You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘abortion’ tag.
Kevin DuJan at HillBuzz shared breakfast with his black friends at a Chicago hotel recently.
One of their hot issues, along with their opposition to gay marriage, is their frustration with abortion and Planned Parenthood.
This is what DuJan had to say (emphases mine):
… every time someone comes out screaming about wanting more abortions that the correct response would be to call that woman a racist and tell her that she’s only doing this so more black babies could be killed. ”That would shut those [morally derelict women] up in a heartbeat if Republicans [and other pro-life supporters] would do that…just call them racists and they will run for the hills. It will work on the Planned Parenthood crowd. Go and start accusing them of being a racist organization and watch all Hell break loose”. The Think Squad has always been very open about how useful accusing someone of being a racist can be, particularly if you are doing it to anyone on the Left…since the Left FREAKS OUT when its own weapons are used against it.
I’ve seen articles out there talking about how Obama’s decision to embrace gay marriage has really hurt him with black people (which is true …) but it’s really the abortion celebration that Democrats held in Charlotte that’s angered black women in particular.
Pro-life campaigners should feel free to play the race card.
In fact, as recently as a few years ago — and perhaps even now, who knows? — you could call Planned Parenthood and ask that your donation be dedicated to the extermination of a specific race in a specific city. No sound needed for this short video recording an actual conversation (a set-up, but Planned Parenthood appeared to accept the premise). A transcript is included in the video:
The Advocate, which is behind the video, is not the American gay magazine but a UCLA action group.
We are now beginning to see some questionable stories after the London 2012 Olympics and Paralympics Games. Two follow.
On the day that a story about mother-to-daughter womb transplants in Sweden appeared, the Telegraph also reported a request for a ‘ban’ on abortions where disability in the foetus has been detected. Interestingly, this did not come from groups of or for the disabled but from Catholic and Evangelical Protestant church groups.
The Paralympic Games were a joy to watch and, as I said previously, got many of us thinking differently about disability. This can only be a positive.
However, one has to wonder about the way disabled people are treated in general in the UK — benefits, mobility, job opportunity. Is this appeal for an abortion ban a form of emotional blackmail?
Women who want an abortion will go where they can get one, regardless of the law. Many Irishwomen came to the UK, teenage girls included, to get abortions. I don’t read so much about that now.
Here are a couple of reader responses, the first — and most recent — from a disabled person (emphases mine):
blondieuk: How dare these religious groups try to hijack the good feelings after the Paralympics for their own political and religious ends.
The athletes don’t triumph over their disabilities – they like myself, just make the best of what we can.
At a time when the disabled need all the help we can get with unfair benefit cuts, lack of access to jobs, lack of public transport we can use and an increase in hate crimes – what do the religious groups do ? – try to use disabled athletes for propoganda purposes.
Shame on you.
I’m disabled and fully support decisions made by families on what to do with unwanted pregnancies – even if the embryo has the same disabilities as I have.
If you want to help the disabled how about giving us a job or a tube we can get into or access to benefits when we are too sick to work instead of cynically using us for your own ends.
Anita Bellows: The Paralympics might trigger this call, but the way disabled people are treated by this government makes for the opposite argument.
MarinaS: Shame on you Telegraph for giving a platform to such an exploitative campaign. No disability campaigners or groups signed this letter; it is a case of outside religious interests exploiting the disabled (who have enough to worry about these days, thanks) to push an anti-woman agenda.
Organisations like Life are pushing for a ban on all abortions, not just specific types. This is clearly a disingenuous wedge campaign on their part. A respectable broadsheet should not encourage such bad-faith arguments, especially ones that usurp the voices of the disabled.
This is a sensitive issue which the disabled, their families and their support groups should be mooting first.
The second news story involves an exhortation from the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, to businessmen. He believes they should model themselves on Olympian ideals. I can see a case for excellence, good ethics, sporting teamwork and so forth. However, I fear this is not what he has in mind:
We have no political agenda. We have instead a moral tradition that has accumulated wisdom down the centuries, drawing on the twin sources of revelation and reason.
It has given us an outline of a paradigm of good business practice that is contained in Catholic Social Teaching. This talks of solidarity and subsidiarity and their relation to common good, of the unique human dignity of every person specially those who are poor, vulnerable or disadvantaged, and it also talks about the nature of work and human creativity. And it is intensely conscious of the content and influence of culture, the shared values of any society that can do so much good – and if they go wrong, much harm.
I am joining prominent leaders of business and industry at a conference in London today [Tuesday Sept 18] in discussion of what it would take to bring about a renewal of the business culture in Britain.
We have sub-titled it “Uniting corporate purpose and personal values to serve society”, because we have detected a tendency for business people to feel they need to adopt a different set of values in business than those which they apply in the rest of their lives. That intriguing insight clearly needs further investigation.
Hmm, that sounds suspicious, too, especially as he goes on to mention that he and the Archbishop of Canterbury are in agreement on the matter. ‘No political agenda’, only that of the social gospel. (For more on this, please see my Marxism / Communism page and the heading ‘Communism and the Church Today’.)
Neither of these news items is completely honest. And that is not necessarily the Telegraph‘s fault.
The following is for mature readers only.
My jaw dropped in disbelief the other day when I read this post on one of the most famous colas in the world (emphases in the original):
Thought of as a soft drink. Strong enough to kill.
Yes. One 12 oz oca Cola [sic] is all it takes to end a human life. Many women when late try to end their pregnancy, in poor countries, and over a period of time, they’ve worked out the best way to do it.
All they need is a 12 oz bottle of Coca Cola. This they boil for fifteen minutes. Then they leave it out in the midday sun from morning til afternoon.
This must do something to alter the chemical composition, because that alone, when drunk, can be fully effective to cause an abortion. They only add headache pills to beef up the solution, and whack, the pregnancy’s over. It works in about half of cases, my partner assures me. Her friends have used it successfully.
What chemicals are there inside Coca Cola which achieves this outcome, I wonder?
Another report says that a metal coin left in Coca Cola for a week will dissolve into the liquid. You put an egg in Coca Cola and the shell disappears.
What’s in that drink, for God’s sake?
It attracted two anonymous comments asking for more information. Another person mentioned the douche method from the 1950s and 1960s, which I’ll get to below.
First, however, let’s look at the issue of the pointed accusation at the world’s top cola drink manufacturer. Would the world’s other leading brand work as well? What about other brands of cola? Surely, they contain nearly the same ingredients. What about non-cola drinks?
Furthermore, once the cola is combined with headache pills, then it is no longer cola as originally manufactured.
One might as well ask what is in the headache pill — note, the brand was unspecified — that acts as a possible abortifacient.
And no one has speculated on the effect of hot sunshine, boiling and how combining a soft drink with headache pills under those conditions produces a halfway-reasonable abortion method.
One thing is clear: the substances will have all been altered either by heat or by combining one with the other. Neither colas nor headache pills can produce the effect as they are, if such an effect really exists.
I searched the Internet and could find nothing to support this method, which I can only conclude must be purely anecdotal with a 50% success rate.
Ladies — do not expect this method to work. Men — think a little bit about the above questions before advising people not to drink a particular brand of cola.
Now to the original Coca-Cola abortion myth.
Nearly 60 years ago, a story developed saying that douching with Coca-Cola would produce a home abortion. This was common currency until sometime in the 1960s. The origins of the story are unclear.
However, anyone — man or woman — who has paid attention in high school biology class will know instinctively and logically that this is anatomically impossible.
Let’s explore myth and reality further.
How was the method meant to work?
From Urban Dictionary:
The practice of rinsing the vaginal vault with a carbonated beverage, such as a cola drink. The can or bottle is usually agitated vigorously post coitus, and the ensuing spray is directed towards the vaginal opening. In the 1950s, prior to availability of the oral contraceptive pill, this was considered a form of birth control, and Coca cola was thought to have some spermicidal properties. Referred to in the song “Coca Cola Douche” by 60s New York band, The Fugs.
Snopes says that Dr Pepper was also used. The carbonic acid in the shaken bottle of the soft drink was thought to act as a spermicide and that the sugar would ‘explode’ sperm cells. They cite studies which have tested for spermicidal properties in Coca-Cola; the initial positive results by Harvard University researchers in 1985 could not be replicated by other teams around the world. A Taiwanese group concluded that ‘cola has little if any spermicidal effect’. The same holds true for Pepsi-Cola. Nigeria’s Krest Bitter Lemon, studied in 1992, seemed to work the best; researchers attributed this to the lemon — an alkaline (not acid) property — in the drink. It is unclear whether further research on Krest was done. Note that the researchers experimented with the soft drinks on sperm in vitro — in glass — so, using test tubes. It is highly unlikely that Krest would work as a post-coital douche.
Why doesn’t it work?
Sexologist Dr Ruth Westheimer, writing for Dummies.com, explodes the myths about pregnancy. This is worthwhile reading, especially as I have known a few young women who were caught out by the first time, standing up and withdrawal myths.
Douching is useless both for hygiene and birth control purposes. If you’ve heard that douching — with vinegar, Coca-Cola, commercial douches, or anything else — prevents pregnancy, don’t believe it. By the time you finish with intercourse and douche, many sperm have already begun their trip toward the egg and are beyond your ability to flush them out.
The sugar may also give the user a yeast infection.
It amazes me that the following even needs saying in the 21st century, but …
Drinking soft drinks or douching with them to induce an abortion will not work.
What about Coca-Cola’s ability to clean pennies?
This will work with any soft drink, not just Coca-Cola.
From Wiki Answers:
Simply put, coke is acidic on the pH scale. If you don’t remember what the pH scale is, it is a measure of how acidic or alkaline a substance is. Coke is about 3 on the pH scale, making it decently acidic (just so u have a comparison distilled water is 7 on the pH scale which is neutral). In short acid eats away at metals while alkaline eats away at protein. So when calcium and zinc build up on your penny soaking it in coke will eat away at the metals built up, leaving it nice and shiny.
Side note: alkaline pH substances eat away at proteins so that’s why we use high alkaline products to clean our sinks and toilets.
Bottom line: carbonated soft drinks are acidic. Soft drink acids target metals, not humans.
Now let’s stop the nonsense about carbonated drinks.
Now there is a controversial triangle of topics.
A few recent news items caught my eye:
- The Amish and Muslims are exempt from Obamacare because both religious groups object to insurance. Two states are also exempt. Hmm. Anna’s Clue Tank points out that the health care package is unconstitutional as it denies equal protection and smacks of totalitarianism. It also seems, to me, as if these exemptions show favouritism to certain groups. Beyond that, it’s just a bad idea (and isn’t how the NHS works). IRS agents deciding whether you’ve got the right Obamacare plan, i.e. paying enough into government coffers? You couldn’t make it up. However, there is good news on the horizon, as a number of Protestant evangelicals support the 12 lawsuits Catholic organisations have filed against Obamacare.
- William Peter Blatty, the 85-year author of The Exorcist, might sue Georgetown University in Washington DC’s Diocese Court of Canon Law. Although he graduated from Georgetown in 1950, he has been unhappy with the Jesuit-run university’s drift away from Catholicism. The last straw for him was their inviting Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to be their 2012 Commencement speaker. The Archdiocese of Washington (DC) also found the invitation ‘shocking’. Shades of the University of Notre Dame’s inviting President Obama to be their Commencement speaker in 2009. The Diocese of Fort Wayne was also outraged but couldn’t do anything about it. They do not have direct control over religious orders, i.e. Notre Dame’s Congregation of the Holy Cross.
- Speaking of Notre Dame, the elderly priest Father Norman Weslin, who was so cruelly manhandled by security staff there after peacefully protesting against abortion during Commencement weekend in 2009, is now very ill. The priest has been living at an Alzheimer’s residence for the past two years but his health is deteriorating. Norman Weslin served his country as a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army. He started the Mary Weslin Homes for Pregnant, Unwed Mothers in memory of his late wife, also firmly pro-life. Father Weslin was ordained in 1986. Please remember him in your prayers.
- Back to Georgetown and the Washington Post article concerning William Peter Blatty. Anna’s Clue Tank picked up on number of Catholic comments against Blatty and in defence of Georgetown. As Anna rightly observes:
… since they are unsure of what the Catholic Church stands for and they don’t want to stir themselves on a Saturday or a Sunday to attend Mass, I suggest they buy a recent copy of a book called Catechism of the Catholic Church. It might do them a world of good. And when they questions they could talk to the parish priest. It could be an eye opening experience …
As for Georgetown (which covered up Jesus’s name for Obama’s team in 2009):
Perhaps they do need to get out the incense, Holy Water, crack open a Bible, and then examine themselves. Then they just might discover the log in their eye and remove it. Might find again the path St. Ignatius of Loyola set out for all Jesuits. And as a result – Go forth and set the world on fire.
We all hoped the same would happen at Notre Dame, unfortunately, it was business as usual.
“…all who hate Me, love and court death.” — Proverbs 8:36
“…sin, when full grown, gives birth to death.” — James 1:15a
Once again, thanks to a serendipitous trawl of the Net, I happened across two online posts, at least 15 years apart, which discuss the same topic: what America (and the rest of the West) must be on guard against.
First, from the 1990s, a few excerpts from an article by Cutting Edge Ministries‘ director, David Bay. It’s called ‘Six-Step Attitudinal Change Plan’ and was originally broadcast on radio. This is one of those items which if I had read it when he originally posted it, I would have passed it by without a second glance. However, it ties in so well with what Linda Kimball (Patriots and Liberty) and I have been discussing for the past few weeks that it is really a must-see. Most emphases in bold below are mine. Those in red are mine; the rest are in the original.
The moral bankruptcy of our society is well-documented.
Few people understand why we have become morally bankrupt. However, when we look at society through the eyes of God, through the Bible, we can easily see why we are facing the unprecedented troubles today …
Now consider the following news briefs:
Three weeks ago, we showed that America has rejected our traditional Christian Values Foundation, replacing it with a Satanic Values Foundation. Once we view our daily news with this focus, we can easily see why we are facing daily crimes of great variety and incredible atrocity. But, this is only part of the horror; the rest of the story is that most Americans subscribe to many Values of Satanism without realizing that they have also fallen victim to this trap. To quickly review:
Again, we quote the Satanic Bible, the most common Values:
- Personal selfishness, i.e., greed and pride.
- Physical lust.
The elevation of these Satanic values to the level of encouraging its members to deliberately indulge in them has produced tremendous societal effects:
- Strong desire for power over others.
- Strong desire for accumulation of wealth and material possessions.
- Strong sexual desires, to be satisfied no matter who might be harmed.
- Life becomes cheapened, losing God-given sanctity.
- Obsession with violence and murder.
- Lack of compassion or empathy for those individuals who are handicapped or who are ill.
- Obsession with death. Death symbols begin to appear in society, and followers begin to fix their minds on death. Remember, hard-core Satanism demands human sacrifice, the younger the better. If our theory is correct, we should be able to see our society killing the innocent …
The Six Step Attitudinal Change Plan works like this:
- Some practice so offensive that it can scarcely be discussed in public is advocated by a RESPECTED expert in a RESPECTED forum.
- At first, the public is shocked, then outraged.
- But, the VERY FACT that such a thing could be publicly debated becomes the SUBJECT of the debate.
- In the debate, sheer repetition of the shocking subject gradually dulls its effect.
- People then are no longer shocked.
- No longer outraged, people begin to argue for positions to moderate the extreme; or, they accept the premise, challenging, instead, the means to ACHIEVE it.
EXAMPLES: 1. DRUG LEGALIZATION
1. According to Newsweek magazine, December 25, 1989, respected American officials, both liberal and conservative, Republican and Democrat, have begun to call for the legalization of drugs, claiming all our efforts have miserably failed.
2. At first, the public is shocked and outraged. This outrage has been led by other respected American officials …
3. Even discussing drug legalization at such high levels in our government gives the issue a stamp of legitimacy.
4. This war of words provides the sheer repetition necessary to dull the public’s opposition.
5. People are now becoming less shocked by the proposal.
6. No longer shocked, the focus of the debate shifts to moderating the extremes of both sides of the debate.
So we can see just as in the case of abortion, a compromise will then be reached that will legalize drugs in a limited manner. Several years later, American public opinion will have been changed sufficiently to allow for ever-wider legalization. (This point is very key: Limited acceptance of the controversial proposal is always fatal, because it opens the firmly-shut door just a crack. This tiny beginning then allows the door to be systematically opened wide.)
EXAMPLES: 2. CHANGING SEXUAL PREFERENCES
TV, Newspapers, and Magazines are strongly supporting the campaign for public acceptance of homosexuality. TV shows, movies, and articles in printed media have been consistently presenting a picture of validity and normalcy in the homosexual lifestyle. Simultaneously, Governmental Agencies, certain elected officials, and our courts have been actively re-shaping laws which promote this normalcy theme. Clearly, our entire society is moving rapidly and strongly toward full acceptance, and Mass Media is leading the charge.
Remember Sodom and Gomorrah? (Genesis 18:16-19:29). God’s actions amount to a NATIONAL capital execution. Consider the scene: God’s Holy Angels, bodily incarnated as men, visit Lot’s house to warn him to flee Sodom before God’s physical judgment falls. Homosexual men have seen these angels enter Lot’s house, so they surround the house and loudly call to the angels to come outside so they could have homosexual relations with them …
The entire society of Sodom was supportive of homosexual activity … God not only condemned this societal support, He physically destroyed the cities in punishment …
We see this kind of societal support for homosexual behavior in America. But, there is more, as Lesbianism is now being promoted in women’s magazines, on T.V., and in newspapers.
We have gone through all 6 steps of the Plan are now in the process of opening the door wide.
Today, we see a steady Mass Media drumbeat to convince Americans that traditional Judeo-Christian values governing heterosexual relationships is out-of-date and has been replaced. Thus, we see TV sitcoms which depict couples living together without being married and even raising children together …
Newspapers feature article after article which depict real-life situations in which men and women, living together without being married, appear happy and prosperous.
Pornography is the avenue by which the Six-Step Attitudinal Change Plan has traditionally worked in America. Both mediums of printed material and video material has changed the values of many … All the mediums of Mass Media are now running many articles on real-life stories of sexual perversions. Even when the tone of the article is negative, even horrific, sheer repetition is at work.
EXAMPLES: 3. ADVANCE DEATHMAKING As Desirable/Noble/Courageous/ Advantageous To Society
Americans are being convinced that Individual Euthanasia is a right which society should protect and advance …
After the Jewish Holocaust, many Jewish scholars studied German society to discover how the nation of the Martin Luther Christian Tradition could turn into one of the greatest mass killing machines in history. One study, The Nazi Doctors, by Robert Lifton, states emphatically the Nazi Holocaust could never have occurred if the intermediate step of Euthanasia had not first occurred. The individual’s “right to die” very quickly became the government’s “right to kill“.
German Public Opinion was molded by films showing incurable people being “helped” by sympathetic physicians. Medical Committees were set up in local communities comprised of local physicians, to decide whether a person was medically incurable, and thus eligible for euthanasia. German public acceptance for Euthanasia was begun by activist doctors, was promoted by activist doctors, and throughout the Mass Death Camps, was directed by activist doctors …
This is one of the concerns I have about David Cameron’s Big Society localism. It could potentially spiral out of control very quickly, in this way or in others. Earlier this summer, the BBC featured a television show about British author Terry Pratchett, an Alzheimer’s victim, who discusses and investigates euthanasia. He would like to have it when the time comes. So, already, we have the respected source and we are becoming accustomed to the idea of death on demand.
EXAMPLES: 4. Reduce “Overpopulation” of the Earth
… What are the New Age answers to this `horrible’ over-population of the earth? We have listed just two of their answers; please understand they are utilizing the Six Step Attitudinal Change Plan to achieve their goal. Remember the supreme importance in this Plan of Point #4, creating a tremendous battle in the media and in the streets between opposing sides. This battle creates the sheer repetition necessary to erode people’s opposing attitudes.
Abortion on Demand
When all 6 points of the Six-Step Attitudinal Change Plan have properly completed, the door has been opened just a crack to allow the objectionable process and only in certain circumstances. Then, the door is systematically forced open wider and wider, until the point is reached where the formerly objectionable practice is occurring constantly and for whatever reason. Clearly, we have been at this point with abortion. Since 1973, over 27 million American babies have been killed!! Every abortion prevents the population of the earth from getting larger, thus contributing to their goal of reducing the world’s population by two-thirds! …
This is true. Britain’s Daily Mail carries many stories on doctors advising abortions for the possibility (!) of a club foot or cleft palate; the latter can be operated on quite routinely and if the first cannot, custom-made orthopaedic shoes and physiotherapy enable the person to walk reasonably well. This was true even when I was growing up in the 1960s. So, if any doctor suggests an abortion for either of these conditions, just say no.
Sarah Kliff looked at American abortion data for Newsweek magazine in 2010 and from data gathered from a reproductive rights think tank, the Guttmacher Institute, calculated that 40% of American women have had abortions. 40%! She writes (emphases mine throughout):
This is, to be fair, a crude estimation. It does not factor in some teenage abortions, although it does get most of them, since both the pregnancy and abortion rates of 18- to 19-year-olds are much higher than those of 15- to 17-year-olds (see tables 2.2 and 2.3 of this Guttmacher report for the data). Nor does this estimate take into account how many of those 45 million abortions were among women having more than one, which could reduce the overall percentage. At the same time, women who had abortions pre-Roe are left out, as are those who had illegal abortions post-Roe (yes, that still happens). Working with the data that we do have on the prevalence of abortion, I think 40 percent is a pretty good, albeit imperfect, estimate.
If anything, I believe the debate among our readers really hits home one of the main points of my story: since we do not talk much about abortion, we generally underestimate just how prevalent it is.
Keep in mind that it’s not the cool, clinical procedure as presented in the media. It’s not like going for a botox treatment at lunchtime. There are many variables involved — physical and emotional. Many women live with the trauma for the rest of their lives. It can also have a knock-on effect on the way they relate with other people — friends, families, boyfriends or colleagues.
Next up from 2009, we have a post from Todd of Blue Collar Philosophy who has a train of thought similar to that of David Bay of Cutting Edge Ministries (the first article). Below are extracts from his post, ‘The Great Evangelical Collapse’. It outlines a book he hopes to publish. Todd, by the way, was a former Dead head (as in Grateful) and has a Master’s degree in the Philosophy of Religion and Ethics.
My manuscript centers on the conflict and influence the liberal spirit of the age is having on Christianity in America. The particular manifestation of this spirit of the world is humanist/liberal/progressive and ultimately satanic and it stands in total opposition to an orthodox/conservative biblical view of the world.
Chapter 1. Death of a Dead Head: From Jerry to Jesus
I use my testimony as an opening chapter to set up the how ideas have consequences. The ideas that are dominating American society and politics stem from the spirit of the age which stands in total opposition to the truth of God’s Word in the Bible. Ideas are inherently religious in nature and inform our notions of truth and have radically different effects on our ethical views and how we live. I explain my life and liberal world view before becoming a Christian and how radically my life changed afterward.
Chapter 2. The Dual Crisis
This chapter further details the liberal spirit of the age and its influence on America’s cultural life. The wars of the twentieth century have left mankind in a dual crisis of meaning and value. America’s consumer mentality, coupled with this crisis, has led to a fast food religious and moral outlook that ultimately places the justified self, the autonomous person at the center of the moral universe …
Chapter 3. Homosexuality: Liberation from Self-Control
This new justified self cannot be restrained in the pursuit of the satisfaction of any desire it may have. When meaning and value are assumed to be relative then everything is up for grabs including human sexuality. A radical gay rights agenda has developed around the idea that homosexuality is just another normal expression of human sexuality and ought to be accepted as such. Tolerance is no longer putting up with something one disagrees with but is now synonymous with complete acceptance which also entails promotion. I put forth a broad response to this agenda by looking at the biological, philosophical, theological, and political reasons to reject this agenda based on a sexual act.
The assault on the Christian view that life has value in that it was created by God has disastrous consequences for the defenseless among us. I respond to the arguments in favor of abortion and euthanasia by articulating a view of human personhood that is not relative or emergent based on some subjective criteria that constantly changes. Under this liberal view, life has value only if those who stand in power say it does and there is no way to check such arbitrary assertions. Only by grounding the value in life in it being a unique creation of God can personhood not be compromised.
Chapter 5: Democracy in Crisis
This liberal spirit is also undermining our democracy. Through relativism, multiculturalism, and pluralism the foundation of Democracy is being destroyed. Removing self-control and value will usher in a new form of totalitarian government in America. With the removal of internal restraint people see no reason to refrain from satisfying their immediate desires no matter how perverse they may be. In order for Democracy to survive people need to exercise self control …
Chapter 7: Biblically Based Renewal
The only institution that can respond and challenge this liberal spirit of the age is the Christian church. The tragedy is that the Christian church in America is falling under the same sway of this worldly spirit. Christians have accommodated and compromised their faith to such an extent that there is little difference in how they live. Christians who claim to be against abortion or say homosexuality is a sin voted for a liberal candidate like Barack Obama who would not stand against infanticide as a state Senator. He is also advocating for gay rights. There is a widening gap between what Christians say they are for and the consistent application of such affirmations to their lives. This allows for relative qualifications of the objective moral absolutes stemming from God’s Word. A Christian will assert that he or she is personally against abortion “but” and fill in the rest. Any such qualification reveals a compromised faith that in the end is no different from someone with no faith at all. Christians need to return a biblically based world view that stands alone and independent from the influences of the world. This will help begin to transform the Christian church in America so that it can address the problems in our society as well …
We have spiralled downhill considerably over the past 20 years. Think back 50 years. These events and modes of thought would have been unimaginable then. It’s certainly time to pray and study the Bible.
The American actress Jane Russell died on Monday, February 28, 2010.
My parents and their friends were born around the same time as Miss Russell. No one, even my mother’s friends who were avid fans of film gossip, ever had a bad thing to say about her.
Some of her obituaries were better than others. A few mentioned her Christianity and conservative politics in passing whilst others explored these points in more depth. These things I didn’t know. They make interesting reading. Emphases mine throughout.
Born Ernastine Geraldine Russell on June 21 1921 at Bemidji, Minnesota, she grew up in California, graduating from Van Nuys School. Though her mother had been an actress, the young Jane did not initially entertain thoughts of a career in showbusiness, opting instead for employment as a chiropodist’s assistant. But showbiz was in the blood and in 1940, she enrolled in Max Reinhardt’s Theatrical Workshop. Later, she studied with Maria Ouspenskaya, with a little modelling on the side.
That was how Howard Hughes discovered her, earmarking her immediately for the Western he planned to make with brand new stars. Russell and Jack Buetel were cast in the leading roles. Though The Outlaw was not released for many years, Hughes’s publicity machine kept the stories churning about this actress with the phenomenal embonpoint.
[She] was … the daughter of a U.S. Army lieutenant and his wife, a small-part touring actress …
At the start of her career, she found herself pregnant at 18 by her high school sweetheart, Los Angeles Rams quarterback Bob Waterfield, who later became her first husband in 1943.
As she was not married, Russell went to a back-street quack. ‘I had a botched abortion and it was terrible. Afterwards my own doctor said: “What butcher did this to you?” I had to be taken to hospital. I was so ill I nearly died.’
The abortion left her unable to bear children. During her 25-year marriage to Waterfield, which she described as ‘tempestuous’, the couple adopted a baby girl, Tracy, and a British boy and then another boy.
In 1955, Russell helped to found the World Adoption International Fund, an organisation to place children with adoptive families and which pioneered adoptions from foreign countries by Americans.
For the rest of her life, she held to the belief that abortion was wrong in any circumstances — including even rape or incest.
A born-again Christian, long before that term was in general use, she formed the Hollywood Christian Group for weekly Bible study at her home, attended by many of the leading names in the film industry.
She also joined a singing group to record gospel songs, one of which made it into the charts.
Her marriage to Waterfield ended in divorce in 1968, and in that same year she married the minor stage actor Roger Barrett, but he died three months after the wedding.
Her third husband, to whom she was married for 25 years, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel, died in 1999.
Back to the Telegraph for more about the adoption of her English son after the Second World War:
“I’m the mothering type,” she admitted, when visiting England in the early Fifties to attend the Royal Command Film Performance. High on her agenda was “to adopt a really cute little English baby boy”, as she was unable to have children … Her mother, who was accompanying her, faced an even more challenging task. “I’ve come over”, she said, “to see if I can get hold of a rare German edition of the Bible”. “That”, added her daughter, “is the secret of our family’s success – religion. Mom always was devout.”
The quest for that “cute” little boy opened up a long and bitter battle, involving questions in the House and impassioned pleas by Lt-Col Marcus Lipton, Labour MP for Brixton, for the actress to return the 15-month-old boy, Thomas Kavanagh of South Lambeth, to his rightful mother. An agreement had been reached with the boy’s parents for him to spend three months with the actress in her Hollywood home, but legislation of 1950 expressly forbade parents to allow their children to be adopted by non-British subjects. In the end, after an 11-month struggle, Miss Russell did adopt Thomas Kavanagh in America, while the parents were discharged conditionally in London “for unlawfully permitting the care and possession of the child to be transferred”.
As far as politics went, the Mail relates:
In 1971, she made her Broadway stage debut in the Stephen Sondheim musical Company, and later in the decade appeared in TV commercials for Playtex Cross-Your-Heart Bras, with the catchphrase, ‘For us full-figured gals’.
Behind the scenes, however, she had been battling alcoholism for a number of years, and in 1978, there were worldwide headlines when she was arrested for drink-driving and jailed for 96 hours.
After that, she swore off alcohol, describing herself as ‘a teetotal mean-spirited Right-wing conservative Christian bigot’.
Asked what she thought of Hollywood liberals such as George Clooney, Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn, she replied: ‘I think they’re not well.’
In later life:
she moved to Santa Maria, California, to be close to her younger son.
She was visited there in 2004 by Leonardo DiCaprio, who was filming The Aviator and wanted her to tell him what his character, Howard Hughes, was really like.
In 2006, at the age of 84, though suffering from macular degeneration of the eyes and with hearing aids in both ears, Russell put together a musical show, The Swinging Forties, which played twice a month at the Radisson Hotel in Santa Maria.
It featured herself and about a dozen of the town’s residents, including a choir director and a retired police officer.
Asked why she did it, Russell said: ‘Out of boredom, and because there was nothing much going on in town for the older folks to do.’
Another ‘old school’ star passes. It won’t be long before I stop reading film stars’ obits. The new ones just aren’t worth the time.
Jane Russell recognised her sins and duly repented. May she rest in peace and may her family walk in the comfort of almighty God.
James Delingpole, Telegraph blogger and Spectator columnist, is keen on debunking the Church of Gaia.
So, it was no surprise that he latched on to Harold Lewis’s resignation letter from the American Physical Society, whose position on climate change can be found here. The position statement is the one to which Professor Lewis refers to below. (Thanks to Dick Puddlecote for featuring the Delingpole column.)
Since then, it appears that Professor Lewis will be joining The Global Warming Policy Foundation.
Here are excerpts from Professor Lewis’s letter (emphases mine throughout):
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood … Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that …
As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce … an honest appraisal of the situation at that time …
How different it is now. The … money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1/ … In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate.
2/ The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry … and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it … In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety … The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe.
3/ In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4/ So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science … I might note that it was not easy … you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.
5/ To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses … The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6/ As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it … I think it is the money … to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department … would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst.
And so would Tobacco Control, another leviathan spanning the world. But we’ll look at the spurious science behind that in another post.
It’s all money and job-generating stuff. And, as my readers have seen, it’s also all about Church unity. No dissension, no discussion, only agreement. After all, when funding and your job are at stake, what’s to discuss?
About this, Dick Puddlecote writes:
I have looked at tobacco control ‘science’. Just about all of it. And everything described by Lewis is not only replicated therein, but is more duplicitous, more resistant to debate, more mendacious, more money-oriented, and more corrupt, than anything Lewis will have witnessed.
Based on this experience, I can also offer a prediction. Lewis will be ostracised, his name blackened, his previous work dismissed as eccentricity, his future work dismissed as funded by oil companies. He will be expunged from the scientific community and threats of similar treatment will be issued to all who dare to commission him.
Or maybe, as one of Dick’s readers noted, they’ll just say he was ‘gaga’ or an ‘embittered’ old man. I hope not, but this is how these guys work. And they’re always in it for the long Gramscian game.
Delingpole’s blog post generated nearly 1,800 comments when I read it. It may have more now. A reader, Henrybrubaker, cited in the blog Banned, had this to say (brief excerpt below):
… Eco-fascists are … extreme and they are willing to go to any lengths to protect their criminal schemes. If they are not confronted, discredited and defeated could the future bring us an eco-genocide? There are those on the side of ‘gaia’ who think that is exactly what should happen.
The greenies will scream at me ‘How dare you compare us to the Nazis, we are not the same, we don’t want to build the death camps etc…’. Perhaps not, perhaps the majoity … don’t want to kill us all. However, these people are the tools, the useful idiots, of the extremist eco-fascists. They do the ground work for people with views like Pentti Linkola, the Finnish eco-fascist who wants to destroy the majority of humanity and essentially enslave the rest …
Mr Brubaker’s comment received 54 recommendations from his fellow readers.
Stewart Cowan of Realstreet does an outstanding job of dissecting ethical issues. In ‘Is Prince Charles a eugenicist? Are you without realising?’ he explores why the heir to the throne thinks the way he does:
Prince Philip wrote in the foreword to If I Were an Animal (1986),
In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.
He notes that the Prince of Wales wishes to be known as Defender of Nature when he becomes king:
Defender of Nature? The worry is: how much do his beliefs match his dad’s?
Cowan believes that the Church of Gaia is part of eugenics:
This is how the world’s elites view humanity – as a virus; a cancer spreading across the planet and killing it. I believe the main purpose of the environment movement is to sear images like these into people’s minds so that they will either willingly accept, or more likely, be forced to go along with a managed reduction in population: eugenics.
On the 10:10 campaign, he writes:
… They really seemed to believe as Prince Philip does and also appeared to revel in the bloody murder of those who won’t go along with them.
It seems that the only difference between the Nazis and the Ecofascists is the targets to be eliminated.
The mysterious Georgia Guidestones suggest the world’s population should be limited to half a billion people. These elite atheist globalist “Ten Commandments” are as follows. (Some of these should already be familiar as the groundwork was begun a long time ago)
1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely – improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion – faith – tradition – and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth – beauty – love – seeking harmony with the infinite.
10. Be not a cancer on the earth – Leave room for nature – Leave room for nature.
Whoever was responsible for these words clearly thought that at least nine out of ten people must be eliminated.
Notice how much prominence that second “commandment” has in western society today: Guide reproduction wisely.
The only ‘guidestone’ that makes any sense is Number 7, however, I suspect that would be used against us instead of for us.
He notes that ‘family planning’ has been around for many decades now:
It has been made to appear totally acceptable, even wholesome.
As I have written about before, Marie Stopes, “pioneer” of Britain’s abortion clinics, used to send her poetry to Adolf Hitler in adoration, while calling for the compulsory sterilisation of the diseased, drunkards, or simply those of bad character.
While that hasn’t quite happened yet, family planning is considered normal and many people believe that killing unborn humans is acceptable, even a “woman’s right”. This particular cull deprives many millions a year of their part in history.
I didn’t know that about Marie Stopes, did you?
What’s next? What about:
… a euthanasia industry to match the effectiveness of the abortion factories?
This should easily be achieved in this age of family breakdowns and the seemingly increasing disrespect for the elderly. Old folk will be told it is their right to be terminated in cases of illness, even a spot of depression or a harelip. They will be encouraged to feel they are a burden to the rest of society and the environment and eventually they’ll be volunteering to jump off cliffs (or ride their wheelchairs over). There will be posters in doctors’ surgeries alongside the family planning ones.
Who knows? Euthanasia may even be incorporated into family planning. For example, if you want four children, you should plan to have all the grandparents killed off by the time the fourth child arrives. It could be promoted as a double celebration: a new life comes into the world and an old timer gives his life for the planet so as to maintain humanity in perpetual balance with nature.
Cowan’s conclusion is chilling:
You could live with that, couldn’t you? Ask yourself how many of their lies you have bought up until now.
I can think of a group with whom they might start. Can you? Hint: it’s the only minority group worldwide that has no legal or state protection anywhere, increasingly deprived of housing, recreation and employment. If you think you know who it is, do leave a comment.
One thing you won’t see contributors to Your Freedom clamouring for is a reduction in term limits for abortion.
Guido Fawkes featured a post on the subject at the end of June and got roundly caned for it by his readers. Some of his readers’ comments were truly shocking in their callousness. Guido explained the situation concisely (emphasis in the original):
It seems counter to reason that unborn babies below 24 weeks are unable to feel pain. Any mother who has been through a pregnancy will tell you that their babies react to external stimuli; light, caffeine and noise will all get a reaction from within the womb.
Yet a review by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists’ says foetuses are “undeveloped and sedated”. Since it is from their ranks that those who perform abortions are drawn, Guido questions the scientific objectivity of the report. It would certainly ease their consciences to believe that abortions are painless. Guido is sceptical, they would say that wouldn’t they?
Guido helpfully provides the link to a Daily Mail story from 2009 about a little mite who was born at 23 weeks. Whilst still undersized at the time the article was written, little Jessica is a healthy lass and her parents are justifiably proud.
The Coalition really need to address this issue quickly. There are two issues here. One is that abortion is too often being used as a means of birth control — we have been desensitised and mistakenly see life in the womb as ‘a clump of cells’. The other is that medicine has come a long way since abortion was first legalised 40+ years ago. It’s time to take a good look at our hostility to human life, as exemplified by the august Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (shudder — who’d a thunk it?), and redress the balance. Our abortion limits and use of terminations is a travesty. See the latest UK abortion stats and read more about the procedure in general.
This just in — news of a premature baby left to die at Norwich University Hospital, despite her parents’ pleas to staff, because she was born at 22 weeks instead of 23 weeks. The mind boggles. Simply unconscionable.
Some of you have been searching for this information. Here is a breakdown of abortions by number and demographic since 2006 in California alone.
White females carried the burden at 53.6%. Black females had 35% of terminations. The remainder, roughly 12%, are made up of ‘others’ and ‘unknowns’.
Make of it what you will. In total, 627,321 abortions were carried out that year — in only one state.
This is a complicated story which goes back to last year.
Perhaps you have read about Sister Margaret McBride, at the time Vice President of Mission Integration at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, Arizona, who ‘excommunicated herself’ for authorising that an abortion be performed on a mother-of-four. Sister Margaret is a Sister of Mercy. The Most Revd Thomas J Olmsted is the Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix.
Much has been written about this case. especially by secularists and non-Catholics. It has turned the nun into a type of convenient martyr for the anti-Catholic brigade. To understand the matter fully, let’s examine the facts of which we are aware and ask a few questions.
Background: The mother in question was diagnosed with pulmonary hypertension in the first trimester of her pregnancy. St Joseph’s ethics committee met and Sister Margaret took a decision in this case. Catholic Online reports that the Arizona Republic stated St Joseph’s policy on abortion in its own coverage:
The first says that physicians cannot perform direct abortions under any circumstances, including for such reasons as to save the life of the mother.
A second directive adds, however, that “operations, treatments and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted … even if they will result in the death of the unborn child.” This directive is based on the Catholic philosophical principle of double effect, which says that if the treatment sought addresses the direct causes of the woman’s health condition (such as radiation treatment for cancer), but never intends to kill the unborn child (even though that may happen as a secondary, but unintended, effect of the lifesaving treatment), then it is morally licit.
Hospital officials claimed that they were following the second directive by aborting the baby.
Could Sister Margaret not have said, ‘Before we take a decision, I would like to discuss this with Bishop Olmsted and report back to you, at which time we will decide’?
With regard to double effect, how could a direct abortion not kill an unborn child?
How qualified would Sister Margaret have been as Vice President of Mission Integration to take that decision?
Abortion and saving a mother’s life: LifeSiteNews also carried this story. They spoke with Dr. Paul A. Byrne, Director of Neonatology and Pediatrics at St. Charles Mercy Hospital in Toledo, Ohio (emphases mine):
Dr. Byrne said, “I don’t know of any [situation where abortion is necessary to save the life of the mother].
“I know that a lot of people talk about these things, but I don’t know of any. The principle always is preserve and protect the life of the mother and the baby.”
Byrne has the distinction of being a pioneer in the field of neonatology, beginning his work in the field in 1963 and becoming a board-certified neonatologist in 1975. He invented one of the first oxygen masks for babies, an incubator monitor, and a blood-pressure tester for premature babies, which he and a colleague adapted from the finger blood pressure checkers used for astronauts.
Byrne emphasized that he was not commentating on what the woman’s particular treatment should have been under the circumstances, given that she is not his patient.
“But given just pulmonary hypertension, the answer is no” to abortion, said Byrne.
Byrne emphasized that the unborn child at 11 weeks gestation would have a negligible impact on the woman’s cardiovascular system. He said that pregnancy in the first and second trimesters would not expose a woman with even severe pulmonary hypertension – which puts stress on the heart and the lungs – to any serious danger.
A pregnant mother’s cardiovascular system does have “major increases,” but they only happen “in the last three months of pregnancy,” Byrne explained.
I must admit that when I read this story initially, I thought the lady was in her final trimester, only because I know a Catholic mother of five who was seriously ill with pulmonary hypertension with each of her pregnancies during that time. She was always fine up until that point, at which time she had to have plenty of bed rest or risk damaging hers or her baby’s health. Fortunately, all her children are healthy, active teenagers now. Of course, I realise that not every case is the same, but this particular mother told me that her doctor warned her that everything would be fine until the final three months. That was how pulmonary hypertension worked. And, yes, she was very ill indeed during those final weeks, but neither she nor her husband ever considered an abortion.
Did Sister Margaret’s patient have a history of pulmonary hypertension? What drugs or techniques could help to minimise it?
Excommunication: This is a highly complex topic, about which you can read more at Catholic Encyclopedia. It is unusual for the Church to declare someone anathema, even f you beg them to do so. I know a man who, in his mid-20s, had meetings with bishops and a cardinal. He pleaded with each to excommunicate him, but they refused. They said that even though he was an atheist at the time he met with them, who could predict that he wouldn’t come back to the Church one day? He had done nothing to warrant excommunication other than to develop some rather eloquent (yet flawed) arguments against Christian belief.
There are differing reasons for excommunicating people and differing degrees of excommunication. Sometimes the term is used when a priest or bishop refuses to give Communion to someone in their diocese (e.g. outspoken views on abortion). This usage may render a more severe — yet unintended — meaning. In this case, we do not know if Sister Margaret is excommunicated from the Church altogether. I would bet that she is still allowed to be a Sister of Mercy and live in community, albeit under some constraints. If so, she is still a Catholic, but without receiving the Sacraments or fully participating in the Mass. Bishop Olmsted may even lift Sister’s excommunication at a future date. Sister may also have some recourse to a higher authority, perhaps at the Vatican. Let’s not get too emotive over this.
Church discipline and abortion: In any event, excommunication is an example of Church discipline — in place to protect the faithful.
Catholic teaching is highly specific when it comes to abortion. Recall that Bishop Olmsted said that Sister Margaret ‘excommunicated herself’. Here is what the Catholic Encyclopedia says that excommunication applies to:
“Those who efficaciously procure abortion.” The fruitless attempt is not punished with excommunication; authors do not agree as to whether the woman guilty of self-abortion is excommunicated.
Therefore, any Catholic who helped this lady have an abortion has effectively excommunicated himself as a result.
The Catholic Church is not the only one to have done this historically. The Didache (‘did-a-kay’) appears to have been the first Church doctrine regarding abortion. Tertullian and St Cyprian developed it and gave their rationale. Whilst I cannot speak for our Lutheran cousins today, Martin Luther had no sympathy for any woman who wanted an abortion. He wrote:
If they become tired or even die – – that does not matter, let the woman die in childbirth.
I realise that Sister Margaret’s story comes at a time when the Catholic hierarchy overlooks what paedophile priests have done. And, yes, it does look as if a bishop is exerting undue pressure on a nun. However, all historical evidence points to firm Christian and Western policies on the matter until the 20th century, when the teachings and laws on abortion were thrown to one side.
Bishop Olmsted has exercised Church discipline. And that’s how it should be. Now, let him and the other bishops get on with cleaning up the priesthood.