Right to Life - Archive

June 2010: Life Matters

FIND PAST HOMEPAGE TOPICS UNDER "CURRENT HEADLINES" IN THE LEFT MENU…

NEW! The Time to Stand is NOW – Reject Burris Amendment: Co-sponsors Deadline to Sign on 30 June

NEW! 16th Annual SMART & GOOD SCHOOLS Summer Institute (K-12) — 28-30 June 2010

UN Leadership in Disarray as Scientific Dispute Shatters Consensus on Maternal Health

UN Women Deliver 2 Fails to Deliver, Ends With A Whimper

Pro-life Efforts Pay Off Big as Sidewalk Counselors Take to the Streets

Right to Life of Michigan Announces Proudly Pro-Life Social Networking Day

Conjoined Twins Locked in Battle for Life

Int'l Planned Parenthood Fed. Report Calls for Youth Sex Rights and Reveals New UN Funding / Intl Planned Parenthood Report: 140M Income, More United Nations Money

Commentary: Pregnancy Centers Fighting Back Against National Pro-Abortion Attacks

Horror in China: Aborted but Still Living Baby Sent for Cremation

Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss Suit Against Aurora Planned Parenthood

Commentary: If Human Beings Were Whales…

More U.S. Taxpayer Funds for Pro-Abortion Kenyan Constitution: Rep. Smith

Obama Admin May Have Illegally Spent $10 Million Promoting Abortion in Kenya

McDonald's Ad in France Promotes Teenage Homosexuality

Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood: Best Friends Forever or Coincidental Business Associates?

Resource: New Online Resource for the Family Launched At UN —
The Global State of the Family Index — http://globalfamilyindex.org.qa/ …

THE TIME TO STAND IS NOW – Reject Burris Amendment
Medical people often are not activists. We are too busy already. And we don't want to look "political." But in the arena of abortion and conscience, we MUST be activists, or we will become extinct, and elective abortion will become standard of care medicine. We try to make activism as simple as possible for you. See below:

The Burris amendment was added to the National Defense Authorization Act. This will permit the performance of abortions in both domestic and overseas military facilities. And, at taxpayer expense.

Representatives Taylor and Akin are circulating a letter to House and Senate leadership urging them to reject this amendment.

Has your congressperson co-signed this pro-life initiative? The following U.S. Reps have already signed. If yours is not on this list, please email them and urge them to sign the Taylor-Akin letter, and also to vote against the Burris amendment.

Representatives who have aready signed include: Aderholt, Alexander, Bachmann, Bachus, Bartlett, Bishop, Boozman, Broun, Burton, Buyer, Calvert, Cao, Carney (PA), Carter, Chaffetz, Conaway, Critz (PA), Dahlkemper, Duncan, Emerson, Fleming, Forbes, Fortenberry, Foxx, Franks, Garrett, Gingrey, Graves (GA), Graves (MO), Griffith, Hall (TX), Harper, Herger, Hoekstra, Hunter, Inglis (SC), Jones (NC), Jordan, King (NY), King(IA), Kingston, Lamborn, Latta, Linder, Lipinski, Lungren, McIntyre, Manzullo, Marchant, Marshall (GA), McKeon, McMorris Rodgers, Gary Miller (CA), Neugebauer, Olson, Paul, Pence, Pitts, Platts, Price (GA), Roe, Rogers (AL), Ryan (WI), Ryan (OH), Sensenbrenner, Schmidt, Shimkus, Smith (NJ), Taylor (MS), Thompson (PA), Thornberry, Tiberi, Turner, Westmoreland, Wilson (SC), Wittman

If your person is not on the list, please contact him/her.
Here is a simple message (or make up your own): "I strongly request that you co-sign the Taylor-Akin letter to House and Senate leaders urging them to reject the Burris amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act. This amendment would permit the performance of elective abortions in both domestic and overseas military facilities. This amendment must be defeated. Your voters do not want government funded abortion."
Just copy and paste.

Deadline for members to sign is June 30.

The easiest way to contact your legislator is this:
For Representatives, Go to https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml Follow the prompts. If you don't know the last 4 numbers on our 10 digit zip code, look on your driver's license. Paste (or write) your message. Submt. Done!

For Senators, go to http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Follow prompts, paste letter, submit. Done!

Thanks for doing your part to oppose tax-funded elective abortion as the standard of care in the U.S. military.
[21June2010, AAPLOG, aaplog.org]

 

 

 

 

 

16th Annual SMART & GOOD SCHOOLS Summer Institute (K-12) — 28-30 June 2010
SUNY Cortland, by the Center for the 4th & 5th Rs, and the Institute for Excellence & Ethics
"Improving Teaching & Learning Through the Power of Character"
www.cortland.edu/character/institutes.asp
Lessons from The Classroom: 20 Things Good Teachers Do, by Hal Urban, www.halurban.com
Related Books by Dr. Thomas Likona:
Educating for Character
Smart & Good High Schools
Character Matters
Raising Good Children

 

 

 

Women Deliver 2 Fails to Deliver, Ends With A Whimper
Three thousand abortion advocates packed into the Washington, DC Convention Center this week for the Women Deliver 2 conference, a meeting aimed at increasing funding and government accountability for maternal mortality reduction strategies, including access to "safe abortion." While organizers closed the conference amid applause and cheers from a half-empty auditorium, outcomes fell far short of the ambitious funding goals set by organizers in the months leading up to the conference.

Women Deliver brought together United Nations (UN) agencies like the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and the World Health Organization and prominent abortion organizations like Ipas, International Planned Parenthood Federation, and Catholics [sic] for Choice, to call for an additional $12 billion USD a year in funding and to galvanize political support.

     By the end of the conference the only significant new income came from the $1.5 billion USD initiative launched by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Political participation was similarly underwhelming. Unlike the original conference in London in 2007, Women Deliver 2 failed to produce a government document, though parliamentarians and government ministers were sequestered in closed-door meetings for much of the conference.

     The lack of official participation from the United States was also noted by participants. In 2007, an official congressional delegation went to the London conference. This year, there was no American delegation in attendance even though the conference took place less than a mile from the US House of Representatives.

     In the wake of the University of Washington study published in The Lancet in April which contradicted UN statistics and showed a significant decrease in maternal mortality, UNFPA executive director Thoraya Obaid told her staffers that the organization "must speak with one voice."

      At a UNFPA staff briefing the day before the opening of the conference, Obaid circulated a briefing book of talking points to staffers which they were directed to use in speaking to the public and press during the conference.

Obtained by the Friday Fax, the UNFPA briefing book downplayed the discrepancy in maternal mortality figures, taking the position that "estimates are estimates," and maintained the call for the additional $12 billion per annum in funding to "fulfill the unmet need for family planning."

     Unchanged from the 2007 conference were attacks on religion…and the "Religious Right" as major obstacles to the "reproductive rights" agenda. At one session, Monica Roa, the abortion activist who helped liberalize Colombia's abortion law in 2006, warned of threats posed to pending abortion litigation in the form of "well-funded" and "better educated" up-and-coming lawyers from schools like Ave Maria School of Law.

     Indeed, Women Deliver 2 organizers were careful to shut down any opposition. 

On the last day, the National Right to Life Federation (NRTLF) stood outside the convention center handing out bags emblazoned with the slogan "Celebrate Motherhood" to conference-goers. The bags contained fetal models and information on proven maternal mortality reduction strategies.

Desperate to shut out any pro-life messages, security guards and conference staffers barred the front entrance, demanded to look inside conference-goers parcels and confiscated the offending bags right out of the hands of individuals, despite objections.

Stunned by the actions of the conference staff, one NRTLF volunteer rhetorically asked "Isn't this supposed to be a conference to help mothers?"   [10 June 2010, Friday Fax Volume 13, Number 26, Samantha Singson, NEW YORK, http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1644/pub_detail.asp]

Pro-Abortion Women Deliver Conference Ends with Low Attendance, Fundraising
Three thousand abortion advocates packed into the Washington, DC Convention Center this week for the Women Deliver 2 conference, a meeting aimed at increasing funding and government accountability for maternal mortality reduction strategies, including access to "safe abortion."

While organizers closed the conference amid applause and cheers from a half-empty auditorium, outcomes fell far short of the ambitious funding goals set by organizers in the months leading up to the conference.

Women Deliver brought together United Nations (UN) agencies like the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and the World Health Organization and prominent abortion organizations like Ipas, International Planned Parenthood Federation, and "Catholics" [sic] for Choice, to call for an additional $12 billion USD a year in funding and to galvanize political support.

By the end of the conference the only significant new income came from the $1.5 billion USD initiative launched by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Political participation was similarly underwhelming. Unlike the original conference in London in 2007, Women Deliver 2 failed to produce a government document, though parliamentarians and government ministers were sequestered in closed-door meetings for much of the conference. [LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report 6/11/10 #4917, Washington, DC (LifeNews.com/CFAM]

UN Leadership in Disarray as Scientific Dispute Shatters Consensus on Maternal Health

Deep divisions with top United Nations (UN) officials and abortion activists on one side and maternal health researchers on the other became public this week during the Women Deliver 2 conference in Washington DC.

The dispute threatens to derail hopes of raising $30B for family planning at international development conferences in the coming months. These include the Group of Eight summit this month and the UN High Level Millennium Development Goals (MDG) Review in September.

     The medical journal The Lancet published a study in April refuting UN research claiming 500,000+ annual maternal deaths has remained unchanged for decades. The new study put the figure at 342,900 with 60,000 of those from HIV/AIDS, and said the number has been declining since 1980.

     World Health Organization (WHO) executive director Margaret Chan told journalist Christiane Amanpour that legal abortion was a key factor in reducing maternal deaths, but the Lancet study she referred to never mentioned abortion. Thoraya Obaid, director of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), said the UN's own report on maternal health would be published in September and show similar trends. But WHO's top statistician Ties Boerma said the UN report would likely not be published until 2011, and when pressed stated cryptically that one could expect it to have similar findings if it were to use the same data.
 
     Such collaboration seemed unlikely due to a sharp disagreement between UN staff who want only one set of UN-centered "consensus" statistics, and other scientists, such as the new study's author Christopher Murray and Lancet's editor Richard Horton, who called for more scholarly independence.

     Scientists flatly refused to back up the 20 year-old claim by UN agencies and activists that family planning improves maternal health. The Guttmacher Institute's president, Sharon Camp, asked Murray whether his study's finding linking declining global fertility rates to better maternal health supports the idea that more family planning will reduce maternal deaths. Murray replied that "there is no scientific way to prove that."

     Scientists also undercut UN
staff's use of the world's slow progress toward MDG 5 as a basis for urgent pleas for family planning funds. Boerma and Murray both said that its aim of reducing maternal deaths 75% by 2015 was unrealistic since it was not based upon "historical trends." The world would need an 8% annual drop, whereas 4% has been the best so far.

     Downplaying the remarks, Guttmacher’s Camp defended a joint Guttmacher-UNFPA report which was based on the now discredited UN figures, and which calls for a doubling of family planning funds in order to reduce maternal deaths by 70%.  Camp did not explain why the same amount of funding would be required for a smaller overall reduction.

     Hans Rosling, professor at the prestigious Karolinska Institute, said that the world's dramatic drop in fertility cannot be tied to policy interventions, citing instead improved personal income. He cited Sri Lanka, whose sharp decline in maternal deaths was the basis for setting the MDG 5 goal to reduce maternal deaths 75% by 2015. He asserted that the island nation benefited from asphalt roads and other infrastructure put in place under its period of colonialism. Not mentioned was the fact that abortion is highly restricted there.

     Basing his findings on data reaching back to 1800, Rosling jibed the UN's 20 year-old maternal health statistics, saying maternal health research predates the UN.

     The disarray of UN leadership on the maternal health data comes in the same week that UN member states begin negotiating the outcome document for this September's high-level meeting on maternal health.
[10 June 2010, Friday Fax Volume 13, Number 26,  Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D., New York, http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1645/pub_detail.asp]

Pro-Abortion Women Deliver Conference Ends with Low Attendance, Low Fundraising
Three thousand abortion advocates packed into the Washington, DC Convention Center this week for the Women Deliver 2 conference, a meeting aimed at increasing funding and government accountability for maternal mortality reduction strategies, including access to "safe abortion."

While organizers closed the conference amid applause and cheers from a half-empty auditorium, outcomes fell far short of the ambitious funding goals set by organizers in the months leading up to the conference.

Women Deliver brought together United Nations (UN) agencies like the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and the World Health Organization and prominent abortion organizations like Ipas, International Planned Parenthood Federation, and "Catholics" [sic] for Choice, to call for an additional $12 billion USD a year in funding and to galvanize political support.

By the end of the conference the only significant new income came from the $1.5 billion USD initiative launched by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Political participation was similarly underwhelming. Unlike the original conference in London in 2007, Women Deliver 2 failed to produce a government document, though parliamentarians and government ministers were sequestered in closed-door meetings for much of the conference. [LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report 6/11/10 #4917, Washington, DC (LifeNews.com/CFAM]

Pro-life Efforts Pay Off Big as Sidewalk Counselors Take to the Streets
A pro-life mom vacationing with her family in San Diego walked into the Family Planning Associates abortion clinic on Saturday for a free pregnancy test and was able to help five women make decisions to keep their babies.

One of the women who changed her mind about having an abortion was already in her hospital gown when she encountered the undercover pro-lifer in the restroom. After a woman-to-woman sharing of hearts, the abortion-bound woman got dressed and left the clinic.  [http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/10-babies-saved-at-abortion-clinics-in-2-states-in-1-week/  Operation Rescue; Pro-Life Today | 10 June 2010]

Right to Life of Michigan Announces Proudly Pro-Life Social Networking Day
On Wednesday, June 16, Right to Life of Michigan will host a Proudly Pro-Life Social Networking Day throughout social networking web sites. Prolife social networking users on Facebook, Twitter, Myspace and other sites will share links, pictures and status updates including the message "I am proudly prolife."

Utilizing the growing popularity of online networking tools, Right to Life of Michigan will promote the message using their own social networking accounts and encourage other users from Michigan and throughout the online communities to join in the event. [LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report 6/11/10 #4917, Lansing, MI ]

 

 

Conjoined Twins Locked in Battle for Life
Doctors discussed terminating the pregnancy with the mother, Brianna Manns, 21, after they determined the twins were not likely to survive.

But Manns said abortion was never an option. "I am a strong believer in not having abortions — very, very strong," said Manns, taking a break from the neonatal intensive care unit at University of Illinois Medical Center at Chicago, where her sons are hospitalized. "And they are my babies." 

The boys, born March 31, have lived longer than doctors predicted, but they are critically ill. Medical experts say they cannot be separated and are not candidates for a heart transplant because of their complicated anatomy.
[http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/06/conjoined-twins-locked-in-battle-for-life-at-chicago-hospital.html, Chicago Breaking News; Pro-Life Today | 10 June 2010]

 

 

 

 

 

Int'l Planned Parenthood Fed. Report Calls for Youth Sex Rights and Reveals New UN Funding
[Comment from Friday Fax: we report on the just-released annual report from International Planned Parenthood Federation. They report they are awash in millions and millions of dollars and are focusing their evil ways on kids.]
 The abortion giant, the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), has just released its latest financial statement. The report boasts of increased spending on youth programs and a significant increase in funding from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), with an overall 20% boost in income as compared to 2008.

     In 2009, IPPF raked in a staggering $140 million, the bulk of which came from government grants.  Sweden, the United Kingdom and Japan top the organization's list of government donors, accounting for 40% of grant money received.

     Grants from foundations and multilateral organizations also grew from the previous year.  UNFPA, while it is not one of the organization's largest donors, nearly doubled its contribution to IPPF last year from $783,000 to $1.36 million. The World Health Organization, apparently a new IPPF donor, contributed $15,000 in 2009.

     IPPF spent a significant portion of its income on an increased focused on youth, to the tune of $9.9 million dollars more than the previous year. According to the report, a central theme of IPPF’s mission is the "provision of high quality and accessible youth friendly sex

ual and reproductive health (SRH) services."

     As part of their strategic framework, the IPPF report lists the five priority areas of focus as “Adolescents/Young People, HIV/AIDS, Abortion, Access, and Advocacy.”  The term adolescent commonly refers to a child between ages 10 and 14.  As part of their vision, IPPF is working to “develop a guide for young people to implement the IPPF Declaration of Sexual Rights,” and boasts that “IPPF youth programs now more strongly promote sexual rights in all their strategies, activities and services for and by young people.”

     IPPF will also launch a new global initiative entitled "Girls Decide; stand up for sex and pregnancy."  Aimed at young women, this initiative will focus on "preventing unintended teenage pregnancy, and providing safe abortion and safe motherhood services."

     IPPF reported increased activity across the board. According to the latest figures, while spending on "abortion activity" was down almost $5 million last year, IPPF and its member associations reported providing 1.1 million "abortion-related services," almost five times greater than in 2005.  IPPF also doubled the number of "contraceptive services" in the same time period.

     The organization will next take aim at the UN in September at the high level review on the Millennium Development Goals where it will continue to push the controversial target on "universal access to reproductive health by 2015" and promoting young people’s, "and especially girls’ and young women’s, sexual and reproductive health rights; and increasing recognition and action around sexual rights."

     As reported previously by the Friday Fax, IPPF has been partnering with youth organizations like the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts and the Young Women’s Christian Association to help to promote family planning and “adolescent reproductive health.”

     IPPF recently hosted the 4th Africa Conference on Sexual Health and Rights, whose plenary speakers included several high-level UN agency officials.
[3June2010, Friday Fax, Volume 13, Number 25, Samantha Singson & Terrence McKeegan, J.D., New York, http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1640/pub_detail.asp ]

 

Intl Planned Parenthood Report: 140M Income, More United Nations Money
The abortion giant, the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), has just released its latest financial statement. The report boasts of increased spending on youth programs and a significant increase in funding from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), with an overall 20% boost in income as compared to 2008.

In 2009, IPPF raked in a staggering $140 million, the bulk of which came from government grants. Sweden, the United Kingdom and Japan top the organization's list of government donors, accounting for 40% of grant money received.

Grants from foundations and multilateral organizations also grew from the previous year. UNFPA, while it is not one of the organization's largest donors, nearly doubled its contribution to IPPF last year from $783,000 to $1.36 million. The World Health Organization, apparently a new IPPF donor, contributed $15,000 in 2009.

IPPF spent a significant portion of its income on an increased focused on youth, to the tune of $9.9 million dollars more than the previous year. According to the report, a central theme of IPPF’s mission is the "provision of high quality and accessible youth friendly sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services."
[LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report, June 4, 2010, New York, NY, CFAM]

 

 

 

Commentary: Pregnancy Centers Fighting Back Against National Pro-Abortion Attacks
by Peggy Hartshorn

Attacks against pregnancy help centers have been occurring since the 1980’s, led by NARAL, the leading pro-abortion political force and ally of Planned Parenthood. In fact, for years, the pregnancy help movement has been brushing away the slander attacks like we fan away returning swarms of hornets.

But, at the same time, we have been developing a much stronger network of centers and friends and we are now ready to fight back and even take the sting out of the pests! A good offense often makes for a great defense, and this one provides us all a few positive things to do.

NARAL’s strategy is outlined in womensenews.org (12-2-09), a feminist newsletter. First, publish “studies” that show that centers “mislead” women. Second, identify “sympathetic lawmakers” who will pass legislation restricting the free speech of pregnancy help centers in order to close them down.

No matter that the “studies” rely on “evidence” gathered only by NARAL members who act as fake clients and try to trip up the centers they visit.

This is proving embarrassing for NARAL, however. When such a study was brought into hearings on a law to muzzle centers in Virginia, the expert witness for NARAL was forced to admit that their study contained “methodological flaws!"

In hearings on a similar bill in Washington state, four of the six women who testified against our centers, upon close questioning by lawmakers, had to sheepishly admit that they were employed by either NARAL or Planned Parenthood! So, who is misleading whom?

Like a nightmarish game of “whack a mole” these attacks keep popping up. In three places now, restrictions on center advertising have been rushed into place: Austin, Baltimore, and Montgomery County, Maryland.

In case you missed it, two small pregnancy help centers in these targeted areas are suing to have the reputations of all our centers cleared!

The Washington Post and Washington Times recently covered one of the lawsuits, just filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, close to Washington, D.C., by the Alliance Defense Fund on behalf of a small Spanish language center, Centro Tepeyac. The other suit has been filed by the Archdiocese of Baltimore on behalf of Baltimore’s Center for Pregnancy Concerns. Yeah! We are not sitting still in this attempt at strangulation through regulation.

What do these proposed laws have in common? They all restrict the freedom of speech of our centers by requiring them to advertise what they do NOT provide. They must post disclaimers on their doors indicating that they do not provide or refer for contraceptives or abortions. One law even requires the size of the sign and that it be in English and Spanish.

Another needs to say “Montgomery County Health Officer encourages women who are or may be pregnant to consult with a licensed health care provider.” All define fines to be levied if the required advertising is not prominently displayed. Some have suggested “common ground”: we will comply if Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics will post signs saying, “We do not provide professional counseling or after-care, medical or emotional. Once we kill your child, we don't know your name.”

Why are the hornets attacking more furiously now than ever before? Over 2,000 plus pregnancy help centers and pregnancy help medical clinics and mater

nity homes means several thousand women every week no longer turn to abortion because they feel they have “no choice.”

The pregnancy help movement, fueled by charity and equipped by the leadership training and support of Heartbeat International and our partners, and providing ultrasound proof of the humanity of the preborn, is lowering abortion sales and tilting the culture toward life. Therefore, in the eyes of NARAL and Planned Parenthood, we are now a threat. We must be stopped.

(For the Family Research Council’s excellent report on the effectiveness of pregnancy centers and our contribution to maternal and child health in the USA, see www.heartbeatinternantional.org/apassiontoserve)

You would think that before accusing our centers of deceiving and damaging women, NARAL would collect some real evidence, say, a few hundred affidavits from among the hundreds of thousands of women served over the past 40 years in the thousands of pregnancy help ministries across the land.

If NARAL accusations were true, then there must be tens of thousands of women willing to testify that they went to pregnancy help centers and were damaged by the caring volunteers who gave them free pregnancy tests, or the nurses who provided them with ultrasounds and confirmed the presence of their own babies, alive and beautiful in their own bodies.

Truth is, it is impossible to find mothers who will testify, “I came to this pregnancy help center and they deceived me into having this beautiful baby! My life is ruined!”

We have one powerful, slander-busting weapon that abortion advocates do not have – precious BABIES with happy Mothers!

NARAL’s regulatory proposals are self-serving and insulting to women, who are fully able to determine who they seek help from and decide if it is offered in good faith.

Using the powerful testimonies of our mothers and their babies, we intend to fight back. We welcome your help and participation in defending and commending the pregnancy help movement.
[http://www.lifenews.com/nat6388.html,  June 2, 2010,
LifeNews.com Note: Peggy Hartshorn is the president of Heartbeat International, a worldwide network of over 1,100 pregnancy resource centers]

 

 

 

 

Horror in China: Aborted but Still Living Baby Sent for Cremation
 An aborted baby boy, who had been declared dead by doctors in Foshan City, China, suddenly cried out as he was about to be cremated, but died later after doctors refused to treat him.

A mortuary worker at the Nanhai Funeral Home reportedly was startled by a cry from a box, labeled "medical waste," that he was about to put into the incinerator. He opened the carton and found the baby moving, but choking on some cotton wool in his mouth, the locally based Information Times reported.

After the worker cleared his mouth, the baby yawned and breathed normally. He was rushed back to Guanyao Hospital, which had attempted to abort him earlier that day; but doctors in the hospital reportedly ignored him and left him in the lobby to die.

He was confirmed dead later in the day and returned to the funeral home for cremation. However, workers put the body in a refrigerator pending further investigation.

Liu Sanhong, an official with the hospital, told the Shanghai Daily that staff checked the baby for an hour to make sure that he was dead. Liu declined to comment on whether doctors tried to save the baby or not.

A funeral home official told Information Times that he took a video of the baby, who was about seven months gestation, to prove that he was alive when discovered at the crematory.

Following this, the report said that all workers at the funeral home had been ordered not to talk about the incident.

Earlier this year, outrage was sparked by the mishandling of the bodies of aborted children by the Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University.

On March 31, 21 babies' bodies were found dumped in the Guangfu river in east China's Jining City.

The bodies, some in diapers, some in plastic bags marked "medical waste," were found under a bridge by a man who had been fishing.

Reports suggested most of the dead babies were females who had been allowed to die or were aborted and dumped because parents wanted to keep the option open for a male child within China's coercive one-child system.

While human rights groups and international population experts have denounced wide scale sex-selective abortion and female infanticide in China, the state-run Xinhua news agency blamed the incident on "local custom and a lack of regulation."

Related:  Babies' Bodies Found Dumped in Chinese River
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10033109.html
[25May2010, T. M. Baklinski, Foshan City, China, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052502.html ]

 

 

 

 

Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss Suit Against Aurora Planned Parenthood

Striking down a motion to dismiss, Judge Neal W. Cerne of Dupage County Court has ruled that a lawsuit may go forward alleging that a Planned Parenthood mega-center violates city zoning laws and that the zoning board blatantly ignored the violation.

Although this decision was cheering to pro-life advocates, Judge Cerne removed many of the defendants originally named from the lawsuit, including the City of Aurora, Mayor Tom Weisner, the previous CEO of Planned Parenthood of Illinois, and the city Planning Commission. Cerne ruled that the case may proceed before the Aurora zoning board of appeals and building code board of appeals.

Attorneys with the Thomas More Society, a pro-life legal group, sued Planned Parenthood (PP) on behalf of Aurora residents calling PP to task for the secretive construction of Aurora's 22,000 square foot, $7.5 million "super clinic."

Planned Parenthood had begun furtively constructing the abortuary by using the name of a front corporation called Gemini Office Development (GOD).  By acting as GOD, Planned Parenthood prevented Aurora residents from objecting to the construction of the clinic.  A pro-life construction worker's suspicions were raised only after noticing the bullet-proof glass and surgical equipment that were being installed.

Yet Thomas More lawyers say the city of Aurora and the Zoning and Building Board of appeals have long turned a blind eye to the violations.

Planned Parenthood had claimed that the deception was intended to protect the clinic's staff and construction workers from dangerous protestors.

"This massive and illegal abortion facility is a blight on the quiet residential neighborhood that it borders," said Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive director and legal counsel. "If the City of Aurora's zoning laws are to have any meaning, Planned Parenthood must be held to account for its repeated and flagrant violations of those laws."

Although hailed as a victory by pro-life leaders, the mixed ruling handed down by Judge Cerne also allowed Planned Parenthood to claim victory. The judge dismissed counts alleging that pro-lifers were denied due process because of the secretive construction, and that defendants violated the state constitu

tion's Equal Protection clause…

Related: Pro-Life Protestors Win Key Demands From City of Aurora in Settlement
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/mar/10032504.html

Aurora Residents Sue City and Planned Parenthood Over Giant Abortion Mill's Zoning Violations
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08021503.html

Aurora Zoning Board Stands By Planned Parenthood Mega-Abortion Center despite the Law and Lies
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jan/08011006.html

Residents Say Planned Parenthood Lied on Giant Abortion Mill Application – City Investigates
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/aug/07082908.html
[24may2010, James Tillman, AURORA, Illinois, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052405.html ]

 

 

 

Commentary: IF HUMAN BEINGS WERE WHALES …
By Judie Brown

The headline is not a joke! It is in fact so uncharacteristically serious that there are barely printable words to express my horror. The headline from whence my speechlessness emanates is this: “‘Human rights’ urged for whales and dolphins.”
Recently a gathering of scientists, philosophers, conservationists, law professors and ethicists have come to the conclusion that the alleged intelligence level of certain mammals known as cetaceans, such as the whale and the dolphin, entitles them to basic human rights—rights that all preborn human beings are being denied as I write. In a public statement entitled “Whales Have A Right To Life, Liberty And Wellbeing,” the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society reports, “In collaboration with Paola Cavalieri of the Great Ape Project, this weekend WDCS hosted a ground-breaking meeting in Helsinki, Finland. Experts gathered to ask whether cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) should be considered as non-human persons.” The resulting document that came out of that meeting, entitled “Declaration of Rights for Cetaceans: Whales and Dolphins” states the following:

Based on the principle of the equal treatment of all persons;
Recognizing that scientific research gives us deeper insights into the complexities of cetacean minds, societies and cultures;
Noting that the progressive development of international law manifests a growing sense of entitlement by cetaceans;
We affirm that all cetaceans as persons have the right to life, liberty and wellbeing.
We believe that:

1.    Every individual cetacean has the right to life.
2.    No cetacean should be held in captivity or servitude; be subject to cruel treatment; or be removed from their natural environment.
3.    All cetaceans have the right to freedom of movement and residence within their natural environment.
4.    No cetacean is the property of any State, corporation, human group or individual.
5.    Cetaceans have the right to the protection of their natural environment.
6.    Cetaceans have the right not to be subject to the disruption of their cultures.
7.    The rights, freedoms and norms set forth in this Declaration should be protected under international and domestic law.
8.    Cetaceans are entitled to an international order in which these rights, freedoms and norms can be fully realized.
9.    No State, corporation, human group or individual should engage in any activity that undermines these rights, freedoms and norms.
10.  Nothing in this Declaration shall prevent a State from enacting stricter provisions for the protection of cetacean rights.

Contrast this declaration with the following brief excerpt from American Life League’s Declaration on Truth and Life:

At a time when man's very existence and understanding of the Truth is threatened on every level by the vacuum of moral relativism, it is imperative that we move beyond the inconsistent definition of "pro-life," realizing that the Truth upon which we stand and base our principles exists outside the realm of human definition and interpretation.

We must constantly serve, through all of our actions and our words, without exception, as a reflection of the Truth, and pursue only those remedies for evil and deprecation in our cultures that are consistent with this Truth in our collaborative quests for the true Good.

This requires unwavering defense of the true nature of the human person-at all times and in all circumstances.

This requires the recognition of humankind in its entirety, and the definition of each and every human being as equal and sacred according to the laws of God and man.

This requires an affirmation of life's most basic principle—a fearless response to and acknowledgment of the victimization by our government, our courts and our society, of those deemed non-persons.

There is a distinct difference between those who respect the human being as a human person because of his innate dignity and character and those who prefer to ignore the fundamental human rights of all individual human beings while concentrating on the misguided notion of human rights for various forms of animal, plant and sea life.

Moral relativism could not be more evident, nor the contrast so great, as this clash between truth and falsehood. One document denies the hierarchy of order established by the Creator while the other is an all-encompassing statement devoted to the undeniable truth that every human being is a human person deserving of equal protection under the law and in society.

The first document and those who endorse its content place the emphasis on equality, if you will, among all mammals whether it is an individual person or a cetacean. The second recognizes the Biblical imperative that God gave to man in Genesis 1:28, “Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air and all the living things that move on the earth.”

The news report of the Helsinki meeting includes a statement that pinpoints the cultural contradiction that exists today between those who know God and those who deny God:  

Thomas White, director of the Center for Ethics and Business at Loyola Marymount University in California who was at the Helsinki talks, said dolphins can recognize themselves in a mirror, an ability rare in mammals that humans only acquire at about 18 months of age.

"Whaling is ethically unacceptable," he told Reuters. "They have a sense of self that we used to think that only human beings have."

Mr. White clearly has no problem in suggesting that, because of an alleged ability to see oneself in a mirror, the dolphin is in some respects superior to a child of 18 months. What White is not saying in his statement is that the human being possesses the faculties, if allowed to mature, to continue to study the dolphin while the dolphin would never have the capacity to study a human being. By his very nature, the human being is superior in every respect. But I digress.

Mr. White, according to his biography on the college web site, is “the Conrad N. Hilton Chair of Business Ethics. He has been with Loyola Marymount since 1994 and is an expert in business ethics, gender issues, renaissance humanism. … White is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board, Wild Dolphin Project. He's also a Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics and served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations' 2007/8 Year of the Dolphin program.”

Setting aside for obvious reasons the fact that Loyola Marymount University is a Catholic
entity operated by the Jesuits, there is an apparent embrace within academia for subjects that lend themselves to a sort of secular humanism devoid of the fundamental principles upon which truth is established, including the natural law. This is perhaps why it is possible for intelligent people like White to make the leap from human beings to various types of mammals as persons deserving equality under the law.

White’s misguided perspective, though shared by many in Helsinki, is not accepted among those who truly understand God’s plan for the universe He designed. For example, InsideCatholic.com editor Brian Saint-Paul commented in a recent interview:

[O]nce you start treating animals like humans, it becomes that much easier to treat humans like animals. We've seen it in the euthanasia movement; we've seen it in artificial insemination. Artificial insemination didn't arise out of nowhere. It came from veterinary medicine. Animal medicine is often the canary in the coal mine for human medicine. This isn't entirely negative, of course. Because veterinary medicine can be more progressive and because a number of techniques from animal medicine have been adopted by humans with great success and great benefit for all, we tend to look at those successes and think we can take just about anything we do to an animal, and do it to a human. So we get artificial insemination, we get euthanasia, we get sterilization, we get cloning and all the varying kinds of cell research.

And he concludes,

When these activists blur the distinction between animals and humans, the only thing the Church can do is react against that error. We acknowledge they have a noble aim in protecting animals, but they are going about it the wrong way. They don't see that they are creating a much bigger problem than the one they're trying to solve.
 
They are mortgaging the future of humanity for the future of animals.

Or, one could say they are denying that humanity has a future unless the animals among us are considered part of the human family. It is easier now than ever before to see the wider acceptance of the long-held convictions of the godfather of the animal rights movement, Peter Singer. Though not quite as callous as he in their public statements, Singer’s perspective is becoming increasingly popular among those who favor animals over human beings or at the very least consider them equals. 

Lest we forget, it was Peter Singer who opined, "Surely there will be some nonhuman animals whose lives, by any standards, are more valuable than the lives of some humans."

It was also Singer who wrote, "An animal experiment cannot be justifiable unless the experiment is so important that the use of a brain-damaged human would be justifiable."

Sadly, many are walking through the very rhetorical minefield that men like Singer pioneered, a minefield that could ultimately destroy the definition of the human person as we know it. Which begs the question: What if human beings were whales …?
[26May2010, Judie Brown is president of American Life League]

More U.S. Taxpayer Funds for Pro-Abortion Kenyan Constitution: Rep. Smith

Potentially illegal U.S. taxpayer funding in support of Kenya’s proposed pro-abortion constitution may now exceed five times the level originally expected, announced the office of leading pro-life U.S. congressman Chris Smith Wednesday.
 
In a May 6 letter to the Inspectors General at the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), three leading Republicans called for investigations into the funding, including whether a $2 million donation to promote the proposed constitution violates a provision of law known as the Siljander Amendment.

The provision stipulates that no USAID and State Department funds “may be used to lobby for or against abortion.”

The new constitution's abolition of the country's strict abortion ban has been one of the top generators of controversy over the document in Kenya.
 
Subsequent meetings with investigators have revealed that actual U.S. taxpayer expenditures in support of the pro-abortion constitution are estimated to exceed $10 million.
 
Representative Chris Smith (NJ-04), the Ranking Republican on the House Africa and Global Health Subcommittee who is spearheading three requests for investigations into U.S. spending in Kenya, said, “This week I learned that U.S. taxpayer expenditures in support of the proposed constitution may exceed $10 million—five times the level we original suspected.
 
“This massive spending will undoubtedly be directed to those entities that are pressing for ratification of the proposed constitution.  Such support will further enable passage of a constitution that is opposed by many pro-life leaders in Kenya, because it enshrines new rights to abortion.  As such, the funding is a clear violation of federal law against use of U.S. taxpayer funds to lobby for or against abortion.”

The discovery of additional U.S. donations, said the pro-life veteran, “gives even more urgency to our request for thorough and objective investigations into all State Department and USAID funded activities related to Kenya’s proposed constitution." "I hope that all investigative agencies will take our request seriously and act swiftly in this matter,” said Smith.
 
Smith authored the May 6 letters and was joined by Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18), the Ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Darrell Issa (CA-49), the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee. All three Members of Congress have broad legal oversight jurisdiction concerning federal international funds. [D.C., May 26, 2010, www.LifeSiteNews.com, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10052606.html

 

 

 

 

Obama Admin May Have Illegally Spent $10 Million Promoting Abortion in Kenya

New information obtained by a member of Congress makes it appear the Obama administration has spent $10 million potentially illegally promoting a pro-abortion constitution in Kenya. Obama officials were thought to have spent $2 million but Rep. Chris Smith says that figure could exceed $10 million.

Lobbying for or against abortion is prohibited under a provision of federal law known as the Siljander Amendment annually included in the State, Foreign Operations Appropriations Act.

The amendment reads, “None of the funds made available under this Act may be used to lobby for or against abortion,” and violations are subject to civil and criminal penalties under the Antideficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341."

Smith, the leading Republican on the House Africa and Global Health Subcommittee, and two other members of Congress have called for a probe into the Obama administration's spending in support of a campaign to get the pro-abortion constitution approved in Kenya in August.

The three sent a May 6 letter to the Inspectors General at the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development seeking a probe.

Today, Smith's office informed LifeNews.com that subsequent information uncovered by investigators has revealed that actual U.S. taxpayer expenditures in support of the pro-abortion constitution are estimated to exceed $10 million.

“This week I learned that U.S. taxpayer expenditures in support of the proposed constitution may exceed $10 million—five times the level we original suspected," Smith said.

“This massive spending will undoubtedly be directed to those entities that are pressing for ratification of the proposed constitution. Such support will further enable passage of a constitution that is opposed by many pro-life leaders in Kenya, because it enshrines new rights to abortion. As such, the funding is a clear violation of federal law against use of U.S. taxpayer funds to lobby for or against abortion,” Smith explained.

He added, “Learning of significant additional U.S. donations gives even more urgency to our request for thorough and objective investigations into all State Department and USAID funded activities related to Kenya’s proposed constitution. I hope that all investigative agencies will take our request seriously and act swiftly in this matter."

As LifeNews.com reported, US Ambassador to Kenya Michael Ranneberger called last month on the African nation's political leaders to rally the people to pass the referendum.

Smith authored the May 6 letter with Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, the Ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee.

Ranneberger issued a statement praising the Kenya parliament for passing the proposed constitution and urging President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga to rally support for it.

He also suggested the Obama administration would fund a national campaign to persuade the people to adopt the document.

Although the draft contains language advocating the right to life for unborn children, it contains a section with a health exception that essentially opens the nation to unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason.

Before the revised constitution can come into force, it must be approved by popular vote — expected in July or August.

“Kenya’s current constitution includes no reference to abortion and abortion is not legally permitted in Kenya except to save the life of the mother," the pro-life Republican lawmakers said.
[26May2010, Steven Ertelt, Washington, DC,http://www.lifenews.com/int1555.html ]

 

 

 

 

McDonald's Ad in France Promotes Teenage Homosexuality

A new McDonald's ad in France, part of their large "come as you are" ad campaign,  features a homosexual teen speaking sweetly to his male paramour before he is forced to closet his emotions before a presumably insensitive father.

"We see McDonald's decision to backhand hundreds of millions of traditional family values people," Bill Johnson, President of the American Decency Association, told LifeSiteNews, "and align themselves with promoting the godless behavior of a few."

In the ad, a boy sitting in McDonald's receives a call from his lover while his father orders a meal.  He tells his lover that he was thinking about him, and that he misses him, before he hangs up because his father is coming.

After his father sits down next to him, his father tells him that it is a shame that he is in an all-male class, because otherwise he would be able to get all the girls.

This is not McDonald's first homosexualist activism.  In 2008, McDonald's paid $20,000 dollars to become an official "organizational ally and corporate partner" of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC).

In the same year, McDonald's also helped sponsor the San Francisco Gay Pride Parade; Richard Ellis, vice president of communications for McDonald's USA, was also appointed to the board of directors of the NGLCC.

Yet because of a boycott started by the American Family Association on July 3rd of that year, Richard Ellis left the board of the NGLCC and McDonald's said that it did not plan to renew its membership with the NGLCC.

Bill Johnson called the new television spot "one of the most bewildering kinds of advertisements when you consider the fact that so many Americans across this country have done business with McDonald's."

He said that they were "testing, testing once again the marketplace, by running obvious[ly] pro-gay ads," despite their previous conflict with pro-family activists.
[2June2010, James Tillman and John-Henry Westen, France,  http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jun/10060210.html ]

 

 

 

Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood: Best Friends Forever or Coincidental Business Associates?

Like many families, my grandmother and great-grandmother both had breast cancer. The issue of wanting to fight what harms your family or friends is noble. So when I tell people that I do not support Susan G. Komen, an organization that exists to “fight breast cancer”, I normally get the look of one: why would you abandon your family? or two: oh, there goes one of those extremists.

However, my reasons are not that extreme, but rather principled. I’m sure many of you reading this article have also been confronted with the issue of if I ‘m pro-life then how can I support an organization that supports the nation’s leading abortion provider. Hopefully, the following principles can shed some light on how to respond sympathetically, yet firm with why you cannot wear pink, or join the race, or all the various ways that Susan G. Komen is supported.

Principle # 1 Don’t give to organizations that promote the shedding of innocent blood.

If this were a list of commandments, we could start with Thou Shall Not Kill. However, Proverbs 6:17 states that one of the seven things God hates are hands that shed innocent blood.

Unfortunately, Susan G. Komen has given over $3 million dollars between 2003 and 2008 to Planned Parenthood which is the nation’s leading abortion provider. While Susan G. Komen makes claims that these grants go for breast exams, once the funds go to Planned Parenthood they are fungible. For example, you can throw two twenty dollar bills into a purse one from a friend and one from your own account, but when you go to pay the light bill you use both.

The same is true with Planned Parenthood’s money it receives from Komen. Whenever someone applies for a grant they can say that while this $5,000 is going to breast cancer research, 20 percent of that money is going to pay for administrative costs like keeping the lights on and paying rent. So in essence, the money that people are raising to fight breast cancer is also going to keep the lights on at Planned Parenthood.

    According to the 2008 Annual Report from Planned Parenthood, breast cancer services decreased by 4% and abortion procedures increased by 6%.

     In 2008, Susan G. Komen gave $731,000 to Planned Parenthood.

Principle # 2 Know and Recognize the Risk Factors for the Disease You are Trying to Prevent.

There are certain risks that can increase an individual’s chance of getting breast cancer. While Susan G. Komen says that they believe in knowing your risk factors, they have repeatedly denied the link between breast cancer and one of the greatest avoidable risk factors, abortion.

 According to Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, “29 out of 38 worldwide epidemiological studies show an increased risk of breast cancer of approximately 30% among women who have had an abortion.”

When a woman has an abortion she interrupts the natural process of estrogen production and breast development. When a woman first becomes pregnant her body produc

es a Type 1 carcinogen, cancer causing agent, estrogen in order to nourish and provide for the baby. If the mother has her child, her body stops producing as much estrogen and her breasts mature. However, if that process is interrupted, the estrogen production continues and her breasts stay in an immature state, making them more susceptible to breast cancer.

Groups like Susan G. Komen acknowledge that the level of exposure to estrogen throughout a woman’s lifetime is one of the greatest predictors for breast cancer. Sadly, they do not acknowledge that the increased exposure to estrogen after an abortion could increase risks of breast cancer as well. For an organization whose primary goal is “to have a world without breast cancer”, you would think they would try to let women know of all the risk factors for breast cancer, especially those that are preventable like abortion.

Recently, in an article by Jill Stanek, pro-life author and blogger, asked a very thought-provoking question, “Is it really “morally permissible” to cause breast cancer in one room if screening for it in the next?”

Stanek also noted in her article that recently that the ties between Planned Parenthood and Susan G. Komen are running deeper and deeper. See an excerpt below from Stanek’s article:

    Three days ago a diligent pro-lifer in Washington state discovered on Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest’s IRS 990 forms that it has held a 12.5 percent share in Metro Centre, a mall in Peoria, Ill., since 2006. PPGNW is Washington’s largest abortion provider. (It is also currently under investigation for Medicaid fraud.) Metro Centre is owned by Eric Brinker. Eric Brinker is the son of Nancy Goodman Brinker, the founder of SGK. Eric also sits on SGK’s board.

Eric was a stand-up guy and responded to most of my initial questions. He explained in an e-mail, “This share represents a minority, non-operating interest in the business which they inherited from one of the original shareholders, a resident of Peoria. I, Eric Brinker, have controlling interest in Metro Centre.” But when I pursued follow-up questions, Eric wrote he was no longer available. So there is much still unanswered. Why didn’t PPGNW cash in its inheritance? Why didn’t Eric buy? If the share was willed, it was worth something. The real-estate market was thriving in 2006. It appears both partners are OK with this now four-year-old business partnership.

In essence, Planned Parenthood and Susan G. Komen’s nephew own a mall together.

The bottom line is that Susan G. Komen is not accomplishing its mission every time it gives to Planned Parenthood.

Every time a woman has an abortion and part of the money to fund that center … came from Komen, they are putting women at a greater risk for breast cancer.

Every organization, no matter how noble the cause they claim to represent, seems to be — needs to be — held accountable.

The question is, will you?

To continue your search for the ties between Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood, please visit:

Susan G. Komen for the Cure Awards 72 Grants to Planned Parenthood
http://www.bdfund.org/breastcancer.asp

Komen Giving to Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz Down as Donations Drop
http://lifenews.com/nat6297.html

Planned Parenthood Deepens Link to Breast Cancer Group
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=134729

Susan G. Komen’s List of Grants to Planned Parenthood
http://ww5.komen.org/ResearchGrants/CommunitybasedGrants.html

Studies about the Link between Abortion and Breast Cancer
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/index/

Report: Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood: A Visible Link http://www.lifeissues.org/AbortionBreastcancer/komen/fact_sheet.pdf

Filed under Birth Control, Parenting, Pregnancy, abortion, anti-abortion, breast cancer, planned parenthood, pro-choice

Tags: abortion, planned parenthood, susan g Komen, abortion breast cancer link, nancy brinker
[13May2010, http://georgialife.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/susan-g-komen-and-planned-parenthood-best-friends-forever-or-coincidental-business-associates/  by Hannah Carter, Director of Education; 20May10, Prolife America Daily News]

 

 

Resource:New Online Resource for the Family Launched At UN
The Doha International Institute for Family Studies and Development (DIIFSD) launched a new research tool aimed specifically towards families and children.

The Global State of the Family Index — http://globalfamilyindex.org.qa/ — provides the latest cross-national indicators on the status of families around the world including: rates of infant mortality, maternal mortality, marriage and divorce as well as economic indicators.

The Qatar-based DIIFSD conducts research and promotes scholarship on "the legal, sociological and scientific basis of the natural family as the fundamental unit of society." [19May10, Singson]