Irish President signs abortion into law: pro-lifers vow legal challenges
DUBLIN, July 30, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Irish President today signed into law the bill that allows direct killing of unborn children, up to the point of full gestation, in cases where the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, including if she threatens suicide.
Pro-life activists have said that not only does the law violate the Constitution's protections for the unborn, but the suicide provision is wide open to abuse and could pave the way for effective abortion on demand. During government hearings into the bill psychiatric professionals had specifically denounced the suicide provision, saying abortion can never be considered treatment for mental illness.
While President Michael D. Higgins had the power to send the Protection of Life in Pregnancy Act 2013 to the country’s Supreme Court to determine whether it violated the country’s constitutional guarantee of the right to life for the unborn, he chose instead to sign without a legal review.
This legislation was the final result of the Irish Supreme Court judgment in the 1992 X Case and the subsequent decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the A, B and C case. Pro-life advocates have vowed both to defeat the Fine Gael party, which formed a coalition government with the Labour Party, after promising during the campaign never to legislate for abortion.
Niamh Uí Bhriain of Dublin’s Life Institute, who was in the forefront of the fight against the bill, said that the immediate task is to launch a legal challenge to the law. She told LifeSiteNews.com that there are also plans afoot for a pro-life party.
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!
“The challenges that then face the pro-life movement include ensuring that a pro-life political alternative arises from this travesty, which has seen our government defy the media, ignore the medical experts and allow bullying and bribery to force passage of this legislation,” she said.
Rebecca Roughneen of Youth Defence wrote that the act has set a historical precedent for Ireland in establishing in law that “some of us are worth less than others; so much so that it is now within legality to deliberately destroy a human life … A tiny, helpless, voiceless life.”
She said the act is in violation not only of the Constitution, but of the Irish tradition of “cherishing the children of the nation equally” and opposing the death penalty.
“What happened to our country that rose from the ashes of an oppressed nation, which vowed to uphold the rights of and protect its citizens from those that sought to oppress them?”
Liam Gibson, the Belfast, Northern Ireland representative of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), told LSN that various groups, including SPUC, had predicted that this would be the outcome of the A,B&C decision. Legalization of abortion in the Republic, he said, is going to have repercussions throughout the island, and abroad. Among the avenues open to the pro-life movement now are the “serious doubts” about the act’s constitutionality.
But Gibson warned that the pro-life cause “will always be vulnerable while we place too much trust in the democratic process.”
“Abortion in Ireland could not have been legalised without the betrayal of politicians who, prior to being elected, pledged to protect the rights of unborn children. Of course those politicians must be held accountable at the next election but first pro-lifers must work to gradually win over the ordinary people in all walks of life who at present simply don't care.
“At the same time we need to organise resistance to the implementation of the new law especially by strengthening the resolve of medical personnel not to co-operate with the culture of death.”
Gibson also called for greater and more muscular resolve among some elements in the pro-life movement in Ireland. They “must remain resolute in defence of the right to life of every unborn child, without exception, without apology and even in hard cases.”
“Not every section of the movement is prepared to do this but anything less than this and Ireland could easily go the same way as Canada. That might seem unimaginable but what was unimaginable just five years ago has now happened.”
Pro-life people must not allow themselves to be “intimidated into silence by well-meaning colleagues who believe that the abortion debate must be carried out on terms acceptable to modern secularist culture”.
‘Little miracles’: Mom gives birth to naturally-conceived quintuplets after refusing ‘selective reduction’
AUSTRALIA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A 26-year-old Australian mom has given birth to five healthy babies, all conceived naturally, after refusing the doctor’s advice that she must abort three of them in order to give the remaining two a better chance at life.
“After my initial ultrasound I was told I could consider the selection method to give 2 babies the best chance in life,” wrote mom Kim Tucci in a Facebook post last September.
“I watched a YouTube video on the procedure and I cried. I could never do that! Was I selfish for not giving two the chance of 100% survival? All I knew is that I already love them and that every heart beat I heard I connect with them more. For me life starts when a heart starts beating and all I know for sure is that I will do whatever it takes to bring them into this world healthy,” she wrote.
Last Thursday Kim and her husband Vaughn welcomed the five new members into their family — one boy and four girls —increasing the number of their children from 3 to 8. The babies were born at 30 weeks, 10 weeks early, due to insufficient space in Kim’s womb. They weighed on average about 2.5 pounds.
The quintuplets’ story began last March, after Kim and Vaughn had been trying for six months to conceive just one more child for their family. Due to health complications, Kim wondered if she would ever become a mother again.
After what she thought was an extra long cycle, she decided to take a pregnancy test.
“I was feeling tired and a little nauseated and thought I would take a pregnancy test just to get the ‘what if’ out of my head. To my shock and utter excitement it was positive,” she wrote on a Facebook post.
The parents got the shock of their lives when doctors confirmed in an ultrasound examination that there was not one baby, but five.
“After a long wait for the ultrasound we finally went in. The sonographer told me there were multiple gestational sacks, but she could only see a heart beat in two. I was so excited! Twins!”
“I was moved to another machine for a clearer view and had the head doctor come in and double check the findings. She started to count, one, two, three, four, five. Did i hear that correctly? Five? My legs start to shake uncontrollably and all i can do is laugh. The sonographer then told me the term for five is ‘quintuplets,’” Kim wrote.
Even though Kim began to feel stretched to the limit with all those human lives growing inside her, she chose to focus on her babies, and not herself, referring to them as “my five little miracles.”
“It's getting harder as each day passes to push through the pain, every part of my body aches and sleeping is becoming very painful. No amount of pillows are helping support my back and belly. Sometimes I get so upset that I just want to throw my hands up and give in.”
“Sometimes my pelvis becomes so stiff I can barely walk and my hips feel like they are grinding away constantly. I'm finding it hard to eat as I basically have no room left in my stomach, and the way it is positioned it's pushed all the way back with the babies leaning against it.”
“My skin on my belly is so stretched its painful and hot to touch. It literally feels like I have hives! No amount of cream helps relieve the discomfort. I have a lot of stretch marks now. Dealing with such a huge change in my body is hard.”
“Is it all worth it? Yes!!!! I will keep pushing through,” she wrote in one Facebook post days before the babies were born.
The newborns' names are Keith, Ali, Penelope, Tiffany, and Beatrix. They were born at King Edward Memorial Hospital in Subiaco, Western Australia. Mother and babies are reported to be doing well.
UN rights chief tells Catholic countries to legalize abortion over Zika virus: bishops and cardinal react
GENEVA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- The United Nations, following the lead of international abortion activists, is now urging Latin American countries hit by the mosquito-borne Zika virus to lift restrictions on abortion for pregnant women who have contacted the virus and whose pre-born children may be at risk for birth defects, including having smaller than normal heads.
The UN human rights office said today that it is not enough for South American countries to urge women to postpone pregnancy without also offering them abortion as a final solution.
“How can they ask these women not to become pregnant, but not offer… the possibility to stop their pregnancies?” UN spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told reporters.
UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said that governments should make available contraception and abortion services.
“Laws and policies that restrict (women’s) access to these services must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” he said.
But Brazil’s bishops strongly asserted yesterday that efforts should be made to eradicate the virus, not the people who may be infected by it.
The disease is “no justification whatsoever to promote abortion,” they said in a statement, adding that it is not morally acceptable to promote abortion “in the cases of microcephaly, as, unfortunately, some groups are proposing to the Supreme Federal Court, in a total lack of respect for the gift of life.”
Honduras Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga has also come out strongly against the notion of “therapeutic abortions” as a response to the problem. Unlike Brazil where abortion is legal in the case of rape or health of the mother, abortion remains entirely illegal in Honduras.
“We should never talk about ‘therapeutic’ abortion,” the cardinal said in a homily at a February 3 Mass in Suyap. “Therapeutic abortion doesn’t exist. Therapeutic means curing, and abortion cures nothing. It takes innocent lives,” he said.
While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an international public health emergency February 1 on account of concerns over the virus, critics have pointed out, however, that not one death as resulted from the virus. Even on WHO’s own website the virus is described in mild terms.
“It causes mild fever and rash. Other symptoms include muscle pain, joint pain, headache, pain behind the eyes and conjunctivitis. Zika virus disease is usually mild, with symptoms lasting only a few days,” the website states. “To date, there have been no reported deaths associated with Zika virus,” it added.
Critics suspect that the crisis is being manipulated to advance an anti-human agenda on the pre-born.
“Is Zika, actually, a hideous virus that threatens to spread uncontrollably across the world creating an army of disabled children with tiny heads and low IQ’s? Or might this be a willful misinterpretation of the scarce data to manipulate public opinion and legislatures?” wrote pro-life critic Mei-Li Garcia earlier this week.
“It becomes very clear that the publicity surrounding this story has a very little to do with medicine and a lot to do with a convenient crisis that is being used by those pushing for the legalization of abortion around the world,” she wrote.
Hillary’s litmus test for Supreme Court picks: They must ‘preserve Roe v. Wade’
DERRY, NH, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Hillary Clinton has a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees - several, in fact. At a Democratic event on Wednesday, Clinton unveiled her criteria in selecting a judge for the nation's highest court.
“I do have a litmus test, I have a bunch of litmus tests," she said.
"We’ve got to make sure to preserve Roe v. Wade, not let it be nibbled away or repealed,” she said.
That echoes her recent call to arms speech before Planned Parenthood last month, when she stated that taxpayers must fund abortion-on-demand in order to uphold the "right" of choice.
“We have to preserve marriage equality,” Clinton said, referring to last summer's Obergefell v. Hodges case, a 5-4 ruling that redefined marriage nationwide. “We have to go further to end discrimination against the LGBT community."
Her views differentiate her from the Republican front runners. Ted Cruz has called the court's marriage ruling "fundamentally illegitimate," and Donald Trump told Fox News Sunday this week that he would "be very strong on putting certain judges on the bench that I think maybe could change things." Marco Rubio has said he won't "concede" the issue to the one-vote majority.
All Republican presidential hopefuls say they are pro-life and will defund Planned Parenthood.
Her husband, Bill Clinton, raised the makeup of the Supreme Court early last month in New Hampshire, saying it receives "almost no attention" as a campaign issue.
On Wednesday, Hillary said "the next president could get as many as three appointments. It’s one of the many reasons why we can’t turn the White House over to the Republicans again.”
Clinton said her judicial appointees must also reverse the Citizens United ruling on campaign finance and oppose a recent decision striking down a portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In 2013's Shelby County v. Holder, justices struck down Section 4(b) of the act, which said that certain states and jurisdictions had to obtain permission from the federal government before changing their voting laws.
At one time, most politicians frowned upon any "litmus test" for judicial nominees, emphasizing the independence of the third branch of government. "I don't believe in litmus tests," Jeb Bush told Chuck Todd last November.
But with the rise of an activist judiciary in the middle of the 20th century, constitutionalists have sought to rein in the power of the bench.