Pope Benedict's address for World Day of Peace

Pope Benedict in his message for World Day of Peace January 1st 2012 addresses the issue of educating young people in Justice and Peace.
In his address Pope Benedict stresses the importance of the family and the parents as the primary educators of their children and he looks at the current threats to family life. We have included some relevant extracts below together with a link to the complete text 

Where does true education in peace and justice take place? First of all, in the family, since parents are the first educators. The family is the primary cell of society; “it is in the family that children learn the human and Christian values which enable them to have a constructive and peaceful coexistence. It is in the family that they learn solidarity between the generations, respect for rules, forgiveness and how   to welcome others.” (1) The family is the first school in which we are trained in justice and peace.

We are living in a world where families, and life itself, are constantly threatened and not infrequently fragmented. Working conditions which are often incompatible with family responsibilities, worries about the future, the frenetic pace of life, the need to move frequently to ensure an adequate livelihood, to say nothing of mere survival – all this makes it hard to ensure that children receive one of the most precious of treasures: the presence of their parents. This presence makes it possible to share more deeply in the journey of life and thus to pass on experiences and convictions gained with the passing of the years, experiences and convictions which can only be communicated by spending time together. I would urge parents not to grow disheartened! May they encourage children by the example of their lives to put their hope before all else in God, the one source of authentic justice and peace.

There is much in the address which must be looked at in depth and the entire text is available on this link

UN Secretary General sees the UN as “the voice of the voiceless and the defender of the defenceless.”

One of my colleagues, Vincenzina Santoro Chief United Nations Representative – American Family Association of New York, writes - Let’s hold UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to his words! and then continues:

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s year-end press conference did not exactly make it to the front pages of the world’s newspapers. However, for the occasion, Mr. Ban was keen to remind reporters that he was completing his first five-year term at the end of 2011 and was looking forward to his second mandate. In his remarks, he stated that the world needs the United Nations now more than ever. This is debatable, but he gave us some food for thought. According to Mr. Ban, over the past five years, he tried to “advance a practical, action-oriented vision of the UN as “the voice of the voiceless and the defender of the defenceless.”

Reflecting on his words, who could be more voiceless and defenceless than the unborn? Is this not especially true of the unborn who are to be aborted – their very tiny existence about to be crushed, dismembered and terminated, yet they cannot utter a word or take a stand? They were not part of his “action-oriented vision.” If the Secretary-General were truly sincere about defending the “voiceless and defenceless” he should be a defender of all the unborn. Mr. Ban indicated that in January he would present the outline for his second term, making references to commitments to the rights of women and children with the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development to be center stage among 2012 events. Perhaps he should include the unborn.

While Mr. Ban conducted his news conference, given the season, elsewhere in New York theatre troops were busy presenting the Dickens classic: “A Christmas Carol.” The character of Ebenezer Scrooge early on, in his unrepentant stage, refuses to give alms to the poor and ill so that the “ranks of their populations” could be thinned! Was such an attitude the forerunner of today’s population controllers? Possibly. But Scrooge saw a guiding spirit and soon enough experienced a conversion. Can we be a modern day “ghost of Christmases past” for the Secretary-General and use his very own words to draw their rightful conclusion?

There is something else that could boost a pro-life stance with the Secretary-General. Mr. Ban’s country of birth, South Korea, has the lowest fertility rate among developed countries: 1.15 children per woman, the result of all too successful official family planning policies pursued for decades. Today there is much hand wringing in South Korea about the implications of a shrinking population. Such concern ought to work in favor of the voiceless, defenceless unborn.

Starting with the Secretary-General’s own words, if all pro-lifers – at the UN and elsewhere –began a (massive?) writing campaign and asked him to support the voiceless and defenceless unborn child, would this not be the true meaning of his words and a new, right vision for the UN?

The address is:
Hon. Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General of the United Nations
United Nations Headquarters
New York, NY 10017

Polish freedom and the victory of hope and truth

Brian Burch, of Catholic Vote (USA), gives us the following interesting story, by Paul Kengor, professor of political science at Grove City College. The story relates to two champions of life:

It was 30 years ago, December 13, 1981, that martial law was imposed upon Poland by the communist government.  Poles were aghast, horrified, frightened.  And so was the man in Rome, a Polish native named John Paul II, and so was another man thousands of miles away in Washington, DC, President Ronald Reagan.

When word of the communists’ actions reached the White House, President Reagan was furious.  He wanted to help the people of Poland in any way he could.  At that very moment, Reagan committed to save and sustain the Polish Solidarity movement as the wedge that could splinter the entire Soviet bloc, as the first crack in the Iron Curtain.

One of Reagan’s first responses was to call someone he deeply respected: John Paul II.  On December 14, he told the Holy Father: ‘Our country was inspired when you visited Poland, and to see their commitment to religion and belief in God.  It was an inspiration. … All of us were very thrilled.’

At that point, Reagan had not yet met John Paul II in person.  Reagan had been president only for 11 months.  Both he and John Paul II had been shot earlier in the year.  Reagan told the Pope that he looked forward to a time when the two men could meet in person.  […]

Reagan followed up  with two letters to John Paul II […] neither of which was declassified until July 2000.  In the December 17 letter, he asked the Pope to urge Poland’s General Jaruzelski to hold a meeting with Lech Walesa and Poland’s Archbishop Glemp.  In the second letter, Reagan explained the counter-measures his administration was taking against the USSR; he also asked the Pope to use his influence with the Polish Church to lift martial law, to gain the release of detainees, and to resume a dialogue with Solidarity; and he requested that John Paul II press other Western countries to join the United States.  ‘If we are to keep alive the hope for freedom in Poland,’ said Reagan, ‘it lies in this direction.’

Another account given by Professor Kengor tells of a meeting between Ronald Reagan and Romuald Spasowski, the Polish Ambassador, on 23 December 1981.  The ambassador and his wife had just defected to the United States.  

Michael Deaver, a close Reagan aide, witnessed the meeting. Deaver later recorded:

The ambassador and his wife were ushered into the Oval Office, and the two men sat next to one another in plush-leather wingback chairs.  Vice President Bush, and the ambassador’s wife, sat facing them on a couch.

[…] The ambassador […] begged the president never to discontinue Radio Free Europe.  […]  ‘Please, sir, do not ever underestimate how many millions of people still listen to that channel behind the Iron Curtain.’

Then, almost sheepishly, he said, ‘May I ask you a favor, Mr. President?  Would you light a candle and put it in the window tonight for the people of Poland?’

And right then, Ronald Reagan got up and went to the second floor, lighted a candle, and put it in the window of the dining room.

That candle might have brought to mind those lit after Mass by a young Karol Wojtyla.  Then and now, they burned bright for Russia’s conversion.

But Reagan did more than that.  That evening, with Christmas only two days away, the president gave a nationally televised speech watched by tens of millions of Americans.  He connected the spirit of the Christmas season with events in Poland: ‘For a thousand years,’ he told his fellow Americans.  ‘Christmas has been celebrated in Poland, a land of deep religious faith, but this Christmas brings little joy to the courageous Polish people.  They have been betrayed by their own government.’  He made an extraordinary gesture.  The president asked Americans that Christmas season to light a candle in support of freedom in Poland.   […]

Thirty years ago, December 1981, the communists tried to turn out the lights in Poland.  But like a candle in the White House window, Ronald Reagan and John Paul II and the people of Poland kept a flicker of hope alive.

It may seem like a long time ago, distant to the interests of Americans today.  In truth, this was a crucial turning point for the world, for freedom, and for faith.   It is a history lesson worth taking to heart, especially this Christmas.

Indeed, that lesson can equally be taken to heart in Western European countries today.

It brings to mind, too, the Irish custom of leaving a candle lighting in the windows of houses on Christmas Eve night to welcome the Virgin Mary and St. Joseph who were looking for some suitable shelter for the birth of the Saviour of the world.

Christmas 2011

Powerful Pro-life video

Something well worth watching!

On Saturday, 10 December, Youth Defence presented their new Christmas video on a large screen in O’Connell Street, in Dublin city centre.   The video, and its message, attracted a lot of attention from people of all ages who passed by.

  www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djyx2c0V6Bg

                                                 A Naoidhe bhig atá mór

A Leinbh óig atá sean

San mainséar níor chuir a lán

Cé nach bhfághann áit ar neamh.

Feast of the Holy Innocents-Croagh Patrick pro-life climb

I realise that this may be somewhat short notice, or it could act as a reminder!

The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, whose members celebrate Solemn Mass in the traditional Latin Rite, has organised a pilgrimage to Croagh Patrick to take place on 28 December (the Feast of the Holy Innocents).   The pilgrimage will be made in reparation for abortion throughout the world, and to ask St. Patrick to protect the unborn.  You are cordially invited to take part in the pilgrimage, the details for which are as follows:

Where:  Croagh Patrick, Co. Mayo

When:   Wednesday, 28 December 2011

              10 a.m. – meet at the Visitor Centre at the base of Croagh Patrick

              12 pm – Holy Mass in the Chapel on Croagh Patrick

Further information can be obtained by contacting limerick@icrsp.org

Website: www.institute-christ-king.ie

Gender Quotas

Because of the fact that women tend to choose life-paths other than involvement in politics there are those who insist that gender quotas should be introduced to ensure that a sufficient number of women choose political life. 

A recent Irish Times news item, in relation to one of the Irish political parties reads as follows:

‘FF commits to making 30% of its local election candidates women’.   I don’t know how FF (Fianna Fáil – the major opposition party) would manage that extraordinary feat!

The news item refers to legislation that is under discussion in the Irish parliament at the moment in relation to the cutting of funding to political parties that do not have a 30 per cent figure of women candidates for election, with the required percentage increasing to 40% in the coming years.      
A former Attorney General, Michael McDowell, has described the legislation as being unconstitutional, and a number of smaller political parties, such as the Christian Democrats and the Christian Solidarity Party, together with family groups and other concerned and sane individuals throughout the country, see in the proposed legislation a move towards blurring the natural and necessary distinctions between men and women.    

There are, too, other far-reaching consequences related to the proposed legislation, and it is interesting to note that the chief proponents of the measure are the Labour Party and radical feminist groups.

Marriage, the family and traditional values, under sustained attack at the UN

The US under President Barack Obama has been waging war against marriage and the family and was the prime motivator behind a resolution on sexual orientation approved by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva last June. The resolution called for a report which has just become available and will be debated during the March session of the Council. We are currently analysing this report and will comment on it shortly. 

In order to underline the commitment of the current US administration to the issue, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced recently that President, Barack Obama, has delivered a ‘sweeping directive’ to UN diplomats in Geneva in relation to the promotion of homosexual and lesbian ‘rights’ when matters of diplomacy and foreign assistance are under discussion.   If the directive is implemented (and it seems that it will be) the outcome will most likely be the elevation of the ‘rights’ of homosexuals and lesbians above the genuine rights of groups, for example, that are persecuted for religious beliefs, for promoting democracy and human rights, ethnic minorities, etc.

Meanwhile, a Bill to protect marriage is being debated in Nigeria, and the Catholic Medical Association of Nigeria has denounced ‘“the coordinated ferocity” by foreign governments and international groups “browbeating” legislators to adopt laws that are premised on “dubious science and ethical mischief.”’

A statement from the National Council of Churches of Kenya declares that ‘God did not make a mistake, being gay is that person’s own perspective.  Those who live as gays need help to live right and we should not be supporting them to live in a wrong reality. […] They have not ceased to be God’s children and no one is a gone case.’

Christmas Greetings

The Directors and management of European Life Network wish all our readers the compliments of the season

May you all have a happy, peace filled and joyful Christmas this year 

and may you also enjoy a prosperous 2012

Tragic HIV/AIDS vote in European Parliament

John Smeaton (www.spuc-director.blogspot.com) gives a very lengthy and interesting account of the recent vote on HIV/AIDS that was taken in the European Parliament.  It is sad and worrying to note that the resolution, which called for ‘safe and legal’ abortion as a way to prevent HIV/AIDS, was carried, despite rejection of it on the part of a good number of MEPs.    

The website of European Dignity Watch reports as follows: 

‘Unfortunately, all bad passages were adopted. […] In other words, the European Parliament is of the opinion that in order to contain this epidemic, the abortion of potential carriers of the virus is a legitimate means.  Only one out of seven problematic passages was rejected by a majority of the EPP [European People’s Party] group (the group that contains Christian democrats) and about half of the Conservatives, however not enough to ban “safe and legal abortion” from the resolution.’

European Dignity Watch later wrote: 

‘ […] on the occasion of World AIDS Day, a solid majority in the European Parliament voted on a resolution declaring that official EU policy for HIV/AIDS prevention should be closely linked to “sexual and reproductive rights” – including safe and legal abortion.

‘Although a resolution to combat HIV/AIDS is indisputably worthy of parliamentary support, the amalgamation of HIV with abortion suggests an alarming underlying eugenic logic that seems to say: Possible carriers of the HIV virus should be preventively aborted in order to prevent further spreading of the disease.

‘Prior to the vote by the European Parliament, no discussion at all was held on the real risk of HIV infection or even on the medical possibilities that exist to reduce its transmission.  This is why we think it is important to give a few key facts about the medical reality of HIV in both developed and developing countries.  […]’

Meanwhile, the humanist lobby is concerned that ‘several religious organisations launched an aggressive campaign to lobby MEPs and urge them to vote against three key paragraphs in the resolution.   Their objective was to create a distinction between the fight against AIDS and reproductive rights and to make sure that MEPs removed contraception and abortion from the resolution.   This campaign more generally aimed to limit – if not prevent – women’s sexual and reproductive rights. […]’

The humanists, however, ‘fought back’, but they are very concerned that although 369 MEPs voted in favour of one of the dangerous paragraphs (no. 22), 206 MEPs voted against it, which fact – say the humanists – ‘should keep us mobilised in the future.’

It is reported, too, that a UK Socialist MEP, Michael Cashman, pointed out during the plenary session of the debate that ‘a holistic approach, including contraception and abortion, is therefore necessary to prevent new contaminations.’    It is horrifying to think that in this day and age anyone could consider the killing of unborn babies to be ‘holistic’.

For the interest of the Irish electorate it should be noted that the usual suspects – Prionnsias de Rossa, Nessa Childers, Paul Murphy, et al. – were conspicuous in their support for the resolution in its entirety. However, sad to report, only MEPs Liam Aylward and Pat the Cope Gallagher voted against the resolution in its entirety in the final vote. 

Assisted suicide

Sky News held an on-line poll in the last few days.   The question asked in the poll was: ‘Should assisted suicide be legal?’  This, in my opinion, is the height of irresponsible journalism, people were invited to vote either ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ to the question. However, no matter how many votes were cast the numbers appear to have remained at 86 for ‘Yes’, and 14 for ‘No’.    Now, I think that’s rather strange but I also think it shows the danger of such initiatives if they can be manipulated.

The advocacy group ‘Care not Killing’,(CNK) that speaks out against assisted suicide and offers help to those who might be inclined to consider such a situation, is referred to as follows on the Sky website: 

‘[…] But the organisation Care not Killing is opposed to any erosion of the law.  It says vulnerable people who believe they are a burden on others could feel obliged to die.’    

It is at least good to see that CNK gets a mention and thus might be a beacon of hope and consolation to someone.

"Batman" star Christian Bale refused access to blind Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng

Christian Newswire  report that "Batman" star Christian Bale traveled nine hours from Beijing to visit blind forced abortion opponent Chen Guangcheng. Bale said, "What I really wanted to do was shake the man's hand and say 'thank you,' and tell him what an inspiration he is." 

 see VIDEO on LifeSite News

Bale never got the chance. He was roughed up and forced away from Chen's village, according to a CNN report

Bale was in Beijing, China for the premier of "The Flowers of War," a drama about the 1937 Rape of Nanjing. About his attempt to visit Chen, Bale stated, "I'm not brave doing this . . . This was just a situation -- I can't look the other way." 

According to Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women's Rights Without Frontiers, "Christian Bale is right that the true heroes are the Chinese citizens who have been beaten and detained trying to visit Chen, and yet Bale is a hero as well. He is starring in the most expensive film ever made in China, which China hopes will win an Academy Award. Nevertheless, he has the courage to stand against official injustice and has greatly raised the visibility of Chen's case." 

Littlejohn contrasted Bale's actions with those of Relativity Media. "Christian Bale has used his star power to shine a light on the unjust treatment of Chen Guangcheng. In contrast, Relativity Media filmed '21 and Over' in Linyi, where Chen is languishing under house arrest. They did nothing to help Chen. I hope that moviegoers will demonstrate their concern for Chen Guangcheng at the box office by boycotting '21 and Over.'" 


Ireland's Gain: The Demographic Impact and Consequences for the Health of Women of the Abortion Laws in Ireland and Northern Ireland since 1968

A new report, released in Belfast and Dublin this week by the Pensions and Population Research Institute (PAPRI), compares outcomes for women in Ireland, with those of women in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and clearly shows that Irish women benefit significantly from Ireland's ban on abortion in a number of ways.  
The study, compiled by actuary Mr Patrick Carroll M.A., F.I.A. compared statistical data on abortions carried out on women resident in Ireland and Northern Ireland from 1968-2010 with the corresponding data for mainland Britain and discussed the implications for women's health. Significantly it also links Ireland's low abortion rate to low incidences of breast cancer and comparative good mental health among women when compared with those in England Scotland and Wales. The study also showed that Northern Ireland enjoys lower levels of these problems than the rest of the UK.
Mr Carroll in his presentation said that 

"Restrictive laws on abortion have enabled the birth rate in the Republic and Northern Ireland to remain much higher than the European average. Today the Irish birth rates are near to replacement level and Ireland benefits from a more youthful demographic profile with less dependence on immigration than other European countries."

He added that there were benefits for both women and children, explaining that: 

"it is because abortion rates are low among Irish women that Ireland shows a low incidence of maternal and infant conditions known to be abortion sequelae: still births, low weight births whether in singleton or multiple births, preterm or premature births, cerebral palsy and maternal deaths."

"Ireland also benefits from low incidence of breast cancer and comparatively good mental health among women and a low incidence of certain diseases of the immune system, to which low abortion rates have contributed. Liberalisation of abortion laws in Ireland can be expected to result in higher abortion rates and a corresponding deterioration in respect of these conditions affecting the health of women," 

The report is very timely because of the pressure being put on Ireland following the decision in the A,B and C case last December. It is hoped that this report will help to inform the "expert group" which the Irish Government is about to nominate in their consideration of the issue.  Mr Carroll's research is critical in the examination of the impact of any liberalization of abortion laws and their adverse impact on women's health in particular in regard to, premature birth rates, stillbirth rates, suicide rates, mental health, breast cancer rates, and immunological disorders 

Whilst it is impossible to give an accurate figure the report implies that the current population would be in the region of 100,000 lower if pro-abortion legislation had existed.  

Report Summary  
1. Restrictive laws on abortion have enabled the birth rate in the Republic and Northern
Ireland to remain much higher than the European average. Today the Irish birth rates are near
to replacement level and Ireland benefits from a more youthful demographic profile with less
dependence on immigration than other European countries.

2. Liberalisation of abortion laws in Ireland would result in a less youthful demographic
profile with a smaller native population as illustrated for Northern Ireland in the epoch since
1968 and for the Republic for future years.

3. Distinct traditional features of Irish demography are still apparent such as large families for
married couples in the Republic notwithstanding the late age of childbearing in Ireland and
Irish participation in the general trend to smaller families everywhere. The late age of women
at first giving birth in Ireland, in conjunction with higher Irish parity progression, explains a
high proportion of Irish abortions being nulliparous i.e. carried out on women who have had
no previous full term pregnancy.

4. Because most Irish abortions are nulliparous, and therefore especially damaging to the
health of women, it is because abortion rates are low among Irish women that Ireland shows a
low incidence of maternal and infant conditions known to be abortion sequelae: still births,
low weight births whether in singleton or multiple births, preterm or premature births,
cerebral palsy and maternal deaths.  Ireland also benefits from low incidence of breast cancer
and comparatively good mental health among women and a low incidence of certain diseases
of the immune system, to which  low abortion rates have contributed.  Liberalisation of
abortion laws in Ireland can be expected to result in higher abortion rates and a corresponding deterioration in respect of these conditions affecting the health of women.


 

Forced Sterilisations in Peru

Shades of Nazi Germany!  It has been reported that under the presidency of Alberto Fujimori in Peru, from 1990 to 2000, there was allegedly a government policy of forced sterilisations carried out on Peruvian women.   It appears that there may have been up to 300,000 victims of this horrific policy, which can only be described as a gross human rights violation.   The majority of the women subjected to it were poor, and often belonging to indigenous groups who would not have been able to speak any language other than their own particular one.  Partly because of this the women would not have understood what was being carried out on them – when they were asked, that is.   It seems that in very many cases the women were not even consulted about what was about to be imposed on them. See BBC report 

Aurelia Paccohuanca (see photograph) who had 4 children was told by nurses 

"You give birth like pigs or hamsters!"

The Attorney General of Peru has just recently re-opened an investigation into the practice of forced sterilisations, and the evidence of many women will contribute to the legal examination into the allegations – so called – that the practice was standard among public health-care providers under the term of office of Mr. Fujimori.

One woman who was sterilised without her knowledge, following the birth of her child (who died soon afterwards), took an action for damages against the doctor who performed the sterilisation on her.   She was successful in her action, and she was awarded the sum of approximately €2,400.   What an inhuman and derisory outcome.  No money could ever replace her inability to conceive and bear children in the future.

Let us hope that the sterilised women (and some men, also) of Peru may be granted some peace in their lives

Myths about pro-lifers and how to refute them

Live action.org have published a BLOG post article setting out 5 of the commonly expressed myths about pro-lifers and how to refute them. There in fact many more and it is important for pro-life activists to be aware of them and how to respond in the most effective and non confrontational way
The Following is the Live action BLOG post by Kristen Walker, written with a humourous twist

There are a lot of negative stereotypes about the pro-life movement. I could easily write a list of 20 or more. These five, though, are the ones I personally encounter most often, and in the most capital letters. You’ll probably find them familiar. If you don’t know how to argue against these, you should.

5. We’re all brainwashed.
Since they can’t seem to wrap their brains around how a person might make an intelligent, informed decision to oppose abortion, anti-lifers sometimes like to assume we have all been duped. I have been accused, via Facebook, Twitter, email, and comment, of having been brainwashed by the following people or organizations: the Republican Party, Christians, the Vatican, white men, television, the conservative media, Sarah Palin, and the devil. I am not making any of those up.

Okay, I admit it. The devil made me pro-life.

While I suppose there are those who were raised inside Vatican walls and never heard a dissenting opinion, the truth is that even kids brought up in homes with pro-life parents were probably exposed to pro-abortion ideology somewhere along the way. It may have even happened without their knowledge.
Let me give you an example: I loved the movie Dirty Dancing as a kid. I wasn’t allowed to watch it, but I managed to watch it almost constantly, starting at around age ten. A major plot line in that movie is a main character having an abortion. Everyone is super casual about it, although they never use the word “abortion.” The girl ends up getting hurt by the procedure, but the impression is that this is because the woman had to go to an unsafe doctor with “a dirty knife and a folding table.” Then a real doctor is called and the girl is okay and everyone dances some more. The impression I got as a kid was that abortion was a tragic and sexy thing that pretty girls sometimes had to get because they were so desirable and awesome.
I don’t remember hearing anything about abortion from my church or my mom or my friends. I only heard about it from TV and movies, and it was always portrayed in the same light: a sad but necessary thing that boyfriends should pay for while wearing sheepish expressions. I ended up pro-choice until age 27, when I made a decision, based on little or no Chinese water torture by any Popes or Palins, that abortion was wrong and must be ended.
The best way to combat this stereotype is to share your own story. Let anti-lifers know the sound, rational, scientific and ethical reasons on which you base your pro-life activism. And don’t let your kids watch Dirty Dancing.

Sorry, Patrick.

4. We’re violent.
This is my least favorite myth because it’s the least true. The pro-life movement is by definition an outcry against a violent act.
Eight people have been killed in the United States by anti-abortion protesters. Last I heard, they had all been caught and punished. Fifty million babies have been killed — legally — by abortionists since 1973. Yet we’re the side that gets called violent. Fifty million to eight… Those are pretty dramatic numbers. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say it’s safer to be an abortionist than an unborn baby. Somebody somewhere is probably going to quote that in outrage, never mind the fact that is statistically 100% true.
The pro-life movement as a whole continuously and widely condemns acts of violence, yet anyone who professes a pro-life viewpoint is subject to being called a “clinic bomber.” Eight people — out of hundreds of millions — do not represent the movement, especially when their actions have been decried countless times.
If someone accuses you of belonging to a violent movement, remind them that since Roe v. Wade, every year an average of 1.2 million unborn children have been killed in the U.S., versus an average of two-tenths of an abortionist. The numbers don’t lie.

3. We’re all religious, conservative, and old.
There’s nothing wrong with being religious, conservative, or old, but it’s a mischaracterization. I am a conservative Catholic in my early 30s now, but when I became pro-life, I was a liberal agnostic in my 20s. While many — probably most — pro-lifers believe in some sort of deity, or at least in the human soul, not all of them do. The arguments that made me pro-life were grounded in science, ethics, and human rights. They had nothing to do with religion.
The friend who changed my mind knew better than to use a religious argument with me; I would have stopped listening. I was already wary because she was Catholic. I guess I thought she would sprinkle holy water on me while I wasn’t looking. But she didn’t. She just answered my questions — I had a lot of them — and by the end of the conversation I was, quite against my will, pro-life. I have remained so ever since.
I was also not a conservative, and many — including the friend I mentioned — remain pro-life and liberal or Democrat. The atheist, liberal New Yorker writer Nat Hentoff, after “coming out” as pro-life, experienced a backlash of negativity from fellow writers, intellectuals, atheists, Jews, and Democrats, but he stayed pro-life and a “civil libertarian” for the rest of his career.
A lot of people, when they think of pro-life activists, think of little old ladies saying the rosary outside a clinic. God bless those little old ladies and the work they do, but the truth is the pro-life movement is becoming a youth movement. Despite the fact that society in general seems to get more secular and less conservative, more and more young people oppose abortion. There is no consensus as to why, but it may have something to do with advancing science and technology. We know far more about the unborn human today than we did when Roe v. Wade was decided.

The "products of conception."

If someone tells you all pro-lifers are middle-aged white Christian Republicans, tell them they’re wrong — even if you are a middle-aged white Christian Republican. I have known pro-lifers of every age, color, religion, and political persuasion. If you don’t, try to get to know some. They’re everywhere! Check out Secular Pro-Life, Pagans for Life, or Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League. They may have a perspective you haven’t considered, which will help build your arsenal of pro-life knowledge and arguments, and make your parties more interesting.

2. We’re hypocrites if we oppose abortion but don’t oppose (fill in the blank).
Can you be pro-life and pro-death penalty? Yes. Can you be pro-life and support the war in Iraq? Yes. Can you be pro-life and eat meat? Yes.
You can’t compare these things to abortion. You can’t compare anything to abortion, except certain instances of euthanasia, which by the way are also covered under the pro-life umbrella.
Abortion is child murder. It’s the intentional killing of an innocent human being. And when I say “innocent,” I mean it in the most literal sense. I don’t mean “innocent” of murder, shoplifting, or appearing on “Jersey Shore,” though all of these are undeniably bad things. I mean completely innocent. The unborn child has never harmed a living soul. He did not cause his own existence. He did not ask to be conceived. He is brought to life and, in an abortion, he is killed, most often for the same reason he was conceived: because his mother made a choice.
No act compares to abortion in its heinousness. So don’t let anyone tell you that you must oppose the death penalty, or war, or meat if you are pro-life. Explain the difference between incidental death and intentional. Explain to them the difference between a cow and a human. Explain to them the difference between a convicted criminal and an unborn baby.

1. We have an ulterior motive.
This is the most common argument you will hear, and it honestly doesn’t even deserve the term “argument.” It is a non-argument. An argument would be, “Abortion is okay because the fetus isn’t human,” or “Abortion is okay because the unborn deserve no rights.” Those are arguments. They’re wrong, but they’re arguments. Instead, I am often accused of pretending to be against abortion when what I really want to do is one of the following: Take all human rights away from women. Stop everyone from having sex. Encourage child abuse. Make promiscuous girls feel bad about themselves.
And so on. So instead of saying, “Abortion should be legal because….,” the presenter of this “argument” says, “Well, you just want to enforce your Puritanical sexual values.” Or, “You just want people to have babies they can’t afford.” And so on.
Look. I’m gonna take this opportunity to come out with it: I am secretly okay with abortion. I honestly don’t mind if women go into clinics and pay doctors to suck their children out of them. What I’m really after, what I’ve really wanted all along, is to engage in “slut-shaming.” Apparently "slut-shaming" is a real thing that people are against. This was taken at the SlutWalk Toronto.... Yeeeeah.

This is my favorite non-argument ever. Written by “freelance journalist and stand-up comic” Amanda Grimes (whose graduate thesis was on “gender and stand-up comedy”), this blog made me literally wipe tears of laughter from my eyes. So she’s got the comedy part down! According to Grimes, pro-lifers aren’t really interested in saving lives. What they secretly want to do — wait for it — is make slutty girls feel bad about themselves. You heard me. The ulterior motive behind the pro-life movement, according to Andrea Grimes, is “slut-shaming.”
Ms. Grimes, if by “slut-shaming” you mean encouraging young women to behave in ways that will result in less pain for themselves, their children, and society, it is certainly on my list of reasons for opposing abortion. However, I hate to break it to you, reason number one is that I am actually nutso enough to believe in the sanctity of every human life. Sorry to disappoint. Now get back to that groundbreaking, totally relevant thesis!
By the way, for the record, you know what changed Grimes’s mind about abortion? I’ll let her say it in her own words:

Well, I got off my religious high horse and on to a sex life I enjoyed and found fulfilling.

That is… profound, isn’t it? She went to college, lost her virginity, and found out sex was fun! So then she discarded all the morals her parents went to the trouble to teach her, and ”went right the f*** out” and got on birth control, which, as it often does, led her to going right the eff out and feeling okay about abortion. “I believe wanting to take that choice away from others is deeply about shame and punishment and  judgment, and not about righteousness and love.”
Guess what, Grimes? Just because you believe something about us doesn’t make it true.
So apparently, Ms. Grimes did not believe in the sanctity of life. She was merely having fun “slut-shaming.” But just because she didn’t have strong, factual, righteous, loving reasons for opposing abortion doesn’t mean that’s the case for you, or me, or any other pro-lifer.
Don’t let anyone assign you intentions that aren’t yours. We are pro-life because we care for women and their children. We are pro-life because we believe in human rights. Don’t give an inch when it comes to your reasons for opposing abortion.

If you engage in any kind of pro-life activism you are going to encounter resistance. Not all of it will be honest, pleasant, or fair. If they haven’t yet, people are going to assume things about you and assign you traits and beliefs that don’t belong to you. (We’ll get to the name calling in another article.)
Learn to politely, rationally, tell them why they’re wrong, and bring the issue back to what it’s really about: the reprehensible act of abortion, what it truly is, and why we have to stop it.

March for life Budapest: December 28th, Feast of the Holy Innocents

The march is advertised under the banner: PEACE IN THE WOMB! march for abolition of the legalised genocide in Hungary.

December 28th the Feast of the Holy Innocents has been chosen as a memorial day for the unborn babies whose lives have been terminated by abortion in Hungary. 

The advertisement for the march tells us that: Anti-life policies have resulted in the killing of more than 6 million unborn children and has thus deeply damaged many millions of families. 

The march will commence at 14:00 p.m. and the leaders will mark the losses by citing the children’s names and tolling a bell. The march will commence from Square Március 15. tér (downtown) and will proceed to King Saint Steven Memorial and then to the palace of the state-president (castle-district), asking him to proclaim an act of “amnesty” for the innocent children before birth from 1 January, 2012.

"Human dignity is inviolable. Everyone has the right to life and human dignity, the life of a foetus will be protected from conception.” (II. Article of the Constitution of Hungary,  25. April 2011. )

 

The programme sets out the following:

PROCESSION

13:00 Church service and holy mass in the nearby churches. Blessing to the roses in the Roman Catholic Main Church in the city center named after Our Lady (Nagyboldogasszony).

14:00 Start from square Március 15. tér to the Chain-bridge („Lánc-híd”).

14:40 Throwing roses into the Danube, we mourn the children-victims killed before their births during the era of the national genocide, we are praying for reconciliation of their parents who felt them as burdens, for the ob-gyns who executed the death-sentences of the genocide, for those who as bystanders were just watching the killing of people without protesting against it, and for the politicians who declared war against the fertility of their own nation.

15:00 Via Clark Ádám tér – Fő u. – Apor Péter u. –  Hunyadi János út – Jezsuita lépcső we proceed to the sculpture of King Saint Steven at the square of the Holy Trinity („Szentháromság tér”).

15:20  600 red roses – symbolising the basic, procreative law of nature and the Heavenly Constitution which is fostering our survival – will be put to the feet of King Saint Steven. Singing the Hymn:

Castle once, now heap of stones;

Fled are all its graces,

Death-cries, rattles, sighs and groans

Occupy their places.

Ah but liberty disdains

Veins that death must vanquish,

Red-eyed orphans in their chain.

 15:45 Start at Jezsuita lépcső – Csónak u.– Színház u. walk to the palace of the state-president at „Szent György tér” square.

16:00 Speech and prayer: the new constitution can be beneficial if it guarantees the right to life for unborn children. On behalf of the Holy Crown, we ask Pál Schmidt, state-president of Republic of Hungary to use his moral and political clout as he was the one that finished the era of Hungarian genocide on the 4th of June, 1956 and to change the words of the new constitution into an act by declaring „amnesty” for unborn children before 1st of January 2012! We ask the lawmakers that the „law” on the protection of unborn children (from year 1992., Nr. LXXXIX) – which is against life and common good – be adjusted to the basic natural law pertaining to the Heavenly Constitution.

16:30 Singing the Hymn:

With the Magyar take your stand,

Lord, in his vain struggles,

Shield him with your mighty hand

From that sea of troubles.

He whom ill-luck long has cursed

This year grant him pleasure,

He has suffered with the worst

Time beyond all measure!

18:00 – 21:00 Prayer, reconciliation and Holy Mass for Life by bishop (Cave-Church run by Paulins, Square Gellért tér)

The event is hosted by the following organisations, Alliance of Christian Intellectuals, Alpha Alliance, Human Life International – Europe, National Alliance of Large Families, Peace in the Womb, Pro-Life Forum, Society of Catholic Doctors named after Saint Luke, Secular Order of Franciscans, Society of Christian Medical Doctors in Hungary, Union of Large Families

CONTACT  Imre Téglásy, Ph.D.

e-mail: alfateglasy@t-email.hu, cellular: +36 30 9226775, www.yesforhungary.eu

                                                                                   

INFORMATION!  Parking space for coaches and cars at the Pest-side of the bridge called  Erzsébet-híd (Elisabeth-bridge). The route is 2.5 kilometesr long, a comfortable walk of 70 minutes. Those joining the event outside the procession can use public transport (a blue bus, nr. „16” starting from the square in downtown („Deák tér”) or from the squre called „Széll Kálmán tér”) You have to get off at the stop called „Szentháromság tér” („Holy Trinity”), or at the stop called „Palota út” („Palace street”). There is an elevator called ”gyorslift” or „sikló” from the „Lánchíd” (Chain-bridge) to the spot, too.

Protest over closure of Ireland's Embassy to the Holy See

Despite the icy cold weather and the occasional blustery shower of rain, approximately two hundred people gathered at Dáil Éireann, in Kildare Street, Dublin, on Thursday afternoon, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of Our Lady.   Those present travelled from many parts of Ireland in answer to a call from the Christian Solidarity Party to protest against the closure of Ireland’s Embassy to the Vatican by the coalition Government – ostensibly for economic reasons!   

Cardinal Sean Brady at the time of the announcement of the closure, expressed his "profound disappointment"about the move and continued

"This decision seems to show little regard for the important role played by the Holy See in international relations and of the historic ties between the Irish people and the Holy See over many centuries,"

The Irish Embassy to the Holy See was established in 1929, and it was one of the first resident missions to be established by the Irish Government.  The Papal Nuncio from the Vatican has always been regarded as the Doyen of the Diplomatic Corps here.  Ireland’s diplomatic connection with the Vatican has now been downgraded to that of a senior official of the Department of Foreign Affairs being appointed to deal with Vatican affairs.   A physical presence in Rome is no longer in existence.    

There has been much criticism of this move, which is seen as a snub to Pope Benedict, and to the Church.   Both clerical and secular writers have pointed out that in breaking direct diplomatic links with the Holy See the Irish Government has, as the saying goes, ‘cut off its nose to spite its face’, particularly – from a purely worldly point of view – as the Vatican is such an important ‘listening post’ in diplomatic circles worldwide.

According to a Reuters report at the time of the announcement of the closure “Dublin said it was closing its mission to the Vatican along with those in Iran and East Timor to help meet its fiscal goals under an EU-IMF bailout. The closures will save the government 1.25 million euros ($1.725 million) a year.”

It is interesting to note that according to the Irish Aid website the Irish Government through Irish Aid has since 2006 donated almost €30 million to the pro-abortion UNFPA and according to a speech given by Minister of State Jan O'Sullivan at an Irish Family Planning  Association (IFPA) event to launch the UNFPA 2011 State of Population Report,  

"UNFPA will continue to be a priority partner for Irish Aid and we look forward to work ever more closely with them in them in the run-up to the 2015 deadline for meeting the Millennium Development Goals."

It is a very sad day in which Ireland, which has stood for so long against the evil of abortion can find tens of millions to support UNFPA which assists in the termination of unborn lives in developing countries, but cannot find the money to keep the Holy See embassy open.

A Voice for Life: New Pro-life Movie on the life of abortion survivor Melissa Ohden

Christian Newswire reports Over 1.2 million children lose their lives to abortion every year in the United States alone. Over 53 million children have lost their lives to abortion in the United States since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Many know the sad reality of these statistics, but most don't know the amazing reality that sometimes children survive failed abortions and exist in our world today. Melissa Ohden, a 34-year-old international pro-life speaker and advocate, wife and mother, is one such survivor.

Melissa's powerful story of surviving a failed saline infusion abortion in 1977, of overcoming the concerns regarding her ability to survive past infancy and go on to lead a "normal" life, of being adopted into a loving family that supported her in her search for her biological family and in her struggle to face the reality of her life as an abortion survivor to ultimately become a voice for the unborn, is featured in the newly released pro-life documentary, A Voice for Life.

A Voice for Life became a reality when Melissa Ohden, Steve Feazel and Gunther Meisse II combined their talents to present a miraculous message of life. This unique film views abortion through the eyes of Melissa Ohden who is an abortion survivor. Producer and writer, Steve Feazel met Melissa when both were appearing on a TV talk show in Pittsburgh. Steve was there promoting another documentary when he heard Melissa tell her story.

Featuring pro-life leaders and advocates including Father Frank Pavone, Alveda King, Dr. John Willke, Kevin and Theresa Burke, and Michael Clancy, A Voice for Life has premiered at events for Heartbeat International and National Right to Life to great acclaim. The Dove Foundation review for the documentary echoes the sentiments of individuals and organizations that have been moved by the film and see its' value in promoting the sanctity of life: "We highly recommend this inspirational and remarkable DVD and gladly award it our Dove 'Family-Approved' Seal in addition to five Doves, our highest level."

A Voice for Life continues to garner awards on an international level, including the Transforming Stories International Film Festival in South Africa, and the Redemptive Film Festival in Virginia Beach, where it received the highest honor. More importantly, to the creative team of A Voice for Life, Steve Feazel, Gunther Meisse, and Melissa Ohden, the pro-life film is making an impact in the world, touching hearts changing minds, and bringing hope and healing to individuals who have been devastated by abortion.

The soul-baring testimonies of numerous women and a man who have experienced an abortion in their lives, the inspirational testimony of a young woman who stood strong in her beliefs about the sanctity of life in the face of a teenage pregnancy, the heart-warming testimonies of a birthmother and adoptive mother regarding their open adoption, and the testimonies of pregnancy center staff and pro-life advocates woven throughout Melissa's miraculous story, provide an in-depth perspective to abortion that is both informing and convicting people around the world.

As one such reviewer, Edwin L. Carpenter, stated, "Women share their emotions from post-abortions and reflect guilt but the value of a life lesson learned. The viewer of this DVD will marvel at God's grace as Melissa Ohden reflects forgiveness and her belief that God spared her for a purpose."

In addition to the 58 minute documentary, a short, 9 minute film, featuring Melissa as narrator, has also been released for pregnancy centers and other organizations that minister to abortion vulnerable women to utilize as a resource in their life-saving, life-transforming work. Melissa's powerful message to women in this video as both a survivor and a mother, herself, is beyond description. To view the trailer of the short resource video, visit www.avoiceforlife.com/trailer.html.

To join the churches, pro-life and Christian organizations and individuals who have been positively impacted by A Voice for Life, please visit www.avoiceforlife.com to view the trailer and purchase the film. For more information on Melissa Ohden and her ministry, please visit www.melissaohden.com.

Attn. Media: To schedule an interview with Melissa Ohden contact Gloria Leyda, Ambassador Speakers Bureau, 615-370-4700; gloria@ambassadorspeakers.com.

Irish Babies being aborted in UK while childless couples in Ireland seek to adopt abroad

A feature entitled ‘From the Archives’ that appeared in the Irish Times newspaper recently throws an interesting light on society in general in Ireland over sixty years ago, and particularly on the plight of children born to Irish mothers outside wedlock at that time.  The piece, an editorial that appeared in the newspaper in 1949, tells us that 

‘The lot of the unwanted legitimate child is hard.  That of the unwanted illegitimate child is vastly harder.  The charge of infanticide is heard with monotonous regularity in our Irish Courts, but often, when a terrified mother shrinks from so dreadful a crime and consents to carry the stigma of her shame, her unwanted child almost has reason to regret that he had not been granted the mercy of a quick death.’  Three possibilities are suggested for the mother – to ‘farm out’ her child to some family that would be willing to raise him (often a miserable existence); to put her child into an institution (again, not always an ideal solution); and, thirdly, to put her child up for adoption.  ‘She may be put in touch with some decent, childless and frequently well-to-do family that is anxious to adopt the child and bring him, or her, up as its own.’

The editorial continues with a remarkable comment that is extremely relevant to today’s world, where childless couples are willing to go to any lengths to obtain a child – be it IVF and the financial and physical cost to the woman – or be it going through all the hassle and expense of adopting a child from Russia, Vietnam, China, or wherever, and the sometimes dubious advantage to the child in question.

The editorial says that the possibility of adoption is ‘infinitely the best solution of the three.  It is well known that there are many thousands of childless couples in Ireland who would gladly bring up such a child as their own, give him every advantage within their means, endow him with their name and social position, and leave him their money.’

Why do the childless couples of Ireland have to resort to IVF and other AHR (assisted human reproduction) procedures, or why do they have to go abroad to other countries to adopt a child today?     If the thousands of Irish babies who are killed by abortion every year were alive today would they not bring happiness to so many childless couples, and at the same time be allowed to live the life that God intended for them.

The editorial ended by commenting on a problem involved with the process of adoption at that time – the fact that there was no possibility of legally adopting a child.    A small matter, but one that has been resolved in the intervening years through appropriate legislation. 

Caring for the terminally ill

The Dominican Sisters of St. Rose of Lima (also known as the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne) in Hawthorne, north of New York City, is a congregation founded around the beginning of the 1900s by a lady named Rose Hawthorne (she was a daughter of the novelist Nathaniel Hawthorne, author of The Scarlet Letter).  The main purpose in establishing the congregation was to care for elderly, and not so elderly, people, who are terminally ill.      

The Sisters provide direct care for their patients, they do not charge a fee, and they do not accept government funds or insurance reimbursements.    How do they manage this?  ‘We do the best we can and trust the rest to the Lord’, the Superior General says.   Approximately one hundred people are cared for by the Sisters, in Hawthorne, Philadelphia, Atlanta, and in Kisumu (Kenya, East Africa).   Sister Alma Marie, the vocations director of the Congregation, says: ‘Many come here with the fear of dying, of being alone.  When we care for them, we can see the transformation.   We help them live the life that God has given them to the fullest.  We celebrate life.’ 

One of the residents, who had previously been cared for in a well known New York establishment, summed up the atmosphere that is present at the homes run by the Sisters when she said: ‘I always wanted to go home with my family when they visited.  I don’t feel that way here.  I’m already home and my family is content to see me here, because they know I’m happy.’     Would that all people, young and old, who need to be cared for could enjoy such evidently wonderful care, especially towards the end of their lives.