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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

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?

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.

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.