Friday, 13 September 2013

Hillary Clinton should not have been honoured by St Andrews University

Hillary Clinton (left) at St Andrews
Today the University of St. Andrews awarded former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton an honorary doctorate for her (alleged) championing of:
“education, human rights, democracy, civil society and promoting opportunities for females around the world”.
However, Clinton is radically pro-abortion and works to promote abortion in the developing world. Abortion is contrary to human rights and opportunities for females, born and unborn. Hillary Clinton supports the killing of unborn children in the developing world. She should not have been awarded a doctorate by the University of St. Andrews.

Hillary Clinton supports the appalling procedure of partial-birth abortion. The child is delivered up to the neck; then a sharp instrument is inserted into the back of the head to kill the child; then an aspirator is used to suck out the brain so the head can be crushed and pass through the cervix.

Hillary Clinton received the Planned Parenthood ‘Margaret Sanger Award’ in 2009. Clinton said of Sanger:
“I admire Margaret Sanger enormously... I am really in awe of her.”
Margaret Sanger believed the following:
  • "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." Woman and the New Race
  • "The most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children”. “The large family... is therefore a greater evil than any one of them [war, poverty, child labour, prostitution]."
  • "Keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as the feeble-minded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class."
  • "Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted."
  • "Feeble-minded persons, habitual congenital criminals, those afflicted with inheritable disease, and others found biologically unfit by authorities qualified to judge should be sterilized or, in cases of doubt, should be so isolated as to prevent the perpetuation of their afflictions by breeding." America Needs a Baby Code.
Clinton opposed plans for conscientious objection for healthcare professionals to abortion.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Local Authorities should tell primary schools: no more sex ed in science lessons, says Safe at School

Local Authorities should advise that primary schools will not be permitted to include sex education in Key Stage 1 and 2 science lessons under the new National Curriculum, said SPUC's Safe at School campaign, which supports parents facing unacceptable sex education in their child's school.

Antonia Tully of Safe at School told the media today:
"Every parent should now feel confident that their primary-aged child will not be subjected to graphic information about sex in compulsory science lessons. Where local authorities advise schools of the requirements of the national curriculum, from 2014 they must stop advising both schools and parents that there is mandatory sex education in science lessons.

The outgoing primary science curriculum contains the word 'reproduction' in the statutory requirement for teaching the human life-cycle. Schools are viewing this as a green light to teach children about sexual intercourse in science lessons from which their parents could not withdraw them. Similarly under the outgoing curriculum, many schools are teaching children at Key Stage 1 (aged 5-7 years old) to identify their sexual organs. The incoming curriculum does not mandate schools to teach children about human genitalia or sexual reproduction. Sexual reproduction is only covered with reference to animals, with the suggestion that children should hatch and rear chicks to observe this. (See notes below for relevant extracts from the new curriculum).

Safe at School is warning parents that vigilance by parents is still needed. The new science curriculum does suggest that Year 5 children (aged 9-10) could be taught about "the changes experienced in puberty". Parents must ask their child's teacher to show them exactly what will be shown in class if this is covered.

Meanwhile thousands of primary schools will have to update their Sex and Relationship Education (SRE) policy before 2014 to state clearly that no part of sex education is taught in science lessons. Safe at School will be advising parents and governors on this matter." 
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Thursday, 12 September 2013

New Australian archbishop has clear pro-life/pro-family messages

The Vatican announced today that Pope Francis has chosen Bishop Christopher Prowse to be the new Catholic archbishop of Canberra-Goulburn, Australia. Bishop Prowse is currently bishop of Sale, Victoria, and was previously an auxiliary bishop in Melbourne. He holds a doctorate in moral theology from the Lateran in Rome. Below are some clear pro-life/pro-family messages from Bishop Prowse in recent years:

Abortion
"The Victorian Abortion Reform Bill should be rejected by Parliament and the community as a breach of fundamental human rights. Good legislation is supposed to protect the weak, but this is a death sentence to many of the tiniest Victorians in the womb, right up to 40 weeks' gestation. ... The existence of each person, their capacity to enjoy life and all other rights, the viability of community and the common good depend profoundly on the right to life ... Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions and will not provide referrals for the purpose of abortion ... The Bill ignores the fact that there are two persons, not just one, affected by every choice about abortion."
"A mockery of human rights", Herald Sun, 9 September 2008

Euthanasia
"Those whose lives are diminished through suffering deserve special respect. The sick and those people with handicaps are deserving of special help. Euthanasia is never acceptable and is morally inadmissible. (CCC 2276-2277) It is an offence against the dignity of the human person and is an insult to the giver of all life, God."

Marriage
"Proposals to give same-sex relationships legal marital recognition is something the Catholic Church will never endorse. Such ideas are an attack on the institution of marriage that has served us so well for millennia – long before Christianity ... We believe that marriage is between a man and a woman who intend a permanent bond of love that is open to the possibility of the gift of children. In other words, it is both love sharing and life giving. This stance is based on reason – what we call the natural moral law. However, Christians see the institution of marriage in the light of faith. We see marriage in the light of God’s plan for man and woman. ... Children have human rights too. They are rarely mentioned in the current debate. Tragically, they are not mentioned much either in the abortion issue that stills troubles the social conscience. But children have rights to have a mother and father. Marriage and family life are already very fragile societal institutions. For the sake of peace and stability in the world, we must do all that we can to protect it."
"Marriage, family and the World Youth Day", Catholic Life, August 2011

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

My letter in The Telegraph on sex-selective abortion

Andrew Lansley, former health secretary
Yesterday The Telegraph published a letter from me about sex-selective abortion and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)'s decision not to launch prosecutions. The letter as published was edited - see the Letters page for 11 September and scroll down 12 letters to "Abortion law". Here is the original version submitted for publication:
SIR - Andrew Lansley told Parliament yesterday that dealing with breaches of the abortion law was “the responsibility of the prosecuting authorities.” No doubt he meant the decision about whether to prosecute individual doctors, and he has a reasonable point.

The Telegraph reported (22 March 2012), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9161735/One-in-five-abortion-clinics-breaks-law.html , that:
Mr Lansley warned that so-called abortion on demand was not acceptable. “It’s not what Parliament intended and it’s not what the law provides for,” he said. “My job is to enforce the law.”
At the time he was health secretary. And he did not enforce the law – abortion for any reason at all was, and continues to be, the order of the day at the department of health. The department enforces only protocols aimed at reducing (maternal) fatalities to an acceptable level. The requirements for a medical reason for any abortion were and are routinely disregarded.

So why are “wrong-sex” abortions controversial, if any other reason will do? It may be because the advocates of abortion on demand are maddened by women using freedom of choice to choose against their own kind.

John Smeaton
Chief executive, Society for the Protection of Unborn Children
London SE11
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Sunday, 8 September 2013

Parliamentarians & pro-family groups will "fiercely resist" Daily Telegraph sex education campaign

Yesterday's Daily Telegraph newspaper  published a joint letter by parliamentarians and civil society pro-family groups, who oppose the Daily Telegraph’s campaign to “bring sex education into the 21st Century”. The entire letter is reproduced below.

Commenting on the Daily Telegraph campaign, Antonia Tully (pictured), Coordinator of SPUC's Safe at School, said
“Any change to the sex education guidelines could be dangerous in the current climate of calls for the inclusion of pornography in sex education. The Sex Education Forum has published an online magazine showing teachers how to introduce children and teenagers to pornography. These lesson ideas are not about teaching children and teenagers about how to avoid pornography, but normalising it. The Daily Telegraph campaign is calling for so-called sex education "experts" to teach children.  It's time to recognise that parents are the experts when it comes to their own children. As readers will see, the joint letter is signed by a range of parliamentarians and pro-family groups, demonstrating the broad body of individuals and groups who are opposed parents being undermined. Safe at School  will fiercely resist the Daily Telegraph campaign”.  
Sir,

The “Telegraph Wonder Women” campaign to “bring sex education into the 21st century” by redrawing the official guidelines on teaching sex education, makes scant reference to parents.

 Any moves to redraw these guidelines must involve organisations which recognise parents as the primary educators of their children on sexual matters.  

Children and teenagers accessing online pornography is a problem which urgently needs to be addressed.  Parents have a vital role in teaching their children about how to avoid pornography. The government should be supporting parents in this task.

Current government guidelines on teaching sex education contains over 90 references to the importantance of involving parents in teaching children about sexual issues.  Any new guidelines should place the same emphasis on parents.

Yours faithfully,

Antonia Tully, SPUC Safe at School
Norman Wells, Family Education Trust
Colin Harte, Director, Christian Institute
The Lord Carey of Clifton
Philip Davies MP
Mary Glindon MP
Jim Shannon MP
Revd  Andrew Symes, Executive Secretary, Anglican Mainstream
Dr Chris Richards, MB BS FRCPCH, Lovewise
Professor David Paton, Nottingham University Business School
Dr Trevor Stammers FRCGP
Kathy Gyngell, Research Fellow, Centre for Policy Studies
James Wiltshire, Campaign to Protect Children
Dr Lisa Nolland
Yusuf Patel, SRE Islamic
Marie Peacock, Chair, Mothers at Home Matter
Edmund P Adamus, Director for Marriage & Family Life, Diocese of Westminster
Imam Sulaiman Gani
Tahera Ayazi, Tower Hamlets' Parents Action Group - SRE
Sue Relf, Challenge Team UK

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy