Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

The devil at the door

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

October 26, 2012 ( - Many pro-life leaders have often commented with frustration on the disparity between the passion of those who work within the movement, and the apathy of the population at large that the movement struggles to reach. In order to defeat the Culture of Death, the pro-life movement must activate the large swathes of the public who assert that they are pro-life—but who do not feel the urge to speak out, take action, or otherwise assist the pro-life movement.

There is a simple reason for this, and a very erroneous one: most people do not feel that the Culture of Death will have any impact on them.  “I am against abortion and would never have one,” they rationalize, “And that’s clearly enough.  Abortion and the Culture of Death will never personally affect me, and therefore I have no compelling reason to fight it.”

This dangerous view is the most significant factor inhibiting the success of the pro-life movement today, and one that has had devastating consequences.

First, briefly, there is a concept that noted author and conservative commentator Mark Steyn calls “Demography is Destiny”—in other words, a nation that kills its offspring is a nation in the most fundamental sense without a future. Wonder why nations are collapsing under the weight of massive debt and deficit because revenues are drying up? Well, if you kill off huge numbers of your future taxpayers through abortion, it cannot be much of a surprise when there are enormous numbers of elderly people needing health care and other services, while there are an increasingly shrinking number of young people entering the work force. With abortion having been legal and prevalent in most countries for decades, young people are, in essence, survivors.

The next time you shake your head at decades-old programs that are now proving unsustainable, you may want to re-think the idea that abortion and the Culture of Death do not affect you. It’s affecting you, right now.

Aside from what should be the obvious impact abortion has on the intrinsic functioning of a nation and everything from its economy, immigration patterns, and debt levels, there is a far more sinister way the Culture of Death can have a direct impact on you personally—and one you may not even have realized.

When human life is downgraded by abortion—essentially discrimination based on age and nothing more—the door has been opened to judge human value based on any other polemically arguable characteristic. In China, 37 million baby girls have been lost in what even The Economist is calling a gendercide.  Across Western Civilization, the vast majority of children with Down Syndrome or other disabilities are being butchered in the womb. And now the debate surrounding euthanasia continually rears its ugly head—in Canada, the United States, and across Europe.

Dr. Margaret Somerville, Director of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics, and Law of McGill University, recently revealed how in the Netherlands, where euthanasia has been legal for over thirty years, “some elderly Dutch people are afraid to go to their own hospitals, because they fear being euthanized—and that some are crossing the border to go into the German hospitals, where, as a result of the Nazi legacy, euthanasia is rejected.”

Pastor Martin Niemoller was a German pastor who was thrown into a Nazi concentration camp during the Second World War for opposing Adolf Hitler. He once made a famous statement that resonates ever more loudly today:

First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.

What prophetic words. This is the situation that many elderly people in the Netherlands and, we fear, in any nation where euthanasia begins to take hold, are beginning to face.

First they came for the pre-born, and I did not speak out, because I was born.

Then they came for the disabled in the womb, but I did not speak out, because I was not disabled.

And when I was elderly and sick and the doctor approached me in the hospital, there was no one left to speak out for me.

The battle for the lives of the pre-born and against the Culture of Death is one that is imminent, and one that the very survival of our nations depends on. We cannot help but wonder if the situation in the Netherlands might have been different if people had stood up and with a unified voice rejected the downgrading of human life. They did not realize what a Pandora’s Box had been opened—until it was too late. They permitted the Culture of Death to flourish, and when it finally came for them, there was no one left to speak up.

Do not be fooled by beautiful words and moving catchphrases such as “women’s right to choose,” or “every child a wanted child,” or “right to die”—insidious words that drip with the blood of millions of innocents and represent the shattered lives of all involved. Do not be fooled into thinking that the beast we have allowed out of its cage will never turn on you. Do not be fooled into thinking that the Culture of Death can be contained, and that you are safe.

How high must the corpses pile up before we say enough? Join with us, and together we can EndtheKilling!

Reprinted with permission from

Share this article

Steve Jalsevac Steve Jalsevac Follow Steve

Today’s chuckle: Rubio, Fiorina and Carson pardon a Thanksgiving turkey

Steve Jalsevac Steve Jalsevac Follow Steve
By Steve Jalsevac

A little bit of humour now and then is a good thing.

Happy Thanksgiving to all our American readers.

Share this article

Featured Image
Building of the European Court of Human Rights.
Lianne Laurence


BREAKING: Europe’s top human rights court slaps down German ban on pro-life leafletting

Lianne Laurence
By Lianne Laurence

STRASBOURG, France, November 26, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – The European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday that a German regional court violated a pro-life activist’s freedom of expression when it barred him from leafleting in front of an abortion center.

It further ruled the German court’s order that Klaus Gunter Annen not list the names of two abortion doctors on his website likewise violated the 64-year-old pro-life advocate’s right to freedom of expression.

The court’s November 26 decision is “a real moral victory,” says Gregor Puppinck, director of the Strasbourg-based European Center for Law and Justice, which intervened in Annen’s case. “It really upholds the freedom of speech for pro-life activists in Europe.”

Annen, a father of two from Weinam, a mid-sized city in the Rhine-Neckar triangle, has appealed to the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights at least two times before, Puppinck told LifeSiteNews.

“This is the first time he made it,” he said, noting that this time around, Annen had support from the ECLJ and Alliance Defense Fund and the German Pro-life Federation (BVL). “I think he got more support, better arguments and so I think this helped.”

The court also ordered the German government to pay Annen costs of 13,696.87 EUR, or 14,530 USD.

Annen started distributing pamphlets outside a German abortion center ten years ago, ECLJ stated in a press release.

His leaflets contained the names and addresses of the two abortionists at the center, declared they were doing “unlawful abortions,” and stated in smaller print that, “the abortions were allowed by the German legislators and were not subject to criminal liability.”

Annen’s leaflets also stated that, “The murder of human beings in Auschwitz was unlawful, but the morally degraded NS State allowed the murder of innocent people and did not make it subject to criminal liability.” They referred to Annen’s website,, which listed a number of abortionists, including the two at the site he was leafleting.

In 2007, a German regional court barred Annen from pamphleteering in the vicinity of the abortion center, and ordered him to drop the name of the two abortion doctors from his website.

But the European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday that the German courts had "failed to strike a fair balance between [Annen’s] right to freedom of expression and the doctor’s personality rights.”

The Court stated that, “there can be no doubt as to the acute sensitivity of the moral and ethical issues raised by the question of abortion or as to the importance of the public interest at stake.”

That means, stated ECLJ, that “freedom of expression in regard to abortion shall enjoy a full protection.”

ECLJ stated that the court noted Annen’s leaflets “made clear that the abortions performed in the clinic were not subject to criminal liability. Therefore, the statement that ‘unlawful abortions’ were being performed in the clinic was correct from a legal point of view.”

As for the Holocaust reference, the court stated that, “the applicant did not – at least not explicitly – equate abortion with the Holocaust.”  Rather, the reference was “a way of creating awareness of the more general fact that law might diverge from morality.”

The November 26 decision “is a quite good level of protection of freedom of speech for pro-life people,” observed Puppinck.

First, the European Court of Human Rights has permitted leafleting “in the direct proximate vicinity of the clinic, so there is no issue of zoning,” he told LifeSiteNews. “And second, the leaflets were mentioning the names of the doctors, and moreover, were mentioning the issue of the Holocaust, which made them quite strong leaflets.”

“And the court protected that.”

Annen has persevered in his pro-life awareness campaign through the years despite the restraints on his freedom.

“He did continue, and he did adapt,” Puppinck told LifeSiteNews. “He kept his freedom of speech as much as he could, but he continued to be sanctioned by the German authorities, and each time he went to the court of human rights. And this time, he won.”

ECLJ’s statement notes that “any party” has three months to appeal the November 26 decision.

However, as it stands, the European Court of Human Rights’s ruling affects “all the national courts,” noted Puppinck, and these will now “have to protect freedom of speech, recognize the freedom of speech for pro-lifers.”

“In the past, the courts have not always been very supportive of the freedom of speech of pro-life,” he said, so the ruling is “significant.”

As for Annen’s pro-life ministry, Pubbinck added: “He can continue to go and do, and I’m sure that he does, because he always did.”  

Share this article

Featured Image
A vibrant church in Africa. Pierre-Yves Babelon /
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

, ,

‘Soft racism’: German Bishops’ website attributes African Catholics’ strong faith to simplemindedness

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

GERMANY, November 26, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) --  The only reason the Catholic Church is growing in Africa is because the people have a “rather low level” of education and accept “simple answers to difficult questions” involving marriage and sexuality, posited an article on the official website of the German Bishops' Conference posted yesterday. The article targeted particularly Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea, the Vatican's prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and ardent defender of Catholic tradition.

First Things blogger Leroy Huizenga, who translated a portion of the article, criticized the article's view as “soft racism.”

In his article, titled “The Romantic, Poor Church,” editor Björn Odendahl writes: 

So also in Africa. Of course the Church is growing there. It grows because the people are socially dependent and often have nothing else but their faith. It grows because the educational situation there is on average at a rather low level and the people accept simple answers to difficult questions (of faith) [sic]. Answers like those that Cardinal Sarah of Guinea provides. And even the growing number of priests is a result not only of missionary power but also a result of the fact that the priesthood is one of the few possibilities for social security on the dark continent.

Huizenga said that such an article has no place on a bishops’ conference website. 

“We all know that the German Bishops' Conference is one of the most progressive in the world. But it nevertheless beggars belief that such a statement would appear on the Conference's official website, with its lazy slander of African Christians and priests as poor and uneducated (Odendahl might as well have added ‘easy to command’) and its gratuitous swipe at Cardinal Sarah,” he wrote. 

“Natürlich progressives could never be guilty of such a sin and crime, but these words sure do suggest soft racism, the racism of elite white Western paternalism,” he added. 

African prelates have gained a solid reputation for being strong defenders of Catholic sexual morality because of their unwavering orthodox input into the recently concluded Synod on the Family in Rome. 

At one point during the Synod, Cardinal Robert Sarah urged Catholic leaders to recognize as the greatest modern enemies of the family what he called the twin “demonic” “apocalyptic beasts” of “the idolatry of Western freedom” and “Islamic fundamentalism.”

STORY: Cardinal Danneels warns African bishops to avoid ‘triumphalism’

“What Nazi-Fascism and Communism were in the 20th century, Western homosexual and abortion ideologies and Islamic fanaticism are today,” he said during his speech at the Synod last month. 

But African prelates’ adherence to orthodoxy has earned them enemies, especially from the camp of Western prelates bent on forming the Catholic Church in their own image and likeness, not according to Scripture, tradition, and the teaching magisterium of the Church. 

During last year’s Synod, German Cardinal Walter Kasper went as far as stating that the voice of African Catholics in the area of Church teaching on homosexuality should simply be dismissed.

African cardinals “should not tell us too much what we have to do,” he said in an October 2014 interview with ZENIT, adding that African countries are "very different, especially about gays.” 

Earlier this month Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels, instead of praising Africa for its vibrant and flourishing Catholicism, said that African prelates will one day have to look to Europe to get what he called “useful tips” on how to deal with “secularization” and “individualism.” 

The statement was criticized by one pro-family advocate as “patronizing of the worst kind” in light of the facts that numerous European churches are practically empty, vocations to the priesthood and religious life are stagnant, and the Catholic faith in Europe, especially in Belgium, is overall in decline.

Share this article


Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook