Rita Diller

Planned Parenthood’s war on the family

Rita Diller
By Rita Diller
Image

September 5, 2012 (Stopp.org) - Behind Planned Parenthood’s favorite slogan, “Every child a wanted child,” is a sinister agenda that strikes with deadly force at the child—the very heart of the family.

The late 1960s was a time when our brothers and best friends were disappearing from our ranks as they headed to Vietnam. Many never came back; others were forever horribly wounded—physically, spiritually, and emotionally. The war was front and center in the news every day, and we watched the horrors of war live and in color on our televisions.

At the same time, another war was coming to a head—a war that was hidden behind smoke and mirrors. It was a war that had been brewing like a deadly potion in a witch’s cauldron for decades; it was a war that would disfigure and seek to kill our families and our nation from within—and most of us never saw it coming.

It was a war that would backfire in the face of the women who championed it and who were supposed to benefit from it. In reality, it was a war on the smallest and the weakest in society, a war on morality and a war on the very backbone of society—the family.

It eventually became known as the sexual revolution.

And its most successful weapon looked so small, so innocent, so helpful. The sexual revolution was indeed catapulted into its heyday by a tiny pill.

One woman was front and center in developing and promoting that pill, setting the sexual revolution in motion. That woman was eugenicist and immorality expert extraordinaire, Margaret Sanger—the foundress of Planned Parenthood. Sanger practiced what she preached. She kept a husband and assorted lovers on the line simultaneously, and left her children with “anybody handy,” according to her son, Grant, while she gallivanted around the world promoting her sinister agenda.

Her war on morality and the family would eventually claim among its victories a supposed right for women’s autonomy over their “own” bodies, to the exclusion of the welfare of the new lives they were entrusted with by God. It was a war that pitted mothers against their own children in a battle to the death.

As Mary Eberstadt writes in her book Adam and Eve After the Pill:

A series of popes, some of the world’s leading scientists, and many other unlikely allies all agree: No single event since Eve took the apple has been as consequential for relations between the sexes as the arrival of modern contraception.

Modern contraception is not only a fact of our time; it may even be the central fact—in that it is hard to think of any other whose demographic, social behavior, and personal fallout has been as profound.

Today, the rotten fruit of the pill and the “sexual revolution” it propelled is all around us, as predicted by the Vicar of Christ himself.

In 1968, Pope Paul VI warned in his encyclical Humanae Vitae that widespread acceptance of contraception would result in dire consequences.

Dr. Janet Smith sums up Paul VI’s predictions about the consequences of contraception:

1. Infidelity and moral decline.

2. Lost respect for women. ”[T]he man” will lose respect for “the woman” and “no longer (care) for her physical and psychological equilibrium” and will come to “the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.”

3. Abuse of power: “Paul VI also observed that the widespread acceptance of contraception would place a ‘dangerous weapon… in the hands of those public authorities who take no heed of moral exigencies.’

4. Unlimited dominion: The idea of unlimited control over one’s body.

We find ourselves 44 years later in the midst of a society that has lost its moral bearings. Many young women today find that men, in general, are no longer interested in marriage, but are looking for a one-time sexual hookup, a “friend with [sexual] benefits” or, at the very most, a live-in lover. Birth control is expected, and is left up to the woman. When the birth control fails—as it does in the case of half of unintended pregnancies—the woman finds herself being shoved into a Planned Parenthood abortion facility, or often goes there herself to allay desertion by the one who should be protecting both her and their child. When she refuses to do so, she is often left to raise the child alone.

Sexual immorality, spurred on by the pill, is very bad news indeed for families. In 1960, when the pill came on the market, 5.3 percent of births were to unmarried women. In 2010, more than 41 percent of children were born to unmarried women. Among black, non-Hispanic women, that rate soared to 73 percent.

Meanwhile, the number of divorced people increased by 345 percent between 1960 and 1992.

The number of unmarried women of childbearing age who are cohabiting skyrocketed from 439,000 in 1960 to 5.5 million in 2000—an astounding 1,150 percent increase in 40 years. In 2008, there were 6.8 million cohabiting opposite-sex adult couples.

The children of single mothers, overall, fare poorly compared to their peers who have both mother and father intricately involved in their lives. They are more likely to live in poverty, more likely to have problems with the law, and more likely as young adults to be unemployed and less likely to attain higher education.

Planned Parenthood lies when it says it represents the best interests of women and children. In reality, it is a social engineering machine that is intent on destroying the traditional family. Planned Parenthood is the orchestrator of a massive war on families—a war in which we all come out on the losing end.

Now it joins hands with the government to hold hostage Catholics and others who object to contraceptives, sterilization, and abortive drugs, playing the bully that will force us to violate our consciences or to pay huge fines and lose our businesses for daring to object to its mandate.

Visit our website, www.thepillkills.com, for more information on the perils of the pill, and visit our page on Facebook.

To paraphrase St. Pio of Pietrelcina (Padre Pio), contraception is not just homicide; it is also suicide. It is time we heed the words of the popes, saints, and scientists who forewarned us of the monstrosity that is the pill, and join with one mind and heart to overcome the stranglehold of contraception on our nation while working to stop its advance worldwide. St. Pio, please pray for us.

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to be changed.”

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook