|
PC's Responses to Questionnaire
206 Contact: clcns@clcns.com |
Click Item for More
Information
|
|
Tax funded
Abortions in NS [FAQ's]
|
|
1. Nova Scotia approaching a winter time in demographics.
2. 25 Years Of AIDS: Have We Learned Anything Yet? - By George Will - Jun 5, 2006
``In the period October 1980-May 1981, 5 young men, all active homosexuals, were treated for biopsy-confirmed Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia at 3 different hospitals in Los Angeles, California. Two of the patients died.'' - Centers for Disease Control - June 5, 1981
WASHINGTON - Those words 25 years ago announced the arrival of something most Americans thought anachronistic - an infectious disease epidemic. At first it was called GRID - gay-related immune deficiency. In September 1982, CDC renamed it acquired immune deficiency syndrome - AIDS.
Its worldwide toll has already exceeded the 20 million killed by the 14th-century bubonic plague. By 2020, it probably will have killed more than has any epidemic in history, with most fatalities in sub-Saharan Africa, where it probably began about 75 years ago after some people who ate wild chimpanzees in Cameroon became infected with a low-virulence progenitor of the virus that causes AIDS.
An epidemic requires both a microbe and an enabling social context. In Africa, aspects of modernity in a primitive setting became a deadly combination: HIV was spread by roadside prostitutes serving truckers and soldiers traveling on modern roads. Africa's wars caused population dislocations; economic development caused migrations of workers across porous borders. Both weakened families and dissolved traditional sexual norms. Jet aircraft integrated Africa into the world flow of commerce and tourism. In 1980s America, the enabling context included a gay community feeling more assertive and emancipated, and IV drug users sharing needles.
AIDS arrived in America in the wake of the Salk vaccine, which, by swiftly defeating polio, gave Americans a misleading paradigm of how progress is made in public health. Pharmacology often is a small contributor. By the time the first anti-tuberculosis drugs became available in the 1950s, the annual death rate from TB had plummeted to 20 per 100,000 Americans, from 200 per 100,000 in 1900. Drugs may have accounted for just 3 percent of the reduction. The other 97 percent was the result of better nutrition and less urban crowding. Thanks to chlorination of water and better sanitation and personal hygiene, typhoid, too, became rare before effective drugs were available.
Which suggests that the most powerful public health program is economic growth. And the second-most powerful is information.
The 14th-century Black Death killed one-third of Europe's population, but it was in the air, food and water, so breathing, eating and drinking were risky behaviors. AIDS is much more difficult to acquire. Like other large components of America's health care costs (e.g., violence, vehicular accidents, coronary artery disease, lung cancer), AIDS is mostly the result of behavior that is by now widely known to be risky.
The U.S. epidemic, which so far has killed 530,000, could have been greatly contained by intense campaigns to modify sexual and drug-use behavior in 25 to 30 neighborhoods from New York and Miami to San Francisco. But early in the American epidemic, political values impeded public health requirements. Unhelpful messages were sent by slogans designed to democratize the disease - ``AIDS does not discriminate'' and ``AIDS is an equal opportunity disease.''
By 1987, when President Reagan gave his first speech on the subject, 20,798 Americans had died, and his speech, not surprisingly, did not mention any connection to the gay community. No president considers it part of his job description to tell the country that the human rectum, with its delicate and absorptive lining, makes anal-receptive sexual intercourse dangerous when HIV is prevalent.
Twenty years ago a San Francisco public health official explained death's teaching power: Watching a friend die, like seeing a wreck along a highway, is sobering. But after driving more slowly for a few miles, we again speed up. AIDS has a more lasting deterrent effect.
There has, however, been an increase in unsafe sex because pharmacological progress has complicated the campaign against this behavior-driven epidemic. Life-extending cocktails of antiviral drugs now lead some at-risk people to regard HIV infection as a manageable chronic disease, and hence to engage in risky behavior. Furthermore, the decline of AIDS mortality means that more persons are surviving with HIV infection - persons who can spread the virus. And drugs like Viagra mean that more older men are sexually active.
Still, even with no pharmacological silver bullet, AIDS deaths in America have been declining for a decade. In Africa, where heterosexual sex is the primary means of transmission, the death rate is steady relative to population growth, and the age of beginning sexual activity is rising, as is the use of condoms. Human beings do learn. But they often do at a lethally slow pace.
George F. Will is a 1976 Pulitzer Prize winner, whose columns are syndicated
in more than 400 magazines and newspapers worldwide. Copyright © 2006
- Washington Post Writers Group
Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/georgewill/2006/06/05/199794.html
Please visit us at our website: www.robertjason.ca
E-mail address: bobeva@vaxxine.com
3. Bishops To Vote On New Order Of Mass In English - By Jerry Filteau
WASHINGTON (CNS) - The U.S. bishops will be asked to approve a new translation of the Order of Mass when they meet in Los Angeles June 15-17.
If the new translation is adopted as proposed and subsequently approved by the Vatican, Catholics will have to learn a number of changes in their Mass prayers and responses. Among the more obvious will be:
- Whenever the priest says "The Lord be with you," the people will respond, "And with your spirit." The current response is "And also with you."
- In the first form of the penitential rite, the people will confess that "I have sinned greatly... through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault." In the current version, that part of the prayer is much shorter: "I have sinned through my own fault."
- The Nicene Creed will begin "I believe" instead of "We believe" - a translation of the Latin text instead of the original Greek text.
- The Sanctus will start, "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God of hosts." The current version says, "Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might."
Approving a new text of the Order of Mass is only the first step in a long process of considering and approving a new translation of the entire book of prayers said at Mass. In the United States that book has been called the Sacramentary since 1970, but the Vatican wishes to restore the name Roman Missal, since it is an English translation, with minor adaptations, of the normative Latin "Missale Romanum."
Officials of the bishops' Secretariat for the Liturgy told Catholic News Service May 23 that it is uncertain whether the bishops will seek to publish the new Order of Mass for U.S. use as soon as possible or wait until they have the new English translation of the entire Roman Missal completed. Completing the entire Roman Missal is likely to take at least two more years.
Once the bishops adopt new liturgical texts, they must also be confirmed by the Vatican before they can be authorized for use.
In general, people will find many of the Mass prayers in the new version slightly longer and fuller, as the new translation is based on rules for liturgical translations issued by the Vatican in a 2001 instruction. Unlike the previous Vatican rules - which encouraged freer translations more adapted to the language into which one was translating - the new rules require closer adherence to the normative Latin text.
In a recent letter Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, told the head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that if a current text does not conform to the new translation norms it must be changed.
"It is not acceptable to maintain that people have become accustomed to a certain translation for the past 30 or 40 years, and therefore that it is pastorally advisable to make no changes... The revised text should make the needed changes," he wrote.
He said his congregation is open to dialogue about "difficulties regarding the translation of a particular text," but the 2001 instruction calling for translations more faithful to the Latin text "remains the guiding norm."
His letter, dated May 2 and addressed to Bishop William S. Skylstad of Spokane, Wash., USCCB president, was posted on the Catholic World News Web site in late May.
In response to a query from CNS, Bishop Donald W. Trautman of Erie, Pa., chairman of the USCCB Committee on the Liturgy, said Bishop Skylstad sent the letter to all Latin-rite bishops in advance of the June meeting.
"I see this letter as a clarification and further restatement of criteria for translation previously authored by the congregation," Bishop Trautman said. He said it "offers additional input for the deliberation of the bishops."
The Order of Mass, found at the center of the Roman Missal, consists of the prayers recited every day at Mass, as distinct from the Scripture readings and prayers that are proper to the day's feast.
Thus what the bishops are to vote on in June are new versions of the prayers that Mass goers are most familiar with because they hear or say them so regularly.
Within the Order of Mass are some prayers for which there are a limited number of alternatives, such as the forms of the penitential rite, the four different Eucharistic prayers or the various acclamations following the consecration.
The text the bishops are to vote on in June does not include the prefaces, solemn blessings, prayers over the people or elements found in the appendix that also form part of the Order of Mass.
The International Commission on English in the Liturgy, which prepared the text to be voted on, is still consulting with English-speaking bishops' conferences around the world on the translation of the prefaces and other elements and does not have a final version of them yet.
Churchgoers will have to learn a different version of the Gloria when the new texts are put into use because part of the current prayer in English does not follow the structure of the Latin version.
In the Nicene Creed, where the current version refers to Christ as "one in being with the Father," the new ICEL translation says, "consubstantial with the Father." In the documentation sent to the bishops before the meeting, however, the Committee on the Liturgy has recommended keeping the "one in being" translation in the United States.
The new ICEL text for the people's prayer before Communion says, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed."
The committee proposed that the bishops seek to keep the current shorter version of the beginning of that prayer, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you." The committee did not, however, propose a change from the ICEL translation at the end, where the people currently pray, "but only say the word and I shall be healed."
The bishops will also vote on several American adaptations in the Order of
Mass, such as adding the acclamation, used in the United States since 1970 but
not found in the Roman Missal in Latin, "Christ has died, Christ is risen,
Christ will come again."
4. CLC-DMC - See Marriage Vote Action Alert - June 9, 2006
"I haven't had a single person come up to me to talk about it. It certainly isn't in line with the five priorities that we're set out." Peter MacKay, quoted in the Kitchener Waterloo Record recently. Other MP's have been quoted as not receiving any letters, emails, etc on the subject. Here in NS, Gerald Keddy, Bill Casey and Peter McKay, could this be a CPC Strategy?
When marriage, family and children are devalued in any society it seems, that society is in decay and once that society accepts homosexuality as a norm, then it is in extreme decay. One only has to review the works of Pitrim Sorokin, J.D.Udwin and others.
Marriage has been the time-tested arrangement that has fostered generations and given stability to countries.
The USSR, France, Australia have opted against recognizing homosexual marriage, and 20 USA, States have placed in their constitutions laws to protect marriage as between one man and one woman.
Please take the time to visit your MP, E-Mail, Fax or phone and the time to do it is now this summer.
Herm Wills, Campaign Life Coalition NS
PS. Campaign Life Coalition is a partner in the Defend Marriage Coalition.
Note from Jim C.
Hi Herm,
This is a neat tool that can help you contact your
MP. If people want to write letters by e-mail to ALL the MPs at once, with each
one appearing to be a unique one, they can use this wonderful site: http://www.friendsoffreedom.org/action.php?op=ActionLetterBlank
5. Demand Soars for 'Morning-After Pill' - Fri, 19 May 2006
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=a846c7d0-695a-43e9-bc61-bbb6805bfe5d
Demand doubles for morning-after pill. Health care costs down as drug more accessible: research
Tom Blackwell, National Post - Friday, May 19, 2006
Demand for the morning-after pill has doubled in the year since the drug was made available in Canada without a prescription, sales figures indicate.
Shipments of Plan B - designed to prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex - soared after the Federal government ruled the product could be purchased directly from a pharmacist, without a doctor's approval, says the IMS Health research firm. And there is evidence that easier availability of the pill is leading to significant savings for the health care system, says a University of British Columbia scientist studying the drug's use. "Reduced costs for abortion, for physician visits... It's substantial," said Dr. Judith Soon of the UBC's faculty of pharmacy sciences. She did not provide specific details of the cost savings because her study has not yet been published.
Dr. Soon said she is now looking at whether broader use of emergency contraceptives in B.C. has led to a decrease in the abortion rate in the province.
Anti-abortion crusaders, however, say they are appalled by the boom in Plan B sales. They insist it aborts pregnancy, contradicting scientists who agree the drug blocks conception, and is not an abortion pill.
Sexual-health advocates complain, meanwhile, that some pharmacies will not dispense the pills, while others ask personal questions that critics argue are often unnecessary.
Melanie Thomas, a 24-year-old graduate student at the University of Calgary, said the campus drugstore refused to sell the pills to her for possible emergency use, suggesting she go on regular birth control. "That was startling, to say the least," she said. "The attitude was paternalistic."
The morning-after pill, sold under the brand name Plan B for $35 to $50 a treatment, is an enhanced dose of the hormone progestin, used in some regular birth-control medication. Dispensed as two separate tablets, it prevents pregnancy 89% of the time if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex.
Health Canada decided in March of last year that it could be bought over the counter from pharmacists to ensure women get their pills in time. Although European nations, as well as British Columbia, Quebec and Saskatchewan, had already taken a similar stance, it remains a controversial issue in some jurisdictions. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, ignoring staff recommendations, ruled last year that a prescription would still be necessary in the United States.
In Canada, the manufacturer, Duramed Pharmaceuticals, supplied 23,000 morning-after pills to retail pharmacies in January, 2005, and 20,000 in February. The numbers climbed steadily after the rule change in March, averaging 41,000 a month in the past year, according to IMS.
That translated into wholesale sales of $4.1-million in the 12 months after the new policy came into force, twice the sum for 2004.
The figures are good news to Kelli Dilworth of the Canadian Federation for Sexual Health, formerly called Planned Parenthood Canada. "This is such an important issue for women in Canada," she said. "Emergency contraception is safe and effective and so important to women's health and autonomy."
But there have been reports of pharmacists in rural areas refusing to sell the pills on principle, forcing women to travel long distances, Ms. Dilworth said.
Controversy has also swirled around some pharmacists who ask questions about the type of contraception the customer uses, how recently they had sex and even their names. Pharmacists argue, with the support of privacy commissioners in some provinces, that they need such information to ensure the pill is appropriate for the particular woman.
While the hope is that wider use of the morning-after pill will cut back on Canada's abortion rate, national statistics to measure any such effect will not be available for a year or more.
The Morgentaler Clinic in Toronto has not seen a reduction in demand for its services since Plan B was made available over the counter, said Sharon Broughton, the clinic manager.
Depending on where a woman is in her menstrual cycle, the drug keeps the egg from leaving the ovary, prevents the egg from meeting the sperm or blocks a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. Even the U.S. Health and Human Services Department states unequivocally that it is not an abortion pill.
But Canada's largest pro-life group maintains that Plan B is morally offensive. Mary-Ellen Douglas, a spokeswoman for the Campaign Life Coalition, argues that the uniting of the egg and sperm represents conception, and the drug destroys the "newly conceived baby."
As well, women are being exposed to potential side effects, which can include nausea and vomiting, without seeing a doctor first, she warned.
tblackwell@nationalpost.com
© National Post 2006
6. Drug 'Reverses' Vegetative State; Terri Schindler Schiavo's Family Comments
The Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation Center for Health Care Ethics Calls For a Moratorium of Ordinary Care Removal From Persons Diagnosed in a Persistent Vegetative State
ST. PETERSBURG, Florida, May 24 /Christian Newswire/ - Following reports that the drug Zolpidem can temporarily revive people in a permanent vegetative state (PVS) to the point where they are able to speak, The Foundation is calling for a moratorium of all potential ordinary care removal for persons diagnosed in a PVS condition.
Zolpidem is usually used to treat insomnia. However, South African researchers,
writing in the Neuro Rehabilitation, looked at the effects on three patients
of using the drug for up to six years.
They reported that "All patients were aroused transiently every morning
after Zolpidem."
Their conclusion was that Zolpidem appeared to be effective in restoring some
brain function to patients previously determined to be in a persistent vegetative
state.
Terri's family pleaded for years with Terri's guardian, Michael Schiavo, and
the courts to try and use different treatments or medicines that could possibly
help improve Terri's condition, but were denied. The Foundation has been contacted
by dozens of families with similar stories of patients improving significantly
after being wrongly diagnosed in this PVS condition.
In December 2000, Patricia White Bull, after given the drug Amantadine (used
to stimulate people with Parkinson's disease and brain damage) awoke after 16
years of being in what doctors were calling a persistent vegetative state. Sadly,
we will never know if any of any of these drugs or treatments that were available
would have improved Terri's condition.
This recent finding and other studies in the past demonstrate the dangers of
this subjective and often incorrect diagnosis. A report released by the British
Medical Journal in 1996, found that 43% of the diagnosed cases of PVS they studied
were, in fact, misdiagnosed.
"We at the Foundation are seeing that the PVS diagnosis is being commonly
misdiagnosed. Consequently, it has become very obvious we don't know enough
about this so-called diagnosis, and common sense dictates that the removal of
food and water based on this misclassification must end until further studies
can be conducted." Robert Schindler, Sr.
About the Schindler Family: Mary and Robert Schindler as well as Suzanne Schindler
Vitadamo and Bobby Schindler now work for The Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation
Center for Health Care Ethics in St. Petersburg, Florida, an organization dedicated
to ensuring the rights of disabled, elderly and vulnerable citizens against
care rationing, euthanasia and medical killing.
To: National Desk - Contact: Bobby Schindler,
The Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation Center for Health Care Ethics, Inc.,
727-490-7603, info@terrisfight.org
7. In The U.K., Aborting A Baby Is Legal, But Depicting It Is A Crime, By Steven W. Mosher - May 30, 2006
The persecution of pro-lifers in the U.K. is intensifying. Peaceful pro-life activist Edward Atkinson is going to jail for having sent a picture of an aborted baby to a hospital administrator. He was charged with - if you can believe it - sending "offensive materials" through the mails.
PRI Weekly Briefing
30 May 2006
Vol. 8 / No. 20
Our cousins in Great Britain, from whom we inherited a language, a political
culture and, most specifically, the principle of freedom of speech, are going
off the deep end, to judge from the jailing of Edward Atkinson.
Here's the background. Last year, the U.K. was rocked by a high-profile abortion
case. This was because the demise of "Baby A," as she became known,
was photographed and videotaped. This evidence of her brutal end was widely
distributed in the U.K.
The abortion took place at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Kings Lynn, Norfolk,
not far from where Mr. Atkinson lives. This veteran pro-life campaigner decided
to educate the Hospital's chief executive, Ruth May, in the horrors of such
events. He sent copies of the photographs and other literature to Ms. May.
Upon receiving the pictures, Ruth May complained to the authorities. The Director
of Public Prosecutions, as district attorneys are known in the U.K., promptly
ordered his arrest on the charge of "sending offensive materials through
the mails." The policy then dragged the 75-year-old Catholic, who is nearly
crippled with arthritis, from his home and held him in prison until his court
date.
In court, the hospital staff recounted how the photographs had upset their delicate
sensibilities. Ruth May's secretary, Christine Rogers, said she was "upset"
when she opened the letter from Atkinson containing a picture of Baby A. The
hospital's "Complaints and litigation manager," Karl Perryman, said
that as a father of two daughters he had been quite disturbed" by the images
he had been shown. Ms. May herself opined that "It is upsetting for everyone."
She went on to say that "I believe people who work for the National Health
Service, and particularly at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, are passionate about
providing excellent care for their patients."
All except for those they abort, of course. In that case their "passion"
is reserved for those who have the courage to remind them of what they are doing
to tiny babies. Such pricks to their (perhaps guilty) consciences make them
"upset" and "disturbed."
Atkinson himself said that he had sent the images "to educate," adding,
"I accept that the documentation was highly distressing. It's horrendous,
monstrous and sickening but it represents the truth of what is going on in our
world. Everyone in this courtroom knows that abortion is murder and no one has
the guts to say it."
On the basis of the hospital staff's testimony, Mr. Atkinson was convicted and
ordered to serve a month in jail. In sentencing Mr. Atkinson, District Judge
Phillip Brown said "It is clear that you intended to shock and I am certain
that your purpose was to cause distress and anxiety."
Somebody ought to tell the BBC, which specializes in broadcasting shocking footage
from Iraq intended to cause distress and anxiety among the British public over
the British troop deployments there, that these are now punishable offenses
in once jolly olde England.
Mr. Atkinson was also fined 500 English pounds in court costs to be deducted
directly from his pension and given a five-year anti-social behaviour order.
Judge Brown warned that disobeying the order would result in five years in jail.
In that case, the stalwart Mr. Atkinson replied, "you may as well lock
me up and throw away the key."
He has been punished in other ways as well. The Norfolk hospital boss, Ms. May,
struck him off the waiting list for a hip replacement, and now formally denies
him all medical treatment save for life-threatening illnesses.
All this for having exercised his right to freedom of speech on behalf of the
voiceless unborn.
I have some advice for our English cousins, at least those of the pro-life variety:
someone ought to organize a postcard campaign directed at the offended hospital
staff - whose hospital apparently continues to authorize abortions, by the way.
Let them complain to the police about the thousands, if not tens of thousands
of postcards that they are receiving.
Ms. Ruth May
Chief Executive
Queen Elizabeth Hospital
Gayton Road, Kings Lynn
Norfolk, England
PE30 4ET
Now is the time to stand with Mr. Atkinson. They can't arrest you all.
Steven W. Mosher is President of the Population Research Institute.
PRI
P.O. Box 1559
Front Royal, Va. 22630
USA
Phone: (540) 622-5240 Fax: (540) 622-2728
E-mail: jad@pop.org
Media Contact: Joseph A. D'Agostino
(540) 622-5240, ext. 204
Website: www.pop.org
(c) 2006 Population Research Institute. Permission to reprint granted. Redistribute
widely. Credit required.
If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to PRI, please go to http://pop.org/donate.cfm.
All donations (of any size) are welcomed and appreciated.
To subscribe to the Weekly Briefing, go to: http://pop.org/subscribe-weekly.cfm
or e-mail us at pri@pop.org and say
"Add me to your Weekly Briefing."
The pro-life Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human rights
abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending counter-productive
social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of "overpopulation."
8. Lifeissues.net Newsletter #279 - July 02, 2006
Greetings from LifeIssues.net (www.lifeissues.net)
Dear Friends for Life,
Latvian Parliament Withstands EU Pressure on Homosexuality: The Latvian Parliament has decided to exclude a ban on sexual orientation discrimination from its Anti-Discrimination Bill, despite a directive from the European Union. Although implementation of the legislation was a condition for Latvia's accession to the Union in 2004, Latvian lawmakers have rejected it.
Several members of Latvia's ruling Christian Democratic party called for the deletion of the sexual orientation clause, calling homosexuality "sinful" and "degenerate".
This latest move by the Latvian parliament has again raised the ire of homosexual activists. In December 2005, the parliament passed a constitutional amendment to protect the traditional definition of marriage with an overwhelming majority. Same-sex "marriage" was already illegal according to the Latvian civil law code, but the constitutional amendment now explicitly states that marriage can only exist between a man and a woman.
Representatives from the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) are demanding that the EU reassess Latvia's membership and said it hoped that the European Commission would take legal action to ensure the law was implemented in full. ILGA has repeatedly been rejected by the UN for NGO accreditation for allowing pedophile groups in their membership.
And continuing to support the Culture of Death, the EU has approved Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research. The European Union parliament has approved spending tax money on embryonic stem cell research. However, the funding will not be used for human cloning. The guidelines from the last budget gave preferential treatment to adult stem cell research but still funded embryonic stem cell studies as long as they were not conducted in nations with bans on such funding.
God Bless and kindly consider praying for the "Sanctity of Human Life."
Jerry Novotny, omi
(Quote) If people contemplate and really see the sanctity of life, their "quality of life" arguments fall away and they will understand that we are here to care for each other, not to kill each other. Caring, and not convenience, is the sign of a civilized and just society! - Ron Panzer, President, Hospice Patients Alliance.
Lifeissues.net Newsletter #279 - July 02, 2006
Table Of Contents:
1. India: Care For The Terminally Ill
2. Europe Headed For Crisis With Forecast That Third Of Population Will Be Over
60 By 2050
3. Even With 100% Condom Use 30% Still Contract Potentially Deadly HPV Virus
4. Caritas Hosts "Peace Forum" In Sri Lanka
5. Amnesty International: Abortion "Rights" And Now Homosexual "Rights"?
6. The Economic Impact Of HIV/AIDS In The Developing Countries
7. In Search Of Old Japan? It's Already Here - Population Drops As Society Ages
8. Controversial Organ Donation Method Begins In Canada - Organs Extracted 5
Minutes After Heart Stops
9. Catholic Church To Excommunicate Scientists In Embryonic Stem Cell Research
10. Medical Journalist Says Reliance On Condoms Spreads HIV/AIDS
Website: Life Tree http://www.lifetree.org/. Hospice is supposed to help terminally ill patients live comfortably during their last weeks or months of life, but some hospices have been invaded by euthanasia advocates.
Item #1. India: Care For The Terminally Ill
European governments should start preparing now for the health care costs of
a rapidly aging population one third of which will be over 60 by 2050 in a region
already trying to cope with a looming shortage of pension funds, according to
a report published Wednesday.
View full text at Hindu.com: http://www.hindu.com/mag/2006/06/25/stories/2006062500330600.htm
Item #2. Europe Headed For Crisis With Forecast
That Third Of Population Will Be Over 60 By 2050
European governments should start preparing now for the health care costs of
a rapidly aging population one third of which will be over 60 by 2050 in a region
already trying to cope with a looming shortage of pension funds, according to
a report published Wednesday.
The report by the charities International Longevity Centre-UK and The Merck Company Foundation warned that there were already increases in a litany of ailments ranging from strokes to heart disease, cancer and cataracts.
The report is the latest indication of a trend that some experts believe will also cut into Europe's global economic competitiveness, as labor forces shrink and face ever-greater difficulties of caring for the masses of the infirm and retired.
"We must recognize that they (the elderly) are a resource to the community and so we must plan for their needs equal access to health care, good mental health, careers," said Sally Greengross, executive director of the International Longevity Centre-UK.
The number of Alzheimer's disease cases in Europe currently at 5.5 million will double in the next 50 years while numbers of depressed seniors were also expected to rise. Depression affects between 10 and 15 percent of the population over 65, and seniors with depression are two to three times more likely to have two or more chronic illnesses than those without depression, the report said.
View entire article at Pravda: http://www.lifeissues.net/control_panel/news_info.php
Item #3. Even With 100% Condom Use 30% Still Contract
Potentially Deadly HPV Virus
A new study on condom effectiveness in protecting against the cancer-causing
human papilloma virus has shown a discrediting 30% failure rate. The report,
however, is being praised as a breakthrough for its claim that condom use offers
"significant" protection against the virus.
The study relied on the journals of 82 female university students who kept daily records of their sexual behaviour, and found that 70% of the women, who reported 100% consistent condom use, were virus-free at the end of three years.
The Illinois Family Institute criticized news reports of the study as misleading and inaccurate, saying the 30 per cent failure rate was far more important information than the limited success of the study.
"In fact, the study reports that 12 out of 42 women whose partners always used condoms did get HPV. Thus, 28.5% of the women got HPV even with 100% condom use," said William Beckman, executive director of Illinois Right to Life Committee.
"Why isn't the fact that condoms, even under ideal usage conditions, failed 28.5% of the time the real story here? Who would consider this an acceptable failure rate when dealing with a cancer-causing virus?"
Furthermore, Beckman points out, the study itself is inconclusive since it relies on the self-reporting of just 82 university-aged women.
"For those who are still impressed by the "70% less" infection rate, remember that with only 82 women, the sample size is so small that the results have very little statistical significance."
The author of the study, Rachel Winer of the University of Washington in Seattle, attempted to explain the 30% infection rate which occurred despite supposedly consistent condom use by suggesting that women may have "misreported" key elements in the study, reported the New Scientist, a suggestion that alone calls into question the legitimacy of the study's findings.
Among those applauding the report was Markus Steiner of Family Health International in Research Triangle Park, NC, who co-wrote an accompanying commentary. He told the New Scientist that the research should put an end to calls for FDA warnings against condom failures in protecting against HPV, by groups advocating abstinence.
"We're hoping the findings of the paper will dissipate this pressure," he said.
Beckman responded to such suggestions by saying, "If this study is proof of anything, it is proof that condoms do not provide satisfactory protection against HPV. That was the position taken by supporters of the abstinence-only approach in the first place. This study certainly does not challenge their position."
Read Illinois Family Institute press release: http://www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=32902
View article at LifeSiteNews.com: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06062701.html
Item #4. Caritas Hosts "Peace Forum"
In Sri Lanka
A first-ever "Peace Forum" organized by Caritas International ended
on June 28 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, with the charity workers urging the Tamil
rebels and the Sri Lankan government to observe a ceasefire agreement to halt
the escalating violence.
"Our condolences go out to all those who have lost their loved ones in acts of extreme violence in recent weeks and many thousands who have suffered through the long history of this conflict," said the concluding statement from the June 26-28 Caritas forum, which was attended by 70 foreign delegates.
In the apparent breakdown of a 2002 ceasefire, which had brought the protracted ethnic violence in Sri Lanka to a temporary halt, 562 civilians have been killed in 2006, along with dozens of combatants from government security forces and the Tamil rebels known as Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE).
Since 1983, the Tamil rebels have been waging a violent campaign for autonomy for ethnic Tamil areas in the north and east. The civil war had claimed nearly 65,000 lives, displacing over 1.8 million people, prior to the ceasefire brokered by Norway in 2002.
While Sinhala-speaking Buddhists account for nearly 70% of the island nation's 19 million people, the ethnic Tamils account for 17%. Christians and Muslims account for the remainder of the population.
View full text at CWNNews.com: http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=45015
Item #5. Amnesty International: Abortion "Rights"
And Now Homosexual "Rights"?
June 28, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com)
- Amnesty International has publicly condemned Latvia for refusing to pass legislation
that would have included "sexual orientation" in employment anti-discrimination
laws.
The legislation went before the Latvian parliament several weeks ago, where it was rejected for reasons centering largely on Latvia's family-friendly tradition and beliefs and the fear that passing such legislation could significantly erode traditional family values.
The Latvian president Vike-Freiberga vetoed the amended legislation, requesting that the Latvian parliament reconsider. In a letter to the Latvian parliament president Vike-Freiberga said that despite the fact that the legislative body had determined that existing anti-discrimination laws were sufficient, and that there was no reason to specify "sexual orientation" in such legislation, that Latvia's entrance into the EU required the passage of the legislation.
Amnesty International has applauded Vike-Freiberga's decision, and has called on her to continue to veto anti-discrimination legislation that does not include "sexual orientation."
"Amnesty International," reads the organization's open letter on the matter, "calls on the Latvian parliament to include sexual orientation as a ground for discrimination on the labour market as soon as possible. Amnesty International reminds the Latvian authorities that discrimination based on sexual orientation is a human rights violation."
The letter also addresses what they allege are past "LGBT issues which have marred Latvia's human rights record." In particular AI accuses Latvia of discrimination for refusing to allow a Gay Pride march in July of 2005, adding that in the debates surrounding the march "several government and local government representative made statements that can be interpreted as homophobic."
This latest move has confirmed the ever-increasing fears of many supporters of AI that the organization is well on the road to becoming just another anti-life/anti-family tool of the left, masquerading as a "human rights" organization. In particular many of AI's supporters have vocally condemned AI's recent decision to move towards advocating for abortion as an international human right.
Recently the Vatican came out and condemned AI's move towards pro-abortion activism. Cardinal Renato Martino, head of the Pontifical Council for Peace and Justice and the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, was quoted as saying "I have great esteem for Amnesty but doing this, they cut off their hands. I hope they don't do this because if they do, they are disqualified as defenders of human rights." "When they say 'reproductive rights', they mean abortion. Do they defend the rights of everybody? No! Not of the unborn because the unborn will be killed."
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
· Amnesty International Considers Pushing Enforcement of Abortion as
Human Right http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042511.html
· Vatican Condemns Amnesty International's Move Towards Abortion Advocacy:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06062106.html
· Latvia Defies EU, Again: No "Sexual-Orientation" Language in Employment Discrimination Laws: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06061606.html
Item #6. The Economic Impact Of HIV/AIDS In The
Developing Countries
HIV/AIDS has the potential to create cruel economic impacts in many countries.
The economic effects of AIDS will be felt first by individuals and their families,
then ripple outwards to firms and businesses and the macro-economy. It is typically
different from most other diseases because it is infected people in the most
productive age groups. The effects will vary according to the severity of the
HIV/AIDS pandemic and the structure of the national economies.
Agriculture, fishing and livestock are the main business of the most poor or developing countries. Manpower is the main asset of these businesses. Agriculture is the largest sector in most economies accounting for a large portion of production and a majority of employment. By the way, the epidemic has impacted national economic growth in a number of countries e.g. Tanzania has experienced a 15 to 25 % fall in GDP as a result of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. This is due to a number of reasons. The epidemic condition takes up a large number of funds for the provision of basic health care and prevention services e.g. in Rwanda in 1995 an estimated 66% of public health expenditure was for HIV/AIDS patients.
Source of article at News from Bangladesh: http://www.bangladesh-web.com/news/view.php?hidDate=2006-06-29&hidType=FEA&hidRecord=0000000000000000114515
Item #7. In Search Of Old Japan? It's Already Here
- Population Drops As Society Ages
The government announced in early June that more than one in five Japanese is
now 65 or older, and that ratio could rise to one in four in the next decade.
The senior population reached 25.6 million in 2005, a record high. The country
has some 25,000 centenarians, about the same percentage of the population as
the 50,454 centenarians in the U.S. in 2000.
One reason for all the old people: Japanese women had a life expectancy of 85.6 years in 2005, the world's highest for the 20th straight year. Japanese men live an average of 78.6 years, second only to Icelandic males.
Another reason: The fertility rate is hitting rock bottom - 1.25 children per woman, far below the 2.1 needed to keep the population steady. The U.S. rate is 2.04 children per woman.
View full text at Mainichi Daily News: http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/features/news/20060629p2g00m0fe010000c.html
Item #8. Controversial Organ Donation Method Begins
in Canada - Organs Extracted 5 Minutes after Heart Stops
June 27, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com)
- In a press conference at the Ottawa Hospital today, doctors announced the
first-ever non-heart beating organ donation (NHBD) procedure preformed in Canada.
The procedure, also known as donation after cardiac death (DCD), typically involves a person who requires a ventilator and, although he has measurable brain function, is determined to have no hope of recovery. The doctors then remove ventilation from the patient and wait for the heart to stop beating. If the heart stops for five minutes, death is pronounced and the organs are harvested by another surgical team.
One of the major ethical problems with the procedure is that there are cases where the heart has recommenced beating and circulation after five minutes of stoppage; another is that the stoppage of the heart is caused by the removal of the ventilator.
Organ donation by "brain death" remains controversial after 30 years of the procedure being practiced, but DCD is even more controversial since there is very little time left for ethical considerations. While with "brain death" organs can be harvested at leisure since machines keep air flowing into the lungs and blood circulating, with DCD the stoppage of the heart necessitates very quick harvesting as organs deteriorate without blood flow.
The presentation of Canada's first DCD sounded more like an emotion-laden sales pitch than a medical press conference. The Therien family was on hand to lend support to the organ donation method as their 32-year-old daughter, Sarah Beth, was the first-ever donor in Canada. Sarah's father noted that the family was Roman Catholic and needed to be assured that the procedure was not in violation of the faith. Mr. Therien said that he was assured by hospital staff, "Dr. Kim and his team", that it was not in violation of the Catholic faith.
Those assurances, however, ring hollow. The Catholic Church has not even finally pronounced itself on organ donations by "brain death" let alone the new DCD procedure. In 2003, the Archdiocese of St. Louis condemned the NHBD protocol saying it is "cruel and dangerous and does not meet standards of respect for human life." It called for an immediate moratorium on the practice "until such time as clearer, objective moral standards of determination of death are enacted."
LifeSiteNews.com spoke with Dr. Moira McQueen, President of the Canadian Catholic Bioethics Centre about the matter.
Dr. McQueen told LifeSiteNews.com that waiting only five minutes after cessation of cardiovascular circulation was "frankly . . . not nearly enough." She noted there have been cases of auto-resuscitation after more than five minutes without a heart beat. Even though organs may be harmed by waiting for a sure determination of death, the principal concern is an accurate determination of death, since otherwise the patient is being killed by organ extraction. "The important thing for us is that the person donating has to be dead," explained Dr. McQueen. "The organs are a secondary consideration, that being established first."
Dr. Cameron B. Guest, Chief Medical Officer for Trillium Gift of Life Network, the agency that handles organ donation in conjunction with the hospitals, spoke with LifeSiteNews.com about the controversy over timing. Speaking of auto-resuscitation, he said, "All of the cases that were reported happened in less than a minute."
Dr. Guest, also the Chair of the Organ and Tissue Donation Committee at Sunnybrook
and Women's College Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, informed LifeSiteNews.com
that Catholic hospitals in Ontario were
looking to take on the CDC method.
Dr. Guest conceded however, that "If there were evidence to show that large volumes of patients" were resuscitating after five minutes his team would look into altering their protocols. That concession is not good enough for Catholic hospitals says Dr. John Shea, the medical advisor to Campaign Life Coalition. Where there is a doubt about ending life, Dr. Shea told LifeSiteNews.com, we cannot ethically proceed.
The pro-life movement is opposing CDC for those same reasons.
"The laudable purpose of saving lives does not justify the donation of an organ whose removal could cause the death of a donor," said Jim Hughes, National President of Campaign Life Coalition (CLC). "Harvesting organs just five minutes after the heart stops is just plain frightening. There are cases of people whose hearts have re-started after a longer period of time," he said.
"These situations put the physician in the difficult decision-making position between the care of their patient and balancing that care against the possibility of passing on the patient's organs to someone else," said Mary Ellen Douglas, National Organizer CLC. "The code of the physician is to do no harm and a heart-wrenching decision between two patients places the physician in the role of playing God."
See a short paper by Dr. Shea on NHBD: http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/she/she_21nonheartbeating.html
Item #9. Catholic Church to Excommunicate Scientists
in Embryonic Stem Cell Research
The Catholic Church restated its opposition to embryonic stem cell research
on Wednesday saying it plans to excommunicate scientists who conduct it because
it involves the destruction of human life. Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo made
the comments to an Italian Christian magazine.
Trujillo, head of the Vatican department dealing with family affairs, said the church believes embryonic stem cell research is as bad as abortion. Cardinal Trujillo told Catholic publication Famiglia Cristiana that "destroying human embryos is equivalent to an abortion... it's the same thing." He said the church is worried that "certain crimes" are being treated as if they had "become rights." Trujillo also said the Catholic Church is concerned that international groups and some countries are regarding the speaking out against abortion and embryonic stem cell research as a crime or against women. "[E]ven talking about the defense of life and family rights is being treated as a sort of crime against the state in some countries - a form of social disobedience or discrimination against women," he explained. Elaborating on the excommunication, he said the warning "applies to all women, doctors and researchers who eliminate embryos."
View full article at LifeNews.com: http://www.lifenews.com/bio1579.html
Item #10. Medical Journalist Says Reliance on Condoms
Spreads HIV/AIDS
June 23, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com)
- A medical journalist has added her voice to claims that the explosion in HIV/AIDS
infection rates is directly linked to reliance on condom use as a virus preventative.
Writing for Crisis Magazine, prize-winning investigative journalist Sue Ellin Browder said the growing consensus among public health professionals is that condoms should only be used as a last measure of protection for persons involved in extremely high-risk activity such as sex-trade work.
Zenit News Agency reported yesterday on Browder's conclusions. "So far, there's no good evidence that condoms will reverse population-wide epidemics like those in sub-Saharan Africa," Browder wrote. She offered evidence that dramatic increases in condom distribution in African nations paralleled an explosion in HIV/AIDS infection rates within the population.
Citing statistics from South Africa, Browder stated that condom distribution between 1994 and 1998 leaped to 198 million from 6 million, but death rates from HIV/AIDS in the years between 1997 and 2002 saw a massive 57 per cent increase.
A report from the UNAIDS agency in 2003 confirmed the dangers of relying on condoms to protect against the HIV/AIDS virus. The report showed that condoms are ineffective in protecting against HIV an estimated 10% of the time. That estimate, although itself a major blow to population control activists who have consistently claimed condoms to be 100% effective, is still far lower than some studies which have shown more than a 50% failure rate.
Ms. Browder's report echoes the warnings of multiple medical experts, among them Dr. Norman Hearst of the University of California, who raised the alarm on condom use as an AIDS preventative in 2004. Dr. Hearst presented statistics showing a marked correlation between increased condom sales in the African nations of Kenya, Botswana, and others, and a parallel increase in HIV rates by year.
Promoting abstinence and marital faithfulness has had the only significant measurable impact on reducing HIV infection rates in Africa. The country of Uganda has achieved an unprecedented reduction in HIV transmission rates, up to 18%, with a program known as the ABC approach - 'A' stands for 'abstinence' and 'B' for 'be faithful.' "C', for "condom use' is suggested only as a last-ditch effort to find some protection from the disease, recommended as a partial safety net for those who insist on engaging in high-risk sexual behaviour.
"Most sub-Saharan African nations, following the pro-condoms model, continue to suffer from rising HIV infection rates. Ugandan surveys show a reduction in premarital sexual activity among Ugandan youth and a reduction in extramarital activity among adults," wrote Population Researcher Institute's Joseph A. D'Agostino.
Ms. Browder herself has blamed the sexual revolution in Western society for leading directly to today's AIDS epidemic, stating that, "If truth be told, the revolution has been a disaster". Today we have more than two dozen varieties [of sexually transmitted disease], from pelvic inflammatory disease to AIDS (which presently infects 42 million people worldwide and has already killed another 23 million)," in an article for Crisis Magazine in 2004.
Read Zenit News Agency coverage: http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=91414
See related LifeSiteNews coverage:
United Nations Report says Condoms Fail to Protect against AIDS 10% of the
Time: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/jun/03062303.html
New Research Confirms Condoms Not Effective in HIV Prevention: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/jan/04011408.html
UN Anger Over Uganda's Successful Abstinence Program Fueled by Loss of Funds Says Researcher: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/oct/05101404.html
Action:
1. Pray that we all may have the courage to be God's presence in society and
support those who have been deemed "unworthy of life".
2. Stay informed at Lifeissues.net website: http://www.lifeissues.net.
3. Consider participating with a financial donation to help pay travel expenses
for Fr. Jerry's Speaking Tours to poorer countries in Asia. (Purpose - Journey
for Life into the Heart of Asia. Series of lectures on - The Family at Crossroads:
Trends and Challenges.) Remaining 2006 schedule: August - Sri Lanka; October
- Philippines; November - China. Thank you for your active participation for
making this missionary approach possible by your financial assistance. Kindly
send donations directly to: Fr. Jerry Novotny OMI; LifeIssues.net, Editor; Akebono-cho
1-15-9; Kochi City, Japan, 780-8072.
4. All past issues of LifeIssues.net Newsletter available online. Click here:
http://lifeissues.net/newsletters/mojo.cgi?flavor=archive&list=lifenews&start=0.
(These newsletters are an extension of the Website.)
Contact Editor:
Jerry Novotny OMI; Akebono-cho 1-15-9; Kochi City, Japan 780-8072; Tel/Fax:
088-843-0406; E-mail: jerry@lifeissues.net
Websites by Editor:
English site: http://www.lifeissues.net,
Japanese site: http://www.japan-lifeissues.net,
OMI site: http://www.omijapankorea.net/index.html
9. Marriage Vote Action Alert - June 6, 2006
I heard an MP today tell me he received no emails or faxes or anything on terrorism today, but he got about 300 emails on marriage, all telling him to leave it alone and not revisit the issue. The SSM forces are mobilized. Are we going to be running just to catch up again? - Tim B.
Prime Minister Harper has confirmed that Parliament will be asked to deal with
the marriage definition and the impact of Bill C 38 "same-sex" marriage
in the fall 2006 session. A free vote will be held, asking MPs if they want
to re-visit this issue.
Some MPs are already using the excuse that they have not heard any complaints
from constituents about the marriage issue, which must mean that nobody cares
and it should be left alone. Other MPs are saying they are getting many emails
asking them to leave the marriage issue alone. If that is true, then it seems
the advocates for homosexual marriage are active and vocal. We know that last
time the issue was raised, some MPs received thousands of emails - many from
people who were not their constituents and many from people living in other
nations, lobbying in favour of homosexual marriage. In all likelihood, this
is what is happening again. It proves how e-mail communication can be abused
by some activists.
Now is the time for advocates of the one-man one-woman definition of marriage
to let their voice be heard. Summer is an excellent time to visit your MP, since
they are in their home constituencies. I encourage you to make an appointment,
keep them busy over the summer, go in pairs if necessary, and let YOUR
VOICE be heard on marriage. Please be respectful and polite whenever
communicating with your MP, and clearly and concisely state your views. This
one call to action is perhaps all you need
to do this summer.
Let us not allow anti-family MPs to create excuses for voting against revisiting
the marriage issue.
However, even if Parliament votes against revisiting the marriage issues -
the marriage issue is NOT dead. There will be another Parliament and another
time. And until the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman
is restored to its proper significance and honour, we will not give up the battle.
The results of how Parliament deals with the marriage issue this fall will also
influence future nomination meetings, and the next election.
CFAC's Call to Action - A, B, C
A) Call your MP and request a meeting. To obtain MP contact information,
visit www.familyaction.org/
click - YOUR MP. MPs of every party must allow their constituents to meet with
them. Your MP must be held accountable for representing the position of his/her
constituents, not that of their party, their leader, nor their conscience. If
an MP is anti-marriage and anti-family, one might question what kind of conscience
they have. Your MP must be committed to finding out what the constituents want,
and represent the constituents. A visit is worth more than e-mails.
CFAC is also calling for a full and comprehensive investigation/study into the impact that changing the legal definition of marriage is having on children, taxation, education and even health care issues. Please ask your MP to call for a study on this matter in preparation for new future legislation. A French white paper has very revealing evidence that was recommended to the French government http://familyaction.org/Articles/issues/family/marriage/marriage-for-childrens- sake.htm
B) E-mail your own MP. E-mails may serve limited purpose as a result of the abuse in the last round of the marriage debate, but email your MP anyway. Ensure you note that you live in their riding and you do vote, and your vote in the next election will be influenced by how the MP votes on marriage.
C) Ask others in your riding to take these actions also. Many Canadians
are very concerned about the negative impacts that same sex "marriage"
has already had on the social structure, health care and benefits, children,
and public education. Inform them and ask them to let their position be known
to their MP.
We know summer should be a time of enjoyment, and I hope you get some rest and
enjoy time with family and friends. But please keep in mind the crucial importance
of the institution of marriage and its impact on our culture. The social and
national legacy we leave to our children and future generations will in part
depend on what this generation of voters does to preserve traditional marriage.
Please - take a few minutes this summer to invest into Building
the Future for Canada.
Dr. Brian Rushfeldt, Executive Director
Canada Family Action Coalition
Leading citizen action making a difference
P.S. a new high quality bumper sticker is now available at $5. Order via phone
or mail with payment. Look at www.familyaction.org
- see what is new.
10. MPAA Places Christianity In Same Category As Sex, Violence, Profanity
Be sure to forward this to your friends and family!
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is now warning parents of movies which contain a reference to the Christian faith, equating Christianity as being on the same level of sex, violence and profanity when it comes to objectionable material.
The MPAA is controlled by Hollywood moguls known for their bitter opposition to Christianity.
A new family film featuring miracles and a pro-God theme has earned the PG rating because it would offend non-believers. The MPAA refuses to give movies which promote the homosexual lifestyle a similar warning. In other words, MPAA warns parents if a movie has Christianity presented in a positive manner but refuses to warn them if homosexuality is presented in a positive manner.
Facing the Giants is the story of a Christian high school football coach who uses his undying faith to battle the giants of fear and failure. Due to the Christian content, the MPAA rated it PG, placing it in the same offensive category as sex, violence and profanity.
Click Here to read a good Scripps Howard News Service article about this issue. http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=RELIGION-FAITH-06-07-06
The plot includes several prayers being answered, a medical miracle, and a mystic who delivers a message from God. The scene which MPAA found most offensive was a discussion between the football coach and a boy named Matt. The coach says the boy needs to stop bad-mouthing his father and get right with God.
The boy replies: "You really believe in all that honoring God and following
Jesus stuff? Well, I ain't trying to be disrespectful, but not everybody believes
in that."
The coach responds: "Matt, nobody's forcing anything on you. Following Jesus Christ is the decision that you're going to have to make for yourself. You may not want to accept it, because it will change your life. You will never be the same."
That, says the MPAA, is very objectionable and parents need to be warned.
Take Action
Send an e-mail to the MPAA asking them to stop their anti-Christian bigotry.
Click
Here to E-Mail the MPAA Now!
Or paste this link to your browser: https://secure.afa.net/afa/afapetition/takeaction.asp?id=201
If you think our efforts are worthy, would you please support us with a small gift? Thank you for caring enough to get involved.
Sincerely,
American Family Resource
Center - Everything for the family! Books... Music... Videos... Gifts,
etc.
American Family Filter
- Strong, Internet filtering software and porn blocking technology.
11. PM Adviser Sees 'Have Nots' As The New 'Haves' In Court System - By Tonda MacCharles
The Toronto Star - May 13, 2006
Most Canadians probably don't know or don't care about Ian Brodie's view of the country's top court. He is not an MP. He is a political scientist, a tenured one at that. But his opinions are far from academic. In fact, they may warrant more attention than any of the musings of MP Maurice Vellacott or others seen as on the fringe of this new Conservative party. Because Ian Brodie is right at the centre. He is on leave from academia, and is chief of staff and top adviser to Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
In writings before he took leave from the University of Western Ontario - he organized the Draft Harper campaign to replace Stockwell Day as Canadian Alliance leader - Brodie showed he is a tough-minded observer not just of the Supreme Court of Canada, but also of the way "traditionally disadvantaged groups - official language minorities, feminists and homosexual rights advocates" - have gotten their way when they appear before it. In a 2003 paper, Brodie wrote with Ted Morton that those "have-nots" are the new "haves" in Canadian society. The two argue that official language minorities, feminist groups and gay rights activists are the ones who acquired the money (courtesy of federal funding) and the political clout to advance their cause. And they say central governments, from Pierre Trudeau on, helped the courts become political actors when it furthered their own political prospects.
Sound familiar? It's not put as indelicately as Harper did when he said Liberal governments pushed gay marriage rights "through back channels" by appointing judges to do it for them. Brodie doesn't say the courts are stacked. But he argues the odds are. And those odds don't favour socially conservative groups or those who dispute liberal interpretations of rights in the Constitution, and its Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It is a view shared by other political scientists and law professors who think judges go too far, are too "activist" in drawing on principles underlying the law that are not explicitly written in legislation, and using those unwritten principles to overturn or invalidate democratically enacted laws. It is a view popular among the "Calgary School" of conservative academics who mentored Brodie and Harper at the University of Calgary. (It is, however, a view disputed by many who argue that Charter rights litigants are losing far more challenges to government legislation than they win.)
But it's a view Brodie has developed in several publications. In Political Dispute and Judicial Review, a 2000 compendium of essays, Brodie writes that before Trudeau gave the Supreme Court more control over its docket, appointed reform-minded law deans to the bench, and brought in the Charter, "Canadian Supreme Court judges did not think of their role as 'creative.' They did not make new law. They thus avoided having to decide whether government policies were advisable, since they could accept the law as it was established by legislatures or other courts." In the Canadian Journal of Political Science in 2001, Brodie argued Trudeau consciously set about enlisting the courts as allies in his fight to institute bilingualism at a provincial level. In a piece for the Fraser Forum in 2002, Brodie wrote "Pro-life and traditional family groups ... have been consistently denied (federal) funds" to take their arguments before the Supreme Court, calling it "strange" and "unfair."
Now that Brodie is in a position of power, will his theory - about how central governments use the courts or federal funding to advance a political agenda - be put into practice, in this case to advance a conservative one? Brodie declined a request for an interview for this article.
No surprise after last week's furor over the views expressed by Vellacott.
On the political left, Vellacott's comments re-awakened suspicions that the
Conservative government has its sights on eroding the independence of what it
sees as a too-activist, too-liberal judiciary. Vellacott denounced the "God-like
powers" judges take upon themselves, attributing the description to Chief
Justice Beverley McLachlin - wrongly, as it turned out. He called for "judicial
restraint." The federal Liberal party says there's a trend. "The Prime
Minister himself has expressed similar disdain for the Supreme Court,"
MP Anita Neville said in a news release. But in an interview with the Star's
Bruce Campion-Smith yesterday, Harper denied having an agenda for the role of
the courts beyond the recent introduction of parliamentary scrutiny for judicial
appointments.
12. Pro-Life Boot Camp Equips Teens and Young Adults for Activism
LOS ANGELES, May 26 /Christian Newswire/ - Soon young people from across the
nation will travel to Southern California for what is best described as the
Pro-Life Boot Camp. Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, a pro-life youth organization,
will hold their 9th annual Leadership Training Camp, featured in such magazines
as Jane and Teen People. This high-energy, ten day camp beginning June 26th
is for high school and college age young people who want to be trained to be
effective and courageous in their pro-life efforts.
"I have always felt that abortion is wrong," says 14- year-old Angelique
Guaraneri, who will be attending the camp for the second time this year. "But
until I attended the camp last year, I didn't feel like I could articulate why."
"Survivors have helped me to see that my age is not an obstacle to my
voice being heard on critical issues such as abortion. Instead I feel that my
age is an asset. Who better to speak about abortion than someone who had a 1
in 3 chance of being a victim themselves? Because of Survivors Camp, I now feel
confident enough to speak to anyone about this controversial issue. Whether
it's to a professor at Harvard or a passerby on the street, the truth about
abortion remains the same and I am ready to share it with them."
The Survivors utilize the first few days of camp to equip themselves with the
tools they will need for effective activism. Students complete basic and advanced
training from nationally recognized pro-life advocates, engaging in challenging
seminars and skill- building exercises.
The extensive training includes learning the basics of the scientific issues
behind the question of when life begins, how to speak to women who find themselves
in a crisis pregnancy, using the media to get out your message, planning and
executing a successful activist event, and knowing your rights in the public
square.
James Conrad, a Survivor veteran and current camp leader, speaks about its
unique purpose, "Survivors camp is not your average nature hike, water
balloon games, hotdogs and fireside songs camp experience. The purpose is to
take 50 young people and give them the training and tools needed to go back
to their communities and take an active stand against the worst evil of our
day, the slaughter of innocent children through abortion."
The second part of the camp is the hands-on portion of the learning experience.
With the encouragement of experienced advisors, the Survivors are placed in
leadership positions at camp activism events. All Survivors are given opportunities
to practice their skills, whether as event leader or media spokesperson. The
goal is to prepare the Survivors for their own events and activities back at
home.
"We believe that it is not enough to know that abortion is wrong, but
we are called to expose the horrific truth to the world," said Cheryl Conrad,
Director of Survivors. "The Survivors ministry was founded to educate and
equip young people who have a heart for the pre-born and are willing to be used
by God to defend those unjustly sentenced to death."
Christian
Newswire - Forward
this press release to another reporter or news producer.
To: National Desk
Contact: Arianna Grumbine, Public Relations Coordinator for Survivors of the
Abortion Holocaust, 909-744-7283, arianna@survivors.la
Survivors
of the Abortion Holocaust
13. The Pope's Warning - By Roy Clancy, Calgary Sun - May 24, 2006
http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Clancy_Roy/2006/05/24/1594675.html
The Calgary Sun - May 24, 2006 - By Roy Clancy
Some Canadians' noses are out of joint after Pope Benedict had the audacity to criticize our nation in front of the world.
The pontiff's beef?
Our low birthrate, which Benedict attributes to the absence of religion in our lives. His words have been met so far with little more than a chorus of grumbles and cries to "mind your own business."
The Pope blames our woes on our "secular" status, which simply means Canada's population is turning away from organized religion.
How far? Just look at the reaction to Prime Minister Stephen Harper closing a speech with the words: "God bless Canada."
It's hard to believe that could offend anyone. After all, he's not beseeching any particular religion's god to bestow good fortune upon our country.
But, judging from the negative reaction these days to the words God, religion and church, you'd think he was uttering an obscenity.
According to Statistics Canada, the number of Canadians who practice no religion sat at about 19% in 2004, compared to 12% in 1985. Fair enough. We live in a free country, where no one is forced to believe anything they don't wish to believe. No one could argue against that.
The drawback is that organized religion once provided a foundation for our moral standards and a model for good behaviour. As its impact on our society wanes, it is replaced by an ambiguous set of rules.
Personal gratification moves toward the top of the list. The '60s slogan "if it feels good, do it," has become the mantra for an entire society. Many politicians, even if they hold deep religious convictions themselves, are reluctant to place themselves in the line of fire by suggesting a nation's success runs far deeper than the employment rate or income levels.
Fortunately, Pope Benedict is bound by no such constraints. In fact, stirring things up is part of his job description.
That's what he was doing when he urged Canada's Roman Catholic bishops to preach "with passion."
Like the man he claims as his Saviour, Benedict is obviously on a mission. He recently suggested a lack of true love was behind an increase in failed marriages and a decrease in birthrates across the developed world. It's a message our politically correct society might not want to hear, but it is one that bears closer scrutiny.
At first glance, our diminishing birthrate appears just another manifestation of modern life, which offers us choices and benefits unknown to previous generations.
The trouble is, if our birthrate continues to diminish, or even remains steady at close to record low levels, it will begin to threaten our nation's survival.
Even immigration isn't filling the void - despite the fact we welcome more newcomers than just about any nation.
The foundation of our society will crumble around us without enough fresh blood to replenish our population.
It's interesting so much debate is devoted to the potential impact of global warming, while this more fundamental threat goes virtually ignored. The mainstream argument runs that everyone is free - there's that word again - to make their own choices about parenthood.
The larger question is why our society as a whole has come to place so little value on children when they mean so much to the continuation of our nation's viability.
It's not simply a matter of making it easier for parents to afford the cost of raising children - even though that would be a good start. Benedict and other religious leaders can only try to change our society's attitude that places a higher value on luxury cars, estate homes and sun destination vacations than on a noisy house full of energetic, laughing children.
If they don't succeed, the eventual economic repercussions may do the job for them.
New figures by Statistics Canada project there'll be more seniors over age 65 than children under 15 by 2015. By 2031, the number of seniors could be double the number of children.
When that happens, who'll take up the jobs needed to keep our economy going to support this mob of oldsters?
Where will the health-care providers come from needed to keep these masses of seniors healthy and happy?
Sadly, perhaps that's what it will take for our self-centered, cynical society
to finally heed the true significance of Benedict's warning.
14. Reuters News Agency Reported - California Lawmakers Reject Assisted-Suicide Bill - June 28, 2006
California lawmakers narrowly rejected a bill on Tuesday that would have allowed the terminally ill to enlist doctors to help them commit suicide.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 3-2 to block the measure. Committee Chairman Sen. Joe Dunn, a Democrat from Santa Ana, California, cast the deciding vote, siding with two Republicans.
Dunn said he could not trust that future lawmakers would refrain from expanding the bill to allow persons not suffering from terminal illnesses to hasten their deaths.
The bill mirrored an Oregon law allowing doctors to prescribe a lethal prescription to terminally ill patients.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger suggested earlier this year he would not sign such a bill because the issue of physician-assisted suicide is of such importance it should be left to voters.
Today the 'San Francisco Chronicle' reported in more detail on the same hearing in Sacramento, California.
Legislation to allow doctors to help terminally ill patients end their lives was defeated Tuesday after an emotionally charged hearing that drew 120 people to testify about life and suffering and whether modern medicine should be called upon to hasten death.
The bill failed in its first legislative hearing when the senator chairing the committee that held the hearing surprised supporters and voted against it. The action in effect ends chances of passing the measure this year.
Sen. Joe Dunn, a Santa Ana Democrat, said he wrestled with his position on the controversial measure. During the past week, Dunn consulted with Orange County's Catholic bishop, who opposed the measure, and a UC Davis bioethics expert, who supported it.
Ultimately, Dunn said, he was afraid that in the future, "the power of money" would expand the application of doctor-assisted suicide beyond terminally ill patients.
"In this society, in California and the United States, more often than not public policy decisions are driven unfortunately by money concerns," Dunn told the packed hearing room where the Senate Judiciary Committee met. "With a heavy heart, I will be a 'no' vote."
Later, Dunn said money's influence could come from any number of sources:
HMOs, health insurers, even the state's unwillingness to appropriate money for more end-of-life care.
Dunn's vote was critical for supporters. Dunn had previously said he was undecided on the bill, and he said he remained so at the beginning of Tuesday's hearing.
Without Dunn's vote, supporters could not get the three "yes" votes needed to clear the five-member committee. The remaining two Democrats voted for it. Republicans opposed it.
"It's a crushing disappointment," Assemblywoman Patty Berg, D-Eureka, one of the bill's co-authors, said after the vote. "To have this bill fail because one senator has no faith in the legislators who will come after us is truly devastating. Terminally ill patients in California deserve better than this."
The emotionally charged issue of whether terminally ill patients should be able to avoid further suffering and end their lives has been debated in the California Legislature almost since Oregon became the first state in the nation to allow the practice eight years ago.
The bill defeated Tuesday, AB651, was modeled after Oregon's law and would have allowed a doctor to prescribe a lethal prescription to a terminally ill patient diagnosed with no more than six months to live.
It has been opposed by the California Medical Association, the Catholic Church, some disabled advocates and hospice operators, among others.
Supporters include individual doctors, advocacy groups for seniors and the state Commission on Aging.
So contentious is the issue that coalitions have formed on either side: Californians for Compassionate Choice supports the idea. Californians Against Assisted Suicide opposes it.
"It's about the freedom of the individual to make choices. It is not a freedom without limits. It's appropriate only for those whose death is imminent and unavoidable," Berg said in presenting the bill.
Tom McDonald, a 76-year-old retired electronics technician from Lake Oroville, near Chico, provided the hearing's most wrenching moment.
"Passing this bill this year means more to me than most because I've been placed in death row," said McDonald, who was diagnosed in January with terminal melanoma. "My doctor told me I'd know when I'm near the end because I'll be coughing up blood. I'm not too thrilled with the prospect of ending my life drowning in my own blood. I do not want my loving wife to endure such a sight. Nor do I want my daughter, my son or my grandchildren subjected to such horrors. Nor do I want to lose control of my dignity and my faculties, but at this point I will be out of options."
Opponents were sympathetic to McDonald but argued that doctors should care for patients rather than help them take their lives.
"Suicide is not medical care. It is its antithesis," said Holly Swiger, a hospice nurse who serves on the board of the California Hospice and Palliative Care Association.
Marilyn Golden, an analyst for the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, told the committee that legalizing assisted suicide would "distort the attitude of doctors toward their sickest patients."
Opponents also said that sometimes dying people learn valuable lessons about life and love and care, lessons they would have missed if they had hastened their end.
Supporters countered that the measure had even more safeguards than Oregon's law and that patients enduring intense suffering should be given the option to end that suffering.
"I'm very disappointed. Seventy percent of Californians consistently support this," said the bill's other co-author, Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-San Fernando, acknowledging that the bill cannot be revived this year.
Even if the measure had passed the Legislature, it was unlikely to be signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
At a Sacramento Press Club luncheon in January, the Republican governor, who is running for re-election in the fall, said the decision on whether California embraces such a law should be left to the voters.
"This is a decision probably that should go to the people, like the death
penalty or other big issues," Schwarzenegger said. "I don't think
that we, 120 legislators and I, should make that decision."
15. This Is The Information Provided By The Care NOT Killing Coalition In
The UK
This is excellent news. Last year the British Medical Association (BMA) decided
to take a neutral stand on assisted suicide. The BMA tremendously influences
the Canadian Medical Association (CMA). The renewal of opposition by the BMA
gives us great hope in Canada that the CMA will not move to neutralize its position
on assisted suicide.
Alex Schadenberg - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
Latest On British Medical Association Vote Opposing Physician-Assisted Suicide
And Euthanasia - June 29, 2006
Today, the British Medical Association voted overwhelmingly to oppose the legalization
of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. Commenting on this result, the
campaign director of Care NOT Killing, Dr Peter Saunders, said:
"This is a fantastic result for the many organizations campaigning against
euthanasia. It is a very important result in terms of political and public opinion.
It means that the medical profession in the UK is now firmly united in its opposition
to any form of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. This sends a very clear
message to the public and to MPs - doctors who care for dying patients understand
the serious dangers that would arise from legalizing euthanasia. They have come
a clear conclusion today at the BMA conference that legalized killing would
create more problems than it would solve.
"Their verdict - that we need better palliative care for the terminally
ill - sends a clear message that what we need to do is to kill the pain and
not the patient. The argument that decided this vote and the similar vote in
the House of Lords last month is a simple one. For sick and vulnerable patients
the danger is that the right to die could become a duty to die as they feel
pressure, whether real or imaginary, from family, carers and society at large
to request early death.
The BMA vote has rescued patients from embarking upon the slippery slope towards
full blown euthanasia in the UK".
ENDS
Motions
That this Meeting:
Notes for Editors
Care NOT Killing is a new UK-based alliance bringing together human rights groups, healthcare groups, palliative care groups, faith groups and concerned individuals.
Care NOT Killing has three key aims:
· To promote more and better palliative care
· To ensure that existing laws against euthanasia and assisted suicide
are not weakened or repealed during the lifetime of the current Parliament
· To inform public opinion further against any weakening of the law
Care NOT Killing seeks to attract the broadest support among health care professionals, allied health services and others who are opposed to euthanasia. It is campaigning on the basis of powerful arguments underpinned by the latest, well-researched and credible evidence.
Key groups that have already signed up to join Care NOT Killing include: The
Association for Palliative Medicine, the British Council of Disabled People,
RADAR, the Christian Medical Fellowship, the Catholic Bishops Conference of
England and Wales, the Church of England and the Medical Ethics Alliance. 32
organizations have joined the alliance.
For more information, broadcasting bids and media inquiries
Nick Wood of Media Intelligence Partners
07889 617 003 or 0203 008 8146
Katie Perrior
07958 459 398
16. United Mothers, Fathers & Friends Newsletter - June 27, 2006
Please Print Or Forward This Newsletter Along To Others
1) Step 1 Winning the Vote for Marriage
2) A Message from Pat O'Brien - Public Consultation on Bill C-38? A 2 Act Farce!
Dear friends,
We have from now to mid October/November to win the vote to re-visit marriage.
We can do it! However, it requires the committed actions of people like you and the tools that will work.
We send our sincere thanks to all of you who have responded so generously to our marriage campaign. It is greatly appreciated! We are still far short of the $80,000 needed to fully implement the tools that will help us succeed in winning the vote for marriage this fall.
Your support will make a profound difference!
Funds will be put to work in key ridings for education of constituents & media attention (polling, advertising, printing of materials, website development, Internet technology, etc.)
The amount of money generated will determine how extensive this work will be.
Will you help? http://www.unitedmothers.ca/donate.php
Can you share $5,000, $1,000, or $500? Please donate today! Can you share $50, $100, $250? Please share today!
By committing as little as $8 a month ($25/quarter) you will greatly support our efforts to defend marriage, children and the family.
Please consider becoming a quarterly donor or sending your one time donation through our secure website: http://www.unitedmothers.ca/donate.php
To donate by mail: United Mothers; P.O. Box 234; 339-10 Ave., S.E.; Calgary, AB; T2G 0W2
Thank you for your support and continued efforts!
1) Step 1 - Winning The Vote For Marriage
Over the coming weeks we will be encouraging you to take decisive action on specific issues related to winning the vote for marriage.
Canadians need to know that the Bill C-38 committee & parliamentary process was anything but fair and democratic. It was a farce, complete with the high comedy elements of elected officials playing hide and seek in Parliamentary hallways to prevent the committee from having a quorum of members so that critical votes could take place.
Why should MPs revisit the marriage issue?
Reason #1
The lack of democratic process by which Bill C-38 became law is reason enough
for ALL MPs committed to democracy to vote in favour of re-visiting the marriage
issue.
Take Action
This Week's Action Item: Please forward, or print off and share, this article by former Liberal Cabinet Minister Pat O'Brien which clearly outlines that the committee hearings for C-38 were anything but "fair & democratic."
* If anyone insists they were, simply ask them for a copy of the recommendations from the report on marriage of the 2003 House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. (It doesn't exist! It was never completed or tabled in the House of Commons.)
2) A Message From Pat O'Brien
Public Consultation Re: Marriage - A Two Act Farce! - By Pat O'Brien
In January 2003, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights took up the emotional issue of marriage and the demand that its definition be expanded so as to include same-sex relationships.
Between January and May 2003, the Committee visited 12 different Cities covering every region of Canada. It heard 475 witnesses and received 250 briefs and literally thousands of letters expressing every conceivable point of view.
For the most part, the hearings, chaired by Andy Scott, MP, were conducted in a respectful and professional manner with MPs and witnesses on both sides of the argument disagreeing agreeably. The only exceptions I witnessed were a few times when witnesses and even MPs were quick to hurl the "intolerant homophobe" epithet at anyone who dared to challenge so-called "same-sex marriage". What intolerance of the core moral beliefs of others from some people demanding tolerance for gay and lesbian couples!
In late May 2003, its hearings process completed, the Standing Committee began an intensive series of "in camera" meetings to consider its draft report. We considered and often debated this report, clause-by-clause, sometimes line-by-line. The work of the Justice Committee had been highly publicized and often televised live so that there was great anticipation and interest in the report the committee would table in the House of Commons.
Suddenly, early in June 2003, three appointed judges on the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the heterosexual requirement for marriage discriminated unfairly against gays and lesbians. Incredibly, they also ruled that effective immediately, in Ontario, the definition of marriage would be expanded to include same-sex couples.
This unprecedented judicial arrogance and activism was a gratuitous insult to the people and Parliament of Canada. The Ontario Court's ruling pre-empted the important work of the Justice Committee which as every informed Canadian knew was in its very final stage.
It rendered as irrelevant all of the public input re: our most important and fundamental institution; marriage and the family.
At the final meeting of the Justice Committee, every dirty trick in the book was used, by some Liberal MPs, with the support of N.D.P. MPs, and B.Q. MPs, in order to prevent any attempt to have the committee recommend that the Chrétien Liberal Government appeal the rulings of provincial courts in favour of "same-sex marriage".
Veteran Liberal MPs who found themselves in an uncomfortable political situation, skipped irresponsibly the vote on whether to appeal or endorse the Ontario Court ruling. Liberal MPs with little or no involvement in the committee work were willingly substituted for those missing in action so that they could vote as ordered by the Liberal whip, not to support any appeal motion.
Even with the deck stacked so unfairly, the vote on whether to endorse the Ontario Court ruling was still tied 8 to 8. The Chair broke the tie voting in favour; or, in effect, against recommending an appeal.
Then, to the surprise of some, the Chair, ruled properly that a subsequent motion by me, to recommend an appeal of a very similar decision by the B.C. Court of Appeal, was in order. On this motion, we had a better chance for victory as some Liberal "substitutes" had left.
There then ensued a ridiculous farce in which antagonistic Liberal MPs, N.D.P. MPs, and Bloc MPs, hid in the hallway and refused to enter the meeting room so as to deny quorum. This nonsense continued for some time as the committee was prevented from completing its work by some of its own members. And so ended the work of that Justice Committee on marriage in an undemocratic and irresponsible charade. The final report of that committee was never finished, though I still believe it should be finalized and made part of the public record.
The 2nd Act of the sham of a public consultation process on the issue of marriage focused on Bill C-38, the bill of the Martin Liberal Government which removed the heterosexual requirement for marriage. A Legislative Committee was struck and given very limited parameters within which to operate in order to rush this Bill into Law.
There really was no good reason why Bill C-38 could not have been sent to the Standing Committee on Justice for proper hearings and a revisiting and completion of the work of the previous committee described earlier. Because considerable pressure was applied, the Government agreed to limited public hearings but imposed an unnecessary and artificial deadline of early June 2005, for the committee to report to the House of Commons. Hearings began in May and even though I had the personal assurance of Prime Minister Martin that they would be full and fair hearings, they quickly degenerated into a travesty.
Witnesses were sometimes given less than twenty- four hours notice to appear. Some witnesses were berated and insulted at Committee by MPs who were not properly disciplined by the Chair. Witnesses were grouped into delegations with too many people to allow for thorough questioning by MPs.
Although I was not a member of this committee, as I was then Chair of the Standing Committee on National Defence, I personally attended several hearings and witnessed the farce I described.
In fact, I was asked to be a witness at that committee, which I did, using the opportunity to object to the farcical process, which was rushing Bill C-38 through this committee while trying to create the appearance of a proper public consultation.
When this committee report was tabled in the House of Commons in June, 2005, the government reversed its' original intention as explained to me by the Government House Leader, Tony Valeri, and decided to ram the Bill through the House before the summer recess. The Liberal, Martin Government, with the hypocritical support of the N.D.P. and the Bloc Quebecois, (who had always prided themselves on opposing closure), invoked closure, cutting off debate and denying dozens of MPs their right to speak on the most vital issue of marriage.
The Martin Government did not want this legislation hanging over their heads during the summer recess. Why Liberal MPs might be pressured and lobbied by their constituents re: Bill C-38. We couldn't have that now could we - in a democracy like Canada.
So with the completion of Act II, the farcical and undemocratic process was finished and same-sex marriage became legal in Canada.
Unless we reverse course quickly and rescind Bill C- 38, all that will remain is to await the very real and negative consequences that many experts predict will surely flow over time from this enormous legal and political mistake.
(Article printed with permission of author.)
Please Print Or Forward This Newsletter Along To Others
Thank you for your continued efforts!
Michele Dow, United Mothers, Fathers & Friends www.unitedmothers.ca
17. Woman Surgeon Stresses Abortion & Breast Cancer Link at Ottawa Press
Conference - By Gudrun Schultz
OTTAWA, May 16, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - An expert in the field of breast
cancer presented strong evidence linking breast cancer to abortion, in a press
conference held by members of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus last Thursday.
Dr. Angela Lanfranchi is clinical assistant professor of surgery at Robert
Wood Johnson Medical School in New Jersey and co-founder of the Breast Cancer
Prevention Institute.
"The link between abortion and breast cancer is simply the result of a
woman's biology," said Dr. Lanfranchi, citing multiple scientific studies
that link induced abortion with a significant increase in breast cancer rates.
Breast cancer rates have increased by 40% over the 30 years since abortion was
legalized.
"It's the women of the Roe v. Wade generation that account for most of
this increase. Dramatic lifestyle changes brought about by the sexual revolution
and the women's liberation movement are largely responsible for the rampant
breast cancer we see today," she said, reported the Globe and Mail.
Liberal MP Paul Steckle and Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott invited Dr. Lanfranchi
to speak in an effort to raise awareness of the dangerous effects of abortion
on women's health.
"Breast cancer is the most common cancer among Canadian women, according
to the Canadian Cancer Society, yet that organization is not telling women about
a well-documented preventable risk-factor," said Mr. Vellacott, Conservative
co-chair of the PPLC, in a press release. "Women have a right to be told
about this increased risk."
Since 1957, over 40 studies worldwide have shown a link between induced abortion
and breast cancer. A 1996 meta-analysis conducted by Dr. Joel Brind, professor
of endocrinology at Baruch College, City University of New York, established
abortion as a significant independent risk factor for developing breast cancer.
(See Dr. Brind's review of studies conducted over the last 9 years at: http://www.jpands.org/vol10no4/brind.pdf)
According to the Canadian Cancer Society, 102 Canadian women will die of breast
cancer every week. "Withholding from women information about this preventable
risk factor could literally be a matter of life and death," said Steckle.
"This is an important women's health issue," said MP Paul Steckle,
Liberal co-chair of the PPLC. "We are doing women a disservice by ignoring
the epidemiological and biological evidence that shows women who have had abortions
are at an increased risk for developing breast cancer."
Despite mounting well-documented evidence, leading cancer research centres
such as the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, the Canadian
Cancer Society and the Canadian Breast Cancer Network, (along with their U.S.
counterparts), have refused to acknowledge a connection between the effects
of abortion on women's bodies and their subsequent development of breast cancer.
See related LifeSiteNews coverage:
U.S. Breast Cancer Foundation Funding Abortion Provider Planned Parenthood:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022203.html
Canadian MP says Cancer Society Withholding Pill/Cancer Link: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/mar/06031707.html
18.
19. Secular Franciscan Order (SFO)
Please be patient with me while I complete the Newsletter for the First, Second and Third Quarter of 2006 which should have been completed by now.
20. Sobey's Receipts Are Valuable
Please don't throw away your Sobey's receipts. Click here and see why!
Amount of receipts collected to date: $485,615.84
21.
