an information resource
for orthodox Anglicans

Repeat abortions climb with increased contraceptive use

April 16th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Hilary White, LifeSite News

The British government has released statistics showing that while the teen pregnancy and abortion rates are dropping, the number of girls and women having repeat abortions continues to climb alongside steady increases in the use of artificial contraceptives.

According to the Society for the Protection of Unborn Citizens, the statistics show that giving more contraceptives to young girls will lead to more abortions.

According to 2012 figures for London alone, 16,323 women age 18-29 had abortions who had never had one previously. 7,817 of aborting women in London in the same age group had had one previous abortion. 149 had had four previous abortions and 22 had had six previously. Overall, the number of repeat abortions for England and Wales is about 37 percent in the latest figures.

The government’s figures show that in general the abortion rate has dropped since 2010 but the number of repeat abortions has risen. In 2011, 36 percent of women undergoing abortions had one or more previous abortions. The 2011 report said that number has risen from 31 percent since 2001.
 
The same 2011 report found that 96 percent of abortions were funded by the NHS and 61 percent of these were carried out in private facilities who bill the NHS.
 
Health Minister Jane Ellison added that in 2012, of the 185,122 abortions performed on residents of England and Wales, none were allowed under Ground F, “to save the life of the pregnant woman.”
 
Read here
 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Are Christians Obsessed with Sex?

April 12th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion, sex Comments Off

By Nathaniel Givens, First Things

From time to time a member of the Christian left will admonish the Christian right to stop obsessing about sex. This is a clever move because in addition to undercutting traditional sexual morality it also suggests that those who are concerned with the topic are acting on some secret ulterior motive. Voyeurism? Projection? Repression? Whatever the precise cause, it definitely sounds unhealthy.

Tom Ehrich is one of the most recent to advance this case. His post, an excellent example of what C. S. Lewis termed “bulverism ,” largely takes for granted that Christians are obsessed with sex and speculates that this is the result of some kind of perpetual adolescence . The substance of his contention is that:

We obsess about sex, a topic that Jesus himself ignored. Our public presence has narrowed to questions around abortion and homosexuality. The “Christian” political agenda has become nothing more than electing candidates who will deal correctly with abortion and homosexuality.

One could suggest quite a few things that Jesus Christ had nothing to say about, but sex would not make the list. He reaffirmed the central moral teaching of fidelity in telling the woman caught in adultery to “leave your life of sin” (John 8:11, NIV), but then went much farther and stated that “anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28, NIV). Some rather stern language about plucking out eyes and cutting off hands followed thereafter and then further discussion of divorce and fornication. So much for the supposed silence of the Savior on the subject of sex.
 
Just as puzzling, however, is the assertion that abortion is a sexual issue for pro-life Christians. There are a lot of ways that the pro-life movement views abortion. The folks at Feminists for Life view it as a women’s issue. The folks at Secular Pro-Life view it as a secular civil rights issue. The common thread for all pro-life groups, including religious ones, however, is the issue of life. Not sex.
 
Read here
 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The gloves are off in the fight over “sexual rights” here at the UN

April 11th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

by John Smeaton, SPUC

This week I have been attending the 47th session of the Commission on Population and Development at the United Nations in New York.  [...]

The ugly, anti-life agenda has been all too evident this week here at the United Nations. The gloves are off and war is being waged against the unborn, marriage, children and the family. The pro-abortion lobby – which is out here in force – is being led by the likes of Lynne Featherstone on behalf of the British government – Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Development. I will say more about that another day.

Here's SPUC lobbyist Pat Buckley's bird's eye view of what's happening:

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Historic Hearing at European Parliament

April 10th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

From European Dignity Watch

It was a real thriller. But the result couldn’t be better for the proponents of the biggest Citizen Initiative of the EU, One of Us. The European Parliament has never before, in its history, seen such a frank, honest and high-level debate about the inconsistencies of the EU regarding the equal protection of every human being from the moment of conception onwards.

What went on behind the scenes?

Two days before the hearing, the Citizens’ Committee received a letter with a draft agenda, which has been changed without the consent of the Citizens’ Committee. As it turned out, Parliament tried to give minimal speaking time to the representatives of ‘One of Us’ while filling the slots with statements of MEPs. Given the controversies that One of Us has caused over the last two years in some circles, certain MEPs were seemingly attempting to lecture One of Us instead of listening, as would be appropriate for such a hearing.

It was particularly shocking to see that the first round of statements provided speaking slots for four MEPs and two Commissioners before even allowing the Citizens’ Committee to present the initiative and its objectives.

As if that were not enough, an MEP who had publicly stated in recent days that his aim in participating in the Public Hearing was to demolish ‘One of Us’ which he tried to dismiss with hate speech as “a bunch of religious extremists” had been granted three speaking slots in the changed programme.

A letter of protest with an emergency request to change the agenda of the hearing was sent in the early hours of this morning to President Martin Schulz and the 4 chairs of the parliamentary committees scheduled to give their opinion at the hearing.

This morning at 8:50 while the room was filled to capacity with 400 people who were eagerly awaiting the hearing, Gregor Puppinck, the representative of the ‘One of Us’ Citizens’ Committee threatened to call off the hearing if Parliament would not withdraw their agenda that was tantamount to forcing a sham hearing, designed to limit the freedom to express what ‘One of Us’ stand for.

Finally, at 9:15, the hearing began 15 minutes late with an agenda changed in order to comply with the requests that had been made by ‘One of Us.’

From that moment onwards, we saw a highly sophisticated debate, the best ever to be held at the European Parliament on the banning of EU funding into any activity that involves or presupposes the destruction of human embryos.

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

NHS program encouraged 110,000 new women to use abortifacient ‘contraception’

April 10th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Ben Johnson, LifeSite News

The United Kingdom has announced that a successful program to control population levels has convinced 110,000 women to sign up for potentially abortion-inducing forms of “contraception.”

The National Health Services (NHS) introduced a program in April 2009 tying doctors' pay to their ability to meet certain benchmarks, including increasing the number of women using long-acting reversible contraception (LARCs).

A study released on April 2 found that the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) increased the number of women using “IUDs, implants, and injectables” by an estimated 110,000 across the UK.

According to the drugs' description, every form of LARC has the potential to cause an early abortion by preventing a newly conceived baby from implanting in the uterus.

“The increased use of LARCs, especially the injectables, will increase the number of ‘silent abortions’ by an unknowable amount,” Dr. Brian Clowes, the director of research and education at Human Life International, told LifeSiteNews.com. “The patient information pamphlets on all of these contraceptives specifically mention the possibility of interfering with implantation of an embryo – a newly formed human life.”

“The science of how these drugs actually destroy life is typically overlooked,” he said, “due to an argument over semantics: defining pregnancy as beginning at implantation in the womb rather than at conception, when human life begins.”

Read here

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

We lap up TV violence – then hide from the real massacre in our midst

March 30th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Peter Hitchens, Mailonline

It is what doesn’t shock us that is now so shocking. Not all that long ago, news that aborted babies were being burned in furnaces to heat hospitals would have caused a major national storm.

But in our callous, distracted and unimaginative society, it passed by like a momentary gust of cold wind on a warm day, faintly disturbing but swiftly forgotten.

We’re told it’s been stopped. But the supply of human fuel has not halted.

What has happened to us that we no longer really care, either about the massacre of the innocents that goes on day and night in our midst, or about the disposal of human remains as if they were rubbish?

Lots of people must have known, and found it convenient. But in this matter we are really a bit like the respectable inhabitants of Hitler’s Germany, who vaguely noticed that people were loaded on to eastbound trains and didn’t come back, were concerned for a moment and then returned to their normal lives.

I wouldn’t mind it so much myself if those responsible would at least have the decency to be ashamed.

But the campaigners for the killing of unborn babies are proud and assertive. Their horrid deeds are, to them, a ‘right’ and a ‘choice’.

None of this evil drivel could even be expressed if we admitted that the babies involved were fellow humans. But that’s the key to the whole thing. Whoever sets out to destroy any class of humanity will always begin by claiming that his victims aren’t really human.

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Let’s Kill Babies and Put Them To Good Use

March 25th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Bill Muehlenberg

So what do you do with thousands of leftover unborn babies? Well, burning them to heat your joint is always an option. Hey, why not? Recycling aborted babies is an environmental winner, and if you can warm up your place at the same time, it is a real plus.

And I am not making this up folks. This has actually occurred. Here is the story which has just recently surfaced in the UK:

“The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found. Ten NHS trusts have admitted burning foetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat.

“Last night the Department of Health issued an instant ban on the practice which health minister Dr Dan Poulter branded ‘totally unacceptable.’ At least 15,500 foetal remains were incinerated by 27 NHS trusts over the last two years alone, Channel 4’s Dispatches discovered.”

Well, why not? When we live in a culture that so cheapens and demeans human life, even the most innocent and helpless amongst us, then it seems that anything goes. Our moral compass appears to be shattered beyond repair, and we have managed to convince ourselves that in the interests of personal autonomy and freedom anything and everything is acceptable – even using aborted babies as fuel.

Read here

Read also:  What's wrong with using aborted foetuses for central heating? from Cranmer


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Aborted babies are being used to heat UK hospitals. This is the culture of death

March 24th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Tim Stanley, Telegraph

Abortion stories read like dispatches from the frontline of a war. The Telegraph reports:
The bodies of thousands of aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated as clinical waste, with some even used to heat hospitals, an investigation has found. Ten NHS trusts have admitted burning foetal remains alongside other rubbish while two others used the bodies in ‘waste-to-energy’ plants which generate power for heat.
That’s right – institutions created to protect life are being fuelled by burning the remains of the dead. Some bureaucrat somewhere obviously regarded this as “efficient recycling”. It’s more akin to cannibalism.
We pride ourselves in the West on being more civilized that the rest. We have a free press, jury trials, human rights and relative peace. And our TV screens are filled with images of brutality in the developing world that reinforce our sense of superiority. I’ve just finish reading Dancing in the Glory of Monsters, Jason Stearn’s account of the Congo wars that depicts savagery committed wantonly and in the open. Its crimes are visceral – “something foreigners do”, not us.
But what we actually do in Europe and America is to tuck our social evils away into spaces that we can’t see. Elderly homes full of neglect, children’s homes where unspeakable things occur, and medical facilities in which patients are abandoned or abused with the catch-all excuse of underfunding or targets that override the priority of human compassion. The latest story, of light bulbs lit by human remains, is the purest example of the banality of evil, because it is the kind of evil that is motivated by the desire to keep things quiet and tidy. Consider this:
One of the country’s leading hospitals, Addenbrooke’s in Cambridge, incinerated 797 babies below 13 weeks gestation at their own ‘waste to energy’ plant. The mothers were told the remains had been ‘cremated.’
Read here
 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

On Abortion: the human being un-defined

March 24th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

From gentlemind

An act of abortion deliberately takes the life of an innocent human living in the womb. Since abortion pertains to the body – and since we can derive truths from the nature of the body – there is a right answer to the question of abortion. The article refers to Adam, whose whole body is one cell.

1  Viability, Autonomy, and Rights

If an effect is caused in only one way, the thing causing the effect exists to cause it. The womb is the environment we are placed in when we come into existence. Since Adam has nowhere to live without the womb, it exists so that Adam has somewhere to live. To declare that Adam cannot remain inside (if unable to survive outside) and that Adam can remain inside (only when able to survive outside), is to declare that the womb exists to be not used by those needing it. Adam ought to be taken from the womb either a) before viable or b) as soon as viable. There is no after viable. The womb should not exist. The existence of the womb refutes viability. Since Adam can only survive outside after not being able to survive outside, viability punishes Adam for being unable to go back in time. Autonomy is similarly odd. A man can marry but, since marriage is a relationship, he cannot dictate who he marries. If he can, autonomy ceases to be the “right to make own choices” and becomes a “right to make others’ choices”. Since he is also somebody else, his choices cease to be choices (others have a right to dictate to him). Since taking Adam’s life depends on Adam’s existence, the nature of the claim is contradicted by the nature of the thing claimed: choosing to take Adam’s life is “choosing to have no choice”. Nobody has two bodies. Adam is somebody else. Viability claims somebody has no right. Autonomy claims somebody has a right. Universal, inalienable Rights are predicated on the existence of a universal, inalienable qualifier – being human. To be human is to have rights. Rights exist independent of human will. This recognition allows them to operate as an absolute. Detaching them from life leaves them with willed (non-inherent) content. We either have inalienable rights or no rights. If we need to be “more than alive” to have rights, we need to be “more than human” to be human. Some humans become “less than human”. The clash between “right to life” and “right to an abortion” is an illusion – the nature of the claim is contradicted by the nature of the thing claimed: a “right to take life” is a “right to take rights”. A right to abortion is a “right to have no rights”.

If Adam has no rights, nobody has rights. No combination of viability, autonomy and rights can justify an abortion. Could we justify it if Adam is not really alive, not really a human, or not really a person?

Read here

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Abortion Groups Are Not Humanitarian Organizations!

March 19th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Lisa Correnti, Turtle Bay & Beyond

“People still have sexual intercourse even in times of crisis,” said an International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) representative.

Abortion and sexual rights groups like Planned Parenthood and the UN Population Fund are always looking for a new funding stream. The Obama administration has willingly obliged with both groups receiving more funding then any previous administration.

However, this is not enough. With tens of millions of dollars going to humanitarian aid groups to assist in conflict and disaster regions – Planned Parenthood and others want a piece of it. At a recent meeting at the 58th session of the Commission on the Status of Women at the United Nations, IPPF and UNFPA set out to make their case.

Global humanitarian groups have a long history of dealing with vulnerable women and girls during crisis situations when they have been displaced from their homes.

Let’s not allow abortion groups to re-brand themselves as humanitarian organizations. Contact your member of Congress and tell them so.

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

SPUC interview – LifeSiteNews.com

March 18th, 2014 Jill Posted in Marriage, pro-life/abortion Comments Off

Anthony McCarthy, education and publications manager of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) speaks with LifeSiteNews.com's John-Henry Westen on standing up for real marriage as the best defense for the unborn. Sex-ed blinds young people to the "incredible enormity of abortion," he says.

See LifeSiteNews.com story here

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

78 Votes Made All the Difference

March 18th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Joseph Backholm, Family Policy Institute

Late last Thursday night, the 2014 Washington State legislative session ended.

The last two years were historic because of the formation of a bi-partisan majority coalition that was formed when two Democrats joined with the Senate Republicans to take control of the state Senate. As a result, the leadership of the Senate was taken away from downtown Seattle to more moderate leadership.

This changed everything.

Without this coalition in place, it is likely that the Abortion Insurance Mandate would be law, taxpayers would be funding telemed abortions as well, and minors who want professional help with unwanted same-sex attraction would be prohibited by law from getting it.

These bills were not defeated because of a socially conservative majority in the Senate, but because the Majority Coalition agreed to table debates over controversial social issues so they can focus on legislation affecting jobs, budgets, and transportation.

It was an issue of prioritization.

But it wasn't just social issues that were affected.

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The Zuber Report: Radical Feminism defeats itself in the European Parliament

March 17th, 2014 Jill Posted in Culture, Feminism, pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By J C von Krempach, JD, Turtle Bay & Beyond

The easiest victory is when your adversaries cannibalize each other. Such a thing happened in last week’s plenary session of the European Parliament, where the supporters of two different versions of a radical-feminist “initiative report” neutralized each other, which finally paved the way for the best of all possible outcomes: neither of the two texts was adopted.

I admit that the whole thing appeared rather late on our radar screens, so that I wasn’t able to report on this earlier. The scenaripo was similar to that of the defeated “Estrela-Report”. Once again, a radical draft for a (legally non-binding) has emanated from the Parliament’s ominous Committee on Women’s Rights (FEMM), which is something like a sheltered workshop for radical feminists in the EP. Given that the radical elements are more or less amongst themselves in that committee, they are able to draft the most extremist policy papers, which then are tabled and voted in the Parliament’s plenary.

This time, it was a report on equality between women and men in the European Union, drafted by Ines Cristina Zuber, a member of Portugal’s hard-core Communist Party.

Her draft is yet another glaring example of how nowadays communists and other radical politicians have appropriated the vocabulary of human rights to embellish their anti-human-rights agenda: the draft called inter alia for the recognition of “right to voluntary termination of pregnancy”, the legal recognition of same-sex “marriages”, the introduction of compulsory “gender education” at schools, and the complete elimination from all school textbooks of any suggestion that a women could find fulfilment in her role as a mother, or a care-giver.

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

David Cameron presides over largest liberalisation of abortion practice since 1967 Abortion Act

March 13th, 2014 Jill Posted in Abortion, Politics, pro-life/abortion Comments Off

Andrew LansleyBy Peter Saunders, CMF

Prime Minister David Cameron has presided over the largest liberalisation of abortion practice since the passing of the Abortion Act in 1967.
 
Under his leadership, former health minister Andrew Lansley (pictured), working closely with abortion providers and senior figures at the Department of Health, has managed to smuggle in what is in effect a nurse-led abortion service without the issue ever being discussed in parliament and without the knowledge of most of his own party colleagues.
 
This is how he managed it.
 
When the Abortion Act was passed in 1967 it was intended to allow abortion only in a limited set of circumstances.
 
Under the Act an abortion could only be performed by a ‘registered medical practitioner’ (ie. a doctor) and only when two registered medical practitioners were of the opinion, ‘formed in good faith’, that certain conditions applied.
 
About 98% of all abortions are currently performed on grounds ‘that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family’.
 
The two certifying doctors are required to carry out this balancing of medical risk and it is implicit in the legislation that they would meet with the woman to make an assessment about whether these medical conditions applied. How otherwise could they carry out their statutory duties ‘in good faith’?
 
Read here
 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Perversion Compounded and Children Corrupted

March 11th, 2014 Jill Posted in Morality, pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Bill Muehlenberg

There are several truths you can usually count on when we think about the culture wars. One of them is that perversion tends to generate more perversion. Those pushing a particular vice, immorality or perversion tend to push other ones as well. The more the merrier it seems.

And those into unrighteousness and degradation also seem to want to drag children into their world of filth and perversion as well. It is not enough to let immorality and filth reign supreme amongst adults, but these folks also seek out children, dragging them into their sordid world.

Examples of this are easy to come by, and they demonstrate just how far down the moral drain our Western cultures have gone. It is as if there are moral sinkholes swallowing up entire cultures and societies. Or to alter the metaphor somewhat, all over the West we find examples of moral quicksand engulfing individuals, groups and entire nations.

Two recent examples of what I am talking about are worth examining. The first comes from the US. It involves one perverse group (baby killers) trying to get teens hooked on another perversion (bondage and sado-masochism). Hmmm, birds of a feather obviously.

One report on this explains: “Riding the wave of ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ — and other pop culture ‘trends’ — Planned Parenthood of Northern New England (PPNNE) has released a video promoting and celebrating bondage and sadomasochism for teens (BDSM).

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

First abortion, now suicide: we’re on a slippery slope

March 10th, 2014 Jill Posted in Euthanasia, pro-life/abortion Comments Off

by Norman Tebbit, Telegraph

Years ago when that thoroughly decent man David Steel brought in his Abortion Bill he explained that it was not intended to provide abortion on demand, but to end the sordid trade of the back-street abortionists who frequently botched the procedure, inflicting pain and injury on their clients. Many of those who supported him did so for that reason, despite warnings that it was a step too far on to a very slippery slope which would lead to abortion on demand.

Those warnings have proved prescient. Not only has the Steel legislation been greatly widened in scope, but in practice abortion is now available on demand, well past the time when the child would be capable of survival and in practice up to full term. Nor is there any need of evidence of any congenital defects or disorders. All that is necessary is that the mother so wants to be rid of her child that she can find two doctors (who it appears do not actually have to see her) to say that her health might be adversley affected if the child was born. Indeed some doctors regard the mother's reluctance to bear a female child for social reasons as sufficient evidence to allow an abortion.

Now the former Labour Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer plans to bring in his Assisted Suicide Bill to allow doctors to provide lethal medication and asstance if needs be to patients they believe to have less than six months to live.

At present it is a criminal offence to asist in a suicide, but a prosecution requires the consent of the Attorney General and that is rarely forthcoming as he would have to believe that improper pressure had been put on a person to take their own life.

Read here

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Nine out of 10 women say doctors must see abortion patients before giving green light – poll

March 8th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

by John Bingham, Telegraph

Polling suggests strong opposition to new abortion guidelines which say that doctors do not have to see women before approving terminations

Women overwhelmingly oppose moves to allow doctors to approve abortions without seeing patients face-to-face, new polling shows.

Only one in 20 people disagree with the statement that pregnant women requesting a termination should "always" be seen by a qualified doctor before being given the go-ahead.

Although both men and women agree that patients requesting an abortion should be seen by a doctor, the view is held even more strongly by women than men, the survey suggests.

The polling also highlighted widespread fears that women’s health could be put at risk if the requirement to see a doctor is watered down.

It follows the publication of new draft Government guidelines for private abortion clinics which state explicitly that it is “not a legal requirement” for doctors approving abortions to see the women concerned first.

Read here


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Abortion on demand + scientific progress = eugenics

March 7th, 2014 Jill Posted in Eugenics, pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Peter Franklin, Conservative Home

These days eugenics is a dirty word – instant condemnation awaits any politician who even flirts with the idea. Indeed, we prefer to forget just how many eminent figures of the 20th Century were ardent eugenicists – deluding ourselves that it was only the Nazis who believed in human breeding programmes.
 
In a brilliant article for the Spectator, Mary Wakefield reminds us that eugenics has never really gone away – and that scientific progress means that the issue is becoming more not less relevant:
“…the screening of embryos is becoming ever easier. Preimplantation genetic screening, it’s called, or PGS: you fertilise a clutch of eggs, then carefully extract a single cell from each to see which genes what’s got. So there’s a scientific pincer moment going on. The more genes we ‘discover’ and the cheaper PGS becomes, the closer we come to that sci-fi day when parents can shop for their fantasy tot. Your grandchildren may be able to browse for genetic traits in their kids the way you choose shoes — and for me that’s where the trouble begins…”
Though our society has lost its religious faith in the sanctity of unborn human life, Wakefield pleads for a secular version of it:
“Maybe it’s no worse to snuff out an embryo than to squash a pea under a fork — but… don’t you feel in your bones that there should at least be some serious reason to make and break life — or it’s as if we’ve forgotten we were all embryos once.
 
“My half-baked position, thought through mostly in waiting rooms, is that it’s a better fit with our instincts to assume that embryos do have some moral status, even if just a shadow of one; enough so we can accept it’s at least a sadness to snuff ’em out…”
However, if such an instinct does still flicker within the modern mind – then it lies crushed beneath the everyday practice of abortion. When we accept the destruction of human foetal life on an industrial scale, then it seems unlikely that any lingering sense of squeamishness can prevent the eugenic selection of embryos.
 
The only real barriers are those of scientific know-how and economic affordability – and once those are surmounted, what’s to stop us from exploiting the possibilities?
 
Read here
 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

The culture of death bares its teeth: Planned Parenthood president says life begins at delivery

March 6th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Albert Mohler

Cecile Richards is no stranger to controversy. As the president of Planned Parenthood she leads one of the central institutions of the Culture of Death — an organization that was born in the dark vision of Margaret Sanger and now exists as the nation’s most visible promoter and provider of abortion. Cecile Richards has been an ardent defender of a woman’s “right” to abort her baby at any time for any reason. She also believes that women should be able to abort their babies for free, with taxpayers footing the bill.

Her support of abortion for any reason and for any stage of fetal development — including the most barbarous partial-birth abortions — was explained, perhaps accidentally, in an interview she recently gave to Jorge Ramos of Fusion TV. When Ramos asked Richards when life begins, she said: “It’s not something I really feel like is really part of this conversation … every woman needs to make their own decision.”

Her non-answer to one of the most fundamental questions of human dignity was shocking enough, but there was more to come. As it turns out, Richards does have a belief about when life begins.

Ramos was apparently surprised by her evasion of the question and asked, “Why would it be controversial for you to say when you think life starts?”

Read here

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

British contraceptive service admits an uncomfortable truth

February 25th, 2014 Jill Posted in pro-life/abortion Comments Off

By Louise Kirk, MercatorNet

[...]  BPAS tells us that contraceptive pills have a “perfect use” failure rate of one per cent when used exactly as instructed, “but with ‘typical use’ around nine in 100 women will become pregnant a year”. Likewise perfect condom use results in two pregnancies per 100 users while “with typical use – in which the condom is sometimes not put on or taken off properly – that increases to 12 in every 100”.
 
“Contraception fails and sometimes we fail to use it properly,” says Ann Furedi, chief executive of BPAS. “Ultimately women cannot control their fertility through contraception alone, and need accessible abortion services as a back-up for when their contraception lets them down.”
 
Congratulations to Ann Furedi for her frankness. However, I wonder if she will take the next obvious step and use her study to change the advice given out to school children in their ubiquitous sex lessons. After all, BPAS is a key player on our Sex Education Forum, which largely dictates what our children receive.
 
Read here
 
AddThis Social Bookmark Button