Friday, May 29, 2009  --  Mixed messages on Supreme Court nominee

President Obama's selection for Supreme Court judge, to replace retiring Justice David Souter, has been receiving conflicting reviews so far.   New York federal appellate Judge Sonia Sotomayor has been criticized as too willing to craft law from the bench and deemed very likely to fully support "abortion rights." 

However, abortion advocates seem concerned about whether she will support "abortion rights" as they define them, given her ruling to uphold the Mexico City policy and a few other rulings that they would have expected one of their own to rule differently on. 

All I can say is, wouldn't that be nice if a few years from now, we learned that a liberal judicial selection did not satisfy those who supported her appointment, just as we have been disappointed so many times by so-called conservative selections that turned out to be extreme liberals?

Thursday, May 28, 2009  --  Real life experience after rejecting abortion of disabled

Yesterday I learned about the death of Faith Hope Walker, a baby born with a condition called anencephaly, in which a portion of the child’s brain fails to fully develop.  Myah Walker chose life for her baby and described the time from her daughter’s birth through May 23, as the “best 93 days of my life.” Faith passed away peacefully her mother's arms.

Doctors told Myah that her baby was alive only because "she was attached" to her mother and that even if she survived to birth, she would be neither able to hear nor see.  Every one of those dire assessments was incorrect.  Faith lived for three months and she was able to see and hear.

Myah determination to resist the pressure from the medical community for eugenic abortion of her daughter offers real life evidence of the truth expressed in one of the new IRLC radio messages, encouraging recognition of the rights of the disabled before birth.

Wednesday, May 27, 2009  --  Chicago March for Life was a success on May 22nd

I was one of the hundreds of Pro-Lifers who rallied and marched in downtown Chicago last Friday.  Dick Walsh, event organizer and chairman of Americans for Life, announced the primary purpose was to protest the Freedom Of Choice Act (FOCA) and U.S. government funding of abortion worldwide.

Despite problems with the sound system at both locations, the rallies at the Thompson Center and Federal Plaza were successful.  The march went from the first to the second location with the help of a large contingent of Chicago police to protect us from a few radicals supporting "abortion rights."

Speakers at the rallies included, Tom Brejcha, President of the Chicago-based Thomas More Society; Sandy Rios, talk show host on WYLL radio AM1160; Bishop Francis Kane, Chicago Archdiocese; Jim Finnegan, President of Illinois Choose Life; Mary Anne Hackett, President of Catholic Citizens of Illinois; Joseph M. Scheidler, National Director of the Pro-Life Action League; Diane Schroeder, President of Lutherans for Life; and Jill Stanek, nationally recognized blogger and nurse-defender of life.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009  --  Distorting both words and statistics to hide the facts

Back on January 22, 2009 President Obama observed the anniversary of Roe v. Wade by stating, “I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose."  He added, "While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue, no matter what our views, we are united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, reduce the need for abortion, and support women and families in the choices they make," he said. "To accomplish these goals, we must work to find common ground to expand access to affordable contraception, accurate health information, and preventative services."

If someone reduces the "need for abortion," would you expect to reduce the number of abortions?  Obama supporters who claim to be concerned about abortion certainly seem convinced that he will reduce the number of abortions. 

Some even claim that his programs will reduce abortions, while inaccurately suggesting that abortions increased under Bush.   These advocates seem to rely on fairy tales rather than facts to reach the conclusion that abortions increased while Bush was President.

So is there any unity possible under Obama on the goal of reducing abortions?   Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, recently attended a meeting at the White House for the purpose of finding "common ground" among people with differing views on abortion. 

Melody Barnes, Director of the Domestic Policy Council, led the meeting.   In response to input from Wendy Wright about a possible goal of reducing abortion, Barnes testily interrupted to correct her by stating, "It is not our goal to reduce the number of abortions."

What then might it mean to "reduce the need for abortion"?   Is it possible it actually means more abortions by providing government funding of abortion so that more women who "need" abortions will be able to obtain them?  If so, then "reducing the need for abortions" means increasing the number of abortions.  Once these poor women get their government-funded abortion, the need for abortion will have been reduced!

Might it be that "common ground" is based on slick semantics that suggest reducing the number abortions to some, while actually meaning increased abortions to those who propose to seek this common ground?  If not, exactly what does "reduce the need for abortion" mean when Obama's top official in charge of finding "common ground" says, "It is not our goal to reduce the number of abortions."?

While we are considering semantics, maybe this question needs to be asked at the next "common ground" meeting: Beyond affordable contraception, exactly what are "preventative services" referenced in Obama's January 22nd statement?   Is this a new term to describe abortion?

Friday, May 22, 2009  --  Politically incorrect education coming out

At first glance, the two articles I will reference here may not seem to be related.  However, once the first article establishes when human life begins, the conclusions reached about the abortive effects of the birth control pill in the second article are enhanced by that evidence.

David MacDonald, a pro-life musician and activist, says that a simple diagram explaining precisely the basic biology of when life begins has become one of his most useful tools in explaining the pro-life position to students at schools that he visits.

"When I gave the students copies of this simple diagram they immediately understood when life begins.  From there it was easy to show them what is wrong with abortion," explained MacDonald.  The diagram explains that a human being has 46 chromosomes, while a sperm and egg only have 23.  When the sperm and egg meet at conception, they combine to form the 46 chromosome: a human being.

Alton and Juliana Davis chose Sunday, May 17th, to make a public revelation of their own failure to follow Church teaching on contraception early in their marriage and to acknowledge the probability that they had aborted their first children through so-called "silent abortions," because of their use of artificial contraception.

The Davis's are co-founders of an apostolate called The Leaven, whose purpose is to defend the Catholic Church's teaching on the value of human life, and to support and promote Natural Family Planning in Nebraska by promulgation of the Church's encyclical on the sacredness of life and sexuality, Humanae Vitae.

"Today, May 17, 2009, is the day I decided to come out about my so-called 'silent' abortions caused by artificial contraception," said Juliana in a press release. "I had abortions that I never realized I had until I learned how several methods of birth control I used in the early 70's worked; that is, they caused the tiny babies (embryos) growing within my womb to abort without my knowing it because they were unable to implant in my uterine wall."

These are the facts of life that both young and old need to learn if we are to regain respect for human life, especially at conception.

Thursday, May 21, 2009  --  Student Advisory Council rejects abstinence

Yesterday the Chicago Sun-Times (on page 19) included an articled entitled "Teens urge teaching sex ed."  It reported that a statewide Student Advisory Council will recommend that schools be required to teach sex ed that presents "contraceptive options."

I first wondered about the origin of this Student Advisory Council, expecting it to be some kind of formulation of Planned Parenthood or the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health.  However, it seems to be accounted for on the State Board of Education web site, but how do its members get selected?

If this same Student Advisory Council recommended that since schools are so dangerous, students should be given training in use of firearms, I am sure that idea would be rejected immediately, but sex ed is politically correct these days so such a recommendation is considered to have merit.

Regardless of finding no direct connection between organizations, Planned Parenthood and the Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health are behind the push for casual sex ed in schools.  They even created a web site called "Responsible Sex Ed" to promote their cause.  Once they decided they did not need that web site anymore, it has been converted into a porn site.  Consider that a prediction on the effectiveness of their sex ed proposals.

Wednesday, May 20, 2009  --  Notre Dame quells dissent without dialogue

My April 23rd blog already gave examples of the lack of dialogue at Notre Dame with anyone who objected to the invitation of President Obama to give the commencement speech.  That lack of dialogue got ugly, as it turned into almost police state tactics to quell all dissent.

I might be persuaded that arresting people coming onto campus pushing baby carriages containing dolls bloodied with fake blood could possibly be justified, especially when they stated that they intended to get arrested.  The case of Fr. Norman Weslin seems to be quite a different matter since he only carried religious articles.  He describes the situation as follows:

I carried Christ's Cross and said The Rosary on the campus of Notre Dame dedicated to the Patroness of America and the Unborn in order to save the lives of our most precious babes while they are still dancing in their mothers’ wombs. I am a Catholic priest. It is my duty to speak out and to stop the killing of God’s children.

For this, the President of Notre Dame had me arrested and put in jail. Who could ever believe what they saw that day on television sets across the country? One Catholic priest, the President of a Catholic University demanding police arrest and jail another brother priest while honoring a man who claims “irreconcilable” differences with the Holy Catholic Church!!

Tuesday, May 19, 2009  --  "Choice" becomes a "climate of pregnancy discrimination"

We have learned of previous cases where owners of companies have pressured female employees to get abortions through threats that a pregnancy would get them fired.   In those cases, the women usually went for the abortion themselves because of fear of losing their jobs.

Now we learn that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Bloomberg News.  This company has been accused of condoning "systemic, top-down discrimination against female employees."

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg previously led Bloomberg News, and he was required to testify in this case where his company is accused of fostering a climate of pregnancy discrimination.  This situation is just more evidence that abortion is not accurately described as a "choice."

Monday, May 18, 2009  --  On the roadside, to educate Notre Dame on abortion

Yesterday, I rode one of the four buses sponsored by the Pro-Life Action League to participate in their well-organized event to educate those attending the University of Notre Dame graduation on what abortion looks like.  Coming from the expressway to the campus entrance the signs were organized to first show a healthy 8-week baby in utero.  Then came the signs showing a 10-week abortion, followed by the even more disturbing signs showing a late-term abortion.

Of course, another purpose was to protest Notre Dame's choice of commencement speaker so there were also signs stating "Shame on Notre Dame" and "Obama = abortion."  At my position we were holding the 10-week abortion sign and the "Obama = abortion" sign.  We got mostly positive responses from the people driving by toward the campus entrance.

About 90 minutes before the 2:00pm commencement Air Force One flew across the road close to our position.  We read the words "United States of America" on the plane without difficulty.  If President Obama was looking out the window, he certainly should have been able to see the line of people holding signs along the road.

After about two hours on the roadside, we brought the signs in, had a quick lunch, and took the buses onto the Notre Dame campus to attend the alternate graduation ceremony, held for those Notre Dame graduates who were not willing to tolerate the scandal represented by the selected commencement speaker. 

Over 20 students were acknowledged for their powerful statement in defense of preborn children by their alternate choice for recognition of their graduation day.  They were true heroic leaders on this sad day in Notre Dame history.  Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, led about 700 people in the Pro-Life Rosary to reflect on the value of all human life in support of these graduates.  They then received a long applause when moving their tassles to acknowledge their graduation, followed by a blessing from the priests in attendance including the local bishop, John D'Arcy.

Other assessments of the meaning and implications of Obama's Notre Dame appearance:

Pro-Life Leaders Dismayed by Obama's Abortion Remarks at Notre Dame
Excerpts From Significant Reports on Obama Speech at Notre Dame
Bishops Chaput, Finn Slam Fr. Jenkins Speech at ND Commencement: "Intellectual Vanity"
A False Theology: Obama's Appeal to Faith Runs Contrary to Christian Faith
Obama's Abortion Record Doesn't Match His Notre Dame Rhetoric
Letter from Two Catholic Women Arrested at Notre Dame
Thoughtful voice all but lost in Obama-Notre Dame drama  (John Kass)

Friday, May 15, 2009  --  Risks of brain death diagnosis and organ donation

Below is a draft of a new IRLC radio message.  Listen for this and other IRLC radio messages on WIND 560 AM beginning on June 8th.

This is Bill Beckman with Illinois Right to Life.

In the state of Illinois, if you choose to be an organ donor, you now register your intent in the Illinois Organ/Tissue Donor Registry. Did you know your intent becomes absolute, so it cannot be overruled by family members or other caregivers? Were you aware that the option to limit your donation to specific organs or tissues has been eliminated?

What if you decide not to register as an organ donor? If you say “no” when you renew your driver’s license, that negative response is not recorded. The organ procurement agency wants a chance to convince your relatives that you should be an organ donor.

To preserve vital organs for transplant, a patient must be declared “brain dead” while the heart and lungs are still functioning, usually with medical assistance. During 2008 a number of cases became known where patients declared brain dead actually recovered.

How many recoveries after a “brain death” diagnosis need to occur to raise serious questions about brain death? Becoming an organ donor should not a casual decision, but is sufficient information provided to achieve informed consent?

If you do not intend to be an organ donor, how do you prevent an organ procurement agency from performing invasive procedures to preserve your organs for transplant while you are still alive?

For more information, call 312-422-9300.

Thursday, May 14, 2009  --  Giving science preference over ethics is dangerous

Below is a draft of a new IRLC radio message.  Listen for this and other IRLC radio messages on WIND 560 AM beginning on June 8th.

This is Bill Beckman with Illinois Right to Life.

Do you think that creating, and even cloning, embryos so they can be killed to obtain their stem cells is a moral activity that can be done responsibly?

Caring for each other and easing human suffering cannot justify killing other humans to achieve it. Some will claim that the embryo is not human. Such a claim is certainly not scientific. Human embryos grow into human babies, then adolescents, and finally adults.

Why are the eggs of endangered species of birds and turtles protected? If we understand that they must be protected because they become birds and turtles, how can we deny the same protection to human embryos? Failing to protect human embryos is a denial of both scientific fact and moral values. This abuse of science allows some humans to benefit from the mistreatment of other humans.

Such devaluing of human life is very dangerous because the track record of humanity to act responsibly is very poor when any class of human beings is denied their rights. We know all too well the horrors created by slavery, the Nazi holocaust, and the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Do you really feel safe giving science preference over ethics?

For more information, call 312-422-9300.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009  --  Rights of the disabled begin before birth

Below is a draft of a new IRLC radio message.  Listen for this and other IRLC radio messages on WIND 560 AM beginning on June 8th.

This is Bill Beckman with Illinois Right to Life.

Did you know that Down syndrome babies are an endangered species? With prenatal diagnosis now prevalent, over 90% of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome are killed before birth.

This situation represents another illogical disconnect. Once a disabled child is born, many government rules protect the child’s rights. These rights are meaningless without the right to life.

Even worse, circumstantial evidence raises many questions about the reliability of prenatal testing. How many babies are killed based on a diagnosis that would have turned out to be wrong?

Even though genetic counseling is described as non-directive, mothers often report being told abortion is the best option for “special needs” babies.

As one sidewalk counselor told a mother approaching an abortion clinic, “God knew from the beginning of time that He would create this special baby and He gives special babies to special mothers."

Even “special needs” babies are a gift from God, so the rights of the disabled must exist before birth. Abortion is not the answer. That mother chose life, stating, “I am keeping my baby! I don't care what the doctor or what anyone else says. This is my baby!"

For more information, call 312-422-9300.

Tuesday, May 12, 2009  --  Do not choose abortion based on the economy

Below is a draft of a new IRLC radio message.  Listen for this and other IRLC radio messages on WIND 560 AM beginning on June 8th.

This is Mary Anne Hackett from Illinois Right to Life.

Consider this scenario: Yesterday you learned you were pregnant.  Today you lost your job, and now you can’t afford health insurance.  Planned Parenthood’s solution?  Just get an abortion.

Help is available for you to overcome your difficult circumstances. Pregnancy care centers, and even government programs, are available to help you give your baby life.   Don’t be deceived by the rhetoric of choice.  Choose life for your baby.   You won’t regret it.

For more information, call 312-422-9300.

Monday, May 11, 2009  --  Conscience Rights for the Medical Profession

Below is a draft of a new IRLC radio message.  Listen for this and other IRLC radio messages on WIND 560 AM beginning on June 8th.

This is Mary Anne Hackett from Illinois Right to Life.

The Obama Administration plans to overturn the conscience protections of doctors, pharmacists, nurses and other members of the medical profession, despite 87% opposition from the general public. Rules to enforce these protections were finally established in late 2008.

It is all about “choice.” A woman has the right to choose an abortion, so why should a doctor not have the right to choose against performing abortions?   Overturning conscience protections is an attack on the right to follow ones conscience and amounts to discrimination and persecution, forcing medical professionals to buckle under or leave their profession.

Removing conscience rights from medical professionals will impact the right of patients to choose a healthcare professional who shares their moral views and will force ethical people out of the profession entirely to accommodate the demands of a few. The freedom to choose by one group of women will be lost by all other women.

It is time to defend the rights of conscience for all Americans.

For more information, call 312-422-9300.

Friday, May 8, 2009  --  Abstinence funding pulled from FY 2010 Federal budget

Part of the Obama administration's miniscule "savings" found in reducing his proposed Fiscal Year 2010 budget by a fractional amount is defunding abstinence education. 

Abstinence education was previously funded under the CBAE (Community Based Abstinence Education) and Title V Abstinence Education Programs.  Obama's proposed budget eliminates funding for both of these programs. 

In their place, larger amounts have been allocated for "comprehensive" sex education, as pushed by Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocates.  Why would abortion advocates be strong supporters of a program that would reduce demand for their primary product? 

Even though they claim "comprehensive" sex education will reduce the need for abortion by reducing "unwanted" pregnancies, why would they actually want that to happen?  Obviously, they do not want that to happen.   Lucky for them, no legitimate studies have ever demonstrated that "comprehensive" sex education was effective at reducing "unwanted" pregnancies.  In fact, more "unwanted" pregnancies are almost assured, so they can count on selling more abortions.

Thursday, May 7, 2009  --  Abortion "rights" pushed internationally

Encouraged by the pro-abortion policies of the Obama administration, international pro-abortion organizations are challenging any roadblocks they find to full implementation of their anti-life agenda.  Amnesty International and International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) are among these vocal anti-life advocates.

Amnesty International (AI) has expressed its opposition to the Dominican Republic's proposed protections for unborn life in that nation's draft constitution and penal law.  AI claims that the nation’s constitutional and legal reforms “could lead to violations of women’s human rights” and further claims that laws penalizing abortion would lead to increased maternal mortality.

IPPF has launched a petition campaign to pressure governments to “promote, protect and fulfill their promise to provide better access to sexual and reproductive health services” for all young people “regardless of age.”  This campaign includes objectives for governments “to recognize the right of all young people to make decisions about their own sexual and reproductive health” and to “build momentum for universal access to sexual and reproductive health services around the world.”

Both of these anti-life initiatives misrepresent what international law actually says, and doesn't say, about abortion.  No “right to abortion” or to “sexual rights” have been agreed to in any binding, negotiated UN document.

Wednesday, May 6, 2009  --  Real life is stranger than fiction

An email from Planned Parenthood quotes children's author Judy Blume saying, "There is no organization that I know of that supports motherhood and all that it means more than Planned Parenthood. That's why I'm honoring moms everywhere with my gift to Planned Parenthood today."  Exactly how does preventing or aborting pregnancy "support motherhood"? 

In a similar timeframe, attempting to overcome other misinformation proclaimed by Planned Parenthood, abstinence education backers took their positive message to Capitol Hill to tell lawmakers about a study done by researcher Dr. Stan Weed which debunks the myths about abstinence education and shows that abstinence programs actually outperform "comprehensive" sex education programs.

Of course, "comprehensive" sex education is Planned Parenthood's myth for reducing unwanted pregnancies and abortions, that fails every time it is tried.   I suppose that does mean there are more (single) mothers because of Planned Parenthood, but I would not consider that supporting motherhood, especially since they are trying to sell abortions to as many of them as possible.

Tuesday, May 5, 2009  --  Free speech threatened based on its content

No government authorities seem to raise concerns when anti-war or homosexual activists exercise their free speech rights.  No laws are passed to establist buffer zones around furrier stores when animal rights groups picket them, even though they may get violent by spraying furs with red paint.

But watch out for those "right-wing extremists" who oppose abortion!  When the issue is prayer and sidewalk counseling at abortion clinics, laws are being passed to establish 35-foot "buffer" zones around the building, and moving "buffer" zones around customers and employees.

Now some Federal courts are playing semantics to justify these violations of free speech, that should be protected under the First Amendment, by claiming that the buffer zone statute is "content-neutral and validly regulates the time, place and manner of expressive activity."  Obviously, content-neutrality is in the eye of the beholder for these judges.

Leave it to the Department of Homeland Security to try to discourage people from even showing up at abortion clinics by calling them "right-wing extremists" and warning local law enforcement to be watchful.  Just as the only "choice" is abortion (just observe Planned Parenthood), tolerance and free speech rights only apply when the cause is of the politically-correct persuasion.

Monday, May 4, 2009  --  U.S. Senate on the brink?

Stopping anti-life bills in the U.S. Senate will depend on use of the filibuster, requiring 60 votes to end debate and allow a vote on a bill.  With Senator Arlen Specter moving to the Democratic Party, getting 41 votes to maintain a filibuster appears to have become more difficult. 

The Minnesota Supreme Court is still trying to sort out the ballot counting between Senator Norm Coleman and challenger Al Franken.   If Franken is declared the winner, Republicans would have only 40 Senate seats and would need to get at least one Democrat to vote against ending debate to maintain a filibuster to block an anti-life bill.  We may soon find out if there are really any Pro-Life Democrats in the U.S. Senate.

Now that a Supreme Court appointment is on the line, with the June retirement of Justice David Souter, blocking a radical anti-life nominee would seem almost impossible.  However, Senator Specter's switch to the Democrats creates one new opportunity.

When President Obama nominates a replacement for Justice Souter, that nomination will head to the Senate Judiciary Committee for hearings and a vote. The committee requires the consent of at least one Republican to end debate and move a nominee to the full Senate for a vote.

Now that Specter is a Democrat, all the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are Pro-Life and Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions becomes the top Republican on the Committee.  Might the Democrats have trouble getting that one Republican vote on a controversial nominee?  Stay tuned.

Friday, May 1, 2009  --  Notre Dame -- the story that will not go away

Today I received a powerful article written by a 1999 graduate of Notre Dame.  Please read the entire article, but her last paragraph makes the key point:

I’d like to ask this of Fr. John Jenkins, the Notre Dame president: Who draws support from your decision to honor President Obama—the young, pregnant Notre Dame woman sitting in that graduating class who wants desperately to keep her baby, or the Notre Dame man who believes that the Catholic teaching on the intrinsic evil of abortion is just dining-room talk?

When Mary Ann Glendon refused the Notre Dame Laetare Medal, they said they would promptly find another person to receive the award.  Apparently, they could find no takers.

Effective on May 4th, the Pro-Life Action League will have two large billboards located near the Notre Dame campus.  The billboards, along the Indiana Toll Road, Interstate 80/90, will read, "NOTRE DAME: Obama is pro-abortion. How dare you honor him," along with a picture of a baby in utero sucking its thumb.

You can register for the May 17th Notre Dame Protest Bus, and choose to leave from any of three Chicago area locations.  If you'd rather drive on your own, you can park at St Joe High School, 1441 N. Michigan Street, South Bend, IN.  Here's a map.  Get more details at: Notre Dame Protest.