Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Seven Brides for Fourteen Brothers - Sex Selection - Part II - Rain Man Mantra

Continuing our commentary on Ms. Hvistendahl's book "Unnatural Selection", let's talk about the author herself. Ms. Hvistendahl is a journalist, whom the Wall Street Journal describes as a first-rate reporter. In her book "Unnatural Selection" she very aptly documents the effects of sex-selective abortions. Now, before we begin to think that Ms. Hvistendahl is writing this book as a condemnation of abortion, let's look a bit further into her thinking.

Ms. Hvistendahl is actually very worried that the "right wing" or the "Christian right" - as she labels anyone on the pro-life side - will be able to use this sex-selective abortion travesty as a weapon against a woman's right to abortion. It would seem her real concern here, is not the female babies, but the opportunity for pro-lifers to make a further case against all abortion. This, she fears, would be the "feminists worst nightmare". Mr. Last, senior writer at the Weekly Standard, wrote an article in a recent Wall Street Journal book review, on Ms. Hvistendahl's book, stating, "It is very telling that Ms. Hvistendahl identifies a ban on abortion  - and not the killing of tens of millions of unborn girls - as the "worst nightmare" of feminism".  So, is Ms. Hvistendahl pushing for equal rights for male babies to be aborted as much as female babies? What is her real point here?

It would certainly appear, that while accurately describing one particular evil seed of the abortion industry, Ms. Hvistendahl still struggles to defend it. Mr. Last goes on to aptly comment,  "After decades of fighting for a woman's right to choose the outcome of her own pregnancy, it is difficult to turn around and point out that women are abusing that right." This difficulty presents itself in Ms. Hvistendahl's book, when she struggles to find solutions to the sex-selective abortion problem. She even proposes banning the common revealing of the sex of a baby to parents during ultrasound testing, going so far as to place rigorous government enforcements, such as sting operations that would send doctors and ultrasound techs and nurses who reveal the sex of babies to jail! She even proposes police surveillance of obstetrics facilities, to "investigate women carrying female fetuses more thoroughly" when they request abortions, in order to ensure that their motives are not illegal? Illegal?

This is so schizophrenic - the persistence of keeping abortion legal, yet making it illegal in some instances? The desperation to defend the indefensible drives one to duplicity as well as madness! Mr. Last points out that, "Despite the author's intentions, "Unnatural Selection" might be one of the most consequential books ever written in the campaign against abortion. It is aimed, like a heat-seeking missile, against the entire intellectual framework of "choice". And it seems that this reality is not lost on Ms. Hvistendahl, as she struggles with a crisis of conscience, while not admitting it to herself.

So, what do we call people who see the obvious right in front of them, yet persist in ignoring reality? Or those who are so stubbornly fixated on a particular ideology, that they become completely irrational in their determination to ignore the fact that their convictions just might be wrong? Reminds me of the Rain Man, who believed that his underwear could only be purchased from K-Mart .. to the point where he kept repeating K-Mart - K-Mart, like a mantra! So too, do those who push for a woman's right to have an abortion, keep repeating the mantra - "pro-choice - pro-choice", in spite of continuing and overwhelming evidence of the obvious horrors and realities of abortion - even those horrors, so aptly documented by one of their very own! Ms. Hvistendahl has seen the enemy, but refuses to admit that the enemy is herself and all others of her group think.


Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Seven Brides for Fourteen Brothers - Sex Selection - Part I

Mara Hvistendahl, is the author of the book "Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls and the Consequences of a World Full of Men". She has written this book out of her concern for girls. Why is she concerned? Particularly in countries such as China, India and numerous other developing and developed countries, there are many more men than women. This is the direct result of a systematic campaign against baby girls. Her book "Unnatural Selection" reports the reasons for this gender imbalance, what it is, how it came about, and what are the ramifications for the future. 

In nature, there are 105 boys born for every 100 girls. This is the natural balance which nature provides, and any other ratio is the result of unnatural events.

In Ms. Hvistendahl's book, the "unnatural events" specifically referred to, are sex- selective abortions. Now we all know you cannot fool Mother Nature. So, when we skew any natural balance, there are repercussions. And when we start skewing the natural balance of human males to females, there are serious ramifications. Ms. Hvistendahl argues that such imbalances are portents of Very Bad Things to come, stating: "Historically, societies in which men substantially outnumber women are not nice places to live. Often they are unstable. Sometimes they are violent."  She uses the examples of fourth century B.C. Athens, which was a particularly violent and bloody time in Greek history - and China's Taiping Rebellion in the mid-19th century. In both cases, female infanticide was widespread. She also points  out that the sparsity of women in the early frontiers of the American West, contributed to it being so wild.

There is overwhelming evidence of a link between sex ratios and violence, as high levels of male births make it more difficult for men to get a bride, leading to the buying and selling of women. Seven brides for fourteen brothers, is a recipe for disaster. This has led to men in wealthier countries poaching females from the poorer ones. Ms. Hvistendahl says that in Vietnam, for example, the mail-order-bride business is booming. Worst of all, sex-trafficking is also a booming business as a result.

Ms. Hvistendahl's book is replete with wrenching details of her interviews with demographers and doctors from Paris to Mumbai. One of whom is, Paul Ehrlich, the guru of overpopulation (of whom Al Gore is apparently a cult follower), who authored, "The Population Bomb" in 1968. Ehrlich still believes that getting rid of girls is the best answer to keeping families from having too many children. She interviews other such gurus of sex-selection, such as Geert Jan Olsder a Dutch mathematician who helped contribute to China's "One Child" policy. She also visited the Nanjing "Patriot Club", which is an organization of Chinese surplus men who play war games and mock combat for kicks.

And of course, all the usual Western suspects, are revealed, such as the Ford Foundation, the United Nations and the other main culprit, Planned Parenthood. She shows how these suspects have pushed sex-selective abortions as a means of controlling population control. Malcom Potts, wrote, when it came to developing nations, abortion was even better than birth control with his statement: "Early abortion is safe, effective, cheap and potentially the easiest method to administer." Really? Who is it safe to administer to? 

The famous saying, "Behind every great man is a woman" is going to become obsolete, as there are not going to be enough women to stand behind any man, great or small. To be continued. Stay tuned ....

Monday, June 27, 2011

Al's At It Again - If You Are Poor - Beware!

Al Gore, the global warming & climate change guru, is now advocating fertility management ... among the poor.  Translation ... he would like to eliminate the poor, as a means to reduce the world's population, and save the planet. I thought only Super Man did that.

With his trademark altruistic style, Nobel  Peace Prize recipient Al stated, "One of the principle ways of stabilizing the population is to empower and educate girls and women, "  He went on, "you have to have ubiquitous availability of fertility management so women can choose how many children to have, the spacing of children." So how many condoms does one need to save the rain forest? Al believes the carbon units are infesting the planet ... and must be eliminated. 

So, once again, we have all the usual erudite deceptions, such as ... fertility management  and reproductive health. But even a monkey could figure out that someone is trying to shoot him down out of the Yum Yum tree, because the tree is more important than the monkey. And mankind rates even less these days. Al's family planning measures have included abortion to curb population as a means of protecting the environment for at least 15 years. Wonder what happens after 15 years?

Once again, from Margaret Sanger, and now dear ol Al, the poor are the ones who are targeted. I mean, if the planet is threatened by mankind's carbon footprint, wouldn't those who can afford gigantic SUVs, be the ones leaving that footprint, rather than the poor little guy in Africa, who walks to work?  Elitism at its finest. Global Warming is a hoax, designed to perpetuate the travesty of fertility management and reproductive health ... which are aimed at eliminating the poor. 

Abe Lincoln was a poor boy who lived in a log cabin, and learned to read with a Bible. Jesus Christ  was born in a stable, with no place to lay his head, except a lowly manger.  Abe Lincoln became one of America's greatest president's, and Jesus Christ, was the Son of God made man. Al would have had both these children aborted, because they were poor. 

Thursday, June 23, 2011

NEA Makes An Offer Teachers Can't Refuse

The National Education Association (NEA), after putting forth their new pro-abortion agenda, will now go one step further, by spending $60 million on the re-election campaign of the most pro-abortion President ever, Barack Obama. Wow! Chills are running down my spine.

NEA executive director John Wilson says, he is prepared to pull out all the stops to ensure the pro-abortion president has another four years in office, and to promote taxpayer funding of abortions, while packing the Supreme Court and other federal courts with abortion activists.  He stated,  "We've got a lot of selling to do. Our members are very unhappy, we've got to explain to them the stakes. We cannot wait until a few months before the election." 

He went on to explain that part of the $60 million would be used to pressure (arm-twist?) an estimated 1 million Republican NEA members, into voting for Obama, by saying that we need more time to pressure members to stick with Obama once again. He bemoaned the fact that they had endorsed his election bid a bit too late in 2008. So, this time around they're being more pro-active in twisting people's arms in enough time before the 2012 elections. Sounds like the Godfather ... making an offer they can't refuse ... without serious repercussions, such as their job security?

You wonder why so many kids are dropping out of school, or just getting by?  When these are the people in charge of their education and formation ... or rather malformation.

In 2008, when the NEA endorsed Obama, Karen Cross, political director of NRLC said, "The tragic irony of the NEA's endorsement of Barack Obama is not lost on millions of pro-lifers across the country. The NEA has chosen to back a  presidential candidate who wants to continue a policy of abortion on demand, which has resulted in nearly 50 million missing students in classrooms from coast to coast, since 1973. Barack Obama's extremist pro-abortion agenda is a poison pill for our nation's classrooms. It borders on the incomprehensible, that our nation's educators would get behind a candidate, whose agenda will result in more missing children."

Some of this $60 million comes from union dues paid by teachers themselves, who may or may not be on board with this policy. Those who are not, this year, will no doubt face extreme pressure from the NEA. Hello! Are there any parents or grandparents out there?  Where's the public outcry. This bears a strong resemblance to the conscience rights of health care workers.  

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Testing Ahead Of A Baby's Birth More Convenient - New Way To Eradicate A Disease?

A new non-invasive prenatal blood test, to determine Down syndrome, will be made available next year ... one which will avoid the risk of miscarriage, and offer accurate results as early as nine weeks into a pregnancy. Until now, women have only had two very invasive test procedures for determining the possibility of giving birth to a handicapped child. The first known as amniocentesis, done around the 4th month of pregnancy, involves inserting a needle through the woman's stomach, penetrating the womb, to withdraw a sample of amniotic fluid. The 2nd is known as CVS, and involves taking a small sample of tissue from the woman's placenta. Both these tests pose a tiny, yet very real risk of miscarriage.

But the real impact of this new miracle of modern science, is that the many Down syndrome babies who heretofore escaped abortion, due to not being tested before birth, will now be at greater risk, as the convenience and low risk of this new test will make it routine, catching many expectant mothers unawares. Dr. Brian Skotko, a Down syndrome specialist at Children's Hospital Boston stated, "How are women today able to make a truly informed decision?"  The ease of such an early diagnosis thrusts a woman into a decision she may not have been prepared to make so early into her pregnancy ... or even a consideration.

Diagnosing a baby's health before its' birth today, offers parents the ability to be prepared for any special need their child may have before he or she is born. We can all appreciate the benefits of having prior knowledge of what to expect and be prepared for in the event of a Down syndrome child. Medical knowledge is only half of the concern. It is also helpful for parents to be prepared mentally and emotionally for a special needs child. The question is, how early does a parent need to know of its' child's medical needs in order to prepare themselves?

We all know that ease and early diagnosis in a pregnancy term, is more of an excuse for the consideration of abortion, rather than the thought of parental preparedness. The statistics of Dr. Brian Skotko of Children's Hospital Boston, reveal a shocking 92 percent of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome inutero being aborted ... so much for parental preparedness. This is really about offering women an opportunity for abortion at an early stage in their pregnancy ... even before they have informed husbands, boyfriends or family that they are expecting. Now, with this newer test, how many more Down syndrome babies will be eliminated? At 92% we're not that far from 100%.

This new marvel of medical science has been sacreligiously dubbed the "Holy Grail" of prenatal tests, as one researcher predicted in a Canadian newspaper, that more couples will choose this type of testing, and therefore "slowly eradicate the disease".  Disease?  Down syndrome is not a disease! And it is not Down syndrome which will be eradicated .. rather it is the babies who have Down syndrome who will be eradicated.  Is this how we cure disease these days?  And what other disease is medical science planning to eradicate by murdering the person who has it? Perhaps those of you who have diabetes or any other "disease" which needs to be "eradicated" better be concerned.

Stating Brian Skotko of Children's Hospital once again, he says, "the vast majority of people with Down syndrome and their families affirm that their contributions to their communities are significant, and their lives are very valuable." This new advanced technology simply offers more accurate methods of diagnosing babies still in the womb, simply making them easier targets for abortion.

Friday, June 10, 2011

State of Health Insurance Abortion Coverage Opt-Outs

Since the passage of Obamacare, officially titled the Paitient Protection and Affordable Care Act, many states have stepped in to fill the loophole allowing taxpayer funding of abortion. They have accomplished this by passing laws prohibiting abortion coverage in health plans created through the state exchange program set up by Obamacare. Arizona was the first state to do so in April of last year followed by four other states that session. Eight more states have passed laws prohibiting abortion coverage in the 2011 session and eight additional states currently have such legislation pending. The following chart and map gives details:

StateBill NumberDate Enacted/Status
Passed in 2010:
Total: 5 states
ArizonaAZ SB 13054/24/10
TennesseeTN SB 26865/05/10 (Democrat Gov. did not veto or sign, but allowed bill to become law without his signature.)
MississippiMS SB 32145/24/10
LouisianaLA HB 12477/02/10
MissouriMO SB 7937/23/10 (same scenario as TN)
Passed in 2011:
Total: 8 states
UtahUT HB 3543/23/11
IdahoID S 11154/01/11
VirginiaVA HB 24344/06/11
OklahomaOK SB 5474/20/11
IndianaIN HB 12105/10/11
NebraskaNE LB 225/18/11
KansasKS HB 20755/25/11
FloridaFL H 976/02/11

Total passed: 13 states
Not Passed in 2011:

MinnesotaMN HF 201Vetoed (5/25/11)
MontanaMT SB 176Vetoed (4/4/11)
ArkansasAR SB 113Passed Senate and House with amendments, then House did not transmit bill back to the Senate for them to concur before adjournment (2/2/11)
GeorgiaGA SB 177Same path as AR (4/12/11)
Rhode IslandRI S 87Passed Senate (4/6/11)
AlabamaAL SB 202Passed Senate (5/24/11)

Total: 6 states
Pending in 2011 session:

PennsylvaniaPN SB 3Passed Senate
OhioOH HB 79Reported out of House committee
WisconsinWI AB 154/SB 92In committees of origin
OregonOR HB 3600In House committee
IowaHF 576, HSB 57, SF 38In committees of origin
MichiganHB 4143/HB 4147In House committee
South CarolinaSC H 3406/S102In committees of origin
New JerseyNJ A 3085In Assembly committee

Total: 8 states

Contact: Brianna Walden Source: FRCBlog

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Eternal Rest Grant Unto Him O Lord

We at Lake County Right to Life were very sorry to hear that State Rep. Mark Beaubien died suddenly yesterday of an apparent heart attack.

Rep. Beaubien served in the state legislature representing the Barrington area for nearly 15 years.  Although we disagreed on significant issues, Rep. Beaubien was always cordial.  He was also always up-front—there were never any surprises about where he stood.

Our thoughts and prayers are with his wife Dee, his children and his grandchildren.

Visitation will be Thursday, June 9, from 1:00 -9:00 p.m. at the Davenport Family Funeral Home, 419 East Terra Cotta, Crystal Lake.  Funeral Mass will be Friday, 10:30 a.m. at St. Anne’s, 120 Ela (at the corner of Franklin) in Barrington.  Burial will be private.

Please join us in praying for the Beaubien family. 

Bonnie Quirke

Friday, June 3, 2011

Jack Makes "Final Exit"

Dr. Jack Kevorkian, 83, better known as Dr. Death, because of his controversial crusade for assisted suicide, has himself just "passed away peacefully and naturally" without anyone pulling his plug, or injecting him with lethal doses of drugs ... no assisted suicide for Jack. The man who assisted and pushed for others to have the right to knock themselves off, faced his own natural death without seeking the escape of suicide.

Dr. Kevorkian was an unemployed pathologist who authored a book titled, "Final Exit", the first how-to book for suicide, followed by the development of his famous suicide machine,which he named. "Mercitron". He also had Orwellian dreams of setting up suicide clinics, which he called, "Obitoria". Assisting in the suicide of more than 130 people, he was convicted in 1998 of second-degree murder in the case of a 52 year old man with Lou Gehrig's disease, leading to his medical license being irrevocably revoked.

Early in his career, Kevorkian planned to conduct invasive medical experiments on "living" human beings. His focus, in the beginning, was on death-row inmates facing execution. Why death-row inmates? Dr. Kevorkian explained, "The best way to understand the mechanisms of the criminal mind is to study all parts of the intact living brain." Question ... What separates Kevorkian from Jeffery Dahmer? Answer ...The media and Al Pacino.

Al won an Emmy in 2010 for portraying Jack in the HBO film, "You Don't Know Jack". You bet you didn't know Jack! Like most serial killers, Jack had many facets. During his acceptance speech, Pacino praised Kevorkian, calling him, "brilliant and interesting and unique". So was every prototype of the Anti-Christ we've ever had ... ie ... Nero, Diocletian, Pol-pot, Genghis Khan ... in our day in age ... Stalin, Hitler, Bin Laden, to name a few... I'm sure they were all darlings of the media in their day too. Al went on to say, "It's really an honor to have had the pleasure to try to portray someone as brilliant and interesting and unique as Dr. Jack Kevorkian. And the fun I had just trying to get inside of his head, which of course, I could never." Let's hope not. What's Al selling here? What's brilliant about killing people? What's interesting about assisting vulnerable human beings to die? And what is unique about someone who is just another serial killer? Unless you have an agenda? What was the Emmy really for? Have actors who played Adolf Hitler ever glamorized the monster, or enjoyed getting inside his head?

Kevorkian went to prison after killing Thomas Youk on CBS's 60 Minutes and was released 8 years later, a frail old man, but still a crusader for death. With the death of Dr. Kevorkian, will the debate over assisted suicide go away? I highly doubt it ... and here's why ...

The Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, will absolutely bring about rationing of health care as a federal mandate. In the year 500 BC Hypocrites separated physician as healer from physician as killer. The first and primary goal of medicine is, "to do no harm". That wall was breached in 1973 when the physician became the killer with abortion, followed by Dr. Death, to be continued with Obamacare.

Ponder, Oregon, Washington and Montana, already have legalized physician assisted suicide. How many other states will follow. Will Jack be back?

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Repeal Civil Union Law & Support Referendum on Marriage

New Civil Unions Law Already Infringing on Religious Freedom

Illinois’ Civil Unions law went into effect June 1, and even State Sen. David Koehler, sponsor of the bill in the senate, is frustrated with its repercussions to religious freedom. Koehler made it clear that the law, ironically named “The Religious Freedom Protection Act and Civil Union Act,” was intended to protect the rights of social service organizations, including adoption agencies, to carry out their duties according to their faith.

But months ago, activists began challenging the ability of religious childcare agencies to prohibit the placement of children with same-sex couples, so Sen. Koehler proposed a religious exemption amendment to protect the rights of these agencies. Despite lobbying by Catholic Charities and other organizations, the amendment was defeated in the Senate Executive Committee.

Last Thursday, Catholic Charities in Rockford announced that “Because of this failure and the anticipated legal challenges it will present to our free exercise of religion, the Diocese or Rockford is forced to permanently discontinue all state funded adoption and foster care operations as of June 1, 2011.”

The challenge began after a same-sex couple’s attempted adoption through Lutheran Children and Family Services in Chicago was denied. This moved DCFS to confer with gay advocates in concert with the governor’s and attorney general’s offices to “begin to resolve the legal issues” with Lutheran Children and Family Services, Catholic Charities and the Evangelical Child and Family Agency. The expected result of these conversations will be a choice for the adoption agencies to change their policies or lose state funding.

Attorney Peter Breen of the Thomas More Society (who will be the featured speaker at Lake County Right to Life’s September 24 educational forum) believes that Catholic Charities and other religious adoption agencies should be protected because sectarian adoption agencies are not on the list of places where non-discrimination laws apply. However, attorneys for the ACLU contend that the law’s religious exemptions are meant to apply only to “core religious functions” (e.g. weddings) and not contracts with the state.

Lake County Right to Life opposes the Civil Unions law and supports any effort to repeal it. Lake County Right to Life also supports the effort to place a referendum defining traditional marriage on the 2012 ballot.

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

What Would You Do?

The ABC TV show "What Would You Do" (a sort of updated "Candid Camera") went to Texas to see how people would react to a boy pressuring a girl to get an abortion:

(H/T: Creative Minority Report's Matt Archbold writing at National Catholic Register.