NewsTue Oct 25, 2011 - 11:34 pm EST
‘Occupy LifeSite,’ says D&P
You won’t believe what D&P is up to now!
In a recent email to its supporters, the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (D&P), the Canadian bishops’ international development arm, urged their supporters to ‘Occupy Lifesite!’
D&P, which LifeSiteNews has exposed to be funding dozens of pro-abortion organizations, called upon its members to flood the comment box of a recent article published by The Catholic Register. The article covered the fact that LifeSiteNews Editor-in-Chief John-Henry Westen was recently banned from attending the public sessions of the Canadian bishops’ annual meeting.
The comment section of the article includes many attacks against LifeSiteNews and you, our supporters! D&P supporters claim that we and our supporters are “an extreme ideological group” against “the cause of human dignity,” and are “bent on destroying D&P for its preferential option for the poor.” The list goes on.
Perhaps the most absurd accusation is that LifeSiteNews and our supporters in some way “disdain the poor,” simply because we have questioned D&P’s willingness to fund organizations that promote abortion in the third world.
It goes without saying that LifeSiteNews supports every legitimate effort to help the poor: we just don’t happen to believe that helping the poor should include funding groups that also advocate for laws allowing the killing of the poorest and most innocent – the unborn!
It should be obvious to a Catholic organization like D&P that any such “charity” does not deserve our direct financial support.
Unfortunately, LifeSiteNews has for over 2 years uncovered more and more evidence that the ways in which D&P “serves” the poor includes support of organizations that promote abortion, contraception, sterilization and many other anti-life measures in various countries around the world. You can see the evidence for yourself here!
For its many investigative reports exposing undeniable violations of important life, family and faith principles, LifeSiteNews is being subjected to increasingly hostile assaults!
Here is a sampling of just a few of the many malicious statements made by D&P supporters in the Register comments section:
- “Lifesite should truly examine its conscience given all the financial and sexual scandals their prominent leaders are having these days…They continue to propagate lies and fabrications against an official church organization…The recent scandals and their extreme right wing views not only about abortion but other social issues (anything about poor is socialism for these people) only alienated many laypeople, bishops, and priests.
- “(LifeSiteNews’) consistent and unbalanced attacks on organizations and individuals that have worked tirelessly for the cause of human dignity does not qualify as journalism and should not be treated as such.”
- “Lifesite is ideologically-driven, using fetus and abortion issue as a cover to their ultra-right wing perpective of life that is now being condemn worldwide by the growing “occupy the wall street movement”
- “This unaccountable website has crossed the line of decency, journalistic or otherwise by its incessant malicious attack on an important organization of the Catholic Church. Development and Peace should have taken legal action against this group for defamation.”
This is not the first time LifeSiteNews has been attacked for merely reporting the facts. Earlier this year, LifeSiteNews was hit with a $500,000 lawsuit by a self-proclaimed “pro-choice” Canadian Priest, Fr. Gravel, for our reporting on what he has said and done.
It is significant, as we recently reported, that D&P supporters are being called on to financially support Fr. Gravel’s lawsuit.
The plot then thickens because, as we also noted in the same article, “if Gravel wins the $500,000 suit, he is “willing to donate a significant amount to Development and Peace.”’
Development and Peace supporters and past leaders are now even strongly criticizing the bishops for “aligning themselves with the Vatican” and daring to ensure the Catholicity of D&P in response to the information in LifeSiteNews reports.
It is obviously only going to get worse! If speaking the truth is going to be equated with libel and defamation, LifeSiteNews will need to be financially able to respond with strength to all such current and future assaults.
Of course, we have to count on you, our loyal and generous supporters, to help us respond to these attacks.
We want to assure you that we are not going to let any of these intimidation tactics deter us or stop us from reporting what must be reported. In fact, all this intimidation confirms we are having an impact and must not only continue, but even increase our investigative reporting.
one-time request for extra financial support today!
Your donation will send a clear message to D&P opponents and similar groups or individuals that LifeSiteNews will not be intimidated by baseless bullying tactics and they will not be able to divert attention or cover the truth with their shameless denials and name-calling.
For life and Family,
P.S. You may wish to add your thoughtful comments to the article published by The Catholic Register here. Let your comments take the high road with respectfully presented facts and opinion, rather than D&P advocates’ low road of demeaning an organization and individuals and attacking their personal credibility.
‘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.