Monday, October 31, 2011

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Pro Life Ad in Kelowna BC


“Yesterday, it was the African who was determined to be ‘3/5’s human’ and could therefore be bought and sold, even killed as ‘property,’” continued Bartram. “Today, it’s the baby in womb who has been dehumanized. She has been declared a ‘non-person’ and can therefore be killed at will. The day is coming, however, when legalized abortion will be relegated to the dust bin of history, a sorry chapter in human history to be looked upon with great disdain by future generations.”
h/t LifeSiteNews

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Abortion and Breast Cancer



Michael Coren interviews Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a breast surgeon from New Jersey. Women need to know this but they are not being told. And the Canadian Breast Cancer Society refuses to acknowledge this link. This is political correctness at the expense of women's health. As Dr. Lanfranchi says "it is just wrong to keep this information from women."

"For teenagers 18 and under, who had abortions between 9 and 24 weeks, their risk went up 800 percent, which is a huge risk."

Monday, October 24, 2011

Some Acid Thoughts

Down at the 40 Days vigil site, a couple of young men (university students, we presume) have showed up with home made signs for Pro Choice. They are doing this to please some girls, I suppose. They tape the signs to the trees above our professionally made signs and frankly, it just looks tacky. Then they stand ten feet away from us and try to engage passersby in conversations. Meanwhile we at the vigil simply pray.

The other day, my husband said "these guys are just screwing around on my tax dollar". Ah, there's an acid thought. But you know, isn't he right? Most abortions are done because someone got pregnant while in a relationship that is not quite right, not stable, not really going anywhere. Usually that means the guy doesn't want a baby cluttering up the picture. He wants to be unhampered. Why don't I just say it, they are not married. So abortion is the means to clean up the mess. In this case, the "mess" is another human being.

Today, Starr Parker had an article called Moral Responsibilites are Linked to Fiscal Responsibilities. She wasn't quite as blunt as my husband but essentially, she is saying the same thing.

Liberals love to frame the killing of developing humans as being about women's lives, health and rights. But, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 3 percent of abortions are performed for reasons of a woman's health. Abortions that are performed because a woman's life is in danger amount to a fraction of 1 percent. That leaves more than 96 percent for convenience with some 50 percent repeat customers.

Regarding abortion, the liberal agenda is really about two things. One, an alleged right to sexual promiscuity; and two, an alleged right to have others bear social and financial responsibility for that promiscuity.

Fortunately, a sizable part of the American population doesn't see things this way. And, fortunately, a sizable part of our population remains in awe of the miracle of life and our responsibilities toward all aspects of life, both in and outside the womb.

It doesn't take that much thought to realize the fallacious thinking that suggests that matters of economy and matters of morality have nothing to do with each other.

The "right to abortion" culture is simply a subset of the entitlement culture, the culture that says your life is about making claims on others rather than personal responsibility.

Disrespect for life and disrespect for property go hand in hand. We can't divorce our sexual promiscuity from our fiscal promiscuity. Restoring personal responsibility in both areas is what we need today to get our nation back on track.

Read the entire article here
Starr Parker

Friday, October 21, 2011

Radio Gems

While driving, I often listen to CJLU, the Christian radio station in my town. I dislike Christian popular music (sorry, but most of the songs are droning voices sung on three or four notes, max) but the offerings in the morning and evening are often superb.

This morning, I caught just ten minutes of John MacArthur. I am not saying that I agree with all of his theology, because I haven't heard much of it and I haven't read any of his books. But he made great sense this morning and I wished that I could have written it down as he spoke.

He was talking about Christians who say "well, it must be God's will" to everything that happens in their life and in the lives of others. MacArthur basically said this is crap. Much of what happens in this world is not God's will, but is the success of evil over what is good. When someone's marriage breaks up, that is not necessarily God's will. Nor is the loss of someone's job. Bad things happen to good people and pacifying one's self with the glib slogan of "it's God's will" leads us into a place of acceptance and tolerance of things that should not be tolerated.

As MacArthur said, much that is abnormal is accepted as normal by the world today. I thought of the people passing us at the 40 Days vigil, many of them thinking "abortion is legal, get over it". Well, abortion may be legal, but for a woman to kill her own child is not normal and should not be accepted as normal. I just read about a Catholic priest in El Paso who has been moved 250 miles away to an isolated community because he wrote about the Bible's teachings on homosexuality in the local paper. And the bishop stated that this priest was expressing his own opinion, not the position of the Catholic Church and that he was endangering the Church's tax-exempt status with the IRS. Ah, the clincher - money.

This priest was teaching what we as Catholics and what all Christians who follow the Bible believe: that homosexual behaviour is intrinsically disordered and sinful. So is heterosexual activity outside of marriage, by the way. It is not just homosexuals who come in for reprimand; it is anyone who is breaking the commandment with anyone.

MacArthur said that we are called to pray "thy will be done". What this means is that we try to align our own wills with that of God. Much of what happens in this world would never be the will of God; our accepting of it as some kind of Christian discipline is simply wrong. If something is evil and against the commands of God, then we are to speak up and, as MacArthur says, we are called to "rebel" against the forces of evil in this world.

Christians are not passive wimps who accept whatever happens to them or to someone else. Many of the greatest social reforms have been started and carried out precisely by people who were deeply Christian in their thinking and in their actions. Surely, the chaos of this present culture calls us to be even more courageous as we stand against the tide of worldly, not Godly, values.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Dr. Lanfranchi on Michael Coren

Next Tuesday, Sun Media will host The Arena which is Michael Coren's popular talk show. His guest will be Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, a breast surgeon from New Jersey and founder of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. Dr. Lanfranchi is known for her position that induced abortion and artificial birth control are contributing to the increase of breast cancer among pre-menopausal women.

A must to watch, tune it. Coren is good every day, but this show will be of particular interest to women.

Click on this link to watch Sun News live. Michael Coren's show airs at 7-8 pm Central Time, 8-9 pm Eastern Time.

Sun News Network

Late Term Abortions - never mention the baby


Notice the word baby is never mentioned. Terms such as "elective procedure", "size of the pregnancy", "bpd measurement" are used.
When asked if there is anything wrong with the pregnancy and the answer is no, that the caller's husband has lost his job, her response is simply "okay". No attempt to ask the woman if she could keep the baby if helped, no attempt to dissuade her from abortion. Then the clincher - the price is eight to nine thousand dollars, which will be covered by Medicaid.

You can't convince me that abortion is not a lucrative business.

h/t Live Action

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Is there an agenda behind the "Occupy" events?

David Limbaugh seems to think so. Creating unrest over the differences between rich and poor, inciting people to blame the rich for all their problems, and launching their venom on the banks is all part of what Obama has been doing for the past couple of years. This is a man who wants radical change in America, and he has not demonstrated the kind of patriotism that one would expect of a president.

Obama and Occupy Wall Street are One

President Obama acts as though he merely sympathizes with the Wall Street occupiers' "broad-based frustration" about how America's financial system works, but he's doing a lot more than sympathizing. He's fanning their flames...

Why do we believe that in defaming tea partyers, Obama is projecting? Simply because he is a community organizer at heart with an ends-justify-the-means ethic. He has been engaged in political street agitation his entire adult life, so it is natural for him to assume his political opponents would engage in the same tactics. But they don't...

For a bird's-eye view of the type of protest Obama and his fellow leftists pretended to fear in the tea party events, we need look no further than the Wall Street occupier dust-ups. Here hateful and violent rhetoric abound, just as the ugly specter of racism, particularly against Jews, is in full relief, all of which are as verifiable in the YouTube videos of these protests as their absence has been in the tea party videos.

On her blog, Michelle Malkin cites a Denver protester saying, "There's a lot of stuff that needs to change, and it if doesn't, violent revolution will come."

He continues, "If you get the thirteen families that own the world, including George Bush and his administration, get them in front of the White House and hang them and shoot them, because they deserve that." And if that doesn't impress you, how about the protesters "calling for the beheading of 'white kids,' the 'hanging' of capitalists, and the murder of parents," as reported by the blog "Pundit Press"?

This, my friends, is representative of the type of protest our community organizer in chief claims to be "monitoring" and nevertheless supports -- the type that has led to more than 750 arrests throughout the country, compared with only one arrest in all the tea party protests...

With Obama, it's all smoke and mirrors; nothing is as he would have you believe. Every negative thing he says about the tea partyers is false, including that they don't represent the sentiment of the American majority, which is bursting with outrage at Obama's reckless agenda.

And whereas he pretended to fear violence from the tea partyers, he is actually trying to foment unrest among the occupiers. Their lifeblood is class warfare, and he is stoking its flames every single day.

With no ideas left on his plate that a long suffering American public is willing to further indulge, much less embrace, Obama is reduced to what he knows best: stirring public discontentment and unrest, hoping that this will somehow serve his political interests.

Watch Obama use the Occupiers to get himself re-elected.

Monday, October 17, 2011

LifeSiteNews banned

Life Site News banned from public sessions of bishops' meeting

I wonder who is allowed to attend? Salt & Light? the Catholic Register?

Apparently just Salt & Light are allowed in and they have been streaming the meetings live to a total of 13-15 viewers. Wow!

How's that for transparency?

Friday, October 14, 2011

Bill Whatcott and Freedom of Speech in Canada



No matter what your beliefs are about homosexuality, this case is very important for the continuance of free speech in Canada. If people get their feelings hurt by other's words, should that be considered "hate speech"?
Because if it is judged to be "hate speech", then no one will be free to express their beliefs in public.

h/t BigBlueWave

Issues Untouched by Feminists

The ongoing 40 Days for Life vigil in Halifax has brought out some feminists from the Women's Centre at St. Mary's University. Why is that feminists always push abortion as a solution for women everywhere, while ignoring other issues?

In places where safe, legal abortions are not available or easily accessible, women are still choosing to terminate their pregnancies. Making abortion illegal will nto stop women from making this choice, but will only serve to endangner their lives.

On the issue of sex-selective abortions, as in more girl babies are aborted than boys (even here in Canada, feminists!) these women are silent. So they want to bring abortion to third-world countries, but say nothing about immigrants to Canada bringing their boys-are-preferred ideology to Canada.

On the issue of female genital mutilation, again silence. So when it is revealed that the abortionist Grosnell (the Philadelphia abortionist who was finally arrested) took photos of the mutilated genitals of Muslim women, no feminists speak up about this either.

On the issue of forced abortion, whether that be in China or here at home where parents threaten their daughters with rejection unless they abort, again feminists are silent.

Why does it seem that providing abortion for everyone everywhere is their #1 cause? Why do they think that abortion is the absolute litmus test for female emancipation?

Particularly shocking is the fact that one of the pro-choice women has already had herself sterilized at the age of 20. She says, if she wishes to have a child later, she will simply use IVF. This is sexual freedom?

I think the woman who refuses to sleep with a man and face the consequences of an uncommitted relationship alone, is by far the freer woman.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Freedom of Speech in Canada



This case has very much at stake for Christians in Canada today... The Gospel of Life is offensive to some people. And no matter how much we speak the truth in love, there will always be some who will be offended...
There is a lot at stake. If this case goes, the wrong way, Christians will find more and more that their rights to speak about the truth will be limited.
- Andre Schutten, legal counsel for Reform Political Action in Canada

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Reproductive Justice

Over at our 40 Days for Life vigil site, two bikes have appeared wrapped with coloured yarn in the gay pride fashion. Attached to the bikes were signs with the words Reproductive Justice on them.

I am puzzled by this quest for reproductive justice. Perhaps if you read this and have a comment to share, you can enlighten me. I just don't get the picture. What do they consider to be "unjust"? The fact that they are born as women and have the role of bearing the next generation? Is that the injustice they feel?

Is it a desire to be just like men, in every way? To be able to compete in the world of jobs with men, without having the inconvenience of pregnancy and childcare getting in the way? Is that the injustice they feel?

Am I missing something here? Do women not realise that the ability to bear children is something that men don't get to do? That childbearing and child rearing can actually be seen as the good side of the coin.

There are many women out there in low-paying jobs and in jobs that don't challenge their minds who would love to be able to stay at home and raise their children. There are many women in better-paying jobs who don't like their work. I don't see that the job-world holds that much attraction to merit the cause for "reproductive justice".

If "reproductive justice" means that women must have access to abortion for whatever reason, where is the justice for the child in the womb, half of the time that child being female? Is a woman's freedom to be gained at the price of taking another's?

The bottom line must always be crossed: what are the unborn?
If they are not human beings, then abortion simply doesn't matter.
But if they are members of the human race, as medical science clearly states they are, then it matters a great deal.
Because abortion dehumanizes this class of persons in order to do away with them. And every great injustice in the world has happened the same way: by dehumanizing a class of persons, we can then justify the evil that we do to them. Jews were dehumanized by the Nazis in order to exterminate them; blacks were dehumanized by white landowners in order to make them slaves; now the unborn are dehumanized by society in order to abort them.

If I have missed something here, please do let me know.

Saturday, October 8, 2011