LifeNet

Superb essay: "One women's journey from pro-choice atheist to pro-life Catholic"

In early July the Jesuit publication America had the following as it's cover story (you should be able to access the entire article through the link; please email us if you cannot open it). It is a marvelous practical explanation of the Church's teaching on love, sex, and life. We excerpt sections, but strongly recommend reading the entire essay. The author's blog is  http://www.conversiondiary.com/ and well worth visiting.

America | The National Catholic Weekly - A Sexual Revolution

Back in my pro-choice days, I read that in certain ancient societies it was common for parents to abandon unwanted newborns, leaving them to die of exposure. I found these stories to be as perplexing as they were horrifying. How could this happen? I could never understand how entire cultures could buy into something so obviously terrible, how something that modern society understands to be an unthinkable evil could be widely accepted among large groups of people. ...

One night I was discussing the topic with my husband, who was re-examining his own pro-choice stance. He made a passing remark that startled me into reconsidering this issue: “It just occurred to me that being pro-life is being pro-other-people’s-life,” he quipped. “Everyone is pro-their-own-life.”

************

At some point I started to feel I was more determined to remain pro-choice than to analyze honestly who was and was not human. I started to see this phenomenon in others in the pro-choice community as well. As I researched issues like partial-birth abortion, I frequently became stunned to the point of feeling physically ill upon witnessing the level of evil that normal people can support. I could hardly believe my eyes when I read of reasonable, educated professionals calmly justifying infanticide by calling the victims fetuses instead of babies. It was then that I took a mental step back from the entire pro-choice movement. If this is what it meant to be pro-choice, I was not pro-choice.

Yet I still could not quite label myself pro-life.

************

Growing up in secular middle-class America, I understood sex as something disconnected from the idea of creating life. During my entire childhood I did not know anyone who had a baby sibling; and to the extent that neighborhood parents ever talked about pregnancy, it was to say they were glad they were “done.” In high school sex education class, we learned not that sex creates babies, but that unprotected sex creates babies....

All my life, the message I had heard loud and clear was that sex was for pleasure and bonding, that its potential for creating life was purely tangential, almost to the point of being forgotten. This mind-set became the foundation of my views on abortion. Because I saw sex as being by default closed to the possibility of life, I thought of unplanned pregnancies as akin to being struck by lightning while walking down the street—something totally unpredictable and undeserved that happened to people living normal lives.

My pro-choice views (and I imagine those of many others) were motivated by loving concern: I just did not want women to have to suffer, to have to devalue themselves by dealing with unwanted pregnancies. Since it was an inherent part of my worldview that everyone except people with “hang-ups” eventually has sex, and that sex is, under normal circumstances, only about the relationship between the two people involved, I was lured into one of the oldest, biggest, most tempting lies in human history: the enemy is not human. Babies had become the enemy because of their tendency to pop up and ruin everything; and just as societies are tempted to dehumanize their fellow human beings on the other side of the line in wartime, so had I, and we as a society, dehumanized what we saw as the enemy of sex.

************

I came to see that our culture’s widespread use and acceptance of contraception meant that the “contraceptive mentality” toward sex was now the default attitude. As a society, we had come to take it for granted that we are entitled to the pleasurable and bonding aspects of sex even when we are opposed to the new life it might produce. The option of abstaining from the act that creates babies if we see children as a burden had been removed from our cultural lexicon. Even if it would be a huge crisis to become pregnant, we had a right to have sex anyway. If this were true—if it were morally acceptable for people to have sex even when they believed that a new baby could ruin their lives—then abortion, as I saw things, had to be O.K.

Big rally today in the Philippines agianst abortion and contraception

You can read about it here  -

Asia's Catholic Country Crusades Against Abortion, Contraception Push | PewSitter.com

On the 40th anniversary of Pope Paul VI's encyclical "Humanae Vitae," which condemned artificial birth control, Filipino priests, nuns, seminarians and laity will rally en masse against the Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008.

The legislation would create a new agency called the Commission on Population, which would institutionalize artificial birth control, implement sex education for students as early as the fifth grade and pave the way for legalized abortion.

The rally is the latest strike against the population-control legislation in a country that is 85 percent Catholic. Bishops are denying the Eucharist to politicians who favor the anti-life legislation as well as advising voters that a politician's stance on population control should form the basis of their voting decisions.

Fr. Euteneuer, President of Human life International, on tomorrow's fortieth anniversary of Humanae Vitae

Prayer and Fasting to Repair the Damage of Dissent By Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer President Too numerous are those voices - amplified by the modern means of propaganda - which are contrary to the voice of the Church. To tell the truth, the Church is not surprised to be made, like her divine Founder, a "sign of contradiction," yet she does not, because of this, cease to proclaim with humble firmness the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical. Of such laws the Church was not the author, nor consequently can she be their arbiter; she is only their depositary and their interpreter, without ever being able to declare to be licit that which is not so by reason of its intimate and unchangeable opposition to the true good of man. (Humanae vitae, 18) Humanae vitae, the papal encyclical "on the transmission of life," stands as a solid bulwark against the constant degradation of marriage and family in our modern age. Like Jesus, this teaching is indeed a "sign of contradiction" and even a reproach to those who wish to give human selfishness unbridled permission to wreak havoc on these divine institutions. The dissenters infiltrating our own Church say that this encyclical is "indicative of church hierarchical dysfunction" (National Catholic Reporter) or that millions are "dying as a result of the ban [on contraception]" ("Catholics" for a Free Choice), but in the face of all that dissent, we must say, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." And for those who do, in fact, "know what they do," we offer prayer and fasting for their sins. On Friday of this week, on the actual anniversary of the encyclical, HLI is calling for the many millions of faithful Catholics to offer some sacrifice and prayer for those who have given scandal about this most important teaching. There are public dissenters like the myriad false-Catholic politicians and other public figures like Sean Hannity who have profoundly distorted the perception of the Church's wisdom in the minds of millions of believers and non-believers alike. Academics teaching at some of this nation's so-called Catholic universities bear a deep-seated guilt for their leading astray the impressionable young people whose adult lives have become stamped with the seal of dissent. These are the very ones who were supposed to teach them the truth. Perhaps worst of all are those clergy who for many years have used the sacred space of the confessional to deceive the struggling consciences of the laity or who have maintained an irreverent silence about these issues from the pulpit while the wolves ravage their flocks before their eyes. Indeed, the sins of the dissenters have affected us all because they have failed to rebuke the winds of error and the storms of immorality that have blown over our society since the sexual revolution of the sixties. The devastation has been enormous. "Father forgive them," is our prayer as we look to a future where Humanae vitae will be vindicated in all its wisdom. This Friday is the 40th anniversary of this marvelous encyclical, and it deserves a special remembrance in our hearts and lives. Please join with us, spiritually, this Friday or the following week, in offering some prayer or tangible sacrifice in reparation for the many sins of the dissenters always keeping in mind that dissent never has the last word. The Truth always wins in the end! One final challenge: In our task of forming the "generation of assent" to Humanae vitae, the greatest thing we do on the encyclical's anniversary is to actually read it! (Or read it again, as the case may be.) You will be amazed at its brevity, simplicity and beauty - it is a gift that keeps on giving, just like all the things of God. We have provided a printable version for you or you can read it on-line as you wish. Let us know what you think and your comments may make it into a future HLI publication - as a witness to the new generation of assent. Blessings to all!		Humanae vitae online Humanae vitae in.pdf
Sincerely Yours in Christ, Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, President, Human Life International

WEDR Interview, Radio WVOX 1460 AM, Monday, July 28, 6:30 a.m.

Bob Marone will interview WEDR Committee Co-chairperson Judith Anderson on his Good Morning, Westchester! program on New Rochelle's WVOX Radio 1460 on the AM dial, at 6:30 a.m. on Monday, July 28. The topic is this year's Women's Equality Day Reformed ceremony at the County Board of Legislator's Michaelian Building, Martine Avenue in White Plains on August 15th at 12 Noon. This year marks the 88th anniversary of the 19th Amendment and women's voting rights. A commemorative event has taken place in Westchester County for the last 35 years; the last seven years by the current committee of "pro-life feminists".

The 2008 recipient of the Mott-Stanton-Anthony award will be the Reverend Geneva Patterson of Peekskill, and the kenote speaker is author and syndicated columnist, Maggie Gallagher, current President of the National Organization for Marriage.

The annual WEDR event takes place at the County Board of Legislator's Michaelian Office Building, 8th floor, 148 Martine Avenue in White Plains on Friday, August 15, 12 Noon - 1:00 p.m.

Tune in, if possible, and for more information on the event go the link below.

LifeNet: Women's Equality Day Reformed - Press Release

Tomorrow Night! July 25th - Humanae Vitae Celebration

 

In honor of the 40th Anniversary of Pope Paul VI's encyclical, Humanae Vitae, Saint Mary Church, Norwalk, will have a Mass, reception, and address by Msgr. William Smith on Friday night, July 25.

The evening will begin with a High Mass in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite at 6:30 p.m.. Afterwards a light reception (includes quiche, salads, so come straight from work!) in Msgr. Hajus Hall, followed by a talk on "Humanae Vitae: 40 years later" by Msgr. William Smith, Moral Theology Professor at St. Joseph Seminary of the Archdiocese of New York. Baby sitting will be available. Visit http://www.stmarynorwalk.net/ for directions.

Women's Equality Day Reformed - Press Release

Hudson Valley Coalition for Life, Inc.

Box 494

Ossining, NY 10562

hvcljournal@gmail.com

 

July 22, 2008

 

TO:      Westchester and Putnam County media – radio, television, and newsprint 

            The media are invited to cover the event!

 

RE:      Women’s Equality Day Reformed  - Friday, August 15, 2008

           Ceremony 12 Noon, Sharp! to 1:00 p.m.  Refreshments immediately follow.   

           

 

 

Women’s Equality Day Reformed will celebrate 88 years of women’s voting rights and explore the face of true feminism at its annual ceremony at Noon on Friday, August 15, 2008 at the Westchester County Michaelian Building’s 8^th floor Conference Room, 148 Martine Avenue at Court Street, White Plains, New York. This year’s theme: Feminine Dignity at the Crossroads.

 

The 2008 Woman of the Year is the Reverend Geneva Patterson of Peekskill. The Reverend will be honored for almost 30 years of service as a community health worker for Westchester County that includes the care of incarcerated women. Her ongoing ministry outreach and generous collaborative concern for the betterment of women and society reflect a life of service worthy of recognition on this day.

 

Keynote speaker is author and nationally syndicated columnist, Maggie Gallagher.   A well-known and recognized expert on marriage, Maggie is currently President of the National Organization for Marriage and a  “most influential” voice in the same-sex marriage debate, according to National Journal. She has written for the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, National Review, and other influential media.

 

The official anniversary date of the 19^th Amendment is August 26. On that day in 1920, Lucretia Mott, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other feminine stalwarts achieved their historical voting amendment.  “In anticipation on August 15^th we will recall the early suffragettes and celebrate with and for women of all voting persuasions,” says WEDR spokesperson Regina Riely.  “The annual ceremony has taken place for 35 years and has been reformed the last seven years, honoring Westchester women formerly denied recognition. Their views, like their feminist foremothers, champion a shared voice in government and the essence of womanhood:

protection of the continuity of life.” 

 

There is limited seating capacity. If you plan to attend call Regina at 914-739-8256 or Judith at 914-329-5163, or email: wedreformed@aol.com or hvcljournal@gmail.com.

 

Also, expect a security check with photo ID at the County building. Seek long-term (3 hour) parking to avoid having to leave the ceremony.

 

 

####

 

 

 

 

 

Follow up to "bloggingheads" discussion by two confused pro-abortion women

A week ago we posted this discussion LifeNet: On bloggingheads TV a discussion by two confused pro-abortion young women from the blog of Ann Althouse.

Althouse posted a very good follow-up which you can find here (excerpt below):

Althouse: Amba regretting an abortion: "if an embryo or fetus is regarded as disposable, then you are, too."

I wanted to break out this beautifully written comment that Annie Gottlieb wrote in the comments to yesterday's abortion post (the one that linked to a Bloggingheads episode featuring 2 diavloggers trying to grapple with the realization that the unborn entity isn't "a blob"):

The nonreligious conclusion I came to as the result of lasting (lifelong) regret of an abortion is that if an embryo or fetus is regarded as disposable, then you are, too. I guess it's a version of what Mother Theresa was saying. An individual either is unique and uniquely valuable or isn't. All are or none are. If your existence had happened at the wrong time (I won't use the demeaning word "inconvenient" because sometimes it's little more than that, but sometimes it's a lot worse), you could have been disposed of. Your existence is accidental and contingent.

(Of course if you believe human beings are nothing special, even a plague on the planet, then by all means let's declare open season on 'em and hasten their extinction. Oh, uh, "us" is "them.")

To consider abortion acceptable is to make a philosophical decision about the world without even knowing it.

It's a tricky thing to write into law. Nearly all traditions have recognized the primacy of the mother's life and circumstances (including economic) in the early stages of pregnancy. The irony is that they knew a lot less than we do about what's involved. They really did believe it was a "blob." We know better.

But they also believed pregnancy was something like an act of God. That's why sex was so severely policed. I can understand why Catholics believe that there's a connection between the casual attitude made possible by birth control and a casual attitude toward life itself.

But is that inevitable? If people choose, for a time or for all time, to use sex to "make self" -- to make their own lives and relationships richer, which I do believe is one of its lifegiving uses -- then they should use birth control religiously. One of the big pro-choice arguments is that "birth control fails." Certainly some percentage of that failure rate is due to wrong or careless use of it. The rest -- the true failures -- might be seen as successes of someone who is just hellbent on being here. And the unwitting invitation of such a person should be viewed at all times as one of the ineradicable risks of sex.

Annie has another comment, that links to an important post of hers from 2005:

You know there are pro-life people who would make it mandatory that a woman be shown an ultrasound of her fetus before she can have an abortion.

I was once at the hospital with a woman who was beginning to miscarry, and I watched the live ultrasound. She was, I forget, maybe 8 or 10 weeks pregnant. The embryo/fetus didn't look like a baby yet, but you could see its heart beating.

I wonder if I would have been able to go through with

an abortion

if I'd seen that.

South Dakota informed consent law now going into force for women contemplating abortion; says abortion "will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique living human being."

Here's the report from the Washington Post - and Planned Parenthood is not happy.

Ruling Gives South Dakota Doctors a Script to Read - washingtonpost.com

CHICAGO -- In a victory for antiabortion forces, doctors in South Dakota are now required to tell a woman seeking an abortion that the procedure "will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique living human being."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit last week lifted a preliminary injunction that prevented the language from taking effect. A spokesman for Planned Parenthood, which runs the state's only abortion clinic, said doctors will begin reciting the script to patients as early as this week.

>>>>>>

"The law is one more terrible, terrible barrier," said Sarah Stoesz, president of the regional Planned Parenthood office. She described the rules as "unprecedented interference in the doctor-patient relationship and unprecedented interference in a woman's life."

Stoesz also called the impetus for the law "ideological" and "non-science-based."

Mailee Smith, staff counsel at Chicago-based Americans United for Life, praised the regulations. "We do think it's a good law, because it does provide a woman with the broadest spectrum of information," she said.

While 32 states have informed consent regulations, Smith said, South Dakota alone includes the reference to a fetus as "a whole, separate, unique living human being."

Obama's ten rationalizations for supporting infanticide

Thanks to Kathy Mylott for forwarding this article to us.

Note: Jill Stanek is a former Illinois Nurse, who had the task of taking a born-alive victim of abortion to a hospital "comfort room" so that she could hold him until he died. The experience was so inimical to her calling that she left nursing and sought protection for babies who survived abortions. Barack Obama led the opposition in

Illinois

to this legislation. The article below outlines his various position statements.

 

 

---

---

Obama's 10 reasons for supporting infanticide

---

Posted: January 16, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

By Jill Stanek
© 2008 

I was intimately involved in the five-year process to pass the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act, testifying before committees twice that then-state Sen. Barack Obama sat on.

Following are 10 excuses Obama has given through the years for voting "present" and "no" on the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act, or BAIPA.

10. Babies who survive abortions are not protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.

Obama, the sole opponent ever to speak against BAIPA, stated on the Illinois Senate floor on March 30, 2001:

I just want to suggest ... that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny.

Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – child, a 9-month-old – child that was delivered to term. …

I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute. For that purpose, I think it would probably be found unconstitutional.

9. A ban to stop aborted babies from being shelved to die would be burdensome to mothers.

   Before voting "no" for a second time in the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 5, 2002, Obama stated:

What we are doing here is to create one more burden on women, and I can't support that.

8. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a doctor's prerogative.

An Obama spokesman told the Chicago Tribune in August 2004 that Obama voted against BAIPA because it included provisions that "would have taken away from doctors their professional judgment when a fetus is viable."

7. Anyway, doctors don't do that.

Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in October 2004 he opposed BAIPA because "physicians are already required to use life-saving measures when fetuses are born alive during abortions."

6. Obama apparently read medical charts and saw no proof.

Also, during a speech at

Benedictine

University

in October 2004, Obama said "there was no documentation that hospitals were actually doing what was alleged in testimony presented before him in committee," according to the Illinois Leader.

5. Aborting babies alive and letting them die is a religious issue.

During his U.S. Senate contest against Obama, Alan Keyes famously said:

Christ would not stand idly by while an infant child in that situation died. ... Christ would not vote for Barack Obama, because Barack Obama has voted to behave in a way that it is inconceivable for Christ to have behaved.

Obama has always mischaracterized Keyes' condemnation as a blanket statement against Obama's pro-abortion position, which is untrue. Keyes was pointedly discussing infanticide.

Nevertheless, induced labor abortion, the procedure that sometimes results in babies being aborted alive, must be included as one Obama condones. Obama responded first to Keyes as he recounted in a July 10, 2006, USA Today op ed:

... [W]e live in a pluralistic society, and … I can't impose my religious views on another.

4. Aborting babies alive and letting them die violates no universal principle.

In that USA Today piece, Obama said he reflected on that first answer, decided it was a "typically liberal response," and revised it:

But my opponent's accusations nagged at me. ... If I am opposed to abortion for religious reasons but seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

3. Introducing legislation to stop live aborted babies from being shelved to die was a political maneuver.

During the

Benedictine

University

speech, Obama said, "The bill was unnecessary in

Illinois

and was introduced for political reasons," according to the Illinois Leader.

2. Sinking Born Alive was about outmaneuvering that political maneuver.

Obama has this quote on his website:

Pam Sutherland … of … Illinois Planned Parenthood … told ABC News, "We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on 'partial birth' and 'born alive.' They put these bills out all the time ... because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats. ..."

And the No. 1 reason Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act was:

1. Introducing Born Alive was a ploy to overturn Roe v. Wade.

During a debate against Keyes in October 2004, Obama stated:

Now, the bill that was put forward was essentially a way of getting around Roe vs. Wade. ... At the federal level, there was a similar bill that passed because it had an amendment saying this does not encroach on Roe vs. Wade. I would have voted for that bill.

This was a lie on two points.

First, there was no such amendment.

Second, both definitions of "born alive" were always identical. The concluding paragraph changed in the federal version. But Obama, as chairman of the committee that vetted

Illinois

' version in 2003, refused to allow an amendment rendering both concluding paragraphs identical. He also refused to call the bill and killed it.

The federal paragraph (c) actually weakened the pro-abortion position by opening the possibility of giving legal status to preborn children, the opposite of Obama's contention:

Illinois

' paragraph (c): A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law.

Federal paragraph (c): Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being "born alive" as defined in this section.

At any rate, so what if stopping hospitals and abortion clinics from aborting babies alive and leaving them to die did theoretically "encroach on Roe v. Wade"?

Obama was admitting he supported infanticide if that were true.

An important feature opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal: "NAACP and Abortion"

Great piece. Glad to see Good Counsel Homes founder Chris Bell featured in the first paragraph.

Depending on your browser, you may have to click on the link four or five times before the article opens; but it will eventually. The entire article is more then twice as long as the excerpt.

After you read the whole article, consider sending a letter to the editor - perhaps pick one aspect to comment on ... You can be sure the Journal has already received comments from the pro-aborts!

The email address for letters to the editor is: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com. To send a letter by regular mail, the address is: The Editor, 200 Liberty St., NY, NY 10281

AND why not either post the letter you have sent to the WSJ as a comment on this post, or copy us with an email?

The NAACP and Black Abortions Main Street - WSJ.com

At the Good Counsel shelters for homeless pregnant women in New York, yesterday was business as usual: pregnant moms getting ready to deliver, other mothers feeding their children, still others going off to school or training for new jobs.

There is a striking fact about these women: most are African-American. "These moms are attracted to Good Counsel because they know they will be in an environment where their baby is considered as beautiful and as worthy of life as any other," says Executive Director Chris Bell.

Yesterday was not business as usual at the 99th annual conference for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. For one thing, the first African-American to head the presidential ticket of a major party was on hand. Yet there was another interesting appearance that went mostly unmentioned. This was a protest by African-American pro-lifers – many NAACP members – who can't understand why America's most venerated civil rights organization turns a blind eye to what they say is the abortion industry's practice of targeting poor minority neighborhoods.

These folks include the Rev. Clenard Childress, a New Jersey pastor who runs a Web site called blackgenocide.org – the same language the Rev. Jesse Jackson used before he threw in his lot with the Democratic Party. These folks include Day Gardner of the National Black Pro-Life Union, and Levon Yuille of the National Black Pro-Life Caucus. And these folks include Dr. Alveda King, a niece of the Rev. Martin Luther King who says she knows what abortion does to a woman – because she had two of them before her change of heart.

"I remember when I was pregnant and considering a third abortion," she says. "I went to Daddy King [her grandfather and Martin Luther King's father]. He told me, 'that's a baby, not a blob of tissue.' Unfortunately, 14 million African-Americans are not here today because of legalized abortion. It's as if a plague swept through America's cities and towns and took one of every four of us."

On bloggingheads TV a discussion by two confused pro-abortion young women

This is worth a view. The blog it's posted on is Ann  Althouse's - a university law professor whose site is quite popular.

Althouse: Will pro-choice activists give any moral weight to the unborn?

Women's Equality Day Reformed - August 15 in White Plains, NY

The annual celebration and award ceremony celebrating 88 years of women's voting rights is upon us!

This year the event will take place on Friday, August 15, 12 Noon Sharp! at the County Board of Legislators Michaelian Building, 148 Martine Avenue (corner of Court Street), White Plains, 8th Floor large conference room. August 26 is the 88th anniversary of the 19th Amendment to our Constitution, and the WEDR Committee has another great event planned to mark the day.

The keynote speaker is well-known author and columnist Maggie Gallagher. Maggie has written for the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, National Review and other influential media. She is President of the National Organization for Marriage and is a recognized expert on marriage. She was named to National Journal's list of the "most influential" voices in the same-sex marriage debate. Maggie's insights will challenge all in this critical national debate that has touched a legislative nerve recently with Governor Paterson's proclamation of out-of-state same-sex marraige as valid in New York State. His circumventing of the legislative process is cause for citizen concern as it effectively silences the voice of the people. An appropriate topic on this anniversary of voting rights.

The 2008 Women's Equality Day Reformed Honoree and recipient of the Mott-Stanton-Anthony award is the Reverend Geneva Patterson of Peekskill. A minister for 32 years, the Reverend Patterson has served Westchester County for 28-1/2 years as a community health worker. It was this work that brought her to the Department of Corrections' Womens' Unit where she served the unique and heartbreaking needs and concerns of incarcerated women. Her holistic and compasionate approach has mended broken lives and spirits. Her ministry's outreach continues to champion this cause.

Gather at 11:30 a.m.; Please bring photo ID for County building security check; seek long-term, 3 hour parking - metered Gallaria garage across the street. Email us at hvcljournal@gmail.com if you plan to join us on August 15! 

Gardasil vaccine death toll rises

On June 30 World Net Daily posted an article  www.worldnetdaily.com warning that the vaccination Gardasil is coming under attack again with "a new federal report describing the complications from Merck & Co.'s Gardasil medication for sexually transmitted human papillomavirus - which has been proposed as mandatory for all schoolgirls."

"The new documents reveal a total of 8,864 Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System records, up from a total of 3,461 that had been reported in a document just last fall." Gardasil is a three-vaccine protocol that ranges from $150 per vaccine. That's $150 times three. 

According to WND, "Anaphylactic shock," "foaming at mouth," "grand mal convulsion," coma" and "now paralyzed" are a few of the startling descriptions," in this federal report.

LifeNet and prolifers have been raising concerns about this vaccine from its inception as being recklessly foisted on women and young girls, despite not being properly tested for short and long term effects, on the youngest girls especially.

Judicial Watch uncovered "reports of about one death each month since last fall, bringing the total death toll from the drug to at least 18 and as many as 20. There also were 140 'serious' reports of complications including about three dozen classified as life threatening, 10 spontaneous abortion and half a dozen cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome"

Judicial Watch is also quoted in the article, "Even though Gardasil will not be fully tested for safety until 2009, physicians are already pushing it as a routine, harmless vaccine. Merck's aggressive advertisement campaign tells young girls that their lives could be "one less" affected by cervical cancer and that, 'It's your turn to help guard against cervical cancer.'"

Without question, the money and politics of this issue has trumped concerns for women's health. The fact that Gardasil is being pushed on women by some women's groups is even more shocking. The fact that billions of dollars and the politics of "choice" are involved is no shock at all. Sexual promiscuity - despite its obvious and statistically proven consequences (like HPV) - must be protected at all costs. It is the "bread and butter" of an abortion industry that promotes early sexual activity and that leads young people towards lifelong physical and emotional health consequences, sexually transmitted diseases but one. 

Check out the World Net Daily link above and type Gardasil in the "Search" to read the complete article. The piece closes, "In 2007 Merck's aggressive lobbying campaign and contributions to Women in Government resulted in proposals in at least 39 states to institutionalize such vaccinations."

Gardasil has been pushed hard and beyond safety boundaries for financial and poltical reasons. Maybe it will take a few more deaths for women to wake up on this one, too. If women's groups have been misled on this, then they should be the first to speak out! Connect the dots, ladies.

Spread the word. Stop Gardasil now.