Some Revolution

Misoprostol, the wave of the future?

 

But researchers are finding an alternative that is safe, cheap and very difficult for governments to restrict — misoprostol, a medication originally intended to prevent stomach ulcers.

 

...

 

Researchers are finding that if women take misoprostol alone, effectiveness drops to 80 to 85 percent. That may sound low, but it's typically far better and safer than alternatives that women turn to, Dr. Winikoff noted.

 

...

 

"Medical abortion represents a revolution in women's reproductive health," said Dana Hovig, the chief executive of Marie Stopes International, an aid group that provides women's reproductive health services in 43 countries around the world. "It saves women's lives and has enormous potential to increase access to safe abortion at minimal cost."

 

Twenty per cent of its users will have a failed abortion....And that's considered safe?

 

In countries with substandard healthcare?

 

And this is being hailed?

 

Here's my take.

 

I think women will continue to prefer suction and curettage.

 

Why? Because even though you have to go through the bother of going to the clinic and having somehow stick a vacuum in your nether regions, when it's done, it's done. It takes five minutes.

 

The abortion pill will do the job. Most of the time. But take days and days to complete. And you have to bleed. And bleed. And bleed some more. And cramp up like you wanna die.

 

 And after all that effort, there's still a five per cent chance that you'll have to go to the clinic anyway.

 

I know that the medical abortion might ease the minds of some because it's like a miscarriage, so you can make yourself believe that you're undergoing a natural process.

 

A  significant (albeit small) percentage of women will take this abortion pill and end up seeing their dead fetus. The fetal remains will no longer be whisked away in a cannister, to be examined and flushed away. And they will understand that although the "pregnancy" coming out looks like a blob of tissue (it can look like a big red mass of placenta and whatever else comes out-- which justifies the 'products of conception' line) when you examine the tissue, you do find the fetus. You do find a baby with arms, legs and so forth.

 

It will be traumatizing.

 

Perhaps women will start asking why no one told them...that a fetus was going to be killed, that they might see their fetus (because of course the abortion industry won't warn them of that.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A burning question

QUOTE:

In France, law enforcers, academics and the public are in shock over the case of Dominique Cottrez, 47, who confessed to killing eight of her children soon after delivering them. Experts consider this the "worst case of infanticide"

 

...

 

What I wanted to know upon reading the news was why Cottrez—and other women like her and in her situation—didn't simply use contraception if they feared pregnancy so much or loathed babies that badly.

 

Maybe she did!

 

But seriously, she'd have to go to the doctor to get her tubes tied or a prescription for the pill. Or an abortion.

 

 

Anne Rice too good for Christianity

 

 

Story 

 

People who quit the Church because of the bad behaviour or attitudes of others always struck me as a little Pharasaical.

 

I'm not talking about people who quit for serious differences on the issue of belief. It's only normal that you want to change church when you don't share the creed of the one you're in.

 

I'm talking about people who think that the other members of their church are too sinful or morally compromised.

 

Christ came to reach sinners after all.

 

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

 

You see a lot of fat, unhealthy people at the gym, too. Does that mean you shouldn't join the gym?

 

Besides, their interpretation of what Christ was all about is often based on the zeitgeist of the day than the actually text of the Gospel.

 

 

 

 

 

Dilemmas, Dilemmas, at The Abortioneers

Should Abortion Staff Tell the Truth About Pill Abortions, wonders a blogger at the Abortioneers

 

http://abortioneers.blogspot.com/2010/07/happy-pills.html

 

(Which she titles "Happy Pills", interestingly enough).

 

She recounts how she was asked by a Hispanic woman about a pill to "bring on one's period."

 

 

QUOTE:

 

On the other hand, though, I struggled with the desire to give her accurate information and be straight with her with the lingo of "abortion," not "inducing a period" and also respecting her need for coping with this unintended and unwanted pregnancy in a way that she knew how, and especially, not scaring her off an into the streets where she would acquire the tablets from someone who would fully go along with her "bring on the period" plan. Women aren't dumb, and they know full well that a period of this type comes along with a fetus, but where does that leave as as providers and as advocates for women?

So it's between telling the woman the truth about her biology and medical treatment, or "scaring her" into buying an abortion off the street.

 

Which would defeat the purpose of legal abortion in the first place, right? I mean, if a woman can't be lied to, she'll go out and kill herself with street drugs. Allowing her to assume the consequences of her own actions and ignorance would be tragic.  It's a slippery slope. 

 

But to get the whole picture about this post, you have to read this comment. The issue for the commenters isn't: Is this lady owed the truth? Does she need the truth? No. Check out how they frame this:

 

Says Not Guilty:

 

Personally, I think it is unwise to "go along" because the antis already accuse us of lying to women to "force" them to get an abortion. I feel like in the long run, this sort of semantics hurts us.

 

Whether it hurts the woman is another issue.... So much for informed consent. Why is this situation even an issue?

 

Moral Pilgrim writes:

 

So when you wonder whether it is appropriate to talk in real terms, I'd suggest that "telling it straight" would, in the long run serve abortion providers and clients.

 

Clients? Patients are clients?

 

And you have to laugh when Moral Pilgrim says that straight talk serves abortionists. The truth, that abortion kills a human being, hasn't done the abortion industry any good.

What Everyone Needs to Know about Late-Term Abortion

Does not seem to include what actually happens to the fetus, in the eyes of The Abortion Gang:

 

http://abortiongang.org/2010/07/what-everyone-needs-to-know-about-later-abortions/

 

I guess sticking a needle into a baby's heart or ripping him limb from limb is just a minor, insignificant detail for them.

 

 

Update

I am back from vacation.

 

So that means I go back to my horrible internet connection.

 

This situation will take several weeks to correct.

 

In the meanwhile, uneven blogging and moderation ahead.

 

Sorry about that!

MN Human Rights Department: Ladies' Night Discriminates

This is getting ridiculous:

The department, which is charged with enforcing the state's anti-discrimination laws, said it was pursuing cases against five businesses in Minneapolis and neighboring St. Paul that it said were violating the law -- though it declined to identify them, saying the names of charging parties and respondents are private until the cases are closed.

Isn't the secrecy a little like...The Inquisition?

Ignorant Feminist Abortion Supporter

It looks like someone needs remedial biology:

First, you say that abortion is the "killing of an unborn life". You are incorrect.

Well let's go over basic biology, shall we?

First question: is the fetus alive? Yes. How do we know? Because a fetus takes in nutrients, expends energy and grows.

The fetus therefore lives up to this definition of "life".

Okay, so what kind of lifeform is it?

Seeing as the fetus is born of two human beings, and every human fetus turns into a human being (i.e. no individual organism turns into another species) then we can safely conclude that a fetus is a human being.

I cannot believe there are still people out there who do not know that basic biological fact. I shouldn't be surprised, but I am.

Abortion terminates a pregnancy by expelling fetal tissue that requires the use of a woman's body for 9 months to survive. By scientific definition, it is a parasite.

Biological offspring cannot be parasites. Parasites are creatures who, in significant numbers, will cause significant damage or death to the host.

By design, parasites harm their hosts. The hosts are NOT designed to sustain the lives of the parasites.

However, the uterus is designed to sustain the life of the fetus.

Another point to take into account is that parasites are of a different species than their hosts.

Fetuses are of benefit to the species because their survival ensures the survival of the species. Large numbers of real parasites could mean the extinction of a species.

If fetuses were truly parasites, then ALL women would want to get rid of them because they would be harmful to all women. But they are not truly parasites. They are only considered parasites, i.e. by analogy.

Therefore, they do not meet the scientific definition of a parasite.

Forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy is the same as forcing you to support another human by handing over your body; your liberty; your health to keep them alive.

Guess what: we do that. We are forced to support other human beings by our taxes, our effort, our bodies, our liberty, and so forth.

Why? Because we have a moral responsibility towards other human beings.

We do not live in a society that says "oh, you're dying from my lack of assistance-- tough luck pal! I have the choice to ignore you."

What kind of heartless, callous society is that?

And I know the next response-- that we don't force people to give up their kidneys for others. No, we don't expect people to undergo the loss of an organ to help someone live. People have a right to bodily integrity.

But the difference between a kidney and a uterus is that a uterus exists for the survival of that other person. In fact, the placenta is a creation of the fertilization of the sperm and ovum. The placenta itself exists for NO OTHER REASON that to keep the baby alive. The uterus serves other functions (like hormonal regulation) but even hormonal regulation has an important reproductive function.

A woman's body is designed to be a home to a newly conceived human being. Therefore, it is entirely consistent with the notion of bodily integrity-- that is, to respect the body's proper design and health-- to prevent women from killing their unborn children.

Nobody requires you to "lend" your body to another human being to let them live, so why should women be required to do so? Answer: they should not.

That fetus is not just some stranger. That fetus is the woman's offspring, her child. That entails moral obligations.

The mother has no right to reject those obligations. Certainly not the right to kill an unborn child.

Gay American Idol Contestant Lays $300 Million Human Rights Complaint

Three Hundred Million Bucks???

Now we're talking!

I mean complainants are ridiculous to stick to damages in the tens of thousands of dollars.

You need to demand a payoff in the nine digits.

Goodness knows, if he hadn't been insulted and humiliated, he would have gone on and made at least as much. If he never developed that productive career, naturally, it's their fault.

It's hard not to be snarky at a case like this.

Abortion stops a beating ...

heart!

Or maybe it doesn't.

"But it was during this night when he was drunk that she revealed to him the truth, that she underwent an abortion because of the volatile nature of their relationship.

"She did not want to bring up a child into this bad situation. It was not to goad him, but was in response to what he was saying about her being unable to maintain a pregnancy."

She didn't want to bring a child into a bad situation, so she had him killed.

Dealing with domestic violence through violence against an innocent party. That makes sense.[/sarcasm]

Ignoring the moral dimension

Not Guilty writes:

Removing fetal tissue is the same, to me, as removing inflamed tonsils or an infected appendix.

(...)

Abortions are a medical procedure and they have a use in our society and they should not be treated any differently from any other medical procedure. This latter point is an important one.

I love how she ignores the BIG difference between abortion and an appendectomy.

Abortion KILLS a human being.

Appendices are not human beings and they are not killed.

Fetuses are creatures who are considered worthy of love, albeit not unconditional love.

Notice how people who are involved with abortion NEVER confront that moral conflict.

They can't.

Join me in bringing abortion medicine back to the mainstream.

Now why in the world would abortion NOT be in the mainstream...could it be that it has something to do with the fact that IT KILLS A HUMAN BEING?

Join me in saving the lives of doctors.

It's funny because the stigmatization of abortion is not a direct cause of the deaths of abortionists. If anything, abortionists are safer when abortion is ILLEGAL. Ever heard of an abortionist being shot in a country where abortion is illegal?

Now of course I'm being facetious. But it just goes to show how twisted their logic is.

If you want to stop terrorism, fight the terrorists, not the ideas.

Or should we ban all talk of Palestinian sovereignty until Hamas and Al-Qaida stop their terrorism?

Don't "Trust Women"

When they decide to visit a Crisis Pregnancy Centre.

For thousands of years, women have contemplated abortion, and have been persuaded not to have abortion, and they always will be.

Maybe Abortion Pushers should just butt out.

Oh, but wait, when women decide to have recourse to services offered by people who oppose their agenda, all of a sudden, they become paternalistic and "protective" of women.

Clearly they believe women are untrustworthy.

[/sarcasm]

One of the testifying moms, Danica Fountain of Arizona, says she felt pressured to abort her baby before she arrived at the Women’s Center of Tucson, a local pregnancy resource center. “I was absolutely shocked to see that this so called ‘blob of tissue,’ the term I so commonly heard people use when referencing a pregnancy this early on, was in fact a fully formed baby! She had a head, arms and legs," says Fountain.

“When I saw my baby’s heart beating I knew I would do anything to protect my child."

Interesting how abortion clinics are supposed to give "factual information" about pregnancy....but DON'T.

Projection maybe?

I can't get over how blind they are

I was reading a post at the Abortion Gang about how television shows don't promote abortion.

It was a pretty inspid post, because the conclusion was that poor-choicers should continue to speak out against it. Well DUH.

Poor-choicers don't seem to get what it is that drives people to reject abortion. It's like they all think that this rhetoric about "choice" and "being supportive of women's decisions" will pull the wool over people's eyes.

They don't get that all the poor-choice rhetoric in the world doesn't change this one fact:

abortion is the killing of innocent human life.

And that's how the majority of American teens feel.

So pop culture is going to go along with that, because advertizers don't want to alienate their market.

I just cannot get over how they treat the "abortion is murder" ethical problem as some kind of ancillary issue, like it's not central to their problem with pushing abortion.

Their comeback is to say that since women are the ones caring for the baby, women get a say over who gets to live in their uterus.

The problem with that idea is that it neglects the fact that the woman is the MOTHER of the baby, and therefore has a moral responsibility to that child. That she did not choose to create this child does not elimiate the relationship.

The second problem is that even if we eliminate the issue of the mother's relationship to the child, killing some unwanted resident of one's uterus is an extreme and callous solution to a problem.

It's like a woman's feelings or circumstances justify taking a human life.

Poor-choicers are so focused on their gynocentric ideology, that they forget the concerns of anyone else.

They are completely blind to the interests of the fetus, and they don't address those interests.

The more intelligent members of the movement know that. The rest don't care. They just do not care what happens to another prenatal human being. If the baby has to die in the name of women's empowerment, well too bad baby. Who cares, it's just a human life, right?

The real haves and have-nots in Canada

Stephen Taylor:

Indeed in this country, there are two groups of people. In fact, some would call these groups the haves and the have-nots. This is an not inaccurate way of describing it, but those that would might have the two switched. Canadians form two groups: those that receive from the government and those that pay to the government. Those who form — or are constituent to — organizations dependent on government policy (and spending) are firmly against the changes to the census. Those on the other side are largely ambivalent because they are the large, unorganized and unsubsidized net taxpaying masses.

...

Regarding the issue of the census:

If Stephen Harper succeeds in moving in this direction, he will be in the initial stages of dealing a huge blow to the welfare state. If one day we have no idea how many divorced Hindu public transit users there are in East Vancouver, government policy will not be concocted to address them specifically. Indeed if this group were organized (the DHPTUEV?) and looking for government intervention, they’d be against the census change. The trouble is that in Canada, the non-affiliated taxpayers not looking for a handout have not organized. Indeed, the only dog they have in this fight is the amount of tax they pay (aka “transfers”) to sustain the interests of others.

This is why laws get passed in spite of public opposition to them, such as the gay marriage law.

Lobby groups have the public money. They therefore have the resources to mobilize their voting blocks to pressure the government as well as opinion leaders.

We're all hypocrites in the end

Ain't it the truth:

By comparison, politics is difficult, not only because it isn't just a brutish game that people play for money – although, more than often, it can be that too – but because, no matter which team you decide to support, someone will end up calling you a hypocrite in the end.

If you're a lefty and you don't give change to the homeless guy in the street, for instance, your lefty friends will ask you where your social conscience has gone. And if you're a conservative and you do give change to the homeless guy in the street, your conservative friends will say hurry up and stop being such bleeding heart, you're just feeding his drug habit and someone else is going to get our dinner reservation. And of course, both sets of friends are right.

But then again, more often than not an accusation of hypocrisy is false. It's a convenient rhetorical device that relies on an apparent double standard, rather than a real one.

Seen at Kathy Shaidle's Blog

I just thought this was amusing given Kathy's temperament. :) I guess that would be logical to advertize this at a blog named Five Feet of Fury.

Somehow, I doubt there are going to be a lot of takers.

Why Monogamy?

St. Thomas Aquinas knew the problem with polygamy:

A study by advocacy group Sisters in Islam (SIS) found that the majority of first wives and children in polygamous families were unhappy with the arrangement.

...

"Generally, it is due to the fact that their right to demand (time and money) from their husband has decreased because their father now has another family," SIS researcher Syarifatul Adibah Mohamad Jodi told reporters.

...


However, husbands were not entirely happy with the situation, either. Many of those surveyed said they found it "most difficult to fulfill the needs of the first wife and their children".

Some people say that men are "naturally polygamous".

By that, they mean that men tend towards having sex with multiple partners.

But when it comes to forming relationships and families, men are NOT naturally polygamous.

One set of wife and kids is hard enough to manage without setting up another household.

You just don't have the time or the energy to devote yourself as you should to all the parties involved.

It's like signing up to be an absentee dad.

When you can't completely focus on one relationship, that relationship is more likely to fail.

That's why polygamy is a relationship that is largely based on reproduction and money.

Nothing wrong with reproduction or money. But reproduction and money do not a relationship make. Emotional fulfillment almost surely suffers.

If you're the first wife, and your husband finds another wife, you will feel like your love and loyalty was all for naught. You will feel gipped.

From a public policy standpoint, it makes no sense for the state to recognize polygamy. Polygamy does not ensure the optimal conditions for raising children, the future citizens of the state.

I know that many people will blindly advocate for polygamy on the foolhardy notion that the State should just recognize anything that the people want to do-- and not examine the nature of the issue or the possible outcomes.

When it comes to sex-related matters, people don't want to actually oppose the more libertine opinion. It can set you up for being ridiculed as some kind of prude.

These "prudes"-- hard-working, married, monogamous, faithful people are the happiest people in society. They can't be that stupid.

Abortionist Petition Makes a Mockery of the Declaration of Independence

Taken from:

 

 

http://ga1.org/campaign/provider_bill_of_rights_2010

 

 

Abortionists are up in arms that their practice-- that of killing prenatal human beings-- is treated differently. They demand an end to the stigma of their profession, and to all the restrictions they face.

 

While I think abortionists deserve compassion in the sense that they need spiritual help, I also think that they don't deserve any kind of respect for their practice.

 

 

QUOTE:

 

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that the people of this country entrust their health and well-being to doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals; that among these professionals are those who provide abortion, a safe, legal medical procedure;

 

 

Yeah, YOU hold those truths to be self-evident. Most of America doesn't.

 

 

QUOTE:

 

Despite the equal intrinsic value of all medical professionals and all patients,

 

 

But not of all human beings.... Note the phrasing...

 

I do not support violence in any way shape or form against abortionists or their accomplices. Abortionists are humans, too. Not to mention that poor-choices make political hay of that violence.

 

But that will not deter me or the pro-life movement from telling it the way it is. This is not about "personal opposition to abortion". This is about the reality of the equal value of ALL human beings, and their inalienable right to life, even in the womb.

 

They never address the issue of the fetus. They can't. They know they can't win on that point. All they can do is try to deflect attention from what it is they do.

 

Abortionists, you kill human beings. And demanding that you STOP being treated as people who kill human beings will not make the stigma go away.

 

You will not be viewed as the same. Signing a petition, and getting others to sign, will not change that.

 

Fetuses deserve love, not death.

 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal."

 

Too bad abortionists don't know the meaning of THAT phrase.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rate your church at ChurchRater.com

ChurchRater.com has been relaunched:

 

http://www.churchrater.com

 

The purpose of this website is to point you to the right Church.

 

It's like other rating websites like RateMyMD.com

 

I think this is desperately needed. It would save a lot of time and grief for many church- (and parish) shoppers.

 

They're focused on American Protestant churches, but I have found Catholic churches, and Canadian churches.

 

 

That didn't take long...

HEADLINE:

After exposé, Vicariate of Rome asks clergy leading 'double lives' to
leave priesthood

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/after-expos-vicariate-of-rome-asks-clergy-leading-double-lives-to-leave-priesthood

Now why can't the Vatican) (and/or) other dioceses) make the same
request of priests who won't teach the Catholic Faith?

Was that so hard?

Ontario government to propose wage freeze for public sector

I predict utter failure:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario/ontario-government-to-propose-wage-freeze-for-public-sector/article1649078/

McGuinty will feel the heat and cave, especially since next year is an election year. He's not going to win votes from the right on this, especially after the HST issue.

The only way to balance the budget is to cut spending.

Rate of HIV infection up in Canada

Researchers fail to cite most obvious cause....

Lack of personal responsibility:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/new-hiv-infections-in-canada-back-to-1982-levels/article1648558/

They say that one in four HIV carriers don't know their status.

If you're going to forego common sense on issues regarding sex, you're
not going to bother getting an HIV test.

Why we can't get priests to teach about the Culture of Life

HEADLINE:

Gay Priest Scandal Rocks Rome

H/T: Creative Minority Report:

http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2010/07/gay-priest-scandal-rocks-rome.html

Details at the Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1297083/Gay-priest-sex-scandal-undercover-Berlusconi-reporter-films-clerics-gay-clubs.html#ixzz0uW2cWX8W

QUOTE:

In its preview Panorama insisted that it had carried out through
checks and established that all three priests were bona fide but would
not reveal their real names or any other details.

...
That's a shame. If a priest is being that scandalous, I think we
should know about it.

QUOTE:
Panorama editor Giorgio Mule said: 'This was a two week investigation
and was not aimed at creating a scandal but showing that a certain
section of the clergy behaves very differently.'
...

You have GOT to be kidding me. Not aimed at creating a scandal???

Yeah right, pal.

Should twins conjoined at the head be aborted?

Dahn Batchelor raises the issue

Just some background info about Dahn: he's a retired lawyer and he was conceived through rape and thankful his mother never aborted. But he is not in the pro-life camp. But he is certainly not keen on abortion.

(I hope this blog by email thing works)

---

UIPDATE: I need practice with this blog by email thing. It seems to be the least frustrating way to blog right now.

UK's Youngest Premature Twins Born

Amelia was born at 23 weeks, 2 days gestation. Arthur, her brother, was born ten days later.

Take a look at this baby. Feminists say that when this baby is in the womb, she's not a person. She's not anything, legally. She's a nothing. Stick a needle in her heart and induce a heart attack? No big deal. That's your right! Trust women, and all that.

And if a baby like this has to die in the womb, oh well, tough luck baby. You don't matter in the womb. All that matters is the woman's autonomy. Everyone else's concerns are secondary.

47% of Gay Couples Have “Sex Agreements” – Only 45% Monogomous: Study

Shocking, I know.

I can hear the comeback to that story.

"We're just as unfaithful as straights-- we're just more honest about it."

Like monogamy is a bad thing.

If marriage is about sex, then monogamy makes no sense. Polygamy is the natural choice.

But marriage is about building a relationship.

Building a relationship takes a lot of effort. It's harder to build 2 or 3 simultaneous relationships than to build one.

Let's face it: women are high maintenance. Women like to have the exclusive attention of their husbands. They need the presence of their husbands during their pregnancy. Someone has to bring home the bacon.

Once again, progressives think they're being forward-thinking when in fact they give women the shaft. I'm sure feminists are all about autonomy and choices, rather than what women really want and need.

Marriage protects women. Remember that.

Feminism has never been about women

Abortion Gang blogger reveals what the rest of us knew:

Feminism has never been for promoting women for gender’s sake. In fact suggestions that they have done so are essentialist by assuming that women think and act with some hive mind and are as interchangeable as a stepford-wife.

Feminism is about a subgroup of women dictating to the rest of us what our rights are. Don't want abortion to be a right? Tough luck, we say so!

Feminism has never been about promoting women for gender's sake. However, opponents of feminism are tarred as opponents to women and not as opponents to ideas about women. If you're going to say that feminism is about ideas-- not women as women-- then you can't automatically assume that those who oppose your ideas are anti-women.

Feminism loses its legitimacy when it excludes those people whose welfare it seeks to advance. It becomes, in a sense, paternalistic.

Poor-choicer expects media to shill for abortion

Rob at The Abortion Gang is upset at Emily Bazelon, who wrote an article for the New York Times called The New Abortion Providers. Rob says that she is a known advocate for "choice". But he feels that she overstepped the bounds in revealing the behind-the-scenes activities of pro-aborts trying to make abortion mainstream in university faculties.

Perhaps in the future, journalists will think twice about how much is necessary to tell the story, and pay more attention to the point where they cross the line leaving responsible reporting behind.

It seems that they take it for granted that "objective" media is about serving ideological ends, not giving all sides of the story.

Shocking, isn't it?

VIDEO: Revamarie Savage is silent no more about her abortion

Adoptees want the right to see birth certificate

Report:

In no legislation or on any adoption contract does it state why an adopted person is not entitled to his/her own birth certificate. Most adoption laws were created to "protect" the infant from the stigma of bastardization, but those provisions are no longer needed.

Comments issues

At the time of posting, I'm having trouble with the comments.

I apologize for the inconvenience.

The last batch of 9 messages were all approved.

I want to reinstall the template, but I'm having internet connection issues, which I cannot resolve for several weeks, due to a number of factors that have to do with my recent move to a new house.

So sorry about that. Will try to get around to reinstalling them.

Blogger compares so-cons to Muslims

Dr. Dawg:

The only real differences I can see between some social conservatives and their Islamist brethren, in fact, are pork and alcohol.

Yeah so-cons are CONSTANTLY issuing fatwas to kill people they disagree with. They stone women who engage in adultery. They regularly engage in suicide bombing. They beat up the women who won't wear a veil over their head.

Yep. Exactly alike.

Show the Truth: One Woman's Experience

Received by email:

I just returned from three days spent “on the line” with Show the Truth tour. It was exhausting, exhilarating, and inspiring.

Show the Truth is democracy in action. The graphic signs of aborted babies are a silent testimony to the 110,000 babies killed through abortion each year. We stood on public property, between the sidewalk and the curb; peacefully displaying our message- abortion kills an innocent life.

The days are filled with prayer. Participants attend daily Mass, and pray before and after each demonstration. Rosaries are not only in evidence, but are put to good use during the day. This infusion of prayer is a critical component of the mission.

The required organizational skills are impressive. Participants come for a day, a few days, or the entire week. Some sleep in the church basement, some drive back to their homes at night. But despite the fluctuating numbers, all must be fed at regular intervals. Along with food considerations, there is a thorough accumulation of ‘extras’ at the ready- raincoats, umbrellas, sunscreen, lawn chairs, air mattresses and a never ending supply of water bottles. The Canadian Armed Forces could take a lesson or two!

There are three daily demonstrations, lasting 1 ½ hours each. We stood on both sides of busy intersections, our signs angled to maximize their exposure to the passing cars. It must be staggering to encounter this horrific display on a casual drive to the store or to work.

The signs upset people- a Catholic school principal called the police on us, demanding that we leave the school/church parking lot. Guelph and Waterloo campus security police asked us to leave. A Brantford shopping mall security asked us to vacate the parking lot entirely. Negotiations occurred regularly with the local police. People shouted obscenities at us from cars, they yelled angrily at us on street corners.

There were happy moments- listening to the youth singing at the back of the bus, having great discussions with pedestrians, the laughter that occurred throughout the day, the giggles of the young children at break times.

There were poignant moments- two priests napping side by side on the bus, a woman who sobbed on the main street in Guelph when she first saw the signs, and a pastor who, upon seeing the signs, went out and purchased water bottles for the entire crew and then delivered them along with encouraging words.

Perhaps the most inspiring moments came in Cambridge. Often at great personal expense, local pro-lifers had worked diligently for years to ensure that abortions were not performed in their town. But I was unaware, until after the Show the Truth demonstration, that Cambridge was an ‘abortion-free zone.’ I offered literature to cars waiting at the stoplights, and I was amazed to discover that Cambridge drivers were overwhelmingly pro-life. In fact, 50% of the people I encountered identified themselves as pro-life. The majority of the cars took the literature I offered. Some asked me before I could even offer it! Many had very encouraging words to say. It was the highlight of the week.

There are some who say that we should not upset people with these unsettling signs. But they neglect to mention the unborn in this discussion. It is Show the Truth participants who represent the voice of the unborn.

The media has refused to cover the facts of the abortion story and abortionists continue to tell women it is “just a blob.” Show the Truth participants are willing to brave the wind, rain and sun to stand and show the truth of abortion. Real, live babies are being brutally murdered in our nation. Rather than a passive, hope-for-the-best approach, Show the Truth takes the truth to the streets in an undeniable fashion.

Please consider joining them for the Toronto tour in August. You could also donate to the cause through their webpage :

www.showthetruth.ca


Kathie Hogan
Parry Sound

The Ethics of Keepsake Ultrasounds

Loved this abstract:

In many countries "fetal portrait studios" and "prenatal boutiques" have sprung up offering keepsake videos and images of the unborn child to pregnant women. People with little or no formal training in ultrasound often operate these studios. Professional associations of physicians have been highly critical of these developments and demand legislation to crack down on what they see as a potentially hazardous practice that might be harming the fetus. However, it is well known that physicians' wives, daughters, in-laws and friends will receive excellent ultrasound images of the future family member and keepsake videos, albeit in a medical setting and performed by skilled and certified professionals. The ethics of reserving something that the public obviously craves for your own select group is difficult to argue. It is quite possible that in 10 years' time there will be mobile phones with built-in ultrasound transducers with which women can watch their fetus at all times during pregnancy. Until then, the medical ultrasound community should adapt to changing attitudes and expectations and accept the reality of entertainment ultrasound and do its best to regulate it.

Sometimes I wonder if the objection to keepsake ultrasound has more to do with the abortion issue than the actual risks.

The Truth about Stats Regarding Unsafe Abortions

Says a Harvard Study:

Despite the realized importance of unsafe abortion as a global health problem, reliable data are difficult to obtain, especially in countries where abortion is illegal. Estimates for most developing countries are based on limited and incomplete sources of data.

Ya don't say.

Do you think that those stats might be just a little off?

The New Abortion Providers

This article is taken from the Wall Street Journal, but it's republished on a Bioethics website.

It's about the training of the next generation of abortionists.

It appears that many abortionists are quietly working in medical faculties,away from the prying eyes of protesters, where they are trying to make abortion mainstream.

City of Toronto Spends $30000 on Cigarettes for the Homeless

Says Toronto mayoral candidate Rob Ford.

Your tax dollars at work! :)

I smell a Human Rights Complaint

Woman claims rights violated when barber wouldn't give her a hair cut


Why is this even a news story?

How did this journalist get word of it She hasn't even taken legal action yet.

It looks like there was some kind of collusion to get this story in the paper. It's like the CBC turned into a platform for a liberal agenda. Really hard to believe, I know.

Psst...A haircut is not a right.

And by the way, if you get a set of clippers and find a willing friend, you can do your own sideburns. It'll save you money in the long run.

ATTN Residents of OTTAWA: Protest McGuinty's Eco Tax Julty 17th

When:  Saturday, 17th of July, 2010, 12:00 noon to 2:00 pm

Where:  Premier Dalton McGinty’s Ottawa office at 1795  Kilborn Ave.

More commentary at Xanthippa's Chamberpot

Pass it on!

Sexy Pamela Anderson Ad Urges People to Go Vegetarian

Men, help me out here.

Wouldn't this ad encourage you to be a meat-eater?

You know, as in the phrase: "you're so cute I could eat you. "

Am I wrong?

Feminist seeks to organize a counter-demonstrate at Show the Truth in Burlington

It appears that a feminist who blogs under the name of "Not Guilty" (NG) has learned that Show the Truth will be coming to her home town of Burlington, Ontario on Friday, and she is looking to organize a counter-demonstration.

NG has prepared a number of signs for the occasion.

I cannot be there in Burlington to bear witness to the Gospel of Life.

Nonetheless, I can offer up my own graphics for the occasion.

The old saying is true: a picture is worth a thousand words.

And in case you're interested, she will be tweeting using the #streetcornersforchoice hash tag.

There's another means to witness to the truth.

Feminism: the right not to take responsibility...

of nurturing your unborn child:

But I think we can agree the core of feminism is about gender equality and equity; about allowing people of all genders equitable and real autonomy and agency, including the right to decide who or what we will allow to take up or keep residence inside our own bodies,

Yeah, because embryos just move in there on their own volition.

She treats the embryo as a resident, but forgets that that "resident" is one's CHILD, to whom one has a moral responsibility.

But the only thing that matters is autonomy. If ANYTHING gets in the way of that autonomy, no matter of how valuable-- like someone else's life-- it must take second place.

and who, besides ourselves, we will choose to be responsible for and beholden to.

As opposed to WHAT we will be beholden to, like absolute and universal values.

The value of full ownership of our bodies and lives isn’t really about making the playing field level with men. It’s about having rights for a whole set of situations, circumstances and issues completely unique to people with working ovaries and which burdens us the most.

Unique rights for unique situations. So feminist...

It’s about the quality and integrity of our own lives and our ownership of them, no matter what the hell is going on with men.

"TRUST WOMEN!"

This is how stupid feminism is. Even when it defies its own parameters of common sense (don't bring children into a violent relationship) it adheres blindly to its own slogans.

(Read all the situations cited. Interesting list).

Look, if a fetus isn't a human being with rights, how are you helping this woman by supporting an obviously stupid choice?

It's not helpful (assuming the fetus is not a human being). It's ridiculous. You would be doing her a favour to persuade her to abort.

But their mantra of autonomy is so extreme, that it doesn't matter what the result is.

Just as long as autonomy is respected.

And if the woman puts herself and others in a whole lot more trouble because of it, well tough luck, don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Another woman’s life and choices are not mine to make or dictate,

Isn't it interesting that persuading a woman to abort is dictating.

Leading a woman to one choice or another is not dictating. Seriously. You are still an autonomous human being if you are persuaded to pick one choice over another.

Pregnancy can always potentially hurt the woman who is pregnant or a child that she delivers physically, emotionally, psychologically, economically and in a myriad of other ways, sometimes for lifetimes

Pregnancy SOMETIMES hurts.

Abortions ALWAYS hurt.

So, as with any situation like that, we do triage. We look first and foremost at who may be or has been hurt or harmed the most,

Harmed the most?

You mean a fetus losing his life is not harmed the most?

Hey, as long as a woman's autonomy isn't violated, that's all that matters...

To determine that, we must listen to and privilege the people who have expressed being hurt or harmed,

And ignore those who can't express the harm they've suffered...

FRC Report Addresses ‘Faulty’ Fetal Pain Study

Says the Family Research Council:

"RCOG is using a faulty definition of pain in this study," said Jeanne Monahan, Director of the FRC's Center for Human Dignity. "A number of experts in the field of fetal development ... previously have refuted the idea that the cortex needs to be fully developed for an unborn baby to feel pain."

She continued: "On the contrary, it is possible that unborn babies between 20-30 weeks of development can experience greater pain than a full-term newborn or older child."

...

The RCOG report is based on the idea that the cortex is required to feel pain. The FRC’s report, however, points out that even babies born without fully developed cortexes "respond to noxious stimuli."

Southern Baptists Reflect on Their Divorce Rate

Details Here.

When you have no "get-out-of-jail free" card, you tend to work harder (and smarter) to make it better.

We Catholics should also ponder our de facto divorces in the forms of annulments.

If our Church is issuing annulments left and right, then we are doing something very wrong. Annulments should be exceptional, not routine.

I knew a canonist who said that problem is not just that marriages fail, it's that priests allow marriages that never should have happened in the first place. They don't take the time to investigate whether all the elements of a sacramental marriage are present.

I'll confess that I have been mad enough at my husband to want to leave (and to be fair, he's probably thought of it, too). Then I sat down and thought about the cost-- what it would do to my children. I said to myself: I'm not going to screw up my kids' lives for MY PROBLEM.

When you realize what's at stake, that it's not just about YOU, then you're a lot more conciliatory. Just because you're unhappy now doesn't mean you'll be unhappy 6 months or a year down the line.

And reading a lot of Dr. Phil helped. When it comes to making a marriage happy, the most important person in the marriage is YOU.

Secularist doesn't get it

From The Abortioneers:

The dilemma: I can hardly relate to clients who worry about god and if this god is going to forgive them for their abortion(s).

(...)

I just want to say to said bright, capable young woman, "You know. I hate to break it to ya, but there is no god.Or if there is a god, this god is sooooo not going to care about if you have an abortion or not. If there's a god, it might be a teensy bit more caught up with more important matters like, um, global warming, civil wars across the world, genocides. That sort of thing."

Yeah, mass killing of prenatal human beings is of NO CONCERN to God.

I keep re-reading literature from RCRC (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice) and other documents, but it's not really helping me get back to understanding this spiritual concern she has.

Now why would God be concerned with the killing of a human being? What problem could he possibly have with that?

You wonder if they follow the same abortion debate that we do.

Minnesota reveals abortion information

Becomes hotbed of abortion-related violence.

Not.

Jill Stanek's 10 Tips for Pro-Life Bloggers

Right here.

I would also add:

* When possible, add images. I know I often don't for lack of time. If you're good at creating your own images, even better!

* Try to be unique. There are predictable pro-life responses to every article. Try to draw out an idea or reaction that could come from no one else.

* If you have unique facts and data to bring to the fore, please do so! There are lots of things we don't know, facts that are sitting in university libraries and all kinds of databases that could be of use. Real Choice does a good job of gathering information on women who died from abortion. Can you find and scan original pictures from old textbooks? Can you cite OB\GYN textbooks for interesting information late-term abortions? Those are just two ideas.

We need MORE. More original information, insight, images, reporting, videos, EVERYTHING. The more, the better.

Oh those male progressive bloggers

About Rona Ambrose, BigCityLib writes:

And I'm trying to find another picture of her that will show whether she's "built" or not, so I can assign a definitive 1 to 10 score.

It's okay to objectify female politicians when they're conservative.

I don't expect a lot of feminists to pipe up about this, either, seeing as this kind of thing serves their purpose. They want more women in politics. Just not the Conservative kind. Those women can stay home for all they care.

Stop an Iranian Woman from Being Executed-- SIGN THIS PETITION!

From FreeSakineh.org:

Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, Iranian Mother, could be put to death at any moment

July 12, 2010: IRAN: Judiciary official says woman to be stoned for husband’s murder, not just adultery.

An Iranian woman faces death after having been tortured for alleged adultery.

In 2006 Ashtiani was convicted of having an ‘illicit relationship’ and received 99 lashes. Since this time the 43 year old has been in jail where she recanted the confession she made under the duress of the lashing.

Just recently she was dragged before a court and retried. Again she was convicted and this time, despite the punishment she has already endured, sentenced to be stoned to death. This barbaric practice involves wrapping a woman tightly from head to toe in white cloth, burying her up to her shoulders in sand, and pelting her to death with large stones.

Yesterday late in the afternoon Iran’s government denied reports that Ashtiani will be executed by stoning, though her death sentence may still be carried out by some other method, likely hanging.

Knowledgeable Iranian human rights activists, including Amnesty International, question the veracity of this statement and remain deeply concerned about Ashtiani’s fate.

WE must not let Ashtinai become another victim of the debasing, inhuman treatment of women that has become the daily reality in Iran. Make your voice count and encourage others to do the same.

Take action against the practice of stoning; take action against abuse of women, sign this petition

Please sign the petition. It doesn't cost you anything, and the momentum generated by this could help save a life. I also encourage you to blog this.

Little Shop of Horrors

Abortion Clinic Owner Responds with Chainsaw as Radio Blares: 'God Bless Pro-Lifers!'

Ah yes. Once again, evidence of that astonishing standard of professional medical attention that we have come to expect from an abortion clinic.

Yeah, a staffer wielding a chainsaw is just the thing a single young girl needs to inspire confidence in the medical personnel, wouldn't you say?

Keep up the good PR! :)

The Case FOR Abortion Restrictions

From a post arguing against abortion restrictions at TheAbortion Gang:

What the decision in Morgentaler means is that technically a woman can walk into a clinic at 35 weeks and abort. Legally, there is nothing stopping her. Practically speaking, even if a woman were to ask to terminate a healthy fetus at 35 weeks, chances are next to zero that a doctor would do it.

But wait a minute….what about Trust Women? (See below). Shouldn’t the medical system acquiesce to ALL abortion requests, regardless of the motivation and gestational stage? Doesn’t the medical system exist to service every woman’s reproductive choice no matter what the case?

Abortionist Warren Hern reported in an interview with Esquire magazine that he once refused to do an abortion on a victim of rape who was 35 weeks pregnant. Granted, he refused on the grounds that he could have lost his medical license. But he also said that he didn’t have a lot of sympathy for her as she had not gotten around to doing anything about it.

Is a woman sovereign over her body or not?

Realistically, and most importantly, women don’t do that.

Abortionist Warren Hern says otherwise. So does ethicist Margaret Somerville, who reports she was consulted on a case of a woman who wanted to abort her child for a cleft palate in the late third trimester.

The latest abortion I have ever seen is for a baby at 36 weeks gestation. In Quebec.

This is where the “trust women” phrase comes into play. You, me, the government, everybody, needs to trust that women will do the right thing.

Yeah because women are infallible in their judgement. They would never do anything to harm themselves, their family or anyone else. You can’t trust a woman to get silicone breast implants; nor can you trust a woman to know whether her five-year-old needs to be in a car seat.

But by God, when it comes to killing her unborn child, a woman’s judgement should NEVER be questioned because she cannot possibly be wrong. And if you dare suggest that women are WRONG when it comes to the killing of preborn human beings, well that makes you a misogynist.

Question women’s judgement when it comes to any other issue.

NEVER when it comes to abortion.

Women 'Must Be Prepared to Kill' Unborn Children to Protect Autonomy: Times Writer

LONDON, U.K., July 6, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - After contemplating the immense mysteries of human life and sacrificial love in comparison to a woman's "right to fertility control," a writer for the Times of London concludes that attempts by pro-aborts to dismiss the life of an unborn child are a "convenient lie" hiding the fact that, "Yes, abortion is killing.”

“But,” she concludes, “it's the lesser evil."

Translation:

Other people's LIVES (never mind rights!) matter less than my own.

How typically feminist.

The lesser evil is not taking on the responsibility of this unwanted baby.

No. The lesser evil is killing an innocent human being.

But, she insists, "you cannot separate women’s rights from their right to fertility control."

Yeah. Someone else has to die in the name of freedom.

Again, so typically feminist.

Usually when you kill in the name of freedom, you kill oppressor. You kill the beings who are forcing you to live in unjust conditions.

You don't kill innocent by-standers.

Unborn children may be inconvenient, but they're not oppressors. They never chose their situation.

They simply await to be loved.

The autonomy envisioned by feminists is a ludicrous illusion. There is no such thing as an autonomy so absolute that it gives you the right to take no responsibility for another human being, and it especially does not give you the right not to kill them.

Think about it.

How selfish is an ideology that says: you have ZERO responsibility towards a given human being in need?

How selfish is an ideology that says that the state has no business protecting a whole class of human beings for any reason whatsoever?

Autonomy is all that matters to feminists. THEIRS. If a baby has to suffer and die because of it, well too bad, so sad. Women's rights matter more than fetal rights.

---

Internet connection is still shaky. I'm having technical issues that I don't want to get into. Expect more light blogging.

Linda Gibbons is No Criminal

Received by email:

Karla Holmolka is Canada's most notorious female criminal. The crimes she committed could only be described as heinous. She was incarcerated in 1995, and released in 2005, serving ten years of jail time. Ten years for the brutal slaying of three innocent girls.

Linda Gibbons has been in and out of jail for the past fifteen years. When you add it up, her jail time totals over seven years now. This last session has been a long one, with Linda in jail for over 570 consecutive days. So, what is Linda's grave crime?

Linda is guilty of praying in front of abortion clinics and for offering counsel to the women who are about to undergo an abortion. Many of you will be astounded to learn that this is a crime in Canada. But it is the truth.

In 1994, Ontario NDP Premier Bob Rae and Attorney General Marion Boyd decided to clamp down on pro-life picketing by passing an injunction that would not allow pro-life people inside a 60 foot "bubble zone" around specific abortion clinics in Ontario. It was no secret that Bob Rae's NDP government of the day was adamantly pro-abortion.

Pro-lifers were upset by the injunction. They felt duty-bound to attempt to counsel women to reconsider their decision to abort. Pro-lifers wanted to be present outside the abortion clinics, to be a prayerful and peaceful presence. The injunction forced pro-lifers across the street from the clinics, where they were virtually ineffective.

Linda Gibbons believes that she must answer to a higher authority than the provincial government when it comes to the issue of abortion. She thinks the legislation is shortsighted, as it does not allow women the opportunity for last minute assistance and it does not allow pro-lifers the opportunity to offer that assistance.

Linda is not willing to stand, ineffectively, across the street from the abortuary. Furthermore, she believes that sidewalks are public space.

And so, Linda's epic battle against the provincial government of Ontario began on September 2, 1994 when she was first arrested for violating the bubble zone injunction. Linda has been arrested many times in the intervening fifteen years. She refuses to sign the conditions that will allow her bail, i.e. not to appear within the bubble zone. She does her jail time, and then goes back to the streets to continue her pro-life efforts.

Many of you will wonder what motivates Linda. Many of you will think her actions are futile. Or foolish.

She calls it a "street ministry" and firmly believes that "we need to maintain our witness in front of abortuaries." Linda's guide is her bible, which clearly states, "We ought to obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29) Through all her jail time, Linda's bible has been her support and comfort. She has also been sustained by the outpouring of mail that she receives daily, from around the world.

Linda does not hide the fact that her own life was touched by abortion. She wants to spare women and men the pain that she experienced. The guilt that she feels because of her abortion motivates her to help others. She stands outside the abortion clinic, and offers to talk to the women going in. No hard sell and no heckling. Her manner is prayerful and peaceful.

But it is not lawful for Linda Gibbons to stand on the sidewalk and offer comfort, and so she is quickly re-arrested and returned to jail.

Slowly but surely, Linda's plight is gaining public attention. Mainstream media have no ink to spare for a simple grandmother who refuses to accept the legality of a 1994 provincial injunction. Unless it’s from a “pro-choice” perspective, abortion is not a story that the mainstream media likes to visit anyway. But Linda's persistence and perseverance are so extraordinary, that the story is gaining ground. Pro-life blogs mention her name frequently, and her story appeared, albeit briefly, in a recent National Post article.

Not many of us would be willing to go to jail to maintain our personal principles. Linda Gibbons is putting her pro-life beliefs on the line, willing to do serious jail time. Many consider Linda to be a pro-life heroine, a prisoner of conscience. REAL Women agrees with them.

To send a note of encouragement to Linda Gibbons, write:

Vanier Center for Women,
655 Martin Street, Box 1040,
Milton, ON, L9T 5E6

Rwandan Genocide Rape Victims Grateful for Children Conceived in Rape

KIGALI, Rwanda, June 30, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The tribal genocide of 1994 in Rwanda resulted in more than 800,000 Rwandan deaths and countless women suffering rape at the hands of the Hutu militia who were ordered to kill off the country's minority Tutsi tribe.

Now, 16 years later, the children of the raped women are facing the reality of how they were conceived. They and their mothers are looking for acceptance in a society that is still healing from the horrors of the past.

One Tutsi woman who barely escaped with her life after having been raped on three different occasions by several assailants, told the BBC in a special report that she is deeply thankful for her daughter, despite the circumstances of her conception. She said there was never a time when she did not love her.

And no, not all women love their babies at first:

But now, thanks to the support of other survivors of rape, his mother has learned to separate her son from the hatred she feels for those who raped her.

"I saw him as a killer, a son of a killer - but, of course, he was innocent, it wasn't him who did these things. I found other women who had similar problems as me. I didn't know that there were others who suffered the same. I thought I was alone," she says.

"So now I've changed. Now he sees that I'm close to him. We go out together. We walk around in Kigali."

In the West, we have the reflex of thinking all babies conceived in rape will be aborted. We think of the horror of the act, and suspect that the child will always evoke that horror.

Here's what people forget.

People can and do change their feelings.

Victims of sexual assault do sometimes forgive their attackers. In some circumstances, they even develop good relationships with them.

Forgiveness exists.

Forgiveness doesn't mean you deny what happened was wrong. It simply means you move on. It means you direct your will and your emotional life in such a way that you no longer harbour anger and resentment so that you're set free.

People do that.

A mother of baby conceived in rape is not condemned to hate her child if she chooses. She is not condemned to relive the horror.

There is freedom from the past.

---

PS: I'm still really busy because of the move. I suspect it will be this way for many weeks.

Pope Benedict XVI on Freedom

Freedom is not only a gift, but also a summons to personal responsibility. Americans know this from experience – almost every town in this country has its monuments honoring those who sacrificed their lives in defense of freedom, both at home and abroad. The preservation of freedom calls for the cultivation of virtue, self-discipline, sacrifice for the common good and a sense of responsibility towards the less fortunate. It also demands the courage to engage in civic life and to bring one's deepest beliefs and values to reasoned public debate. In a word, freedom is ever new. It is a challenge held out to each generation, and it must constantly be won over for the cause of good (cf. Spe Salvi, 24). Few have understood this as clearly as the late Pope John Paul II. In reflecting on the spiritual victory of freedom over totalitarianism in his native Poland and in eastern Europe, he reminded us that history shows, time and again, that “in a world without truth, freedom loses its foundation”, and a democracy without values can lose its very soul (cf. Centesimus Annus, 46). Those prophetic words in some sense echo the conviction of President Washington, expressed in his Farewell Address, that religion and morality represent “indispensable supports” of political prosperity.

++ Pope Benedict XVI, speech at the White House in April 2008