Dozens of upcoming presentations on DPS ballot question

We regularly receive calls from people asking where they can hear a presentation on Doctor-Prescribed Suicide and the ballot question. As you know, many presentations have been given, but, as you can see, there are still many opportunities to be informed and to inform your neighbors. I am sure there are some we don't have listed. Please let me know and we will post. Thanks, Anne   MAADSP - No On 2 Upcoming Events   Councils on the Aging Sept 12, Cohasset Sept 13, Plymouth Sept 17 Fairhaven Sept 20 Peru Sept 24 Bellingham and Tyngsboro Oct. 10 Dighton and Salisbury Oct 15 Brewster Oct 18 Halifax Oct 22 Newburyport   Other engagements and panels:   Sept 14 CIRCA panel Sept 20 Winchester Professionals Oct 21 Amesbury/ Holy Family Parish Talk Oct 10 Salem/Olde Town Hall, panel discussion on No on 2.    Boston Archdiocese: Physician Assisted Suicide Announcements The so-called "Death with Dignity Act," if passed this November, will legalize physician-assisted suicide in Massachusetts. Do you know about this law? Do you know how it will affect medical care in Massachusetts? Do you know how it will affect the sick and dying in your community? Medical, legal and ethical professionals will explain how you can oppose physician-assisted suicide.   Sign up for one of the workshops below today!     Date Location Time Monday, September 17       Our Lady of Lourdes, Brockton 7-9pm Tuesday, September 18 St. Charles Borromeo, Woburn 7-9pm Wednesday, September 19 St. Jerome, Weymouth 7-9pm Thursday, September 20 St. Bonaventure, Plymouth               7-9pm Friday, September 21 K of C Hall, Lexington 7:30-9:30pm Monday, September 24 St. Eulalia, Winchester 7-9pm Tuesday, September 25                     Sacred Heart, Quincy 7-9pm Thursday, September 27                   St. Mary, Waltham 7-9pm Tuesday, October 2 St. John the Evangelist, N. Chelmsford 7-9pm Wednesday, October 3                      St. Raphael, Medford 7-9pm Wednesday, October 10 Pastoral Center, Braintree 1-3pm Wednesday, October 10                      St. Bernadette, Randolph 7-9pm Thursday, October 11                       All Saints, Haverhill 7-9pm Monday,October 15                          St.Patrick, Natick                                               7-9pm Thursday,October 18                        St. Columbkille, Brighton 7-9pm Monday, October 22    St. Mary, Lynn 7-9pm Wednesday,October 24                     St. Peter, Plymouth 7-9pm  To register contact:  Ann Cussen @ ann_cussen@rcab.org    Phone: 617-779-3644 Name Parish City/Town Phone E-Mail Address Workshop Date   Worcester Diocese:     PRESENTATION ON END-OF-LIFE ISSUES AND PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE - Sept. 5   The Pro-Life and Adult Faith Formation Ministries of the Grafton Catholic Community will host a panel presentation, "Catholics and Dying:  Hear the Truth About End-of-Life Issues", on Wednesday, Sept. 5 from 7:00 to 9:30 p.m. at St. James Parish Center, 89 Main St., South Grafton.   Speakers include Dr. Paul Carpentier, Msgr. Peter Beaulieu, Atty. Henry Luthin, and Allison LeDoux, who will discuss Catholic teaching on end-of-life concerns and address the proposed law on physician-assisted suicide that will be on the Massachusetts ballot this November.  ALL ARE WELCOME!     Novena to St. Joseph - Begins September 10   All are welcome to the annual Novena to St. Joseph at Christ the King Parish, 1072 Pleasant St., Worcester, to pray for the seriously and terminally ill.  The novena will begin on Monday, Sept. 10 (7:15 to 8:00 p.m.) and will be conducted on nine successive Monday evenings.  There will be guest homilists, prayers for the dying, and Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.  The novena is also a spiritual response to the prospect of doctor-prescribed suicide in Massachusetts.  Please consider coming and bringing your friends!  The names of those who are terminally ill can be submitted in advance by calling 508-754-5361 or by email to Monsignor Sullivan at tsullivan5@mac.com.     On October 27th a day-long conference featuring Dr. William Toffler, a professor at the Department of Family Medicine at Oregon Health and Science University and national director of the Physicians for Compassionate Care Education Foundation (one of the leading national groups working to oppose DPS)is scheduled in Worcester. We'll have more information.

Way to go, Joe!

Today we joined Alan and Helen to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary.  The article below by Joe Fitzgerald was the main topic of conversation..  It is a masterpiece.  Enjoy! Anne Shots at Scott Brown just hurt Elizabeth Warren By Joe Fitzgerald  |   Saturday, August 25, 2012  Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061155644 Sawed-off shotguns are banned because they wound indiscriminately, and so do blanket indictments, which are the sawed-off shotguns of political discourse, hurting anyone who happens to be in the line of fire when a venomous candidate such as Elizabeth Warren begins to hurl her vitriol.   If there's anyone who ought to be focusing on issues rather than demonization, it's this Harvard professor, recruited from obscurity to pursue a seat in the U.S. Senate.   If she'd remained beneath the radar screen, out of the political spotlight, she could still be masquerading as Harvard Law School's "first woman of color." No one, including disappointed sycophants in the liberal wing of the media, would have searched in vain for any verification of her claim to having a smidgeon (1/32nd) of Cherokee blood in her DNA.   Now she's out there grimacing in TV commercials, feigning indignation over the soaring costs of a college education, prompting industrious reporters to discover she earned more than $350,000 for teaching one class twice a week, which could have funded the tuitions of seven Harvard Law students.   Still, she remains hell-bent on ferreting out flaws and inconsistencies in her opponent, real or imagined, bringing to mind an observation made by former Patriotscoach Raymond Berry: "Heat not only builds character; it also reveals character."   The heat of this campaign is revealing a lot about the professor.   Jumping onto the coattails of outrage over Missouri's Todd Akin, the GOP's U.S. Senate candidate whose thoughts on "legitimate rape" were universally condemned, Warren wasted no time linking Scott Brown and the Republican Party to "an agenda that is against women."   In other words, if Akin offended you, Brown should, too.   It's a classic blanket indictment, a sawed-off shotgun blast of vilification.   The professor wants you to look at Akin and see Brown.   Should we then look at Harvard professors and see Timothy Leary?   She wants you to look at Republicans and fear for women.   Should we then look at Democrats and picture Ted Kennedy's lascivious prowling at the Au Bar in Palm Beach, Fla., or Bill Clinton's lurid exploitation of Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office?   Wouldn't that suggest to her that women might trust the leadership of an experienced office-holder who's happy in his marriage, who's the much-involved father of two adoring daughters, and who's been serving in the National Guard since he was 19?   According to Warren, none of that matters because of a nut in Missouri.   Berry was right. The heat of this political season is telling us much about the professor, and it isn't very flattering.

Friday Reminder

Friends, Robin Loughman, RN, Chairwoman of No On 2 (Massachusetts Alliance Against Doctor Prescribed Suicide) asks me to thank so many of you who have donated to this most important effort.  She tells me about G, who has made two generous contributions.  When she thanked him, he said he could not think of anything more important! I cannot think of anything more important, either.  For the Death Lobby, this is do or die.  If they cannot pass this flawed suicide law in Massachusetts, where can they?  We can set them back by a decade.  We must educate people.  That can be done in large enough numbers only by TV. You know No On 2 needs money.  Please do what you can, NOW. Thanks and bless you! Anne http://noonquestion2.org/ https://www.facebook.com/NoOnBallotQuestion2 https://twitter.com/NoOnQuestion2Ma

No wonder we are winning!

Poll: Abortion Issue Much More Important to Pro-Life Voters by Steven Ertelt | LifeNews.com | 8/22/12 6:52 PM With all of the sturm und drang over the Todd Akin comments, the media is trumpeting the issue of abortion in an attempt to attack pro-life advocates, the Romney campaign and Republicans. But when it comes down to pulling the lever for a candidate, polling data consistently shows the abortion issue is more motivating and salient in terms of their vote to pro-life voters than it is to abortion advocates. As the Pew Research Center notes today: Far more opponents than supporters of legal abortion view this as a very important voting issue. Fully 73% of those who say that abortion should be illegal in all cases rate abortion as a very important voting issue; 55% of those who say abortion should be illegal in most cases also rate it as very important. By contrast, just a third of those who favor legal abortion in all cases, and just 22% who say it should be legal in most cases, rate abortion as very important to their vote. About four-in-ten voters in each group (44% legal in all cases, 42% legal in most) say abortion will be not at all important in their decision about whom to vote for.   Among opponents of legal abortion, large majorities of both women (64%) and men (59%) say the issue will be very important to their vote. But among supporters of legal abortion, more women than men say it will be very important (34% vs. 19%).

Does MCFL have any exceptions to abortion ban?

We have been receiving calls from the media and individuals who are sincerely interested in whether MCFL has any "exceptions".  As our Mission Statement says, we work to protect life from conception. So, once a baby is conceived, that baby should be protected.   We do not oppose procedures necessary to prevent the death of the mother from such medical conditions as tubal pregnancy or cancerous uterus.  For these conditions, appropriate procedures are, respectively, a salpingectomy and a hysterectomy. Without these operations, both the mother and the child would die. Such  procedures are not abortions because their goal is not the death of the baby. Rebecca Kiessling has an excellent piece on rape which puts the whole exception argument in a logical context. http://www.lifenews.com/2012/08/20/woman-conceived-in-rape-responds-to-akin-abortion-controversy/ The amazing National Geographic video on pre-natal development, In The Womb, is online.  It is not available to buy, but we have some copies at MCFL that we would be happy to lend you. http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/in-the-womb/episodes/in-the-womb/ Isn't it amazing how abortion is constantly in the public square!  The fruits of years of your hard work. Thank you all!  Anne

No On 2 needs your help now!

Robin Loughman, Chairwoman of No On 2 (called Massachusetts Alliance Against Doctor Prescribed Suicide before they knew the ballot number) has asked me to tell you that the committee is in desperate need of your generosity. They need to raise $50,000 this week.   At first, people think "death with dignity" sounds nice. You and I have been educating hundreds of thousands of people. We will continue and we will all work very hard as Nov 6th draws near. That is not enough for an issue like this!   We have the messages that will win. The only way to get them to enough people is to use TV, which is very expensive. The experts working with No On 2 have a plan that uses TV, radio, and the internet.   We need to help them raise the money to pay for the plan. If we lose, the fall-out will be another Roe v Wade!   Please read the candid analysis below by No On 2. Then go to http://noonquestion2.org/ and invest in life.   You are the best!                                                                                                                         Anne   PS, You can donate on-line or by mail. Any amount will help - $10 or $10,000 are all needed.   No On 2- Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats   Strengths   The strength of those opposed to doctor-prescribed suicide has always been in the ability of those on the ground to utilize existing networks to organize. Further, it is in the diversity of those groups opposed to assisted suicide and their willingness to focus on an issue that binds them together; including disability and patients rights groups, medical professionals and their respective trade organizations, right to life groups, ethnic-affiliated groups, faith-based communities and those that advocate for the poor and those with limited healthcare access.   Weaknesses   Traditionally, the first has been the ability of doctor-prescribed suicide opponents to raise significant funding in a particular state or nationwide. Second has been the ease with which those supportive of assisted suicide legalization have framed this as a "Choice" vs. The Catholic Church debate.  It is important to note that opponents of assisted suicide in Vermont and California have been successful in turning that message frame and achieving victory.     Opportunities     With Question 2 on the ballot there is an opportunity to significantly thwart pro-doctor-prescribed suicide advocates effort to legalize and normalize this practice in the U.S.   There are few other competing measures on the ballot in various states this November that provide the possibility to have as much future impact as Question 2 does upon defeat or passage in Massachusetts.   Threats   Those supporting doctor-prescribed suicide legalization have built a national fundraising advocacy effort trying to position themselves as the experts on end of life issues; when in reality their main purpose is legalization and societal normalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia. Should they succeed in Massachusetts, they will undoubtedly redouble their advocacy and legalization efforts in states like Vermont, California, Montana, Colorado, Arizona and Hawaii. Their campaign will be extremely well funded and we can anticipate them out-raising the No On 2 campaign at minimum 2:1.

MA is almost best of the worst!

I came across this well-documentedpresentation of the importance of the abortion issue in elections which I thinkyou will appreciate.  Please keepeducating about DPS.  Anne   What is the most decisive issue in2012? By Dennis M.Howard , Renew America,August 18, 2012 MT. FREEDOM, NJ — What's the most decisive issue for Election 2012? If you go by the numbers, it is far and away the issue that politicians least want to talk about — Abortion. According to a fresh analysis just completed, abortion is already the most decisive factor in whether a state will vote "blue" (Democratic) or"red" (Republican.) Analysis of data in the 130th edition of the U.S. Statistical Abstract shows that 80% of the nation's 1.2 million abortions occur in Democratic "blue" states, while only 20% occur in Republican"red" states. That makes abortion the single most decisive factor in whether a state votes "red" or "blue." Politicians ignore it at their peril. Not surprisingly, the issue is divisive. Fully 90% of all abortions occur in just 25 states, while the other25 states make up "pro-life America" — with just 10% of all abortions. Federal funding for abortion-related services, needless to say,go disproportionately to the high abortion states. Like it or not, "pro-life America"is paying the bill for "pro-choice America." The District of Columbia with an abortion rate of 50% — 2.5 times the national average — rivals New York City as the"abortion capital" of the United States. In New York City,the black abortion rate is even higher — 60% — while the rate for Hispanics is40%, and for whites 20%. High abortion states Twelve states rank as high abortion states with rates above the national average of 19.4 abortions per 1,000 women, age 15-44. They are: New York (37.7), New Jersey(34.5), Maryland (31.3), Delaware(29.2), Nevada (27.7), California(26.9), Florida (26.7), Connecticut(23.8), Rhode Island (23.3), Hawaii(21.3), Massachusetts (19.8), and Michigan (19.5). All of these states voted Democratic in 2008. Only Florida and Michigan are given much chance of switching parties in 2012. Low abortion states Meanwhile, 15 states have abortion rates of less than 10 per 1,000 women age15-24. They are: Oklahoma(9.7), No. Dakota (9.6), Nebraska (9.1), Indiana (8.6), Wisconsin(8.6), Arkansas(8.4), So. Carolina (8.0), Missouri(7.0), West Virginia (6.7), Utah(6.4), Idaho(6.2), So. Dakota (5.1), Mississippi (5.0), Kentucky (4.5), and Wyoming (0.7). Thirteen of these states voted Republican in 2008. Only two voted Democratic: Wisconsin and Indiana.Both have low abortion rates and both are given a chance of switching parties in 2012. Moderate states split The remaining 23 states have more or less average abortion rates. In 2008, they split politically — with 14 voting Democratic and 9 voting Republican. However, as many as 6 of those in the Democratic column are considered toss-ups today. They include: North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, Minnesota, and Iowa. Which way they'll go will almost certainly determine the outcome of the election. What does that mean for voters and for politicians? Pro-life voters need to speak up vocally about the issue. Pro-choice voters certainly will. Keep your favorite candidate's feet to the fire and don't let him or her brush the issue aside.Abortion is not only a moral issue. It's a powerful economic issue as well.Fight for what you believe in. For pro-life candidates, it's not enough to simply please your favorite constituency. You must educate yourself about the issue from a moral, social,and economic standpoint as well. By becoming better at persuading marginal voters, you can help change voter opinion. Major pro-life focus should be on states most likely to shift to the pro-life side — both politically and in terms of their current abortion rates. That's where progress is most likely to happen. That doesn't mean giving up in "high abortion" states. Effective education and activism aimed at the 13-35 age group through churches and social media can bring about dramatic changes. Voters need to realize that abortion is one of the leading factors behind today's economic crisis. More than 55 million abortions have occurred since1967, causing a cumulative loss in national GDP (Gross Domestic Product)estimated at $45 trillion. That's nearly 3 times current GDP. Moreover, abortion has taken the lives of 30% of the under-45 generation,killing the famous "youth market" that drove the U.S. economy since World War II. This contributed to a huge decline in consumer demand for housing, education, health care and consumer products. It also caused a huge loss of jobs in such fields as education, health care,construction, food production, automobiles, and a great many other consumer products. The brunt of abortion's demographic impact coincided with the retirement of the Baby Boom generation — creating a "double whammy" that caused me to predict the approaching economic crisis as early as 1995, while other analysts were still predicting boom times head. This demographic impact is also one of the fundamental reasons for our current slow recovery. Demographic changes are like shifts in the earth's crust:They take place slowly and persistently over a long period of time, but when they hit, they hit hard. Other factors such as trade policy,the mortgage and financial crisis, changing technology, and the transformation of America's communications and distribution infrastructure also played a role, but changing demographics and declining social values have a deeper, more persistent impact. Right now, abortions are declining by a mere 1% a year — which is just what one would predict as a result of abortions 30 years earlier. Unless we can increase that rate of decline to 5% or 10% a year, abortion could be around for another200 years. If that happens, America won't survive. And that's the big reason why abortion should be the most decisive issue for 2012. The very survival of our nation is at stake. © Dennis M. Howard

DPS now question 2. You can defeat!

Robin Loughman, Chairwoman of MAADPS, has asked us to share this with you.  Last night at the Summer Academy, Fr Mullen reminded people that our goal is a "No" vote from every voter.  This new web presence of the MAADPS, which is now MAADPS - No On 2 is very encouraging.  So many of you have asked what you can do.  Getting involved with social media is something very helpful which you can do.  Thanks, Anne P.S.  Investing a generous contribution is something else each of us needs to do.  After all, this is just as crucial as abortion with even  more potential victims!  https://www.efundraisingconnections.com/c/NoOnQuestion2/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The Secretary of State has assigned No 2 to the doctor-prescribed suicide ballot question.  In order to fight it better, we have changed our name to the Massachusetts Alliance Against Doctor-Prescribed Suicide - No On 2.  We have also upgraded our web site and web presence.  Please check them and get involved. Website:  http://noonquestion2.org/ Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/NoOnBallotQuestion2 Twitter:  https://twitter.com/NoOnQuestion2Ma Our goal is to get people to vote "no" not to have any philosophical discussions with them. Please let us know if you have successes in convincing people. Thank you, Robin Loughman, Chairwoman"

Student Academy a Big Success!

The final session of the 2012 MCFL Student Summer Academy was held last night at St.Brendan's Parish in Bellingham.  It was an excellent night with Rep. Ryan Fattman distributing the certificates of completion as 27 students were commissioned as Pro-life Youth Ambassadors. Anna Brisbois, Laura Brisbois, Clare Marie Fecteau, Joseph Fecteau,Kelsey Gallagher, Thomas Gaudet, Luke Gonya, Olivia Gonya, Peter Gonya, MarkHennigan, Alex Hufnagel, Olivia Koerner, Anna Koerner, Austin Leavitt, CollinLeavitt, Nicole Linse, Clare McCallan, Joe O'Reilly, Nicholas Piselli,Alexander Piselli, Katelin Riley, Erica Ritter, Monica Vise, Sean Waclawik,Catherine Waclawik, Ian Jankauski, and Michael Hennigan are all now ready to carry the pro-life message to an all-to-often hostile world.  What's more, they are ready to do so with both information and compassion. Later in the evening we were joined by members of the community to hear some excellent presentations on the dangers posed by the Doctor-Prescribed Suicide law on the ballot this coming November.  I'm sure the Summer Academy kids will be leaders in the fight to inform the public about this horrible proposal. Last night went well, but really the entire six week program was a huge success.  I especially want to thank MCFL Vice-President Linda Thayer for all her hard work and Fr. David Mullen, MCFL Board Member and Pastor of St. Brendan's for the use of the wonderful facilities. I really enjoyed meeting all the great kids who participatedand I hope to have an even bigger group for next year's academy. Thanks so much for all the support! Best regards, John Triolo MCFL Director of Communications

No On 2 - how you can help defeat doctor-prescribed suicide

We now know that the doctor-prescribed suicide ballot question is number 2 on the Nov 6th ballot.  So the campaign becomes "No On 2", which is all people really need to know.  The Alliance has asked me to forward this message: Please email all your contacts today and encourage them to "Like" the No On 2 Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/NoOnBallotQuestion2 and follow No On 2 on Twitter: https://twitter.com/NoOnQuestion2Ma I am really impressed with the way the Alliance is building their web presence!  We must do all we can to help! Thanks, Anne

What is a better word for "untruth"?

	A better word for untruth would be three words: National Catholic Reporter http://ncronline.org/news/politics/which-presidential-candidate-truly-pro-life

Nellie Gray, RIP

Dear, indomitable Miss Nellie has died at age 88.  Nellie founded the March for Life in 1974 and guided it ever since, working full-time year-round so that millions of pro-lifers could witness and lobby on the sad anniversary of Roe v Wade.  What an impact the March has had!  Nellie made a point of incorporating groups of post-abortive woman, minority and young participants. In 1976, when we ran Ellen McCormack for President because the Democratic party was leaving its roots, Nellie organized a March in New York before the Convention.  Nellie came to Boston in 2010 to address the Pro-Life Legal Defense Fund Dinner.  I picked her up at the airport.  The March for Life Principles have always been "no compromise", which some have interpreted as being opposed to laws like the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.  Nellie explained to me that she favored the Ban and other efforts to cut down on the number of abortions.  She was able to visit with her old friend, Dr Mildred Jefferson.  As it turned out, this was shortly before Dr Jefferson's death. If November 6th develops as we hope, this March will be the largest, most joyful ever.  I'm sure Nellie, in her usual way, is already praying up a storm for that to happen.  I hope all of us will get to the March in Nellie's honor this year.  Anne

Romney-Ryan a Win-Win for Life! See Ryan take apart O on O-care

Before you read the MCFL press release, please watch Paul Ryan deal with the President - six minutes of sense about O-care.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs    A knowledgeable Mass political observer told me five years ago to watch Paul Ryan. We need adults in DC and Ryan certainly is one. We are all potential patients. As one, I feel a lot safer than I did yesterday. Enjoy the day! Anne   For immediate release   Boston, August 11, 2012                                                           contact Anne Fox, 781-449-1774   Massachusetts Citizens for Life applauds the selection by Governor Romney of Paul Ryan as his running mate. Congressman Ryan has long been a friend of life at all stages. His voting record is 100% pro-life, protecting the lives of unborn children, their mothers, the disabled, and the elderly.   Ryan has written. "Personally, I believe that life begins at conception, and it is for that reason that I feel we need to protect that life as we would protect other children...I remain committed to restoring the value of human life and fighting for the rights of the unborn...Most importantly, we must ensure that the most vulnerable among us - both unborn children and mothers struggling with unplanned pregnancies - are afforded the compassion and opportunities they need to choose life. February 2009, op-ed published in The Journal Times of Racine, Wis.   According to Anne Fox, President, Massachusetts Citizens for Life, "Paul Ryan has a proven pro-life record. Also, he will work to protect life with his sensible fiscal plans which will protect patients from rationing and denial of care.   Fox continued, "Romney-Ryan is a win-win for the children, the disabled, the elderly, and every person in this country"

Choose Life plates - very encouraging news!

Let me share the good news.  MCFL called 26,000 of you in June about the plates.  About 300 promised to get plates and did!  You and others have brought the total of plates on cars to 2908!  That means we need 92 more plates to reach 3,000. When we reach 3,000, the Foundation will again get their share to help fund educational efforts and pregnancy resource centers. Thanks to all of you who have plates. If you don't or know someone who doesn't, please encourage them to do so! Thanks again, Anne

The Baby Killer Bailout

Everyone who has seen this has wanted to share.  It is worth a read.  Anne The Baby Killer Bailout URL: http://www.markcrutcherblog.com/index.cfm/2012/7/23/The-Baby-Killer-Bailout In the first few years after its legalization, studies were taken to determine the cost of an abortion. The findings were that the price of a first-trimester procedure was generally around $350. The interesting thing is, that figure has changed little since then. To put this in perspective, even if we ignore the fact that prices have probably risen faster in medicine than in any other area of the economy, applying the basic rate of inflation shows that an item purchased for $350 in 1973 costs almost $2,000 today. So the question is, with no competition and a seemingly reliable demand, why has the abortion industry not been able to raise prices in almost 40 years? The answer is that, contrary to what the abortion lobby would have us believe, the demand is not reliable. In any marketing environment, buying decisions can be categorized on a "marginal / non-marginal" scale. On one end of the scale are decisions based solely on "want" (marginal) and, on the opposite end are decisions based solely on "need" (non-marginal.) Buying a ticket to a baseball game is an example of a marginal decision because it is a decision based on want. On the other hand, if a business owner cannot operate his business without a forklift, his decision to purchase one is based on need and is, therefore, non-marginal. One significant factor in determining where a product falls on this scale is the degree to which consumers might reject it because of price. The more price-sensitive a product is, the more marginal is the decision to buy it. Using the previous examples, a rise in the price of baseball tickets will decrease their sales more than a proportionate rise in the price of forklifts will decrease their sales. This "marginality" scale applies to all purchasing decisions, including the decision whether to "purchase" an abortion or not. Since day one, the abortion industry has pushed this idea that when a woman does not want to be pregnant she will crawl through hell on broken glass to get an abortion. In other words, their contention is that the abortion decision is a non-marginal one. For that to be true, it would have to also be true that the cost of abortions does not significantly impact the abortion rate. The problem is, the evidence does not support this. In April of 1988, the financial publication, Economic Inquiry, Vol. XXVI, published a study about the relationship between abortion cost and abortion rates and concluded that, "The significant inverse relationship between the price of abortions and the abortion rate confirms that the fundamental law of demand is applicable to abortions." Other independent studies have also documented that, as the cost of abortion goes up the demand for abortion goes down. In addition, Colorado abortionist, Warren Hern, reinforced this conclusion during a May, 1997, annual convention of the National Abortion Federation held in Boston, Massachusetts. At a workshop regarding the use of ultrasound in abortion, Hern complained that paying for an ultrasound machine would increase the cost of an abortion by $25. He went on to say that such an increase would cause patient loads at abortion clinics to "plummet." Hern was not merely confirming the argument that price affects the abortion rate, he was going much further and stating that even small increases in price have an overpowering impact. By the way, Hern is no novice in this area. He is the author of the textbook, Abortion Practice, that is almost universally considered to be the definitive publication on abortion and abortion provision. The point is, whether it's these studies or the comments of Warren Hern, the consistent message is that the abortion lobby's "hell on broken glass" rhetoric is a self-serving fabrication and that the abortion decision is often a highly marginal one. If that were not the case, a $25 price increase would not significantly impact abortion rates much less cause the number of women having abortions to "plummet." This represents a very sticky dilemma for the abortion industry. The obvious solution to their current economic woes would be to raise prices to reflect their increased costs even if that meant making more money off fewer procedures. But the abortion lobby knows that is not a viable option. They have always been aware that, in order to maintain abortion's legality, they need the political and cultural inertia created by a high abortion rate. This has put them in a kind of "Catch 22" situation. They need higher prices to financially survive, but those higher prices would lower the abortion rate and threaten their political survivability. In a nutshell, that is why the abortion industry has not raised prices for almost 40 years. Meanwhile, the cost of doing business has risen dramatically. The result is that the $350 abortion that was so profitable in 1973 dollars, is a stone-cold loser in 2012 dollars. What this means, and what the abortion lobby has known for several years, is that their future depends on finding a way to raise their prices without lowering abortion rates. Enter Barack Obama. Make no mistake about it, one of the primary motivations behind this guy's obsession with socialized medicine is government-funding of abortion. In fact, a model for what his administration intends to do already exists. Imagine two women sitting in an abortion clinic waiting room. They are the same age, in the same state of health and their pregnancies are at the same gestational stage. The only significant difference between them is that one is paying cash and the other has a health insurance policy that covers elective abortion. After their babies have been exterminated and their corpses tossed in the dumpster, the first woman will be out the clinic's door for the usual $350 or so. However, the other woman's insurance company will be lucky to escape with anything less than a $3000 claim to pay. This is a scenario that is repeated every day at abortion clinics all across the country. It is also a peak into what Obamacare is all about. The Obamanazis figured out a long time ago that the abortion industry's only hope for survival is for socialized medicine to convert every $350 patient-paid abortion into a $3000 taxpayer-paid abortion. Equally important is that, since customers will be getting their babies butchered at no charge, the abortion rate is not going to drop. In fact, it's going to skyrocket. To put it bluntly, Obamacare is a permanent stimulus package for the abortion industry. Now, if you think I'm baying at the moon here, let me take you back to December of 2009 when this debacle was being fought out in Congress. With only a few hours left before the Christmas recess, it looked like America was going to dodge this bullet. Despite all the greasy politics, arm-twisting, semi-veiled threats, naked bribery, sweetheart deals in smoke-filled rooms and other assorted criminal activities being committed by the Obamanazis, they were still a couple of votes shy. The problem was that several Democrats were holding out over concerns that Obamacare was going to pay for abortions. Obama and his fellow travelers were assuring them that this was not the case. Of course, this could not be verified since no one had actually seen the bill and, furthermore, they were not going to see it before voting on it. In one of the most arrogant and moronic things ever uttered by an elected official, Nancy Pelosi openly stated that Congress would have to pass the bill before the public would be allowed to see what was in it. The crucial thing to note here is that this hang-up over abortion-funding could have been easily resolved. If the administration had not been lying, they could have simply allowed those rebellious Democrats to add a one paragraph statement to the final bill specifically prohibiting any funding for abortion. Had they done that, these guys would have shuffled back onto the reservation and passage would have been assured. But the Obamanazis were lying. They knew abortion funding was written into the bill's language and that such a paragraph would wipe it out. Since they were not willing to give up on one of the fundamental goals of this monstrosity, they had to stick with their argument that we should all just blindly trust them when they said that the bill would not pay for abortions. In effect, a blank contract was shoved in front of Congress and a pen was forced into their boney hands. This strategy worked because, to no one's surprise, the so-called "pro-life Democrats" eventually wimped-out, stopped questioning Obama's lies and signed where they were told to sign. As is common in the political arena, when the choice is between principle and ambition, the latter is usually chosen. And so it was. Today, the bill is available for all to see and now everyone can know what the pro-life movement knew all along. Abortion funding is included. In the final analysis, it is simply a fact that Obama was prepared to flush his crown jewel legislation down the toilet rather than take abortion funding out of it. The fancy rhetoric he used during the debate may have been about people suffering and dying because they are being denied basic healthcare. But his actions made it clear that he would write these people off without blinking an eye, unless a government bailout for Big Abortion was part of the deal. Like I always say, to understand the abortion issue just follow the money trail. In this particular case, if you believe nothing else I've written here, believe this: on the day that Obamacare becomes fully implemented, every single abortion performed in America will be taxpayer-funded. Every single one.

DPS article. Comments immediately, please

A column, "Should Massachusetts Allow Assisted Suicide?" appears in the Barnstable, Hyannis Patch,  http://features.rr.com/article/07ahf4h6RvbOU?q=Massachusetts It is not a poll but solicits comments.  The first comment is about intractable pain. Given our medical advances, pain is really off the table.  No one should have to suffer and, if they are, relatives need to consult another doctor. Please answer this or other points. You'll find a good list of things that are wrong with the proposed legislation.  http://features.rr.com/article/07ahf4h6RvbOU?q=Massachusetts You make such a difference!  Thank you, Anne

Massachusetts Citizens for Life
The Schrafft Center, 529 Main Street
Boston Massachusetts 02129
United States

9 MA Congressmen vote for legal abortion for any reason until birth, 1 abstains

District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803) passed tonight, 220 to 154, a 66 vote margin, but short of the two-thirds vote required under the fast-track procedure utilized today ("suspension of the rules").   Only 154 voted in favor of abortion for any reason any time in pregnancy and we had 9 of them! Our "share" should have been three. Yes, we have ten Congressmen but Barney Frank didn't vote. That means Olver, Neal, McGovern, Capuano, Markey, Tierney, Tsongas, Lynch, and Keating all cast extreme pro-abortion votes! What can we do? Heed the words of Doug Johnson, crack Legislative Director of National Right to Life, "Today's groundbreaking majority vote constitutes a giant step towards this bill ultimately becoming law -- perhaps after the replacement of some of the lawmakers who today were unwilling to protect pain-capable unborn children in the sixth month of pregnancy and later."   Just remember we did have a life-saving victory today in the MA State House! Anne

Subject MCFL's pro-life Congressman

Steve Stockman, dear friend and former consultant with MCFL has just won his run-off election for Congress in Texas. He is a Republican and the district is heavily Republican, so this is tantamount to election. I have already asked him to address our MA Caucus at the March for Life. His election came on the same day that our Congressmen voted as extremely pro-abortion as is possible. It does make one think - Steve's is a new district, created because Texas gained districts. Massachusetts lost a district. It is almost as though Steve has our district - what a great metaphor for where the country and the pro-life movement are going. With Steve in DC again it will be easier to repeal O-care and its dreadful HHS Mandate - which kicks in for most today. Anne