The social, cultural, spiritual, political, academic, and literary rantings of a slightly strange Catholic English teacher.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Gladiator Quote!
"Conjure magic for them and they'll be distracted. Take away their freedom, and still they'll roar. The beating heart of Rome is not the marble of the Senate. It's the sand of the Colosseum. He'll bring them death... and they will love him for it."
Friday, March 20, 2009
Today's vocabulary lesson from the Crazy Schoolmarm:
carpetbagger |ˈkärpitˌbagər|
noun. derogatory.
While we're on the subject, one organization that is actually seeing more business during these tough economic times is Planned Parenthood. Abortions provide a major source of revenue for this organization, and this part of their business is booming, according to a report from NPR's All Things Considered.
Profiting from despair and death.
AIG kinda pales in comparison.
------------------------------------------------------------
Hat tip: SuzyB.org.
noun. derogatory.
- historical (in the U.S.): a person from the northern states who went to the South after the Civil War to profit from the Reconstruction.
- a person perceived as an unscrupulous opportunist : the organization is rife with carpetbaggers.
While we're on the subject, one organization that is actually seeing more business during these tough economic times is Planned Parenthood. Abortions provide a major source of revenue for this organization, and this part of their business is booming, according to a report from NPR's All Things Considered.
Profiting from despair and death.
AIG kinda pales in comparison.
------------------------------------------------------------
Hat tip: SuzyB.org.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Civil marriage and Separation of Church and State.
Prompted by the California Proposition 8 controversy, Darwin Catholic has posted a thoughtful reflection on the question of whether the State should simply get out of the marriage business altogether, leaving marriage in the hands of religious faiths.
Check it out.
Check it out.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Pro-Life health care workers: polish your resumes
According to Bloomberg and other sources, President Obama plans to reverse a concience protection rule issued by the Bush administration last December:
Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama plans to revoke a last minute rule from the Bush administration to shield health workers who refuse to participate in abortions or other medical activities that go against their beliefs.
The new proposal appeared as a notice on the White House Office of Management and Budget’s Web site. The original rule was issued in late December, in the final weeks of the Bush administration, and took effect on Jan. 20, the day Obama became president.
The rule issued by Bush health chief Michael Leavitt prohibited groups that take U.S. money from firing, denying professional certification to or otherwise discriminating against medical providers who refused to perform or assist in abortions or give referral information.
During my last year as an undergraduate, I briefly considered a career in law. As I investigated this possibility, I became so uncomfortable with the possibility that my faith and my job might come into conflict, that I opted for teaching. (It didn't help that many legal documents make extremely dull reading).
If we think there is a shortage of health care workers now, it will be interesting to see what what happens when people begin to leave or avoid medical professions altogether as a result of this.
I have posted on this issue before. I duplicate my comments below:
So, the logic of Planned Parenthood and other opponents of such regulation is that there will not be enough people providing abortions, euthanasia, in-vitro fertilizations, embryonic stem cell research, and other ethically dubious "services".
Hold on a second, though...
I thought people were so excited about these things that they were eager to provide them!
The subtext of the opposition's argument is that there will not be enough people to perptetuate the Culture of Death unless Planned Parenthood, the AMA, and other left-leaning "powers that be" in the medical, scientific, and political world are free to force doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and researchers to participate in unethical practices against their will.
The other underlying message is that the practices mentioned above are absolutely necessary and vital health services. There seems to be little faith in what human ingenuity can do, even within the bounds of divine law. There are natural alternatives to artificial birth control. Abortion is not the only option for pregnant women. In-Vitro fertilization is not the only fertility treatment out there. Adult stem cells have proven much more useful so far than the embryonic variety, and we can care for the elderly and the terminally ill without hastening their deaths.
To expect any professional to violate his or her conscience in order to remain employed is ludicrous and irresponsible. What good is a conscience if one is not permitted to follow it? What kinds of doctors, lawyers, teachers, scientists, and other professionals would we have in our society if we only hire those who are willing to compromise their most closely held beliefs for a paycheck? What kind of society will we have if we teach our children to listen to their bosses before their hearts?
Furthermore, in a nation where freedom of speech, religion, and association are held to be sacred values, it is inappropriate for employers to penalize their workers for exercising their rights in every part of their lives.
I can tell you this: there are many people in many professions who will choose their consciences over everything else, even if it means changing careers. Many people have already risked their jobs in order to provide what they believe to be the best, most ethical care for their patients. If people are worried about a health care shortage, they should wait and see how many doctors and other health care providers will elect to leave their profession rather than lose their souls.
I suggest that if such procedures as abortion and embyronic stem-cell research are as widely accepted as we are led to believe, proponents of such things should have nothing to fear!
Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama plans to revoke a last minute rule from the Bush administration to shield health workers who refuse to participate in abortions or other medical activities that go against their beliefs.
The new proposal appeared as a notice on the White House Office of Management and Budget’s Web site. The original rule was issued in late December, in the final weeks of the Bush administration, and took effect on Jan. 20, the day Obama became president.
The rule issued by Bush health chief Michael Leavitt prohibited groups that take U.S. money from firing, denying professional certification to or otherwise discriminating against medical providers who refused to perform or assist in abortions or give referral information.
During my last year as an undergraduate, I briefly considered a career in law. As I investigated this possibility, I became so uncomfortable with the possibility that my faith and my job might come into conflict, that I opted for teaching. (It didn't help that many legal documents make extremely dull reading).
If we think there is a shortage of health care workers now, it will be interesting to see what what happens when people begin to leave or avoid medical professions altogether as a result of this.
I have posted on this issue before. I duplicate my comments below:
So, the logic of Planned Parenthood and other opponents of such regulation is that there will not be enough people providing abortions, euthanasia, in-vitro fertilizations, embryonic stem cell research, and other ethically dubious "services".
Hold on a second, though...
I thought people were so excited about these things that they were eager to provide them!
The subtext of the opposition's argument is that there will not be enough people to perptetuate the Culture of Death unless Planned Parenthood, the AMA, and other left-leaning "powers that be" in the medical, scientific, and political world are free to force doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and researchers to participate in unethical practices against their will.
The other underlying message is that the practices mentioned above are absolutely necessary and vital health services. There seems to be little faith in what human ingenuity can do, even within the bounds of divine law. There are natural alternatives to artificial birth control. Abortion is not the only option for pregnant women. In-Vitro fertilization is not the only fertility treatment out there. Adult stem cells have proven much more useful so far than the embryonic variety, and we can care for the elderly and the terminally ill without hastening their deaths.
To expect any professional to violate his or her conscience in order to remain employed is ludicrous and irresponsible. What good is a conscience if one is not permitted to follow it? What kinds of doctors, lawyers, teachers, scientists, and other professionals would we have in our society if we only hire those who are willing to compromise their most closely held beliefs for a paycheck? What kind of society will we have if we teach our children to listen to their bosses before their hearts?
Furthermore, in a nation where freedom of speech, religion, and association are held to be sacred values, it is inappropriate for employers to penalize their workers for exercising their rights in every part of their lives.
I can tell you this: there are many people in many professions who will choose their consciences over everything else, even if it means changing careers. Many people have already risked their jobs in order to provide what they believe to be the best, most ethical care for their patients. If people are worried about a health care shortage, they should wait and see how many doctors and other health care providers will elect to leave their profession rather than lose their souls.
I suggest that if such procedures as abortion and embyronic stem-cell research are as widely accepted as we are led to believe, proponents of such things should have nothing to fear!
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
The bag is out of the cat..
Just watch the look on this cat's face as it is being blow dried before it is "shorn".
Hysterical. (Even if you do feel a bit sorry for the kitty...)
Hysterical. (Even if you do feel a bit sorry for the kitty...)
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Birth control pills increase risk for gallstones.
"If you have gallstones and are taking birth control pills, you may want to ask your health care provider if you should use another method of birth control. "
And, according to the National Digestive Diseases Information Clearinghouse (NDDIC):
"Women are twice as likely as men to develop gallstones. Excess estrogen from pregnancy, hormone replacement therapy, and birth control pills appears to increase cholesterol levels in bile and decrease gallbladder movement, which can lead to gallstones."
Gallstones can cause anything from annoying discomfort to life-threatening illness.
One more item to add to our list of many reasons to consider Natural Family Planning and avoid synthetic hormones.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Eugenics and idiocy in the media once again...
FoxNews has an article about a woman in California who just gave birth to eight children after getting a fertility treatment:
Reports are circulating that cast an unflattering light on the miracle mom who gave birth to octuplets in California Monday.
CBS News reported Friday that the mother of eight newborns, who already had six children, filed for bankruptcy and abandoned her home less than two years ago. She hasn't been identified publicly yet, though CBS News described her as a woman in her 30s who lives with her parents.
The woman's mother revealed to the Los Angeles Times that her daughter already had six children before seeking fertility treatment, though she had no idea she would become pregnant with so many babies.
...
The babies were born nine weeks premature, adding to their health risks, the Associated Press reported. Because of the risks, doctors generally advise against births with so many multiples — though the decision is left up to the mother.
Stress comes along with any pregnancy, but giving birth to octuplets could be overwhelming, according to Dr. Charles Sophy, medical director of Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services,
"Any new parent is going to be under stress and multiple that by 8, it's a lot of stress," Sophy told FOXNews.com. "Hopefully the upfront work and due diligence was done."
Sophy said the most pressing concern for Suleman should be getting the youngsters on a schedule.
"Eating, sleeping and bathing are the key areas to get scheduled," he said. "The same goes for mom and dad. Parents need to make sure they're whole or else they won't be valuable to their children."
Sophy said the expense of raising 14 children will likely be prohibitive, citing studies that estimate it costs roughly $2.5 million to raise a child to adulthood. Using that math, raising 14 children would cost roughly $35 million.
"And that's basic stuff," he said. "That doesn't include swimming lessons and things like that. It's very costly and hopefully the planning that needs to be done was done upfront."
The subtext: She's poor, she's ignorant, she's too stupid to know better than to have 8 more kids when she's bankrupt and living with her parents. Oh, and the poor dear will never be able to manage the STRESS!
In other words, she's not a miracle mom, she's just an ignorant woman.
They fall just short of saying she should have done the "smart" thing and had them all killed in the womb. You know, save the poor babies from a lifetime of illness and suffering and the taxpayers from the expense of providing them with health care. Doesn't she know that chilren are better off dead than chronically ill? Doesn't she know they'll be a drain on society? You know, like Nancy Pelosi says, "family planning" stimulates the economy!
I'm surprised they didn't comment upon all of those little carbon footprints.
It really irritates me when people play the ignorant/hysterical/weak woman card. Really.
Setting aside the ethical problems with the kind of fertility treatment she received, let me ask this: Is there something wrong with seeing this as courage?
She could have aborted some or all of those children, but she didn't. She has six already, so it isn't like she doesn't know that having kids is difficult. And she sought fertility treatment, so it's not like she doesn't know how this happened. Come on.
Furthermore, having been a Kaiser patient, I can tell you it isn't their style to not inform a woman of the negative risks of motherhood, especially if she is having multiples. She had to know what she was getting herself into. And she did it anyway.
Think about it. How many women have the guts to try to raise 16 children, even if they're born one at a time?
I'd have a cup of tea with someone like that any time. She can bring her 16 kids along.
Who said FoxNews was a right-wing news outlet?
Reports are circulating that cast an unflattering light on the miracle mom who gave birth to octuplets in California Monday.
CBS News reported Friday that the mother of eight newborns, who already had six children, filed for bankruptcy and abandoned her home less than two years ago. She hasn't been identified publicly yet, though CBS News described her as a woman in her 30s who lives with her parents.
The woman's mother revealed to the Los Angeles Times that her daughter already had six children before seeking fertility treatment, though she had no idea she would become pregnant with so many babies.
...
The babies were born nine weeks premature, adding to their health risks, the Associated Press reported. Because of the risks, doctors generally advise against births with so many multiples — though the decision is left up to the mother.
Stress comes along with any pregnancy, but giving birth to octuplets could be overwhelming, according to Dr. Charles Sophy, medical director of Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services,
"Any new parent is going to be under stress and multiple that by 8, it's a lot of stress," Sophy told FOXNews.com. "Hopefully the upfront work and due diligence was done."
Sophy said the most pressing concern for Suleman should be getting the youngsters on a schedule.
"Eating, sleeping and bathing are the key areas to get scheduled," he said. "The same goes for mom and dad. Parents need to make sure they're whole or else they won't be valuable to their children."
Sophy said the expense of raising 14 children will likely be prohibitive, citing studies that estimate it costs roughly $2.5 million to raise a child to adulthood. Using that math, raising 14 children would cost roughly $35 million.
"And that's basic stuff," he said. "That doesn't include swimming lessons and things like that. It's very costly and hopefully the planning that needs to be done was done upfront."
The subtext: She's poor, she's ignorant, she's too stupid to know better than to have 8 more kids when she's bankrupt and living with her parents. Oh, and the poor dear will never be able to manage the STRESS!
In other words, she's not a miracle mom, she's just an ignorant woman.
They fall just short of saying she should have done the "smart" thing and had them all killed in the womb. You know, save the poor babies from a lifetime of illness and suffering and the taxpayers from the expense of providing them with health care. Doesn't she know that chilren are better off dead than chronically ill? Doesn't she know they'll be a drain on society? You know, like Nancy Pelosi says, "family planning" stimulates the economy!
I'm surprised they didn't comment upon all of those little carbon footprints.
It really irritates me when people play the ignorant/hysterical/weak woman card. Really.
Setting aside the ethical problems with the kind of fertility treatment she received, let me ask this: Is there something wrong with seeing this as courage?
She could have aborted some or all of those children, but she didn't. She has six already, so it isn't like she doesn't know that having kids is difficult. And she sought fertility treatment, so it's not like she doesn't know how this happened. Come on.
Furthermore, having been a Kaiser patient, I can tell you it isn't their style to not inform a woman of the negative risks of motherhood, especially if she is having multiples. She had to know what she was getting herself into. And she did it anyway.
Think about it. How many women have the guts to try to raise 16 children, even if they're born one at a time?
I'd have a cup of tea with someone like that any time. She can bring her 16 kids along.
Who said FoxNews was a right-wing news outlet?
Monday, January 26, 2009
Get a grip, Nancy.
Or at least take an Economics course.
Pelosi: Contraception is Good Stimulus for the Economy
Her words:
"Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."
Her line of reasoning:
Never mind that in the real world, one needs people to be employees to produce commodities and other people to be customers who buy products. These business transactions keep the economy moving. Money means little if there isn't a population around to use it. Japan is a prominent example of this connection between growth in the population and the economy. For the past few years, Japan has been working to avert an economic downturn as its own population declines.
Let's also consider the fact that young people generate a great deal of economic activity with their parents' money. Think of all of those teenagers at the malls and movie theaters with Mom and Dad's cash in their pockets. Think of all of those Wii systems, computers, iPods, and other techno-toys people bought for their sons, daughters, nieces, nephews, and grandchildren this past Christmas. Heck, just think of what the 13-25 crowd does for the cosmetic industry! I don't see many advertisements for zit creams directed at the over 40 crowd.
But, then, who ever said that Washington is the real world?
Those of us in the real world want to be able to keep our hard-earned money so that we can feed, clothe, educate, and (within reason) entertain our children as we see fit. Nancy Pelosi is telling us we shouldn't even have them! In her view, they'll only drain the resources of the government village that will raise them for us, because obviously we can't (or shouldn't have to) take on the arduous task of raising them ourselves.
It's the same condescending attitude that we see in "humanitarian" agencies that provide abortion and birth control overseas.
I suppose I should be thankful for one thing, though. Mrs. Pelosi is at least has the honesty not to hide how out of touch she really is.
____________________________________________
Update:
Check out this video from Students for Life:
Just call her No Apologies Nancy!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related:
Nancy Pelosi's Neo-Eugenics
Pelosi: Contraception is Good Stimulus for the Economy
Her words:
"Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government."
Her line of reasoning:
- It is the government's responsibility to provide for people.
- Government spending on people is good for the economy.
- More people mean more government spending.
- Therefore, fewer people mean less spending.
- Fewer people are cheaper than more people, making it easier for the government to spend more money per person.
- Hence, birth control (with its ugly cousin abortion) is better for the economy.
Never mind that in the real world, one needs people to be employees to produce commodities and other people to be customers who buy products. These business transactions keep the economy moving. Money means little if there isn't a population around to use it. Japan is a prominent example of this connection between growth in the population and the economy. For the past few years, Japan has been working to avert an economic downturn as its own population declines.
Let's also consider the fact that young people generate a great deal of economic activity with their parents' money. Think of all of those teenagers at the malls and movie theaters with Mom and Dad's cash in their pockets. Think of all of those Wii systems, computers, iPods, and other techno-toys people bought for their sons, daughters, nieces, nephews, and grandchildren this past Christmas. Heck, just think of what the 13-25 crowd does for the cosmetic industry! I don't see many advertisements for zit creams directed at the over 40 crowd.
But, then, who ever said that Washington is the real world?
Those of us in the real world want to be able to keep our hard-earned money so that we can feed, clothe, educate, and (within reason) entertain our children as we see fit. Nancy Pelosi is telling us we shouldn't even have them! In her view, they'll only drain the resources of the government village that will raise them for us, because obviously we can't (or shouldn't have to) take on the arduous task of raising them ourselves.
It's the same condescending attitude that we see in "humanitarian" agencies that provide abortion and birth control overseas.
I suppose I should be thankful for one thing, though. Mrs. Pelosi is at least has the honesty not to hide how out of touch she really is.
____________________________________________
Update:
Check out this video from Students for Life:
Just call her No Apologies Nancy!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related:
Nancy Pelosi's Neo-Eugenics
Schoolmarm Ruler tips to: SuzyB.org, Tito
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Choose Life License Plates
Annie at After Abortion posts on which states have them and which do not.
Texas, like the other states highlighted in yellow, is working on this.
At the Texas Rally for Life this year, there were petitions going around for a Choose Life plate here in Texas. Considering our governor fully supports the idea, and our state already has parental notification, waiting periods, and a "right to know" statute, I think we have a good chance of making these license plates a reality.
The sale of these special license plates would go to support adoptions, making it easier for women to choose life for their babies.
If you live in a state that is considering these, be sure to voice your support!
Texas Rally for Life, 2009
It was a very cold and windy day in Austin yesterday. A cold font blew in, making coats, gloves, and jackets a must this year.
There is no official count for the number of participants yet, but over 2,000 marched last year, and the crowd was larger this time in spite of the cold, and quite vocal. As we marched down the streets, chanting, our voices reverberated through downtown Austin, echoing off of the buildings as we went. I took the picture above as we approached the Capitol. That is only part of the crowd which you see here. There were a many more people behind me.
The Austin police did a very good job of protecting the safety of those on both sides.
Governor Perry spoke a this year's rally, promising us that he would continue to support pro-life legislation, regardless of what happens in Washington.
Adoption dominated the discourse at this year's rally. Most of the speakers were women who had placed a child for adoption, or couples who were adoptive parents themselves. The parents testified to the beauty and love that their adopted sons and daughters brought to their families. The birthmothers spoke of how difficult it was too choose adoption. But, the knowledge that they provided their children with loving homes helped them find the strength to face that difficulty. They spoke in order to counter the emphasis our culture places on the "giving up" of a child over the loving acceptance of the child by her new parents.
Video Source
There were counter protestors, of course, making sure they confronted us "anti-choice zealots". In spite of their attempts to be more organized this year and to "keep the anti-choice message from being heard", it looked like there were only about two or three dozen of them. Chanting things like "Jesus died for your sins, not for mine", accusing us of being "patriarchal" and beating drums did little to counter our message. One counter protestor accused a friend of mine of not believing in dinosaurs and told her she can't say anything about abortion until she has been pregnant. (Interestingly, my friend is a science teacher and happens to be visibly pregnant right now). Some said things not fit to print. I regret to say that their display said more about their bigoted ideas about pro-lifers than it did about us. At least they were a touch more civilized than the counter-protestors in San Francisco.
Considering Austin is one of the most "blue" regions of the state of Texas, I'm surprised that was the best they could do.
Ironically, one of the groups organizing the counter-protests calls itself "Central Texas Anti-Racist Action". I wonder if anyone has ever told them about Margaret Sanger's desire to use abortion as a tool of racial purification?
After the rally was over, many of us found ourselves rushing to the nearest Starbucks (or other hot beverage provider) to warm up our (slightly numb) fingers, toes, and noses. Though our extremities were cold, our hearts were certainly fired up to continue the fight for Life. All told, it was a very good day.
I would also like to add a great big "Hello" to the 30,000 plus marchers who participated in the Walk for Life West Coast in San Francisco, CA yesterday. This is only their fifth year doing this, and the sheer size of the event is astounding!We all marched together at the same time (We at 1 p.m. Central Time, they at 11 a.m. Pacific). Support for Life in this country not only crosses party lines, religious lines, and ethnic lines; it also crosses time zones!
Here is a site with photographs of the 2006 Walk..
Thursday, January 22, 2009
49,551,703 Total Abortions since 1973
Nearly 50 million human beings deliberately exterminated in the womb.
Today is the 36th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision which, along with Doe v. Bolton, legalized abortion on demand across the United States.
As the title of my blog clearly indicates, I teach. Every week, a collection of young people move through my classroom. Every year is different. Every class is different. Every period is different.
I play a sort of game with myself every year. It's more of a challenge, really. I challenge myself to learn one unique (and positive) thing about each student. It does not matter what, exactly. Some of these positive traits are easy to see. Some are bizarre. Doing this helps me to appreciate my students a little better, and reminds me to treat them with care and respect to the best of my ability. I also find that in those moments when they drive me nuts it helps me to be a little more fair.
What is interesting is what happens when someone is absent. The empty desk changes the room somehow. There is a piece missing. There is a gap where a vibrant (or at least quietly scintillating) personality usually sits. Even when one of my quieter pupils is missing, the difference is noticeable. The classroom feels incomplete somehow.
There are nearly 50 million empty desks out there right now in our schools, in our workplaces. How many gaps are there in our world that someone should have filled? How many of those singles on e-harmony are looking for a soul-mate who never given a chance at life? How many of our friends, siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews have been lost to abortion? It has been 36 years. How many children were never even conceived, because their parents were aborted? How many women suffer in silence, knowing that their children have been slaughtered and their bodies have been scarred by the scourge that is abortion?
What would the world be like if these children had lived?
"Strange, isn't it? Each man's life touches so many other lives. When he isn't around he leaves an awful hole, doesn't he?"
Today is the 36th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision which, along with Doe v. Bolton, legalized abortion on demand across the United States.
As the title of my blog clearly indicates, I teach. Every week, a collection of young people move through my classroom. Every year is different. Every class is different. Every period is different.
I play a sort of game with myself every year. It's more of a challenge, really. I challenge myself to learn one unique (and positive) thing about each student. It does not matter what, exactly. Some of these positive traits are easy to see. Some are bizarre. Doing this helps me to appreciate my students a little better, and reminds me to treat them with care and respect to the best of my ability. I also find that in those moments when they drive me nuts it helps me to be a little more fair.
What is interesting is what happens when someone is absent. The empty desk changes the room somehow. There is a piece missing. There is a gap where a vibrant (or at least quietly scintillating) personality usually sits. Even when one of my quieter pupils is missing, the difference is noticeable. The classroom feels incomplete somehow.
There are nearly 50 million empty desks out there right now in our schools, in our workplaces. How many gaps are there in our world that someone should have filled? How many of those singles on e-harmony are looking for a soul-mate who never given a chance at life? How many of our friends, siblings, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews have been lost to abortion? It has been 36 years. How many children were never even conceived, because their parents were aborted? How many women suffer in silence, knowing that their children have been slaughtered and their bodies have been scarred by the scourge that is abortion?
What would the world be like if these children had lived?
"Strange, isn't it? Each man's life touches so many other lives. When he isn't around he leaves an awful hole, doesn't he?"
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Your Tax Dollars at Work: Paying for Abortions
In his inauguration speech, President Obama promised "to help restore faith in government without which we cannot deliver the changes that we were sent here to make."
I guess he does not think he needs to be accountable to us when he spends our funds on abortion, even though, according to a 2006 Zogby poll, 69% of Americans object to such use of their tax money.
That's right, folks. Obama plans to overturn the "Mexico City Policy" begun during the Reagan era and promoted by President Bush, which prevented the use of your tax dollars to fund abortions overseas. Obama's planned executive order will once again allow your money to fund abortion, whether you like it or not.
And, as an added bonus, rumor has it he will sign it tomorrow, on the 36th Anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.
If the "Freedom of Choice Act" passes, your tax dollars will fund abortions here in the United States, too. And there won't be a thing we can do about it.
Sorry, but spending my money on the destruction of innocent human life without my consent or even a vote from my senators and representatives does nothing to increase my faith in government.
News outlets covering this (Some only in obscure, one-sided references):
CBS News
FoxNews
CNN
Washington Post
Pro-life Websites and Blogs:
SuzyB.org: here and here.
LifeSite News
Catholic News Agency
LifeNews.com
I guess he does not think he needs to be accountable to us when he spends our funds on abortion, even though, according to a 2006 Zogby poll, 69% of Americans object to such use of their tax money.
That's right, folks. Obama plans to overturn the "Mexico City Policy" begun during the Reagan era and promoted by President Bush, which prevented the use of your tax dollars to fund abortions overseas. Obama's planned executive order will once again allow your money to fund abortion, whether you like it or not.
And, as an added bonus, rumor has it he will sign it tomorrow, on the 36th Anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision.
If the "Freedom of Choice Act" passes, your tax dollars will fund abortions here in the United States, too. And there won't be a thing we can do about it.
Sorry, but spending my money on the destruction of innocent human life without my consent or even a vote from my senators and representatives does nothing to increase my faith in government.
News outlets covering this (Some only in obscure, one-sided references):
CBS News
FoxNews
CNN
Washington Post
Pro-life Websites and Blogs:
SuzyB.org: here and here.
LifeSite News
Catholic News Agency
LifeNews.com
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Inauguration Day
"Suddenly another voice spoke, low and melodious, its very sound an enchantment. Those who listened unwarily to that voice could seldom report the words that they heard; and if they did, they wondered, for little power remained in them. Mostly they remembered only that it was a delight to hear the voice speaking, all that it said seemed wise and reasonable, and desire awoke in them by swift agreement to seem wise themselves. When others spoke they seemed harsh and uncouth by contrast; and if they gainsaid the voice, anger was kindled in the hearts of those under the spell. For some the spell lasted only while the voice spoke to them, and when it spoke to another they smiled, as men do who see through a juggler's trick while others gape at it. For many the sound of the voice alone was enough to hold them enthralled; but for those whom it conquered the spell endured when they were far away, and ever they heard that soft voice whispering and urging them. But none were unmoved; none rejected its pleas and its commands without an effort of mind and will, so long as its master had control of it."
(JRR Tolkien, The Two Towers.)
Let us hope and pray that our new President will use his voice to defend true justice for all people.
(JRR Tolkien, The Two Towers.)
Let us hope and pray that our new President will use his voice to defend true justice for all people.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Life
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: CatholicVote.com via National Catholic Register via Tito Edwards at American Catholic
(Whew!)
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Study finds men, not poverty, drive women to abortion.
The early American feminists saw this one coming a mile away. Wait, I take that back. They saw over 100 years ago that it had already arrived:
"[This] subject lies deeper down in woman's wrongs than any other...I hesitate not to assert that most of [the responsibility for] this crime lies at the door of the male sex."
Matilda Gage, The Revolution, 1(14):215-6 April 9, 1868
A recent study finds that unsupportive male partners are the top reason women decide to have abortions:
While abortions have decreased in women having their first pregnancy, the number of repeat abortions has increased. Today, 47% of all abortions are obtained by women who have already had at least one previous abortion.
In addition, most abortions occur now in the group of women who already have one living child. ....
A new study by Priscilla Coleman and colleagues has been published in the International Journal of Mental Health Addiction. This study uses data from the Fragile Families and Well-Being Study.
The sample was drawn from hospitals in 16 cities around the country, which had high numbers of unmarried births. The final sample consisted of families with one child. The mothers then either aborted or gave birth to a subsequent child. ....
This study looked at the reasons women chose childbirth or abortion for their subsequent pregnancy. It is unique, in that, it examined the decision-making process in the context of the relationship with the father of the child. ....
The results of the study indicated that the most important factors in determining the women's choice to abort a second pregnancy were those associated with the father's inability or unwillingness to provide assistance in rearing the first child.
Women were significantly more likely to abort if they reported that the father of the child cannot be trusted to "watch the child for a week," "take good care of the child," "watch the child when the mothers needs to do things," "does not support the mother's way of raising the child," "does not respect the schedule and rules" for the child, etc.
In addition, it was found that mothers who were married to the father were significantly more likely to deliver the baby.
What is especially interesting are the variables that did not appear to influence the choice of abortion vs. delivery.
For example, the difficulty of raising the child, based on poor temperament of the child or the need for frequent medical intervention, did not affect the choice to abort. In addition, financial considerations were not important in the decision. ....
The results of this study are counter to the prevailing opinion that women abort because of poverty and financial considerations. Instead, these mothers were more apt to make the decision based on whether or not they would be supported in their role as a mother by a father who had already demonstrated an ability to care for one of his children.
"Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!"
-Susan B. Anthony, The Revolution.
Tips of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Granny Grump and Feminists for Life.
"[This] subject lies deeper down in woman's wrongs than any other...I hesitate not to assert that most of [the responsibility for] this crime lies at the door of the male sex."
Matilda Gage, The Revolution, 1(14):215-6 April 9, 1868
A recent study finds that unsupportive male partners are the top reason women decide to have abortions:
---------------------------------------
While abortions have decreased in women having their first pregnancy, the number of repeat abortions has increased. Today, 47% of all abortions are obtained by women who have already had at least one previous abortion.
In addition, most abortions occur now in the group of women who already have one living child. ....
A new study by Priscilla Coleman and colleagues has been published in the International Journal of Mental Health Addiction. This study uses data from the Fragile Families and Well-Being Study.
The sample was drawn from hospitals in 16 cities around the country, which had high numbers of unmarried births. The final sample consisted of families with one child. The mothers then either aborted or gave birth to a subsequent child. ....
This study looked at the reasons women chose childbirth or abortion for their subsequent pregnancy. It is unique, in that, it examined the decision-making process in the context of the relationship with the father of the child. ....
The results of the study indicated that the most important factors in determining the women's choice to abort a second pregnancy were those associated with the father's inability or unwillingness to provide assistance in rearing the first child.
Women were significantly more likely to abort if they reported that the father of the child cannot be trusted to "watch the child for a week," "take good care of the child," "watch the child when the mothers needs to do things," "does not support the mother's way of raising the child," "does not respect the schedule and rules" for the child, etc.
In addition, it was found that mothers who were married to the father were significantly more likely to deliver the baby.
What is especially interesting are the variables that did not appear to influence the choice of abortion vs. delivery.
For example, the difficulty of raising the child, based on poor temperament of the child or the need for frequent medical intervention, did not affect the choice to abort. In addition, financial considerations were not important in the decision. ....
The results of this study are counter to the prevailing opinion that women abort because of poverty and financial considerations. Instead, these mothers were more apt to make the decision based on whether or not they would be supported in their role as a mother by a father who had already demonstrated an ability to care for one of his children.
---------------------------------------
"Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; But oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!"
-Susan B. Anthony, The Revolution.
Tips of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Granny Grump and Feminists for Life.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Anti-Feminism and the Birth Control Pill
Interestingly enough, even in the Pill's earliest days, it was known to have poisonous effects on the female body. But, during the initial trials in the 1950s, researchers John Rock and Gregory Pincus were so excited about its effectiveness they didn't stop to think about whether or not they were harming women (emphasis mine):
Dr. Edris Rice-Wray, a faculty member of the Puerto Rico Medical School and medical director of the Puerto Rico Family Planning Association, was in charge of the trials. After a year of tests, Dr. Rice-Wray reported good news to Pincus. The Pill was 100% effective when taken properly. She also informed him that 17% of the women in the study complained of nausea, dizziness, headaches, stomach pain and vomiting. So serious and sustained were the reactions that Rice-Wray told Pincus that a 10-milligram dose of Enovid caused "too many side reactions to be generally acceptable."
Rock and Pincus quickly dismissed Rice-Wray's conclusions. Their patients in Boston had experienced far fewer negative reactions, and they believed many of the complaints were psychosomatic. The men also felt that problems such as bloating and nausea were minor compared to the contraceptive benefits of the drug. Although three women died while participating in the trials, no investigation was conducted to see if the Pill had caused the young women's deaths. Confident in the safety of the Pill, Pincus and Rock took no action to assess the root cause of the side effects.
...
In later years, Pincus's team would be accused of deceit, colonialism and the exploitation of poor women of color. The women had only been told that they were taking a drug that prevented pregnancy, not that this was a clinical trial, that the Pill was experimental or that there was a chance of potentially dangerous side effects. Pincus and Rock, however, believed they were following the appropriate ethical standards of the time. In the 1950s, research involving human subjects was much less regulated than it is today. Informed consent standards were minimal and only the most basic toxicity tests were required for human trials.
(Source: PBS.org)
In other words, they decided the pill was safe and the women were just hysterical little things and the side effects were all in their heads.
There are few things more frustrating than having a doctor dismiss symptoms that you know are real by conveniently filing you away as hysterical woman. This has only happened to me personally on one occasion, but that does not make it any less infuriating.
Also interesting here is that a female researcher raised concern about the harmful side-effects, only to be dismissed herself by these two men who apparently believed that not being pregnant is much more important than being healthy.
All good feminists should be outraged by this. So should anyone concerned about racial equality and imperialism, for that matter. We are told that the pill is supposed to be liberating for women, but it was (no pun intended) conceived through the exploitation of women. Women who were not even fully informed about the fact that they were test subjects! So much for choices.
Dr. Edris Rice-Wray, a faculty member of the Puerto Rico Medical School and medical director of the Puerto Rico Family Planning Association, was in charge of the trials. After a year of tests, Dr. Rice-Wray reported good news to Pincus. The Pill was 100% effective when taken properly. She also informed him that 17% of the women in the study complained of nausea, dizziness, headaches, stomach pain and vomiting. So serious and sustained were the reactions that Rice-Wray told Pincus that a 10-milligram dose of Enovid caused "too many side reactions to be generally acceptable."
Rock and Pincus quickly dismissed Rice-Wray's conclusions. Their patients in Boston had experienced far fewer negative reactions, and they believed many of the complaints were psychosomatic. The men also felt that problems such as bloating and nausea were minor compared to the contraceptive benefits of the drug. Although three women died while participating in the trials, no investigation was conducted to see if the Pill had caused the young women's deaths. Confident in the safety of the Pill, Pincus and Rock took no action to assess the root cause of the side effects.
...
In later years, Pincus's team would be accused of deceit, colonialism and the exploitation of poor women of color. The women had only been told that they were taking a drug that prevented pregnancy, not that this was a clinical trial, that the Pill was experimental or that there was a chance of potentially dangerous side effects. Pincus and Rock, however, believed they were following the appropriate ethical standards of the time. In the 1950s, research involving human subjects was much less regulated than it is today. Informed consent standards were minimal and only the most basic toxicity tests were required for human trials.
(Source: PBS.org)
In other words, they decided the pill was safe and the women were just hysterical little things and the side effects were all in their heads.
There are few things more frustrating than having a doctor dismiss symptoms that you know are real by conveniently filing you away as hysterical woman. This has only happened to me personally on one occasion, but that does not make it any less infuriating.
Also interesting here is that a female researcher raised concern about the harmful side-effects, only to be dismissed herself by these two men who apparently believed that not being pregnant is much more important than being healthy.
All good feminists should be outraged by this. So should anyone concerned about racial equality and imperialism, for that matter. We are told that the pill is supposed to be liberating for women, but it was (no pun intended) conceived through the exploitation of women. Women who were not even fully informed about the fact that they were test subjects! So much for choices.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Pill harms environment/population, says its inventor
Yes ladies and gentlemen. One of the men responsible for producing the pill says it is a "demographic catastrophe" and an environmental hazard.
From Cathnews.com:
Eighty five year old Carl Djerassi the Austrian chemist who helped invent the contraceptive pill now says that his co-creation has led to a "demographic catastrophe."
In an article published by the Vatican this week, the head of the world's Catholic doctors broadened the attack on the pill, claiming it had also brought "devastating ecological effects" by releasing into the environment "tonnes of hormones" that had impaired male fertility, The Taiwan Times says.
The assault began with a personal commentary in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard by Carl Djerassi. The Austrian chemist was one of three whose formulation of the synthetic progestogen Norethisterone marked a key step toward the earliest oral contraceptive pill.
Djerassi outlined the "horror scenario" that occurred because of the population imbalance, for which his invention was partly to blame. He said that in most of Europe there was now "no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction." He said: "This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete."
...
The fall in the birth rate, he said, was an "epidemic" far worse, but given less attention, than obesity. Young Austrians, he said, were committing national suicide if they failed to procreate. And if it were not possible to reverse the population decline they would have to understand the necessity of an "intelligent immigration policy."
Of course the secular world is doing its usual scoffing. The Taipei Times headlines this story with "Catholic Church renews its attack on contraceptive pill". (Sorry, folks. You can't renew something that never let up in the first place.). Of course, there is a token quotation from a representative of an environmentalist group:
Angelo Bonelli, of the Italian Green party, said it was the first he had heard of a link between the pill and environmental pollution. The worst of poisons were to be found in the water supply.
“It strikes me as idiosyncratic to be worried about this,” he said.
I'm astonished that this is the "first he had heard" about this when secular researchers in Canada and the United States have recognized the negative environmental effects of hormonal contraceptive use on aquatic life and on human populations, which include poisoning fish, and causing increased rates of cancer in the people who eat them. The reasearch in Canada goes as far back as 2004.
So lets take stock here. So far the pill has managed to poison:
Fish
Men who eat fish
Women
Society
The Planet.
NFP, anybody?
--------------------------------------
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to my husband, who told me about this.
From Cathnews.com:
Eighty five year old Carl Djerassi the Austrian chemist who helped invent the contraceptive pill now says that his co-creation has led to a "demographic catastrophe."
In an article published by the Vatican this week, the head of the world's Catholic doctors broadened the attack on the pill, claiming it had also brought "devastating ecological effects" by releasing into the environment "tonnes of hormones" that had impaired male fertility, The Taiwan Times says.
The assault began with a personal commentary in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard by Carl Djerassi. The Austrian chemist was one of three whose formulation of the synthetic progestogen Norethisterone marked a key step toward the earliest oral contraceptive pill.
Djerassi outlined the "horror scenario" that occurred because of the population imbalance, for which his invention was partly to blame. He said that in most of Europe there was now "no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction." He said: "This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete."
...
The fall in the birth rate, he said, was an "epidemic" far worse, but given less attention, than obesity. Young Austrians, he said, were committing national suicide if they failed to procreate. And if it were not possible to reverse the population decline they would have to understand the necessity of an "intelligent immigration policy."
Of course the secular world is doing its usual scoffing. The Taipei Times headlines this story with "Catholic Church renews its attack on contraceptive pill". (Sorry, folks. You can't renew something that never let up in the first place.). Of course, there is a token quotation from a representative of an environmentalist group:
Angelo Bonelli, of the Italian Green party, said it was the first he had heard of a link between the pill and environmental pollution. The worst of poisons were to be found in the water supply.
“It strikes me as idiosyncratic to be worried about this,” he said.
I'm astonished that this is the "first he had heard" about this when secular researchers in Canada and the United States have recognized the negative environmental effects of hormonal contraceptive use on aquatic life and on human populations, which include poisoning fish, and causing increased rates of cancer in the people who eat them. The reasearch in Canada goes as far back as 2004.
So lets take stock here. So far the pill has managed to poison:
Fish
Men who eat fish
Women
Society
The Planet.
NFP, anybody?
--------------------------------------
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to my husband, who told me about this.
Monday, January 5, 2009
When your unborn child is seriously/terminally ill...
... There are alternatives to abortion as well as support on the web.
Perinatal Hospice
As prenatal testing becomes increasingly routine, more parents are learning devastating news before their babies are born. In too many places, the ability to diagnose has raced ahead of the ability to care for these families and their babies. But in a beautiful and practical response, some pioneering hospitals and hospices are starting perinatal hospice or perinatal palliative care programs for families who wish to continue their pregnancies with babies who likely will die before or shortly after birth.
Be Not Afraid
Carry to Term with a Negative Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Partners for Life
String of Pearls
Living with Trisomy 13
A Trisomy 18 Journey
Waiting With Love
And then there are the children that defy all predictions, such as this young man with Spina Bifida:
And these two young ladies:
And others who make it clear that the term "differently-abled" is actually very apt.
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Christina Dunigan
Perinatal Hospice
As prenatal testing becomes increasingly routine, more parents are learning devastating news before their babies are born. In too many places, the ability to diagnose has raced ahead of the ability to care for these families and their babies. But in a beautiful and practical response, some pioneering hospitals and hospices are starting perinatal hospice or perinatal palliative care programs for families who wish to continue their pregnancies with babies who likely will die before or shortly after birth.
Be Not Afraid
Carry to Term with a Negative Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Partners for Life
String of Pearls
Living with Trisomy 13
A Trisomy 18 Journey
Waiting With Love
And then there are the children that defy all predictions, such as this young man with Spina Bifida:
And these two young ladies:
And others who make it clear that the term "differently-abled" is actually very apt.
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Christina Dunigan
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Kirk and King Arthur
Let's have some fun!
Star Trek Meets Monty Python:
Python Trek:
Picard sings the 'Alphabet song'
Star Trek Meets Monty Python:
Python Trek:
Picard sings the 'Alphabet song'
Thursday, January 1, 2009
AMA at odds with majority of Doctors
While the AMA officially opposes the Bush Administration's protection of health workers' consciences, they do not represent the opinion of all in their profession.
From LifeNews.com:
A new national study among 1,736 physicians conducted by HCD Research reveals 50 percent of physicians support the new rules. Just 33 percent oppose the rules and the rest had no opinion.
A majority of those who responded also said they believed the "government should be involved in protecting health workers who refuse to participate in care they find ethically, morally or religiously objectionable."
A majority of physicians who responded also agreed with the statement that "doctors and hospitals have the right to refuse to perform any procedure that is inconsistent with their personal beliefs.
However, while doctors supported the conscience rights on abortion, they didn't think the rule should include revoking the funding of government entities or medical centers that violate those rights. Some 43 percent said no while 22 percent said funding should be revoked and the rest did not answer.
However, nearly three-quarters (73%) did not agree that health care professionals have the right to withhold information about where a patient can obtain the care they need.
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Tito
From LifeNews.com:
A new national study among 1,736 physicians conducted by HCD Research reveals 50 percent of physicians support the new rules. Just 33 percent oppose the rules and the rest had no opinion.
A majority of those who responded also said they believed the "government should be involved in protecting health workers who refuse to participate in care they find ethically, morally or religiously objectionable."
A majority of physicians who responded also agreed with the statement that "doctors and hospitals have the right to refuse to perform any procedure that is inconsistent with their personal beliefs.
However, while doctors supported the conscience rights on abortion, they didn't think the rule should include revoking the funding of government entities or medical centers that violate those rights. Some 43 percent said no while 22 percent said funding should be revoked and the rest did not answer.
However, nearly three-quarters (73%) did not agree that health care professionals have the right to withhold information about where a patient can obtain the care they need.
Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Tito
PP Houston Expansion Update
Via the Houston Coalition for life. An updated list of companies and contractors involved in the remodel of the building that will become a massive Planned Parenthood facility in downtown Houston:
These businesses and companies are making the expansion of Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas become a reality. Please pray for their conversion, do not support their business, and contact them to respectfully voice your opposition to Planned Parenthood's late-term abortion center.
Companies Involved:
Kathleen A. English, English + Associates Architects Inc.
English + Associates Arctitects Inc. http://www.english-architects.com/
1919 Decatur
Houston, Texas 77007
Telephone: 713.850.0400
Fax: 713.850.0411
info@english-architects.com
Engineer:
Elaine Rogers, Rogers Moore Engineers, LLC
Rogers Moore Engineers, LLC http://www.rogersmoorellc.com/index.html
2411 Fountainview, Suite 222
Houston, Texas 77057
Telephone: 832.242.3372
Fax: 281.582.5955
erogers@rogersmooreLLC.com
United Site Services- Portable Toilets
http://www.unitedsiteservices.com/service-areas/houston-texas.html
Telephone (local): 281-494-2920
Corporate Office: 508-594-2655
ARC Abatement Demolition Contractors
ARC Abatement, - Houston http://www.arcabatement.com/services.htm
6630 Roxburgh Dr, suite 120
Houston TX 77041
713-849-7738 / 800-920-7738 FAX 713-849-7744
Jeff Young, General Manager - Houston
Alpha Electric Company
906 W. 19th Street
Houston, Texas 77008
Office 713.802.1166
Fax 713.802.1628
Owners:
Jimmy Stallone - E-mail jstallones@alphaelectricco.com
Bo Parrish- E-mail bparrish@alphaelectricco.com
Ryder Insulation
5810 N. Houston Rosslyn Rd.
Houston, TX 77091
Office: 713.686.0388 and/or 713.686.4336
Fax: 713.686.4418
Owner:
John Ryder- E-mail: jryder@ryderinsulation.com
Meyerson Builders, Inc.
Main Office
1770 St. James Place, Suite 509
Houston, Texas 77056
Contact Jerry Meyerson
Telephone: 713.355.4443
Fax: 713.961.2830
E-mail: jerry@meyersonbuilders.com
Central Texas Office, Meyerson Builders, Inc.
P.O. Box 523
Flatonia, Texas 78941
Contact Sandy Meyerson
Telephone: 361.865.3302
Companies Who Do Business with Planned Parenthood at 3601 Fannin
Below is a list of companies who do or have done business with Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas. We ask you to please not endorse or patronize any company which assists Planned Parenthood in its daily operation of aborting babies.
Heights Builders
Owner: Greg Harbin
1149 W. 19th St.
Houston, TX 77008
Phone: 713-869-1255
Fax: 713-869-8810
Email: gharbin2001@yahoo.com
The importance of being respectfulwhen contacting these companies cannot be overemphasized. We are operating under the assumption that these are good people who would not be involved in this if they knew they were building a facility that will be used for the slaughter of innocent human life. This is not about threatening people. It is about helping them to do what is right in a spirit of love for our fellow human beings.
These businesses and companies are making the expansion of Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas become a reality. Please pray for their conversion, do not support their business, and contact them to respectfully voice your opposition to Planned Parenthood's late-term abortion center.
Companies Involved:
Kathleen A. English, English + Associates Architects Inc.
English + Associates Arctitects Inc. http://www.english-architects.com/
1919 Decatur
Houston, Texas 77007
Telephone: 713.850.0400
Fax: 713.850.0411
info@english-architects.com
Engineer:
Elaine Rogers, Rogers Moore Engineers, LLC
Rogers Moore Engineers, LLC http://www.rogersmoorellc.com/index.html
2411 Fountainview, Suite 222
Houston, Texas 77057
Telephone: 832.242.3372
Fax: 281.582.5955
erogers@rogersmooreLLC.com
United Site Services- Portable Toilets
http://www.unitedsiteservices.com/service-areas/houston-texas.html
Telephone (local): 281-494-2920
Corporate Office: 508-594-2655
ARC Abatement Demolition Contractors
ARC Abatement, - Houston http://www.arcabatement.com/services.htm
6630 Roxburgh Dr, suite 120
Houston TX 77041
713-849-7738 / 800-920-7738 FAX 713-849-7744
Jeff Young, General Manager - Houston
Alpha Electric Company
906 W. 19th Street
Houston, Texas 77008
Office 713.802.1166
Fax 713.802.1628
Owners:
Jimmy Stallone - E-mail jstallones@alphaelectricco.com
Bo Parrish- E-mail bparrish@alphaelectricco.com
Ryder Insulation
5810 N. Houston Rosslyn Rd.
Houston, TX 77091
Office: 713.686.0388 and/or 713.686.4336
Fax: 713.686.4418
Owner:
John Ryder- E-mail: jryder@ryderinsulation.com
Meyerson Builders, Inc.
Main Office
1770 St. James Place, Suite 509
Houston, Texas 77056
Contact Jerry Meyerson
Telephone: 713.355.4443
Fax: 713.961.2830
E-mail: jerry@meyersonbuilders.com
Central Texas Office, Meyerson Builders, Inc.
P.O. Box 523
Flatonia, Texas 78941
Contact Sandy Meyerson
Telephone: 361.865.3302
Companies Who Do Business with Planned Parenthood at 3601 Fannin
Below is a list of companies who do or have done business with Planned Parenthood of Houston and Southeast Texas. We ask you to please not endorse or patronize any company which assists Planned Parenthood in its daily operation of aborting babies.
Heights Builders
Owner: Greg Harbin
1149 W. 19th St.
Houston, TX 77008
Phone: 713-869-1255
Fax: 713-869-8810
Email: gharbin2001@yahoo.com
The importance of being respectfulwhen contacting these companies cannot be overemphasized. We are operating under the assumption that these are good people who would not be involved in this if they knew they were building a facility that will be used for the slaughter of innocent human life. This is not about threatening people. It is about helping them to do what is right in a spirit of love for our fellow human beings.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
President protects the Consciences of Health Care providers
The Washington Post does its best to spin this as a bad thing with the telling headline "Rule Shields Health Workers Who Withhold Care Based on Beliefs". They could have easily titled it "Rule Protects Rights of Conscience for Health Care Workers".
Here is an excerpt:
Read the rest.
So, the logic of Planned Parenthood and other opponents of such regulation is that there will not be enough people providing abortions, euthanasia, in-vitro fertilizations, embryonic stem cell research, and other ethically dubious "services".
Hold on a second, though...
I thought people were so excited about these things that they were eager to provide them!
The subtext of the opposition's argument is that there will not be enough people to perptetuate the Culture of Death unless Planned Parenthood, the AMA, and other left-leaning "powers that be" in the medical, scientific, and political world are free to force doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and researchers to participate in unethical practices against their will.
The other underlying message is that the practices mentioned above are absolutely necessary and vital health services. There seems to be little faith in what human ingenuity can do, even within the bounds of divine law. There are natural alternatives to artificial birth control. Abortion is not the only option for pregnant women. In-Vitro fertilization is not the only fertility treatment out there. Adult stem cells have proven much more useful so far than the embryonic variety, and we can care for the elderly and the terminally ill without hastening their deaths.
To expect any professional to violate his or her conscience in order to remain employed is ludicrous and irresponsible. What good is a conscience if one is not permitted to follow it? What kinds of doctors, lawyers, teachers, scientists, and other professionals would we have in our society if we only hire those who are willing to compromise their most closely held beliefs for a paycheck? What kind of society will we have if we teach our children to listen to their bosses before their hearts?
Furthermore, in a nation where freedom of speech, religion, and association are held to be sacred values, it is inappropriate for employers to penalize their workers for exercising their rights in every part of their lives.
I can tell you this: there are many people in many professions who will choose their consciences over everything else, even if it means changing careers. Many people have already risked their jobs in order to provide what they believe to be the best, most ethical care for their patients. If people are worried about a health care shortage, they should wait and see how many doctors and other health care providers will elect to leave their profession rather than lose their souls.
I suggest that if such procedures as abortion and embyronic stem-cell research are as widely accepted as we are led to believe, proponents of such things should have nothing to fear!
Here is an excerpt:
The far-reaching regulation cuts off federal funding for any state or local government, hospital, health plan, clinic or other entity that does not accommodate doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other employees who refuse to participate in care they find ethically, morally or religiously objectionable. It was sought by conservative groups, abortion opponents and others to safeguard workers from being fired, disciplined or penalized in other ways.
But women's health advocates, family planning proponents, abortion rights activists and some members of Congress condemned the regulation, saying it will be a major obstacle to providing many health services, including abortion, family planning, infertility treatment, and end-of-life care, as well as possibly a wide range of scientific research.
Read the rest.
So, the logic of Planned Parenthood and other opponents of such regulation is that there will not be enough people providing abortions, euthanasia, in-vitro fertilizations, embryonic stem cell research, and other ethically dubious "services".
Hold on a second, though...
I thought people were so excited about these things that they were eager to provide them!
The subtext of the opposition's argument is that there will not be enough people to perptetuate the Culture of Death unless Planned Parenthood, the AMA, and other left-leaning "powers that be" in the medical, scientific, and political world are free to force doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and researchers to participate in unethical practices against their will.
The other underlying message is that the practices mentioned above are absolutely necessary and vital health services. There seems to be little faith in what human ingenuity can do, even within the bounds of divine law. There are natural alternatives to artificial birth control. Abortion is not the only option for pregnant women. In-Vitro fertilization is not the only fertility treatment out there. Adult stem cells have proven much more useful so far than the embryonic variety, and we can care for the elderly and the terminally ill without hastening their deaths.
To expect any professional to violate his or her conscience in order to remain employed is ludicrous and irresponsible. What good is a conscience if one is not permitted to follow it? What kinds of doctors, lawyers, teachers, scientists, and other professionals would we have in our society if we only hire those who are willing to compromise their most closely held beliefs for a paycheck? What kind of society will we have if we teach our children to listen to their bosses before their hearts?
Furthermore, in a nation where freedom of speech, religion, and association are held to be sacred values, it is inappropriate for employers to penalize their workers for exercising their rights in every part of their lives.
I can tell you this: there are many people in many professions who will choose their consciences over everything else, even if it means changing careers. Many people have already risked their jobs in order to provide what they believe to be the best, most ethical care for their patients. If people are worried about a health care shortage, they should wait and see how many doctors and other health care providers will elect to leave their profession rather than lose their souls.
I suggest that if such procedures as abortion and embyronic stem-cell research are as widely accepted as we are led to believe, proponents of such things should have nothing to fear!
Monday, December 29, 2008
Cat Captions
ICanHasCheezburger.com is a blog devoted almost exclusively to funny cat pictures and their captions. Captions usually include some form of phonetic spelling.
Here's one to which I relate quite well:
If you're a cat fan with a sense of humor, it is worth a look.
For Star Wars fans, a similar website exists: http://www.icanhasforce.com/
Thanks to Michelle for telling me about ICanHasForce.com.
Here's one to which I relate quite well:
If you're a cat fan with a sense of humor, it is worth a look.For Star Wars fans, a similar website exists: http://www.icanhasforce.com/
Thanks to Michelle for telling me about ICanHasForce.com.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Naral Co-Founder and former Abortion provider tells the truth.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson is not new news to many of us. As an abortion doctor and abortionist, he played a crucial role in forming media and public opinion with respect to legalized abortion. When he began studying fetology (that's foetology for those of you "across the pond"), he changed his mind. Here is what he says about the numbers and slogans still touted by the pro-choice movement today:
"We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalising abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalisation."
Read more.
"We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalising abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalisation."
Read more.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Bailouts for banks, auto manufacturers... And Planned Parenthood?
From the Susan B. Anthony list, which advances the cause of pro-life
women in America:
http://www.sba-list.org/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=ddJBKJNsFqG&b=4179747&aid=11533
Abortion groups have submitted their 50 page proposal to the
Obama-Biden transition team. At the top of the list? More taxpayer
dollars for abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood. How much
more? Over 1.5 billion dollars more!
The Abortion Bailout Package:
* $1 BILLION dollars in taxpayer funding for International Abortion Groups
* $700 million in taxpayer funding for "Title X" Health Clinics
(aka your local Planned Parenthood affiliate)
* $65 million for the UNFPA, an international aid organization
connected to coercive abortion as part of China's coercive one-child
policy
* Repeal the Hyde Amendment – Vastly expanding federal taxpayer
funding for abortions
* Include Abortion coverage in any taxpayer-subsidized national
health care program
* Expand taxpayer-funded abortions on military bases
* Expand taxpayer-funded abortions through the Peace Corps program
* Expand taxpayer-funded abortions for federal prisoners
Send a letter to your Senators today demanding that they keep your tax
dollars out of the pockets of abortion providers.
Click on the link above to take action and automatically send a letter
to your US senators.
women in America:
http://www.sba-list.org/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=ddJBKJNsFqG&b=4179747&aid=11533
Abortion groups have submitted their 50 page proposal to the
Obama-Biden transition team. At the top of the list? More taxpayer
dollars for abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood. How much
more? Over 1.5 billion dollars more!
The Abortion Bailout Package:
* $1 BILLION dollars in taxpayer funding for International Abortion Groups
* $700 million in taxpayer funding for "Title X" Health Clinics
(aka your local Planned Parenthood affiliate)
* $65 million for the UNFPA, an international aid organization
connected to coercive abortion as part of China's coercive one-child
policy
* Repeal the Hyde Amendment – Vastly expanding federal taxpayer
funding for abortions
* Include Abortion coverage in any taxpayer-subsidized national
health care program
* Expand taxpayer-funded abortions on military bases
* Expand taxpayer-funded abortions through the Peace Corps program
* Expand taxpayer-funded abortions for federal prisoners
Send a letter to your Senators today demanding that they keep your tax
dollars out of the pockets of abortion providers.
Click on the link above to take action and automatically send a letter
to your US senators.
Designer Babies
I ran across this today:
http://www.elitedonors.com/Ad%20Criteria.html
This service calls itself "Elite" donors is looking for a tall, attractive, college educated (At a top 100 school, no less), athletic, caucasian egg donor with no genetic health problems. I saw a link to their advertisement on Facebook and flagged it as offensive.
Nope, no hint of eugenics here.
And let's not even talk about how exploitative and dangerous egg harvesting can be to women, even to the point of bearing disturbing similarities to human trafficking.
The couple using this service should be ashamed of themselves, especially when there are so many imperfect yet perfecly loveable children out there who need to be adopted by loving parents, even if said children do not look like they do.
Watch Gattaca, people.
http://www.elitedonors.com/Ad%20Criteria.html
This service calls itself "Elite" donors is looking for a tall, attractive, college educated (At a top 100 school, no less), athletic, caucasian egg donor with no genetic health problems. I saw a link to their advertisement on Facebook and flagged it as offensive.
Nope, no hint of eugenics here.
And let's not even talk about how exploitative and dangerous egg harvesting can be to women, even to the point of bearing disturbing similarities to human trafficking.
The couple using this service should be ashamed of themselves, especially when there are so many imperfect yet perfecly loveable children out there who need to be adopted by loving parents, even if said children do not look like they do.
Watch Gattaca, people.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Absurdity in Advertising
There have been some police chases in the news lately. These things always seem to be alike. This one is a little different. Different enough, in fact, that it makes for some fairly memorable advertising.
The video speaks for itself:
The video speaks for itself:
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Quote of the day from Google:
Every man is wise when attacked by a mad dog; fewer when pursued by a mad woman; only the wisest survive when attacked by a mad notion.
- Robertson Davies
- Robertson Davies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)