The Language of Love

One of the most encouraging pastoral letters I have seen for some time was published on March 24^th, the eve of the feast of the Annunciation, by Bishop James Conley of Lincoln Nebraska. The pastoral letter entitled the ‘Language of Love’ highlights the sacrificial nature of authentic love and the disruptive immorality of contraception.

Bishop Conley referred to the visit of Mother Teresa of Calcutta twenty years ago and reminded his congregation about some of the things she said;

“Love,” she told them, “has to hurt. I must be willing to give whatever it takes not to harm other people and, in fact, to do good to them.  This requires that I be willing to give until it hurts.  Otherwise, there is no true love in me and I bring injustice, not peace, to those around me.”

Mother Teresa he says, ‘believed, as do I, that much of the world’s unhappiness and injustice begins with a disregard for the miracle of life created in the womb of mothers.  Today, our culture rejects love when it rejects the gift of new life, through the use of contraception’

Mother Teresa he continues said that, “in destroying the power of giving life, through contraception, a husband or wife…destroys the gift of love.”

Husbands and wives are made to freely offer themselves as gifts to one another in friendship, and to share in the life-giving love of God.

He created marriage to be unifying and procreative.  To join husband and wife inseparably in the mission of love, and to bring forth from that love something new. 

The full text of letter is included below and can also be read in full on thislink.

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ

Twenty years ago, Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta stood before the President of the United States, before senators and congressmen, before justices of the United States Supreme Court.  She spoke about her work among the world’s poor.  She spoke about justice and compassion.  Most importantly, she spoke about love.

“Love,” she told them, “has to hurt. I must be willing to give whatever it takes not to harm other people and, in fact, to do good to them.  This requires that I be willing to give until it hurts.  Otherwise, there is no true love in me and I bring injustice, not peace, to those around me.”[1]

Sacrifice is the language of love.  Love is spoken in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who poured out his life for us on the cross. Love is spoken in the sacrifice of the Christian life, sharing in Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.  And love is spoken in the sacrifice of parents, and pastors, and friends.

We live in a world short on love.  Today, love is too often understood as romantic sentimentality rather than unbreakable commitment. But sentimentality is unsatisfying.  Material things, and comfort, and pleasure bring only fleeting happiness.  The truth is that we are all searching for real love, because we are all searching for meaning.

Love—real love—is about sacrifice, and redemption, and hope.  Real love is at the heart of a rich, full life.  We are made for real love.  And all that we do—in our lives, our careers, and our families, especially—should be rooted in our capacity for real, difficult, unfailing love.

But today, in a world short on love, we’re left without peace, and without joy.

In my priesthood, I have stood in front of abortion clinics to offer help to women experiencing unwanted pregnancies; I have prayed with the neglected elderly; and I have buried young victims of violence.  I have seen the isolation, the injustice, and the sadness that comes from a world short on love.  Mother Teresa believed, as do I, that much of the world’s unhappiness and injustice begins with a disregard for the miracle of life created in the womb of mothers.  Today, our culture rejects love when it rejects the gift of new life, through the use of contraception

Mother Teresa said that, “in destroying the power of giving life, through contraception, a husband or wife…destroys the gift of love.”

Husbands and wives are made to freely offer themselves as gifts to one another in friendship, and to share in the life-giving love of God.

He created marriage to be unifying and procreative.  To join husband and wife inseparably in the mission of love, and to bring forth from that love something new.

Contraception robs the freedom for those possibilities.

God made us to love and to be loved.  He made us to delight in the power of sexual love to bring forth new human beings, children of God, created with immortal souls.  Our Church has always taught that rejecting the gift of children erodes the love between husband and wife: it distorts the unitive and procreative nature of marriage.  The use of contraception gravely and seriously disrupts the sacrificial, holy, and loving meaning of marriage itself.

The Church continues to call Catholic couples to unity and procreativity. Marriage is a call to greatness—to loving as God loves—freely, creatively, and generously.  God himself is a community of love—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  Christian marriage is an invitation to imitate, and to know, and to share in the joyful freedom of God’s love, an echo of the Holy Trinity.

 _________

In 1991, my predecessor, Bishop Glennon P. Flavin, wrote that “there can be no true happiness in your lives unless God is very much a part of your marriage covenant.  To expect to find happiness in sin is to look for good in evil…. To keep God in your married life, to trust in his wisdom and love, and to obey his laws…will deepen your love for each other and will bring to you that inner peace of mind and heart which is the reward of a good conscience.”[2]

God is present in every marriage, and present during every marital embrace.  He created sexuality so that males and females could mirror the Trinity: forming, in their sexual union, the life-long bonds of family.  God chose to make spouses cooperators with him in creating new human lives, destined for eternity.  Those who use contraception diminish their power to unite and they give up the opportunity to cooperate with God in the creation of life.

As Bishop of Lincoln, I repeat the words of Bishop Flavin.  Dear married men and women: I exhort you to reject the use of contraception in your marriage.  I challenge you to be open to God’s loving plan for your life.  I invite you to share in the gift of God’s life-giving love.  I fervently believe that in God’s plan, you will rediscover real love for your spouse, your children, for God, and for the Church.  I know that in this openness to life, you will find the rich adventure for which you were made.

Our culture often teaches us that children are more a burden than a gift—that families impede our freedom and diminish our finances.  We live in a world where large families are the objects of spectacle and derision, instead of the ordinary consequence of a loving marriage entrusted to God’s providence.  But children should not be feared as a threat or a burden, but rather seen as a sign of hope for the future.

In 1995, Blessed John Paul II wrote that our culture suffers from a “hedonistic mentality unwilling to accept responsibility in matters of sexuality, and… a self-centered concept of freedom, which regards procreation as an obstacle to personal fulfilment. ”[3]  Generous, life-giving spousal love is the antitode to hedonism and immaturity: parents gladly give up frivolous pursuits and selfishness for the intensely more meaningful work of loving and educating their children.

In the Diocese of Lincoln, I am grateful for the example of hundreds of families who have opened themselves freely and generously to children.  Some have been given large families, and some have not.  And of course, a few suffer the very difficult, hidden cross of infertility or low fertility.  The mystery of God’s plan for our lives is incomprehensible.  But the joy of these families, whether or not they bear many children, disproves the claims of the contraceptive mentality.

Dear brothers and sisters, Blessed John Paul II reminded us that, “man is called to a fullness of life which far exceeds the dimensions of his earthly existence, because it consists in sharing the very life of God.”[4] The sexual intimacy of marriage, the most intimate kind of human friendship, is a pathway to sharing in God’s own life.  It is a pathway to the fullness of our own human life; it is a means of participating in the incredible love of God.  Contraception impedes our share in God’s creative love.  And thus it impedes our joy.

The joy of families living in accord with God’s plan animates and enriches our community with a spirit of vitality and enthusiasm.  The example of your friends and neighbors demonstrates that while children require sacrifice, they are also the source of joy, meaning, and of peace.  Who does not understand the great gift of a loving family?

Yes, being lovingly open to children requires sacrifice. But sacrifice is the harbinger of true joy.  Dear brothers and sisters, I invite you to be open to joy.

_________

Of course, there are some true and legitimate reasons why, at certain times, families may discern being called to the sacrifice of delaying children. For families with serious mental, physical, or emotional health problems, or who are experiencing dire financial troubles, bearing children might best be delayed.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that couples must have “just” reasons to delay childbearing. For couples facing difficulties of various kinds, the Church recommends Natural Family Planning: a method for making choices about engaging in fruitful sexual relations.

Natural Family Planning does not destroy the power to give life: instead, it challenges couples to discern prayerfully when to engage in life-giving sexual acts. It is an integrated, organic and holistic approach to fertility care.

Natural Family Planning is a reliable and trustworthy way to regulate fertility, is easy to learn, and can be a source of unity for couples.  To be sure, using NFP requires sacrifice and patience, but sacrifice and patience are not obstacles to love, they are a part of love itself.  Used correctly, NFP forms gentle, generous husbands, and selfless, patient wives.  It can become a school of virtuous and holy love.

Those who confine sexual intimacy to the infertile times of the month are not engaging in contraceptive practices.  They do not attempt to make a potentially fertile act infertile.  They sacrificially abstain during the fertile time precisely because they respect fertility; they do not want to violate it; they do not want to treat the gift of fertility as a burden.

In some relatively rare instances, Natural Family Planning is used by couples with a contraceptive mentality.  Too often couples can choose to abstain from fertility by default, or out of fear of the consequences of new life.  I encourage all couples who use Natural Family Planning to be very open with each other concerning the reasons they think it right to limit their family size, to take their thoughts to God, and to pray for his guidance. Do we let fear, anxiety, or worry determine the size of our families? Do we entrust ourselves to the Lord, whose generosity provides for all of our needs?

“Perfect love,” scripture teaches, “casts out fear.”[5]

Dear friends, I exhort you to openness in married life.  I exhort you to trust in God’s abundant providence.

_________

I would like to address in a special way Catholic physicians, pharmacists and other healthcare professionals.  The noble aim of your profession is to aid men and women as they live according to God’s perfect plan. Bishop Flavin wrote that, as professionals, “you are in a position to be God’s instruments in manifesting his truth, and his love.”[6]

No Catholic healthcare provider, in good conscience, should engage in the practice of medicine by undermining the gift of fertility.  There is no legitimate medical reason to aid in the acts of contraception or sterilization.  No Catholic physician can honestly argue otherwise.

Healthcare is the art of healing.  Contraception and sterilization may never be considered healthcare.  Contraception and sterilization denigrate and degrade the body’s very purpose.  Fertility is an ordinary function of health and human flourishing; and an extraordinary participation in God’s creative love.  Contraception and sterilization stifle the natural and the supernatural processes of marriage, and cause grave harm.  They treat fertility as though it were a terrible inconvenience, or even a physical defect that needs to be treated.

Contraception attempts to prevent life from the beginning, and when that fails, some contraception destroys newly created life.  Many contraceptives work by preventing the implantation of an embryonic human being in the uterus of his or her mother.

Contraception is generally regarded by the medical community as the ordinary standard of care for women. The Church’s teachings are often regarded as being opposed to the health and well-being of women.  But apart from the moral and spiritual dangers of contraception, there are also grave physical risks to the use of most chemical contraceptives.  Current medical literature overwhelmingly confirms that contraception puts women at risk for serious health problems, which doctors should consider very carefully.

Some women have health conditions that are better endured when treated by hormonal contraceptives.  But the effects of contraception often mask the underlying conditions that endanger women’s health.  Today, there are safe, natural means of correcting hormonal imbalances, and solving the conditions that are often treated by contraception.

Contraception is an unhealthy standard of care.  All doctors can do better.

Catholic physicians are called to help their patients and their colleagues learn the truth about the dangers of contraception and sterilization.  The good example of a physician who refuses to prescribe contraceptives and perform sterilizations or a pharmacist who refuses to distribute contraceptives in spite of antagonism, financial loss, or professional pressure is an opportunity to participate in the suffering of Jesus Christ.  I am grateful for the Catholic physicians and pharmacists who evangelize their patients and colleagues through a commitment to the truth.

 ________

Tragically, a majority of people in our culture and even in our Church, have used contraception.  Much of the responsibility for that lies in the fact that too few have ever been exposed to clear and consistent teaching on the subject.  But the natural consequences of our culture’s contraceptive mentality are clear.  Mother Teresa reflected that “once living love is destroyed by contraception, abortion follows very easily.”[7]  She was right.  Cultural attitudes that reject the gift of life lead very easily to social acceptance for abortion, for no-fault divorce, and for fatherless families.  For fifty years, America has accepted the use of contraception, and the consequences have been dire.

Dear brothers and sisters, I encourage you to read the encyclical by Pope Paul VI, Humanae Vitae with your spouse, or in your parish.  Consider also Married Love and the Gift of Life, written by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Dear brother priests, I encourage you to preach about the dangers of contraception, and to visit with families in your parish about this issue.

Dear brothers and sisters, if you have used or prescribed contraception, the merciful love of God awaits.  Healing is possible—in the sacrament of penance.  If you have used or supported contraception, I pray that you will stop, and that you will avail yourself of God’s tender mercy by making a good heartfelt confession.

_________

Today, openness to children is rarely celebrated, rarely understood, and rarely supported.  To many, the Church’s teachings on life seem oppressive or old-fashioned.  Many believe that the Church asks too great a sacrifice.

But sacrifice is the language of love.  And in sacrifice, we speak the language of God himself.  I am calling you, dear brothers and sisters, to encounter Christ in your love for one another.  I am calling you to rich and abundant family life.  I am calling you to rejoice in the love, and the sacrifice, for which you were made.  I am calling your family to share in the creative, active love of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I pray that in true sacrifice, each of you will know perfect joy.

Through the intercession of Our Lady of the Annunciation, the Holy Family, and in the love of Jesus Christ,

+James D. Conley

Bishop of Lincoln

March 25, 2014

Solemnity of the Annunciation of the Lord

[1] Blessed Teresa of Calcutta.  National Prayer Breakfast, 1994.

[2] Glennon P. Flavin, Pastoral Letter to Catholic Couples and Physicians.  September 26, 1991

[3] Blessed John Paul II.  Evangelium Vitae, 13.

[4] Ibid. 2.

[5] I John 4:18

[6] Bishop Flavin.

[7] Blessed Teresa of Calcutta.  National Prayer Breakfast, 1994.

Ideologically driven Committee on the Rights of the Child oversteps mandate

-->

The United Nations (UN) Committee on the Rights of the Child significantly overstepped its mandate in presenting its non-binding concluding remarks and recommendations in respect of its recent consideration of the Holy See report.

This was particularly evident in its recommendations.

The Committee for example attacked the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion, contraception and homosexuality, under the guise of a critique of the Church's handling of child sex abuse cases. The report, among similar things, recommends that the Catholic Church: identifies 

• "circumstances under which access to abortion services can be permitted" (section 55)

• "overcome[s] all the barriers and taboos surrounding adolescent sexuality that hinder their access to sexual and reproductive information, including on family planning and contraceptives" (section 57a)

• "ensure[s] that sexual and reproductive health education and prevention of HIV/AIDS is part of the mandatory curriculum of Catholic schools" (section 57c) 

This Committee has once again overstepped its mandate by making demands well beyond the scope of the actual wording of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. There is nothing in the Convention, which requires the Catholic Church or any other body to facilitate abortion, contraception or homosexuality.

The Committee also failed to recognise the significant progress achieved by the Holy See in the area of the protection of children or to take cognizance of the actual submissions made by the Holy See both in writing and during its January appearance before the Committee

The Holy See Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Archbishop Tomasi responding to questions in respect of the Committee conclusions said:

‘I would say that there is a difficultly apparent in understanding the position of the Holy See that cannot certainly give up certain teachings that are part of their deep convictions and also an expression of freedom of religion and these are the values that in the tradition of the Catholic Church sustain the common good of society and therefore cannot be renounced, for example the committee asked for acceptance of abortion and this is a contradiction with the principle of life that the convention itself should support recommending that children be protected before and after birth.

If a child is eliminated or killed we can no longer talk about rights for this person, so there is a need to calmly and in detail analyzing the recommendations proposed by the committee and provide an accurate response to the committee itself, so that there will be no misunderstanding on where we stand and the reason why we take certain positions and I would add that the practical remedies for preventing cases of abuse of children in forms of laws or decisions of Episcopal Conferences of directives for the formation of seminarians constitute a package of measures that is very difficult, I think, to find other institutions or even other states that have done so much specifically for the protection of children. So, my sense is that we have to continue to refine, to enact provisions that protect children in all their necessities so that they may grow and become productive adults in society and their dignity be constantly respected.

And at the same time we have to keep in mind that even though there are so many millions, forty million cases of abuse a year regarding children and unfortunately some cases affect also Church personnel. We have to keep in mind that, we have to continue to combat this tragedy knowing that even a case of abuse of a child is a case too much.’

John Smeaton executive director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children SPUC commenting on the report  said;

'There is a great deal of hypocrisy in the committee's report. Under the cover of seeking to protect children against sexual abuse, the report promotes damage to children - the destruction of unborn children through abortion and the destruction of born children's innocence through the promotion of contraception and homosexuality.

The Holy See's representatives made clear to the committee last month, Catholic leaders are facing up to the shocking child abuse scandals within the Church. Pro-life and pro-family groups throughout the world must  - like SPUC - come to the UN to help the Holy See in its vital work of protecting, unborn children and the marriage-based family. This work is under constant attack by the Catholic Church's enemies, as manifested in the committee's report today.

Any pro-life/pro-family groups interested in lobbying at the UN are invited to contact me for help and advice regarding accreditation and related issues'

Contraceptive pill poses risk of blood clots

-->

The Guardian reports Feb 2^nd on the risk of fatal blood clots associated with the contraceptive pill but then down play the story and minimize the risks. The question that arises immediately is are the risks being minimized for ideological reasons? Is access to the contraceptive pill considered to be more important than a woman’s life or health?

The article references a report that France’s drug safety agency has found a link between sometimes-deadly blood clots and third- and fourth-generation contraceptive pills. The National Agency for Drug and Health Product Safety (ANSM) in France estimates about 20 women die each year in France of blood clots connected to contraceptive use.

The Guardian article reads

Women in England using some of the most popular brands of contraceptive pill are to be warned that they carry a risk of fatal blood clots.

The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) told GPs the risks posed by combined hormonal contraceptives [CHC], which contain two different female hormones, an oestrogen and a progestogen, were small and the benefits outweighed them but that women should understand those risks.

The advice for GPs states: "The decision to use any CHC should be taken only after a discussion with the women to ensure she understands: the effect of any intrinsic risk factors on her risk of thrombosis [eg deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, heart attack and stroke]; the risk of thromboembolism with her CHC; that she must be alert for signs and symptoms of a thrombosis."

An alert was issued by the MHRA to GPs on 22 January after the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said in November that the product information for CHCs containing certain synthetic progestogen should be updated.

The EMA launched a review after France's drug safety agency estimated that about 20 women die each year in France of blood clots connected to contraceptive use.

The EMA concluded: "The benefits of CHCs in preventing unwanted pregnancies continue to outweigh their risks, and that the well-known risk of VTE [venous thromboembolism] with all CHCs is small."

The agency found that the risk of blood clots in the veins varies between CHCs, ranging from five to 12 cases per 10,000 women who use them for a year, compared with two cases each year per 10,000 women who are not using CHCs.

A checklist for prescribers provided by the MHRA says a CHC should not be prescribed to certain women, including those with a history of a thromboembolic event or with very high blood pressure, those who have had major surgery, or have a period of prolonged immobilisation coming up.

It says the suitability of a CHC should be discussed with a woman if they have certain risk factors including age, obesity and smoking and that if exposed to more than one of those risk factors it "may mean a CHC should not be used". The MHRA advises that CHCs containing ethinylestradiol, a synthetic form of oestrogen, in combination with certain kinds of synthetic progestogen – namely levonorgestrel, norgestimate, or norethisterone – are considered to have the lowest risk of VTE.

A user card and patient information sheet are also provided, detailing the risk. The former says: "The overall risk of a blood clot is small but clots can be serious and may in very rare cases even be fatal." Women are warned to seek immediate medical attention if they experience symptoms including severe pain or swelling in either leg, sudden unexplained breathlessness, weakness or numbness of the face, arm or leg.

Dr Sarah Branch, deputy director of the MHRA's vigilance and risk management of medicines division, said: "Women should continue to take their contraceptive pill. These are very safe, highly effective medicines for preventing unintended pregnancy and the benefits associated with their use far outweigh the risk of blood clots in veins or arteries."

Gates Foundation African Conference promotes more abortion and contraception

The relentless attack on African countries continues apace and despite the protestations of Melinda Gates that her global family planning campaign was not about abortion, the third international Conference on Family Planning (ICFP) co-hosted by the Gates Foundation which took place in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia last week had a number of abortion related sessions, such as “Efforts to Implement Policies that Expand Access to Safe Abortion,” “Access to Safe Abortions,” “Abortion and Quality of Care,” and “Abortion: Before and After.”

Obianuju Ekeocha in her BLOG, 'Culture of Life Africa', commenting on conference, raises questions in respect of the presentations and points out that the real question the world should be asking at this point is - Access to what? Choice of what?

In an excellent article which is reprinted in full below and is also accessible on this link Obianuju poignantly says,

We are thirsty and they give us condoms! We are hungry and they offer us contraceptive pills! We are sick and they offer us the most modern techniques of abortion! We are naked and they lead us into the arms of sexual hedonism! We are imprisoned by poverty and they offer us sexual liberation!!!

Silent tears roll down for Africa in a modern world that can neither see our pain nor hear our cry for help.

We mourn deeply for the destructive seeds of sexual revolution which were sown last week in Adis Ababa.

The text of complete article follows (please access the BLOG for live links in the original  text)

Last week, the heavy noose of population control was placed around the neck of Africa

as the Gates Foundation hosted what they called, the biggest family planning event in history with about 3000 attendees.

The International Conference on Family Planning Adis Ababa  was a 4-day event which had so many tentacles targeting almost every layer of the African society- women, men, youth, singles, married, professionals, academicians, politicians, celebrities,dignitaries and law makers.

They featured an impressive line-up of key note speakers that included the most influential African movers, shakers and leaders.

There were also international and western organisations who were there to support and strengthen the core purpose of the conference - population control of Africa.

Their theme was "full access , full choice"

But the real question the world should be asking at this point is - Access to what? Choice of what?

Africa is home to millions of people who have no access at all to basic education or even basic healthcare.

Most of us know or have friends or family members who have no choice in their impoverished situations.

And yet, a hand full of people who have access to the greatest material wealth in the world come to us to tell us that what Africans need most is full access to sex without attachments.

Terms like LARC(long-acting reversible contraception) were thrown around a lot during this conference.  Emergency (abortifacient) contraception was put on a pedestal. Increasing access to Abortion  was also another major area of discussion. African leaders in attendance were highly encouraged to increase their national budget and schemes  for birth control. Adolescent "friendly" contraception initiatives were also flaunted for the young and supposedly unmarried ones as some of the western speakers and officials described and labelled African societies as "judgemental" in considering sex outside of marriage.

Dearest people of the world, this is absurd! This is twisted and distorted!

To convene in Africa some of the most brilliant minds from around the world only to deliberate and discuss the best ways of getting the most effective birth control into the most remote parts of Africa. To bring in sexual and reproductive rights giants like International Planned Parenthood Federation so as to have them encourage sexual hedonism among  our African youth. To have well known pro-abortion organisations like Ipas speaking on increasing and expanding access to abortion in Africa. To bring in medical "experts" from halfway across the world so as to have them teach, demonstrate and simulate second trimester D & E abortions...

This is heart-breaking for the entire Continent of Africa!

Going through some of these presentations , I was brought to tears for my people who lack and want so much to have access to even the most basic tools of development and all they get is the neo imperialists telling them how great things will be for them if they have "full access and full choice" of the finest contraceptive paraphernalia, tools and devices that will give them unconstrained and unrestrained sexual freedom.

We are thirsty and they give us condoms! We are hungry and they offer us contraceptive pills! We are sick and they offer us the most modern techniques of abortion! We are naked and they lead us into the arms of sexual hedonism! We are imprisoned by poverty and they offer us sexual liberation!!!

Silent tears roll down for Africa in a modern world that can neither see our pain nor hear our cry for help.

We mourn deeply for the destructive seeds of sexual revolution which were sown last week in Adis Ababa.

The pain is almost unbearable to imagine the effects of a sexual revolution on a Continent that is already heavily laden with much human suffering.

And so we weep bitterly.

We weep not just for ourselves but for our children who will reap the devastating dividends of this extensive contraceptive project in the future.

  

          Melinda Gates

Ever since Melinda Gates unveiled and unleashed her extensive and expensive contraception project in Africa more than a year ago, millions of dollars have been spent across the Continent leading to a reactive trend of events like the increased efforts among our African leaders to expand access to contraception, the launching of more population control initiatives in various parts of Africa, the stronger and more insistent push for legalised abortion in many African countries, the increased amounts of government money being diverted (from other development projects) to be channeled into providing birth control and subsequently, an undeniable increase in the usage of artificial contraception in almost all parts of Africa. And yet the lives of the African women have not improved at all. They may be having more vacuous and sterile sex which is free from conception on every day of the month and every month of the year but they are certainly not better fed, they are not healthier , and they are not even more educated than before Melinda's project and therefore they are not more empowered. This project has failed the African women on every single note!

I have begged and appealed to Melinda Gates last year when she tripped the switch of population control in Africa and I will readily do it again today with much respect where it is due.

The African women deserve so much more than this humanitarian project that promises them nothing more than sexual liberty above all else.

And as you inadvertently flood our nations with birth control pills, injectables, Intra Uterine devices and condoms, our culture is being drowned out by your own, our priority is being replaced by your own, our opinion is being eclipsed by your own and our value is being swallowed up by own.

We highly respect, and dare not define, your western sensitives and values, please mercifully respect our own African sensitives and values.

The African women deserve to stand proudly among the women of the world within the context of their own cultural sensitives and values. They deserve to be recognised in the full esteem and stature of their radiant African femininity, beauty, and dignity that is firmly rooted in a vibrant culture of life and family.

Russian Federation under pressure from Member States and NGO’s at the Human Rights Council in Geneva, on abortion and on laws enacted to protect children from homosexual propaganda.

Geneva: The Human Rights Council on Friday 20th September, considered the report (A/HRC/24/14), of the outcome of the Universal Periodic Review of the Russian Federation which took place in late April and early May.

The process known as the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) permits other Member States and a variety of organizations to make recommendations regarding a country’s human rights record.  Of a total of 231 recommendations, Russia accepted 48 completely, accepted 15 in part and rejected 68 others.

It was notable that among the many recommendations made to Russia there was considerable pressure from other Member States to relax its regional and proposed Federal laws on homosexuality. These recommendations were firmly rejected by Russia.

The pressure on Russia came from 9 EU Member States, two South American Member States along with Canada and Australia. The following recommendation from Belgium gives the tenor of the recommendations, which were made by 13 Member States.

140.88. Rescind regional laws and regulations which favour and tolerate discrimination based on sexual orientation, and refrain from adopting similar laws at the federal level, as well as take measures to prevent the arbitrary use of existing regulations against LGBT rights, including their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly (Belgium);

This recommendation referred to a bill before the Russian Parliament at the time (subsequently approved), aimed at protecting children and family life in Russia by banning homosexual propaganda and is similar to one previously passed by the government of St. Petersburg and other regional bodies. The new law imposes fines of up to $170 on individuals, $1,700 on public officials, and $17,000, on organizations, for exposing minors to propaganda advocating a homosexual lifestyle.

The rejection of these recommendations created an immediate ripple according to the UPR newsletter No. 39 (see link) which says:

The precedent of Russia is one of the most challenging threats to the UPR since its inception in 2008 as it is opening the door for other States to delete all recommendations they perceive as being politically orientated. Legal dispositions of the UPR do not provide for any opportunity for the States under review to remove recommendations. 

Following presentation of the report to the Human Rights Council a number of Member States intervened and a variety of non-governmental organizations made recommendations.

There was limited time in the meeting for some member states to make oral statements; most of them, with the exception of the United Kingdom were encouraging to Russia.

Some NGO’s were given time to make short oral statements before the formal adoption of the outcome report for Russia. The tone of these interventions was much more strident as non-governmental organizations lambasted Russia for its new restrictive laws on Homosexual propaganda and Freedom of assembly.

NGO Speakers included the Centre for Reproduction Rights (CRR), Human Rights Watch, Action Canada for Population and Development, International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues, Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists, Reporters without Borders and Freedom House Foundation.

The center for Reproductive Rights congratulated Russia on its acceptance of Slovenia’s recommendation to put in place comprehensive and evidence-based sexual and reproductive health education programs urging Russia to make this a mandatory part of the school curriculum.

The following examples are indicative of the NGO comments

Human Rights Watch said they regretted the fact that Russia had rejected the recommendations to repeal the regional laws banning “homosexual propaganda” in 11 Russian regions as well as what was then a similar federal draft law but which on June 29th had been signed into federal law by President Putin, banning exposing children to “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relationships.”

Action Canada for Population and Development, speaking on behalf of ASTRA Network, complained that Russia has poor access to what they term ‘women’s reproductive rights’ in which they include abortion access. 

'Women's reproductive rights are restricted in Russia, especially in regard to access to modern contraception and family planning services. Access to contraception is limited by a lack of comprehensive information and subsidization from the state budget. […]

The government has still not amended the laws that introduced mandatory waiting periods for women who want to undergo abortions. These waiting periods put women in situations of serious vulnerability and critically limit their access to timely reproductive health services. […] 

In the final analysis Georgy Matyushkin, speaking on behalf of the Russian Federation, accepted only those recommendations, the content and wording of which, was supported by the Russian Government and which could be implemented in practice.

Misleading article refers to a so called 'post-fertilisation contraceptive'

-->

The Daily Mail recently published an article saying that according to researchers women should be offered a so called ‘after-sex contraceptive pill’ that they claim could ‘prevent pregnancy’ up to a month later.

According to the article researchers are urging drug companies to develop a version of the Pill that would disrupt a pregnancy after the egg and sperm had joined to create an embryo.

In plain language, this is not contraception, it is abortion.

Once fertilization has taken place a new embryo exists and any substance used to end the life of that new human being can and should be termed an abortifacient.

Neither are these headlines based on any new drugs, or even research. Instead they focus on a controversial opinion piece calling for research to be carried out into what the researchers falsely term ‘a post-fertilisation contraceptive'.

The controversial opinion piece was published in a pro abortion journal ‘the Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care’.

Six Irish women have died as a result of taking oral contraceptives

The Dail (Irish Parliament) was told last Wednesday June 26th in and answer to a question by Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor, that six Irish women have died as a result of taking oral contraceptives.

According to a report in the Journal the Dail was told that the Irish Medicines Board has received notifications of six deaths related to the use of the oral contraceptive pill in Ireland since 1992.

The report continues;

Two of those deaths involved the use of Yasmin and Yaz, brands associated with a number of recent deaths in Canada. The women were reported to have died due to clotting-related complications.

“It is well established for many years that combined contraceptives carry a very small risk of clots, known as venous thrombembolism,” junior minister Alex White explained in an answer to a parliamentary question.

The risks of these adverse reactions is detailed in all product information and safety issues have been highlighted by the IMB in its newsletters.

The controversy in Canada comes as an EU-wide review draws to a close. According to Minister White, the examination is due to conclude and report in the coming months.

It is understood that in one of the Yasmin/Yaz-related deaths, the patient purchased the contraceptive online. She also had other risk factors that could have contraindicated its use.

Online sales

Last year, 273 seizures Yasmin, Yasminelle and Yarina were recorded by customs. Under current law, it is illegal for prescription medicines to be supplied by mail order.

The IMB attempts to follow up with the intended recipient of the seized goods to explain the health risk associated with seeking to source and use such products.

The practice of ordering drugs through Internet sites has become more common in recent years. Yasmin costs between €12 and €14 per month in Irish pharmacies.

Canada

The question was posed by Deputy Mary Mitchell O’Connor last week following reports in Canada that at least 24 women taking Yaz and Yasmin birth control pills died from possible adverse reactions since 2007.

According to the CBC News, Bayer – the makers of the pill – have paid more than $1 billion to settle thousands of lawsuits in the US. However, it has defended its products.

A class-action has also been certified in Canada.

Ireland

In an inquest last year, a Cork coroner heard how a 33-year-old woman collapsed and died after developing a blood clot that reached her lungs. She was predisposed to clots and had been taking the contraceptive pill for nine years.

A post-mortem exam concluded that she died from a pulmonary venous thromboembolism, in association with a third-generation contraceptive pill.

The pathologist noted that it was a “rare event”.

Obama mandate "unnecessary, and deeply offensive" Archbishop Chaput

We reported on February 1^st on the US mandate that orders all US employers to pay for contraception and abortion.

Just to recap and to report on the up to date position, the Obama administration in January ordered all employers to pay for coverage of abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization through their health insurance programs.  

After the Catholic Bishops and a host of other religious and pro-life organizations voiced their strong opposition, President Obama announced what he called an “accommodation.” 

But the so called “accommodation” is actually worse than the original order!  It’s so bad that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) deemed it to be unacceptable.  The reality is that nothing has really changed. 

 

Archbishop Chaput in a statement called the mandate insulting and dangerous

An “accommodation” offered Friday by the White House did not solve the problem. Instead, it triggered withering criticism from legal scholars such as Notre Dame’s Carter Snead, Harvard’s Mary Ann Glendon, Princeton’s Robert George, and Catholic University of America president John Garvey, along with non-Catholic scholars including Yuval Levin, the religious liberty law firm the Becket Fund, and numerous Catholic and other organizations.

Many Catholics are confused and angry. They should be.

Archbishop Chaput also said

[...] But the HHS mandate, including its latest variant, is belligerent, unnecessary, and deeply offensive to the content of Catholic belief. Any such mandate would make it morally compromising for us to provide health-care benefits to the staffs of our public-service ministries. Moreover, we cannot afford to be fooled – yet again – – by evasive and misleading allusions to the administration’s alleged “flexibility” on such issues. The HHS mandate needs to be rescinded. 

The full text of Archbishop Chaput's statement can be viewed on lifeSitenews.com see this link

A number of organizations intend to make legal challenges to this mandate. Priests for Life for example have decided to file a federal lawsuit against the Obama administration to block the enforcement of the HHS mandate on us and have it declared unconstitutional. 

Congress are also debating measures to protect conscientious objection and religious freedom

Due to the critical issues involved here we will report further on this issue as it develops

US Bishops react in alarm to Obama administration contraception mandate

Many Bishops throughout the US have reacted in alarm to the Obama administration contraception mandate that will require religious employers to cover contraception sterilization and the provision of some abortifacient drugs, in new health care plans in the US according to a Catholic News Agency report (CNA/EWTN News)

Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska, in a letter he ordered to be read at every Sunday Mass in his diocese on Jan. 29th, said that Catholics may have to suffer for the integrity of their institutions

“We cannot and will not comply with this unjust decree. Like the martyrs of old, we must be prepared to accept suffering which could include heavy fines and imprisonment,” 

Bishop Bruskewitz wrote

“Our American religious liberty is in grave jeopardy,” he warned, describing the impact of new rules that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has instituted as part of federal health care reform.

Those rules, confirmed as final on Jan. 20, will require most religious employers to cover contraception and sterilization, including some abortion-causing drugs, in new health care plans. Sebelius has given religious groups an extra year to comply, but rejected calls for a broader exemption clause.

“This means that all of our Catholic schools, hospitals, social service agencies, and the like will be forced to participate in evil,” Bishop Bruskewitz explained.

The bishop recalled that the Church “has pleaded with President Obama to rescind this edict, but all pleas have been met with scorn and have fallen on deaf ears.”

He described Secretary Sebelius as a “bitter fallen-away Catholic,” and called her one-year deadline extension for non-exempt religious employers “an act of mockery” – because, he noted, “during that year, they must 'refer' people to the insurance that covers wicked deeds.”

A proposed U.S. Senate bill, the “Respect for Rights of Conscience Act,” would amend the health care law to let employers opt out of covering some services. Bishop Bruskewitz urged Catholics to call their elected representatives in support of the bill, and to protest the “outrage” of the contraception mandate.

Meanwhile, he said, the faithful should “pray and do penance that this matter may be resolved.”

The bishop of Lincoln was one of a large number of U.S. Church leaders voicing alarm over the weekend, in letters distributed to parishes and read at Mass regarding the Health and Human Services order.

In the Diocese of Phoenix, Catholics heard a message from Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, who declared that people of faith would not be “made second-class citizens” and “stripped of their God-given rights.”

In Marquette, Michigan, Bishop Alexander K. Sample said that if the rule takes effect, “we Catholics will be compelled to either violate our consciences, or to drop health coverage for our employees and suffer the penalties for doing so.”

New Orleans Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond stressed the need for action in his letter to the faithful over the weekend, as he decried the “unprecedented attack on religious liberty” by which the state was “violating our rights to make choices based on our morals and Church teaching.”

Archbishop Aymond is in Rome for meetings with Vatican officials as well as Pope Benedict XVI, who issued his own warning to the U.S. Church just before Health and Human Services finalized the mandate.

In remarks to bishops of the Mid-Atlantic states on Jan. 19, the Pope said all U.S. Catholics must “realize the grave threats to the Church’s public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political and cultural spheres.”

Legislation that offends the objective moral law.

‘Given the proneness of our human nature to evil, given the enticement of bodily satisfaction, given the widespread modern incitement to un-chastity, it must be evident that an access, hitherto unlawful, to contraceptive devices will prove a most certain occasion of sin, especially to immature persons.  The public consequences of immorality that must follow for our whole society are only too clearly seen in other countries.

‘If they who are elected to legislate for our society should unfortunately decide to pass a disastrous measure of legislation that will allow the public promotion of contraception and an access, hitherto unlawful, to the means of contraception, they ought to know clearly the meaning of their action, when it is judged by the norms of objective morality and the certain consequences of such a law.

‘To add to the confusion, it is being suggested that our society ought to be brought into line with the outlook of other countries.  Hitherto, we have endeavoured to legislate according to the established beliefs and standards of our own people.  One can conceive no worse fate for Ireland than that it should, by the legislation of our elected representatives, be now made to conform to the patterns of sexual conduct in other countries.

‘It is also being suggested that such uniformity of sexual outlook and practice can, in some obscure way, assist the re-unification of our country.   One must know little of the Northern people, if one can fail to realise the indignant ridicule with which good Northern people would treat such an argument.  It would indeed be a foul basis on which to attempt to construct the unity of our people.

‘It may well come to pass that, in the present climate of emotional thinking and pressure, legislation could be enacted that will offend the objective moral law.   Such a measure would be an insult to our Faith; it would, without question, prove to be gravely damaging to morality, private and public; it would be, and would remain, a curse upon our country.’

Prophetic words!   The above is an extract from a letter written by Archbishop John Charles McQuaid, Archbishop of Dublin, to his priests in 1971, following the announcement by Mary Robinson (former president of Ireland) that she had drafted a Bill which would allow for the provision of contraception to be made legal.

Some issues of concern, which arose during Ireland’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Our initial review of Ireland’s UPR concentrated on the issue of abortion, however there are a number of additional issues in the draft report, which are a cause for concern.

The draft report outlined 126 recommendations in total, 62 of which were accepted by the Irish Government. The Government also made a commitment that it would "study carefully" a further 49 recommendations before the next Human Rights Council session in March 2012.

One of the issues recommended by Mexico and set out in the Irish Government list of accepted recommendations related to making contraceptive information “available and accessible” to “boys, girls and adolescents”.



“Ensure the national availability and accessibility to contraceptive services and methods including through the dissemination of information and education to boys, girls and adolescents taking into account prevention of discrimination based on geographic (sic), status, disability or migrant status”. 



The Government has also agreed to consider the following recommendations made by Spain, Switzerland and Uruguay

The Spanish recommendation  called on the Irish Government to, 

“Deepen the Reform of the law on same-sex marriage and change the concept of traditional family as enshrined in the Constitution”

The fact that the Government are prepared to consider this recommendation it is a cause for grave concern

The Government also agreed to consider Switzerland’s recommendation to “amend Article (sic) 37 of the 1998 Employment Equality Act in order to prevent such discrimination against homosexual and unmarried parents”.

Again this is a cause for concern in that section 37 of the act allows religious institutions, such as schools or hospitals, to hire or to refuse to hire in accordance with their ethos.



The Irish Government also agreed to consider a recommendation by Uruguay to explicitly prohibit “any form of corporal punishment in the family”.

 

 

Dr. Garret Fitzgerald

Much has been written and said about the extraordinary contribution made to Ireland’s history and life by Dr. Garret FitzGerald, R.I.P., who died last week, and whose State Funeral took place on Sunday.    His legacy, particularly in respect of improving relations between Ireland and Britain, and in bringing about peace in Northern Ireland (the Six Counties), will undoubtedly be remembered for many generations into the future.  

There are, however, some aspects of Dr. FitzGerald’s work that will not be looked on too kindly by many people in Ireland – and that is what was called his ‘Constitutional Crusade’ to transform Ireland into a ‘pluralist and liberal’ society.

Numerous press tributes to him following his death made reference to this aspect of his legacy.   For instance, the Irish Examiner for 20 May 2011 had this to say of him:

‘He had a profound influence on social change in the Republic.  Besides lobbying for the separation of church and state, he spearheaded constitutional campaigns for the introduction of divorce and abortion.’

And another media outlet: 

‘A supporter of the liberal wing of the party [Fine Gael], known as The Just Society, he campaigned strongly in favour of Ireland joining the EEC in the 1972 referendum.  … A difficult economic situation led to tough and unpopular medicine, while in 1983 the electorate voted against Dr. FitzGerald’s advice to amend the Constitution to protect the life of the unborn, and three years later rejected the introduction of divorce.’

[To clarify this rather strange sentence – Dr. FitzGerald favoured the introduction of divorce, and he did not favour incorporating an amendment to protect the life of the unborn in the Constitution.]

There is a wonderful little book entitled The Facilitators (published by Brandsma Books Limited, many years ago). It tells you all you ever wanted to know about the ‘facilitators’ who are so successfully active in so many areas of life in Ireland today.  It also gives an in-depth account of what happened in the lead-up to the 1983 referendum mentioned above. I quote from the book: 

‘Two days before the referendum, Dr. FitzGerald made a long-promised address to the nation about his position on the Amendment.  He repeated the main arguments of the Anti-Amendment (pro-abortion) Campaign, referring to the possibility that the measure might actually usher in abortion, the difficulties it would cause for some methods of contraception; and to the women who would possibly die as a result of it.  As his trump card, he said it was his Christian duty to urge the people to vote against it'

This of course proved to be completely false in that it was precisely the passing of this amendment that has protected Ireland from the introduction of abortion. It should also be pointed out that despite Dr. Fitzgerald's dire warnings Ireland has the lowest level of maternal mortality in the world.

Dangers of the oral contraceptive pill

Following our article last Wednesday about the danger of blood clotting associated with oral contraception, the contraceptive pill we now report on a very sad case of a young girl who died from a pulmonary embolism caused by a deep vein thrombosis (DVT) the most likely cause of which was the contraceptive pill.

The mum of a teenager who died from deep vein thrombosis has said that the contraceptive pill she was taking to treat her acne may have contributed to her death, and has warned other parents to be aware of the risks. see report by parentdish

Seventeen-year-old Charlotte Porter had been taking the contraceptive pill Dianette to treat her spots. The drug - like other combined contraceptive pills - increases a patients' risk of developing blood clots.

Charlotte's mum Beverley took her to hospital in Maidstone, Kent in March 2010, when she complained her leg was swelling up and turning purple. The teenager died just hours later from a pulmonary embolism caused by DVT.

An inquest into her death was told she had been prescribed the contraceptive Dianette to treat her acne. The Coroner ruled that Charlotte had died from natural causes, but that she had probably had undiagnosed DVT when she visited her doctor two weeks before her death, complaining of a lumpy left leg.

Her GP told the court Charlotte had not displayed symptoms of DVT at the time, but independent expert, Dr Nigel Langford, said that it was likely a clot was present.

Charlotte's mum implored other parents to be aware of the risks of taking the combined pill. Mrs Porter, 47, told reporters: 'The doctors said to us it was very, very rare to happen to someone so young.

'If she was 71 years old, not 17, then you would expect that sort of thing. She was full of life and always on the go.'

' It goes without saying that Charlotte's death has devastated my family and me.

' We would urge all parents of young girls prescribed with Dianette to be aware of the risks associated with it, mainly the risk of DVT.'