Thursday, August 24, 2006
With the switch to selling Plan B in a manner similar to malt liquor and cigarettes, will the next move be selling Plan B at 7-11?
Monday, August 21, 2006
Sunday, August 20, 2006
Under Unintended Pregnancy and Family Planning here's what our state government is pushing on women in immigrant, or as they like to say "non-citizen" communities. Note the innocuous and innocent sounding title for the program.
The Eastern Washington Family Outreach Pilot Project that provides free or low cost contraception to women who are not U.S. citizens was expanded to include five more counties. Family Planning and Reproduction Health (FPRH) received state funds to include non-citizens in Adams, Chelan, Douglas, Franklin, Grant, and Yakima counties in the pilot project. Three family planning agencies are administering the pilot project. In addition, two agencies were awarded small federal grants through Title X to do non-citizen pilots. One agency will cover Whatcom and Skagit counties. The other agency covers Chelan and Douglas counties and their federal grant will be used to enhance their existing non-citizen pilot project.There are so many things wrong with this I don't even know where to start. Is shoveling more money to Planned Parenthood really the best use of our state's resources? Are isolated, possibly uneducated, non-English speaking women who are fearful of deportation really in a position to give informed consent or opt out of a state program they may feel is compulsory in order to stay in the United States? What kind of contraception are they taking about -- birth control pills or Norplant or IUDs? Norplant and IUDs aren't exactly reversible at any time. Is this contraception or a state sponsored sterilization program? Are there any reporting requirements demanded of the women, i.e. must they report any contraceptive failures back to Planned Parenthood or the state, whereupon they are introduced to a "family planning" appartchik, freshly-minted from one of our state schools who tells them how safe and wonderful abortion is.
Assuming these women are Catholic, I have to wonder if the Catholic Church in Washington, especially the Archdiocese of Western Washington is paying attention to what the state is doing. Coincidentally the headline on their glossy magazine Samaritan this month was, "Immigration Assistance in the Skagit Valley: Serving a population in need of reliable information." Churches that need to be informed about this program include: Immaculate Conception in Mount Vernon; St. Charles in Burlington; Sacred Heart in La Conner; Immaculate Heart of Mary in Sedro-Woolley; and St. Catherine in Concrete.
Friday, August 18, 2006
"Really the right answer is 'yes,' whenever the woman asks for it," Dr. Linda Prine of Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City, the study's lead author, told Reuters Health.
Evangelicals question contraception; 88% still support it
A recent New York Times article on the subject, it is true, quoted Albert Mohler, the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, saying that the separation between sex and procreation caused by contraceptives is "ominous." But he also went on to say that "evangelical couples may, at times, choose to use contraceptives in order to plan their families and enjoy the pleasures of the marital bed."
Cooler Heads Prevail on Pharmacists' Right to Conscience
"Pharmacists and all other health care providers already have a constitutional and statutory right to refuse to participate in any service to which they have a moral objection."
Reproduced below is a letter recently sent to Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) in respose to Senator Murray's defense of her vote against the Child Custody Protection Act:
Sadly, I believe you are misinformed and your approach, not the Child Custody Protection Act, is what endangers the health of women.
If your statistic is correct, then two-thirds of women who do not involve their parents are not victims of abuse (from their parents.) They are, however, victims of abuse by a system that readily channels them into the choice of abortion as the preferred option to a challenging pregnancy. This two-thirds of women then face life long serious physical and emotional consequences including depression, suicidality, drug and alcohol abuse and spiraling self-esteem and self-confidence which negatively impacts their future life success.
I don't need statistics to tell me that this is true because I have worked with these women for the last twelve years. These women tell me about the so-called "counseling" provided by "family planning clinics" which was nothing more than disinformation regarding potential health consequences for themselves as well as development of their child, along with no real help toward making any other choice but the choice of abortion.
Many young women express fear of disclosing pregnancy to their parents and even say such things as "My parents would kill me." This can reflect a typical adolescent fear with no actual basis in reality. What teens need at that point is specific help in telling parents and enlisting their support. After the initial shock, most parents step in with support for their daughter. This bonds the family and results in growth for the teen as well as family relationships.
There are safeguards of judicial bypass already provided by law for those teens in truly dangerous abuse situations. What we do not need is intrusion into the parent / teen relationship by teachers, counselors, other school officials and clinic personnel by providing transportation across state lines so minor teens can obtain abortions without parent knowledge or consent. This is clearly wrong-headed thinking.
Senator Murray, we do agree on the need for education which will significantly reduce teen pregnancies. Unfortunately, current public funding supports education by the very people who profit by teen sexual activity and abortion, most notably Planned Parenthood. This is a clear conflict of interest. I would urge you instead to read the attached study (The Current National Picture on Teen Pregnancy by Stan E. Weed, Ph.D., 1999, 4 pp, available through the US Conference of Catholic Bishops) regarding teen pregnancy statistics and sex education.
Democrats pride themselves on being open-minded. I would therefore respectfully request you read this article with an open mind. Any democrat who votes a consistent ethic of life is first in line to get my vote.
In the meantime, I will continue to pick up the pieces of those women who have been victimized by a so-called pro-choice culture.
Many people live with great dichotomy, for example, condemning abortion but supporting capital punishment. (.pdf file, see page 17)Ahh, yes insult the pro-lifers who understand the Church's teaching on both abortion and capital punishment, and the difference between the taking of innocent human life and the right of the state to exercise the death penalty in a prudent manner. It's too bad the Archbishop didn't mention the real dichotomy: The many Catholics in Western Washington who insist on wearing their seamless garment inside out by condemning capital punishment but supporting abortion.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Whatever the case, After Abortion has the best analysis and background information on this latest outrage. They also have a great sample letter with references to the specific studies showing abortion's harmful effects.
You can write or email the Seattle Times at: firstname.lastname@example.org and Diane Albert, Letters Editor.
You may want to mention that at least one abortionist in Washington believes that Post-Abortion Syndrome exits since they reported it as a complication to the Department of Health in 2002. (MS Excel doc; see Table 8D; "1 PAS")
You could also mention that the author of the quote below and one of the major researchers into the ABC link, Dr. Janet Daling with Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, lives in Seattle. They could talk to her without even the expense of a long-distance call or thinking about the time-zone.
If politics gets involved in science, it will really hold back the progress we make. I have three sisters with breast cancer, and I resent people messing with the scientific data to further their own agenda, be they pro-choice or pro-life. I would have loved to have found no association between breast cancer and abortion, but our research is rock solid, and our data is accurate. It's not a matter of believing. It's a matter of what is.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Electing Mike McGavick is essential to maintaining control of confirmation of pro-life judges in the next 2 years. Please pass this on to your pro-life friends! This election is essential for the future of our nation and beliefs.
WA Conservative Coalition Coordinator
Mike McGavick for the US Senate
I'm sure you are a nice person but are you kidding? McGavick will vote to confirm almost any nominee that gets through the Judiciary Committee, including another Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Would he vote to confirm a Robert Bork? Hmmm...my guess is probably not. Too much pressure from the "mainstream" Republicans back home, his staff, contacts at "It's My Party Too", and his friends at the Seattle PI and The Stranger. Besides, by the time it gets around to a full vote of the Senate the fix is already in and the nominee, 99.9% of the time, flies through the Senate by a wide margin. In this scenario, McGavick's vote is of little consequence. The president is really the gate-keeper when it comes to SCJ nominees. As long as we get a good pro-life president who nominates good pro-life judges we can get the kind of SCJ we want even with a Maria Cantwell in office.
However, how he would vote on other pro-life issues such as the suspension and reviw of RU-486, funding for Planned Parenthood and international population control, bans on fetal farming, cloning, and whatever else the abortion lobby is trying to get for themselves can be of critical importance. These votes are often close and we need to win them to just hang on to the gains the pro-lifers have made in past years. McGavick has refused to tell pro-lifers how he would vote on those issues. He refused to answer the survey from Human Life of Washington. Fortunately we know that he has told the Seattle PI he supports legal abortion.
Mike doesn't share the beliefs of pro-lifers after all now does he? For reasons known only to his heart he supports legal abortion with few if any restrictions.
By the way, may I see a copy of the survey or questionnaire that gained him his endorsement from "It's My Party Too" PAC?
Only pro-abortion choice, pro-illegal amnesty, gay rights, tax and spend constitutional liberal candidates have an inside track for the support of the GOP pragmatic elite and the big money they have controlled (and squandered) since 1980. Trying to run a conservative candidate through this surrealistic obstacle course is, and has been, hopeless. I’ve been on enough of the conservative teams to know. We are the outsiders in our own Party. It is the Decepti-Cons, that fool the Party faithful about who they are, that run the show.
Which reminds me, why is George Nethercutt (R) who I am constantly told is "pro-life" part of the Advisory Board for the pro-abortion PAC "It's My Party Too"? Is he just practicing the world's second oldest profession or has he perhaps been committed to unsafe, legal, and common abortion all along.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
It is no wonder abortion mills smell so nasty,” said Cheryl Sullenger. “The blood – and God knows what else – simply flies during an abortion and that stuff all soaks into the dry wall and gets tracked into the carpeting where it putrefies. There is no way to get rid of it aside from major demolition. From what we observed, there can be no such thing as a ‘safe, clean’ abortion clinic.No commentary necessary. Just read the whole article.