VIDEO: Islamic "re-education" centres in Malaysia

UK Judge to Pedophile: ‘I Don’t Criticize You for Being…Attracted to Children’

What? It's his sexual orientation. He was born that way. #sarcasm

H/T: 5FF

Scottish Study Examines Parenting and Teen Sexuality

Just interesting:

Abstract [Formatted for greater clairity].

CONTEXT: Extensive research has explored the relationship between parenting and teenagers' sexual risk-taking. Whether parenting is associated with wider aspects of teenagers' capacity to form satisfying sexual relationships is unknown.

METHODS: Self-reported data were collected in 2007 from 1,854 students, whose average age was 15.5 years, in central Scotland. Multivariate analyses examined associations between parenting processes and sexual outcomes (delayed first intercourse, condom use and several measures reflecting the context or anticipated context of first sex).

RESULTS: Parental supportiveness was positively associated with all outcomes (betas, 0.1-0.4), and parental values restricting intercourse were positively associated with all outcomes except condom use (0.1-0.5).

Parental monitoring was associated only with delayed intercourse (0.2) and condom use (0.2);

Parental rules about TV content were associated with delayed intercourse (0.7) and expecting sex in a relationship, rather than casually (0.8).

Frequency of parental communication about sex and parental values endorsing contraceptive use were negatively associated with teenagers' delayed intercourse (-0.5 and -0.3, respectively).

Parents' contraceptive values were negatively associated with teenagers' expecting sex in a relationship (-0.5).

Associations were partly mediated by teenagers' attitudes, including value placed on having sex in a relationship.

CONCLUSIONS: Parents may develop teenagers' capacity for positive and safe early sex by promoting skills and values that build autonomy and encourage sex only within a relationship. Interventions should promote supportive parenting and transmission of values, avoid mixed messages about abstinence and contraception, and acknowledge that teenagers may learn more indirectly than directly from parents about sex.

St. Joseph's Parish in Ottawa: An agenda of dissent

I just recently broke the story of St. Joseph Parish's Young Adult Group invitation to the Gay Pride Parade.

I just poked around their blog to see what else I could find. Consider this entry:

St. Joseph’s Parish is in the midst of fine-tuning its new communications strategy. An important part of this process included asking parishioners at all masses, including students and young adults at university mass, to tell us what draws them to our church. We received a wide array of responses, but some of the adjectives that kept coming up in dozens of responses included: welcoming, friendly, progressive and liberal. Here’s how our parishioners and guests see St. Joseph’s Parish:

Invitation to be the Spirit – not shackled by prescriptive Catholicsm but open to the paths of the mystics – accepting – weekly reinforcement of us in God and God in us.
...
Equal partners ( women – men, lay-religious; young-old) parish members make decisions, take responsibility are accountable – no clericalism
...

Social justice inclusiveness, re-claiming Catholicism

...

Care for the poor, everyone having a place, liturgy, deep, meaningful, communal, progressive, Living the Spirit of Vatican II

...

Realistic, 21st century – catholic teaching while respecting the history of a 2000+ year old tradition – hopefully not going backward. Should St. Joe’s begin to return to the proceedings of the church prior to Vatican II – I will reluctantly say farewell.

...


A dogma-free place and community of worship, a faith-celebratory place

Why is this kind of heterodoxy allowed to happen? How do you expect the faith to be transmitted, when the people in charge don't make it a requirement.

There are tons of other churches they can "dogma-free" and not be "shackled by prescriptive Catholicism".

Catholicism is what the Church is about.

Albany Bishop Hubbard to celebrate Mass for dissident homosexual group

Gee, I wonder why gay marriage was legalized in New York?

Islamic extremists set up Sharia law controlled zones in British cities

This kind of thing makes me want to go in their area and break as many sharia laws as I can. I would sport tank top and bike shorts, wear my hair long and uncovered and maybe start street preaching about Jesus Christ being the Saviour of the world. To men.

‘This is the best way for dealing with drunkenness and loutishness, prostitution and the sort of thug life attitude you get in British cities.’

Bull. This is just the beginning of an intended take over. You don't need sharia to patrol the streets and stop criminal behaviour.

I think people should go in and assert their freedom. You can't expect the government to deal with it. The will of the people must prevail.

H/T: The Black Kettle

Former University of Ottawa prof says blog post wasn't racist

I don't know about the merits of the case, but I just thought this was interesting:

OTTAWA — A former University of Ottawa physics professor being sued for defamation by another professor from the same school argues that the lawsuit should be dismissed.


Denis Rancourt, fired from the physics department in 2009, is being sued for $1 million in damages by law professor Joanne St. Lewis, who alleges he made racist statements about her on his blog in discussing her professional relationship with university president Allan Rock, a former federal Liberal cabinet minister.

Pittsburgh Abortionists Caught Dealing Drugs

Another one for the abortion is a shady business file.

PITTSBURGH (AP) — Two doctors at a Pittsburgh abortion clinic gave hundreds of prescription diet pills over several years to a staffer seeking to treat anxiety and depression, state authorities said Tuesday in charging the three and a former registered nurse not affiliated with the clinic.

...

In all, the doctors ordered more than 20,000 tablets over several years for Wagner, who "did not pay for the drugs and viewed them as compensation for working overtime and for regularly providing clinic supplies and office refreshments," according to a statement from Kelly.

You'll one thing about the abortion culture: there's a lot of drug involvement.

If you're trying to treat anxiety and depression, shouldn't you consult a psychiatrist? The excuse sounds pretty flimsy.

H/T: JivinJ

China rescues 89 trafficked children as young as 10 days, arrests 369 suspects

More horrors of China's one-child policy:

BEIJING - Chinese authorities have rescued 89 trafficked minors as young as 10 days and the oldest 4 years and arrested 369 suspects after uncovering two child trafficking gangs, authorities said Wednesday.

The busts highlighted China's thriving black market in children — mostly involving buyers who want more children or those who want them as slave labor — that endures despite harsh penalties for traffickers, including death.

...

China's traditional preference for male heirs means some families sell their female babies in order to try for a boy, since the country's one-child policy limits most urban couples to one child and rural families to two.

Should we try to save extremely preterm babies?

Neonatologist John Wyatt gives his arguments, as presented in Christian Medical Comment:

First he argues that gestational age cannot be measured with accuracy other than in IVF pregnancies when fertilisation occurs in the laboratory. In addition other clinical variables besides gestational age are crucially important in determining the likelihood of survival and the risks of disability. These include birth weight (the higher the better), gender (girls do better than boys), multiple pregnancies (singletons do better than twins and triplets), and whether antenatal steroids were given prior to delivery (antenatal steroids improve survival and reduce brain injury). It is a basic principle of medicine that we should individualise treatment to the specific patient we are caring for;.so making blanket resuscitation rules based on gestational age alone is scientifically and medically indefensible.

Second, Outcome figures vary between different neonatal units. A statistic repeated in the programme was that nine out of 100 babies born at 23 weeks will survive and
only one will reach adulthood without disability. It is not at all clear where this figure came from but it is highly contestable. A study based at University College London Hospitals, found an overall survival rate of 46% as a proportion of all live births at 23 weeks for the period 1996 to 2000 3 and other published studies have reported survival rates of 66% from USA4 and 41% in Australia.

Third, most extremely preterm survivors rate their own quality of life highly. The BBC programme gave the strong implication that the majority of extremely preterm survivors were significantly handicapped. It is in fact very unusual for ex-preterm survivors to be so severely disabled that they are unable to interact with others and engage actively in life. Studies of health related quality of life in adolescents and adults have shown that ex-preterm survivors give similar self-ratings to those who were born at term without medical problems.

Ottawa University Catholic Parish Group Invites You to Ottawa Gay Pride Parade

And then you're invited back to St. Joe's Table. Sponsored by University of Ottawa’s Gay Catholics, Christians and Allies Group (GCCA).

The parish priest is Fr. Andy Boyer

Somebody didn't get the memo about homosexual relations being against the Catholic Faith.

A post-abortive woman speaks out on PASS

Faith writes:

As women, we owe it to each other to acknowledge that a pro-choice society hiding behind the ideals of feminism and choice, without the courage to reveal the “undiscussed truths,” is a failure unto ourselves. Yes, I had the right to choose an abortion. What I did not have was the ability to become fully educated on the true irreparable psychological damage that is so often associated with abortion and how alone I would be in my suffering.

Post Abortion Stress Syndrome (PASS)….ever heard of it? It’s a very real condition that affects a large number of women, and even their partners, after an abortion. These women are met with a wide range of emotional symptoms they weren’t anticipating and suddenly find it difficult to cope with their decision. They can struggle with depression, self-doubt, suicide, cutting. Some find it difficult to care for their existing children, often feeling unworthy; and others struggle just to go about their day to day routine. PASS is very real and society needs to become educated on it!

Many pro-choice activists have been sweeping PASS under the rug, implying that it’s simply a myth made up by pro-life advocates as a scare tactic. How could they otherwise account for the limited pro-choice post abortion support groups?

...

So what are the motives behind so many of these pro-choice activists? Is it really about women and their right to choose? That being the case, I would expect they would want to depict a clear truth of what that ‘choice’ entails. Pregnancy, unplanned or planned, is a life-altering event; one which carries with it a life-long decision. No one should make an uneducated choice about proceeding with or terminating their pregnancy without fully weighing their options and thinking through the consequences. And I just don’t feel that women today are given the opportunity to make a truly educated choice. We’re failing them in one of their most desperate hours by offering idealism rather that the facts – the “undiscussed truths.”

That's one thing I've never liked about feminism.

Feminism was supposed to be based on women's experiences. And it's often not.

It's based on a priori goals determined by an elite.

And when women's experiences and desires contradict those goals, the women who have them are swept aside and some are even demonized.

If women were left to themselves to do exactly what they wanted, most would get married-- or at least partner up, have kids and raise them themselves. If they decided to work, it would be in pink ghetto jobs, probably part-time.

But that's extremely inconvenient because it contradicts feminist goals: of having women in every sphere of society in comparable numbers to men, whether that's what women like or not.

And it's the same thing with abortion.

The admission by feminists of psychological problems after abortion is only a recent phenomenon. Even now when it's discussted it's downplayed.

There could be contributing factors that exacerbate those emotions.

But a heck of a lot of women who go and get abortions are affected by those factors.

And many of them probably wouldn't want abortion in the first place if those factors weren't affecting them!

I don't know why many pro-lifers dignify this movement by calling themselves "feminists". I think this legitimizes them.

Feminism is not about women any more. It's about ideas about women.

Disability Campaigners to Stage Mock Execution Outside Parliament in Protest Against Drift Toward Involuntary Euthanasia

From Christian Medical Comment:

Disability rights campaigners dressed in white will stage a mock execution of a wheelchair user outside Parliament on Wednesday 27 July in protest against the dangerous drift toward all-out euthanasia.

Norwegian Shooter Was No Christian

Jonathan Kay:

The idea that right-wing extremists such as Pierce, McVeigh and Breivik are simply the Christian version of Osama bin Laden is entirely wrong, in other words. Islamist terrorists take (misguided) inspiration from their religious texts in the act of slaughter — explicitly linking their motivation to religion. Mass murdering terrorists with a Christian background (and this includes the IRA, incidentally) typically do no such thing, even if the religious-inspired themes of martyrdom and purification tend to animate their doctrines. Not that this makes mass murder any less hideous or destructive — but it does show it to be a different kind of animal.

I would also add that a big difference between Breivik's attack and those of Islamic radicals is that he operated alone and was almost universally condemned. Islamic radicals work with a huge network of support and when they are successful in their attacks, their supporters dance in the streets of many Muslim cities. Of course, I expect the left to neglect that salient fact.

H/T: The Black Kettle

In the wake of Norwegian Shooting, Pope Pleads for Us to Abandon the Way of Hatred

If you want to know how to truly fight cultural marxism and creeping Sharia, listen to the voice of the one that has fought the good fight for several hundred years.

The way to do it is through change of minds and hearts.

Western Civilization stands for the ways of reason and liberty. Shooting people, no matter how wrong they are, does nothing to advance those causes.

Interesting points about the Norwegian Shooter

Oz Conservative writes:

I've now had a chance to skim through Breivik's manifesto. It's long and detailed and mentions many people on the right, even Cardinal Pell and Keith Windschuttle. Some important points:

1. Breivik states re religion: "I’m not going to pretend I’m a very religious person as that would be a lie."

There's more on his blog.

Norwegian Shooter's Facebook Page Altered?

Atlas Shrugs reports: There were two facebook pages-- one English, one Norwegian. Only the English one says he was a Christian and a conservative, and it appears to have been altered....

Is there any evidence that he actually was a Christian? Did he have a Christian discourse? Did he accept Christ as his Saviour? Did he attend Church?

One wonders.

Naomi Wolfe asks: Is Pornography Driving Men Crazy?

I love it when liberals discover what so-cons knew twenty years ago. Better late than never I suppose.

There is an increasing body of scientific evidence to support this idea. Six years ago, I wrote an essay called “The Porn Myth,” which pointed out that therapists and sexual counselors were anecdotally connecting the rise in pornography consumption among young men with an increase in impotence and premature ejaculation among the same population. These were healthy young men who had no organic or psychological pathology that would disrupt normal sexual function.

The hypothesis among the experts was that pornography was progressively desensitizing these men sexually. Indeed, hardcore pornography’s effectiveness in achieving rapid desensitization in subjects has led to its frequent use in training doctors and military teams to deal with very shocking or sensitive situations.

Given the desensitization effect on most male subjects, researchers found that they quickly required higher levels of stimulation to achieve the same level of arousal. The experts I interviewed at the time were speculating that porn use was desensitizing healthy young men to the erotic appeal of their own partners.

What the hell are you talking about? Pornography is harmless, silly girl. *Shakes head*. No reason to regulate or ban it or anything.

And it has nothing to do with the proliferation of child pornography. Whatsoever. Sexual orientation is sexual orientation. It's fixed.

#sarcasm

Guttmacher: What women want from abortion counseling in the United States

From an abstract that I found somewhat amusing:

Using a qualitative sample of 49 women seeking abortions in 2008, we asked women whether they had their mind made up when they called the clinic to make their appointment as well as what they wanted from abortion counseling. The majority of women contacting the abortion clinic had already made up their minds to have an abortion and were therefore not seeking options counseling. Neither were they seeking to emotionally confide in their abortion counselors: They anticipated that the counselor would try to discourage them from having an abortion, they stated that they had met their emotional needs elsewhere, and they feared that confiding in the counselor might endanger their ability to obtain an abortion. They perceived other women needed counseling, though, to help them make a responsible decision.

Healing after abortion

One man's journey.

I didn't have anything to cite, I just thought I'd put it out there.

IVF Through Gamete Donation: It's Still a Crap Shoot

Some people think that if you just look through a catalogue of sperm donors and pick the ones that look healthy, it avoids all potential health problems.

Wrong:

The few following quotes from parents of donor-conceived children or from donors illustrate the impact of the lack of regulation in the industry:

1. “Our daughter is 6 years old and has been diagnosed with a hereditary bone disease called MHE [multiple hereditary exostoses]. There is no history in our family”

2. “At the age of 3, my daughter developed a very rare disease, Rasmussen’s encephalitis, which caused seizures and significant brain damage”.

3. “My father and grandmother both died of multiple myeloma, a nasty cancer. Many members of my family suffer from depression” [former sperm donor].

4. “My husband was a medical student and was an occasional sperm donor….He died of pancreatic cancer in 2002”.

5. “I would like to contact other offspring. Both my children have au - tism, and we have no history in my family of any disabilities.”

Maybe regulation of sperm donation might be another avenue for pro-life efforts. Just a thought.

For Catholics who struggle with same-sex attraction

Nine Spiritual Truths from the Courage Apostolate website.

If you suffer from unwanted homosexual feelings, please explore this website and consider joining this group.

(French) Interview with Fr. Dowd, new auxiliary bishop of Montreal

For those of you who know French, this may be of interest. It's a radio interview from Radio-Canada (Canadian statist media) regarding the new auxiliary bishop of Montreal, Fr. Thomas Dowd.

It includes many interesting tidbits. For instance, Fr. Dowd has a business degree from Concordia, and worked as a manager before becoming a priest. His background is in inter-cultural co-operation, and he's used it in ecumenical dialogue.

Also, when asked by the interviewer about women's ordination, Fr. Dowd had a very shrewd answer. He said that what the Church was trying to look at was how to get the best use out of women's talents.

You can tell the man has a background in communications.

I think he's a keeper. :)

Irish priests say they will fight law that would force them to reveal secret of confessional

But my prediction is that if this law passes, a number will cave.

Why do I think that? Because there's nothing sacred to the clergy anymore.

They cave on Communion. On homosexuality. On fidelity to the Magisterium. Women's ordination.

Why would it be any different with the Seal of the Confessional?

You see clergyman, if you don't uphold the standards of the church on other issues, people are not going to believe you when it comes to the Seal of the Confessional. The best predictor of future results is past results.

If I were a criminal, I would be leary of confessing my sin to a priest, unless I knew him to be very faithful.

Catholics, I know the Seal of the Confessional is of the highest importance, and that makes you think it won't be betrayed.

If the law passes, it will be. It's like same-sex marriage, once the law was passed, priests started conducting blessings.

Generation X Women not having kids or high-powered careers

Daily Mail:

But a new study of university-educated Generation X women (those born between 1965 and 1978) reveals that 43 per cent are not mothers. It means almost half of these women are putting their all into their careers. They’re just not doing as well as the men.

What's wrong with not wanting to be in a high-strung career?

Maybe the problem is that men are so ambitious they're willing to sacrifice quality of life to get ahead.

Now, it could mean that men might accomplish more. They might get more credit.

The truth is feminists, men will always rule the world precisely because of their willingness and ability to put their work ahead of everything else (among other reasons).

But is it such a bad thing that women just aren't that keen on working eighty-hour weeks and want some quality of life for themselves?

No.

Now some feminists might be dismayed that so many women drop out of corporate culture. It means that women surrender a lot of influence and decision-making power in our culture.

So what?

Should women have to live up to an ideology?

I suspect that feminists will resent that corporate culture is so oriented towards male traits and values.

But reality has its own rules. If men are more willing and able to push through the stress (and some men get off on it, actually) they will get ahead. And if women don't want that stress, they will be left behind.

You can't redesign reality and the rules of efficiency and profit.

Instead of fighting against these realities, which are not wrong in and of themselves: just embrace them.

Men and women would be a lot happier that way.


H/T: Oz Conservative

Struggling with homosexuality

Steve Gershom is a Catholic man dealing with same-sex attraction.

He writes:

Talking to Fr. T helped me learn that I could talk to other people, too. In college I learned to let down my guard a little bit, and opened up to a roommate about feeling lonely. I opened up to a couple of friends about my SSA, and then to my older brother. Eventually I was able to open up to the rest of my family.

The more you open up, the easier it is. The more times you experience the compassion and love of friends and family, the more possible it becomes to believe that there’s nothing inside you so shameful that someone won’t understand. Eventually you stop thinking about it as shameful at all.

You start to see yourself as your friends see you, and as God sees you: wounded and struggling, yes, but always beautiful, always worthwhile.

That's exactly how I view same-sex attraction, and that's how I think the majority of faithful Catholics view it.

I think there are a certain number of gay ideologues who want to believe that everyone who is opposed to homosexual behaviour view them as lowlifes.

There's a certain need to believe that they are despised for their inclinations. It fuels their victimhood and by extension their activism.

If they allowed that people oppose homosexual behaviour but didn't think of them as lowlifes, then it might lend credibility to the notion that homosexual behvaiour is wrong. Or at least, it could diminishes the stigma of that belief.

But the truth is, most faithful Catholics, especially younger ones, aren't particularly repulsed by homosexual attraction, per se.

It is considered one struggle among an infinite number of struggles that we all have.

And so admitting to same-sex attraction is likely to attract sympathy, not hostility.

However, I don't think this will be widely acknowledged. Too politically incorrect

About comments moderation

Sorry I've been slow to get to the comments moderation. Now that summer's out, I don't have the computer as much.

I'm also pregnant and my headspace isn't there.

But I will get to them, eventually.

More on Tim Hudak and the abortion kerfuffle

This is not really going to go anywhere.

[Abortion] isn't nearly as inflammatory now as it used to be. The general population, and the media, are way ahead of the politicians and the partisans who advise them. The war for abortion rights in Canada is receding ever further into history and, concurrently, the slogans and stridency necessary during that war seem ever more overwrought to younger generations when they're used against people who are, for example, simply uneasy about abortion.

...

Mr. Hudak's 1995 statement on abortion isn't particularly extremist, and it does nobody much good to pretend otherwise. The belief that politicians can't talk about abortion comes from the same font of conventional wisdom that says they can't talk about other important things - notably health care, immigration and First Nations issues. It's not true, and we'd be better off realizing it.

It's a good news, bad news scenario.

The good news is that we can talk about abortion now. Nobody is going to crucify you in the public square for opposing abortion, in and of itself.

The bad news is that pro-lifers keep voting for these do-nothing pro-lifers, in the vain expectation that this will somehow do the cause some good.

Only when we start demanding more of our politicians will advance the pro-life cause.

Now, you might be saying to yourself: if we vote for someone who might do something, then the voters might rebel.

Not necessarily.

Quebec has a very interesting perinatal policy, which was drafted by Phillippe Couillard, former Quebec Liberal Health Minister, one of the most pro-abortion politicians ever to seat in a legislature (he tried to recruit late-term abortionists!)

Here's another idea: what if the Ontario government bought airtime for anti-abortion spots.

For instance, something really straight forward like: abortion takes a human life.

And that's all they did.

Now a government ad doesn't change the world, but it would be culturally significant.

There are other things that could be done, too.

But nobody wants to do anything.

I suggest one of the reasons is that pro-lifers have allied themselves with people who are strongly supportive of abortion.

You can't fight abortion with people who support it. You can ally yourself with people who don't care about abortion, because they won't stop you, but you can't share the same party with people who support abortion, and expect there to be progress.

Pro-lifers, you have to demand more of politicians, and not just hope for power. If power is what it's all about, you might as well re-elect McGuinty.

School boards best placed to decide on prayer: McGuinty

Now this is something I can work with.

Except:

"So when it comes to faith matters I have faith in school boards, I have faith in schools themselves to make judgments that they think are appropriate in their particular circumstances."

Bull. You don't have faith in Catholic school boards to teach their own fatih. But whatever!


Now, why can't school boards get the same slack when it comes to gay-straight alliances, or junk food, or a whole host of other issues?

School boards can decide whether to accommodate creeping Sharia, but they can't decide if the school will have vending machines?

Why I never trust what any leftist has to say on poverty

From the National Review:

What is poverty? Americans might well be surprised to learn from other government data that the overwhelming majority of those defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau were well-housed and adequately fed even in the recession year 2009. About 4 percent of them did temporarily become homeless.

Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:

● Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.

● Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.

● Enjoys two color TVs, a DVD player, VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system.

● Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care

.

Most poor people aren't that poor.

H/T: The Black Kettle

More from Warren Kinsella on the Tim Hudak abortion kerfuffle

Says Warren Kinsella in the comments:

The issue, here, is that Hudak is a liar. He’s trying to appear pro-life to that constituency, and he’s trying to say “wink wink, don’t worry, I won’t do anything” to the choice constituency.

So which is it?

Pro-lifers, demand more of your politicians.

As for me, I continue to support the Family Coalition Party. Our foundations are getting stronger. We are founding more and more constituency associations, and we're getting active in between elections. Power is pointless if it doesn't advance your issues.

I'm glad someone from Saskatchewan said this

How I've always felt about Quebec and Canada. Gay Caswell:

I like many other people did not know that the first combined parliament was in Montreal. It is one of many obvious proofs that Canadian history and culture is Quebec history and culture. Quebec can no more separate from Canada than it can separate from itself. It is also one of the many obvious proofs that the separatists were not only trying to destroy the geography and economics of Canada but trying to bury our common historic and cultural roots.

Abstract asks: Why is induced abortion common in environments in which modern contraception is readily available?

Thought-provoking question, isn't it?

Why is induced abortion common in environments in which modern contraception is readily available? This study analyses qualitative data collected from focus group discussions and in-depth interviews with women and men from low-income areas in five countries - the United States, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru and Mexico - to better understand how couples manage their pregnancy risk. Across all settings, women and men rarely weigh the advantages and disadvantages of contraception and abortion before beginning a sexual relationship or engaging in sexual intercourse. Contraception is viewed independently of abortion, and the two are linked only when the former is invoked as a preferred means to avoiding repeat abortion. For women, contraceptive methods are viewed as suspect because of perceived side effects, while abortion experience, often at significant personal risk to them, raises the spectre of social stigma and motivates better practice of contraception. In all settings, male partners figure importantly in pregnancy decisions and management

So availability of contraception is not enough to prevent abortion.

It was assumed when contraception was available that people would just use it. And most people do use it.

It's just that there are significant numbers of people who don't.

And people do not weight the advantages and disadvantages of contraception and abortion.

In other words, they just don't put a whole lot of thought into their sexual activity.

It's just assumed that if they use contraception, they won't get pregnant. Which of course isn't true, over the course of a lifetime. Most women can expect one unexpected pregnancy.

Which is why abortion exists.

It's back-up contraception.

But contraception is treated as virtually foolproof, because people do not want to admit of the risk of pregnancy, small as it is, otherwise it would dissuade them, and they don't want to be dissuaded. But that's no reason not to hold them to their personal responsibility.

Brian Lilley on Tim Hudak's Alleged Desire to Defund Abortion

He says:

Here’s how I see this playing out.

1. Dalton McGuinty will use this as an issue.

2. Hudak will run away from it and claim that he has no plans to defund abortion.

3. McGuinty will keep pushing that Hudak plans to defund abortion and preach to the dutiful media how awful this is.

4. McGuinty will continue to receive the backing of the Ontario English Catholic Teacher’s Association and plenty of high profile members of Ontario’s Catholic establishment. No one will claim that any of this is a mixing of religion and politics. He will also continue to receive Communion at Mass.

5. Pointing out that one nominally Catholic leader (Hudak) was once pro-life and while the other nominally Catholic leader (McGunty) is a cheerleader for taxpayer funded abortion up until the 9th month will be regarded as bad manners and an unnecessary mixing of religion and politics.

I am waiting to be proven wrong on this.

I don't think McGuinty will use this as an issue, as he does not want to touch it with a ten foot poll. His underlings and supporters, however, will use it and see how much traction they will get out of it, which is to say, not a heck of a lot outside of the punditry circles. Hudak will cave. McGuinty will continue to receive Communion at Mass. It will hardly be a blip on the campaign trail as most voters are not typically turned on by this issue, and even if abortion were defunded, most people wouldn't care anyway.

Hope for Trisomy 18 Babies?

I don't want to make a bigger deal of this than it really is, but the suggestion that Trisomy 18 babies don't have to be killed in the womb is hope in itself. From an abstract:

BACKGROUND: In current literature the prognosis of trisomy 18 is mainly described as inevitably lethal. After intervention of parental organisations infants have been treated with cardio surgery in the USA, later in Europe as well with good results. We report the consequences of this and similar developments on our pre- und postnatal approach after diagnosis in our department.

PATIENTS AND CASE REPORTS: 2 parents decided to carry the child to term after the recommendation for abortion. According to standard perinatological aspects one child was vaginally delivered, the second with Caesarean section. After informed consent with the parents we planned a supportive management without more resuscitation than stimulation and ventilation by mask. Both children could be stabilised with nasal CPAP. The first one had been operated on a double outlet right ventricle at the age of 6 months, the second needed to be operated for diaphragm hernia. The third child had been delivered by emergency Caesarean section. A bilateral choanal atresia had been operated in the first week of life, a double outlet right ventricle at the age of 15 days. One child is fed by a nasogastric tube, one is bottle-fed and one had a percutanous gastric tube until he died due to septicaemia, all have statomotorically retardation and had periods of pulmonary hypertension. The social situation of the families is characterised by a stable parental relationship and a safe socio-economical status. None of the children had an acute lethal malformation.

DISCUSSION: In single cases a prospective management in patients with trisomy 18 can be possible. Besides medical issues, the emotional parental wish, their social network and economical status are crucial.

CONCLUSION: The prognosis of trisomy 18 is poor. 3 patients and 20 months do not allow any general statements. However, our recent experience and the courses in the recent literature show that in single cases a more prospective management is possible.

For those of you who may be unaware, Trisomy 18 is a common reason for eugenic abortion.

Abortion: Will Someone Think of the Men???

From an abstract:

Men are often overlooked during the abortion process, with little provision for their needs. Abortion services are traditionally woman-centred, where men are expected to play a supporting role. This article discusses the role of men in the abortion care pathway. It makes recommendations for nurses and healthcare professionals on how to acknowledge the feelings and needs of men during the care process, ensuring they are adequately prepared and supported during this difficult time.

I'm curious as to what kind of "care" they would offer pro-life men.

And is it really a difficult time for the guy who's gunning for his girlfriend to get an abortion so he won't have to pay child support? Hmmm....

Meet Europe's most premature baby ever born

Baby Frieda set a record. She’s Europe’s most premature baby, and according to reports, she ties the world record for smallest baby with a boy in Ottawa, Canada, who was born in 1987.

When she was born on Nov. 7, 2010, in Germany, Frieda was in the womb just 21 weeks and five days.

She weighed just over a pound (1.01 pounds, or 460 grams) and was 11 inches long.

One woman's experience with medical abortion

She did not want to go through another surgical abortion and hear that awful suctioning noise. So she chose the medical route. As she lay in a pool of her own blood, her son started to cry. Everything started to crystalize.

But no, the psychological consequences from abortion aren't that serious. Ignore women's testimony. It's all propaganda, right?

Warren Kinsella: Tim Hudak promises to defund abortion

I bet Hudak caves between now and the election. He caved on the HRC, he's going to cave on this.

Abortion Museum Webpage Disses Saint's Choice

The Abortion Museum webpage from Austria starts off its profile of Gianna Beretta Molla this way:

The late pope let women die rather than permit abortions.

Then goes on to say that Gianna Beretta Molla died from her refusal to have an abortion.

Gianna Beretta Molla made that decision completely informed-- as she was a medical doctor. Catholic teaching would have permitted a hysterectomy.

But Gianna made a different choice.

And it's not being respected by this supposedly pro-choice organization.

Proving once again, the argument is not about choice. It's about abortion.

17 week Fetus thrown away after mom suffers miscarriage

On April 27, Lisa and husband were told by a nurse at Swan District Hospital that "it's not a baby, it's just a fetus" and that it had "probably been thrown out with the medical waste".

...

"There was no apology from hosital staff, no explanation as to why this couple's baby was thrown out in the waste, and no offer of counselling whatsoever."

Mr Hammond said the couple's two young children were well aware their mother was having a baby.

"It's a callous disregard for the family and their wellbeing," he said.

"There seems to be no paper trail as to what happened to the fetus."

Here's another law that pro-lifers should have passed:

Every mom who miscarries in a hospital should be offered the possibility to hold a funeral.

It's a no-brainer. It's offering more choice.

UK: Christian Medical Fellowship on the Royal College of Psychiatrists' Review of Abortion and Mental Health

From the blog of Dr. Peter Saunders, head of Christian Medical Fellowship:

One of our main concerns with the RCPysch draft paper is that several of the summary evidence statements are stronger and more definitive than the actual research cited in their review supports. Whilst this might provide strong headlines and summary statements it is at the expense of accuracy and transparency.

On the basis of the available data the conclusions should be more nuanced and tentative.

In particular, the review is wrong to claim that there is no evidence of an elevated risk of mental health problems post-abortion compared to post-pregnancy. This definitive statement is simply not justified by all the data presented. Indeed, the four main research studies selected for this section of the review each found some mental health problems were more common following one or two abortions. It would have been more accurate simply to state, at the very least, that there is conflicting evidence about the relationship between abortion and mental health.

There is hope for PVS patients

Alex Schadenberg has an interesting article about patients who were diagnosed with PVS (Persistent Vegetative State) and who received treatment and eventually regained consciousness.

I'm intrigued by the idea of "Awakening Centers", which specialize in treating PVS patients. They exist in Europe but there are none in North America. Perhaps the pro-life movement should look into funding one.

"I don't want the abortion, but I have to"

An abortioneer tells of a reluctant patient she counselled:

Her story came out in bits and pieces as we continued to talk: like so many of my patients, she had always considered herself to be against abortion and never imagined that she would wind up across from me in this counseling room. She did not think she would cope well after the procedure and she was struggling with whether it was the “right” thing for her to do. At twenty-one, she was a few years removed from legal childhood yet still dependent on her parents, and she said that they were the ones making her terminate the pregnancy. “My parents will kick me out if I have a baby,” she told me. “I’ll be homeless. I won’t have anywhere to go.”

...

Where does the patient’s constitutional right to choose an abortion intersect with the counselor’s responsibility to screen and refuse service due to perceived ambivalence or coercion?

Now, anyone with an ounce of common sense realizes that, any way you square it, letting this woman have an abortion would be a bad decision. She does not want the abortion.

A crisis pregnancy centre could have really helped her. They deal with this stuff all the time. But no no, only people involved in abortion are wise in the ways of crisis pregnancy.

And I find it very interesting that an abortion counsellor has conscience rights to turn women away from abortion, but a pro-life doctor does not. At least in the feminist mindset. Interesting.

But if you look in the comments, here is what one poor-choicer has to say:

If this were a root canal no such counseling would be needed, I'd have to convince no one of my preparedness or "mental readiness."

I seriously question whether root canals cause as much emotional damage as abortions.

As much as you may care, I don't know you and don't see you as a friend but rather the clinic staffer standing between me and the procedure I need. You are just one more hoop, one more person who has more power than I do in a decision that should boil to no one besides me.

Even if it's obvious that it's the wrong decision, but whatever! Trust women and all that. If they screw up their own lives, it's not your responsibility or anything. You're not your sister's keeper.

Life circumstances "force" people to do things all the time.

Funny how that does not include respecting a little baby's life.

But it's still the best option out of a bunch of s***** ones sometimes

So instead of offering a woman a good option, let's offer a woman a crappy one.

See why pro-life feminists say "women deserve better than abortion"?

To an aborter: A Sonnet

I just thought this was interesting. We need more pro-life poetry in this world.

The psychological consequences of "forced birth"

They admit that there hasn't been a lot of studies done on "forced birth" but these pro-aborts say that it could lead to mental health consequences of women who are not able to obtain an abortion.

Okay then, let them stand on the Capitol with a sign saying "I regret giving birth". Let them send the message to the world and especially their children that their kids were unwanted and ultimately unloved.

Yeah, that'll be a big PR success.

“In the meantime, I would hypothesize that forced motherhood is linked with negative mental health outcomes including depression, anxiety, and increased risk for suicide,” Baldwin said. “I would expect women who are denied abortion care to experience sleep disturbances, tearfulness, hopelessness, and an inability to concentrate on their daily work or household tasks. Their concern about their ability to care for the children they already have, or to continue with their job, educational, or caregiving responsibilities, may leave them wracked with worry and fear. We know from our own recent history that women who are faced with an unwanted pregnancy sometimes feel desperate and go to extremes to change their situation, even placing themselves in jeopardy of illness or death.”

Okay, so go up to the kids who were the product of "forced birth" and have the guts to own up to them that their existence caused their mother so much pain and sorrow. Listen kid, you were an accident, and your mom didn't really want you, and we're trying to say that you should have never really existed in the first place.

Bravo to the marketing geniuses who thought of that strategem.

And I love how the expert is forced to hypothesize and speculate, and her words are given an air of authority despite there being no data to back up that claim. But whatever!

“I hate the thought of any woman being forced to have a child she does not want,” Baldwin said.

But not the thought that an existing child should have been killed.

“If as a society we are going to force women to be mothers

Nobody forces anyone to be a mother. If you do not want to parent, adoption agencies will gladly take your kid from you.

we'd better provide them with all the tools they need, including universal access to health care, healthy affordable foods, safe green places to play, education, jobs and child care.”

The state does not have to be the one to do that.

And get a load of this quote:

Nancy Russo, a psychology professor at Arizona State University, and Henry David of the Transnational Family Research Institute stated in an article on www.prochoiceforum.org.uk that “both unintended and unwanted childbearing can have negative health, social and psychological consequences.”

Besides effects on the women who are forced to have unwanted children, the children also suffer.

“As adults they were more likely to engage in criminal behavior, be on welfare and receive psychiatric services,” the article stated, referring to unwanted children. “Another [study] found that children who were unintended by their mothers had lower self-esteem than their intended peers 23 years later.”

The children also suffer! Isn't that rich! You're better off dead than suffering from psychiatric problems.

And so because of possible low self-esteem, they should have never existed in the first place.

All this talk of "being forced" to have children makes having children sound like a bad thing, like it's the cause of their problems. That, once again, makes feminists look like they're against children and motherhood. They're very tone-deaf to their own strategies. Then they're going to wonder why so many people think they're anti-motherhood.

Study: Concurrent sexual partnerships and primary HIV infection

I love the euphemism "concurrent sexual partnerships" for "sleeping around." It makes it sound so respectable.

From an abstract:

The combination of long-term concurrent sexual partnerships and high infectiousness early in HIV infection has been suggested as a key driver of the extensive spread of HIV in general populations in sub-Saharan Africa, but this has never been scientifically investigated.

Really? Call me skeptical, but okay, let's take him at his word.

We use a mathematical model to simulate HIV spreading on sexual networks with different amounts of concurrency.

A mathematical model, as opposed to an actual survey? Hmm...

The models show that if HIV infectiousness is constant over the duration of infection, the amount of concurrency has much less influence on HIV spread compared to when infectiousness varies over three stages of infection with high infectiousness in the first months.

So people sleeping around helps get the ball rolling on an AIDS epidemic, but less so as husbands pass it on to their wives and mothers to their babies. That makes sense.

The proportion of transmissions during primary infection is sensitive to the amount of concurrency

The more people sleep around in the early wave of the infections, the greater the proportion of transmissions. Makes sense.

He seems to be saying there's a certain degree of influence, especially in the first wave of transmissions, but concurrent partnerships have less influence in subsequent waves.

But it's done with a mathematical model. All well and good, but I find it less credible than actually surveying transmissions.

All these studies amuse me because they typically confirm what so-cons know: if you don't sleep around, don't do drugs, reserve sex for marriage and stay faithful, you will never get an STI. It's so blindingly obvious, but public health officials don't seem to want to state it because it's not political correctness. They want to work with people's weaknesses, which is what gets them in trouble in the first place, instead of helping them to be strong and resist all these temptations.

Three Louisiana abortion clinics cited for failure to report child rape

Proving once again that abortion is a shady business.

BREAKING: Fr. Corapi denies all allegations in new response

And the drama continues!

Whoever is right or wrong, the devil is just lovin' it.

Interesting omission: what about the drug charges? Again, I do not wish to suggest that he is guilty or innocent. I'm just bringing it up because the article did not mention any denial on his part. I'd have to see the original.

UPDATE AT 5:55

Found a copy of the original statement on The Black Sheep Dog blog. It appears that LifeSiteNews reproduced the message in its entirety.

No rebuttal of allegation of drug or alcohol abuse. Again, he may or may not be innocent, but it's just noteworthy.

It's not just abortion that's killing India's girls

Infanticide is common in the country side.

Channeling feminists: if we could just get the girls killed in the womb, nobody's rights would be violated and there would be equity between the rich and the poor.

Due to the decrease in the sex ratio in India, young people face difficulties when marrying. One girl is essentially bought from another village and is married off to 4 or 5 men at the same time.

Virtual prostitution, if you ask me. And people wonder why polygamy should be illegal.

Feminists point to sexist attitudes as the real reason behind the uneven sex ratio.

But I will suggest another huge problem: their judicial system.

Justice delayed is justice denied. If people do not get punished for their crimes in a timely fashion, that gives them the impression they have free reign to do what they want.

India already bans sex-selection abortion. So the absence of laws is not the problem. It appears that their judicial system is inadequate in the face of the problem.

Jimmy Akin publishes copy of Fr. Corapi's lawsuit against his accuser

So drop by to find the PDF document.

I haven't commented a lot on this story. I'm not sure what to say about it. So I figure I'd better not.

Today, I'm thinking: we just don't have all the facts. It's a humbling place to be. And by saying that, I'm not saying Fr. Corapi is innocent. I'm not saying he's guilty. I'm saying that everything is happening out of our sight, and that it's too premature to really pass judgement.

Whenever I make the decision not to say anything and let everything unfold to see what we can see, I don't regret it, but when I've developed an opinion and made a judgement (to myself), I've come to regret it.

So I'm shutting up now!

Swedish Midwife tells of her experience with late-term abortion

I happened upon this book by Vivian Wahlberg entitled Memories After Abortion, which is an anthology about abortion experiences, first written in Swedish and translated into English.

In the 1950s, the author trained as a midwife in Sweden and was asked to assist with abortions in a  gynecology department. She recounts who she helped perform an abortion at 22 weeks, which was done through an abdominal incision. I confess, I've never heard of an abortion done that way, unless perhaps it was intended as a hysterotomy. The "surgeon" pulled out a whimpering baby, who was left to die. (And hey, if a fetus has to suffer and die for a woman's sake, then tough luck for you, kid-- right feminists? Right...) Anyhow, the following week she was back in the delivery ward and her first delivery consisted of a disabled baby. All the resources were deployed to help this child. Wahlberg was confused by this contrast. Why such distinction between children.

Why indeed....

Click on the image to read her story.

Anecdotes such as these jar me. It's one thing to suck a fetus through a vacuum during a suction-curettage abortion. The fetus is mushed up and disposed of, never to be seen except by a pathologist. It's easy to become used to the procedure when you don't have to look at the humanity of the victim.

It's quite another to deliver a baby. And a live one at that who is destined to die. How do people who do this live with themselves?

Bibliographical notice:

Vivian Wahlberg, Memories after abortion, Radcliffe Publishing, 2007, 115 pages.

Continuing on the theme of Russian honesty about abortion

When I read about Russian approaches to abortion, it amazes me.

Below is a screen capture I've taken (actually several pasted together) of an anecdote regarding a feminist's trip to a woman's clinic in St. Petersburg in 1995, as well as an example of one Russian gynecologist's approach to abortion.Click on the image to read it.

You can Google it on Google Books if you like: Women's health in post-Soviet Russia: the politics of intervention By Michele R. Rivkin-Fish p. 103-104.

Imagine, they put the pictures of aborted fetuses INSIDE the abortion clinic.

Pro-Life Clinic Launched in Russia

When Russians get serious about abortion, it's game over.

Why? Because Russians are breathtakingly honest about abortion.

Some Russian abortionists will do the sidewalk counselling in the operating room. Why are you having this abortion? Don't you have family supporting you? Where's your boyfriend? Is this what you really want?

I've seen at least one Russian abortionist admit on camera that abortion is legalized murder.

I don't think the feminist rhetoric around abortion has been as strong as in the West. I think the legalization of abortion was done purely for pragmatic reasons. It was criminalized and once again legalized. This is not unusual for communist countries.

Perhaps it's time that Western pro-lifers consider the idea of setting up pro-life medical clinics. I'm not talking about crisis pregnancy centres per se. I'm talking about clinics staffed by doctors and nurses that are out-and-out against abortion. I picture a big sign out front: Abortions not done here. Unborn children respected (or something like that).

Imagine if we decided to compete with Planned Parenthood on offering low-income women medical help. Imagine if we administed Pap tests, STD testing and treatment, gave out prescriptions and anything else they needed.

I think there is probably a lot of unmet medical need out there for low-income women. I'm thinking in terms of medical help for their babies. I remember when I had my first child, getting medical help for basic things like diaper rashes or coughs was complicated. All the walk-in clinics in my town were not taking new patients, so if I wanted to get a diaper rash treated, it would take a few days.

Imagine if average, non-political women were exposed to a pro-life clinic on a regular basis. Imagine we did a better job of treating them wholistically than any other organization.

Wouldn't that be a huge boon to the pro-life cause? If 18-year-old Taylor gets prompt and warm-hearted attention for her STD, if she gets better help for the cyst on her chest, or treatment for her menstrual, don't you think she would be far more likely to trust these familiar faces? If she knew where to turn in the case of a crisis pregnancy, wouldn't that be reassuring and make her less likely to abort?

If Taylor thinks the pro-life community is looking out for her when she is not pregnant, she might be ready to trust pro-lifers when she is.

And when she comes in for prenatal check-ups, and she gets screening for her baby, she won't be referred to an abortionist if the test is positive. She'll be given extra resources to help deal with the issue at hand, so that when the baby is born, everything is in place to treat baby or, as the case may be, provide him with palliative care.

This of course is very resource-intensive. But consider how much we have spent on reaching women. These kinds of medical clinics would be an excellent investment, and also an excellent opportunity to implement the pro-life philosophy in a broader fashion: not just at the abortion clinic door, but in day-to-day life.

Down Babies Aborted After 24 Weeks in UK

Daily Mail:

The data reveals that in 2010 482 foetuses were aborted for Down's syndrome, including 10 who were over 24 weeks.

Don't treat the baby. Kill him. Much easier that way.

And if a fetus has to die in the name of convenience, well tough luck fetus, right feminists?

Only the woman's autonomy matters. The life of a human being whom she should be responsible for is secondary.

#sarcasm

However, Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), said: 'The publication of these statistics after a campaign by the anti-abortion lobby reveals little more than their own vindictiveness.

DO NOT ASK HOW YOUR TAX DOLLARS ARE USED. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT!

Typical leftist mentality.

People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.

It's simple: any activity that requires tax money is open to public scrutiny, unless it's a matter of national security.

'Abortion for foetal anomaly is legal. Behind every one of these figures are doctors and nurses who deserve our admiration and support, and a couple who have often lost a much-wanted pregnancy.'

But the couple did not lose a much-wanted Down Syndrome baby.

The pregnancy seems to have been more desired than the actual baby himself.

And no, having your child killed is not loving act, no matter what your intentions or how much you cry about it. 

Mercy consists in alleviating pain and trying to obtain a better quality of life, not destroying the person whom one assumes will never have a good quality of life (by one's own subjective standards!).

Dear Pro-Choice Movement: Don't Insult Women's Intelligence

Abortion Gang Member KushieIsMoon writes about the issue of pregnancy loss (both natural and induced) and how women view their fetuses.

Legally, fetuses are not infants, are not considered persons, and thus, having an abortion is not murder. But we must remember, the personal is different from the legal. Pregnancy is different for every single woman- and one woman may experience multiple pregnancies in very different ways. A woman may consider her fetus to be ababy, or already a person, because she plans to carry to term. Another woman may consider her fetus to be a baby even though she is planning to have an abortion. Those feelings and beliefs are normal, valid, and should be perfectly acceptable.

Using the term “baby” doesn’t hurt the pro-choice position at all. If a woman believes that abortion is the best option for her baby, then we should support her in her choice.** It does us no good to get into a battle over the word (the same applies if she wants to carry her fetus to term).

Those feelings and beliefs are normal, valid and should be perfectly acceptable, she says.

Except feelings do not determine what a fetus is.

Have the courage of your convictions. Either affirm is a fetus is a human being, or don't.

But don't start acting like a fetus is a human being in one scenario, but not in another, based on what a woman believes a fetus to be.

That's very patronizing.

It suggests that women are not capable of handling the truth. It's reminiscent of the way adults act like Santa exists at Christmas time, when he doesn't, just to make children happy.

That's well and good for little kids.

If fetuses are not human beings, then why not tell the woman that her fetus is not a human being, so that her grief will not be so intense? I.E. Hey listen, the ten-week fetus you lost to abortion? It wasn't even sentient. Don't even worry about it. You'll get pregnant again. And the next time will be when you're able to parent.

Oh wait, is it because you don't want to have that argument? Is it because telling a woman what to think of her pregnancy or her fetus would contradict your movement's ideology?

Would it mean that the woman's subjective judgement is not the be-all and end-all of the prochoice ideology, and that facts about human development and the nature of the fetus actually do matter, contrary to the movement's assertions for the last several decades?

You cannot allow women to be the arbiters of what a fetus is, and then treat them as intelligent beings. We know that subjective judgements don't determine the nature of a thing. Letting a woman's grief determine the nature of a fetus is allowing her intelligence to be subject to her feelings. It plays into the stereotype of women being so emotional by nature that they can't think straight and face reality-based facts.

It's a two-faced stance.

And to think women won't see through that is to treat them as stupid.

Kushie says it does the pro-choice no good to fight over the word "baby". Maybe that's the whole problem, though. The pro-choice movement does not have the guts to tell women either 1) that fetuses are not babies, therefore, grieving over a fetus like it's a baby is not warranted or 2)that abortion actually does kill a baby.

You can't have it both ways, pro-choice movement. Make up your mind and be upfront with women.