A number of analysts have also feared that incentivizing doctors to offer "end-of-life planning consultations" could lead to senior citizens, the terminally ill, or disabled, being pressured into accepting lower quality care from a doctor who figures he can receive higher reimbursement rates for talking with a patient about when or how he can refuse treatment.

Read HR 3962 "Affordable Health Care for America Act" 

See related coverage by LifeSiteNews.com:

Bowling for Death Panels: Euthanasia Group Behind "End-of-Life" Counseling 

Bowling for Death Panels II: Obama Administration Promotes "Death Book" for Veterans

 Back to Top

---

Late-Term Nebraska Abortionist Travels to DC to Rally for Health Bill

Tax money will pay for abortions, even the kind that Carhart commits - late-term abortions

WASHINGTON, DC, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Nebraska's late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart, who has largely overtaken the role of slain late-term abortionist George Tiller, appeared in Washington, D.C.to rally for the abortion-expanding health care bill unveiled Thursday.

Carhart was spotted by Concerned Women for America president Wendy Wright among the crowd that gathered for the bill's debut at the steps of the Capitol building, carrying a sign for the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.

"Nancy Pelosi's bill has gained the support of the nation's most notorious partial-birth abortionist who is under investigation for alleged unsafe medical practices," said Wright.  "Pelosi's bill can now be rightly called an abortionist's dream. Under her bill, government money will pay for abortions, even the kind that Carhart commits - late-term abortions against viable babies that put women's health at risk."

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman, who has launched a campaign against Carhart's abortion business, noted: "If there was any doubt that the Pelosi-Reid-Obama health care scheme would force taxpayers to fund abortions, there isn't anymore."

Carhart is currently under investigation by the Nebraska Attorney General's office after three female former employees came forward with information on possible illegal activity by him. They claimed that Carhart, whom some said was often chemically impaired during work, kept unsanitary working conditions and had the women perform medical duties without any medical training.

Nebraska's Attorney General Jon Bruning called Carhart "one sick individual."

Operation Rescue is sponsoring a protest against tax funded abortions on Saturday at 11:30 AM at the White House in conjunction with the IAM71.org coalition. Click here for more information. 

 Back to Top

---

Life Versus Death; Beggars Versus Giants - Part 2 of 2

See Part 1 of this series

Special Report By Steve Jalsevac

Massive Funding Received by Anti-Life Organizations

In Canada, all abortions are fully funded by taxation dollars. Abortion advocating feminist and other organizations are given millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars from all levels of government, plus funds from wealthy multinational foundations and other sources. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation reported that Canada's Conservative government gave $80 Million to de-population groups in 2006/07. $44,050,000 went to the UNFPA, and $18 million each went to Planned Parenthood and UNICEF.

The Minister for Canadian International Cooperation in the federal Liberal government in the year 2000 unveiled a $2.8 billion five-year plan to promote population control, abortion, abortifacient contraception, homosexuality and sex education targeted at poor nations. The list of abortion funding sources seems endless. By comparison, Canadian pro-life groups have had to work with a fraction of 1% of the amounts given to pro-abortion organizations to counter the influence of these groups.

In the United States, Planned Parenthood receives massive funds from government. Jim Sedlak, the executive director of STOPP International reported that according to PP's 2005-06 report, the organization received taxpayer funds for that year alone totalling $305.3 million and it has amassed assets worth $839.8 million. According to PPFA's financial report for 2007-2008, the abortion provider brought in total revenue of $1.038 billion and posted an $85 million profit.

The giant pro-abortion US foundations have given hundreds of millions towards population control related initiatives throughout the world. One of the nation's ten largest foundations, the MacArthur Foundation, in 2002 had assets of $4.2 billion and was reporting to be making grants totalling approximately $227 million annually. LifeSiteNews reported then that a list of recipients of grants from the MacArthur Foundation includes most of the enemies of life, faith and family that exist on the international level, as well as those in specific countries which the foundation targets. Apart from funding 'Catholics for a Free Choice' and International Planned Parenthood, the foundation targets funds towards abortion and population-control-promoting groups in Brazil, India, Mexico and Nigeria.

Then there is the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, the Packard Foundation and the newer, far larger Buffet and the Gates Foundations - all for many years pouring millions into initiatives and groups around the world that advance what we emphasize is a Culture of Death. A 2002 Vida Humana Internacional report gives some idea of where these foundation funds went to in Latin America at that time. 

"The Most Important Work on Earth"

Wealthy principled, pro-life leaning groups and individuals regularly give millions, if not billions to all kinds of worthy charitable and religious organizations every year. This is good. But they still have not caught on that the work that organizations like Campaign Life Coalition do is of an even higher level of importance. Pope John Paul II told HLI's Father Paul Marx in 1979 that pro-life is "the most important work on earth." Other leading figures have made similar statements.

"The pro-life movement is really all that there is consistently and daily fighting the death movement," says Hughes. "They are the David fighting the Goliath and yet they're not even given the slingshot and stones which were all that David needed to slay Goliath." "It can be disheartening at times," says Hughes, especially given the intimate knowledge that the organization has of the great tragedy and destruction of abortion and its many related evils.

The situation is more crucial now than ever in history. In Canada, there is a greater vacuum of political and other leadership on the life issues than Hughes has ever seen. In the United States, the Obama administration is the most anti-life, antifamily government in U.S. history. Under President Obama the powerful American UN delegation has had it's direction completely reversed and is now committed to pushing a world-wide right to abortion. The growing power of what is becoming a totalitarian EU bureaucracy is a massive threat to life and family.

"In other words," says Hughes, "there's never been a time that a strong national and international pro-life movement has been needed so much, including a much stronger LifeSiteNews international news service." "And yet", he says, "we are crippled by not receiving even remotely sufficient support from those who should be logically supporting us."

Hughes says, "we don't need much, you know, compared to the resources of our opponents. Pro-life workers around the world perform miracles with whatever they are given because of their incredible dedication and the fact that they are strengthened by their religious faith and their passion for justice on this issue." "But," he emphasizes, "they do need far more support than they have been getting -- especially from the wealthy and influential who are pro-life.

Why CLC, for instance, hasn't been getting donations of $1 million, $5 million, $10 million -- is beyond me," Hughes says. "But that has to change and very soon. Those amounts would provide the comparative slingshot and pebbles needed to slay the anti-life Goliath with it's billions of dollars of funding."

The veteran national and international pro-life leader suggests that "if those with large financial resources give a healthy proportion of their usual charitable donation funds to pro-life, they will save vastly more lives and do more long-term good for the world than everything else that they normally support combined."

This is About More Than Abortion

"The pro-life moment movement is not only about abortion," he says. "It is fighting an international movement engaged in a variety of efforts to massively reduce the world's population." "And to achieve that", Hughes explains, "they know they must also eliminate or at least severely limit the influence of religion and traditional cultures that emphasize the dignity and sacredness of human life and the importance of the natural family. They are doing that now."

"Their movement is a danger to everyone," Hughes says. "And unless we begin to take seriously that we have to fight this war, all the other things that we fund will achieve very little." "There will be far less of a future for people of principle and traditional values and a disturbing future for their children and grandchildren in this new world order that will be radically different from what we have worked and hoped for."

"However," Hughes stresses, "as big and as powerful as our opponents are, we are on God's side, so we have truth on our side. We have natural law on our side." The condition, he says, is that "we need much more support of every kind from those who know what is right and what is wrong."

The CLC President says, "Right now, our organization, for instance, is struggling to not have to lay off more critically needed staff. It's not going well. And yet, that is ridiculous. We have so much to do."

Angel Investors Needed

The little people are still doing their very best for the cause of life. What is needed, as can be seen from Jim Hughes's comments, is for those with larger financial means to finally come on board.

There is a special need at this moment for what is termed in the business world, "angel investors", to not only just keep CLC, LifeSiteNews and all the other effective, dedicated groups in the world going, but to help them get to that higher level of organization and influence that will eventually result in more funds coming in to sustain the new level of activity.

The return of investment for the angel investors would however not be a direct financial return on their investment. Pro-life angel investors would receive the same return as all those who have already been giving so much of their lives for this cause -- the sure knowledge there that they are contributing their required share to "the most important work on earth."

At the end of their days they would be assured of the blessed certainty that they responded to God's call to protect the precious lives of the most innocent and vulnerable of his highest creation willed by him specifically to be with him for eternity.

"In other words," says Hughes, "being involved in or at least supporting pro-life work with the right motivation, has lasting benefits that cannot be compared to the always passing rewards of the material life. It is a work of justice at its very highest level. It is the best possible type of legacy to leave the world."

Some years ago U.S. Congressman Hyde made a speech on the abortion issue that struck so deep to the core of the responsibility and rightness of defending the unborn that it has been repeated on numerous websites and in many print publications ever since. The quote seems to be especially appropriate to end this article.

When the Time Comes by Henry Hyde:

"When the time comes as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I've often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God and a terror will rip through your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there will be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, "Spare him because he loved us," and God will look at you and say not, "Did you succeed?" but "Did you try?"' 

See also Beggars vs. Giants: More Powerful Quotes

 Back to Top

---

Draft USCCB Document Addresses Confusion over Reproductive Technologies

By Patrick B. Craine

BALTIMORE, Maryland, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A new draft document on reproductive technologies will be considered by the U.S. bishops at their upcoming annual plenary assembly, in Baltimore from November 16-19.  Titled "Life-Giving Love in an Age of Technology," the 22-page document sets the forth the Church's teaching that procreation can never be licitly separated from the union of husband and wife, reports Catholic News Service.

While the Church feels compassion for those experiencing "unanticipated childlessness," the draft insists that some reproductive technologies "are not legitimate ways to solve" problems with infertility.

"Some solutions offered to infertile couples do justice to their dignity as individuals and as a couple, and to the full human dignity of their child, by helping their marital act to be life-giving," the draft reads. "Others are morally flawed efforts to replace the marital act that are not worthy of the tremendous gift God offers to husband and wife by calling them together as spouses and parents."

In an introduction, Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, chairman of the bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities, points to the need for such a document.  He says there is "great confusion among lay Catholics regarding the church's teaching on human reproductive technologies, including in vitro fertilization, cloning and other morally problematic techniques."

"Any method of 'making babies' is considered by many to be 'pro-life,'" he said.

But, as the draft explains, procreation must always respect the inherent dignity of the child.  "Children are not parents' possessions to manufacture, manipulate or design," it says.  "Rather, they are fellow persons with full human dignity, and parents are called to accept, care for and raise them to be new members of God's family and his kingdom.  Children deserve to be 'begotten, not made.'"

The draft reiterates the Church's condemnation of sperm and egg donation, in addition to surrogate motherhood, artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, and human cloning.

It also addresses the problem of "embryo adoption," in which a woman is implanted with a 'spare' frozen embryo that would otherwise have been killed.  The advancement of reproductive technologies has led to massive amounts of these frozen embryos, and some pro-life Catholics have argued in favour of their adoption.

Last December, in Dignitas Personae, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith appeared to rule that the practice is unacceptable just as is artificial reproduction.

According the U.S. bishops' draft, "Serious moral concerns have been raised about embryo adoption, particularly as it requires the wife in the adopting couple to receive into her womb an embryonic child who was not conceived through her bodily union with her husband."

"The terrible plight of abandoned frozen embryos underscores the need for our society to end practices such as IVF that regularly produce so many 'spare' or unwanted human beings," it explains.

There are, however, licit ways for infertile couples to welcome children, the draft says, including adoption, which it calls "a wonderful way to build a family."

Regarding the physical healing of infertility, the document says, "The challenge is to diagnose and address problems so these (male and female) bodies can function as they should -- and there is no moral problem in doing this, any more than there is in other medical treatments to restore health."

"Hormonal treatment and other medications, conventional or laser surgery to repair damaged or blocked fallopian tubes, means for alleviating male infertility factors, and other restorative treatments are available," it continues.  They also advocate the use of natural family planning to improve the couple's efforts at conceiving.

"These avenues do not substitute for the married couple's act of loving union," the draft explains.  "Rather, they assist this act in reaching its potential for giving rise to a new human life."

Cardinal Rigali, in his introduction, indicates that the rise of reproductive technologies has led to a dehumanization of the unborn, which must be combated even among Catholics.

"The widespread moral acceptance of IVF and the large numbers of frozen embryos have contributed to the general public attitude that human embryos are less than human and are better used for scientific experimentation rather than 'wasted'," he says.  "There is a need to help Catholics understand specific differences between the Catholic understanding and a secular understanding of human life, and how these distinctions have led to different judgments on technologies that may assist human reproduction."

At their plenary assembly next month, the U.S. bishops will also discuss and vote on a pastoral letter about marriage, entitled 'Love and Life in the Divine Plan'.

 Back to Top

---

New Book Details Strong Influence of Trudeau's Womanizing on His Politics

By Patrick B. Craine

October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A new biography about Pierre Elliot Trudeau reveals the great influence exerted on his political decisions by the many women with whom he associated romantically.  For pro-life and pro-family advocates, these revelations shed light on the character and motivations of the man who opened the legal door to Canada's now-rampant sexual permissiveness and abortion culture.

The book, Just Watch Me: The Life of Pierre Elliot Trudeau 1968-2000, is historian John English's second volume on the former Canadian Prime Minister.  English drew on Trudeau's personal papers, as well as interviews with his family and friends.  While he focuses on Trudeau's work as prime minister, he also delves into the man's well-protected private life, including his many romantic attachments and their affect on his politics.

English explains, for example, how Trudeau, greatly distressed by the breakdown of his marriage to Margaret, chose against an election in 1977, despite strong pressure due to his popularity at the time.  "It was Trudeau's worst political decision," writes English.  "Reasons of the heart, sad ones, explain Trudeau's lack of will for an election in the late summer of 1977."  The election waited until 1979, when he lost to Joe Clark.

One of Trudeau's lovers, Margot Kidder, the biographer relates, convinced him to launch his peace initiative in 1983 after he had approved the testing of cruise missiles in Canadian territory.  He actually brought the actress and peace activist to a dinner in Washington, says English, where she "argued vehemently with senior Reagan administration officials while he urged her on by squeezing her thigh each time she scored a point."

Trudeau involved his attachments in state functions on other occasions as well.  He once revealed to Margaret, says English, that he had given two of his mistresses the opportunity to perform at a reception of the Governor General.

Trudeau "flirted continually and outrageously and, despite his concern for privacy, he seemed to enjoy flaunting his attractiveness in the presence of women," says English. 

Trudeau's womanizing, says Mary Ellen Douglas of Campaign Life Coalition, "was a part of his character, his weak character." She added that she believes that Trudeau's permissiveness in his personal life "certainly" had an effect on his legislation - namely his campaign to liberalize Canada's laws on sexuality.

The man famously declared that "there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation," and "what's done in private between adults doesn't concern the Criminal Code."  Using this rationale, he proposed his devastating Omnibus Bill, passed while he was Prime Minister in 1969, through which he won the legalization of abortion, contraception, and homosexual acts.  The year prior his government had legalized divorce as well.

As a professed Catholic, Trudeau justified these massive policy changes by insisting that he could not impose his personal morality on the nation.

But, opines Douglas, "I think he was laughing at it.  He made sure that his lack of morality became law. So he wasn't separating anything except to pretend that he wasn't imposing morality, when in fact, everything about him was imposing immorality, and he made sure he legislated it."

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

The Real Pierre Trudeau: Father of Canada's Permissive Society
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2000/oct/001003a.html

 Back to Top

---

NARAL Supports GOP Candidate in Fight for NY23 Against Surging Pro-Life Conservative

Abortion activist group's strategy called "beyond stupid"

By Peter J. Smith

WATERTOWN, New York, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - NARAL Pro-Choice New York has now thrown itself into the three-way battle going on for the New York 23rd with a heavy endorsement for the embattled Republican pro-abortion candidate Dede Scozzafava.

NARAL, sensing that Scozzafava's political fortunes are in serious trouble, has decided to pour in their resources to prop up her failing bid to fill the seat vacated by Rep. John M. McHugh, who resigned in September to become Secretary of the Army.

Elizabeth Benjamin of the New York Daily reports that the abortion-advocacy group blanketed 10,000 mailboxes in New York's 23rd on Thursday and Friday to get out the vote for Scozzafava. The mass-mailing costs something to the tune of $10,000-15,000 and tells readers that Scozzafava is a "no brainer choice" because the GOP Assemblywoman has "a 100% pro-choice record and a clear record of commitment to reproductive and women's health care issues."

Some pro-abortion advocates, however, are appalled that NARAL has decided to get involved now, arguing that the move essentially amounts to friendly-fire on a candidate who is already hemorrhaging GOP voters over her very liberal stances.

Markos Moulitsas of the left-wing blog Daily Kos says that NARAL is "working for a right wing victory" and that if the pro-abortion organization does not want the pro-life Conservative candidate Doug Hoffman to win, their public effort "is beyond stupid."

"Her role now is that of spoiler -- can she take enough votes away from Hoffman to give the Democrat, Bill Owens, a plurality victory?" wrote Mousilitas, adding that their efforts were indistinguishable from a conservative ad that praised the "progressive" Scozzafava for positions that would offend conservative/GOP voters.

 "When your messaging and tactics are indistinguishable from the right-wing dirty tricksters, you know you've screwed up," lamented Moulitsas.

A new poll commissioned by DailyKos and Research2000 confirms what two smaller previous polls (see coverage) indicated: that Hoffman has surged past Scozzafava into a neck-and-neck race with the Democrat. That poll shows Owens leading Hoffman by one point, 33 to 32 percent, and well within the 4 percentage point margin of error. Republican Scozzafava has crumbled to 21 percent and 14 percent remain undecided. The poll was conducted October 26 to 28.

The poll also shows Hoffman increasing his hold on Republican and Independent voters - both crucial to his campaign - but also garnering more GOP votes than the GOP nominee. The Conservative candidate's surge also means that in little over one week he statistically swapped places with the liberal Scozzafava, who had the blessing of GOP party bosses and the National Republican Congressional Committee.

In fact, it looks like more Republicans are beginning to jump onboard Hoffman's insurgent campaign and abandon Scozzafava in order to deny a seat held by the GOP since 1871 to the Democrats. Former NY Gov. George Pataki - a liberal GOP leader - endorsed Hoffman as the GOP's best hope for NY23, and the NRCC has tacitly backed away from airing ads attacking Hoffman to attacking Owens instead.

The election has enormous consequences for both the GOP as a Hoffman victory would embolden conservatives to demand the GOP select candidates that would embrace a conservative mandate. But for the conservative movement itself, a Hoffman victory would send shockwaves through the conservative establishment as well. It would see the eclipse of conservative Newt Gingrich who endorsed Scozzafava as a pragmatic vs. principled decision, and the rise of Sarah Palin, who acted on her pledge to support conservatives of any party and endorsed Hoffman. Palin's endorsement raised $116,000 for the Hoffman campaign in just 24 hours, furthering adding to his campaign's momentum.

Pro-life organizations are playing a critical role in Hoffman's election effort. The Susan B. Anthony List, which endorsed Hoffman, has recruited over 300 pro-life volunteers to actively assist in the Hoffman campaign. As last reported, 102 pro-life volunteers were recruited by SBA to distribute yard signs, 95 volunteers are in charge of literature distribution at their local churches, and 108 volunteers have pledged to work at polling stations on Election Day. The pro-life group also has 40 homeschoolers and their parents volunteering to man the polls.

Read previous coverage by LifeSiteNews.com:

New Polls Show Pro-Life Conservative Upstart Hoffman Taking Lead in Battle for NY 23 

Conservative Rebellion Explodes in New York over Extreme Liberal GOP Candidate

 Back to Top

---

Student President Faces Removal after Allowing Pro-Life Display

By Patrick B. Craine

SACRAMENTO, California, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Christian student government president in California is facing a recall amidst anger from some administration and students after the student government permitted a pro-life demonstration during the college's annual Constitution Day celebrations.

Constitution Day at Sacramento City College, which took place this year on September 16-17, is an annual celebration of the Constitution and free speech, which features external speakers and organizations who request an invitation from the Associated Student Government (ASG).

ASG president Steve Macias, 19, and student affairs commissioner Monica Guzman now risk losing their positions in a recall vote after the ASG welcomed the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP).  Run by the Sanctity of Human Life Network, GAP draws a comparison between abortion and past genocidal atrocities through graphic images.

While the ASG voted unanimously in favour of the GAP display on September 2nd, in response to a request from the pro-life group, some ASG officials have since denounced the event, admitting they were not aware of the nature of the group when they voted.

"The way the voting works is you get a proposal to read it the week before and you have a week to read it over before you vote on it at the board meeting," Macias told WorldNetDaily. "I guess some of them hadn't read it over and voted on it without knowing what it was. I guess they probably saw Genocide Awareness Project and thought, 'That sounds fine.' They didn't really do their research or ask any questions."

Critics say that hosting GAP without inviting an alternate viewpoint manifested a biased position from the ASG, but, in a September 17th statement, Macias insisted that "the ASG has not endorsed any one side of the debate on the constitutionality of abortion."

Rather, they merely accepted the group's request, he said.  "The ASG does not take into consideration the specific viewpoint of those who request to be a part of ASG events," he explained.  "The determining factor in our Constitution Day events was based on whether or not they addressed constitutional issues that were relevant to students and stressed the importance of our nation's founding documents."

On the second day of the event, several pro-abortion groups came out in response to the GAP display.  Planned Parenthood, the Queer-Straight Alliance club, the Sac City Freethinkers club, and SCC Health Services put up their own booths and passed out flyers.

"They set up tables across from their exhibit and harassed them the entire time they were there, throwing condoms at them, yelling at them, putting signs up and saying, 'A woman's choice is a woman's choice,'" Macias told WND.

Macias says that on the day of the event the administration took him out of class to demand that he shut down the GAP display, despite the fact that the campus is open to the public.

"I was in class," he told WND. "The administration tried to call my phone a million times. Eventually, I walked out of the classroom and picked up the phone."

Vice President of Student Services Michael Poindexter and ASG faculty adviser Lee Weathers-Miguel met him outside his classroom and demanded that he have the pro-life group leave right away.

"I said, 'I can't tell them to leave. They have every right to be here'," said Macias, to which they responded, "Go out there and tell them to move their display somewhere off campus or turn their signs around. Tell them this isn't OK."

"I can't tell them to do any of that," Macias said. "They have every right to be here, and it's not my place to tell them what to do with their display."

"After I refused to tell the group to take it down, they said, 'We're pi--sed off about this. This is unacceptable,'" he said.

Poindexter and Weathers-Miguel told him that he should have invited a pro-abortion group as well.  "They said if I had invited people from the other side, this would have been OK," he explained. "If I would have included Planned Parenthood in this, then it would be perfectly fine. But because I hadn't, they needed to go."

Poindexter left, but Weathers-Miguel remained.  "He said he was incredibly mad because I had 'made him look like an a-- in front of the administration'," Macias said. "He also said he wouldn't forget this."

The recall election was called by Weathers-Miguel shortly afterward, through a violation of protocol, according to Macias.  The election took place October 27-28 and the results have not yet been released.

A week after the event, the Queer-Straight Alliance took up a petition for the new election, and then submitted it to Weathers-Miguel, who validated it and chose a date for the election.

The student government constitution, however, says Macias, dictates that the petition is to be submitted to and validated by the student justice board.  The petition is then given to the student affairs board, who establish election rules for the ASG board to vote on.

"The date [Weathers-Miguel] chose was less than six days away," he said, though College President Kathryn E. Jeffery later pushed it back. "They gave us no information, no letters, phone calls or e-mails. I found out about it through the school newspaper."

According to Macias, the university administration and students supported free-speech displays, so long as they as they were not pro-life.  "They are now saying that they don't support this group, so it shouldn't be allowed on campus - which is wrong," he said. "They obviously don't have a firm grasp of what free speech is if they feel that way."

The extreme reaction to GAP at Sacramento City College sharply contrasts their reception (http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09102807.html) at the University of California-Berkeley earlier this week.  Despite strong protest from the campus pro-abortion groups, the university administrators of the strongly pro-abortion campus defended their right to be there.

"We don't regulate content," said Dean of Students Jonathan Poullard.

Contact Information:

Kathryn Jeffery, President
Sacramento City College
Phone:  (916) 558-2100
Email:  jefferk@scc.losrios.edu

Michael Poindexter, Vice President of Student Services
Sacramento City College
Phone: (916) 558-2142
Email:  PoindeM@scc.losrios.edu

Lee Weathers-Miguel, Student Affairs Specialist
Sacramento City College
Phone:  (916) 558-2382
Email:  miguell@scc.losrios.edu

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Graphic Obama-Themed Abortion Display Clashes with Strong Pro-Abortion Presence at UC Berkeley
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09102807.html

 Back to Top

---

ACLU Fights Illinois Parental Notification Law

CHICAGO, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) recently brought forward a suit in Illinois state court to block the Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act, after the ACLU lost its bid in federal court earlier this year to stop the law from going into effect.

On Thursday, the Thomas More Society, a public interest firm, filed a petition in Cook County Circuit Court to intervene on behalf of three attorneys for the state of Illinois defending the Illinois Parental Notice of Abortion Act.

State Attorneys Stewart Umholtz of Tazewell County, Edward Deters of Effingham County, and Raymond Cavanaugh of Henderson County are seeking to have the case dismissed.

The petition is expected to be heard at 2:00 p.m., Monday, November 2, 2009, along with the ACLU's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the Parental Notice of Abortion Act.

"At some point, the ACLU will realize that Illinois law, just like the law in 36 other states, provides parents the right to know before their underage daughters are taken for abortions," said Peter Breen, Executive Director & Legal Counsel for the Society. "Until that time, we will defend against the ACLU's continued attempts to thwart the will of Illinois voters, the large majority of whom support parental notice before an abortion."

The suit brought in Illinois court by the ACLU did not name Illinois state's attorneys, as had been done in the earlier federal case.

The Thomas More Society's filing asserts that the ACLU's case is barred because of the earlier loss in the federal courts. The Society also asserts that the Illinois Constitution of 1970 did not include a right to abortion, based on the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention. Also, abortion remained illegal in Illinois, under almost all circumstances, after the 1970 Illinois Constitution went into effect and up until the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, which was based only on the U.S. Constitution.

 Back to Top

---

Beggars Versus Giants: More Quotes to Consider

See previous Part 1 and Part 2 of this series

Compiled by Steve Jalsevac

October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The following are additional quotes from prominent individuals emphasizing why abortion and its related anti-life evils must be given a very high priority:


"Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves. Likewise, we cannot survive as a free  nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide."
Ronald Reagan ­ Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation 


"everything collapses without respect for life."
Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo, the head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Vatican City, Oct. 3, 2000

"The abortion law has a common denominator with the spirit of the Nazis and of communism: We may kill.."
Auxiliary Bishop of Salzburg Andreas Laun in an interview with the Austrian magazine News

"Some will say that the defense of innocent life is only one issue among many, that it is important but not fundamental. They are wrong. In the natural moral law, the good of life is the most fundamental good and the condition for the enjoyment of all other goods."
Archbishop Raymond Burke Jan. 2004 

"Defense of human life is the only foundation on which all else must be built, or else, all else is eventually going to collapse. .."
Bishop William Murphy, Archdiocese of Boston in Pilot Column

"The taking of innocent human life is so heinous, so horribly evil, and so absolutely opposite to the law of Almighty God that abortion must take precedence over every other issue."
Bishop James Timlin, D.D., Bishop of Scranton, "The Ballot and the Right to Life" Fall 2000

"...we have a most grave obligation to defend all human life from the moment of conception until natural death. God help us if we fail in this most fundamental obligation."
Archbishop John Myers of Newark, New Jersey - May 4, 2004

"A new 'ideology of evil' is threatening society and it includes gay 'marriage,' and abortion"
Pope John Paul II in his book, "Memory and Identity." about his experiences with 20th-century totalitarianism

[T]he failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the 'rightness' of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community.
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, "Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics" (1998),

"Never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never give up." 
Winston Churchill's shortest and most memorable commencement speech of all time at his alma mater during World War II as quoted by Peter Kreeft in his book How to Win the Culture War.

 Back to Top

---

Mother Charged in Murder of Her Autistic Son

By Patrick B. Craine

MISSISSAUGA, Ontario, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Mississauga, Ontario woman was charged earlier this week with murdering her autistic son in what some are speculating may be a case of euthanasia spurred by the boy's condition.

While full details on the case are yet to be revealed, one advocate for people with disabilities has urged authorities not to treat autism as a "mitigating factor," but instead to "extend special legal protection" to Canada's vulnerable.

Tony Khor, 15, was found by Peel Regional Police on Sunday morning around 11:00 a.m. in Homewood Suites Hotel.  The boy's mother, Seow Cheng Sim, 51, reportedly booked the hotel room on Saturday night for her and her son following an argument with her husband, Boon Khor.

According to neighbours they were arguing over how best to care for Tony, their only child.  Longtime friend and neighbour, Peter Varanelli, said Boon wanted to send Tony, who suffered from severe autism, to a specialized care facility, but his mother would not have it.

"Her son was her life. Period," Varanelli said. "Maybe she should have just accepted that he needed to go to an institution, but she just couldn't see it that way."

The mother has been charged with first degree murder.

While police are still investigating whether Tony's condition motivated the killing, disability right's organizations are speaking out about the boy's death.

"It's heartbreaking, but there are hundreds of thousands of families out there managing to cope without this end result," Suzanne Lanthier, executive director of Autism Speaks Canada, told the National Post.

Strikingly, Tony's murder occurred at the same time as Parliament is deliberating over Bill C-384, which would legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, noted that a similar incident occurred in Montreal more than a decade ago when Charles Blais, an autistic boy, was killed by his mother.  She was charged and convicted, but given a suspended sentence.

According to Schadenberg, such cases are particularly distressing because autistic children will normally completely and totally trust their caregiver.

"My fourteen year-old son is autistic and I feel particularly connected to cases where the parent of an autistic child injures or kills their child," he said.  "I understand the challenges in raising an autistic child and I do not claim to be a perfect parent but the thought of killing an autistic child is abhorrent."

"We cannot make a judgement on this case without further information," he continued. "It is possible that Khor's mother was experiencing a total mental breakdown, but even if that were true the court should not consider autism as a mitigating factor but rather society needs to extend special legal protection to people with disabilities because of their vulnerable nature."

 Back to Top

---

Man Imprisoned Under Anti-Abortion Law for Beating Pregnant 17-Year-Old to Induce Miscarriage

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

VERNAL, Utah, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A 21 year-old Utah man was sentenced to five years in prison on Tuesday for beating a pregnant 17 year-old girl to try to cause a miscarriage, after she paid him to do so.

Prosecutors said the seven months pregnant Uintah County girl paid Aaron Harrison $150 to beat her after her boyfriend threatened a breakup if she didn't abort the child.

Court documents said Harrison brought the girl in May to his home, where he was accused of kicking and biting her, leaving bruises on her stomach and a bite mark on her neck. The baby survived the beating and was safely delivered in August.

Harrison had pleaded guilty to second-degree felony charge of attempted murder, which is punishable by up to 15 years in prison. But District Judge A. Lynn Payne instead sentenced him under Utah's anti-abortion statute, saying a charge of third-degree "attempted killing of an unborn child" better fit the facts of the case, The Salt Lake Tribune reported.

The judge called Harrison's conduct in the beating case "horrible beyond description" and said he had "a remarkable disregard for human life."

"I don't think words can describe the kind of depraved conduct you entered into in trying to take the life of an (unborn) child," Judge Payne said to Harrison from the bench.

Harrison was also sentenced in 8th District Court in connection with three other third-degree felonies, each carrying up to five years imprisonment, which means he will spend up to twenty years behind bars.

The girl, whose identity was not reported, pleaded no contest in June to a second-degree felony charge of criminal solicitation to commit murder for paying Harrison to assault her. Juvenile Court Judge Larry Steele ordered her to be placed in the custody of Utah Juvenile Justice Services until she was 21, but reversed his decision and released her earlier this month after ruling that she was seeking an abortion and was therefore not criminally liable.

Steele called the girl's actions "shocking and crude" in the ruling, but said that under state law, "a woman who solicits or seeks to have another cause an abortion of her own unborn child cannot be criminally liable."

Dr. Frank Joseph, a retired Catholic physician from Southern California who operates a pro-life website called Abortion Truths, commented on the incongruity of the case.

"Here's a case where the girl pays someone to kill her unborn child and it failed but the perpetrator was still sent to prison and the girl was given a slap on her wrist," Dr. Joseph observed.

"Had she paid an abortionist to kill her child, that would have been legal and the girl would not have broken the law and neither would have the abortionist."

The Salt Lake Tribune reports that the girl, who is now 18, is seeking custody of the baby.
 

See related LSN articles:

UK Doctor Convicted of Trying to Poison Pregnant Mistress 

Cow Drug Given To 17-Year-Old Girl In Abortion Attempt 

Man Who Laced Wife's Food with RU-486 Sentenced to Nearly Four Years 

Man Flees Country After Accusation of Causing Abortions by Spiking Drinks with RU-486

Arizona Defense Lawyers Argue No Crime Committed Since Pre-Born Remains are "Not Human" 

 Back to Top

---

Europe's Most Popular Long-Term "Contraception" is Abortifacient IUD

By Hilary White

ROME, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A recently released study has revealed that the abortifacient Intra-Uterine Device (IUD) and the hormone-releasing Intra-Uterine System (IUS) are the most popular forms of long-term birth control in Europe among the over-30s. 
 
Published in the European Journal Of Contraception And Reproductive Health Care, the study evaluates the use of long-acting reversible contraceptives, and notes that younger women who want children later do not use the long-term methods as much as older women.

However, the study noted that 10 per cent of women in Europe use long-term methods, the majority over 30 years of age, and that the most popular long-term methods are intrauterine (which includes both the IUD and the IUS).

But the description of the IUD or IUS as contraceptive can only be accepted together with the newly established definition of pregnancy as beginning only at the implantation, and not the fertilization, of an embryo.

The intrauterine system (IUS) is inserted into the uterus and contains a hormone cylinder that releases hormones which reduce the frequency of ovulation and induces the release of chemicals naturally occurring in the body which are believed to be "hostile" to early-stage embryos. The IUS also has a secondary effect similar to that of other chemical birth control in thinning the lining of the uterus, making it difficult for an embryo to implant.

The World Health Organisation says that IUDs are the world's most popular form of long-term reversible birth control, used by 160 million women around the world. Non-hormonal IUDs are a plastic T-shaped frame that is wound around with pure electrolytic copper wire that is inserted into the uterus.

In 1967, when IUDs were first popularised in the US, the American Medical Association Committee on Human Reproduction pointed out the abortifacient properties of the devices, observing, "That these devices prevent nidation [implantation] of an already fertilized ovum has been accepted as the most likely mechanism of the action."

Anthony Ozimic of Britain's Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) commented that intrauterine "contraception" is not a form of contraception at all, but a method of procuring a very early-term abortion.

He noted that the popularity of the intrauterine devices in Europe is just another manifestation of the continent's flirtation with self-extinction. "Interestingly," he said, "Europa, the mythical Greek woman after whom Europe is named, had three children, whereas the average European woman of child-bearing age only has one or at most two. Killing babies and avoiding pregnancy is hardly the way forward for a rapidly ageing continent."

 Back to Top

---

Extreme Religious Left Furious over Rome's Anglican Offer

By Hilary White

ROME, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Vatican's offer to allow doctrinally Christian Anglicans to enter the Catholic Church en masse is eliciting increasingly shrill denunciations from representatives of the extreme left of the religious world. The Vatican, critics say, is indulging in a form of ecclesiastical "piracy" and is attempting to shift the Church back towards its old pre-Vatican II "imperialism."

In an Op Ed published October 27 in several European newspapers, one of the most notorious members of the Catholic Church's extreme liberal establishment, former Catholic theology professor Hans Küng, lashed out at his one-time university colleague Pope Benedict, saying that the offer to the Anglicans is a "tragedy," and "a non-ecumenical piracy of priests." It presages a shift to the extreme right and a return to an "old fashioned" "anti-reformist" mindset. 

Küng, a Swiss Catholic priest and an outspoken opponent of the Catholic discipline of clerical celibacy, said the decision is a signal that "Pope Benedict is set upon restoring the Roman imperium." He denounced "Ratzinger's stubborn, uncomprehending intransigence" on the matter of married clergy and said that "the Roman thirst for power divides Christianity and damages its own church."

The Vatican's original announcement made clear, however, that the initiative was not initiated by Rome, but in response to the pleas of disaffected groups of Anglicans, including bishops, who can no longer stomach their church's secularising trends.

The Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), the largest of the independent Anglican groups, has asked repeatedly for this provision - a fact that is a matter of public record. In 2007, the group's leaders met in Portsmouth, England and announced that they had "unanimously agreed" to ask the pope for "full, corporate, sacramental union" with the Catholic Church.

The editor-in-chief of the Vatican's paper L'Osservatore Romano, Gian Maria Vian, has struck back, saying that Küng, the "former colleague and friend" of Pope Benedict, has "distorted" the pope's intentions out of "bitterness." He decried Küng's "unprovoked attack" against the Church and "its unquestionable commitment to ecumenism."

Other commentators were more succinct, with the popular and acerbic online columnist "Diogenes" dryly noting at CatholicCulture.com: "Hans Küng has criticized Pope Benedict. In other news, the sun rose in the east this morning."

Patrick Madrid, an American Catholic author and host of several EWTN television and radio series, wrote that Küng's screeds are becoming increasingly predictable. "Father Küng's aggressive ambivalence toward the Catholic Church is almost cute now," he wrote. Küng, he said, is like "a rickety old submarine that surfaces now and then to vent the noxious fumes that have built up inside."

Following the Vatican's announcement, in an Op Ed for the Washington Post retired American bishop of the Episcopal Church Diocese of Newark, John Shelby Spong, took a slightly different tack, saying that the incident is "a sad picture of how out-of-date and irrelevant institutional Christianity has become."

Spong is a major "religious" promoter of left-liberal causes like radical feminism and the homosexualist movement. In his writings, Spong has decried "organised religion," and "theism" as a description of God. He has also denied the Virgin Birth and the bodily resurrection of Jesus. 

Spong continued, "Here we have two unimpressive Christian leaders, rooted deeply in yesterday, jockeying publicly to see who can be the most prejudiced about the role of women and the place of homosexual people in the life of the Christian Church. It would be amusing if it were not so ludicrous."

He continued, "The pope constantly parades before the world an uninformed homophobia and his attempt to suggest that women are 'separate but equal' is almost pathetic." He also blasted the pope for his refusal to accept the liberal consensus on the use of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa.

Spong then took a shot at Rowan Williams, the Anglican archbishop of Canterbury, who signed the announcement and gave his approval. Williams, Spong said, "long ago sacrificed a commitment to truth on the altar of church unity, made peace with those infected with the prejudices of sexism and homophobia and acted as if unity could actually be achieved by rejecting women or gay people."

Spong closes, after nearly 400 words on the subject, saying that he is "quite simply not interested in this debate."

"It does not speak to my world," he concluded.

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Traditionally Christian Anglicans Ask to Join Catholic Church En Masse 

Vatican Guilty of "Divisiveness" for Anglican Reunification Offer: Leftist Critics 

Traditional Anglican Communion "On the Same Page" as Vatican on Life and Family: Canadian TAC Head 

Anglican Reunion will Create "Huge Cultural Shift" to the Extreme Left in Anglican Church 

 Back to Top

---

Wisconsin Ponders Replacing Abstinence-Only Program with Contraceptive Sex Ed

By Kathleen Gilbert

MADISON, Wisconsin, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A law set for consideration in the Wisconsin state legislature aims to replace the abstinence-only curriculum used in the state's public schools with one that educates students on the use of condoms and contraceptives.

The Healthy Youth Act (AB-458 and SB-324), introduced by Democrat state Rep. Tamara Grigsby and Sen. Lena Taylor last month, aims to establish a contraceptive-promoting state curriculum for all schools that have a Human Growth and Development Program.  The curriculum is billed as giving "age-appropriate, medically accurate information" on how to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease.

Under current Wisconsin law, public school sex ed classes are abstinence-based.  The new law would most immediately affect the approximately six in ten public schools currently using a sex education program, according to the Pierce County Herald.

The Assembly Education Committee on Tuesday voted to recommend the Healthy Youth Act on an 8-5 party-line vote, and is now set to be scheduled for debate on the Assembly floor.  The Senate Education Committee held a hearing on the bill on Thursday.  Both chambers are controlled by Democrats.

Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin lauded the bill.

"Abstinence just does not work to change teen behavior. Studies have concluded that," said Chris Taylor, public policy director for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin.

But local pro-life groups, including Pro-life Wisconsin, Wisconsin Family Action, and Wisconsin Right to Life, argue that the legislation would not stem the state's rising pregnancy and STD rates, but only increase the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions. 

Wisconsin Right to Life legislative director Susan Armacost told legislators in a memo that the bill "would require that students be taught about a number of activities that could endanger their health and could result in a growing number of teen sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancies and abortions."

"It's going to be an uphill battle," Matt Sande, the legislative director of Pro-Life Wisconsin, told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN).  "We're hopeful that some of the more moderate Senate Democrats will see that this is overkill, it's a one-size-fits-all mandate that violates the principle of local control."

Said Sande: "It's not just talking about [contraception], it's actually very precise instruction on how to use it.  Make no mistake, there are going to be nurses up there demonstrating how to use this contraception.  It'll be graphic."

The Assembly bill also stresses that the program must not "promote bias against pupils of any race, gender, sexual orientation ... or against sexually active pupils."

In testimony against the Senate bill at a public hearing Thursday, Sande pointed out that the measure would allow physicians and nurses visiting schools under the Volunteer Health Provider Program to discuss reproductive health - a topic that was previously disallowed.  This, he said, would leave children vulnerable to Planned Parenthood employees advocating contraception and abortion in schools.

 Back to Top

---

Sedation with Dehydration used as “Slow Euthanasia” UK Survey Reveals

By Hilary White

LONDON, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - “Slow euthanasia by deep sedation" is a current reality in the British health care system, and not just a journalistic myth, a survey of UK doctors has revealed. The study found that continuous deep sedation (CDS) was more frequently requested by patients or relatives seeking a “hastened death” and was associated “with a greater incidence of other end-of-life decisions containing some intent to end life by the doctor”.

Under existing medical care protocols in the UK, patients who are designated as dying, can have food and hydration withdrawn until they die of dehydration, even when continued hydration can still be of medical benefit.

“Doctors supporting legalization of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, or who were nonreligious, were more likely to report using CDS,” the researchers found.

Published in the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, the survey also said that 18.7 per cent of the 2,923 doctors polled used CDS to keep patients unconscious for long periods to control pain, most often for those who were dying of cancer. Ethicists say that this use of CDS is legitimate if it is not in conjunction with premature withdrawal of hydration. The study also noted that “specialists in care of the elderly were least likely to report the use of CDS”.

Critics of the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP), a widely used protocol for treating the terminally ill, have said that it is a “pathway to death” that presumes the intention to end the life of the patient. In September, after the publication of a letter by physicians warning that the LCP is hastening the death of patients who are often refused food and hydration, pro-life leaders in the UK said that through a combination of existing legislation and various end-of-life medical care protocols, euthanasia has been effectively made legal in the UK without any act of the government.

John Smeaton, Director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), Europe's leading pro-life organisation, told LSN, "We have a government policy of silent euthanasia right now in this country.

“This is being brought about through a number of different factors, but significantly the Mental Capacity Act of 2005, that formally defined the provision of food and fluids as medical treatment.”

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Britain's Pathway to Euthanasia - NHS Protocols for Dehydrating Disabled Patients to Death

British Man Found Free of Cancer Dies after Hydration Removed

 Back to Top

---

Canadian National Pro-Life Conference Opens in Saskatoon Saskatchewan

By John-Henry Westen in Saskatoon

SASKATOON, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Canadian National Pro-Life Conference got underway last night in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, also known as the City of Bridges.  The conference, "Building Bridges: Making Choices for Life," is hosted by the Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association, and sponsored by Campaign Life Coalition and Life Canada.

Jim Hughes, National President of Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), opened the meeting with greetings, thanks and humorous stories, followed by Dr. Delores Doherty President of Life Canada.

The evening's main speaker was Andrea Mrozek, the founding director of the blog prowomanprolife.org.  Mrozek explained that she comes at pro-life from a distinctly women's perspective.  She described her target audience as women in their late twenties to late thirties.

She observed that abortion has not improved the lives of women in society, was actually opposed by early feminists, has many health risks for women, and is disproportionally used to eliminate girl babies over boys. Abortion, she therefore concluded, is actually harmful for all women, and not only those who choose it.

This morning began with a rousing address by Rev. Dr. James Lamb, the Executive Director of Lutherans for Life, United States.  Dr. Lamb reflected on the Scriptures, noting that the path to Calvary did not begin in a stable, but in the body of Mary, the mother of Jesus.  He stressed that as Christian pro-lifers we do not only cherish unborn children because they are precious, but ultimately because they are precious to God.

"Pastors," he said, "don't speak on political issues, unless they are also spiritual issues, and then we are compelled to speak."  Pastor Lamb concluded noting that while the Lord still wants warriors, "we are not striving for victory in the pro-life movement, we are struggling IN victory - the victory is assured."

The next speaker, Dr. Larry Reynolds gave a very moving presentation regarding the issue from the perspective of medical doctors. Dr. Reynolds, a physician who delivered babies for over 30 years, has been a well-loved and respected teacher and researcher in Family Medicine.  

He was, however, punished for his pro-life values. Last year, Reynolds was removed from his posts as Head of the Department of Family Medicine and Professor at the University of Manitoba and Head of the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority's Family Medicine Program.

In his conclusion, he said through tears that when his life is over he prays that, when he meets the countless souls of unborn children and those mothers who suffered from abortion, he will be able to tell them: "I didn't do everything I could have. I didn't do as much as I should have. But I was not always silent."

 Back to Top

---

New Study Shows Parents Play a Significant Role In Teen Sexual Decisions

Teens do listen and want to listen to their parents, as indicated by the surveys"

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

OTTAWA, October 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNEws.com) - A new study by the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada (IMFC) suggests that parental influence over teenage sexual behavior begins during childhood, and that parental attitudes and behaviors significantly influence sexual choices in the teen years.

Research by IMFC's Dr. Frank Jones, based on Statistics Canada data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth which compared responses from parents and their children age six to eleven and then again eight years later as teens, found that parental lifestyle choices influence children's future sexual activity.

The data reveals that 39.9 per cent of teens age 14 to 19 have had consensual sexual intercourse, which differentiated by gender is 41.6 per cent of girls and 38.1 percent of boys.

"Considering the risk of disease, unexpected pregnancy and emotional upheaval, most parents would prefer their teens delay sexual activity," said Peter Jon Mitchell, Research Analyst with the IMFC.

The study looked at four aspects of parental lifestyle that deeply influence teens' perception of themselves and the consequent risks they are willing to take as they grow to adulthood.

Looking at parental substance abuse, the study found that children of parents who drank to excess two or more times a year were more likely to be sexually active as teens. This was particularly true for girls who were 38 per cent more likely to be sexually active than the national average. Similarly, children of smokers were 22 per cent more likely to be sexually active as teens.

Previous studies have suggested teen sexual activity is often accompanied by drug and alcohol use, and teens often take their cues on substance use from their parents.

The study found that strong relationships between parents and children act a protective factor against risk behaviors. Boys and girls who reported having a close relationship with their father were less likely to be sexually active as teens.

"A large body of research reveals that a parenting style that is warm, communicative, supportive, and involves supervision and setting limits, protects teens against risk behaviour, and helps young people develop into healthy, autonomous adults," the report states.

The aspect of community involvement by parents, especially commitment to a faith community or ethnic community, was found to shape a child's future sexual activity.

Parents who were devoted to volunteerism and attended weekly worship with their children were correlated with having teens who were 40 per cent less likely to be sexually active compared to the national average. Boys who attended weekly worship during childhood were 29 per cent less likely to be sexually active in their teen years, while girls who worshiped weekly during childhood were 22 per cent less likely to be sexually active as teens.

The research finally focused on family structure. Married biological parents have been called "the gold standard for insuring optimal outcomes in a child's development," by Rutgers sociologist David Popenoe.

"When our analysis held other factors constant, living with two biological parents, rather than one, influenced a decreased likelihood of sexual activity," the report said.

"Strong correlations between teen sexual behavior and growing up with common-law parents were observed among boys, while correlations between sexual activity and growing up in divorced or separated homes were observed among girls."

The report concludes with the encouraging proposition that "While it may seem daunting to see correlations between family behaviors years ago and sexual activity in your children today-the news is positive. Teens do listen and want to listen to their parents, as indicated by the surveys and polls."

The full text of the IMFC research report is available here.

 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.