RainyAutumnTwilight

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a vampire

  • 29th February
    2012
  • 29
  • 2nd February
    2012
  • 02

Attacks on Susan G. Komen Reveals Planned Parenthood’s Real Face [Updated w/ Video]

How revealing this fight over Susan G. Komen’s defunding of Planned Parenthood is!

Wesley J. Smith asks exactly the right question:“Abortion Matters More Than Fighting Breast Cancer to Liberals?”

So it would seem. Various Democrats like Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) are boycotting Susan G. Komen over this decision. Howard Dean isencouraging corporate sponsors to punish Komen. Welcome to the real face of the pro-abortion movement: bullying liars. They immediately and viciously throw Komen under the bus simply for ceasing to give them money (and their seal of approval).

One of the main lies being pushed by pro-aborts is the claim that women will go without care now. Nonsense. Planned Parenthood never provided the services that Komen contracted through them in the first place. The founder of Komen, Nancy G. Brinker explains in a moving video released today (please click on the link and LIKE the video!) that no woman will experience a gap in Komen’s services. A friend with inside knowledge wrote to me:

…[Planned Parenthood does] not provide essential life-saving screening mammography. They instead refer women to hospitals for those services. But there’s no way of knowing how many women actually follow through and receive a mammogram, which makes measuring impact very difficult.

A better granting model would be to invest in grants with the actual service provider whenever possible, which is exactly what Komen has done with its new strategy…

In other words, Planned Parenthood wasn’t giving women mammograms in the first place, as LiveAction exposed some time ago. Komen simply chose to cut out the middleman (Planned Parenthood) and instead directly support hospitals that actually provide life-saving services.

All of which reminds us of another lie: that Planned Parenthood is about protecting and promoting women’s health. Sue Thayer, who worked for Planned Parenthood for 20 years, exposes that lie in the Washington Times today.

Jill Stanek has more of the inside story on what led Komen to make it’s decision. But as I wrote yesterday, we need to stay focused on two main things: thanking Komen and exposing Planned Parenthood.

Also, important to note: Komen has also promised to stop funding embryonic stem cell research centers, a promise I believe.

Let’s keep up the positive pressure on Komen and push back against the pro-abort lies. If Planned Parenthood thought last year was their worst they are in for bigger surprises this year!

UPDATE — Proabort activists hacked the Komen website yesterday, according to pop culture web siteMediate, inserting the phrase ”Help us run over poor women on our way to the bank.” What a stupid stunt. Women who are fighting for the end of breast cancer should be outraged.

(video added on second post)

  • 9th October
    2011
  • 09
  • 16th September
    2011
  • 16
Contraceptive methods are like putting a premium on vice. They make men and women reckless. Nature is relentless and will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws… If contraceptive methods become the order of the day, nothing but moral degradation can be the result. As it is, man has sufficiently degraded woman for his lust, and contraception, no matter how well meaning the advocates may be, will still further degrade her.

Mahatma Gandhi


(via dennisjoealoy)

(Source: introibo-ad-altare-dei, via catholicknight)

  • 15th September
    2011
  • 15
  • 15th September
    2011
  • 15
restlesshippo:

Largest ever study finds abortion increases risk of severe mental health problems by 81%
“….the largest  quantitative estimate of mental health risks associated with abortion  available in the world literature.”  The research revealed that abortion was associated with a 34%  increased risk for anxiety disorders; 37% greater risk of depression;  110% greater risk of alcohol abuse and 220% greater risk of marijuana  use/abuse.  Abortion was also linked with a 155% greater risk of attempting to commit suicide.

restlesshippo:

Largest ever study finds abortion increases risk of severe mental health problems by 81%

“….the largest quantitative estimate of mental health risks associated with abortion available in the world literature.”  The research revealed that abortion was associated with a 34% increased risk for anxiety disorders; 37% greater risk of depression; 110% greater risk of alcohol abuse and 220% greater risk of marijuana use/abuse.  Abortion was also linked with a 155% greater risk of attempting to commit suicide.

  • 14th September
    2011
  • 14

I See All These Posts That Say “How Can You Say You Are Pro-Life but Not ______”

Pro-life? 

Against the death penalty?

Against war?

Vegetarian?

Feminist? 

But I feel like no one notices that variation. Instead of understanding the pro-life argument, people generalize pro-lifers as blanket conservatives. There are liberal pro-lifers. There are Democratic pro-lifers. There are atheistic pro-lifers. There are pro-life feminists. There are all sorts of people who believe that life should be protected from conception to natural death, but who are completely ignored 

Because once you can’t play the “You are inconsistent here” game, you have to actually acknowledge that there are pro-lifers who are pro-life because they believe they are on the side of peace, life, and social justice.

  • 14th September
    2011
  • 14
  • 14th September
    2011
  • 14
  • 14th September
    2011
  • 14
inchristhopeisfound:

“No matter how it is worded or performed, abortion hurts women.  This won’t stop until women stand up in unison and say, ‘This is unacceptable.  We deserve better.’ Lack of emotional and financial resources are the real undue burden—and abortion will never lift that.”—Serrin Foster, President, Feminists for Life of America

inchristhopeisfound:

“No matter how it is worded or performed, abortion hurts women.  This won’t stop until women stand up in unison and say, ‘This is unacceptable.  We deserve better.’ Lack of emotional and financial resources are the real undue burden—and abortion will never lift that.”
—Serrin Foster, President, Feminists for Life of America

(via advocateforlife-deactivated2012)

  • 13th September
    2011
  • 13

I am pro-life.

littlemissyassy:

Life is an opportunity, benefit from it. Life is beauty, admire it. Life is bliss, taste it. Life is a dream, realize it. Life is a challenge, meet it. Life is a duty, complete it. Life is a game, play it. Life is a promise, fulfill it. Life is sorrow, overcome it. Life is a song, sing it. Life is a struggle, accept it. Life is a tragedy, confront it. Life is an adventure, dare it. Life is luck, make it. Life is too precious, do not destroy it. Life is life, fight for it.~Mother Theresa

  • 12th September
    2011
  • 12
  • 10th September
    2011
  • 10

Med Schools screening out Pro-Life candidates?

by Tom Crowe

 

Medical schools use open-ended questions to weed out pro-life candidates, writes Dr. Daniel Kuebler, professor of biology here at Franciscan University of Steubenville.

Dr. Kuebler is a key professor in our pre-med program which, over the past ten years, has had an average of three graduates accepted into medical schools upon graduation, out of about 5 or 6 who are known to have applied. That number has grown to about five out of eight in the past few years as our bio and pre-med programs have grown. That growth continues as the University has committed itself to growing the hard sciences further and having a greater culture-of-life impact.

In his article he talks about open-ended questions tossed into interviews that seem innocuous enough, and may well be innocuous at some schools. “Suppose a girl and her boyfriend walk into your office seeking an abortion or a referral for an abortion: what do you say to them?” At some schools this could simply be a serious question probing into the candidate’s preparation for handling some of the most sensitive areas of medicine. At other schools, this could be the question to rule all questions. Dr. Kuebler’s contention, and that of a not-insignificant body of anecdotal evidence, is that a fair number of schools use that question to identify the pro-life students and then find another, legitimate reason to opt for another candidate over the pro-life candidate.

Naturally, not all pro-life candidates for med school are the best candidate among the many applications submitted, and in those cases where another candidate is more qualified for the finite number of slots, the more qualified candidate ought to be admitted. But that’s just it: whether a person is opposed to or supports abortion rights ought not weigh into the decision at all.

(Obviously, from the Catholic perspective, anyone who supports abortion ought not be considered a viable candidate for med school, just as we wouldn’t consider someone who advocates for live vivisections or forced medical experiments on the handicapped a viable candidate, but given our present culture we have to take what we can get and work to redeem the time.)

I asked Brian Burke, a friend of mine and a relatively recent graduate of our pre-med program who is presently in med school, about his interview experience. He said that of the three schools that brought him in for an interview the first two posed abortion-related questions and University of Toledo did not. He was only accepted by Toledo, despite being a “strong candidate” on the merits.

The Toledo interviewers did still ask “in depth” about Franciscan and why he chose Franciscan. At the end of the interview the only thing evident from that line of questioning was that he considers himself a faithful Catholic. These days Burke is vice president of the student portion of the Catholic Medical Association andcontributes to their blog.

Of the overall admissions and interview process he says,

The challenge is that medical school is SO competitive that it is impossible to know for certain (unless someone says something overtly) if you are being discriminated against in the application process. I was a fairly strong candidate, but I had a difficult time getting into medical school. I know that at Toledo, one of the big things that helped me was actually having a Franciscan grad who was on the admissions committee. Did I have a difficult time because of my time at Franciscan and my Catholic outreaches? Or is it because I am a white, male? I am not sure I will ever really know, but I suspect that being a faithful, Catholic, and actively pro–life did not help my cause any.

Dr. Kuebler related a story about another student applying at a different school who actually got into an argument with one of the interviewers when it became apparent that the abortion-related questioning was a fishing expedition. The student likely could have handled the situation a little more diplomatically, but the fishing expedition on the part of the professional was uncalled for, unnecessary, and, frankly, in conflict with federal law.

Federal law prohibits schools that receive federal funding from discriminating on the usual host of demographics as well as conscience and religious issues like being pro-life. They do not prohibit asking abortion related questions, however, which creates, as Dr. Kuebler characterizes it, “a loophole big enough to drive a truck through.”

A new effort within the pre-med program here at Franciscan, according to Dr. Kuebler, will include interview preparation. Students ought to anticipate such questions and know how to handle them intelligently, non-confrontationally, and uncompromisingly. Recent graduates who successfully gained admission to med school, including Burke, will be tapped for talks and advice.

Ultimately, as Dr. Kuebler notes, the way forward includes stronger conscience protections for practicing doctors as well as for med school students and applicants—especially in the incredibly sensitive OB/GYN field, which Dr. Kuebler characterized as a mine field for pro-life applicants. But also, like the Franciscan alumnus on the admissions committee mentioned above, those with authority and respect in the field of medicine need to make their voices heard to ensure that candidates are admitted based on the merits and not on biases or political agendas.

And our pro-life doctors need support and prayers, especially as the rules-writing process by unelected bureaucrats established by Obamacare continues apace.

  • 10th September
    2011
  • 10
I know that couples have to plan their family and for that there is natural family planning. The way to plan the family is natural family planning, not contraception. In destroying the power of giving life, through contraception, a husband or wife is doing something to self. This turns the attention to self and so it destroys the gift of love in him or her. In loving, the husband and wife must turn the attention to each other as happens in natural family planning, and not to self, as happens in contraception. Once that living love is destroyed by contraception, abortion follows very easily.
Blessed Mother Teresa (via dennisjoealoy)

(Source: introibo-ad-altare-dei)

  • 10th September
    2011
  • 10
Contraceptive methods are like putting a premium on vice. They make men and women reckless. Nature is relentless and will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws… If contraceptive methods become the order of the day, nothing but moral degradation can be the result. As it is, man has sufficiently degraded woman for his lust, and contraception, no matter how well meaning the advocates may be, will still further degrade her.

Mahatma Gandhi


(via dennisjoealoy)

(Source: introibo-ad-altare-dei)