Siobhan O’Kane

Rosemary Connell: a life lived for others

Siobhan O’Kane
By Siobhan O'Kane
Image

June 19, 2012 (Unmaskingchoice.ca) - I met Rosemary Connell on April 3, 2008. I will never forget that day because she changed my life in one afternoon, much like she has changed and saved the lives of numerous people. I was fifteen then, and did not know that I was being introduced to a woman who would become one of my greatest and most trusted friends.

Rosemary has been involved in the pro-life movement from the beginning of abortion’s rampant assault on children in the early 1970’s. She took her own children in strollers to the annual March for Life. She was involved in Operation Rescue when the outcry against abortion was enough to compel people to block the abortuary’s doors.

Her official record shows three arrests and a served sentence of five months in a woman’s prison in Ontario. Her crime? Disturbing a society from a lethal slumber that, through its complacency, permitted the deaths of millions of children.

The part of the record that cannot be seen on paper are the number of children who are alive today because she is there to save them when the rest of society abandons them. It shows four biological children, four adopted children, foster children, and numerous pregnant women with no home or family who were taken in by her. It shows countless hours of caring for children with disabilities, offering their parents respite, with a love that a mother has for her own children.

How can one person sacrifice so much? Four years after meeting her I am still asking myself that same question. I cannot even remember all the stories. She gives anyone who asks for help all the money in her wallet, a room in her home, or the food in her fridge. She goes out of her way to help others.

Her efforts in the pro-life movement have been inexhaustible for decades. In 1997 Rosemary decided that people needed to see what abortion really looks like in order to grasp the horror of what was happening. It was then that she adopted a strategy that would take Ontario, and later Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, by storm. It started with a dozen people and a dozen images. Today it is one of the largest volunteer based pro-life organizations in Canada with over 250 regular street activists. Rosemary not only founded the organization, but was the first person in Canada to take the abortion images to the streets in the form of large signs.

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!

When I met Rosemary in 2008, she had already been leading Show the Truth for eleven years, organizing and participating in over a thousand demonstrations exposing abortion in all its horror to hundreds of thousands of people. The fruits of her efforts may not all be seen, but there are some hopeful stories that confirm the effectiveness of Rosemary’s method. Show the Truth went to southern Ontario a few years ago, and met a woman who had encountered the graphic signs on her way to her abortion appointment 11 years before. She shared that she had decided to keep her little boy, who was 11 years old by that time. This is just one of countless stories of minds changed and lives saved- all because of one woman’s resilience and conviction that the truth must be shown for the killing to end. Now, Show the Truth has exposed abortion to Canadians over 2000 times since its inception.

Through all her battles against abortion, Rosemary has maintained a simple, compassionate, and admirable personal life. She is a role model to everyone who knows her. For me she is a mentor, a friend, a constant ear, and a voice of reason and moral guidance.

Early in our friendship Rosemary’s husband explained a philosophy that the two had decided to live by throughout their marriage: Money they earn does not belong to them, rather, they are stewards over the money. I experienced her generosity the winter she insisted upon buying me top of the line boots and shoes, replacing the running shoes that I had been wearing. She refuses to let anyone do without when she has the means to make the situation better. I believed each story her friends and husband told about her sacrifices and generosity, and I personally experienced it many times.

One morning Rosemary informed me that I had an hour to study for my written drivers test, which would allow me to cover more ground during activism. Since it was an opportunity to expand my pro-life efforts, I agreed, frantically studied and finally passed after writing the test a fifth time. Rosemary patiently waited with a smile, paying for each new test, telling me I could not leave without my learner’s permit. She called it an investment, one she willingly and gladly made. Nothing is too big or too small for Rosemary to help with.

As her long-time friend and fellow activist Ann Marie Tomlins said, “I often think the reason Rosemary is able to accomplish so much is because she really knows how to love unconditionally. And she really loves all the unborn children and their mothers and that love is strong enough to overcome obstacles”. This is very apparent to me each time I recall the story of how Rosemary had opened her home to a young woman facing an unplanned pregnancy. She lived in the Connell home—which was already busy and full with Rosemary’s children—for a few months during her pregnancy, and several months following the birth of her daughter. Now, over twenty years and two children later, this woman is still in close contact with Rosemary and her husband who both continue to offer support and love.

A woman of small stature, her willpower is immovable. These stories were shared by her family and friends throughout the years, proving just how humble she truly is. I am honored to live and work alongside someone who never backs down from the force of opposition, or succumbs to the fear that might prevent the rest of us from matching her pace. As her husband once told me, “Rosemary has been running uphill since we met and I’m still chasing her. She never slows down”. I know that in years to come, when abortion is a part of history, generations will look back at the lives of those who fought and won, and be inspired by Rosemary.

Reprinted with permission from Unmaskingchoice.ca


Advertisement
Featured Image
A Nazi extermination camp. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

Imagine the outrage if anti-Semites were crowdsourcing for gas chambers

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski
Image
A Nazi oven where the gassed victims were destroyed by fire. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Image
Empty canisters of the poison used by Nazis to exterminate the prisoners. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Image
Syringe for Manual Vacuum Aspiration abortion AbortionInstruments.com
Image
Uterine Currette AbortionInstruments.com
Image

Imagine the outrage if the Nazis had used online crowdsourcing to pay for the instruments and equipment used to eradicate Jews, gypsies, the handicapped, and other population groups — labeled “undesirable” — in their large industrialized World War II extermination facilities. 

Imagine if they posted a plea online stating: “We need to raise $85,000 to buy Zyklon B gas, to maintain the gas chambers, and to provide a full range of services to complete the ‘final solution.’”

People would be more than outraged. They would be sickened, disgusted, horrified. Humanitarian organizations would fly into high gear to do everything in their power to stop what everyone would agree was madness. Governments would issue the strongest condemnations.

Civilized persons would agree: No class of persons should ever be targeted for extermination, no matter what the reason. Everyone would tear the euphemistic language of “final solution” to shreds, knowing that it really means the hideous crime of annihilating a class of people through clinical, efficient, and state-approved methods of destruction. 

But crowdsourcing to pay for the instruments and equipment to exterminate human beings is exactly what one group in New Brunswick is doing.

Reproductive Justice NB has just finished raising more than $100,000 to lease the Morgentaler abortion facility in Fredericton, NB, which is about to close over finances. They’re now asking the public for “support and enthusiasm” to move forward with what they call “phase 2” of their goal.

“For a further $85,000 we can potentially buy all the equipment currently located at the clinic; equipment that is required to provide a full range of reproductive health services,” the group states on its Facebook page.

But what are the instruments and equipment used in a surgical abortion to destroy the pre-born child? It depends how old the child is. 

A Manual Vacuum Aspiration abortion uses a syringe-like instrument that creates suction to break apart and suck the baby up. It’s used to abort a child from 6 weeks to 12 weeks of age. Abortionist Martin Haskell has said the baby’s heart is often still beating as it’s sucked down the tube into the collection jar.

For older babies up to 16 weeks there is the Dilation and Curettage (D&C) abortion method. A Uterine Currette has one sharp side for cutting the pre-born child into pieces. The other side is used to scrape the uterus to remove the placenta. The baby’s remains are often removed by a vacuum.

For babies past 16 weeks there is the Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) abortion method, which uses forceps to crush, grasp, and pull the baby’s body apart before extraction. If the baby’s head is too large, it must be crushed before it can be removed.

For babies past 20 weeks, there is the Dilation and Extraction (D&X) abortion method. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist uses forceps to partially deliver the baby until his or her head becomes visible. With the head often too big to pass through the cervix, the abortionist punctures the skull, sucks out the brains to collapse the skull, and delivers the dead baby.

Other equipment employed to kill the pre-born would include chemicals such as Methotrexate, Misoprostol, and saline injections. Standard office equipment would include such items as a gynecologist chair, oxygen equipment, and a heart monitor.

“It’s a bargain we don’t want to miss but we need your help,” writes the abortion group.

People should be absolutely outraged that a group is raising funds to purchase the instruments of death used to destroy a class of people called the pre-born. Citizens and human rights activists should be demanding the organizers be brought to justice. Politicians should be issuing condemnations with the most hard-hitting language.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Everyone should be tearing to shreds the euphemistic language of “reproductive health services,” knowing that it in part stands for the hideous crime of annihilating a class of people through clinical, efficient, and state-approved methods of destruction that include dismemberment, decapitation, and disembowelment.

There’s a saying about people not being able to perceive the error of their day. This was generally true of many in Hitler’s Germany who uncritically subscribed to his eugenics-driven ideology in which certain people were viewed as sub-human. And it’s generally true of many in Canada today who uncritically subscribe to the ideology of ‘choice’ in which the pre-born are viewed as sub-human.

It’s time for all of us to wake-up and see the youngest members of the human family are being brutally exterminated by abortion. They need our help. We must stand up for them and end this injustice.

Let us arise!


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Paul Wilson

The antidote to coercive population control

Paul Wilson
By Paul Wilson

The primary tenet of population control is simple: using contraception and abortifacients, families can “control” when their reproductive systems work and when they don’t – hence the endless cries that women “should have control over their own bodies” in the name of reproductive health.

However, in much of the world, the glittering rhetoric of fertility control gives way to the reality of control of the poorest citizens by their governments or large corporations. Governments and foreign aid organizations routinely foist contraception on women in developing countries. In many cases, any pretense of consent is steamrolled – men and women are forcibly sterilized by governments seeking to thin their citizens’ numbers.  (And this “helping women achieve their ‘ideal family size’” only goes one way – there is no government support for families that actually want more children.)

In countries where medical conditions are subpar and standards of care and oversight are low, the contraceptive chemicals population control proponents push have a plethora of nasty side effects – including permanent sterilization. So much for control over fertility; more accurately, the goal appears to be the elimination of fertility altogether.

There is a method for regulating fertility that doesn’t involve chemicals, cannot be co-opted or manipulated, and requires the mutual consent of the partners in order to work effectively. This method is Natural Family Planning (NFP).

Natural Family Planning is a method in which a woman tracks her natural indicators (such as her period, her temperature, cervical mucus, etc.) to identify when she is fertile. Having identified fertile days, couples can then choose whether or not to have sex during those days--abstaining if they wish to postpone pregnancy, or engaging in sex if pregnancy is desired.

Of course, the population control crowd, fixated on forcing the West’s vision of limitless bacchanalia through protective rubber and magical chemicals upon the rest of the world, loathes NFP. They deliberately confuse NFP with the older “rhythm method,” and cite statistics from the media’s favorite “research institute” (the Guttmacher Institute, named for a former director of Planned Parenthood) claiming that NFP has a 25% failure rate with “typical use.” Even the World Health Organization, in their several hundred page publication, “Family Planning: A Global Handbook for Providers,” admits that the basal body temperature method (a natural method) has a less than 1% failure rate—a success rate much higher than male condoms, female condoms, diaphragms, cervical caps or spermicides.

Ironically, the methods which they ignore – natural methods – grant true control over one’s fertility – helping couples both to avoid pregnancy or (horror of horrors!) to have children, with no government intervention required and no choices infringed upon.

The legitimacy of natural methods blows the cover on population controllers’ pretext to help women. Instead, it reveals their push for contraceptives and sterilizations for what they are—an attempt to control the fertility of others. 

Reprinted with permission from the Population Research Institute.


Advertisement
Featured Image
United Nations headquarters in New York Shutterstock.com
Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.

New development goals shut out abortion rights

Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.
By Rebecca Oas Ph.D.

Co-authored by Stefano Gennarini, J.D.

A two week marathon negotiation over the world’s development priorities through 2030 ended at U.N. headquarters on Saturday with abortion rights shut out once again.

When the co-chairs’ gavel finally fell Saturday afternoon to signal the adoption of a new set of development goals, delegates broke out in applause. The applause was more a sigh of relief that a final round of negotiations lasting twenty-eight hours had come to its end than a sign of approval for the new goals.

Last-minute changes and blanket assurances ushered the way for the chairman to present his version of the document delivered with an implicit “take it or leave it.”

Aside from familiar divisions between poor and wealthy countries, the proposed development agenda that delegates have mulled over for nearly two years remains unwieldy and unmarketable, with 17 goals and 169 targets on everything from ending poverty and hunger, to universal health coverage, economic development, and climate change.

Once again hotly contested social issues were responsible for keeping delegates up all night. The outcome was a compromise.

Abortion advocates were perhaps the most frustrated. They engaged in a multi-year lobbying campaign for new terminology to advance abortion rights, with little to show for their efforts. The new term “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” which has been associated with abortion on demand, as well as special new rights for individuals who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual (LGBT), did not get traction, even with 58 countries expressing support.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Despite this notable omission, countries with laws protecting unborn children were disappointed at the continued use of the term “reproductive rights,” which is not in the Rio+20 agreement from 2012 that called for the new goals. The term is seen as inappropriate in an agenda about outcomes and results rather than normative changes on sensitive subjects.

Even so, “reproductive rights” is tempered by a reference to the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development, which recognizes that abortion is a matter to be dealt with in national legislation. It generally casts abortion in a bad light and does not recognize it as a right. The new terminology that failed was an attempt to leave the 1994 agreement behind in order to reframe abortion as a human rights issue.

Sexual and reproductive health was one of a handful of subjects that held up agreement in the final hours of negotiations. The failure to get the new terminology in the goals prompted the United States and European countries to insist on having a second target about sexual and reproductive health. They also failed to include “comprehensive sexuality education” in the goals because of concerns over sex education programs that emphasize risk reduction rather than risk avoidance.

The same countries failed to delete the only reference to “the family” in the whole document. Unable to insert any direct reference to LGBT rights at the United Nations, they are concentrating their efforts on diluting or eliminating the longstanding U.N. definition of the family. They argue “the family” is a “monolithic” term that excludes other households. Delegates from Mexico, Colombia and Peru, supporters of LGBT rights, asked that the only reference to the family be “suppressed.”

The proposed goals are not the final word on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They will be submitted to the General Assembly, whose task is to elaborate a post-2015 development agenda to replace the Millennium Development Goals next year.

Reprinted with permission from C-FAM.org.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook