Wednesday, June 29, 2011

NDP and the Gospel

There is a disturbing trend by Catholics and other Christians in Canada of disregarding the NDP’s support for abortion in order to promote the party’s vision for helping the poor.

In the recent election campaign, numerous Catholic bishops and other Christian leaders formally endorsed a project promoting poverty as the primary issue for voters in the election.

Candidatesagainstpoverty.ca, spearheaded by the Religious Social Action Coalition of Newfoundland and Labrador, listed candidates who have pledged “to work to close the growing gap between rich and poor in Canada.” By far, the most candidates endorsed were NDP, though there were at least a couple from the Communist Party of Canada as well. The NDP were the only major party to complete the questionnaire.

The campaign dovetailed with a similar effort by the Canadian Council of Churches, which includes the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The truth is that any politician backing the NDP’s platform is completely unfit for office and, of course, unworthy of the Christian vote. The only time one might be in a position to vote for such a person would be where the other candidates are equally or even more pro-abortion.
- Can Pro-Abortion Catholic Politicians be Rooted in the Gospel?, by Patrick Craine

The advice to consult the website Candidatesagainstpoverty.ca was in our archdiocesan bulletin just prior to the federal election. This despite the fact that the previous week, they had printed the guidelines of the Canadian Conference of Bishops which listed "respect for life" as the first issue when deciding who to cast one's ballot for.

This confuses people so much that one well-meaning elderly woman told me she was upset by the election result because we had been specifically directed to vote either NDP or Green, since those two parties were the ones most concerned with poverty. Emails to the person in charge of content for the archdiocesan bulletin ended in silence when I told her what this woman had said to me.

The ignorance of people simply astounds me; don't they do anything except listen to the odd speech on television? do they not know that the NDP are solidly, without exception, supportive of abortion through all nine months of pregnancy? or are they so enamored of a party that promises more and more entitlement to government programs and funds that they will overlook moral issues and vote for bigger government? and a government that is the complete opposite of Christian beliefs. Do they not recognize the difference between the church founded by Jesus Christ and an NGO?

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Church Apathy

Today, we held a planning meeting for the next 40 Days for Life vigil here in Halifax. We have a good cross-section of people on the team this year; the majority are Catholics as usual, but then the majority of vigil-ites are Catholics; we have two priests on the team, we have a couple from a Congregational church, a young man from an evangelical church, and a woman who has been in both. She was evangelical Anglican, then re-converted to Catholic about five years ago. Invaluable experience as she bridges the two worlds.

One thing that I told the group was the outreach that I did to churches last summer. The facts are disconcerting. 157 churches were phoned, plus one orthodox synagogue. Out of that, I got 35 churches who agreed to run bulletin announcements for our vigil, 8 appointments with pastors in the hope of getting them involved, and the end result was one invitation to speak at one church. Stunning, isn't it?

From the initial phone call, there were quite a few (about 20) who said "call me back closer to the time" with the promise of involvement. When I called back in early September, they had all changed their tune. "Sorry, but we have so many projects that we are involved with, we have so many ministries going on", the big hang-up.

Poor ol' Halifax, so stuck in its 70's thinking, so NDP-minded, so politically correct. Damn them, we are going to have to do some shaking around here.

Monday, June 27, 2011

Canadian Bishops Statement - too little too late

A commission of the Canadian bishops today released a letter on pastoral ministry to young people with same-sex attraction.

“Scripture and Tradition teach that sexual relations between persons of the same sex are not in accord with God’s original intention expressed in the plan of creation,” says the document from The Commission for Doctrine of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB). “For this reason, the Church has consistently taught that homosexual acts can never be approved.”

The bishops repeatedly and emphatically reject any unjust discrimination against those with same-sex attraction. The Church, the document says, “carefully distinguishes between an individual’s inclinations or feelings … and one’s actions. While homosexual acts are always objectively wrong, same-sex inclinations are not in themselves sinful or a moral failing.”

h/t LifeSiteNews

This statement is next to useless in my opinion. Not just because it is stating the Church's position late in the game on this issue, but because the bishops need to teach the Church's position on sexuality in general before they can make any statement about homosexuality.

Church teaching is that sexual relations between men and women are part of God's plan of creation. The fact that the sexual act between a man and woman gives pleasure to the couple while at the same time being the way to create new life is not a coincidence. God didn't separate the two things when He ordered the universe. They are bound together. Separating them is the cause of the problems.

So if the Church does not teach clearly that sexual relations outside of marriage are wrong and if she does not teach that contraception is contradicting God's plan as well, then she can hardly speak about homosexual relations. Her credibility is lost.

As Father Frank Pavone writes in his book Ending Abortion:

... the same activity by which people express the deepest physical intimacy also can give rise to a new life. Did you ever wonder why God put these two aspects together in the same action? Could He not have invented one action to express love and intimacy, and another, separate action to bring about new life? Is it an accident that both belong to the same act, or did God run out of ideas?

Neither, of course. God acted with a deliberate and wise plan in creating human sexuality. His plan says that when one human being give him/herself totally to another, that total "yes" includes a "yes" to new life. The partners put themselves in a stance of readiness.

As Dr. Bernard Nathanson explains, it is not that contraception causes abortion; rather, both are cause by the perversion of autonomy - taking freedom and using it to stop rather than to welcome life.

So, unless the bishops are willing to teach bravely the Church's stand on sex and contraception, it is useless to make any statements about the wrongness of homosexual activity. Because, if you condone sexual relations between husbands and wives that are not open to the creation of life, then you have given your approval to sexual relations for pleasure only without the responsibility of procreation. And that opens the whole show to sex outside of marriage, sex between same sex partners, and a whole array of other sexual couplings.

It is time for the bishops to embrace the teaching of the Church on Humanae Vitae and teach it; only then will they have any chance of being heard on the wider issues of homosexuality and same sex marriage.

One objection I have heard is that how can priests, who are celibate, teach about the sexual relationship of marriage? But you know, as someone who has practiced natural family planning with her husband for years, I know that a great deal of it comes down to the husband learning to be chaste. And, if you don't believe me, ask my husband. NFP calls for a great deal of self-discipline and sacrifice on the part of the husband, more so than for the wife. That being the case, it seems clear to me that celibate priests who practise chastity throughout their entire life, would have a great deal to say on the topic. They could actually be a great help to many couples who are struggling with the issue of restraint within marriage, because they are practising the same restraint themselves.

Friday, June 24, 2011

No wonder they are succeeding

Obama punts same sex marriage at LGBT fundraiser

At $1250 per plate (and an article I read yesterday stated that some people paid $38,000 per plate), no wonder the gay/lesbian crowd is getting what they want.

If pro-lifers had a fraction of that kind of money, just think what we could do. (pregnancy care centres in every city and small town, ultrasound technology available for those centres, resources to help women facing crisis pregnancies, the list goes on)

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

China's One-Child Policy Based on Forced Abortion



"It does not matter whether you are pro-choice or pro-life on this issue. No one supports forced abortion because it is not a choice. And this violence must stop." - Reggie Littlejohn, US lawyer seeking to expose the brutality of China's one-child policy

Is this legal?

Yesterday, this is what I saw in a parking lot of a mall.
She was the driver and she was waiting for someone inside a store.


First, how did she get a driving license? It had to have been in this country, and she couldn't have worn that during her test.
Second, my license states that I must wear glasses while driving. Surely she cannot wear such a head constraint while she drives!
Third, how can she drive safely when her visibility is limited by her head covering? If I were to drive my car with a full face mask on, or covered with a paper bag that just had holes for my eyes, I am sure I would be stopped and charged for violating the rules of the road.

So what is going to happen to women who drive and wear burqas?

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Population Myths

Many of us have been versed in the "population explosion" theories that were promulgated in the 60's. And we feel unable to counteract those who claim that it is actually best to have fewer children in order to share the earth's resources with everyone. Their argument is convincing because it seems to be based on humane concerns. But is it truthful?

The western world is facing a demographic winter. Canada has a birth rate of 1.6, which falls well below the 2.1 rate necessary just to replace ourselves. The US is currently at 2.1, but is declining and will join the rest of the west. Many countries in Europe have birth rates below 1.4 and, once the rate declines to that extent, it is next to impossible to reverse it. You simply cannot get enough people to have enough babies to make the rate turn around. What you then get is "implosion", something that Russia is now facing.

Is there any nation as contrary in its demographics as Russia? While the world’s population police obsess about the ongoing “explosion” of the human species, Russia is on a depopulation slide and in danger of imploding. Again, while the world’s conscience is stirred by Asia’s 163 million missing females, Russia has a gender deficit of 10 million men. And, while “family planning” nearly everywhere else means preventing births at all costs, in Russia it now means reminding people to have a child or three.

... The net result is that Russians are not reproducing themselves. The total fertility rate has been below 1.2 children per woman but has risen to 1.4 -- not far behind Europe’s, but still far short of "replacement". Of the children that are conceived, a shocking number are aborted: official figures for 2008 put the number of births at 1.7 million and abortions at 1.2 million, but some say the true figure for abortions may be as high as 4 million a year. Some 10 to 15 per cent of abortions have complications, leaving at least 7 to 8 per cent of women sterile, which, ironically, has opened the way for surrogacy entrepreneurs.

... In any case, it is in the area of values that the most important work remains to be done, and not only in Russia. This is the reason that the World Congress of Families is meeting in Moscow at the end of this month to hold a demographic summit on Family and the Future of Humankind. The New York Times has tried to write it off as exporting anti-abortionism, but as WCF managing director Larry Jacobs says, it is about much more: “Late marriage, cohabitation and the culturally induced desire for small families are among the many factors that have led to a 50 per cent decline in birthrates worldwide since the late 1960s.”

Rebuilding the Russian Family, by Carolyn Moynihan on www.mercatornet.com

While Russia is the extreme example of demographic winter, the rest of Europe is suffering from the same problem of low birth rates.

WASHINGTON DC, June 21, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Given the precipitous decline in the birthrates of European countries, all anti-natal programs funded by the United States should immediately be replaced by pro-natal programs, one top population expert recently told the U.S. Senate.

“It doesn’t matter whether we call them reproductive health programs, family planning programs, or population control programs,” said Stephen Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute (PRI). “They all have the same effect: they force down the birth rate in countries that are already dying. Such programs are only making a bad problem worse.”

“Five centuries after the Black Plague devastated Europe, a White Pestilence is now decimating that same continent,” he said. “Many nations, especially in Europe, are already in a death spiral, losing a significant number of people each year. Listen closely, and you will hear the muffled sound of populations crashing.” said Stephen Mosher, of the Population Research Institute.

(Interestingly enough, Greece faced this problem once before in its history.)
“One remarks nowadays all over Greece such a diminution in natality and in general manner such depopulation that the towns are deserted and the fields lie fallow. Although this country has not been ravaged by wars or epidemics, the cause of the harm is evident: by avarice or cowardice the people, if they marry, will not bring up the children they ought to have. At most they bring up one or two. It is in this way that the scourge before it is noticed is rapidly developed. The remedy is in ourselves; we have but to change our morals.” (Polybius, 204-122 B.C.)
Europe is Dying, LifeSiteNews

As Mark Steyn says, next time you have a pregnant waitress serve you in a diner, leave her a big tip. She is doing her part to keep society going.

Single Moms

From Melanie Philliips

It's not just absent fathers, Mr Cameron. Family breakdown is driven by single mothers on benefits

Now, excoriating ‘runaway’ or ‘deadbeat’ dads is a familiar refrain. We all know the scenario: feckless youths getting one girl pregnant after another and abandoning each one in turn, playing next to no part in the upbringing of the children they have serially fathered.

This is, indeed, reckless and reprehensible behaviour. But it is only part of a much more complex and deeply rooted problem.

Most pertinently, it totally ignores the fact that there is another feckless actor in this dysfunctional family drama — the mother, who may be having children by a series of different men.

... With the combination of the sexual revolution, the Pill and the welfare state, however, women’s interests changed. Suddenly they were being told sex outside marriage was fine, unmarried motherhood was fine — and crucially, that the welfare state would provide them with the means to live without male support.

That means the welfare state has to stop playing the role of surrogate husband through the benefits it gives single mothers.

... Fatherless families cause pain and misery to everyone. They damage children. They hurt men. And they also harm women.

Far from being ‘liberated’ from men, lone mothers struggle to cope with life. Those in the media and intelligentsia who turn up their noses at marriage may be well-heeled enough to cushion themselves from the worst of the problems.

But, at the bottom of the social scale, lone mothers are often trapped in loneliness, depression and poverty, and — along with their children — far more likely to suffer physical or sexual abuse.

And the more the state is involved in the upbringing of children, the more control it will exert, as we see in the education system. Big government is deciding what children should be taught, even if that disagrees with parents' ideas of what their kids should know.

Monday, June 20, 2011

Sex Selection Abortion and its consequences

The War Against Girls - by Jonathan Last, Wall Street Journal, June 18, 2011

Last reviews the book Unnatural Selection by Mara Hvistendahl.

In nature, 105 boys are born for every 100 girls. This ratio is biologically ironclad. Between 104 and 106 is the normal range, and that's as far as the natural window goes. Any other number is the result of unnatural events.

Yet today in India there are 112 boys born for every 100 girls. In China, the number is 121—though plenty of Chinese towns are over the 150 mark. China's and India's populations are mammoth enough that their outlying sex ratios have skewed the global average to a biologically impossible 107. But the imbalance is not only in Asia. Azerbaijan stands at 115, Georgia at 118 and Armenia at 120.

What is causing the skewed ratio: abortion. If the male number in the sex ratio is above 106, it means that couples are having abortions when they find out the mother is carrying a girl. By Ms. Hvistendahl's counting, there have been so many sex-selective abortions in the past three decades that 163 million girls, who by biological averages should have been born, are missing from the world. Moral horror aside, this is likely to be of very large consequence.
Despite her findings, Ms. Hvistendahl remains firm in her feminist stance of defending "choice" - surprising as that may seem.

Ms. Hvistendahl is particularly worried that the "right wing" or the "Christian right"—as she labels those whose politics differ from her own—will use sex-selective abortion as part of a wider war on abortion itself. She believes that something must be done about the purposeful aborting of female babies or it could lead to "feminists' worst nightmare: a ban on all abortions."

It is telling that Ms. Hvistendahl identifies a ban on abortion—and not the killing of tens of millions of unborn girls—as the "worst nightmare" of feminism. Even though 163 million girls have been denied life solely because of their gender, she can't help seeing the problem through the lens of an American political issue. Yet, while she is not willing to say that something has gone terribly wrong with the pro-abortion movement, she does recognize that two ideas are coming into conflict: "After decades of fighting for a woman's right to choose the outcome of her own pregnancy, it is difficult to turn around and point out that women are abusing that right."

h/t When the Rubber Meets the Road

Friday, June 17, 2011

Hidden Lives Bearing Fruit

This afternoon, while vacuuming, I was thinking about all the young mothers I know who have chosen to forego careers and stay home to raise their children. And I know from personal experience that this can sometimes feel as if the world is passing you by. And you can sometimes wish for the best of both worlds, if that is possible. At least society has told us that it is possible - to be supermom, that is.

And I remembered a story I heard on CJLU, the Christian radio station here in Halifax, some years ago now. The story was told of a young couple living somewhere in rural America, a mother and father and a son. And the father was a preacher. And he was a good preacher, so good that he was asked to travel extensively to preach in many churches. This meant that he was often away from home and this left his wife to bring up their son primarily on her own. As the boy approached the adolescent years, he became more difficult to discipline and the mother was worried. When she conveyed her worries to her husband, his decision was to abandon his preaching career, take a minister's job close to home, and be available to his wife and son as much as possible. Rather than riding out the teen rebellious years, he discerned that his place was first with his family.

They got through those years. I don't know if the father returned to active ministry as before, but I do know what became of the son. He was James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family.

While the story shows the importance of a father's role in bringing up children, it also reveals the importance of parenting in how our children's lives turn out, both parents that is. For all you moms who live hidden lives, raising godly children, and for all the men who strive to put your wives and family ahead of careers, I don't think anything else needs to be said.

Contrast this to Oprah Winfrey who said that the death of her baby in a teen pregnancy gave her the freedom to live her life. Perhaps it is not always about me.

For those unfamiliar with Focus on the Family, it is a Christian organization founded to support family life. It broadcasts daily on radio with guests who speak about issues that are crucial to living Christian family life, marriage, children, sexuality, everything and anything that couples encounter in their daily lives. James Dobson has reached millions of people with his ministry and is a man of great integrity. He recently said that he and his wife are prepared to go to jail, if necessary, to defend the Christian values that underlie American freedom.

This gives me the creeps

What is so disturbing to me about this article is the heartlessness of the medical personnel involved.

LEUVEN, Belgium, June 16, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A disturbing study conducted by Belgian doctors and reported on in the medical journal Applied Cardiopulmonary Pathology involved killing patients via euthanasia in a room next to the hospital’s operating theater, and then wheeling them next door and harvesting their organs immediately after being pronounced dead. The study found that lungs from those who die by euthanasia are more suitable for transplant surgery than lungs taken from accident victims.

The procedure involved admitting the donors to hospital a few hours before the planned euthanasia procedure. They were killed in a room next door to the operating theater. Their lungs were removed immediately after they were pronounced dead.

“The matter of fact way the retrieval process is described in the paper is particularly chilling and shows the degree of collaboration that is necessary between the euthanasia team and the transplant surgeons – prep them for theatre next to the operating room, then kill them and wheel them in for organ retrieval. All in a day’s work in Brave New Belgium.

“Given that half of all euthanasia cases in Belgium are involuntary it must be only a matter of time before the organs are taken from patients who are euthanised without their consent.”

“Doctors there now do things that most doctors in other countries would find absolutely horrific,” Dr. Saunders pointed out.

Ana Iltis, director of the Center for Bioethics Health and Society at Wake Forest University in North Carolina, remarked to Fox News, “Once you accept that physicians are going to kill patients, it seems logical that they would harvest those organs for transplantation. People tend to respond with an ‘Ick,’ but that response should be about euthanasia.”

“People will be considered selfish and ostracized - for not dying by euthanasia or assisted suicide because they will be costing society money by continuing their illness until a natural death, - or because they will be denying fresh, healthy organs for others in need,” Schadenberg observed.

“The organs are healthy because the person who donates the organs is often not terminal, but rather in fear of living through a terminal condition. We will continue to be told that this is about the freedom to choose. But whose choice is it? Choice is the illusion; this is about imposing death,” Schadenberg stated.

Read the article here -
Organs harvested from euthanized patients make better transplants

For some reason, this makes me recall vividly the birth of my third daughter Martha. My doctor was an elderly ob/gyn in Ottawa who was also the head of the pro-life medical group there. A wonderful Dutch doctor who must have delivered thousands of babies in his years of practice. His words upon Martha's arrival in the world (spoken more to himself that to anyone else in the room) were "another individual" spoken with a reverence and awe that was unmistakeable. It was a moment etched in my memory forever.

Thursday, June 16, 2011

The Abortion Debate - can it proceed?

A good article by Charles Lewis of the National Post

Moving the Abortion Debate Forward without Changing the Law

An excerpt:

But I think these incidents (Lewis is referring to the showing of graphic photos of abortion and the controversy that arises from this) reveal something more troubling. The only time society in general discusses these issues is when it is debating the pros and cons of demonstrations and posters. Politicians never discuss it unless it is to confirm a “woman’s right to choose,” which means a woman’s right to have an abortion.

What if Jack Layton were to get up and say that it is unacceptable that so many poor women are forced to have an abortion because they have no financial support? Layton is a big supporter of the poor. What if he suggested that the government help those women realize their dreams of education and job and find way to help them keep their babies?

What if he and Stephen Harper joined together ― not to change the law, because that is not going to happen ― but to show Canada is a place that cares deeply about its young people, its future generations and about life. It would show that Harper still listens to those social conservatives who were his earliest supporters.

This will not happen though because politicians are terrified of the issue. They are so concerned about offending anyone who would think this a first step to making abortion illegal that they have become tongue tied.

So the debate will continue to revolve around posters.


h/t Where the Rubber Hits the Road

A journalist who discusses abortion

Brian Lilley on Sun News Network

Brian Lilley of Sun News Network is willing and brave enough to talk about abortion on his show Byline. Check out the above video to hear the results of a poll in Canada, that shows 52% of Canadians want this issue discussed.

Despite what Prime Minister Harper says that he will not re-open the abortion issue, he may not have a choice as the issue is cracking open more each day. Years of solid pro-life work on the part of faithful people are seeing fruit in events that have unfolded this past year. Bit by bit, this issue is coming unraveled before Canadians and it cannot be shoved under the carpet much longer.

Good Source of Information and Commentary

I have taken to tuning into Sun News Network in the evenings to listen to a couple of shows. Well worth listening to, they have interesting guests on and the hosts talk about everything current in the news, both in Canada and abroad.

Click on the Listen Live button, and in the evening you can get Ezra Levant, Theo Caldwell, Charles Adler and Brian Lilley. Last night, both Caldwell and Adler had the same guest to interview, Dr. John Robson.
For those who are ProWomanProLife readers, you might be interested to know that he is the husband of Brigitte Pellerin, who recently left ProWomanProLife because she took a job as a reporter for Sun News.

This fellow has a PhD in American history from University of Texas at Austin and he now resides in Ottawa and is an invited professor at Ottawa U. He talks about the economy and world politics in a way that someone like myself can understand.

In speaking of the riots in Greece, he said that the Greeks simply don't get it, they believe they are entitled to pay and benefits just by virtue of their existence. They and their politicians do not understand that there simply is no more money. He said they are like someone who realises they have no cash, so they want to write a cheque. When told there is no money in the bank to cover the cheque, they pull out a credit card. They just don't comprehend that the account is at nil. And all the shouting and whining and rioting in the streets will yield nada, because at some point the countries that have been bailing them out are going to say "enough". For some reason, they equate rioting in the streets with productive work. This is the result of government that is so big it the population has become dependent upon it.

Ditto the United States, except that Robson said the Americans are a very industrious lot and they will get to work to salvage their economy. But, and the big but, is that they must get rid of Obama, who is stuck in his ideology that socialism works and he refuses to budge. He continues to legislate more and more government into every aspect of life, making more and more people dependent on the government and less able to eke out their own living. Name one socialist country that has worked, that has not actually reduced their citizens' standard of living to poverty. I can't think of any.

Check him out, this Robson is refreshing. You can read his columns at the
Ottawa Sun.

What is rather frightening is that the scene in Vancouver after the hockey game last night looks rather like the riots in Greece. A lot of people showing a lot of anger that has been smouldering for a while.

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

In Poland, you can be pro-woman and pro-life

SPUC's Polish colleagues are recommending an exciting new initiative to protect unborn children. A growing list of Polish women journalists are signing an open letter (see press release and letter below) calling for a complete legislative ban on abortion in Poland. Polish law allows abortion in three circumstances: danger to the mother's life or health; pregnancy as a result of a criminal act; or serious disability. As a result of many years of educational campaigns by the Catholic Church and the pro-life movement, the numbers of abortions in Poland are relatively very low. That said, all abortions are equally wrong, because all unborn children have an equal right to life. It is absolutely vital that the law upholds the right to life of all human beings equally at every stage of life, from conception to natural death. Even the smallest exception or ambiguity in the terms of legal protection can lead to the intentional killing of innocent human beings, not just through abortion but also euthanasia and embryo research. I therefore recommend the open letter and encourage readers of this blog to forward it to any Polish women journalists they may know.
- Society for Protection of Unborn Children

Read the open letter here - signed by no less than 82 journalists.
Women Journalists Against Abortion

Palin comes out " with her reputation considerably enhanced" - Toby Harnden, Daily Telegraph

Investigation of over 300 pounds of old emails sent by Sarah Palin have yet to reveal anything incriminating about the woman. Instead what is emerging is a picture of a woman who was humane in her business dealings, a woman concerned with the state of Alaska, a woman intent upon her job.

But the most revealing email is the one Palin sent to close family prior to the birth of Trig, her son with Down syndrome. Some journalists are suggesting that the timing of this email reveals that the pregnancy was a fake, but their statements resemble the ludicrous gossip on the front pages of rag mags. How low they will stoop to get at this woman, who poses such a threat to them.

Here is the email itself, judge for yourself:

To the Sisters, Brother, Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, and Friends of Trig Paxson Van Palin (or whatever you end up naming him!):

I am blessing you with this surprise baby because I only want the best for you. I've heard your prayers that this baby will be happy and healthy, and I've answered them because I only want the best for you!

I heard your heart when you hinted that another boy would fit best in the Palin family, to round it out and complete that starting five line-up.

Though another girl would be so nice, you didn't think you could ask for what you REALLY wanted, but I knew, so I gave you a boy because I only want the best for you!

Then, I put the idea in your hearts that his name should be 'Trig', because it's so fitting, with two Norse meanings: "True" and "Brave Victory". You also have a Bristol Bay relative with that name, so I knew it would be best for you!

Then, I let Trig's mom have an exceptionally comfortable pregnancy so she could enjoy every minute of it, and I even seemed to rush it along so she could wait until near the end to surprise you with the news - that way Piper wouldn't have so long to wait and count down so many days - just like Christmastime when you have to wait, impatiently, for that special day to finally open your gift? (Or the way the Palmas look forward to birthday celebrations that go on for three, four days_ you all really like cake.) I know you, I knew you'd be better off with just a short time to wait!

Then, finally, I let Trig's mom and dad find out before he was born that this little boy will truly be a GIFT. They were told in early tests that Trig may provide more challenges, and more joy, than what they ever may have imagined or ever asked for.

At first the news seemed unreal and sad and confusing. But I gave Trig's mom and dad lots of time to think about it because they needed lots of time to understand that everything will be OK, in fact, everything will be great, because I only want the best for you!

I've given Trig's mom and dad peace and joy as they wait to meet their new son. I gave them a happy anticipation because they asked me for that.

I'll give all of you the same happy anticipation and strength to deal with Trig's challenges, but I won't impose on you... I just need to know you want to receive my offer to be with all of you and help you everyday to make Trig's life a great one.

This new person in your life can help everyone put things in perspective and bind us together and get everyone focused on what really matters.

The baby will expand your world and let you see and feel things you haven't experienced yet. He'll show you what "true, brave victory" really means as those who love him will think less about self and focus less on what the world tells you is "normal" or "perfect°.

You will grow and be blessed with greater understanding that will he born along with Trig.Trig will be his dad's little buddy and he'll wear Carhartts while he learns to tinker in the garage. He'll love to be read to, he'll want to play goalie, and he'll steal his mom's heart just like Track, Bristol, Willow and Piper did.

And Trig will be the cuddly, innocent, mischievous, dependent little brother that his siblings have been waiting for_in fact Trig will - in some diagnostic ways - always be a mischievous, dependent little brother, because I created him a bit different than a lot of babies born into this world today.

Every child is created special, with awesome purpose and amazing potential. Children are the most precious and promising ingredient in this mixed up world you live in down there on earth. Trig is no different, except he has one extra chromosome. Doctors call it "Down's Syndrome", and Downs kids have challenges, but can bring you much delight and more love than you can ever imagine! Just wait and see, let me prove this, because I only want the best for you!

Some of the rest of the world may not want him, but take comfort in that because the world will not compete for him. Take care of him and he will always be yours!

Trig's mom and dad don't want people to focus on the baby's extra chromosome. They're human, so they haven't known how to explain this to people who are so caring and are interested in this new little Alaskan. Sarah and Todd want people to share in the joy of this gift I'm giving to the Palin family, and the greater Alaska family.

Many people won't understand_ and I understand that. Some will think Trig should not be allowed to be born because they fear a Downs child won't be considered "perfect" in your world. (But tell me, what do you earthlings consider "perfect" or even "normal" anyway? Have you peeked down any grocery store isle, or school hallway, or into your office lunchroom lately? Or considered the odd celebrities you celebrate as "perfect" on t.v.? Have you noticed I make 'em all shapes and sizes? Believe me, there is no "perfect"!)

Many people will express sympathy, but you don't want or need that, because Trig will be a joy. You will have to trust me on this.

I know it will take time to grasp this and come to accept that I only want the best for you, and I only give my best. Remember though: "My ways are not your ways, my thoughts are not your thoughts- for as the heavens are higher than the earth, my ways are higher than yours!"

I wrote that all down for you in the Good Book! Look it up! You claim that you believe me - now it's time to live out that belief!

Please look to me as this new challenge and chapter of life unfolds in front of you. I promise to equip you. I won't give you anything you can't handle. I am answering your prayers. Trig can't wait to meet you. I'm giving you ONLY THE BEST!

Love,
Trig's Creator, Your Heavenly Father

Monday, June 13, 2011

I think an apology is owed to the Toronto policeman who only stated what is obvious.

These in-your-face parades started in response to a Canadian police officer who, in a talk about public safety, suggested that if women didn’t want to invite sexual assaults they should avoid dressing like ‘sluts’.

Cue a tsunami of ludicrously over-the-top protests that this officer had effectively blamed women for their own rapes.

Such an inflation of well-meaning, if incautious, advice into a thought-crime against half the human race triggered an international explosion of self-indulgent and absurd posturing.

These narcissistic stunts are yet another frivolous distraction by those who take advantage of the unprecedented freedoms won by others as they wrap themselves in the mantle of victim.


It’s absurd that they cannot see the contradictions in what they are doing. For even though they demand that women should not be judged by what they are wearing, such a judgment is precisely what dressing as ‘sluts’ requires the watching world to make.

Of course, sexual assaults take place against women who are dressed perfectly conventionally. But it is wrong to say that therefore there is no such thing as provocative dressing.

Indeed, the reaction of men leering at these silly girls as they paraded their exposed flesh demonstrated all too predictably the supreme fatuousness of their assertions.

Wearing revealing clothing signals that she regards her body as a kind of advertising hoarding for her sexuality. It demonstrates that her sexuality is not a private matter, and most certainly is not restricted to a loving relationship — nor indeed to any kind of relationship.

Of course, any man who sexually assaults a woman is to blame for his own behaviour. But the issue arising from women’s clothing is not blame, but prudence.

The insistence that women’s behaviour never contributes to any harm that may befall them is profoundly anti-feminist — and indeed, anti-human. This is because it robs women of that responsibility for their own actions which lies at the heart of what it is to be a human being.

But there’s an even deeper betrayal. For those pioneering feminists believed that women represented moral values superior to those of men. If women ended up merely behaving like men, they argued, that would negate everything they were fighting for.

Alas, this is precisely what has happened. By claiming that degraded behaviour empowers women, these Slut Walkers are turning back the feminist clock. If women claim to be sluts, that’s how they will be seen.

We live in a society which has degraded the whole notion of human sexuality. It has voided it of spirituality or love, and turned it instead into little more than a heartless and even predatory means of self-gratification.

Feminism surely takes up such absurd or offensive positions because it is past its sell-by date. The great causes which animated it have been won. It now has as much purchase on reality as the grin on the face of the Cheshire Cat which continued long after the cat itself disappeared.

But what (Germaine)Greer actually did was lash feminism to the mast of the sexual revolution. And so she more than anyone else turned it into a carrier for the degradation of society we now see all around us — the porno-paedophile culture; girls emulating the worst of male behaviour in drunkenness, violence and loveless sexual activity; and the disposal of unborn children as if they are of no more value than an unwanted appendix, an attitude which has led directly to the erosion of innate respect for life and the brutalisation of an entire culture.

This is why they insist on continuing to cast women as powerless victims — which is precisely what Slut Walks does.

And that is why Slut Walks, Germaine Greer and the rest of the modern feminist movement are now simply irrelevant to most women’s lives.

As long as women fall prey to the enticing lure of pop stars and Hollywood bimbos, they will think that their femininity is wholly contained in their physical attraction. And more and more exposure of the "body beautiful" is regarded as something liberating; things that are essentially bad for us have always been disguised as something good.

h/t Scarmouche!

Friday, June 10, 2011

Eugenics is Alive and Well

Researchers from the University of Hong Kong say women may soon be able to find out with a simple blood test very early in their pregnancies whether or not the baby they are carrying may have Down syndrome.
Study leader Rossa Chiu and her researchers have been working on a DNA-based test for almost a decade, and have finally released the results of their study. In their largest study, researchers analyzed blood from 753 pregnant mothers. The DNA test was able to identify every single case of Down syndrome with only a few false positives.

What makes this test so incredible is that it’s noninvasive and can be done in about the 13th week of pregnancy. Until now, the only way to know 100% your baby has Down syndrome is to have a amniocentesis or CVS test, and both invasive tests run the risk of miscarriage. Having recently gone through the amniocentesis myself, I know how truly terrifying the experience can be. Although Down syndrome is the only genetic test available now, Chiu and her researchers are sure more are to follow, and this has me very hopeful.

Read the article here
Simple blood test could soon determine if a fetus has Down Syndrome

Hey, this is just great, don't you think? Babies should come with guarantees so that you can return them. The logical consequence of this is infanticide; why keep alive a baby that has been born with defects?

Peter Singer's arguments are entirely logical; once you accept that abortion is okay, infanticide must follow.

Peter Singer on infanticide

Mama grizzly can get them excited

24,000 pages of email correspondence by Sarah Palin have been released today for public consumption. Has any other person in the public square been subjected to such scrutiny? Has Barack Obama? Surely, of all people, if anyone's life is to be seen under a microscope, the president's should be.

Today reams of e-mails sent by Sarah Palin during her time as governor of Alaska will be released to the public. Before the full media circus begins, here’s a proposed rule to guide the discussion: anyone who wants to criticize the content of the Palin e-mails must first make all of his or her own e-mails available for others to read. Sound fair?
-
Jason Richwine in National Review Online

One comment stated that anyone working for someone else knows that their email account from work can be viewed by their employer. However, it is not just Palin's work emails that are being viewed. Her private correspondence is also being released.

The emails were sent and received by Palin's personal and state email accounts, and the ones being released were deemed to be related to state business.
She and top aides were known to communicate using private email accounts. Perez said Palin gave the state a CD with emails from her Yahoo account, and other employees were asked to review their private accounts for emails related to state business and to send those to their state accounts.- Becky Bohrer in Huffington Post

Why such interest in this woman? Why is she so feared by so many on the liberal left? I personally think she is the real deal, she is someone who loves America as Ronald Reagan did, and I think she is prepared to go the distance for her country. I sure hope she runs and we can see her character opposite Obama, a man who is obsessed with his own ideology while his country sinks into ruin.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Exclusive Interview with Linda Gibbons

Interview with LifeSiteNews

“If a two-year-old was being murdered next door, you’re not going to sit down and write a letter to your MP,” she explained. “That we need to do more, that’s obvious, obvious. … If I was going into a house to save a child from a fire, no one’s going to charge me with trespass for that.” At the same time, she insists that she has no interest in calling into question the efforts of pro-lifers who do not join her campaign.

“When we begin to suffer for the unborn, our identification with them, that’s when we’re going to impact society, when they see that,” she added. “The Church is not hurting enough for the unborn. When we start feeling their hurt in a real concrete way, then things are going to change, because then we’re saying very clearly that this cannot go on.”

She said she will continue to challenge the injunction “as long as God gives me life and breath. If I can get out of bed and put my feet on the floor, then I want to continue.”

“My mission is to be all that Christ wants me to be. It is his mission and we are simply walking with Christ,” she said. “It becomes simply a daily moment-by-moment walking with Christ.”

Monday, June 6, 2011

National Post on Linda Gibbons

Serial abortion clinic protester released from jail

Ms. Gibbons walked out of jail on Friday after Ontario Court Justice Mara Beth Greene granted her lawyer’s application requesting that she be released without conditions.

It was a surprising victory for the unrepentant protester who has spent 10 of the past 17 years in jail and inspired her 89-year-old mother to write a poem about her legal travails.

Amidst the Chile mining accident in 2010, her mother wrote: “It’s easier to get miners out of a hole than to get Linda out of a gaol.”

... Over the past two decades Ms. Gibbons has been arrested repeatedly for breaching a court injunction forbidding her from protesting outside several downtown Toronto abortion clinics. Each time she could have walked free on bail she refused to sign an order agreeing to obey the injunction, calling her decision a “principled” stand against compromising her beliefs based on legal restrictions.

“For me to sign off is to say that I will compromise my commitment to the unborn when it comes to legal restrictions,” she said. “I’m not ready to toy with my commitment to pro-life. It would almost be like me telling the unborn, ‘Sorry, I can’t defend you this time.’”

... Her most recent stint behind bars goes back to January 2009. Ms. Gibbons says the last 28 months were long, but that she compartmentalized her own problems to focus on counselling fellow inmates.

“I’m either counselling the women on their addictions, or I’m counselling some woman not to have an abortion, sharing the faith with them or giving them some encouragement to get through the day,” she says. “When you’re in there, you’re not saying, ‘I wish I wasn’t here.’ You’re just saying, ‘What do I do here?’”

... Since Aug. 30, 1994, when a civil court placed a temporary injunction around several abortion clinics in downtown Toronto at the request of the provincial Attorney-General, Ms. Gibbons has been arrested roughly 20 times for various offences under the Criminal Code.

Mr. Santoro has argued that the case should never have been prosecuted criminally but should have been sent back to civil court. The civil court should have also decided whether to make the injunction permanent or quash it, he said.

... This past winter, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear Ms. Gibbons’ case. Mr. Santoro will argue a heavy-handed Crown used the Criminal Code to punish Ms. Gibbons beyond the severity of her offences.

“They have used the criminal process as a strategy to avoid an inquest on the civil side,” Mr. Santoro said in February.

There was never any indication that Ms. Gibbons committed any violence or ever physically harassed anyone. She says the injunction muzzles legitimate pro-life free speech, and will return to her familiar posts outside abortion clinics regardless of the injunction.

“I have really said in my mind that as long as the injunctions exist and God gives me the ability to stand on my feet, that I will continue to challenge these injunctions as long as they exist.”

I have been keeping up a correspondence with Linda for over two years now, since initially sending her a Christmas card in 2009. I was surprised to receive back a long letter and our correspondence began. This is a case of someone who disobeys the law because that law is unjust. Here in Canada, we have our own case of civil disobedience, but it is kept so quiet and away from public view that very few even know about Linda Gibbons. But history will prove her right, just as it did Alexander Solzhenitsyn. As just as with Solzhenitsyn, those who are brave enough to be disobedient in the case of injustice, will suffer greatly.

Saturday, June 4, 2011

Obama and Poverty

A good article from Bill O'Reilly on President Obama's misunderstanding of the causes of poverty.

The key to defeating Obama is understanding him. He is driven by one thing above all: social justice. He fervently believes that prosperous Americans have a moral obligation to help the deprived not only in the United States, but all over the world. This cause influences just about all of his decision-making.

This fact came through clearly in Dinesh d'Souza's book The Roots of Obama's Rage, in which d'Souza claims that the driving force behind Obama is the need to accomplish his father's dreams. And those dreams were centred on ridding the poor nations of the colonial powers that oppressed them. Obama considers the United States to be a nation suffering from neo-colonialism and his desire is to remake the US into a utopia where justice will be met for the poor and marginalized.

I think O'Reilly nails it with this paragraph and quote from RR Reno:

The problem is that Obama does not really understand what drives poverty and hopelessness. Writing in the publication "Public Square," theologian R.R. Reno clearly defines the issue: "A Christian who hopes to follow the teachings of Jesus needs to reckon with a singular fact about American poverty: Its deepest and most debilitating deficits are moral, not financial; the most serious deprivations are cultural, not economic. Many people living at the bottom of American society have cell phones, flat-screen TVs, and some of the other goodies of consumer culture. But their lives are a mess."

Perhaps this is what Jesus meant when he said "the poor will always be with you"; unless one addresses the moral corruption that is at the root of poverty, there can be no lasting change.

O'Reilly concludes that the Republicans need to get this issue clear before the next election and select a leader who can go to the heart of the problem; otherwise, Americans will vote back in a man who, in his ignorance, will bankrupt America.

The cold truth is that Americans will have to become more self-reliant if the country is to maintain its superpower status. Americans must begin planning for their future medical and financial needs, with some government help but not total dependence.

Transitions are usually difficult, but crunch time is here. If the Republican challenger cannot persuade voters that real danger is on their doorstep, the president will win re-election. No spin.

Read the entire article here
Poverty and the President

Friday, June 3, 2011

Linda Gibbons Freed from Jail

Linda was released from jail today with no conditions pending her release.

Read more here
LifeSiteNews

For further details on the Linda Gibbons case, click here
Free Linda

Same Sex Marriage a Societal Experiment

The Essential Public Purpose of Marriage - by Jennifer Roback Morse
h/t Mercator Net

Same sex marriage redefines parenthood, as a side effect of redefining marriage. Up until now, marriage has made legal parenthood track biological parenthood, with adoption for exceptional situations. The legal presumption of paternity means that children born to a married woman are presumed to be the children of her husband. With this legal rule, and the social practice of sexual exclusivity, marriage attaches children to their biological parents.
Same sex couples of course, do not procreate together. What is being called “Marriage Equality” requires a dubious move from “presumption of paternity” to the gender neutral “presumption of parentage.” This sleight of hand transforms the legal understanding of parenthood. The same sex partner of a biological parent is never the other biological parent. Rather than attaching children to their biological parents, same sex marriage is the vehicle that separates children from a parent.

But biology will reassert itself. And in fact, in some cases, biology already is reasserting itself. Some women who have children with female partners find that sharing the care of their children with another woman is not as easy as they thought it would be, and really isn’t comparable with sharing the care with the child’s father. Some men who agree to be sperm donors as “friends” find that they want more of a relationship with their own children than they had anticipated.[8] And some children are having feelings about their absent parents, uncomfortable questions about their origins, and complex emotions about being partially purchased.[9]

Advocates of so called marriage equality typically respond, “That’s just biology,” as if biology were nothing. They are asking people to set aside the natural attachment of parents to their own children, the natural difficulties of treating another person’s child as if they were your own, the natural desires of children to know who they are and where they came from. Suppressing all these feelings in all these people will not be possible indefinitely.

Let us be clear: the alternative to the biological principle for determining parentage is the principle that the government decides who is a parent. Instead of simply recording parentage, the state will determine parentage, not in exceptional cases, but routinely. This is what “getting the state out of the marriage business” will eventually come to mean.

These are not insignificant changes. Please note that these concerns do not assert that anyone is unworthy of marriage, do not make anyone a “second class citizen,” and do not disparage anyone. Changing the law of marriage changes the law for everyone, and puts incentives into place that may affect the behavior of everyone. Redefining marriage is a radical social experiment.

Previous generations of social experimenters have caused unimaginable misery for millions of people. Particular people advocated the policies that led to today’s 50% divorce rate and 40% out of wedlock childbearing rate. None of these people has ever been held accountable.

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Homosexuality in the Media



A recent Gallup poll indicated that 35% of Americans think that there are more homosexuals than Catholics in the US. Fact is 2% of citizens identify as homosexuals (6 million people) as compared to 25% identifying as Catholics (70 million).

So why do 1/3 of the US people think there are that many gays? Answer is simple - promotion of the gay lifestyle by the media.

Case in point: a new film released this week stars Christopher Plummer as a 75-year old widower who "comes out of the closet".

Christopher Plummer in new film

Thrilling, can't wait to see the old geezer.

Note from my husband (who should be blogging himself)- see the similarity here between people thinking there are that many gays in the population and everyone thinking that all priests are guilty of sexual abuse? In both cases, the media misleads the public by painting the picture they want.