The blog for Massachusetts Citizens for Life: the pro-life movement in the Bay State since 1973.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
New website: Healthcare for Gunner.com
Students for Life of America Executive Director Kristan Hawkins has a young son recently diagnosed with Cystic Fibrosis, and has released a website detailing the way in which healthcare proposals would affect him. The website, Healthcare for Gunner, approaches the healthcare debate not only from a pro-life perspective, but from a uniquely pro-child one as well.
New website: "Here is the Blood"
Lila Rose, known for her undercover work exposing the racist donations accepted by Planned Parenthood as well as Planned Parenthood's repeated cover-up of rape, as part of her group Live Action has released a website called "Here is the Blood" (warning: graphic images).
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Abortion case potentially coming up before the Supreme Court
from the article:
Two years after the Supreme Court last ruled on abortion restrictions, a new test case is likely on its way to the Court, perhaps reaching there by next Fall. Responding to an order by the Justices to take a new look at a Virginia abortion ban, the Fourth Circuit Court on Wednesday upheld the law. The en banc Court divided, 6-5, in sustaining the law against claims that it would criminalize the most common method of abortions performed in the second trimester.
Two years after the Supreme Court last ruled on abortion restrictions, a new test case is likely on its way to the Court, perhaps reaching there by next Fall. Responding to an order by the Justices to take a new look at a Virginia abortion ban, the Fourth Circuit Court on Wednesday upheld the law. The en banc Court divided, 6-5, in sustaining the law against claims that it would criminalize the most common method of abortions performed in the second trimester.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Keeping Churches and Pastors faithfully pro-life
Charlie Coudert is a longtime pro-life activist who leads a monthly vigil outside the Framingham Union hospital which provides abortions. In Charlie's July letter he included some material of interest to our many Catholic members, that encourages them to have their priests pledge fidelity to church teachings and documents that support and affirm life. You can find that pledge here. These documents are a project of Human Life International, which does great work trying to reduce abortions globally. HLI's head, Fr. Tom Euteneuer also spoke two months ago in Worcester, to the dinner for Visitation House which is the feature story on the front page of the most recent MCFL News.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Reality vs. the media
The media is reporting gleefully that the aftermath of the Tiller murder has put the pro-life movement in supposed "disarray" - yet the opposite is true. It seems the only time the media likes to talk about abortion is when an abortionist is killed, not every other day of the year when 3,600 children are being killed through surgical abortion daily. If the media were to ask any of the 2000 pregnancy centers, or statewide right-to-life chapters lobbying for legislative change, or the many pro-life committees based out of religious communities, they'd hear that nothing has changed, and the goal of protecting the unborn, helping parents and making a better society more receptive to life is still the job of everyone in the movement.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Abortion as a "blessing"?
You have probably heard about the Cambridge, Mass. Cambridge Divinity appointment of Katherine Ragsdale, featured here in the Phoenix. The article goes to great lengths to explain Ragsdale's infamous "abortion is a blessing" statements in Alabama, as well as rationalize why 'common ground' with us pro-lifers is misguided, and that abortion is never a 'tragedy' because, well, a woman chooses it.
The article fails, of course, to put in context that Ragsdale sits on NARAL's board and that board provides the political cover for an multi-billion dollar publicly supported industry involved with the destruction of children for any reason.
It's so telling to read her words and the obvious contradictions within. Ragsdale is obviously a very intelligent woman, and well-spoken, but she says certain things without even considering their implications:
From the article:
How can a scientific or moral truth be so subjective that it depends on one's own personal beliefs? That would make it not a moral principle, but a matter of personal interpretation. There has to be an objective truth: either the fetus is a child or it is not, but to cop out and say that it depends on what you want to believe is akin to saying that a baby chicken is only a real chicken if you want it to be, other people can disagree and perhaps it's not a chicken at all. Her line of logic is purposefully anti-logic, it is the cold, calm rationalization of forcing what you want to be true over the objective truth.
Her bad logic continues later in the article:
What, I wonder, does she mean by "it"? What is "it"? And by saying "babies they want" she's clearly contradicting her earlier statements that "it" is not a baby. She's saying that until "it" is born, the baby is not a baby, but in the same sentence, just a short few words later, she acknowledges that some babies are wanted and the aborted babies are unwanted, but it shows that she recognizes that they are both babies.
I can't fault Ragsdale, she is obviously so wrapped up in pro-abortion politics, organizations, and self-identity politics that it is likely an enormous intellectual mountain to climb to state the obvious: that abortion kills a child. And I hesitate to too easily castigate the media and the Phoenix, for they are likely surrounded by a climate that doesn't engage these ideas and issues in a competitive way-- they all blindly accept Ragsdale, and look to her as the authority figure. They are reporters who don't know, so they seek out whom they trust to know for them, and are getting bad answers.
No, friends, the uncomfortable blame lies with us. The blame lies on our shoulders because these lies continue without our constructive corrections. These appointments go unchallenged because we give up on the world. We hear too often religious people excuse their own personal inaction because they 'see signs of the end times' or because there's "no hope" or because things are "too far gone" and they let these things continue. We focus on the overwhelming problems and get dispirited, whereas, instead, we need to challenge ourselves each and every day to continue taking constructive pro-life action to help save the unborn. When we hear a pro-abortion argument we need to correct it. When we see a pro-choice politician we need to respectfully engage them, when we find the pro-choicers in our own family, we need to dialogue with them, and when we see a woman in need we need to continue speaking to her and bringing her to the many wonderful pregnancy centers around the state.
The blame lies with us, the challenge is upon us, and the future will change because of you.
The article fails, of course, to put in context that Ragsdale sits on NARAL's board and that board provides the political cover for an multi-billion dollar publicly supported industry involved with the destruction of children for any reason.
It's so telling to read her words and the obvious contradictions within. Ragsdale is obviously a very intelligent woman, and well-spoken, but she says certain things without even considering their implications:
From the article:
"I suppose it's possible for an intelligent, faithful person to still believe that there's no moral difference between a zygote and a baby," Ragsdale allows. "But there's no reason for most of us to believe that. And I don't."
How can a scientific or moral truth be so subjective that it depends on one's own personal beliefs? That would make it not a moral principle, but a matter of personal interpretation. There has to be an objective truth: either the fetus is a child or it is not, but to cop out and say that it depends on what you want to believe is akin to saying that a baby chicken is only a real chicken if you want it to be, other people can disagree and perhaps it's not a chicken at all. Her line of logic is purposefully anti-logic, it is the cold, calm rationalization of forcing what you want to be true over the objective truth.
Her bad logic continues later in the article:
"That's the tragedy in most cases," she continues. "That birth control failed, that they might want to have a baby but the economics are such that they can't possibly afford it, that we don't have healthcare, that women can't choose to have the babies they want. There's a tragedy."
What, I wonder, does she mean by "it"? What is "it"? And by saying "babies they want" she's clearly contradicting her earlier statements that "it" is not a baby. She's saying that until "it" is born, the baby is not a baby, but in the same sentence, just a short few words later, she acknowledges that some babies are wanted and the aborted babies are unwanted, but it shows that she recognizes that they are both babies.
I can't fault Ragsdale, she is obviously so wrapped up in pro-abortion politics, organizations, and self-identity politics that it is likely an enormous intellectual mountain to climb to state the obvious: that abortion kills a child. And I hesitate to too easily castigate the media and the Phoenix, for they are likely surrounded by a climate that doesn't engage these ideas and issues in a competitive way-- they all blindly accept Ragsdale, and look to her as the authority figure. They are reporters who don't know, so they seek out whom they trust to know for them, and are getting bad answers.
No, friends, the uncomfortable blame lies with us. The blame lies on our shoulders because these lies continue without our constructive corrections. These appointments go unchallenged because we give up on the world. We hear too often religious people excuse their own personal inaction because they 'see signs of the end times' or because there's "no hope" or because things are "too far gone" and they let these things continue. We focus on the overwhelming problems and get dispirited, whereas, instead, we need to challenge ourselves each and every day to continue taking constructive pro-life action to help save the unborn. When we hear a pro-abortion argument we need to correct it. When we see a pro-choice politician we need to respectfully engage them, when we find the pro-choicers in our own family, we need to dialogue with them, and when we see a woman in need we need to continue speaking to her and bringing her to the many wonderful pregnancy centers around the state.
The blame lies with us, the challenge is upon us, and the future will change because of you.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Sneak peak into our July issue...
The four main stories will be:
1. Legal problems around adoption
2. Teen outreach and related mental health issues
3. Undiagnosed elderly depression
4. An article on the way to pass Laura's Law
If you have any thoughts or contributions, please contact Helen Cross and let us know. Especially if you know individuals who have had experiences with related topics, we would love to hear from you! You can reach Helen Cross at chapters-at-masscitizensforlife-dot-org
1. Legal problems around adoption
2. Teen outreach and related mental health issues
3. Undiagnosed elderly depression
4. An article on the way to pass Laura's Law
If you have any thoughts or contributions, please contact Helen Cross and let us know. Especially if you know individuals who have had experiences with related topics, we would love to hear from you! You can reach Helen Cross at chapters-at-masscitizensforlife-dot-org
"Social Egg Freezing" and overplanning modern motherhood
This story in "Essential Baby" covers women who are freezing their eggs in order to get around the natural decline in their fertility when they lack a father. On one hand, this seems like a convenient way for working women to deal with their ticking biological clock while managing the pressures of the workplace. But on reflection, the relationship to pro-life is that it makes the children a commodity, and we allow ourselves to 'plan' our lives and children become too managed. We forget the wonder of the unexpected, and the virtue in dealing with the unplanned. Prof. Tony Esolen spoke about many of these topics last fall for Mass Citizens. We have social problems that we solve through science, when considering our high level of wealth and success we really ought to be considering changes in our culture and attitudes that foster communities and a climate where an unplanned pregnancy is welcomed. We want a family, career and meaningful relationships/marriages, and these three things are not in competition with one another and can be balanced instead of 'solved' through technology.
Monday, June 1, 2009
The death of George Tiller
George Tiller, infamous doctor known for performing partial-birth and late-term abortions in Wichita, Kansas was shot and killed yesterday in his church. The emotional trauma of abortion, fostered and reinforced by abortionists and the abortion industry, will sadly only be furthered by this act, not alleviated. The violence also denies the powerful opportunity for conversions, such as those by Dr. Bernard Nathanson and Norma McCorvey. The murder of George Tiller inflicts emotional distress like the abortions he routinely provided, and will not save any babies. It's a sad day in many ways, not the least of which is the knowledge that one 67 year old man has died, and thousands more babies are going to die tomorrow. We live amongst a culture of death.