Examine your OB/GYN

(Photo Source)

Would you let Dr. Kevorkian take care of your grandmother?

Neither would I.

It's just a little creepy to think that the person looking after one's loved one would be equally comfortable killing her as caring for her.

For the same reason, it is important to many of us pro-life women that our OB/GYNs not perform abortions.   Someone I know recently changed doctors mid-pregnancy because she discovered that her Obstetrician was doing so.  She had been seeing this doctor for some time before she became aware of this.

How was it possible that she didn't know?

Many of us don't ask. Sometimes, it is because we don't want to know. It may be because we assume that the wonderful person cheerfully taking care of us and our babies couldn't possibly be one of "those doctors".

It is also true that some doctors don't exactly advertise that end of their practices to patients who do not ask.

Take, for example, Houston based OB/GYN Dr. Bernard Rosenfeld, who is the abortion provider for a National Abortion Federation (NAF) Clinic.  He also has a private practice, with a website to which the NAF clinic links.  The main site for his private practice makes absolutely no mention of the fact that this doctor also specializes in performing abortions, and the only link back to the NAF facility from this site is buried deep in his "Other Resources" menu, out of the way of the eyes of those who aren't looking for it.

Well, as long as he's doing the abortions somewhere else, and not in his private office, some say...

Incidentally,  a simple Google search for this man's name also reveals a second website for his private practice, dedicated to the abortion "services" that he offers in the same office where he also provides prenatal and fertility care to women with, or desperately trying to achieve, wanted pregnancies.

Interestingly, if you want an abortion from Dr. Rosenfeld at his private office, it will cost you twice as much as the exact same services at the NAF facility a short distance away. Quite a price to pay just to avoid having other patients in the waiting room know why you are really there.

According to a video on the NAF website (watch it in Windows or Quicktime format), he has been doing abortions since 1980, and both abortion-related websites indicate that he prides himself on the quality of his work, even to the extent of performing abortions on patients other abortionists will not take! Why does he not advertise this on his main website, along with tubal ligation reversals and obstetric care?  After all, are we not constantly being told that abortion is just another legitimate part of women's health care? And are we not also told that abortion providers are heroes?

I think we can figure out the answer to that little puzzle.

At least Rosenfeld's association with abortion can be readily found on the internet by those patients who are determined to examine his background. Not so for many other doctors, including the one my friend is now no longer seeing.

Many of us avoid patronizing businesses that support Planned Parenthood, and refuse to vote for political candidates who support public funding for abortion.  The same policy should apply to our choice in doctors.

Sometimes the hard questions must be asked.

Say Cheesy!

There are many little things that serve to make life more pleasant, and they are often the patient work of skilled hands. Good meals made from scratch, beautiful music, and richly worded poetry are among them.  The mass-produced, the inane, the vulgar, and the bland become much less appealing when held alongside these things.

Tonight my husband drew my attention to this post over at Fr. Z's blog which links to a recently composed sample of bland lounge music a setting for the new translation of the Gloria in the forthcoming new (and, dare I say, improved) missal.

If you are interested in assailing your ears for a moment, click here.

Here I must paraphrase the fictionalized version of Mozart in the film Amadeus. "One hears such sounds and what can one say but... turn of the century liturgical music!"
 
I once saw a T.V. documentary explaining the process by which perfectly good cheese is adulterated with procesed fats and artificial colorings in order to produce the ubiquitous single slice of American cheese.  Oddly enough, this composition put me in mind of that.

I have been a liturgical singer since I was in my teens. Up to and during that period of my life, the works of Haugen and Haas, as well as much protestant worship music, made up the bulk of the music I heard and sang at mass. It was not until my college years (at a secular university) that I was exposed to truly traditional and well-performed Catholic music, and knew it for what it was.  I had to take courses from the Music department at my university and join one of the performance choirs in order to learn about and sing what had previously been hidden from me.  It had been hidden, in part, because many in the generation before mine had ignored it, laboring under the misconception that the young have no capacity to appreciate that which is old.

Hearing traditional music after a lifetime of hearing the new stuff is much like trying gourmet cheese after a lifetime of eating Velveeta.
 

What I have seen of the new English translation is more poetic, more faithful to the Latin, and more theologically "meaty" than that which we currently use.   It is the hope of many that this will lead to a more beautiful liturgy and better catechesis for the Faithful.  In particular, I would like to see the Latin Rite liturgy in America better retain its Catholic identity. (We can take a lesson from Eastern Catholics as well as our Orthodox brothers and sisters here, whose worship suggests a preoccupation with tradition over superficial modernization.) Maybe the new translation will even encourage a higher level of composition for liturgial music?   Maybe?

I am not insisting that we all have to install massive pipe organs in our churches and start singing nothing but Faurė, Mozart, Byrd and Palestrina.  Not all choirs have the skill for that.  Simple, traditional hymns have enough of the poetic and the reverent in their lyrics and their composition to sound lovely with less traditional guitar or piano accompaniment.  For new mass settings, it might be worthwhile to take some of our cues from these.

Or, if I may continue my cheese analogy, if you can't have brie, try a good, everyday cheddar!

Alas, listening to the sample above is like watching someone pour Cheez Whiz all over a delicately prepared filet mignon.

Affairs of Church and State.

I'll let this clip speak for itself.

Take The Pill for Spider Veins!

(Photo Source)

If you want to have spider veins that, is.

According to Web MD and the US Department of Health Services, taking medications containing estrogen and progesterone can contribute to the development or worsening of spider veins.

Avoiding spider veins is not merely a question of vanity.  They can be very uncomfortable, and can also be a sign of serious circulatory problems in the legs.

Of course, there are plenty of other factors that contribute to spider veins, including heredity, pregnancy, aging, menopause, and lack of exercise.

But, considering that the Pill is also associated with increased risk of cancer, stroke, heart attack, decreased libido, bone loss and many other unpleasant side effects, why give your body one more reason to develop spider veins?

Natural Family Planning keeps looking better and better.

Language fun for the Weekend

Victor Borge and Dean Martin punctuate music.




Victor Borge's Inflationary Language

Woman Power in the Primaries

 This blog would like to offer its congratulations to Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina.  I hope they beat the pants off of Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer.


No doubt there will be much discussion of pro-life feminism (versus the more well-known pro-abortion feminism we have seen in this country over the past 50 years) over the months between now and the election.   Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, rightfully recognizes that abortion, instead of empowering women, has instead created a cultural atmosphere that makes it easier for men to use us as playthings for their own pleasure, and requires us to sacrifice our natural femininity as a condition of full participation in society.  I excerpt her comments below:
 

It’s surprising, really, that abortion-rights feminists are so unequivocal in their insistence that “pro-life feminism” is an oxymoron. After all, the pro-life feminist argument relies upon feminism’s better angels. It is a communitarian argument for one thing.

The pro-life feminist looks out for the interests of other people affected by her decisions. She refuses to take terrible advantage of another vulnerable group - the unborn - in order to advance her own case. She makes the “both/and” argument: both the woman and the unborn child deserve respect.

Secondly, the pro-life feminist relies upon empirical and scientific datum. She makes a rational argument about when life begins or about the psychological or physical harm some women suffer after abortion; she is not shouting down or pressuring her opponents, or belittling them personally.

Finally, she insists that what women alone are capable of doing – bearing and mothering children–– merits more respect than it presently receives. Abortion rights have unburdened men from the fathering role. His freedom from sexual responsibility is premised on the woman's choice to abort or not.

It is no coincidence, suggests the pro-life feminist, that 37 years after women were granted the “right to abortion,” the number of women and children living without the presence or the support of the father is at an all-time high. She thinks it’s no accident that elite jobs are regularly populated by women who, often with regret, felt pressured, with no support available to them, to avoid parenting in order to advance in their career.

Read the entire article here.

Blue Dogs fall for New Trick.

Via Christopher Blosser and Donald McClarey at American Catholic:


US Catholic Bishops: Executive Order Deal A Non-Starter:

We’ve consulted with legal experts on the specific idea of resolving the abortion funding problems in the Senate bill through executive order. We know Members have been looking into this in good faith, in the hope of limiting the damage done by abortion provisions in the bill. We believe, however, that it would not be fair to withhold what our conclusion was, as it may help members in assessing the options before them:

“One proposal to address the serious problem in the Senate health care bill on abortion funding, specifically the direct appropriating of new funds that bypass the Hyde amendment, is to have the President issue an executive order against using these funds for abortion. Unfortunately, this proposal does not begin to address the problem, which arises from decades of federal appellate rulings that apply the principles of Roe v. Wade to federal health legislation. According to these rulings, such health legislation creates a statutory requirement for abortion funding, unless Congress clearly forbids such funding. That is why the Hyde amendment was needed in 1976, to stop Medicaid from funding 300,000 abortions a year. The statutory mandate construed by the courts would override any executive order or regulation. This is the unanimous view of our legal advisors and of the experts we have consulted on abortion jurisprudence. Only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation.”

Richard Doerflinger
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

A further roundup of commentary from other sources here.

One would think that a politician would know all of the tricks in the book well enough to avoid falling for one.

It's too bad we'll have to wait till November to vote these people out of office.

Remembering California

A clever bit of satire from IowaHawk on the late, great state of California


Fans Flock to Mourn California

Tip of the schoolmarm ruler to American Catholic

Cancer Chemistry

The Breast Cancer Fund is an advocacy group that draws attention to environmental toxins that are linked to breast cancer, including those in food storage containers, cosmetics, and even oral contraceptives.

One more group that recognizes the link between the Pill and cancer.

Fr. Pavone on Tiller's Death

He says it way better than I can (or did in my last post)


Tip of the schoolmarm ruler to: Catholic Fire, via The American Catholic.

Every human life is valuable...

...including Dr. Tiller's.

Read the story here.


To shoot a man at a church, endangering the lives of bystanders demonstrates little respect for life or the God who creates it.


It is too late now for the prayers of pro-lifers to lead to this man's conversion.

Murder is completely contradictory to the mission of the pro-life movement, and killing abortionists, and leaving their children fatherless does nothing to solve the problems that drive women to abortion in the first place.

Pray for Dr. Tiller, his family, and his murderer. Hopefully, the person or persons responsible will repent and turn themselves in. If not, at least we may hope that the perpetrator is caught.

"This was a man!"

From SuzyB.org:

"Choosing life brightens father's future"

It's not that men shouldn't be nervous (or even downright terrified) of fatherhood. Parenting is a pretty heavy responsibility. Without fear, there can be no bravery.

It takes courage to choose life.

"Not that I loved Caesar less"...

My kids just finished reading "Julius Caesar".

I was particularly fascinated by Brutus and his conscience this year, perhaps because he seems so relevant to our present political discussions. Though he tries to be noble, Brutus's conscience and his sense of logic both fail him when he chooses to commit objective evil in order to promote what he believes to be the "greater good".

It was "not that I loved Caesar less," he claims. "But that I loved Rome more."

Loved Rome. Patriotism so great that it overcame his basic sense of right and wrong. And the wages of his sin, as one might expect in a Shakespearean tragedy, is death. Lots of it.

At Notre Dame, President Obama presented us with a great deal of talk about unity and common ground. Overcoming differences. Appealing to our ideals as Catholics, he tried to convince us that he is willing to work together to reduce abortion, AIDS, poverty. "Why can't we all just get along?" he seemed to ask plaintively.

I will tell you why, Mr. President. When Brutus betrayed his friend by murdering him in the name of patriotism, he unleashed chaos. "Liberty, freedom, and enfranchisement" do not come when we shuffle off moral authority. The death of Caesar did not mean the beginning of a new republic. Instead, it brought civil war and the tyranny of the mob.

We are happy to work with you, Mr. President, to change our country for the better. If you want to fund adult stem cell research, adoption programs, homes for unwed mothers, and pre-natal care for pregnant women in crisis we are with you. If you want to make it easeir for citizens to take care of each other through local (even faith-based) organizations, you have our full support.

But as long as the FDA thwarts ethical adult stem cell research on your watch, your words are empty. While you support the abortion industry without holding it accountable for its bad behavior, your logic holds no water. As long as you continue to ignore the sanctity of marriage, the value of abstinence, and the consciences of health care workers, we cannot trust your policies. When you send our money overseas to fund abortions over our objections, and your Homeland Security officcials brand us as extremists and terrorists, we cannot take your words seriously, however "fair minded" they may be.

Your diplomatic rhetoric does not match your actions, sir, though surely you are an honorable man.

The other conspirators asked Brutus to set aside his qualms and murder Caesar with them.

You, Mr. President, are asking us to do worse. You are asking us to set aside our qualms, not to eliminate a potential tyrant (though some of your friends might think a child in the womb is such.) You are asking us to set aside our moral convictions and allow the murder of children in the womb and spiritual harm to those outside of it.

You are presenting us with a false choice between our consciences and the "greater good". You may not literally be placing the dagger in our hands, but you are asking us to become accessories to the actions of those who have it.

When it comes to the sanctity of human life, and the true dignity of marriage and women, our answer to you and any other president is the same: Consequentialism is not compatible with Christianity.

We love our country too much to destroy its soul.

We will not be made conspirators, Mr. President.


Tips of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Real Choice, Ad Altare Dei, The American Catholic, William Shakespeare

Pro-Life Democrats

No, it's not an oxymoron.

I actually live in a district with a pro-life Catholic Democrat representing us in our state legislature. I voted to re-elect her this last fall, since she puts her votes where her mouth is, in spite of the criticism of colleagues in her party.

Here's a post at The American Catholic by another Pro-Life Democrat, this time from Florida. Everyone in the movement should read his post.

Life should not be a partisan issue, people.

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."

Today's vocabulary lesson from the Crazy Schoolmarm:

carpetbagger |ˈkärpitˌbagər|

noun. derogatory.

1. 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.
2. 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.

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.

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!

Should I tell my students?

Created by Train Horn

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...)

Birth control pills increase risk for gallstones.

According to an info sheet at the University of Michigan:

"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.

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?

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:

• 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

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..

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?"

Rhetoric

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Changefest '09 - Obama's Inaugural Speech

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: Granny Grump

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

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.

Life

Tip of the Schoolmarm Ruler to: CatholicVote.com via National Catholic Register via Tito Edwards at American Catholic
(Whew!)