Skip to comments.Bobby Schindler: Legacies of Terri Schiavo, Robert Schindler Inspire My Family
Posted on 08/31/2011 4:46:55 PM PDT by wagglebee
click here to read article
Terri’s dad lifted my spirits many a time. He missed his true calling as he had great comedic skill and charisma.
Terri changed a lot of lives, and saved some too. I learned lessons in the fight to save her that helped me fight for my husband’s life. If I had not been involved in the fight to save Terri, I wouldn’t have known how to fight for my husband, and he’d be dead now. I have no tolerance for anyone who supports murder.
Media's not doing that well now either...
“I am so happy to be alive! It is now 11 years later.”
Amen, sister!! I’m forever bonded with all the GOOD people who made their way to help an innocent woman survive her Govt imposed murder.
Saddest chapter in our nation’s history!
Thread by NYer.
The United Nations is debating injecting euthanasia into the right to health and is considering a new treaty on the rights of the elderly to end their own lives for the benefit of society.
At recent U.N. meetings on the issue of aging, it was reported that advanced age impacts the ability to exercise recognized rights and that it is a case of patient autonomy to decide to end life. The Holy See representative at the Human Rights Council said his delegation took strong exception to this argument. The idea is also not being well received by others who respect life.
Donald Thompson of the Christian Medical Association tells OneNewsNow that he objects to euthanasia being described in this way. The term is sounding more and more like convincing responsible citizens' to do their part to unburden society by ending their own lives, he said. The phrasing of euthanasia as 'autonomy' just does not make sense. Individual autonomy does not apply when someone is being pressured to do something.
He says that under discussions of the treaty so far, the elderly would be pressured by their children, doctor, or society to end their own lives. However, Thompson believes some of the most productive years of individuals' lives are in their sixties and seventies. He raises the question of who decides at what age people become more of a burden than others think they are worth: "Is it the United Nations? Is it one of these many countries that have gone bankrupt because of wasteful spending? Is the next step to recommend euthanasia to anyone with a chronic disease?
(Excerpt) Read more at onenewsnow.com ...
Thread by me.
Professor Raymond Tallis is a distinguished emeritus professor of geriatric medicine, philosopher, poet, novelist and cultural critic. He is also a patron of the pressure group Dignity in Dying, previously known as the Voluntary Euthanasia Society. He is additionally chairman of Healthcare Professionals for Assisted Dying (HPAD) which aims to change the law, medical culture and medical practice so that needless suffering at the end of life becomes a thing of the past.
In todays Times (£), Professor Tallis argues passionately in support of assisted dying, which he claims is all about
...permitting physicians to assist the death of mentally competent, terminally ill patients, who are suffering unbearably despite receiving optimal palliative care, at their request.
The phrase assisted dying or assisted death is, however, deeply disingenuous. Indeed, in the context of this whole argument the word dying has turned into what one might classify as a piece of terminal spin. It is used to avoid spelling out that what is actually being proposed by Dignity in Dying is killing -- either helping people to kill themselves, which is what assisted dying is, or causing them to be killed either by a positive action (for example, a lethal injection) or the absence of life-sustaining action (for example, depriving them of food or water).
(Excerpt) Read more at phillipsblog.dailymail.co.uk ...
Thread by Free ThinkerNY.
Elderly patients are being condemned to an early death by hospitals making secret use of "do not resuscitate" orders, an investigation has found.
The orders which record an advance decision that a patient's life should not be saved if their heart stops are routinely being applied without the knowledge of the patient or their relatives.
On one ward, one-third of DNR orders were issued without consultation with the patient or their family, according to the NHS's own records. At another hospital, junior doctors freely admitted that the forms were filled out by medical teams without the involvement of patients or relatives.
Under medical guidelines, the orders should only be issued after senior staff have discussed the matter with the patient's family. A form, signed by two doctors, is then placed in the patient's notes to record what decision was taken.
The findings emerged in spot checks of 100 hospitals undertaken by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), an official watchdog, earlier this year.
A charity for the elderly said the disclosures were evidence of "euthanasia by the backdoor," with potentially-lethal notices being placed on the files of patients simply because they were old and frail.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."
Thanks for the ping!
Thread by blueyon.
Another layer to the depth of the Sebelius abortion corruption has been revealed with todays AP report that Kansas health department (KDHE) in 2005 destroyed the state late-term abortion reports at the heart of the felony charges against Planned Parenthood.
The pre-trial hearing for felony false-writing charges had been scheduled for Monday Oct. 24, Since the original reports have now been discovered as destroyed, the Johnson County District attorneys office had asked for a delay so they could engage other witnesses to verify the authenticity of copies of the state reports.
The state reports are verifications that abortionists send to KDHE for statistical purposes, and are annually tabulated and published. Copies of those reports are required to be kept in the patient medical files. Of crucial importance is that these reports fail to provide valid medical reasons that banned post-viability abortions were performed. They are evidence of illegal abortion.
KFL Executive Director, Mary Kay Culp, said, Only guilty people destroy evidence; not even we anticipated Sebelius and her administration could stoop this low to protect abortion industry criminality, but this proves they did.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifenews.com ...
Thread by rhema.
Last week the House passed with bipartisan support the Protect Life Act, which amends [Obamacare] to assure that no taxpayer dollars will be used to fund abortions.
It also assures that health care providers who do not wish to provide abortions are not forced to by government.
< . . . . >
Liberals love to frame the killing of developing humans as being about women's lives, health and rights. But, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, about 3 percent of abortions are performed for reasons of a woman's health.
Abortions that are performed because a woman's life is in danger amount to a fraction of 1 percent. That leaves more than 96 percent for convenience with some 50 percent repeat customers.
Regarding abortion, the liberal agenda is really about two things. One, an alleged right to sexual promiscuity and two, an alleged right to have others bear social and financial responsibility for that promiscuity.
Fortunately, a sizable part of the American population doesn't see things this way. And, fortunately, a sizable part of our population remains in awe of the miracle of life and our responsibilities toward all aspects of life, both in and outside the womb.
It doesn't take that much thought to realize the fallacious thinking that suggests that matters of economy and matters of morality have nothing to do with each other.
The "right to abortion" culture is simply a subset of the entitlement culture, the culture that says your life is about making claims on others rather than personal responsibility.
Disrespect for life and disrespect for property go hand in hand. We can't divorce our sexual promiscuity from our fiscal promiscuity.
Restoring personal responsibility in both areas is what we need today to get our nation back on track.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Thread by me.
FREDERICK, Md. A 55-year-old Maryland man who became temporarily unconscious after suffering a heart attack and a seizure has been saved from being starved to death after an ADF-allied attorney obtained an order in state court on behalf of the mans mother and brother. The man, Daniel Sanger, is now responding to hospital staff after going six days without food and water.
Although Sanger told his doctor and his mother I want to live before he went unconscious, Frederick Memorial Hospital removed the public-assistance patient from life-giving food, water, and nutrients on Friday with the permission of his wife.
Everyone deserves a chance to recover, said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. There is no question that Daniel expressly stated his desire to live, and yet he was denied the food and water he needed to survive. His wishes should have been followed. ADF sees far too many situations involving hasty decisions to pull the plug on a human life.
The court has done the right thing in granting our request to have Daniels food and hydration restored, said Sangers legal counsel Daniel Cox, one of nearly 2,100 attorneys in the ADF alliance. We are asking the court to award temporary decision-making authority to Daniels mother and brother.
Cox, who heads The Cox Law Center, LLC, filed a motion in Frederick County Circuit Court Wednesday to force the hospital to resume sending life-giving nutrients to Sanger through his feeding tube. The motion, filed in Sanger v. Rafiq, also requested that Sangers mother, Phyllis Sanger, and his brother, Mark Sanger, be awarded temporary custody instead of his wife, Leta Sanger, who went against her husbands express wishes to remain alive.
Chief Judge Peter Krauser, of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, responded by issuing an order Wednesday to provide immediate water and nutrition to Sanger pending the outcome of a hearing that was held Thursday. At that hearing, Frederick County Circuit Judge Theresa Adams issued a temporary restraining order instructing Frederick Memorial Hospital to provide life-sustaining nutrition to Sanger until the completion of a trial set for Wednesday at 9 a.m. EDT at the Frederick County Circuit Court at 100 W. Patrick St.
"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."
Thanks for the ping!
Thread by NYer.
The Planned Parenthood abortion clinic of Overland Park, KS, is currently on trial for 107 counts of falsifying abortion records and committing illegal late-term abortions, 23 of which are felonies.
The charges were brought by former Attorney General Phill Kline in October 2007 following an investigation he launched in 2003.
Today came the bombshell news that the administration of former Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, now the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, destroyed critical evidence in 2005. The evidence was needed to compare records Kline acquired with records Planned Parenthood later submitted.
From the Kansas City Star:
Key evidence needed to prosecute Planned Parenthood for allegedly falsifying abortion documents has been destroyed by the state, court records show.
Prosecutors have asked a judge to delay a Monday hearing to determine whether theres enough evidence to try the abortion provider on 23 felony counts of falsifying termination of pregnancy reports.
Prosecutors say the records kept by the state needed to make their case were destroyed in 2005, some two years before criminal charges were brought against Planned Parenthood.
Court records say that Kansas health officials shredded the documents as part of a routine document destruction.
Its impossible to know precisely when it occurred although it is believed to have been done in 2005, when the health department was part of the administration of former Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, an abortion rights supporter .
Abortion opponents were so incredulous about the revelation that they hard to time finding words to describe their reaction.
Unbelievable, said Mary Kay Cup [sic], executive director of Kansans for Life. We dont believe for one second this was anything but purposefully done to protect the abortion industry.
The destroyed records were critical in establishing the authenticity of records from 2003 obtained by Kline when he investigated the agency as attorney general. Planned Parenthood later provided copies of the documents that the state contended did not match those Kline had.
Later, as Johnson County district attorney in 2007, Kline filed the 107-count complaint against the agency.
Kline argued at the time that the group had performed illegal late-term abortions and falsified or forged documents to make it appear they were legal.
Prosecutors contended that Planned Parenthood had not kept the documents five years as required by law and falsified copies to cover it up.
Kline subpoenaed the documents in question in the fall of 2004. So their destruction the following year doesnt look on the up and up, to say the least.
It now becomes more clear why the Kansas Department of Health and Environment strangely but strongly resisted turning over those documents to Kline and also refused to certify the documents Kline had.
Furthermore, Klines decision not to inform the Sebelius administration about his investigation appears vindicated. His rationale was that it was Sebelius cronies he was investigating.
That decision was one of the reasons a Sebelius-empowered panel suspended Kline last week.
Thread by me.
UTRECHT, Netherlands, October 24, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) The Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) has released new guidelines for interpreting the 2002 Euthanasia Act that now includes mental and psychosocial ailments such as loss of function, loneliness and loss of autonomy as acceptable criteria for euthanasia. The guidelines also allow doctors to connect a patients lack of social skills, financial resources and a social network to unbearable and lasting suffering, opening the door to legal assisted death based on psychosocial factors, not terminal illness.
The June 2011 position paper, titled The Role of the Physician in the Voluntary Termination of Life concludes that the concept of suffering is broader than its interpretation and application by many physicians today.
Included in a broader interpretation of suffering would be disorders affecting vision, hearing and mobility, falls, confinement to bed, fatigue, exhaustion and loss of fitness, according to the authors.
The patient perceives the suffering as interminable, his existence as meaningless andthough not directly in danger of dying from these complaintsneither wishes to experience them nor, insofar as his history and own values permit, to derive meaning from them, explains the KNMG position paper.
In the KNMGs view, such cases are sufficiently linked to the medical domain to permit a physician to act within the confines of the Euthanasia Law.
It doesnt always have to be a physical ailment, it could be the onset of dementia or chronic psychological problems, its still unbearable and lasting suffering. It doesnt always have to be a terminal disease, said Dr. Nieuwenhuijzen Kruseman, Chairman of KNMG to Radio Netherlands Worldwide.
Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director and International Chair of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition committee responded to the new guidelines, saying that in his view the expansion of euthanasia and assisted suicide has been constant and deliberate.
Schadenberg warned that what has happened in the Netherlands canand willoccur in other jurisdictions, if euthanasia and/or assisted suicide is legalized.
When the Netherlands sanctioned euthanasia for emotionally ill patients in 1994, Karl Gunning, head of the Dutch Doctors Union warned the country of the slippery slope it was sliding down.
We have always predicted that once you start looking at killing as a means to solve problems, then youll find more and more problems where killing can be the solution, he said.
Prominent conservative bioethical commentator Wesley J. Smith wondered on his blog how anyone can say that there is no slippery slope with the legalization of euthanasia when loneliness is now one of the legally recognized factors in the decision to end ones life.
Since 1973, when euthanasia was quasi decriminalized, Dutch doctors have gone from euthanizing the terminally ill who ask for it, to the chronically ill who ask for it, to people with disabilities who ask for it, to the mentally anguished who ask for it And now, they want to target vulnerable and marginalized elderly people.
The Culture of Death is voracious. Once it begins to feed, it is never satiated. [T]he categories of the killable [are] never finally enough.
This is compassion? asked Smith rhetorically.
Thread by me.
A new photo of a young boy holding a sign talking about how he survived abortion as one of the 10 percent of Down syndrome children not victimized by abortion before birth has gone viral on Facebook today.
The photo has received thousands of shares and likes and is inspiring pro-life people across the world, including Josh Mercer of CatholicVote.
This powerful message is making its way around Facebook, he said after viewing the photo. When I speak with friends who have a child with Down Syndrome, unfailingly they all say how much joy their child brings into their life. It makes me feel ashamed to live in a country that chooses death instead of life for 90% of babies who are diagnosed with Down Syndrome.
Recently, LifeNews reported on a new study showing how researchers at Childrens Hospital in Boston surveyed families where a member had Down Syndrome and found that Down Syndrome is a positive. From MSNBC.com:
The Reillys represent some of the experiences reported in three surveys conducted by doctors at Childrens Hospital in Boston that suggest the reality of Down syndrome is positive for a vast majority of parents, siblings and people with Down syndrome themselves.
Among 2,044 parents or guardians surveyed, 79 percent reported their outlook on life was more positive because of their child with Down syndrome .
Skotko also found that among siblings ages 12 and older, 97 percent expressed feelings of pride about their brother or sister with Down syndrome and 88 percent were convinced they were better people because of their sibling with Down syndrome. A third study evaluating how adults with Down syndrome felt about themselves reports 99 percent responded they were happy with their lives, 97 percent liked who they are, and 96 percent liked how they looked.
As writer Rebecca Taylor noted her in LifeNews post, So once again the culture of death distorts the truth by suggesting that parents are doing the right thing by killing their Down Syndrome child. The culture of death says, Better dead than have Downs. But 99% of adults with Down Syndrome report they are happy with their lives. I doubt you would find anything close to that percentage in the healthy adult population. And yet it is these very happy adults that are being targeted for destruction in the womb.
Thread by surroundedbyblue.
The United Nations has officially designated October 31st as 7 Billion Day. On that day, the United Nations estimates that the population of the earth will hit 7 billion for the very first time. But instead of celebrating what a milestone 7 billion people represents, the UNPF is focusing instead on using October 31st to raise awareness about "sustainability" and "sustainable development". In other words, the United Nations is once again declaring that there are way too many people on the planet and that we need to take more direct measures to reduce fertility. In recent years, the UN and other international organizations have become bolder about trying to push the sick population control agenda of the global elite. Most of the time organizations such as the UN will simply talk about "stabilizing" the global population, but as you will see in this article, there are many among the global elite that are not afraid to openly talk about a goal of reducing the population of the world to 500 million (or less). To you and I it may seem like insanity to want to get rid of more than 90 percent of the global population, but there is a growing consensus among the global elite that this is absolutely necessary for the good of the planet.
(Excerpt) Read more at endoftheamericandream.com ...
Thread by Kaslin.
"For a renewed respect for human life, from conception to natural death ... "
Seared in my memory is the sound of Kobi Cudjoe, gasping for air, as he read that prayer.
He was one of the petition readers at the special mass held on Oct. 23 at St. Matthew's Cathedral in Washington, D.C., "Honoring the Gifts of Persons with Special Needs." From his wheelchair, he could only be heard as pleading for all those whose lives may be undervalued by a society that sees their disabilities as burdens, and the differently abled as more handicap than human. Just weeks before, the same church had hosted the more well-known mass for Supreme Court justices, lawyers and other dignitaries. That one makes news -- this one, not so much.
It is easy to dehumanize the sick, the weak and the disabled. Pulitzer Prize-winning commentator Paul Greenberg noted one way to do so a few days later, addressing a crowd in Manhattan: "Verbicide must precede homicide," he said. And so whether it be the Down syndrome baby or an unborn child with another adverse prenatal diagnosis, "speak of a fetus, not an unborn child," Greenberg said. "Vocabulary remains the decisive turning point."
The folks at The Human Life Review were celebrating an early Thanksgiving. They gathered in gratitude for the work of Arkansas Democrat-Gazette columnist Greenberg, naming him a "defender of life."
But he didn't always start out that way.
"When Roe v. Wade was first pronounced from on high, I welcomed it," he said in his remarks.
It didn't come up at the dinner, but Greenberg's example stood as a corrective to Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, who had earlier in the week announced on "The O'Reilly Factor" that a man can't be 50 or 60 and change his mind on major issues. We all know what he was doing there -- aiming for a primary blow against the shifting views of rival candidate Mitt Romney. But he was not making a defensible point.
And it wasn't just abortion that Greenberg had changed his mind on. "Start off opposing abortion and you'll start questioning euthanasia, too." He recalled, with the great, tender passion of a touched conscience, the death of Terri Schiavo, the cognitively impaired woman who was denied food and water for 13 "long days." With Schiavo's brother, Bobby Schindler, who runs the Life and Hope Network, which helps families facing the same pressures to end life, in the audience, he said, "It would have been kinder to shoot her."
Most of us have moved on. Perhaps many have on abortion, too. "It is settled law," he said, quoting defenders of legal abortion. "Another generation," though, Greenberg reminded us, "was told Dred Scott v. Sandford was settled law." But, as Greenberg reminded us: "No good cause is forever lost."
Novelist (and medical doctor) Walker Percy wrote, in 1981: "To pro-abortionists: According to the opinion polls, it looks as if you may get your way." I'm not sure he would write that anymore. Polls are changing. And the language of dehumanization has reached a pitch of desperation. The same day Greenberg was being honored for his change of heart and subsequent leadership, abortion-advocacy groups were sending out hyperbolic emails about a "Let Women Die Act" the House of Representatives had supposedly passed. The House passed a bill, all right, but it would simply protect taxpayer money from being used on abortions as part of the health-care legislation passed in 2010.
But Percy might not be surprised at the continuing turn of events. Back then, he wrote: "Picture the scene. A Galileo trial in reverse. The Supreme Court is cross-examining a high school biology teacher and admonishing him that of course it is only his personal opinion that the fertilized human ovum is an individual human life. He is enjoined not to teach his private beliefs at a public school. Like Galileo he caves in, submits, but in turning away is heard to murmur, 'But it's still alive!'"
There were no predictions from Greenberg. "Win or lose, what's important is that we bear witness" to the dignity of man. Like Mr. Cudjoe, we should all be speaking for those who have no voice.
"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."
Thanks for the ping!
Terri was murdered and she's not the only one.
We don't know when we are going to be stricken with something. Make sure to have trusted people around you and that may not be family. Some families like Mikey Schiavo are very bad people. Some families want a quick death so they can get their inheritance.
Find someone to trust before you have a health crisis so you aren't preyed upon or become "stock footage" for one of the big networks.
Thread by surroundedbyblue.
FREDERICK, Md. A judge in Maryland must decide if a man who suffered severe brain damage after a heart attack should continue getting sustenance through a feeding tube at his mothers and brothers behest, contrary to his wifes instructions.
A Frederick County Circuit Court judge will hear arguments Wednesday in the case involving Daniel Sanger, 55, of Rohrersville. The unemployed computer technician lost much of his speaking ability and mobility after a heart attack in July, according to his brother Mark Sanger, a Eugene, Ore., businessman.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Thread by me.
The baby is incompatible with life. Here is the number if you choose to terminate.
Until this Summer, I had never heard of Trisomy 18. Also known as Edwards Syndrome, Trisomy 18 is a genetic disorder caused by the presence of an extra 18th chromosome in a persons cells. This can cause heart malformations, kidney problems, breathing difficulties and a number of other problems. The idea of a genetic disorder was abstract, until Tad, my unborn baby cousin, was diagnosed with T18.
After learning that Tad had T18, doctors quickly changed their tone when talking about him. Despite the fact that some children do survive with the condition, they told his parents that the condition is lethal and that the baby is not compatible with life. Sometimes subtly, and sometimes bluntly, they urged abortion.
Fortunately for Tad (and his extended family), his parents are not only opposed to abortion, but active in the pro-life movement in their community. But, hearing my aunt and uncle tell about the doctors brought me to an important question: Arent we all incompatible with life?
Death is faced by every human being even those with the ideal lives envisioned in the every child a wanted child mantra of Planned Parenthood and pro-abort groups. The fact that Tad will one day meet his Creator proves that he is just as alive and human as his born contemporaries. Knowing that this sad day may come sooner, however, is no reason to end his life now.
Quality of Life vs. Life
In discussing Trisomy 13, another type of Trisomy, a 2003 report by the Hastings Center stated,
Although many of the congenital syndromes that used to be lethal no longer are, they are still routinely referred to as lethal anomalies. But the label is not only inaccurate, it is also dangerous: by portraying as a medical determination what is in fact a judgment about the childs quality of life, it wrests from the parents a decision that only the parents can make.
Aside from the final statement (that implies one should be able to decide the fate of another), this point is very true and the same logic applies to Trisomy 18. As anyone involved in the pro-life movement knows, our society repeatedly fails to make the distinction between quality of life, and life itself.
In the past few decades, science has progressed drastically. We can know the gender, size, health, and even face of our baby before they make their birthday debut. With 4-D ultrasounds, we dont have to wait nine months to see if Baby has Daddys nose.. Yet, with all of these advancements, there is one thing science has yet to create: There is no quality-of-life meter. Nor will there ever be.
We all have that friend who takes pride in their refined taste for something. Perhaps a friend believes his opinions on movies are unsurpassed, or another claims she can distinguish a perfect brew of coffee. Humanity is very gifted at comparing the values of various objects, but we must not carry over that pride into the judgment of life. We dont get to be life connoisseurs, claiming to know what life is worth trying and what life is not. Children with disabilities will know life differently than you and I, but their lives are not worth less than our own.
The failure to distinguish between quality of life, and life itself, moves from frustrating to dangerous when doctors advising mothers miss the distinction as well. Life is lethal, not my cousin. Pressuring a mother to end the life of her own child, however, is lethal and absolutely unacceptable.
I have been unable to find statistics specific to the Trisomy 18 abortion rate, but a more common form of Trisomy, Trisomy 21 (Down Syndrome), has an abortion rate of about 90% upon diagnosis. I would assume the Trisomy 18 rate is higher, as the condition is more life-threatening.
As pro-life individuals, we need to be aware of these dangerous labels for two reasons. First, as with any abortion, we need to have compassion for women and families who have fallen victim to this harmful rhetoric and opted for abortion. Even friends who identify as pro-life could have a hard time knowing where they stand when given such a manipulated diagnosis. In the midst of the trauma and emotion of an unexpected diagnosis, one could easily be swept away by the suggestions of professionals. Second, we need to be prepared when friends are faced with similar circumstances, and ready to help clarify the distinction between quality of life and life itself.
My family is not disillusioned into thinking Tad will live a struggle-free life, but for now we are thankful for him as he is. Let us inform our society about the value of every human life, and help put aside this dangerous, lethal language.
November 4, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Smiles abound throughout the pre-op room, but the eyes betray everyone present. They reveal the hesitation and dread of this fateful day. My patient has come to the day of the probable death of her son, Brenden. It has been a long and emotionally difficult pregnancy for the parents. Chrissi and Scott have known since the 19th week that their beloved son would eventually die because of anencephaly.
Abortion was an option presented by their first round of medical caregivers, but Brendens parents decided on life for their son. They set out to commemorate his short life so that he would not be forgotten. They opted for our clinics perinatal hospice program.
A Very Special Case
I think back to the first day I saw Chrissi and Scott as patients in our crisis pregnancy medical clinic. The nurse told me, Your next patient is abortion-vulnerable and has been told that her unborn child has anencephaly. I was scared as I considered what little support I could offer this young mother and her fiancé.
But my course was set: My stance of pro-life means I promote life in all situations, even in cases of lethal congenital anomaly. I stopped and prayed, asking the Lord to give me the wisdom and ability to assist this couple to choose life for their unborn son.
Upon being introduced to Chrissi and Scott, I could see the discomfort behind the superficial smiles they wore. What could I offer them for comfort? What answers could I give that would satisfy?
I listened for a time and heard that another medical consultant had already discussed abortion as the most reasonable option for them. But they werent satisfied with that course. We discussed the fears and reality of what lay ahead and together concluded that they would carry Brenden to term and that my staff and I would support them in every way possible.
The clinics first complete case for perinatal hospice had begun.
Who Is the Giver?
There were many ultrasounds performed, allowing family and friends to see Brenden jump in the womb. Gathering memories was important for them, as well as for us, the clinic staff. It would appear that we were the ones giving to Brendens family, but we received so much more than we anticipated. This brave couple allowed us to share their sorrow and impending loss and join with them in their journey toward death. It was a rare privilege: When as physicians do we see parents who know the probable day of their childs death?
Chrissi had chosen a Caesarean section because it offered her the best chance at being able to hold her son alive. However, we met resistance on many fronts as we arranged for Brendens delivery. At the beginning of this pregnancy it was her right to choose. But now, when she has chosen life and a surgical delivery for her son, people questioned her judgment and mine. After all, they reasoned, why go through the cost and rigors of a surgical delivery when the baby was going to die anyway?
Then the miraculous occurred: Hearts began to soften. As those involved in approving the procedure became more acquainted with Chrissi and Scott and their case, their perspective changed. Resistance faded and was replaced by curiosity about this extraordinary new family.
We now wheel her to the operating room with entourage in tow: family and friends to chronicle the events of the day and to provide support and encouragement. But Chrissi is the one doling out the courage.
The parents are finally ready to meet their son face to face, knowing that the meeting may be short-lived and very painful.
As a parent myself, I weep as I think of my children.
Brenden is delivered, and he cries his first sounds as if to tell his mom and dad that he is here. Medical knowledge says he cant sense much, lacking the upper parts of his brain. But I see him respond to his mommy and daddy with squeals. What do the experts know? God allowed him to be born this way, and his mother rejoices with tears as her wish to see him alive is granted. God has been gracious to all involved.
Following lots of photos and tears, I realize that we are so much richer for having been involved in Brendens birth.
Later, while walking to my car for the drive home, I consider something my mentor told me years ago: Scott, only live fish swim against the current. Dead fish float downstream with the flow. Brendens parents, my staff and I had swam hard these past 18 weeks against the current of a culture of death. Brenden also had been swimming. Although he died 14 hours after his arrival, his parents rejoiced in the short but special time they spent with him here on earth.
Thread by me.
TORONTO, November 1, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) Because organ donors are often alive when their organs are harvested, the medical community should not require donors to be declared dead, but instead adopt more honest moral criteria that allow the harvesting of organs from dying or severely injured patients, with proper consent, three leading experts have argued.
This approach, they say, would avoid the pseudo-objective claim that a donor is really dead, which is often based upon purely ideological definitions of death designed to expand the organ donor pool, and would allow organ harvesters to be more honest with the public, as well as ensure that donors dont feel pain during the harvesting process.
The chilling comments were offered by Dr. Neil Lazar, director of the medical-surgical intensive care unit at Toronto General Hospital, Dr. Maxwell J. Smith of the University of Toronto, and David Rodriguez-Arias of Universidad del Pais Vasco in Spain, at a U.S. bioethics conference in October and published in a recent paper in the American Journal of Bioethics.
The authors state frankly that under current practices donors may be technically still alive when organs are harvested a necessary condition to produce healthy, living organs. Because of this, they say that protocol requiring a donors death is dangerously misleading, and could overlook the well-being of the donor who may still be able to suffer during the harvesting procedure.
Because there is a general assumption that dead individuals cannot be harmed, veneration of the dead-donor rule is dangerously misleading, they write. Ultimately, what is important for the protection and respect of potential donors is not to have a death certificate signed, but rather to be certain they are beyond suffering and to guarantee that their autonomy is respected.
Instead of the so-called Dead Donor Rule (DDR), the authors propose that donors should be protected from harm (i.e given anesthesia so that they cannot feel pain during the donation process), that informed consent should be obtained, and that society should be fully informed of the inherently debatable nature of any criterion to declare death.
The doctors note that developing the criteria for so-called brain death, which is often used by doctors to declare death before organ donation, was an ideological strategy aimed at increasing the donor pool that has been found to be empirically and theoretically flawed. They also criticize the latest attempts to create new, even looser definitions of death, such as circulatory death, which they argue amount to simply pretending that the patient is dead in order to get his organs.
The legitimacy of brain death, cardiac death, and even circulatory death - which can be declared only 75 seconds after circulatory arrest - as actual death has been an ongoing debate in public commentary on organ donation. Many experts assert that doctors familiar with organ donation are aware that the terms, intended to delineate a threshold of probable death, is different from actual bodily death, rendering highly uncertain the moral status of organ donation.
Meanwhile, countless stories have emerged of miraculous awakenings following brain death, providing weight to the arguments of doctors and others who say that the process of procuring viable organs not only fails to ensure that a patient has certainly died, but is impossible unless a body is still technically alive.
Dr. Paul Byrne, an experienced neonatologist, clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Toledo, and president of Life Guardian Foundation, said he was not surprised at the recent statements, which he said merely reflect a long-open secret in the organ donation field.
All of the participants in organ transplantation know that the donors are not truly dead, Byrne told LifeSiteNews.com in a telephone interview Tuesday.
How can you get healthy organs from a cadaver? You cant.
Byrne affirmed that giving pain medication to organ donors is routine. Doctors taking organs from brain-dead donors have to paralyze them so they dont move so when they cut into them to take organs, and when they paralyze them without anesthetics, their heart rate goes up and their blood pressure goes up, he observed. This is not something that happens to someone whos truly dead.
The neonatologist said he has personally studied the theory of brain death since 1975, seven years after the first vital organ transplant in 1968, and has found that death criteria has continually been changed to accommodate a demand for fresh organs. The idea of a dead donor rule did not even emerge until the 1980s, he said, and didnt enter common parlance until years later.
There really is no dead donor rule, although theyre trying to make it seem like there is, said Byrne.
Byrne led a Vatican conference on brain death criteria in 2008 in which a large group of international experts, many of whom are world leaders in their fields, attested to the illegitimacy of brain death as an accepted criterion for organ removal.
The comments by the Canadian and Spanish experts have come under fire from the organ donor community, some members of which have expressed concern that the statements could lead people to opt out of donating their organs.
In the overwhelming majority of cases, the concept of death is easy, obvious and not really subject to any complex interpretation. Its very clear, Dr. Andrew Baker, the medical director of the Trillium Gift of Life Network, which oversees Ontarios transplant system, told the National Post. Theyre dead, you can see it, there is no return of anything.
James DuBois, a health ethics pro-fessor at Saint Louis University, also criticized the comments, saying that removing the Dead Donor Rule could have negative consequences: decreasing organ donation rates, upsetting donor family members and creating distress among health care workers.
See related article: Vindication of criticisms of organ donation
Thread by markomalley.
Health authorities in south China said Friday they were investigating a hospital medical team for mistakenly diagnosing a stillbirth and disposing of a baby that was alive.
The probe is taking place at the Nanhai Red Cross Hospital in the Guangdong provincial city of Foshan where the incident occurred on October 26, the Nanhai district health bureau said in a statement faxed to AFP.
According to the statement, Liu Dongmei -- eight months pregnant -- had been rushed to the hospital with internal bleeding and stomach cramps.
She later had an emergency birth, but the baby was neither breathing nor crying after leaving the womb and its skin had turned purple, it said.
Believing it was dead, the medical team disposed of the child but did not follow proper hospital procedures, the statement added.
The Foshan News, a local website, reported that when Liu's sister-in-law asked to see the body around 30 minutes after birth, she was handed a yellow plastic bag containing the infant and found it was still alive.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Herman Cain is meeting with Kissinger who is pro eugenics. Word to the wise republicans before you get on the Cain bandwagon.
Thanks for the ping!
Obsma already had a baby disposed of in Chicago, didn’t he? A nurse gave her account of a baby in the janitor’s closet or was that a hypothetical? I believed that it actually occurred.
Thread by massmike.
The lucrative abortion industry sure loves to wallow in its hatred of God:
Imagine the deal theyll probably give you if you come in to kill your baby on Christmas morning.
(Excerpt) Read more at moonbattery.com ...
Two threads by me.
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, November 10, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) When a 64-year-old Dutch woman with dementia was killed in March, she was the first to be euthanized without the ability to consent, Dutch media reported Wednesday.
But anti-euthanasia activists are contesting the claim, saying Dutch patients have been killed without their consent for years.
The woman, a long-time euthanasia advocate, had progressed in her illness to the point where she lacked the ability to consent, but a committee of doctors approved the euthanasia nevertheless.
She left a note expressing her wish to be euthanized, and her husband and children supported her decision.
Alex Schadenberg, who heads the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition in Ontario, warned that allowing euthanasia without the ability for the patient to consent is a whole other track.
When a person has dementia, the greater sufferer is the family member who is watching that person suffer, he said. So now really what theyre saying is, the family members who are experiencing the person with dementia, that we can have euthanasia to alleviate their suffering.
If you can do this to someone with dementia, and theyre also doing this to people with head injuries, well that means weve defined cognitive disabilities as a reason to euthanize, he added.
The Netherlands formally legalized euthanasia in 2002, provided it was requested by a patient experiencing unbearable suffering.
But the laws interpretation has since broadened to the point where the Royal Dutch Medical Association last month released new guidelines claiming the law allows euthanasia in cases of mental and psychosocial ailments such as loss of function, loneliness and loss of autonomy.
In reporting their 2010 statistics, for the first time the Dutch government reported instances of euthanasia for dementia patients. In 2010, 21 persons suffering from the early stages of dementia, but who were otherwise in good health, were euthanized.
Euthanasia is beyond effective control in the Netherlands, wrote bioethicist Wesley J. Smith on his Secondhand Smoke blog. Folks, believe me when I tell you that protective guidelines are not really meant to protect, but give the false illusion of control.
Once you accept killing as an acceptable answer to the problem of human suffering, choice has increasingly less to do with it, he added.
Reports coming out of the Netherlands add to mounting evidence that physician-assisted suicide, over time, leads to the nonvoluntary euthanizing of patientspatients who neither requested nor authorized their deaths. (www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2011/11/what%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%9cchoice%e2%80%9d-got-to-do-with-dutch-euthanasia; www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2011/10/applauding-suicide-for-the-mentally-ill)
In a recent article appearing in the British publication the Daily Mail, there was a well documented case where the once highly touted safeguardthat only competent people currently asking for death will be killedwas willfully abandoned. A 64-year-old woman with severe dementia who was euthanized in the Netherlandseven though she was no longer competent.
The unnamed woman was a long-term supporter of the controversial practice and had made a written statement when she was still well, saying how she wished to die. But the pensioner, who died in March, had been unable to reiterate her instructions as the disease progressed, Volkskrant reported.
The Daily Mail reported that this practice of killing patients with dementia is on the rise, and is being documented. A report released earlier this year revealed a total of 21 patients with early-stage dementia, including Alzheimers died by lethal injection in Holland in 2010. This is the first time dementia sufferers have been included in the countrys euthanasia statistics.
Even so, does this pose a threat to those in the United States? After all, assisting suicide is currently legal in only two states-Oregon and Washingtonand may have some legal basis in the state of Montana, due to a 2010 court decision.
However while assisting suicide remains illegal in nearly every jurisdiction in the United States, those who tirelessly promote doctor-prescribed death are on the offensive in New England.
There is a current effort under way in Massachusetts to obtain 70,000 signatures of registered voters before a petition to legalize it can be presented to the legislature. If they get this far, lawmakers could either adopt it as a law or let voters decide send it to a referendum vote in the November 2012 general election.
The other major effort is in Vermont. Thanks to an outpouring of opposition, a bill to legalize doctor-prescribed death was not taken up in 2011, but could gain traction once the 2012 legislative session begins.
So what could happen next if two New England states were to join Oregon and Washington State? The more states that adopt these dangerous laws, the greater is the risk of other states removing protection from vulnerable populations.
Most would be shocked to learn that in the U.S., legalizing assisting suicide can legally mean legalizing nonvoluntary euthanasia. While Compassion and Choices, the group promoting assisted suicide laws in the states, claims to only seek to allow doctor-prescribed death for the competent, such a limitation is often legally impossible.
But state courts have ruled time and again that if competent people have a right, the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitutions Fourteenth Amendment requires that incompetent people be given the same right.
And it should be noted that in the Netherlands, legalizing voluntary assisted suicide for those with terminal illness has spread to include nonvoluntaryeuthanasia for many who have no terminal illnesses. A 2009 article from the Daily Mail documented that, Cases of [Dutch] euthanasia in the country have increased from 1,626 in 2003 to 2,331 in 2008.
It is also alleged that there have been thousands of cases of involuntary euthanasia and dozens of killings of disabled newborns. [www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234295/Now-Dutch-turn-legalised-mercy-killing.html#ixzz1dJczqGst].This has meant that the problems for which death in now the legal solution include such things as mental illness, permanent disability, and even simple old age.
This cautionary tale being told in the Netherlands adds to mounting evidence that once human beings are regarded as disposable in some, initially carefully circumscribed circumstances, those circumstances will steadily expand. When you put a price on human life, the price goes down. The threat of this happening in the United States might not be as far off as one might think.
Thread by Morgana.
November 11, 2011 (AbbyJohnson.org) - I am going to be honest, when I first left Planned Parenthood, I hated the idea of the rescue movement. I didnt see the point. I thought it was a black mark against the pro-life movement.
Then I started meeting people who had once rescued. I started to see something that I had not before these were normal people. Men, women, old, young, White, Black, Hispanic, priests, pastors, laity so different, but all sharing one goal to save babies. These people had been convicted to do SOMETHING because nothing was being done. There were no peaceful vigils, very limited sidewalk counseling, not many laws to guide pro-life activity. I started to wonder: what if I had been pro-life during the rescue movement? Would I have been willing to sacrifice my freedom in order to save babies and take a stand against abortion?
When I became director of the Planned Parenthood clinic in Bryan, my life changed. All of a sudden, I was acutely aware of the responsibility that sat on my shoulders. I was now the face of that clinic. If something went wrong, it was now on my head. I worked all the time, usually about 70 hours per week. I was addicted to my job, addicted to the responsibility. I carried heavy burdens many were self inflicted. I will share with you my heaviest.
Every day I would arrive at work and check the schedule. Not because I had an enormous amount of employees or because I wanted to micromanage and see who was late
nothing like that. I wanted to look and see who was there that day. I wanted to place them in the clinic
where would they usually be?
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
Two threads by me.
Signs of consciousness have been detected in three people previously thought to be in a vegetative state, with the help of a cheap, portable device that can be used at the bedside.
"There's a man here who technically meets all the internationally agreed criteria for being in a vegetative state, yet he can generate 200 responses [to direct commands] with his brain," says Adrian Owen of the University of Western Ontario. "Clearly this guy is not in a true vegetative state. He's probably as conscious as you or I are."
In 2005, Owen's team, used functional MRI to show consciousness in a person who was in a persistent vegetative state, also known as wakeful unconsciousness where the body still functions but the mind is unresponsive for the first time. However, fMRI is costly and time-consuming, so his team set about searching for simple and cost-effective solutions for making bedside diagnoses of PVS. Now, they have devised a test that uses the relatively inexpensive and widely available electroencephalogram (EEG).
(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...
Late last night the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet published a very important study online that further demonstrated that patients diagnosed to be in a persistent vegetative state have either often been misdiagnosed or are sometimes consciously aware even if they are in a PVS. Several of you wrote back in response to our analysis (www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2011/11/lancet-study-provides-more-evidence-that-patients-in-so-called-%E2%80%9Cpersistent-vegetative-state%E2%80%9D-may-be-consciously-aware) which is one important reason for this follow-up.
I spent about an hour and a half today reading how media outlets covered the conclusions drawn by Bedside detection of awareness in the vegetative state: a cohort study. The New York Times two lead paragraphs are absolutely brilliant, touching most of the major points succinctly in only 145 words:
Three severely brain-injured people thought to be in an irreversible vegetative state showed signs of full consciousness when tested with a relatively inexpensive and commonly used method of measuring brain waves, doctors reported Wednesday. Experts said the findings, if replicated, would change standards in treating such patients.
Scientists have seen meaningful, responsive brain activity in such patients before, using a high-tech magnetic resonance imaging scanner. But the new study, posted online Wednesday by the journal The Lancet, is the first to demonstrate that clear signs of conscious awareness can be detected on an electroencephalogram machine by using an innovative strategy. The EEG is a portable, widely available unit that picks up electrical brain activity through electrodes positioned on a persons head. Clinics and homes treating people with severe brain injuries are far more likely to have access to an EEG than to an M.R.I. scanner.
Very, very impressive. And note that last sentence: EEG is so much easier to use and, by the way, much gentler with patients who are physically fragile.
As helpful as the study is there is an important caveat. While the Lancet study shows that EEGs could detect signs of consciousness in patients who had been diagnosed as vegetative, it does not follow that such patients are definitely unconscious if EEGs do not detect these signs.
As the study itself notes, the fact that the EEG did not pick up these signs of consciousness in 25% of the healthy and aware patients (the controls) shows unequivocally that a null EEG outcome does not necessarily indicate an absence of awareness.
Burke J. Balch, director of NRLCs Powell Center for Medical Ethics, commented, Many patients, probably thousands, have had their food and fluids cut off and died, based on what we now know may well have been mistaken assumptions that they had lost all capacity for consciousness. The Lancet EEG study, together with earlier functional MRI studies, holds out the hope that we may develop ways to communicate with aware patients who have routinely been diagnosed as vegetative, much as today eye movements and blinks are used to communicate with some patients with paraplegia.
Balch added, Just as what were once generally accepted mental health diagnoses of idiot and moron have long been dropped from standard medical vocabulary, it is to be hoped that these studies will help lead to abandonment of the dehumanizing and inaccurate term vegetative as an acceptable medical diagnostic term.
This raises and obvious question which the Washington Posts Rob Stein wrote about today:
The research inevitably raises questions about patients such asTerri Schiavo, a Florida woman in a persistent vegetative state whose familys dispute over whether to discontinue her care ignited a national debate over the right-to-die issue and congressional intervention in 2005. Schiavos brother, Bobby Schindler, said the new study highlights the limits of medicine in providing an accurate diagnosis.
Regrettably, Terri was never afforded these types of exams, Schindler wrote in an e-mail to The Washington Post. Such testing could not have hurt Terri but could have helped her.
Schindler and others called for a reconsideration of such diagnoses.
These findings only reinforce our familys contention that the PVS diagnosis needs to be eliminated particularly given the fact that it not only dehumanizes the cognitively disabled, but it is being used in some instances to decide whether or not a person should live or die, as it was used in Terris case. None of us deserves to be deprived of food and water, he said.
Two quick concluding points. To be clear the Schindler family adamantly denied that Terri was in a PVS. It was that diagnosis that made intervention to save their sister/daughter almost impossible.
Second, the Schiavo case, properly understood, was NEVER about the right to die. There were bogus assurances given by those who wanted her feeding tube removed that she had expressed a wish not to live if ever she was in a situation like that, assurances her family vociferously disputed.
Rather the case was about the duty to treatto extend to a fellow human being the absolute minimum: food and fluidsand to extend to Terris family the right to take Terri home and care for her there.
"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."
Thanks for the ping!
Thread by Morgana.
DALLAS, November 6, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a jarringly candid statement made to WFAA-TV in Dallas, Texas, late term abortionist and Baptist Minister Dr. Curtis Boyd said that when he performs abortions he is "killing," and he has no issues with it whatsoever.
"Am I killing? Yes, I am. I know that," Boyd said during a video interview with the news station following the opening of the Southwestern Women's Surgery Center abortion facility. By law, Boyd must have a surgery center in order to abort a child more than 16 weeks along.
"We see patients from Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and across Texas," Boyd said, admitting that he has performed abortions on girls as young as nine years old.
"The hardest ones are the young girls," he said, saying that girls as young as 9 and 10 years of age have been to his center for abortions.
Boyd opened the first abortion facility in Texas in 1973 following the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision and is the only doctor in North Texas who will perform late-term abortions on women up to six months pregnant.
The abortionist said he was a friend of the late Dr. George Tiller, a fellow later-term abortionist in Witchita, Kansas who was gunned down earlier this year. Like Tiller he professes to be a Christian who prays about the abortions he does.
Boyd told WFAA-TV he is an ordained Baptist minister who has now joined the Unitarian church. He said he prays often.
"I'll ask that the spirit of this pregnancy be returned to God with love and understanding," he said.
Karen Garnett, of the Catholic Pro-Life Committee, who regularly witnesses to life outside the abortion centre, noted to WFAA-TV that Boyd's prayers are "vastly different" from the ones offered by the pro-lifers on behalf of the children he has killed and the mothers they are trying to save from undergoing an abortion.
"We're certainly disappointed to hear any unborn child will be killed by abortion," said Garnett. "But, to hear it's a late-term abortion in Dallas, once again, it's particularly devastating."
Two threads by me.
November 16, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) The dictionary defines a doula as a woman who assists women during labor and after childbirth. But there is a new group of men and women calling themselves doulas who are challenging that definition in radical ways.
Volunteers with The Doula Project, located in New York City, not only help women who give birth to their child, but also accompany them as their unborn child is killed by abortion.
According to a recent article in the New York Observer profiling The Doula Project, volunteers with the organization have provided doula services - counseling, back rubs and reassurance - to some 4,000 women who have undergone abortions.
Pro-abortion activists can no longer face
the truth: this is what abortion looks like.
But in one of the more startling passages in that article, the co-founder of The Doula Project admits what many pro-abortion activists have furiously disputed for years that graphic photos of aborted babies used by many pro-life activists are legitimate.
Those pictures pro-life activists flash are real, Mary Mahoney told the Observer. That is what a fetus looks like when its head is crushed.
Mahoney made the chilling remark while explaining that she is sometimes hesitant to admit pro-choice activists into the abortion doula program, since the reality of abortion can challenge the the pro-choice rhetoric in a powerful way.
When you see the procedure, you must decide, as a pro-choice person, whether you are in or out, said Mahoney, adding: I have never been more in.
Mahoneys statement strikes a deathblow against the claims of pro-abortion activists that graphic images of abortions are faked, or simply photos of stillborn babies.
One article on about.com, titled Top 10 Anti-Abortion Myths, typifies this pro-abortion attitude. In response to the myth that This is what an abortion looks like, author Tom Head responds: Almost always false. Many abortion protest photographs are artists renderings or the result of image manipulation, and the bulk of the rest are of very late-term fetuses aborted for emergency medical reasons.
It isnt hard to see why abortion supporters might want to write off the images as fake: the graphic images are devastating. Faced with the body of a dead and mutilated baby, you must make a choice.
To her infinite discredit, Mahoney has seen the mangled bodies, and she has made her choice. But many pro-choice activists havent theyve simply gone along with the crowd and accepted the status quo. They dont know what abortion really is. They havent seen it. And when they do, the experience can shake their pro-choice conviction to its very core.
The quickest way to change a pro-choicers mind is to let them see the procedure, says Kelly Brunacini of Feminists Choosing Life of New York.
A lot of the argument is intellectual: My body, my choice sounds really good. When you see an abortion or you go through the mourning process with a woman who has aborted, it becomes less intellectualized, and more real.
Of course, a graphic picture of an abortion isnt necessarily a 100% foolproof way to back an abortion supporter into a corner. Instead of facing the truth and making a choice for or against, they may simply choose to deny that the truth is the truth: in other words, deny that the picture of the abortion is really a picture of an abortion.
But in the age of the ultrasound and brutally honest abortion activists like Mary Mahoney, who confess themselves perfectly content with crushed heads if thats what it takes to protect a womans right to choose, denying the truth of the pictures is becoming an increasingly untenable position to hold.
A major coup for proponents of graphic images came in the form of a 2009 article in the New York Times, which exposed the fact that a large percentage of the photos of aborted babies used by pro-life activists were taken by Monica Miller, director of the Michigan-based Citizens for a Pro-Life Society.
That article, published in one of the most widely read publications in the United States, simply took for granted that the photos by Miller depicted what they purported to depict aborted babies. And pro-abortion activists have been doing damage control ever since.
But their desperate efforts are doomed to failure. The truth can no longer be denied. And the truth is this: That is what a fetus looks like when its head is crushed.
And they wonder why pro-lifers compare abortion to the holocaust.
When one considers the ethics of manipulation, the question of whether we ought to, or whether we may manipulate an organism or entity depends on the answer to the first and most fundamental question:
In the fields of obstetrical medicine and reproductive medicine the ethical debates have raged for four decades. Enlightened discourse between opposing parties must assume good motives by all involved, and then go about asking the essential questions, following where the truth of science and reason lead.
Many claim that life begins at some point distant from fertilization, always beyond the point at which they propose some manipulation (abortion, embryonic stem cell culturing, etc ). There are always a list of biological functions that are given to define when human life begins: Cognitive capacity, etc.
The simple biological truth of the matter is that the Cell Theory states that all cells arise from pre-existing cells. There is no blackout period between sperm and egg uniting, and then the emergence of life at some point distant.
The Carnegie stages of human development indicate that human development begins in the zygotic stage. Then there is the assertion of developmental biologist and leading textbook author in the field, Scott Gilbert. In his text, Gilbert takes us through the life cycle of a dog. His text, Developmental Biology, is arguably the leading text in the field. According to Gilbert:
Traditional ways of classifying catalog animals according to their adult structure. But, as J. T. Bonner (1965) pointed out, this is a very artificial method, because what we consider an individual is usually just a brief slice of its life cycle. When we consider a dog, for instance, we usually picture an adult. But the dog is a dog from the moment of fertilization of a dog egg by a dog sperm. It remains a dog even as a senescent dying hound. Therefore, the dog is actually the entire life cycle of the animal, from fertilization through death.
First, note how he sets the word dog off in quotes at one point, to communicate the very essence of the organism:
But the dog is a dog from the fertilization of a dog egg by a dog sperm
The same may be said of all vertebrates, including cats, giraffes, chimpanzees, and humans. Substituting the word human for dog in Gilberts analysis gets to the heart of the matter. We are human for our entire life cycle. We are whole and complete in form and function at every stage of our development, for that given developmental stage. The prepubescent child is fully human, even though they lack the capacity to execute all human functions, such as abstract reasoning, or reproduction.
In the same way, the early embryo is alive and fully human, though it has not yet executed all human organismal functions.
Thread by me.
The Dutch voluntary euthanasia society is proposing to set up teams of doctors and nurses who can help people to die in their own homes, the AD reports on Wednesday.
The idea of the teams stems from the society's wish to set up a special clinic where people can come to die, which the NVVE announced in January.
'Most people want to die at home,' an NVVE spokesman told the paper. The clinic is still on the cards, but will only have a couple of beds for people who cannot die at home, the spokesman said.
The NVVE says only a third of the 10,000 euthanasia requests made every year are actually honoured. This is because the request procedure is complicated and many doctors are not aware of the finer points of the law, the organisation argues.
The number of reported deaths by euthanasia rose 13% to 2,636 in 2009. Some 80% of people who opt for mercy killing die at home.
Euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands under strict conditions. For example, the patient must be suffering unbearable pain and the doctor must be convinced the patient is making an informed choice. The opinion of a second doctor is also required.
"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."
Thanks for the ping!
Thread by Morgana.
We already know there is nothing left sacred. Now all there is to report are the deepening degrees of blasphemy.
Heres one, with some irony thrown in.
Bearing in mind Christmas celebrates the birth of worlds Savior, the British Pregnancy Advisory Service launched a campaign offering free morning-after pills through the month of December to those who end up doing more than kissing under the mistletoe. Click to enlarge
The website names double entendre is gross.
Bpas initially offered to mail the morning-after pill free after a phone consultation.
But the campaign has attracted so much attention the sexy Santa has run out of gifts.
The website now states, Due to the popularity of this service we are unable to provide the morning after pill in advance of need before Christmas.
The editor of Reproductive Health Matters calls these jingle pills. But theres nothing merry about taking mega-doses of female steroids after having unprotected sex, which, btw, do nothing to stop the sometimes incurable and/or deadly STD(s) that may have been contracted at the same time.
Nevertheless, bpas gives ho ho ho new meaning.
Thread by me.
The perils of the social devaluation of people include legal assisted suicide and euthanasia
It is not uncommon to hear people without disabilities and people who have recently acquired a disability say they would rather be dead than disabled.
Although politically incorrect, embedded perceptions that life with disability is full of suffering and indignity promote the idea that it's a death sentence. Able-ist social conditioning equates disability with pain, frailty, incapacity, and poor quality of life. It views persons with disabilities as problems that need to be fixed.
The 'problem' of disability
I would argue the "problem" of disability lies more in external social, physical, attitudinal, and architectural barriers.
I am considered legally blind. If you hand me something in 12 point font, I can't read it. You might say I am disabled because I can't see. However, if you give me a document in large print, I no longer have a problem. An external change resolves a biological "shortcoming."
At times I use a wheelchair. I am "disabled" by the environment around me: stairs, curbs with no access cuts, and doors that don't open automatically. However, when changes are made externally, I become self-reliant.
Negative images devaluing persons with disabilities infiltrate literature, movies, news media, and television. We are portrayed, at best, as having lives no one wants, and at worst, as freaks or deviants. Rarely are we depicted as empowered people with much to contribute to the world around us.
Unfortunately, many people who acquire a disability internalize able-ist perspectives. They see themselves as being of less value, rather than as people who have needs which, when accommodated, help them enjoy the same rights and responsibilities as every citizen.
Dignity and wellbeing are mistakenly equated with being able-bodied. Conversely, illness or disability is associated with lack of dignity. Dignity, a key component in actions before the courts that seek to legalize euthanasia, is often defined by the notion that something like incontinence indicates a lack of dignity because it is perceived as a loss of autonomy.
Although most people would not choose to be incontinent, toileting needs can be met through the assistance of another person or a disposable incontinence product. (Please note I'm not calling them diapers; infantilizing the people who use them only reduces their dignity.) Somehow needing help to go to the bathroom is considered to have a greater detrimental impact on dignity than relying on other supports.
Many people use eyeglasses. However wearing spectacles doesn't lessen one's dignity or even one's rightful place in the world. The need to don an invisible incontinence product, on the other hand, seems a good reason to encourage someone to end it all.
Able-ist attitudes permeate our politics. Canada's current immigration policy restricts persons with disabilities from immigrating to our country. It could deny someone like renowned scientist Stephen Hawking an opportunity to immigrate to Canada.
I admire Hawking. He has not succumbed to the idea that because he has ALS he has nothing left to offer. If a man who has made such significant contributions can't "make the cut," what message does that send? It says we don't really belong because we're not able-bodied.
Medical practitioners are not immune from acquiring these negative perceptions.
Years ago I initiated a conversation with an endocrinologist about the possibility of pregnancy and how it would affect a woman with my disabilities. I wanted to have children, but also wanted to be responsible by getting fair and balanced information from an expert.
My doctor's response was something like, "If people like you stopped having children, we could eliminate this disease from the face of the earth within a few generations."
I don't know if he considered that eliminating "the disease" also meant eliminating people like me. For him, the problem was inside me, and following that logic, I was the undesirable component.
The unworthy are at risk
If we are tacitly acknowledged as unworthy, we are at risk. At times of fiscal restraint, we can experience discrimination when medical budgets are limited.
It's very difficult to access information about how health care resources are allocated, but there is much evidence to support the idea that they are determined by measuring our value using subjective criteria like "quality of life."
If medical practitioners don't have the direct experience of living with disability, and if they don't make extraordinary efforts to explore beyond the bio-medical models available in med student curricula, how can doctors ever have anything but an able-ist evaluation of someone's quality of life?
If our quality of life is viewed as being narrowed, we risk having our health options shrink. If our health options are taken away, or never presented in the first place, our very existence is threatened.
It is especially when we are coming to terms with new conditions, changing conditions, or physical and psychological pain that we need to be reminded that we matter, that we are worth something.
Our dignity is inherent
Our dignity is inherent. We have dignity because we are human. Our dignity is framed within the context of our sense of, contribution to, and interaction with our communities, not about what does or doesn't work in our bodies.
If Hawking can add value to our society, we all can. We are only limited by our able-ist imaginations.
If assisted suicide or euthanasia is legalized, it could be devastating for persons with disabilities. Medical practitioners might never question the desire of someone who has acquired a disability to be euthanized, because they wouldn't consider the possibility that the requester is experiencing difficulty adjusting to a difficult change.
Realistically, acquiring a disability is about living with loss, which often requires profound adjustment and supports, but so does losing a child. Do we hand grieving parents a hypodermic of lethal medicine and say, "This must be unbearable; here's a way to end your suffering"?
Canadians seem enthusiastic about promoting suicide prevention, but is that only for able-bodied people? When we face the social message that it's better to be dead than disabled, the option of assisted suicide and euthanasia, rather than providing supports to help us live fully, puts our very lives at risk.
Thread by Brookhaven.
Ron Paul wants to be pro-life but is officially pro-choice state by state, and so contradicts himself and wrongly assumes that states' rights supersede human rights, concluding that a state like California has the right to permit abortion. But the right to life is God-given so there can be no 'right' to decriminalize child killing.
Ron Paul is Pro-Choice state by state with all of these observations fully documented below:
- opposes a national ban on the dismembering of unborn children
- claims the states may decide if they want to permit the killing of children
- has not acknowledged that human rights trump states' rights
- legislates as though rights come from the state and not from our Creator, thus
- believes the states have the right to permit genocide and commit holocaust
- claims that killing children in the womb cannot "conceivably" violate the U.S. Constitution
- believes the state is the ultimate authority, superseding God's enduring command, Do not murder
- defends the killing of any of the very youngest babies including those conceived in rape through his "exceptions"
- is essentially a Libertarian (small godless government) but runs as a Republican for greater visibility
- The Libertarian Party promotes legalized abortion, pornography, adultery, crack cocaine, suicide, euthanasia, and prostitution
- Ron Paul uses Libertarians for financial and political support but doesn't warn them about their party's gross immorality
Paul's SANCTITY OF LIFE ACT Elevates States' Rights Over Human Rights: From the text of Ron Paul's bill, "...the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review... any case arising out of any statute... on the grounds that such statute... regulates... the performance of abortions..."13 Ron Paul's legislation would violate a fundamental principle of governance by removing the protection of inalienable human rights from the jurisdiction of the courts. By his theory, a state like California has the right from the Constitution to allow the intentional killing of unborn children, but actually those children have a right to life from their Creator. Because the Creator trumps California and the Constitution, and the right to life is inalienable. It is wrong to give aid and comfort to any jurisdiction of government suggesting that they would be free from interference if they permit genocide within their borders. Ron Paul's so-called Sanctity of Life legislation is illegitimate because abortion cannot be a right: neither a woman's, nor parents, nor a states' rights issue.
Paul Defends Killing Kids with Chemical Abortifacients: In his own book, Ron Paul wrote:
"So if we are ever to have fewer abortions, society must change again. The law will not accomplish that. However, that does not mean that the states shouldnt be allowed to write laws dealing with abortion. Very early pregnancies and victims of rape can be treated with the day after pill, which is nothing more than using birth control pills in a special manner. These very early pregnancies could never be policed, regardless. Such circumstances would be dealt with by each individual making his or her own moral choice." -Ron Paul, Liberty Defined47
Human Rights Supersede States' Rights: At the museum beneath the St. Louis Arch a plaque presents a quote from Stephen A. Douglas. This Democratic politician championed states' rights.9 No state though has sufficient authority to nullify the God-given inalienable rights to life and liberty. His states' rights view led Douglas to claim that the people of a territory should decide the slavery question by themselves.
Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it's errors. Like Ron Paul today and abortion, Stephen Douglas believed his Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 would thereby "remove the contentious slavery issue from national politics, lest it threaten to rip the nation apart, but it had exactly the opposite effect."10 The extent of destruction from doing wrong is difficult to fathom.
Ron Paul and Douglas reject the truth that human rights trump states rights. And in 1858 the latter said, "I look forward to a time when each state shall be allowed to do as it pleases. If it chooses to keep slavery forever, it is not my business, but its own; if it chooses to abolish slavery, it is its own business, not mine. I care more for the great principle of self-government, than I do for all the Negroes in Christendom."11 This parallels Paul's claim that, "a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid" as compared to Roe.12 Ron Paul puts his supporters in the awkward position of siding with Douglas, and wrongly claiming that states' rights supersede the God-given inalienable rights of life and liberty.
If states have the right to permit the systematic killing of children, as in Paul's view, then they would also have the right to deprive any other class of citizen of life and liberty. But as a University of Denver law student argued with a professor during a 2008 American Right To Life event, "If a state has the authority to nullify rights, then rights aren't rights, are they?" Thus states' have no such right, neither to define one class of living human being as nonpersons, nor to decriminalize murder, for human rights supersede states' rights.
Two thread by me.
The slippery slope is often derided as a logical fallacy. But when one of the leading advocacy groups for euthanasia in Belgium posts an article entitled Euthanasie: tijd voor de volgende stap, Euthanasia, time for the next step, its hard not to think that it may not be so illogical after all.
The Humanistisch-Vrijzinnige Vereniging (Humanist-Liberal Association) complains that eligibility for euthanasia is far too restrictive. At the moment, only people with unbearable suffering can be euthanased. This leaves out people in irreversible comas, people with dementia, people with irreversible brain diseases and people who are under 18. This is manifestly unfair, the HVV contends.
However, this is not just a private initiative. In November Wim Distelmans, the chairman of the official Federal Committee on Euthanasia, released an open letter to Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo asking him to re-open a national debate on euthanasia. (At the time, Di Rupo was pulling a government together (this took 589 days) but now he is officially prime minister.) He and eight colleagues, like the HVV, have asked the Belgian government to update its 2002 euthanasia law. The proposed changes include these provisions:
Euthanasia is not just a lethal act, but a deadly ideological appetiteone that is never satiated. Once killing is unleashed as a solution to suffering, activists will always want more. Always. As I have written before, they remind me of the man killing plant in Little Shop of Horrors, growing ever larger and constantly yelling, Feed me!
Latest of so many cases in point: Belgian activists have a petition out to open euthanasia to minors and to force all doctors to be complicit in killing by creating a duty to refer to a death doctor if they are not willing to personally euthanize. Here is the Google translation of the petition, linked here in, I think, Flemish:
The Right to Euthanasia: Time for the Next Step. Euthanasia possible, even for those not aware, and who is a minor:
Through this petition we want the federal government, federal parliament seats and all democratic parties insist that the euthanasia during the next legislature will be expanded and refined. We ask the following enhancements:
Since the advance [euthanasia request] is always revocable, is a time limit of five years obsolete. It is desirable to remove the time limit. The municipalities that the declarations of intent to register must already requires the parties to automatically notify the imminent expiration of the deadline.
If the advance euthanasia was registered, its existence must be included on the chip of the electronic ID card.
A referral qualify for the duty doctor who refuses euthanasia.
Assisted suicide should be enrolled in the law on euthanasia.
It must be ensured that hospitals that work with public money, the application of the legislation is not in the way.
Furthermore, we urge the law to expand:
In people with irreversible brain disease or dementia, who previously wrote a living will.
To minors within the current law, without prejudice to the definition of euthanasia (the explicit and considered the request of the patient), and without an age limit to build.
The next step, that is the key. Note, it isnt the final step. Thats because there never is a final step.
Culture of death, Wesley? What culture of death?
Thread by me.
Terri Schiavo of Florida, who's vegetative state
and right to life became a national issue in 2005
The difference between a dead man and a man in a vegetative state used to be a thin line of whether
or not the body was still functioning. But what if the vegetative man is still conscious? That brings
the distinction into a whole new level.
Philosopher Walter Sinnott-Armstrong gave a talk titled Is he conscious? Does he want to be? at the Trent Center for Bioethics on Friday, Dec. 9. He discussed clinical studies which have shown that despite the unresponsive display, patients in vegetative state may be still conscious. With assistance from an fMRI or an EEG scan, doctors can tap into the patients brain activity and read their thoughts.
The scanning studys control was patients who received severe brain trauma and were confirmed to be in a vegetative state. The studies focused on the specific brain activity when the patient was commanded to think about tennis and the brain activity that occurred when the patient was commanded to imagine anything other than tennis. The distinctive brain activities were then coupled with a series of yes or no questions. If their answer was yes, the patient was told to think about tennis and if their answer was no, the patient was told to think about navigating through a house. In one case study, the patient answered five out of seven questions right by showing brain activity associated with tennis to questions for which an affirmative was the correct answer. The other two questions showed no response, and the doctors assumed the patient had gone to sleep.
This confirmation of consciousness in some vegetative patients brings up an ethical issue. Those at the bedside can now ask questions, including do you want to live? The vegetative patients answer to such a question may inform the ethical issue that arises each time we worry about pulling the plug on a clearly living person.
"We will not be silent.
We are your bad conscience.
The White Rose will give you no rest."
Ron Paul declares himself to be an expert, or even a “scholar,” of the Constitution, and unfortunately, his sycophants agree. They are as bad, or if not, worse than the Obamabots.
States have enumerated powers granted by we the People, only people have rights and powers granted to the states can NEVER supersede our individual right to life except as described in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Our Founders recognized that man cannot take away rights given to us by God.
FYI on Ron Paul’s SERIOUSLY flawed votes:
“Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)”
Thread by Fred.
In 1993, Mitt Romney was a successful businessman with an urge to enter public life and a plan to challenge Ted Kennedy for a Senate seat from Massachusetts.
Romney was also a high-ranking official in the Mormon church -- in charge of all church affairs in the Boston area -- with a dilemma over abortion. Romney was personally pro-life, and the church was pro-life, but a majority of the Massachusetts electorate was decidedly pro-choice.
How Romney handled that dilemma is described in a new book, "Mitt Romney: An Inside Look at the Man and His Politics," by Boston journalist Ronald Scott. A Mormon who admires Romney but has had his share of disagreements with him, Scott knew Romney from local church matters in the late 1980s.
Scott had worked for Time Inc., and in the fall of 1993, he says, Romney asked him for advice on how to handle various issues the media might pursue in a Senate campaign. Scott gave his advice in a couple of phone conversations and a memo. In the course of the conversations, Scott says, Romney outlined his views on the abortion problem.
According to Scott, Romney revealed that polling from Richard Wirthlin, Ronald Reagan's former pollster whom Romney had hired for the '94 campaign, showed it would be impossible for a pro-life candidate to win statewide office in Massachusetts. In light of that, Romney decided to run as a pro-choice candidate, pledging to support Roe v. Wade, while remaining personally pro-life.
All lies, all the time: Mitt's greatest hits
Threads by NYer and me.
Those who have implied that the Presidents health care law will establish death panels, have encountered excessive criticism. Yet, more and more information is being released identifying that rationing of care will in fact occur, and that it will be done by government bureaucracies.
For example, a phone call into The Mark Levin Show on WLS 890 from a Chicago neurosurgeon last month revealed that a Health and Human Services (HHS) document, associated with the Obama Administrations federal health law, will inhibit patients over the age of 70 from receiving neurological care. Instead of receiving advanced neurosurgical care, units, (meaning patients), over 70 will receive care to make them comfortable. In order to provide the neurosurgical care, a physician would have to appeal to a ethics committee made up of administrators, not physicians, to determine if the services can be administered.
This document, not surprisingly, has not been presented to the public.
Listen to the call by clicking the link below:
Dr. Alexander K. Smith is a brave man.
It has taken physicians a very long time to accept the need to level with patients and their families when they have terminal illnesses and death is near and we know that many times those kinds of honest, exploratory conversations still dont take place.
Now Dr. Smith, a palliative care specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, who also practices at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and two co-authors are urging another change, one they acknowledge would radically alter the way health care professionals communicate with their very old patients.
In a recent article in The New England Journal of Medicine, they suggested offering to discuss overall prognosis, doctorspeak for probable life expectancy and the likelihood of death, with patients who dont have terminal illnesses. The researchers favor broaching the subject with anyone who has a life expectancy of less than 10 years or has reached age 85.
(Excerpt) Read more at newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Thread by me.
Detroit Seven years ago, Bobby Schindlers life changed as he watched his sister fight for hers.
Terri Schiavo had suffered severe brain damage several years earlier after entering cardiac arrest in her St. Petersburg, Fla., home, but that wasnt what was threatening to take her life.
According to her brother, the hospitals, courts, state and Schiavos husband posed a far greater risk. And on March 18, 2005, Schindler and his parents could only watch helplessly and desperately as Terri Schiavos feeding tube, on which she depended for sustenance, was removed. Thirteen days later, she died a slow death of hunger and dehydration.
Since that gut-wrenching moment, Schindler has devoted his life to advocating for families fighting similar life-and-death battles, something he says continues to happen every day.
The struggle was that we couldnt believe to the extent people were going to end my sisters life, said Schindler, who will give a keynote address during the archdioceses second annual Life is a Gift conference next month. The mindset has changed among our culture and among the general public that they look at someone like Terri really with a profound prejudice and a cruelty in the way they describe her.
Its become part of our vernacular that we just refer to people like my sister as vegetables, which is completely dehumanizing, Schindler said. If we keep moving in the direction it seems to me were moving in, were just going to keep making more and more excuses and justifying more and more why people like my sister should die.
Schindler, whose presentation will focus on what he calls the bioethicist movement in the countrys medical schools, cited a growing problem in the nations attitudes toward the dignity of life, comparing the discussion of euthanasia today to that of abortion decades ago. He says its an issue even most Catholics dont understand.
Catholic teaching is completely clear on how were to care for these individuals, but thats not being told to our laity, said Schindler, who is Catholic. The nation, the general public, needs to be educated to see just how awful, how terrible this issue is.
Schindler will join speakers including Bishop Michael Byrnes and Dr. Paul Wright, who treated and worked with Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, at the conference at Detroits Sacred Heart Major Seminary on Jan. 14. The focus, organizers say, will be on a variety of pro-life issues facing Christians, including poverty and health care reform.
This year the emphasis is more toward acknowledging the dignity of all people with special needs, said Socorro Truchan, coordinator of the archdiocesan Marriage, Family and Pro-Life Office. Last year we emphasized more the unborn, the beginning-of-life concerns.
Truchan said while the abortion issue is important, its vital for Catholics, especially teens, to recognize the entire spectrum of pro-life challenges.
That includes the hot-button topic of homosexuality. Also speaking at the conference will be Dan, a revert to the Catholic faith and a member of Courage, a Catholic apostolate that ministers to those with same-sex attraction.
Dan, who struggles with same-sex attraction and prefers not to reveal his last name, said the Churchs message of freedom and hope is being lost in a sea of secular misinformation on the subject.
Pope Paul VI said its the church thats an expert in humanity, Dan said. So I just want to educate students a little bit about what the churchs teaching is, and then share my own journey of how I found freedom in the truth of the church as someone whos lived with that in his life from the very beginning.
Dan said after being raised Catholic and converting to evangelicalism, he became disillusioned with his faith after college and decided to live with a boyfriend for a year.
I expected God to give me a lot of judgment, but He actually just showed me love, Dan said. And then while Im dating this guy and dont want to ever be attracted to a woman again, I found a woman that I was attracted to, and it brought back up all my desires to be a father and have a family.
Dan said while his relationship with the woman didnt last, it caused him to re-evaluate his faith. He said his journey back to the Catholic Church wasnt all roses, but he said the sacraments keep him strong in moments of weakness.
To those teens who struggle with it, my primary message would be one that first of all says theyre not alone in this, and that there is hope in the journey of embracing chastity, he said.
The conference costs $35 for adults and $20 for students and includes breakfast and lunch. Bishop Byrnes will celebrate Mass before the conference at 7:30 a.m. A complete schedule, including topics and breakouts, can be found at www.aodonline.org/lifeisagift.
Truchan said the conference offers something for everyone.
Anything and everything to do with the dignity of life and upholding life were gearing this conference for, she said. Maybe thats too general, but I figure lets just hold out our arms and then the Lord will bring them all in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.