In honor of the season premiere of Paranormal State tonight, and 40 Days for Life this month, I would like to bring up this topic.
I'm an empath, and I have the Spiritual gift of discernment of spirits. I feel what others feel, and I feel what they don't. I sense spirits. Spirits come to me for help. Although I can't usually hear them or see them the way I hear and see fully physical people, I can feel what they need from me. Non-human entities, a.k.a. demons, threaten me for this.
I have studied the paranormal my entire life, only learning spiritual warfare within the past few years. Before that, I had no clue on how to deal with my gifts. Learning to deal with my gifts has helped me a lot, and helped me to better discern.
That said, every day is a spiritual battle, not just for me, but for all of us. Spiritual activity surrounds us in all that we do. Why do you think sin is so rampant? Demons whisper in the ears of us all, keeping us from Christ. We have to learn to fight them. We have to learn to live for Christ, and not let anything or anyone get in the way of our relationship with God.
Demons do not like that we live, or protect the lives of others. Abortion is not only a sacrifice to idols, but to demons. Anytime someone worships something/someone other than God, they are worshiping demons. Anything that goes against God is something that the devil rejoices in.
Since becoming active in the pro-life community, I have noticed the spiritual activity surrounding the debate. The angels and saints surround the side for life, and demons surround the side for the so-called "choice" for abortion. Yes, there are some people on the side for life who have been taken by the devil, such as whenever there is a shooting or some other sort of violence, or when people start screaming at others, calling names, etc. However, I can tell you that I sense the evil one wherever someone is fighting for abortion. He has the advantage when a human being takes the life of another human being.
Therefore, let us follow what St. Paul tells us in Ephesians, chapter 6 (paraphrased): Let us draw our strength from the Lord and from His mighty power. Let us put on the armor of God so that we may be able to stand firm against the tactics of the devil, that we may be able to resist on the evil day and, having done everything, to hold our ground. Let us stand fast with our loins girded in truth, clothed with righteousness as a breastplate, and our feet shod in readiness for the gospel of peace. In all circumstances, let us hold faith as a shield, to quench all flaming arrows of the evil one. Let us take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. With all prayer and supplication, let us pray at every opportunity in the Spirit. To that end, let us be watchful with all perseverance and supplication for all the holy ones, for ourselves, and for each other, that speech may be given us to open our mouths, to make known with boldness the mystery of the gospel for which we are ambassadors in chains, so that we may have the courage to speak as we must.
We need to pray, pray, pray! Ask Mother Mary, St. Michael, and St. Benedict for help in this fight.
I wear the St. Michael, St. Benedict, and Miraculous medals to protect myself (I also have the Infant of Prague/Sacred Heart of Jesus and St. Dymphna medals. The first was a gift from Heaven (I found it in my mom's car, and she said she didn't know where it came from, but that I should wear it), and the second was a gift from a friend to help with my depression and anxiety). For protection, and to help me fight for God and do God's work, I try to pray the rosary every night, and have been told to pray St. Patrick's prayer The Deer's Cry, and the St. Michael prayer in Latin. While I do miss some nights (okay, a lot of nights - no one is perfect), I really need to make this an every day ritual.
Anyway, every day is a spiritual battle. Let's not lose focus. Let's fight for God, and all that He stands for. Let's stand for, and fight for life!
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Monday, September 13, 2010
The Bible on Abortion - Part Deux
Here are a few other passages of the Bible which condemn abortion. Note that most Bibles will use the word "hell" instead of "Gehenna". However, there are other forms of "hell" that are used in the Bible, not all of them being a deadly, fiery, abortive hell, so I used The New American Bible, which specifies the type of hell, using the word Gehenna, or Hinnom, where needed.
The Book of Leviticus, chapter 20, "1 The LORD said to Moses, '2 Tell the Israelites: Anyone, whether an Israelite or an alien residing in Israel, who gives any of his offspring to Molech shall be put to death. Let his fellow citizens stone him. 3 I myself will turn against such a man and cut him off from the body of his people; for in giving his offspring to Molech, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. 4 Even if his fellow citizens connive at such a man's crime of giving his offspring to Molech, and fail to put him to death, 5 I myself will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him and all who join him in his wanton worship of Molech.'"
The Book of Deuteronomy, chapter 12, "29 When the LORD, your God, removes the nations from your way as you advance to dispossess them, be on your guard! Otherwise, once they have been wiped out before you and you have replaced them and are settled in their land, 30 you will be lured into following them. Do not inquire regarding their gods, 'How did these nations worship their gods? I, too, would do the same.' 31 You shall not thus worship the LORD, your God, because they offered to their gods every abomination that the LORD detests, even burning their sons and daughters to their gods."
The Book of Deuteronomy, chapter 18, "9 When you come into the land which the LORD, your God, is giving you, you shall not learn to imitate the abominations of the peoples there. 10 Let there not be found among you anyone who immolates his son or daughter in the fire, nor a fortune-teller, soothsayer, charmer, diviner, 11 or caster of spells, nor one who consults ghosts and spirits or seeks oracles from the dead. 12 Anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, and because of such abominations the LORD, your God, is driving these nations out of your way."
The 2nd Book of Kings, chapter 17, "16 They disregarded all the commandments of the LORD, their God, and made for themselves two molten calves; they also made a sacred pole and worshiped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. 17 They immolated their sons and daughters by fire, practiced fortune-telling and divination, and sold themselves into evil doing in the LORD'S sight, provoking him 18 till, in his great anger against Israel, the LORD put them away out of his sight. Only the tribe of Judah was left."
The 2nd Book of Kings, chapter 23:10, "The king also defiled Topheth in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, so that there would no longer be an immolation of sons or daughters by fire in honor of Molech."
The 2nd Book of Chronicles, 28:3, "Moreover, he offered sacrifice in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated his sons by fire according to the abominable practice of the nations which the LORD had cleared out before the Israelites."
The 2nd Book of Chronicles, chapter 33, "1 Manasseh was twelve years old when he became king, and he reigned fifty-five years in Jerusalem. 2 He did evil in the sight of the LORD, following the abominable practices of the nations whom the LORD had cleared out of the way of the Israelites. 3 He rebuilt the high places which his father Hezekiah had torn down, erected altars for the Baals, made sacred poles, and prostrated himself before the whole host of heaven and worshiped them... 6 It was he, too, who immolated his sons by fire in the Valley of Ben-hinnom. He practiced augury, divination and magic, and appointed necromancers and diviners of spirits, so that he provoked the LORD with the great evil that he did in his sight."
The Book of Psalms, chapter 106, "34 They did not destroy the peoples as the LORD had commanded them, 35 But mingled with the nations and imitated their ways. 36 They worshiped their idols and were ensnared by them. 37 They sacrificed to the gods their own sons and daughters, 38 Shedding innocent blood, the blood of their own sons and daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, desecrating the land with bloodshed."
The Book of Jeremiah, chapter 7, "30 The people of Judah have done what is evil in my eyes, says the LORD. They have defiled the house which bears my name by setting up in it their abominable idols. 31 In the Valley of Ben-hinnom they have built the high place of Topheth to immolate in fire their sons and their daughters, such a thing as I never commanded or had in mind. 32 Therefore, beware! days will come, says the LORD, when Topheth and the Valley of Ben-hinnom will no longer be called such, but rather the Valley of Slaughter. For lack of space, Topheth will be a burial place."
The Book of Jeremiah, 32:35, "They built high places to Baal in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated their sons and daughters to Molech, bringing sin upon Judah; this I never commanded them, nor did it even enter My mind that they should practice such abominations."
The Book of Ezekiel, chapter 16, "20 The sons and daughters you had borne me you took and offered as sacrifices to be devoured by them! Was it not enough that you had become a harlot? 21 You slaughtered and immolated my children to them, making them pass through fire. 22 And through all your abominations and harlotries you remembered nothing of when you were a girl, stark naked and weltering in your blood. 23 Then after all your evildoing--woe, woe to you! says the Lord GOD."
Note: whenever the word "woe" is used in the Bible, it's a curse. The fact that it's used twice in this passage means it's multiplied by 2.
The Book of Ezekiel, chapter 20, "30 Therefore say to the house of Israel: Thus says the Lord GOD: Will you defile yourselves like your fathers? Will you lust after their detestable idols? 31 By offering your gifts, by making your children pass through the fire, you defile yourselves with all your idols even to this day. Shall I let myself be consulted by you, house of Israel? As I live! says the Lord GOD: I swear I will not let myself be consulted by you."
The Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 18:
1 At that time the disciples approached Jesus and said, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
2 He called a child over, placed it in their midst, 3 and said, "Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever receives one child such as this in My name receives Me.
6 "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of things that cause sin! Such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come! 8 If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.
10 "See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my heavenly Father."
Note that in this passage from St. Matthew's Gospel, Jesus is holding a child, and talking about sin. Then He mentions that those who sin against children will be, themselves, thrown into the fire of Gehenna, which as I mentioned in the previous writing on this topic, is ALWAYS code for abortion in the Bible. In other words, He is saying that if you cause abortion, you will be aborted.
And people say that there is no violence or destruction in the New Testament. Ha!
In my previous post on this subject, I mentioned the Gospel of St. Luke chapter 1. Here's the entire passage from the Douay-Rheims Bible, "41 And it came to pass that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost. 42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb. 43 And whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For behold as soon as the voice of your salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy."
The word used twice in there for "infant" is the Greek word brephos. In the passage above, it is used to describe an unborn child. However, it is used also in chapter 2, when the angel is proclaiming the joyful news to the shepherds that Christ has been born, and when the shepherds see Jesus lying in the manger. "11 For, this day is born to you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David. 12 And this shall be a sign unto you. You shall find the infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and laid in a manger." "16 And they came with haste: and they found Mary and Joseph, and the infant lying in the manger." So, the word for infant in the Gospel of St. Luke, brephos, can be used to mean both a born and unborn child. Meaning, you can't distinguish the two! An unborn child is the same as a born child! St. Luke knew this!
The previously mentioned passage from the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 18, has a parallel in the Gospel of St. Luke, chapter 18, where he again uses the word brephos to describe the children, "15 And they brought unto him also infants, that He might touch them. Which when the disciples saw, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus, calling them together, said: Suffer children to come to Me and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 17 Amen, I say to you: Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a child shall not enter into it."
You can't be Christian and not be pro-life! It just does not work that way. It cannot work that way! Those who are not pro-life are just kidding themselves. Either that, or they haven't studied their Bible - at least not very well.
The Book of Leviticus, chapter 20, "1 The LORD said to Moses, '2 Tell the Israelites: Anyone, whether an Israelite or an alien residing in Israel, who gives any of his offspring to Molech shall be put to death. Let his fellow citizens stone him. 3 I myself will turn against such a man and cut him off from the body of his people; for in giving his offspring to Molech, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. 4 Even if his fellow citizens connive at such a man's crime of giving his offspring to Molech, and fail to put him to death, 5 I myself will set my face against that man and his family and will cut off from their people both him and all who join him in his wanton worship of Molech.'"
The Book of Deuteronomy, chapter 12, "29 When the LORD, your God, removes the nations from your way as you advance to dispossess them, be on your guard! Otherwise, once they have been wiped out before you and you have replaced them and are settled in their land, 30 you will be lured into following them. Do not inquire regarding their gods, 'How did these nations worship their gods? I, too, would do the same.' 31 You shall not thus worship the LORD, your God, because they offered to their gods every abomination that the LORD detests, even burning their sons and daughters to their gods."
The Book of Deuteronomy, chapter 18, "9 When you come into the land which the LORD, your God, is giving you, you shall not learn to imitate the abominations of the peoples there. 10 Let there not be found among you anyone who immolates his son or daughter in the fire, nor a fortune-teller, soothsayer, charmer, diviner, 11 or caster of spells, nor one who consults ghosts and spirits or seeks oracles from the dead. 12 Anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, and because of such abominations the LORD, your God, is driving these nations out of your way."
The 2nd Book of Kings, chapter 17, "16 They disregarded all the commandments of the LORD, their God, and made for themselves two molten calves; they also made a sacred pole and worshiped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. 17 They immolated their sons and daughters by fire, practiced fortune-telling and divination, and sold themselves into evil doing in the LORD'S sight, provoking him 18 till, in his great anger against Israel, the LORD put them away out of his sight. Only the tribe of Judah was left."
The 2nd Book of Kings, chapter 23:10, "The king also defiled Topheth in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, so that there would no longer be an immolation of sons or daughters by fire in honor of Molech."
The 2nd Book of Chronicles, 28:3, "Moreover, he offered sacrifice in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated his sons by fire according to the abominable practice of the nations which the LORD had cleared out before the Israelites."
The 2nd Book of Chronicles, chapter 33, "1 Manasseh was twelve years old when he became king, and he reigned fifty-five years in Jerusalem. 2 He did evil in the sight of the LORD, following the abominable practices of the nations whom the LORD had cleared out of the way of the Israelites. 3 He rebuilt the high places which his father Hezekiah had torn down, erected altars for the Baals, made sacred poles, and prostrated himself before the whole host of heaven and worshiped them... 6 It was he, too, who immolated his sons by fire in the Valley of Ben-hinnom. He practiced augury, divination and magic, and appointed necromancers and diviners of spirits, so that he provoked the LORD with the great evil that he did in his sight."
The Book of Psalms, chapter 106, "34 They did not destroy the peoples as the LORD had commanded them, 35 But mingled with the nations and imitated their ways. 36 They worshiped their idols and were ensnared by them. 37 They sacrificed to the gods their own sons and daughters, 38 Shedding innocent blood, the blood of their own sons and daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, desecrating the land with bloodshed."
The Book of Jeremiah, chapter 7, "30 The people of Judah have done what is evil in my eyes, says the LORD. They have defiled the house which bears my name by setting up in it their abominable idols. 31 In the Valley of Ben-hinnom they have built the high place of Topheth to immolate in fire their sons and their daughters, such a thing as I never commanded or had in mind. 32 Therefore, beware! days will come, says the LORD, when Topheth and the Valley of Ben-hinnom will no longer be called such, but rather the Valley of Slaughter. For lack of space, Topheth will be a burial place."
The Book of Jeremiah, 32:35, "They built high places to Baal in the Valley of Ben-hinnom, and immolated their sons and daughters to Molech, bringing sin upon Judah; this I never commanded them, nor did it even enter My mind that they should practice such abominations."
The Book of Ezekiel, chapter 16, "20 The sons and daughters you had borne me you took and offered as sacrifices to be devoured by them! Was it not enough that you had become a harlot? 21 You slaughtered and immolated my children to them, making them pass through fire. 22 And through all your abominations and harlotries you remembered nothing of when you were a girl, stark naked and weltering in your blood. 23 Then after all your evildoing--woe, woe to you! says the Lord GOD."
Note: whenever the word "woe" is used in the Bible, it's a curse. The fact that it's used twice in this passage means it's multiplied by 2.
The Book of Ezekiel, chapter 20, "30 Therefore say to the house of Israel: Thus says the Lord GOD: Will you defile yourselves like your fathers? Will you lust after their detestable idols? 31 By offering your gifts, by making your children pass through the fire, you defile yourselves with all your idols even to this day. Shall I let myself be consulted by you, house of Israel? As I live! says the Lord GOD: I swear I will not let myself be consulted by you."
The Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 18:
1 At that time the disciples approached Jesus and said, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
2 He called a child over, placed it in their midst, 3 and said, "Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever receives one child such as this in My name receives Me.
6 "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of things that cause sin! Such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come! 8 If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.
10 "See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my heavenly Father."
Note that in this passage from St. Matthew's Gospel, Jesus is holding a child, and talking about sin. Then He mentions that those who sin against children will be, themselves, thrown into the fire of Gehenna, which as I mentioned in the previous writing on this topic, is ALWAYS code for abortion in the Bible. In other words, He is saying that if you cause abortion, you will be aborted.
And people say that there is no violence or destruction in the New Testament. Ha!
In my previous post on this subject, I mentioned the Gospel of St. Luke chapter 1. Here's the entire passage from the Douay-Rheims Bible, "41 And it came to pass that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost. 42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb. 43 And whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For behold as soon as the voice of your salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy."
The word used twice in there for "infant" is the Greek word brephos. In the passage above, it is used to describe an unborn child. However, it is used also in chapter 2, when the angel is proclaiming the joyful news to the shepherds that Christ has been born, and when the shepherds see Jesus lying in the manger. "11 For, this day is born to you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David. 12 And this shall be a sign unto you. You shall find the infant wrapped in swaddling clothes and laid in a manger." "16 And they came with haste: and they found Mary and Joseph, and the infant lying in the manger." So, the word for infant in the Gospel of St. Luke, brephos, can be used to mean both a born and unborn child. Meaning, you can't distinguish the two! An unborn child is the same as a born child! St. Luke knew this!
The previously mentioned passage from the Gospel of St. Matthew, chapter 18, has a parallel in the Gospel of St. Luke, chapter 18, where he again uses the word brephos to describe the children, "15 And they brought unto him also infants, that He might touch them. Which when the disciples saw, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus, calling them together, said: Suffer children to come to Me and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 17 Amen, I say to you: Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a child shall not enter into it."
You can't be Christian and not be pro-life! It just does not work that way. It cannot work that way! Those who are not pro-life are just kidding themselves. Either that, or they haven't studied their Bible - at least not very well.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
The Catholic Church and the Death Penalty
Here is what the Roman Catholic Church has to say, officially and not taken out of context, complete with footnotes, about the death penalty:
Legitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65
65 St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II,64,7, corp. art. (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm – see Article 7)
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.66
66 St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II,64,7, corp. art. (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm – see Article 7)
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
67 Cf. Lk 23:40-43.
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68
68 John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56. 69 Cf. Gen 4:10
Cross-References:
2263
1737 An effect can be tolerated without being willed by its agent; for instance, a mother's exhaustion from tending her sick child. A bad effect is not imputable if it was not willed either as an end or as a means of an action, e.g., a death a person incurs in aiding someone in danger. For a bad effect to be imputable it must be foreseeable and the agent must have the possibility of avoiding it, as in the case of manslaughter caused by a drunken driver.
2265
2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one's country:
Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.45
[Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.46
The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."47
45 Rom 13:7.
46 Ad Diognetum 5,5 and 10; 6,10:PG 2,1173 and 1176.
PG: J.P. Migne, ed., Patroligia Greaca (Paris, 1867-1866)
47 1 Tim 2:2.
2266
2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.
However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."106
106 GS 79 § 4.
GS: Gaudium et spes
1897"Human society can be neither well-ordered nor prosperous unless it has some people invested with legitimate authority to preserve its institutions and to devote themselves as far as is necessary to work and care for the good of all."15
By "authority" one means the quality by virtue of which persons or institutions make laws and give orders to men and expect obedience from them.
15 John XXIII, PT 46.
PT: Pacem in terris
2234 God's fourth commandment also enjoins us to honor all who for our good have received authority in society from God. It clarifies the duties of those who exercise authority as well as those who benefit from it.
1898 Every human community needs an authority to govern it.16 The foundation of such authority lies in human nature. It is necessary for the unity of the state. Its role is to ensure as far as possible the common good of the society.
16 Cf. Leo XIII, Immortale Dei; Diuturnum illud.
2267
2306 Those who renounce violence and bloodshed and, in order to safeguard human rights, make use of those means of defense available to the weakest, bear witness to evangelical charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligations of other men and societies. They bear legitimate witness to the gravity of the physical and moral risks of recourse to violence, with all its destruction and death.104
104 Cf. GS 78 § 5.
Footnotes:
John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56, 69
56. This is the context in which to place the problem of the death penalty. On this matter there is a growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is "to redress the disorder caused by the offense".46 Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfills the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated. 47
It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: "If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person".48
69. In any case, in the democratic culture of our time it is commonly held that the legal system of any society should limit itself to taking account of and accepting the convictions of the majority. It should therefore be based solely upon what the majority itself considers moral and actually practises. Furthermore, if it is believed that an objective truth shared by all is de facto unattainable, then respect for the freedom of the citizens-who in a democratic system are considered the true rulers-would require that on the legislative level the autonomy of individual consciences be acknowledged. Consequently, when establishing those norms which are absolutely necessary for social coexistence, the only determining factor should be the will of the majority, whatever this may be. Hence every politician, in his or her activity, should clearly separate the realm of private conscience from that of public conduct.
As a result we have what appear to be two diametrically opposed tendencies. On the one hand, individuals claim for themselves in the moral sphere the most complete freedom of choice and demand that the State should not adopt or impose any ethical position but limit itself to guaranteeing maximum space for the freedom of each individual, with the sole limitation of not infringing on the freedom and rights of any other citizen. On the other hand, it is held that, in the exercise of public and professional duties, respect for other people's freedom of choice requires that each one should set aside his or her own convictions in order to satisfy every demand of the citizens which is recognized and guaranteed by law; in carrying out one's duties the only moral criterion should be what is laid down by the law itself. Individual responsibility is thus turned over to the civil law, with a renouncing of personal conscience, at least in the public sphere.
46 Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2266.
47 Cf. ibid.
48 Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2267.
Legitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65
65 St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II,64,7, corp. art. (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm – see Article 7)
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.66
66 St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II,64,7, corp. art. (http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3064.htm – see Article 7)
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
67 Cf. Lk 23:40-43.
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68
68 John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56. 69 Cf. Gen 4:10
Cross-References:
2263
1737 An effect can be tolerated without being willed by its agent; for instance, a mother's exhaustion from tending her sick child. A bad effect is not imputable if it was not willed either as an end or as a means of an action, e.g., a death a person incurs in aiding someone in danger. For a bad effect to be imputable it must be foreseeable and the agent must have the possibility of avoiding it, as in the case of manslaughter caused by a drunken driver.
2265
2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one's country:
Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.45
[Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.46
The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."47
45 Rom 13:7.
46 Ad Diognetum 5,5 and 10; 6,10:PG 2,1173 and 1176.
PG: J.P. Migne, ed., Patroligia Greaca (Paris, 1867-1866)
47 1 Tim 2:2.
2266
2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.
However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."106
106 GS 79 § 4.
GS: Gaudium et spes
1897"Human society can be neither well-ordered nor prosperous unless it has some people invested with legitimate authority to preserve its institutions and to devote themselves as far as is necessary to work and care for the good of all."15
By "authority" one means the quality by virtue of which persons or institutions make laws and give orders to men and expect obedience from them.
15 John XXIII, PT 46.
PT: Pacem in terris
2234 God's fourth commandment also enjoins us to honor all who for our good have received authority in society from God. It clarifies the duties of those who exercise authority as well as those who benefit from it.
1898 Every human community needs an authority to govern it.16 The foundation of such authority lies in human nature. It is necessary for the unity of the state. Its role is to ensure as far as possible the common good of the society.
16 Cf. Leo XIII, Immortale Dei; Diuturnum illud.
2267
2306 Those who renounce violence and bloodshed and, in order to safeguard human rights, make use of those means of defense available to the weakest, bear witness to evangelical charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligations of other men and societies. They bear legitimate witness to the gravity of the physical and moral risks of recourse to violence, with all its destruction and death.104
104 Cf. GS 78 § 5.
Footnotes:
John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56, 69
56. This is the context in which to place the problem of the death penalty. On this matter there is a growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is "to redress the disorder caused by the offense".46 Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfills the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated. 47
It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
In any event, the principle set forth in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church remains valid: "If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person".48
69. In any case, in the democratic culture of our time it is commonly held that the legal system of any society should limit itself to taking account of and accepting the convictions of the majority. It should therefore be based solely upon what the majority itself considers moral and actually practises. Furthermore, if it is believed that an objective truth shared by all is de facto unattainable, then respect for the freedom of the citizens-who in a democratic system are considered the true rulers-would require that on the legislative level the autonomy of individual consciences be acknowledged. Consequently, when establishing those norms which are absolutely necessary for social coexistence, the only determining factor should be the will of the majority, whatever this may be. Hence every politician, in his or her activity, should clearly separate the realm of private conscience from that of public conduct.
As a result we have what appear to be two diametrically opposed tendencies. On the one hand, individuals claim for themselves in the moral sphere the most complete freedom of choice and demand that the State should not adopt or impose any ethical position but limit itself to guaranteeing maximum space for the freedom of each individual, with the sole limitation of not infringing on the freedom and rights of any other citizen. On the other hand, it is held that, in the exercise of public and professional duties, respect for other people's freedom of choice requires that each one should set aside his or her own convictions in order to satisfy every demand of the citizens which is recognized and guaranteed by law; in carrying out one's duties the only moral criterion should be what is laid down by the law itself. Individual responsibility is thus turned over to the civil law, with a renouncing of personal conscience, at least in the public sphere.
46 Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2266.
47 Cf. ibid.
48 Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2267.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
The Bible on Abortion
I'm so sick of reading comments on other pages by these self-righteous jerks who think that the Bible is silent on abortion. They obviously haven't done their research, and have, at best, skimmed through the Bible.
The Bible is very clear on abortion: No way, no how. It is an abomination. It is a grave sin. We are all God's children. We have no right to take the life of another, even if that other is still growing in her or his mother's womb.
God knew us before He formed us in our mothers' wombs, "Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations." Jeremiah 1:5. I've heard some people say that this passage is about a prophet, so it is a special case. Well, first off, how do you know that the child you're carrying is not going to be a prophet? In fact, we are all baptized priest, prophet, and king. To say that this verse is about an extraordinary person is doubting the greatness God has destined in each of us.
Everyone has a soul from the time of conception. Psalms 51:5 says, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." You can't be sinful if you don't have a soul. The Letter of James reminds us that, "...the body without the spirit is dead," (James 2:26). Being that an embryo must be living because she/he is growing, means that she/he is living, which means that she/he has a spirit!
"And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb... 'For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy.'" Luke 1:41,44. How could St. John the Baptist recognize The Lord if he was not a conscious being? Yes, all creation bows before the Lord. Yes, St. John the Baptist was a prophet. Does that make this a special circumstance? Other than the recognition of the Lord, no.
Onto a darker topic: Hell. Well, Gehenna. In the Valley of Hinnom, there was a group of people, the Ammonites, who sacrificed to their god, Moloch/Baal. This sacrifice was of both born and unborn children. They were taken from their mothers' wombs, cut open, their blood drained, and then their bodies burnt. Any time these things are brought up in the Bible, it is referring directly to abortion and infanticide.
Gehenna is first mentioned in the book of Joshua, but does not have the meaning it does until it is mentioned again in 1 Kings, chapter 11.
However, Moloch is first referred to in Leviticus, 18:21: "You shall not give any of your seed to be consecrated to the idol Moloch, nor defile the name of your God. I am the Lord." This is directly correlating to the type of sacrifice that Moloch is given by the Ammonites in the Bible. Here, "seed" does not hold the meaning it does elsewhere in the Book of Leviticus, but means "offspring". It defiles the name of the Lord to give such a sacrifice.
"Thus saith the Lord: For three crimes of the children of Ammon, and for four I will not convert him: because he hath ripped up the women with child of Galaad to enlarge his border." Amos 1:13. This vivid description of the sacrifices given to Moloch in Valley of Hinnom parallels today's description of abortion. It is a brutal sacrifice to an idol, and is a grave sin.
I will add more later, but this is just a basic note on how the Bible is AGAINST abortion. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar and blasphemer.
The Bible is very clear on abortion: No way, no how. It is an abomination. It is a grave sin. We are all God's children. We have no right to take the life of another, even if that other is still growing in her or his mother's womb.
God knew us before He formed us in our mothers' wombs, "Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations." Jeremiah 1:5. I've heard some people say that this passage is about a prophet, so it is a special case. Well, first off, how do you know that the child you're carrying is not going to be a prophet? In fact, we are all baptized priest, prophet, and king. To say that this verse is about an extraordinary person is doubting the greatness God has destined in each of us.
Everyone has a soul from the time of conception. Psalms 51:5 says, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." You can't be sinful if you don't have a soul. The Letter of James reminds us that, "...the body without the spirit is dead," (James 2:26). Being that an embryo must be living because she/he is growing, means that she/he is living, which means that she/he has a spirit!
"And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb... 'For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy.'" Luke 1:41,44. How could St. John the Baptist recognize The Lord if he was not a conscious being? Yes, all creation bows before the Lord. Yes, St. John the Baptist was a prophet. Does that make this a special circumstance? Other than the recognition of the Lord, no.
Onto a darker topic: Hell. Well, Gehenna. In the Valley of Hinnom, there was a group of people, the Ammonites, who sacrificed to their god, Moloch/Baal. This sacrifice was of both born and unborn children. They were taken from their mothers' wombs, cut open, their blood drained, and then their bodies burnt. Any time these things are brought up in the Bible, it is referring directly to abortion and infanticide.
Gehenna is first mentioned in the book of Joshua, but does not have the meaning it does until it is mentioned again in 1 Kings, chapter 11.
However, Moloch is first referred to in Leviticus, 18:21: "You shall not give any of your seed to be consecrated to the idol Moloch, nor defile the name of your God. I am the Lord." This is directly correlating to the type of sacrifice that Moloch is given by the Ammonites in the Bible. Here, "seed" does not hold the meaning it does elsewhere in the Book of Leviticus, but means "offspring". It defiles the name of the Lord to give such a sacrifice.
"Thus saith the Lord: For three crimes of the children of Ammon, and for four I will not convert him: because he hath ripped up the women with child of Galaad to enlarge his border." Amos 1:13. This vivid description of the sacrifices given to Moloch in Valley of Hinnom parallels today's description of abortion. It is a brutal sacrifice to an idol, and is a grave sin.
I will add more later, but this is just a basic note on how the Bible is AGAINST abortion. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar and blasphemer.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Independence
We just got done with Independence Day in the US. Patriotism for the country I live in. Well, I also have patriotism for countries which my family has come from (except britain).
I just was on Live Action Films' blog, and found that on their most recent blog post, someone had the gall to say that Youth Defence, a sister pro-life organization in Ireland, has been "discredited". The ONLY bad things I've ever heard said about YD is people calling them "fascist" and other unsuitable terms for being pro-life, Catholic, and Irish.
Youth Defence is not fascist. The people who call them this are pro-abort, anti-Catholic, anti-children, loyalist snobs. Youth Defence is about fighting for the right to live.
I'm a unionist/nationalist. I am Catholic and politically moderate. Being that I'm Catholic, I'm pro-life. If I lived in Ireland, I would be part of the Sinn Féin party.
I believe in life, liberty, and happiness for all! I fight for the right to believe, I fight for the right to live, I fight for the right of a people to govern themselves, to be free from tyranny and oppression. That's what being Irish and American is all about! Being free and standing up and fighting for what you believe in!
I can't wait until Ireland is finally free. Then there will be two Independence Days to celebrate.
I just was on Live Action Films' blog, and found that on their most recent blog post, someone had the gall to say that Youth Defence, a sister pro-life organization in Ireland, has been "discredited". The ONLY bad things I've ever heard said about YD is people calling them "fascist" and other unsuitable terms for being pro-life, Catholic, and Irish.
Youth Defence is not fascist. The people who call them this are pro-abort, anti-Catholic, anti-children, loyalist snobs. Youth Defence is about fighting for the right to live.
I'm a unionist/nationalist. I am Catholic and politically moderate. Being that I'm Catholic, I'm pro-life. If I lived in Ireland, I would be part of the Sinn Féin party.
I believe in life, liberty, and happiness for all! I fight for the right to believe, I fight for the right to live, I fight for the right of a people to govern themselves, to be free from tyranny and oppression. That's what being Irish and American is all about! Being free and standing up and fighting for what you believe in!
I can't wait until Ireland is finally free. Then there will be two Independence Days to celebrate.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Live Action Films: Rosa Acuna Project, video 2
A video released today by Live Action Films continues their Rosa Acuna Project in that project's second video. The Rosa Acuna Project is exposing the lies that Planned Parenthood purpetrates through it's counselers. The advice and information given is medically and scientifically inaccurate and completely misleading. Exposing these lies is something Live Action Films works to get into the public eye to stop this monstrosity of a company which has taken over our world. They give these lies to everyone at the clinics, at PP events, at public events, and in schools - grammar schools, high schools, colleges, and universities.
On September 9, 2009, Live Action Films went undercover into a Milwaukee, WI Planned Parenthood clinic, hoping to catch the liars in the act. Guess what? They did. Getting a pregnancy test, the undercover girls posing as a pregnant woman named Sara and her friend went for a "counseling" session for information on abortion.
After getting the positive results to the test, Sara asked, "So what comes out?" The counseler answered, "Well, you'd miscarry at home, so the entire - whatever fetal matter is there."
First lie exposed: "Fetal matter."
Before 9 weeks gestation, the child is an embryo, not a fetus. Therefore, the term "fetal matter" is incorrect.
Then Sara asked, "So you see the baby?" The counselor answered, "There's not a baby at this point. You wouldn't be able to identify any of the parts of the fetus whatsoever."
Second lie exposed: "There's not a baby at this point."
A zygote, embryo, and fetus are all classified under the term "baby". A little semantics and science lesson for you all:
Baby means "young child".
Child means "any person or thing regarded as the product or result of particular agencies, influences, etc.," as well as, "a human fetus," and, "an unborn or recently born person."
A zygote, which becomes an embryo, which later becomes a fetus, is the product of sexual intercourse.
A person is a human being.
Louis Pasteur's Law of Biogenesis says that a species can only procreate after it's own kind.
In other words, a zygote, embryo, or fetus of humans is also human.
Therefore, a zygote, embryo, and fetus can all be categorized as, "An unborn or recently born person," which defines them as a child. Since they are at a young stage of childhood, they can be categorized as a baby.
Sara asked, "What's a fetus?" The counseler answered, "The fetus is the developing embryo inside of you. But at this point, there's nothing developed at all. There's no legs, no arms, no head, no brain, no heart. At this point it's just the embryo inside of you."
Third lie exposed: "There's no legs, no arms, no head, no brain, no heart."
The video shows the image of a seven week old embryo, which has legs, arms, and a head, and any medical text book can tell you that there is a brain and a heart.
Then the video shows a quote from Abby Johnson, a former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Texas. She said, "They are really trying to increase their abortion numbers, because that is the most lucrative part of their business." Earlier in the video, they reported that the Wisconsin state government provides $5 million to Planned Parenthood every year.
The counseler then explained that, "You know, there's midnight feedings, diapers, money. I mean, the state can help you with insurance, but after that babies do cost a lot and right now the economy's pretty bad, so -" Sara's friend said, "It's expensive to have a baby?" The counseler answered, "Mmhm." Sara said, "Yeah, I don't have a job or anything," to which the counselor answered, "Yeah, if you don't feel financially stable or you don't feel emotionally ready to have a baby, then I would go with abortion. But if you feel you can wing it, and do it, and you want to continue with the pregnancy, that's something you'd really have to think about, you know. And as soon as you have your decision, that's when you call the clinic and let them know."
Fourth lie exposed: "The state can help you with insurance, but after that babies do cost a lot."
Telling women this is a scare tactic. There are crisis pregnancy centers that help women with the financial burden of having children. They provide them with food, shelter, clothing, baby items, education, job training, medical, etc. Not referring to these services for these sort of things is wrong for PP to do.
Fifth lie exposed: "That's when you call the clinic and let them know."
This is hinting that the girl should have an abortion. You don't call the clinic to tell them you're going to have the child. Calling the clinic means setting up an appointment to get an abortion.
The counseler continued, "There's adoption available, there's abortion, or continuing the pregnancy - continuing the responsibility. And what I say to people that are against abortion I say you know, are you willing to take in all these aborted children and raise them yourself? You know, that's a burden that somebody's financially responsible for and you're raising another person for 18 years."
Sixth lie exposed: There are more couples looking to adopt babies than are available for adoption each year. Live Action Films points out that the Center for Disease Control states that about 555,000 couples try to adopt each year, and the National Council for Adoption states that only about 22,000 babies are adopted.
The counseler continued, "The earlier you make the decision, the better, you know. It won't stress you out as much, and it won't cause any, you know - and it actually does affect the price of the procedure, too. It's cheaper the earlier along you are. But I mean, the matter - I know that the commercials, and the pictures, and everything that are out there are just, like, horrible, and they make it out to be this terrible thing, like we're throwing babies out the back door into the dumpster. It's nothing like that."
Live Action Films then placed on the screen, "Instead, the bloody parts are dumped in a bin and trucked away." So that's lie number seven exposed.
The counseler continued, "It's uh - it's a real quick procedure and women are early enough along that there is no real - real, um - fetal matter. It's not like arms and legs and, you know - it's not. It's just embryos."
This is a repeat of lie number three.
So, seven lies, seven "you know"s (she really needs to take a speech class), and a LOT of misinformation, given out to millions of people. This is an international organization which has infiltrated governments, churches, hospitals, the media, and schools. It's time we put a stop to them. I'm glad Live Action Films is around to expose the lies.
On September 9, 2009, Live Action Films went undercover into a Milwaukee, WI Planned Parenthood clinic, hoping to catch the liars in the act. Guess what? They did. Getting a pregnancy test, the undercover girls posing as a pregnant woman named Sara and her friend went for a "counseling" session for information on abortion.
After getting the positive results to the test, Sara asked, "So what comes out?" The counseler answered, "Well, you'd miscarry at home, so the entire - whatever fetal matter is there."
First lie exposed: "Fetal matter."
Before 9 weeks gestation, the child is an embryo, not a fetus. Therefore, the term "fetal matter" is incorrect.
Then Sara asked, "So you see the baby?" The counselor answered, "There's not a baby at this point. You wouldn't be able to identify any of the parts of the fetus whatsoever."
Second lie exposed: "There's not a baby at this point."
A zygote, embryo, and fetus are all classified under the term "baby". A little semantics and science lesson for you all:
Baby means "young child".
Child means "any person or thing regarded as the product or result of particular agencies, influences, etc.," as well as, "a human fetus," and, "an unborn or recently born person."
A zygote, which becomes an embryo, which later becomes a fetus, is the product of sexual intercourse.
A person is a human being.
Louis Pasteur's Law of Biogenesis says that a species can only procreate after it's own kind.
In other words, a zygote, embryo, or fetus of humans is also human.
Therefore, a zygote, embryo, and fetus can all be categorized as, "An unborn or recently born person," which defines them as a child. Since they are at a young stage of childhood, they can be categorized as a baby.
Sara asked, "What's a fetus?" The counseler answered, "The fetus is the developing embryo inside of you. But at this point, there's nothing developed at all. There's no legs, no arms, no head, no brain, no heart. At this point it's just the embryo inside of you."
Third lie exposed: "There's no legs, no arms, no head, no brain, no heart."
The video shows the image of a seven week old embryo, which has legs, arms, and a head, and any medical text book can tell you that there is a brain and a heart.
Then the video shows a quote from Abby Johnson, a former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Texas. She said, "They are really trying to increase their abortion numbers, because that is the most lucrative part of their business." Earlier in the video, they reported that the Wisconsin state government provides $5 million to Planned Parenthood every year.
The counseler then explained that, "You know, there's midnight feedings, diapers, money. I mean, the state can help you with insurance, but after that babies do cost a lot and right now the economy's pretty bad, so -" Sara's friend said, "It's expensive to have a baby?" The counseler answered, "Mmhm." Sara said, "Yeah, I don't have a job or anything," to which the counselor answered, "Yeah, if you don't feel financially stable or you don't feel emotionally ready to have a baby, then I would go with abortion. But if you feel you can wing it, and do it, and you want to continue with the pregnancy, that's something you'd really have to think about, you know. And as soon as you have your decision, that's when you call the clinic and let them know."
Fourth lie exposed: "The state can help you with insurance, but after that babies do cost a lot."
Telling women this is a scare tactic. There are crisis pregnancy centers that help women with the financial burden of having children. They provide them with food, shelter, clothing, baby items, education, job training, medical, etc. Not referring to these services for these sort of things is wrong for PP to do.
Fifth lie exposed: "That's when you call the clinic and let them know."
This is hinting that the girl should have an abortion. You don't call the clinic to tell them you're going to have the child. Calling the clinic means setting up an appointment to get an abortion.
The counseler continued, "There's adoption available, there's abortion, or continuing the pregnancy - continuing the responsibility. And what I say to people that are against abortion I say you know, are you willing to take in all these aborted children and raise them yourself? You know, that's a burden that somebody's financially responsible for and you're raising another person for 18 years."
Sixth lie exposed: There are more couples looking to adopt babies than are available for adoption each year. Live Action Films points out that the Center for Disease Control states that about 555,000 couples try to adopt each year, and the National Council for Adoption states that only about 22,000 babies are adopted.
The counseler continued, "The earlier you make the decision, the better, you know. It won't stress you out as much, and it won't cause any, you know - and it actually does affect the price of the procedure, too. It's cheaper the earlier along you are. But I mean, the matter - I know that the commercials, and the pictures, and everything that are out there are just, like, horrible, and they make it out to be this terrible thing, like we're throwing babies out the back door into the dumpster. It's nothing like that."
Live Action Films then placed on the screen, "Instead, the bloody parts are dumped in a bin and trucked away." So that's lie number seven exposed.
The counseler continued, "It's uh - it's a real quick procedure and women are early enough along that there is no real - real, um - fetal matter. It's not like arms and legs and, you know - it's not. It's just embryos."
This is a repeat of lie number three.
So, seven lies, seven "you know"s (she really needs to take a speech class), and a LOT of misinformation, given out to millions of people. This is an international organization which has infiltrated governments, churches, hospitals, the media, and schools. It's time we put a stop to them. I'm glad Live Action Films is around to expose the lies.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Maternal Mortality and Kenya
As most people in the pro-life world know, the Center for Reproductive Rights released a report yesterday stating that the maternal mortality rate in Kenya is on the rise because of the fact that abortion is illegal. They have stated that 44% of deaths are from abortion, and have specified that those deaths were from illegal abortion, not the procedure which is legal in cases for the life of the mother. I would argue that those deaths are from both. The argument from the Center for Reproductive Rights just sounds silly to me, so I wrote them this letter:
I haven't sent the letter yet, but I'm thinking about it. I don't need them knowing my e-mail address. I already get unsolicited e-mails from Barbara Boxer, I don't need any pro-abort adding me to their mailing list.
Upon further investigation, I found a report from the East African Medical Journal from September 2001 (Rogo KO, Aloo-Obunga C, Ombaka C, Oguttu M, Orero S, Oyoo C, Odera J. "Maternal mortality in Kenya: the state of health facilities in a rural district". East Afr Med J. 2001 Sep;78(9):468-72.) that says basically the same thing: Kenya's maternal mortality rate and abortion deaths are not from illegal abortion so much as they are from a lack of medical care, nutrition, and clean water. The summary of the report, which can be found here, says:
Being that this backs up my claim that the Center for Reproductive Rights is using false scare tactics, do you think we pro-lifers can sue them for leading the people astray under false pretenses?
To Whom it May Concern,
Maternal mortality in Kenya is not from illegal abortion. The deaths are from a lack of medical technology, nutrition, and cleaner water. Kenya just does not have the resources we have here in the U.S.
Knowing that women die from abortion even in developed nations due to uterine perforations, cervical lacerations, endometriosis, infection, excessive bleeding, embolism, ripping of the uterus, anesthesia complications, convulsions, hemorrhage, cervical injury, toxic shock, etc., and the fact that Kenya doesn't have the resources to deal with all of these complications - which are much more common than you would think - shows that Kenya, or any other developing nation for that matter, does not need abortion, they need better medical resources before any other procedure is made legal there. Legal does not mean safe. If abortion were more prevalent in Kenya, more women would die, and that is a fact. The reasons pregnant women and abortive women die in Kenya are the same reasons everyone else dies in that country - a lack of decent medical care, nutrition, and clean water.
An article from the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, "Reducing Maternal Mortality in Developing Countries", says just that: http://wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=116811&fuseaction=topics.event_summary&event_id=394874
Also, contrary to popular belief, legalizing abortion does not lead to less maternal deaths. In fact, it is just the opposite. Those countries in which abortion is illegal have a lower maternal mortality rate than do those where it is legal. Cases in point: Abortion is illegal in Ireland, but it has the lowest maternal mortality rate in the world. In Africa, the country with the lowest maternal mortality rate is Mauritius, a country without abortion, while the country with the highest rate is in Ethiopia, a country with some of least restrictive laws on abortion. Similarly, in South East Asia, the country with the lowest maternal mortality rate is Sri Lanka, the country with the world's most restrictive abortion laws, and the highest maternal mortality rate is Nepal, with the least restrictive laws in the area. In the case of Sri Lanka, a report from The Hindustan Times on January 15, 2009 states, "UNICEF in its latest 'State of the World's Children' report said Sri Lanka has managed 'to halve its maternal mortality rate every six to 11 years by adopting sound strategies, allocating sufficient resources, providing free healthcare and making education for all a priority'." They don't need to legalize abortion to do that. I wouldn't say that Nepal's maternal mortality rate dropped because abortion became legal. I would say that it dropped because people are starting to see the devastation in that country, so they are starting to go over there to provide goods and services in that country, helping improve the health of the Nepali people, including maternal health. I would not attribute a drop in maternal mortality to abortion.
In South America, the highest maternal mortality rate is in Guyana, a country without restrictions on abortion. The country with the lowest maternal mortality rate in South America is Chile, a country in which abortion is illegal. Furthermore, in 1960, Chile's maternal mortality rate was 275 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.The country tightened it's abortion laws in the late 1980s, and, as of WHO's 2005 report, have 16 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.
Maternal mortality dropped significantly in the U.S. following the mainstreaming of antivirals such as Penicillin. It was not due to legal abortion at all. In fact, maternal mortality has actually risen in the U.S. in the past couple of decades.
Truthfully, maternal mortality is measured by a ratio showing how many pregnant women die per 100,000 live births. If a woman doesn't give birth, she is not counted among those live births. However, when a woman dies because of an abortion, whether legal or illegal, since she was known to be pregnant while having the procedure, she is counted among the deaths. So saying that a number per 100,000 live births drops when a woman doesn't give birth is just not true, and cannot be true. However, that number can rise.
Therefore, saying that legal abortion will lower maternal mortality is a complete, and utter fabrication.
If you want to promote health and well being in Kenya, build hospitals and wells, educate doctors in the area, educate the people of Kenya so that they know that going to someone who is not a doctor for a medical procedure, especially for one like abortion, will hurt them severely, and even kill them. Educate them on Natural Family Planning so that they don't have to get an abortion.
Please stop pushing abortion on Kenya and every other country in the world, and please stop using these scare tactics against everyone in the world. We're not stupid. Some may be more gullible than others, but it's still an insult to the intelligence of everyone, including your company, to promote such an idea.
Sincerely,
Amy Roy
I haven't sent the letter yet, but I'm thinking about it. I don't need them knowing my e-mail address. I already get unsolicited e-mails from Barbara Boxer, I don't need any pro-abort adding me to their mailing list.
Upon further investigation, I found a report from the East African Medical Journal from September 2001 (Rogo KO, Aloo-Obunga C, Ombaka C, Oguttu M, Orero S, Oyoo C, Odera J. "Maternal mortality in Kenya: the state of health facilities in a rural district". East Afr Med J. 2001 Sep;78(9):468-72.) that says basically the same thing: Kenya's maternal mortality rate and abortion deaths are not from illegal abortion so much as they are from a lack of medical care, nutrition, and clean water. The summary of the report, which can be found here, says:
BACKGROUND: This study was formulated from the premise that the known causes of maternal mortality, namely haemorrhage, sepsis, obstructed labour and abortion belie the more fundamental development problems that influence it, such as the state of local medical services, quality of care and the facilities' ability to respond to reproductive health emergencies. OBJECTIVE: To document some of the underlying problems and how they were found to influence maternal mortality in Kenya, with specific reference to a rural district. DESIGN: The researchers used the Prevention of Maternal Mortality Network (PMMN) methodology/study design to assess the current state of health facilities, their level of function, and factors influencing their utilisation. Both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection tools were used. SETTING: Siaya District in the western region of Kenya. Data were collected from thirty facilities, which provide obstetric care in the district. PARTICIPANTS: Data were collected by nurse/midwives, nursing school tutors and social scientists with experience in qualitative research methods. Respondents included health service providers and managers at the 30 health facilities. Qualitative data were obtained through focus group discussions with health facility staff as well as community members. RESULTS: All the thirty facilities studied, were grossly wanting in terms of staffing, equipment, essential drugs and supplies. Both quality of care and record keeping were well below acceptable standards. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings are a sad but a fair reflection of our situation not only in Kenya but also in sub-Saharan Africa ten years after the declaration of the Safe Motherhood Initiative (SMI). The results indicate a predictable, widening gap in basic service provision that must be urgently bridged as a prerequisite to any serious and meaningful approaches to reducing maternal mortality in Africa.
Being that this backs up my claim that the Center for Reproductive Rights is using false scare tactics, do you think we pro-lifers can sue them for leading the people astray under false pretenses?
Thursday, March 4, 2010
On Stigmatizing By Twittering
Recently I've been seeing on Twitter these people saying things like:
"There's no cure 4 sexually transmitted viral diseases HIV & herpes. How's adultry working 4 U? #tcot #abstinence"
"one-fourth of sexually active teens have been infected with an #STI. How's sexual perversion working 4 U? #tcot #abstinence"
"Two-thirds of all #STDs occur in people who are 25 years of age or younger. How's fornication working 4 U? #tcot #abstinence"
It's all well and good to promote abstinence. However, there is one HUGE problem with these tweets: Not all of us who have an STD is a pervert, adulterer or adultress, or fornicator. These tweets promote that idea, and lead to stigma against those of us who, through no fault of our own, have gotten an STD.
When I was three, I used a restroom at Disneyland, and, being a kid, put my hands on my face. I did not understand that germs spread in public places, and especially in bathrooms. I ended up with Herpes Simplex 1, with lesions on my face, arms, and legs.
About a year ago, I must have put my fingers in my mouth and touched a cold sore before using the restroom. As a result, I ended up with Herpes Simplex 2.
I'm not a big fan of those who tell me that I must have done something wrong, and God is punishing me. I don't believe that. To hear you say that is like telling me that God doesn't love me. He does, I know He does. It just hurts to hear people telling me He doesn't. When I see people using these tweets, spreading these lies about me, and others like me, I get angry, I get upset, I get depressed, and I cry. I am not an adultress, a fornicator, or a pervert. I am a child of God, and I deserve to be treated as such.
So, for those of you who are tweeting these, PLEASE STOP. You're the same ones who promote not letting stigma get in the way of human life in cases of abortion and euthanasia. This is exactly the same thing. It is respect for every child of God, no matter what illness, disease, or imperfection we might have. There has been no punishment from God, but we are judged by others because you think that there is.
Please find another way to promote abstinence other than calling those of us with STDs names, and placing labels on us. It's not right, and it's not Christian. Cut. It. Out.
"There's no cure 4 sexually transmitted viral diseases HIV & herpes. How's adultry working 4 U? #tcot #abstinence"
"one-fourth of sexually active teens have been infected with an #STI. How's sexual perversion working 4 U? #tcot #abstinence"
"Two-thirds of all #STDs occur in people who are 25 years of age or younger. How's fornication working 4 U? #tcot #abstinence"
It's all well and good to promote abstinence. However, there is one HUGE problem with these tweets: Not all of us who have an STD is a pervert, adulterer or adultress, or fornicator. These tweets promote that idea, and lead to stigma against those of us who, through no fault of our own, have gotten an STD.
When I was three, I used a restroom at Disneyland, and, being a kid, put my hands on my face. I did not understand that germs spread in public places, and especially in bathrooms. I ended up with Herpes Simplex 1, with lesions on my face, arms, and legs.
About a year ago, I must have put my fingers in my mouth and touched a cold sore before using the restroom. As a result, I ended up with Herpes Simplex 2.
I'm not a big fan of those who tell me that I must have done something wrong, and God is punishing me. I don't believe that. To hear you say that is like telling me that God doesn't love me. He does, I know He does. It just hurts to hear people telling me He doesn't. When I see people using these tweets, spreading these lies about me, and others like me, I get angry, I get upset, I get depressed, and I cry. I am not an adultress, a fornicator, or a pervert. I am a child of God, and I deserve to be treated as such.
So, for those of you who are tweeting these, PLEASE STOP. You're the same ones who promote not letting stigma get in the way of human life in cases of abortion and euthanasia. This is exactly the same thing. It is respect for every child of God, no matter what illness, disease, or imperfection we might have. There has been no punishment from God, but we are judged by others because you think that there is.
Please find another way to promote abstinence other than calling those of us with STDs names, and placing labels on us. It's not right, and it's not Christian. Cut. It. Out.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Why I'm Pro-Life
I am just getting into this pro-life activism. I am really rather new to it, so I thought that I would tell my story of why I did not support it before, and why I have decided to get involved.
I have always known that abortion was killing a baby. I just always believed that it should be an option for those who had no other way. You see, I had a friend who was constantly abused by her father. However, he always told the courts and the police that it was my friend and her mom that were the ones who were crazy and abusive, and they believed him, even though the evidence showed otherwise. He told by my friend that if she was raped it would be her fault, and if she got pregnant he would kill her. For my friend’s sake, and for the sake of all girls who were told the same thing, I decided that abortion should be okay for them.
I took a class in college that was entitled, “Women in American History”. In this class, we were taught that Margaret Sanger was someone to look up to, that she helped women. It is said that she helped the doctor she worked for with a patient, Sadie Sachs, who committed an abortion on herself because she was so weak that her body could not handle pregnancies anymore. The doctor supposedly told her that he would help her that once, but abortion was illegal and against God, and he could not help her the next time. He told her flat out to stop sleeping with her husband. Well, Sadie became pregnant again, and, again, self-aborted. She bled out, and the doctor would do nothing to help. What we were not told in that class was that this was in the south, Sanger was a white supremacist, and Sadie was a black woman. It never even occurred to me that Sanger could have helped Sadie, herself. I think the devil made me forget that nurses know just as much as, and sometimes more than, doctors, and are quite capable of helping patients themselves. I should know, as both of my grandmothers were nurses, and my aunt is a rather famous professor at the Boston College of Nursing.
I was brought up as a feminist. I am Irish, and in Ireland, the women are in charge of the clans. The women are the town elders, not the men. Because the women were the ones who stayed home and took care of the kids and the house while the men went out to work all day, the women were the ones to make the rules. So when I see issues where women are being abused or taken advantage of, I am quick to take offense.
Because of all of the above, I was indoctrinated into the belief that it was best for abortion to stay legal in order for women to get proper care that they needed, and for women to not endure abuse. Little did I know that the abuse was abortion itself. I always knew that abortion was wrong, that it was murder of a child, and that the practice was abused by those who use it as a form of contraception. However, I wanted women to be safe, to not have to go through a pregnancy that would kill them, and to not be abused when people found out that they were pregnant. I believed that, for those reasons, it should be legal. I did believe that it should have been outlawed in all other cases, but I could not see that happening, as all women would have to do is tell doctors that they couldn’t handle a pregnancy at that time, or that they were being abused by someone, in order to get an abortion.
Thanks to my friends of the band The Thirsting, however, I was recently made aware of how wrong I was. They wrote a song called Christ Have Mercy, which told a completely different story of the history of abortion than what I was taught. I listened to it, and I thought, “That can’t be right. I was taught by a college professor with a doctorate in history, and this is not what she taught us.” So I looked it up. My friends were right. Professor Dudik, and the textbook, were wrong.
One thing you have to know is that I had an aunt named Cecilia who died when I was 15. She died on New Years Day 2000 because of cirrhosis of the liver due to alcoholism. I have always missed her dearly. She would have been 51 yesterday.
When I was doing research, I came across an illness called Post Abortion Syndrome, also known as Post Abortion Stress Syndrome. It is a mental illness which is similar to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder for those whose disorder has to do with abortion. They have nightmares, wake up in a sweat hearing their baby cry, are very temperamental, lash out at people easily, and cannot be around children, especially children their aborted children’s age. It hurts them very deeply, and takes over their lives.
I had been told that Aunt Cecilia had an abortion, and that her husband forced her into it. However, I never thought that was anything that would have affected her. People always say that it’s a painless procedure with no lasting side effects. Well, as I was researching PASS, I heard someone tell me that’s why she died. That’s why she was an alcoholic. This happened a couple weeks after the tenth anniversary of her death. It explains so much. There was a sadness in her, even though she was so loving, so kind. I always thought it was because of things she was going through because she was abused by her ex-husband, and that the memories of that never really went away. However, the hurtful memories were of an abortion. Moreover, I am about the same age as the child she would have had. So of course I saw the sadness. I would have reminded her of her child. I know she loved me, but now I see it more clearly.
So now I fight this fight in Aunt Cecilia’s honor. Since she is not here to do it herself, and no one else in the family seems to be fighting, I have to be the one who does. Someone has to stand up for her and all women like her, and say that this is not right. Women are hurt by abortion. Women regret abortion. Women deserve better than abortion.
Thank you, Daniel and Matt, for writing that song. It opened my eyes up to a lot.
Thank you, God, for having the guys write that song, and for opening my eyes to these atrocities.
I have always known that abortion was killing a baby. I just always believed that it should be an option for those who had no other way. You see, I had a friend who was constantly abused by her father. However, he always told the courts and the police that it was my friend and her mom that were the ones who were crazy and abusive, and they believed him, even though the evidence showed otherwise. He told by my friend that if she was raped it would be her fault, and if she got pregnant he would kill her. For my friend’s sake, and for the sake of all girls who were told the same thing, I decided that abortion should be okay for them.
I took a class in college that was entitled, “Women in American History”. In this class, we were taught that Margaret Sanger was someone to look up to, that she helped women. It is said that she helped the doctor she worked for with a patient, Sadie Sachs, who committed an abortion on herself because she was so weak that her body could not handle pregnancies anymore. The doctor supposedly told her that he would help her that once, but abortion was illegal and against God, and he could not help her the next time. He told her flat out to stop sleeping with her husband. Well, Sadie became pregnant again, and, again, self-aborted. She bled out, and the doctor would do nothing to help. What we were not told in that class was that this was in the south, Sanger was a white supremacist, and Sadie was a black woman. It never even occurred to me that Sanger could have helped Sadie, herself. I think the devil made me forget that nurses know just as much as, and sometimes more than, doctors, and are quite capable of helping patients themselves. I should know, as both of my grandmothers were nurses, and my aunt is a rather famous professor at the Boston College of Nursing.
I was brought up as a feminist. I am Irish, and in Ireland, the women are in charge of the clans. The women are the town elders, not the men. Because the women were the ones who stayed home and took care of the kids and the house while the men went out to work all day, the women were the ones to make the rules. So when I see issues where women are being abused or taken advantage of, I am quick to take offense.
Because of all of the above, I was indoctrinated into the belief that it was best for abortion to stay legal in order for women to get proper care that they needed, and for women to not endure abuse. Little did I know that the abuse was abortion itself. I always knew that abortion was wrong, that it was murder of a child, and that the practice was abused by those who use it as a form of contraception. However, I wanted women to be safe, to not have to go through a pregnancy that would kill them, and to not be abused when people found out that they were pregnant. I believed that, for those reasons, it should be legal. I did believe that it should have been outlawed in all other cases, but I could not see that happening, as all women would have to do is tell doctors that they couldn’t handle a pregnancy at that time, or that they were being abused by someone, in order to get an abortion.
Thanks to my friends of the band The Thirsting, however, I was recently made aware of how wrong I was. They wrote a song called Christ Have Mercy, which told a completely different story of the history of abortion than what I was taught. I listened to it, and I thought, “That can’t be right. I was taught by a college professor with a doctorate in history, and this is not what she taught us.” So I looked it up. My friends were right. Professor Dudik, and the textbook, were wrong.
One thing you have to know is that I had an aunt named Cecilia who died when I was 15. She died on New Years Day 2000 because of cirrhosis of the liver due to alcoholism. I have always missed her dearly. She would have been 51 yesterday.
When I was doing research, I came across an illness called Post Abortion Syndrome, also known as Post Abortion Stress Syndrome. It is a mental illness which is similar to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder for those whose disorder has to do with abortion. They have nightmares, wake up in a sweat hearing their baby cry, are very temperamental, lash out at people easily, and cannot be around children, especially children their aborted children’s age. It hurts them very deeply, and takes over their lives.
I had been told that Aunt Cecilia had an abortion, and that her husband forced her into it. However, I never thought that was anything that would have affected her. People always say that it’s a painless procedure with no lasting side effects. Well, as I was researching PASS, I heard someone tell me that’s why she died. That’s why she was an alcoholic. This happened a couple weeks after the tenth anniversary of her death. It explains so much. There was a sadness in her, even though she was so loving, so kind. I always thought it was because of things she was going through because she was abused by her ex-husband, and that the memories of that never really went away. However, the hurtful memories were of an abortion. Moreover, I am about the same age as the child she would have had. So of course I saw the sadness. I would have reminded her of her child. I know she loved me, but now I see it more clearly.
So now I fight this fight in Aunt Cecilia’s honor. Since she is not here to do it herself, and no one else in the family seems to be fighting, I have to be the one who does. Someone has to stand up for her and all women like her, and say that this is not right. Women are hurt by abortion. Women regret abortion. Women deserve better than abortion.
Thank you, Daniel and Matt, for writing that song. It opened my eyes up to a lot.
Thank you, God, for having the guys write that song, and for opening my eyes to these atrocities.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Congress Members Do Not Know the Constitution: Mandated Health Care is Not Their Business
I'm really upset about this video and article about Congress and mandated health care: A Message from Congress: No One Questions Our Authority
This is just ridiculous. I am not even a lawyer and I know that the Constitution does not provide for Congress to demand that people purchase health care. My rebuttal to their answers:
Medicaid is not mandated, so using that as an argument does not cut it.
The Commerce Clause does not demand any purchase of anything, including health care.
The fact that the Constitution says to provide for the health and welfare of the American people does not demand that people purchase health care, only that Congress is to provide for the health and welfare of the American people. Not only that, but mandated health care would mean that there would be more bureaucracy in health care, and people would not get the care they needed right away, so either way it does not provide for the health and welfare of the American people, it would only make it harder to get the care we need.
The Constitution says that what is not stated in the Constitution shall be up to the individual states. Therefore, mandated health care is not their business.
Also, are not members of Congress supposed to know the Constitution before they go into office? Do they not swear to uphold the Constitution? It surprises me that so many people in Congress say that they do not know the Constitution. I do not even study law, and I know what the Constitution does and does not provide for! The fact that they do not know is just outrageous!
Ugh. I will never understand why bureaucrats are so stupid.
This is just ridiculous. I am not even a lawyer and I know that the Constitution does not provide for Congress to demand that people purchase health care. My rebuttal to their answers:
Medicaid is not mandated, so using that as an argument does not cut it.
The Commerce Clause does not demand any purchase of anything, including health care.
The fact that the Constitution says to provide for the health and welfare of the American people does not demand that people purchase health care, only that Congress is to provide for the health and welfare of the American people. Not only that, but mandated health care would mean that there would be more bureaucracy in health care, and people would not get the care they needed right away, so either way it does not provide for the health and welfare of the American people, it would only make it harder to get the care we need.
The Constitution says that what is not stated in the Constitution shall be up to the individual states. Therefore, mandated health care is not their business.
Also, are not members of Congress supposed to know the Constitution before they go into office? Do they not swear to uphold the Constitution? It surprises me that so many people in Congress say that they do not know the Constitution. I do not even study law, and I know what the Constitution does and does not provide for! The fact that they do not know is just outrageous!
Ugh. I will never understand why bureaucrats are so stupid.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
The Secular Reasons to be Pro-Life, a.k.a. Anti-Abortion, a.k.a. Anti-Choice
I write this today because of something I was told yesterday. On a message board, I asserted that I am a true feminist since I am pro-life. I was then told that I am a second-class citizen who does not have any rights due to the fact that I cannot choose my own reproductive rights. I was told I am an idiot who is stuck in a world where women are nothing but breeding stock, and that when I decide that I do have reproductive rights I can come out from under the rock I am apparently living under.
Excuse me?!!!
There are many reasons to despise abortion. Abortion is not health care. It is anti-health care. Abortion is not feminist. It is anti-feminist. Many people would call me a traitor to my gender for advocating a pro-life position. Many people would say that my ideals do not allow for equality between genders. They would say that I am against women’s rights. However, I firmly believe that abortion has nothing to do with equality. I believe that women’s rights are infringed upon by this nefarious practice. I believe that abortion is nothing more than a tool of evil, cloaked in the lie told by Larry Lader that “10,000 women a year die” in childbirth.
The first thing about abortion is that what we pro-lifers refer to as abortion is induced abortion. The American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and other people/societies that support abortion often do studies that place induced abortion with what is referred to asspontaneous abortion, also known as a miscarriage. However, the two are completely different, but no abortion advocate will ever admit to that. It is important that you know the difference between these two terms. Those of us who are against abortion know the difference. The reason so many studies show conflicting reports is that abortion advocates refuse to acknowledge that induced abortion is different from a miscarriage. For the purpose of this article, hereafter, induced abortion will be referred to as abortion, and, if I refer to spontaneous abortion, I will refer to it as miscarriage.
Abortion is pure and simple murder. Human life begins at conception, when the male's sperm meets the female's egg, and it forms a human – did you get that – human zygote with unique DNA that never existed before and will never be repeated. You can also note that it is a living human being because of the fact that the baby moves and reacts to stimuli. When an abortion occurs, the baby fights for its life. Don't believe me? Watch a video of an abortion sometime. Just because memories do not stick at that point does not mean that the baby is not conscious. It just means that the part of the brain that stores memory is not fully formed. Or do you not think that those with anterograde amnesia are human either? For the argument of whether the baby interferes with the life of the mother, read on. Abortion does much worse than the baby ever will.
One thing that abortion centers refuse to tell women is that when they become pregnant, they develop a bond with the child. After all, disclosing that fact would be bad for business. Because of that bond, abortion causes many psychological problems. The first and most severe is called Post Abortion Stress Syndrome. It is the same thing as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for the victims of abortion. The women who have it wake up with nightmares. They hear their would-be children crying. They develop severe depression. They often want to kill themselves for it. Other psychological problems that abortion victims develop include, but are not limited to sleep disorders, anxiety/nervous disorders, grief, eating disorders, substance abuse, divorce, chronic relationship problems, self punishment, child abuse, and suicide. Just looking through that list of psychological trauma, you should ask yourself, “Do I really want to be supporting such a cause?”
Another thing that abortion centers keep from their patients is that there is a long list of physical health problems caused by and related to abortion. There are over one hundred illnesses/defects that abortion causes. You know that Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure charity that claims to fight breast cancer? They give the money they raise to Planned Parenthood – who is supposed to use that money for breast cancer research and screenings – who in turn dumps that money into the general fund, allowing that money to be used for abortions. What is so bad about that is that breast cancer is caused by abortion! The very thing that they claim to be fighting, they are actually spreading! Granted, not every case of breast cancer is caused by abortion, but abortion is a major cause of it. Other health risks include, but are not limited to, cervical caner, ovarian cancer, liver cancer, uterine perforations, cervical lacerations, endometriosis, infection, excessive bleeding, embolism, ripping of the uterus, anesthesia complications, convulsions, hemorrhage, cervical injury, toxic shock, fever, chronic abdominal pains, second degree burns, Rh sensitization, vomiting, and gastro-intestinal disturbances.
What about when a woman wants to have children after she’s had an abortion? There are problems with this as well. Abortion causes infertility in women. If a woman who has had an abortion does get pregnant, she is even more likely to have such complications as miscarriages, ectopic/tubal pregnancies, placenta previa, and other major defects, than women who have not had an abortion. If the child is born, they are more likely to be born prematurely or still-born, or to end up with major health complications and handicaps. This is due to the cervical and uterine damage that abortion causes.
There are more reasons, other than health risks, to be against abortion. Most abortions are forced. Yes, you read that right. Most women that walk into an abortion clinic do not want an abortion. They are forced to be there by peer pressure, spousal pressure, and/or family pressure. Their families will kick them out. Their partners do not want the child. Their friends disapproved. Their families disapproved. Teachers disapproved. Counselors disapproved. They had no support system. No one told them that there was another choice. The clinic staff convinced them to do so when just going in there for a check up. Their bosses would have fired them. Their spouse/boyfriend beat them into it. Their mother held a gun to their head. The shelter would not let them in until they had an abortion. These are not things that people in a free society should be dealing with. No one should be forced into making a choice such as abortion if they do not want to. No child should be so unwanted by the people around them. No one should be told they have “the choice” to make such a decision in order to escape such treatment. That is not much of a choice at all. It is blatant coercion. And it happens every day in this country under the banner of “choice”.
Another thing that many people do not tell you, which also falls under the category “anti-choice”, is that many abortions are done on minors. Many of those minors are brought in by their rapists to have the crime covered up. Recently, a reporter named Lila Rose went into a branch of Planned Parenthood and told the staff there that she was fourteen, while her boyfriend was 20, and she was looking to get an abortion. They told her that she needed say that she was sixteen, or else they would have to report her. These were licensed doctors and nurses telling her this. Imagine if you had a fourteen year-old daughter who was having sex with a 20 year-old man without you knowing, and she got pregnant and went to have an abortion, also without you knowing. That would mean that pedophile stole your daughter’s innocence, and covered up the crime, all with the help of licensed physicians. It happens often in abortion clinics, and no one is willing to admit it. Pro-life advocates have been working to get these facts out in the open, but again, under the banner of “choice”, these facts have been covered up.
Planned Parenthood was a company started by Margaret Sanger, a white supremacist and eugenicist, to promote birth control. The only reason she advocated birth control, however, was the fact that she was a white supremacist. She started Planned Parenthood in order to do away with those she called “infidels”, “undesirables”, and “inferior”. Those she was referring to were namely the black population, but also included anyone who was any sort of minority, who was poor, and/or who was not a Protestant. She had the same ideas as Hitler, wanting to promote a “superior” race. Except she was a woman, and so her ideas that would implement her plan were so subtle that they’ve become part of the mainstream. She is famous for saying, "We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," and, "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."
Sanger tutored a man named Larry Lader in her ways and thoughts. He promoted the cause of abortion because he believed that there were too many people on this planet. When he began his course of trying to get feminists to accept the idea of abortion, he told the feminists that in order to live and be accepted in the world of men, they had to control their reproductive systems. He asked them how they could expect to be seen as equal and expect their bosses to let them off for checkups, child birth, maternity leave, ill children, et cetera. Betty Friedan and her group of feminists did not buy it. So, he came up with the lie that 10,000 women were dying every year from childbirth. That got them mad enough to make a movement out of it. Soon, the court case of Roe v. Wade was underway, and in it were women who said that abortion was a fundamental right of women, and how could they be expected to finish school or have a job if they got pregnant.
However, pregnancy has nothing to do with this! You can still go to school if you are pregnant. You can still have a job. If you are not given a job or you are fired just because you are pregnant, you are entitled to sue for discrimination. It does not infringe upon your rights. It does not mean you are not allowed to vote. It does not mean that anyone is allowed to take your freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to property, or any other freedom or right. So the entire argument that abortion is a “fundamental right upon which all others are based” is just wrong.
The original feminists, including Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Alice Paul, and Mary Wollstonecraft, were the ones that wrote the original legislature banning abortion. They all saw abortion as murder, and an unforgivable sin. They believed that the fact that they could have children was what made them superior to men. They flaunted their reproduction. All it took was one lie, told by a man no less, to undo everything they had worked for. Those laws were put there to protect the nation’s women and children. However, because the laws have been repealed, we’re in a world of hurt.
We should be proud of that one thing that separates the women from the men. After all, our reproduction system is how we know that we are not inferior! We can carry children, and men cannot. Men cannot carry on the human race without us. They do not have a woman's intuition or empathy, simply because they are not made to carry a human life within them. Women are the stronger sex.
Abortion is anti-choice. It is anti-feminist. It is anti-freedom. It is anti-health. Anyone who is pro-“choice” is anti-women’s rights. They are anti-feminist. They are anti-health. And they are in support of the same policies that white supremacists drew up long ago.
Is that really a choice that you want to make?
-The Christian View of Abortion
-Life Education And Resource Network: Black Genocide
-Klan Parenthood
-Coerced or forced abortions in America
-Abortion is the Unchoice
-Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
-Abort73.com
-Medical Testimony: A new human being comes into existence during the process of fertilization
-Abortion: A Choice Against Women
-Abortion and Health Risks for Women
-Abortion Linked to Mental Health Problems: New Research Links Abortion With Depression, Other Mental Health Problems
-Physical and Psychological Complications of Abortion: Part 4: Procedural Risks & Complications
-Research on Post-Abortion Issues
-Articles and Analysis on Post-Abortion Issues
-Women Are Three Times More Likely To Die After An Abortion, New Study: CDC Admits Its Abortion and Childbirth Mortality Statistics Are Not Comparable
-The Aftereffects of Abortion
-Busted! Planned Parenthood & National Abortion Federation Caught in Pedophile Protection Scandal
-Child Predators: Exposing the Partnership Between Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation and Men Who Sexually Abuse Underage Girls
-History of Abortion Statistics
-ABC - Abortion/Breast Cancer Link
-Common Misconceptions Made by the Pro-Choice Movement
-Abortions In America
-Life Begins At Conception! <--Warning: GRAPHIC! -Long Term Physiological and Psychological Effects of Abortion on Women: An Original Research Paper on Post Abortion Syndrome Disorder
-Post-Abortion Counselor Confirms Abortions Cause Women Mental Health Issues
-Planned Parenthood 'runs on fear,' former clinic director charges
-Abortionist Hodari Puts Third Abortion Facility Up for Sale, Files for Divorce
-Roe Ruling: More Than Its Author Intended
-6 out of 10 of Americans Oppose Public Funding of Abortion: 51% said that they would even oppose allowing private insurance to pay for abortions
-Illegal Back-Alley Abortionist Opens Risky Late-term Abortion Mill - ADMITS TO KILLING!!!
-Pregnant Pro-Lifer Attacked By Abortion Worker Outside KC Abortion Clinic
-Abortion Promoters Whine Over Cape Cod Being Abortion Free - Even when the reasoning is that no one wants to practice there
-After Abortion: Testimonies
-Published Research Documents Abortion's Injustice and Harm to Women
-Dictionary Slam-Dunks Roe Vs Wade, Frank Joseph, MD
-Aborton doctor: 'Am I killing? Yes, I am'
-Photos of Abortion <--warning: graphic A video with a song about abortion, performed by my friends The Thirsting, with photos on the truth of this situation: -Lord Have Mercy
Feminist sites and articles:
-Feminists for Life Homepage
-When Pro-Choice is Not Pro-Woman
-Real Stories - from the people themselves
-Former Abortionists
-Abortion Related Quotes
-Feminist History: Voices of our Feminist Foremothers
-Feminist History: Herstory Worth Repeating
-Women Deserve Better Than Abortion by Serrin M. Foster
Atheist/Humanist websites and articles:
-Godless Pro-Lifers
-Pro-life and Anti-abortion Connections
-A reality check on abortion By Jim Trageser
-Feminist, Prolife and Atheist by Kathryn Reed
-Matt Wallace's The Compleat Heretic: Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion
There are many reasons to despise abortion. Abortion is not health care. It is anti-health care. Abortion is not feminist. It is anti-feminist. Many people would call me a traitor to my gender for advocating a pro-life position. Many people would say that my ideals do not allow for equality between genders. They would say that I am against women’s rights. However, I firmly believe that abortion has nothing to do with equality. I believe that women’s rights are infringed upon by this nefarious practice. I believe that abortion is nothing more than a tool of evil, cloaked in the lie told by Larry Lader that “10,000 women a year die” in childbirth.
The first thing about abortion is that what we pro-lifers refer to as abortion is induced abortion. The American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and other people/societies that support abortion often do studies that place induced abortion with what is referred to asspontaneous abortion, also known as a miscarriage. However, the two are completely different, but no abortion advocate will ever admit to that. It is important that you know the difference between these two terms. Those of us who are against abortion know the difference. The reason so many studies show conflicting reports is that abortion advocates refuse to acknowledge that induced abortion is different from a miscarriage. For the purpose of this article, hereafter, induced abortion will be referred to as abortion, and, if I refer to spontaneous abortion, I will refer to it as miscarriage.
Abortion is pure and simple murder. Human life begins at conception, when the male's sperm meets the female's egg, and it forms a human – did you get that – human zygote with unique DNA that never existed before and will never be repeated. You can also note that it is a living human being because of the fact that the baby moves and reacts to stimuli. When an abortion occurs, the baby fights for its life. Don't believe me? Watch a video of an abortion sometime. Just because memories do not stick at that point does not mean that the baby is not conscious. It just means that the part of the brain that stores memory is not fully formed. Or do you not think that those with anterograde amnesia are human either? For the argument of whether the baby interferes with the life of the mother, read on. Abortion does much worse than the baby ever will.
One thing that abortion centers refuse to tell women is that when they become pregnant, they develop a bond with the child. After all, disclosing that fact would be bad for business. Because of that bond, abortion causes many psychological problems. The first and most severe is called Post Abortion Stress Syndrome. It is the same thing as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for the victims of abortion. The women who have it wake up with nightmares. They hear their would-be children crying. They develop severe depression. They often want to kill themselves for it. Other psychological problems that abortion victims develop include, but are not limited to sleep disorders, anxiety/nervous disorders, grief, eating disorders, substance abuse, divorce, chronic relationship problems, self punishment, child abuse, and suicide. Just looking through that list of psychological trauma, you should ask yourself, “Do I really want to be supporting such a cause?”
Another thing that abortion centers keep from their patients is that there is a long list of physical health problems caused by and related to abortion. There are over one hundred illnesses/defects that abortion causes. You know that Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure charity that claims to fight breast cancer? They give the money they raise to Planned Parenthood – who is supposed to use that money for breast cancer research and screenings – who in turn dumps that money into the general fund, allowing that money to be used for abortions. What is so bad about that is that breast cancer is caused by abortion! The very thing that they claim to be fighting, they are actually spreading! Granted, not every case of breast cancer is caused by abortion, but abortion is a major cause of it. Other health risks include, but are not limited to, cervical caner, ovarian cancer, liver cancer, uterine perforations, cervical lacerations, endometriosis, infection, excessive bleeding, embolism, ripping of the uterus, anesthesia complications, convulsions, hemorrhage, cervical injury, toxic shock, fever, chronic abdominal pains, second degree burns, Rh sensitization, vomiting, and gastro-intestinal disturbances.
What about when a woman wants to have children after she’s had an abortion? There are problems with this as well. Abortion causes infertility in women. If a woman who has had an abortion does get pregnant, she is even more likely to have such complications as miscarriages, ectopic/tubal pregnancies, placenta previa, and other major defects, than women who have not had an abortion. If the child is born, they are more likely to be born prematurely or still-born, or to end up with major health complications and handicaps. This is due to the cervical and uterine damage that abortion causes.
There are more reasons, other than health risks, to be against abortion. Most abortions are forced. Yes, you read that right. Most women that walk into an abortion clinic do not want an abortion. They are forced to be there by peer pressure, spousal pressure, and/or family pressure. Their families will kick them out. Their partners do not want the child. Their friends disapproved. Their families disapproved. Teachers disapproved. Counselors disapproved. They had no support system. No one told them that there was another choice. The clinic staff convinced them to do so when just going in there for a check up. Their bosses would have fired them. Their spouse/boyfriend beat them into it. Their mother held a gun to their head. The shelter would not let them in until they had an abortion. These are not things that people in a free society should be dealing with. No one should be forced into making a choice such as abortion if they do not want to. No child should be so unwanted by the people around them. No one should be told they have “the choice” to make such a decision in order to escape such treatment. That is not much of a choice at all. It is blatant coercion. And it happens every day in this country under the banner of “choice”.
Another thing that many people do not tell you, which also falls under the category “anti-choice”, is that many abortions are done on minors. Many of those minors are brought in by their rapists to have the crime covered up. Recently, a reporter named Lila Rose went into a branch of Planned Parenthood and told the staff there that she was fourteen, while her boyfriend was 20, and she was looking to get an abortion. They told her that she needed say that she was sixteen, or else they would have to report her. These were licensed doctors and nurses telling her this. Imagine if you had a fourteen year-old daughter who was having sex with a 20 year-old man without you knowing, and she got pregnant and went to have an abortion, also without you knowing. That would mean that pedophile stole your daughter’s innocence, and covered up the crime, all with the help of licensed physicians. It happens often in abortion clinics, and no one is willing to admit it. Pro-life advocates have been working to get these facts out in the open, but again, under the banner of “choice”, these facts have been covered up.
Planned Parenthood was a company started by Margaret Sanger, a white supremacist and eugenicist, to promote birth control. The only reason she advocated birth control, however, was the fact that she was a white supremacist. She started Planned Parenthood in order to do away with those she called “infidels”, “undesirables”, and “inferior”. Those she was referring to were namely the black population, but also included anyone who was any sort of minority, who was poor, and/or who was not a Protestant. She had the same ideas as Hitler, wanting to promote a “superior” race. Except she was a woman, and so her ideas that would implement her plan were so subtle that they’ve become part of the mainstream. She is famous for saying, "We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," and, "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."
Sanger tutored a man named Larry Lader in her ways and thoughts. He promoted the cause of abortion because he believed that there were too many people on this planet. When he began his course of trying to get feminists to accept the idea of abortion, he told the feminists that in order to live and be accepted in the world of men, they had to control their reproductive systems. He asked them how they could expect to be seen as equal and expect their bosses to let them off for checkups, child birth, maternity leave, ill children, et cetera. Betty Friedan and her group of feminists did not buy it. So, he came up with the lie that 10,000 women were dying every year from childbirth. That got them mad enough to make a movement out of it. Soon, the court case of Roe v. Wade was underway, and in it were women who said that abortion was a fundamental right of women, and how could they be expected to finish school or have a job if they got pregnant.
However, pregnancy has nothing to do with this! You can still go to school if you are pregnant. You can still have a job. If you are not given a job or you are fired just because you are pregnant, you are entitled to sue for discrimination. It does not infringe upon your rights. It does not mean you are not allowed to vote. It does not mean that anyone is allowed to take your freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to property, or any other freedom or right. So the entire argument that abortion is a “fundamental right upon which all others are based” is just wrong.
The original feminists, including Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Alice Paul, and Mary Wollstonecraft, were the ones that wrote the original legislature banning abortion. They all saw abortion as murder, and an unforgivable sin. They believed that the fact that they could have children was what made them superior to men. They flaunted their reproduction. All it took was one lie, told by a man no less, to undo everything they had worked for. Those laws were put there to protect the nation’s women and children. However, because the laws have been repealed, we’re in a world of hurt.
We should be proud of that one thing that separates the women from the men. After all, our reproduction system is how we know that we are not inferior! We can carry children, and men cannot. Men cannot carry on the human race without us. They do not have a woman's intuition or empathy, simply because they are not made to carry a human life within them. Women are the stronger sex.
Abortion is anti-choice. It is anti-feminist. It is anti-freedom. It is anti-health. Anyone who is pro-“choice” is anti-women’s rights. They are anti-feminist. They are anti-health. And they are in support of the same policies that white supremacists drew up long ago.
Is that really a choice that you want to make?
-The Christian View of Abortion
-Life Education And Resource Network: Black Genocide
-Klan Parenthood
-Coerced or forced abortions in America
-Abortion is the Unchoice
-Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
-Abort73.com
-Medical Testimony: A new human being comes into existence during the process of fertilization
-Abortion: A Choice Against Women
-Abortion and Health Risks for Women
-Abortion Linked to Mental Health Problems: New Research Links Abortion With Depression, Other Mental Health Problems
-Physical and Psychological Complications of Abortion: Part 4: Procedural Risks & Complications
-Research on Post-Abortion Issues
-Articles and Analysis on Post-Abortion Issues
-Women Are Three Times More Likely To Die After An Abortion, New Study: CDC Admits Its Abortion and Childbirth Mortality Statistics Are Not Comparable
-The Aftereffects of Abortion
-Busted! Planned Parenthood & National Abortion Federation Caught in Pedophile Protection Scandal
-Child Predators: Exposing the Partnership Between Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation and Men Who Sexually Abuse Underage Girls
-History of Abortion Statistics
-ABC - Abortion/Breast Cancer Link
-Common Misconceptions Made by the Pro-Choice Movement
-Abortions In America
-Life Begins At Conception! <--Warning: GRAPHIC! -Long Term Physiological and Psychological Effects of Abortion on Women: An Original Research Paper on Post Abortion Syndrome Disorder
-Post-Abortion Counselor Confirms Abortions Cause Women Mental Health Issues
-Planned Parenthood 'runs on fear,' former clinic director charges
-Abortionist Hodari Puts Third Abortion Facility Up for Sale, Files for Divorce
-Roe Ruling: More Than Its Author Intended
-6 out of 10 of Americans Oppose Public Funding of Abortion: 51% said that they would even oppose allowing private insurance to pay for abortions
-Illegal Back-Alley Abortionist Opens Risky Late-term Abortion Mill - ADMITS TO KILLING!!!
-Pregnant Pro-Lifer Attacked By Abortion Worker Outside KC Abortion Clinic
-Abortion Promoters Whine Over Cape Cod Being Abortion Free - Even when the reasoning is that no one wants to practice there
-After Abortion: Testimonies
-Published Research Documents Abortion's Injustice and Harm to Women
-Dictionary Slam-Dunks Roe Vs Wade, Frank Joseph, MD
-Aborton doctor: 'Am I killing? Yes, I am'
-Photos of Abortion <--warning: graphic A video with a song about abortion, performed by my friends The Thirsting, with photos on the truth of this situation: -Lord Have Mercy
Feminist sites and articles:
-Feminists for Life Homepage
-When Pro-Choice is Not Pro-Woman
-Real Stories - from the people themselves
-Former Abortionists
-Abortion Related Quotes
-Feminist History: Voices of our Feminist Foremothers
-Feminist History: Herstory Worth Repeating
-Women Deserve Better Than Abortion by Serrin M. Foster
Atheist/Humanist websites and articles:
-Godless Pro-Lifers
-Pro-life and Anti-abortion Connections
-A reality check on abortion By Jim Trageser
-Feminist, Prolife and Atheist by Kathryn Reed
-Matt Wallace's The Compleat Heretic: Susan B. Anthony opposed abortion
The Founding Fathers
Contrary to what the atheists/humanists say, religion is a staple of the American way. I'm so sick and tired of them pulling my ancestors' quotes out of context. They were NOT atheist. The only reason they believed in separation of church and state was because the Brits had placed the death penalty on those who were not Anglican, and the founding fathers were of many different Christian faiths. They believed that religion was important to the founding of this country, and important if we wanted to maintain the freedoms they established. Take, for instance, George Washington's Farewell Address:
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
Therefore, should we scrap religion and belief from the law of the land? Not according to our first President. Not according to many other founding fathers, as well.
"Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both." - James Wilson
"If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants." William Penn
"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God." John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
For those who would place Dr. Benjamin Franklin in the category of Deist, Atheist, and/or non-Theist, take into account this reference from the Library of Congress:
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html
The exhibit by the Library of Congress also asserts that the religious clause of the First Amendment was only to keep Congress from establishing a national religion. They believed that right should have been left to the states, as there were too many Christian religions in the United States, and none should have any more importance than the other.
For more on the Founding Fathers and their view of religion:
http://www.foundingfathers.info/forums/Main01/messages/220629775.html
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/beliefs_of_the_founding_fathers#ixzz0btLU7aXG
http://www.marksquotes.com/Founding-Fathers/
http://www.usahistory.info/NewEngland/Puritans.html
http://www.aproundtable.org/tps30info/beliefs.html
http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm
http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm
http://www.whateveristrue.com/heritage/ofathers.htm
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
Therefore, should we scrap religion and belief from the law of the land? Not according to our first President. Not according to many other founding fathers, as well.
"Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants. Indeed, these two sciences run into each other. The divine law, as discovered by reason and the moral sense, forms an essential part of both." - James Wilson
"If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants." William Penn
"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God." John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
For those who would place Dr. Benjamin Franklin in the category of Deist, Atheist, and/or non-Theist, take into account this reference from the Library of Congress:
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06.html
The exhibit by the Library of Congress also asserts that the religious clause of the First Amendment was only to keep Congress from establishing a national religion. They believed that right should have been left to the states, as there were too many Christian religions in the United States, and none should have any more importance than the other.
For more on the Founding Fathers and their view of religion:
http://www.foundingfathers.info/forums/Main01/messages/220629775.html
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/beliefs_of_the_founding_fathers#ixzz0btLU7aXG
http://www.marksquotes.com/Founding-Fathers/
http://www.usahistory.info/NewEngland/Puritans.html
http://www.aproundtable.org/tps30info/beliefs.html
http://www.eadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm
http://christianity.about.com/od/independenceday/a/foundingfathers.htm
http://www.whateveristrue.com/heritage/ofathers.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
