Showing posts sorted by date for query Clinton. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Clinton. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday 28 April 2015

Leading global pro-abortion advocates speak at Vatican conference

Ban Ki Moon, UN Secretary General
Two of the world's leading pro-abortion advocates were addressing a Vatican workshop on the environment today.

At the same time, a press conference at the Palazzo Cesi, in Rome, organised by the Heartland Institute, was addressed by two leading SPUC officials on behalf of Voice of the Family, warning that the population control lobby was advancing its agenda by means of the workshop held today by the Pontifical Academy for Sciences.

The following statement was delivered by Patrick Buckley, UN envoy of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, who was joined in Rome by Maria Madise, SPUC's international manager and manager of Voice of the Family:
Voice of the Family statement on the workshop “Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity. The Moral Dimensions of Climate Change and Sustainable Development” held at the Pontifical Academy for Sciences, 28th April 2015

We wish to express our grave concern at the presence of Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary General, and Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute, at the Vatican workshop Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity. The Moral Dimensions of Climate Change and Sustainable Development held by the Pontifical Academy for Sciences (PAS), Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) and Religions for Peace on April 28th 2015 in anticipation of the new papal encyclical on the environment.

Ban Ki Moon and Professor Jeffrey Sachs are noted advocates of abortion who operate at the highest levels of the United Nations.

The Vatican workshop aims to “raise awareness and build a consensus that the values of sustainable development cohere with values of the leading religious traditions, with a special focus on the most vulnerable.”

Unfortunately, pro-life and pro-family advocates who lobby at the UN have witnessed the environmental issues become an umbrella to cover a wide spectrum of attacks on human life and the family. These attacks pose an immediate threat to the lives of the most vulnerable – the unborn, the disabled and the elderly – as well as grave violations of parental rights.

In light of the attacks on innocent human life witnessed at the UN under the guise of environmental concerns, we are troubled to note the Vatican workshop’s desire “to help build a global movement across all religions for sustainable development and climate change throughout 2015 and beyond”. This timetable exactly coincides with the negotiations of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at the UN, which include strong attacks on life and family. The SDG agenda will determine the direction and financial aid for the third world countries for the next 15 years.

Understandably the population control, pro-abortion lobby must be feeling very much empowered by the influence being exercised in the Vatican by two of the culture of death’s leading figures, Ban Ki Moon and Professor Jeffrey Sachs, especially just before the publication of an encyclical on the environment.

Ban Ki-Moon, who is one of the main speakers at the workshop at the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences, has on many occasions promoted the so-called “right” to abortion worldwide. (1) He also issued a controversial new report this year on sexual violence in conflict zones, which was critical of the lack of “safe abortion” in many conflict situations. The directive openly defies the consensus at the UN that abortion is an issue that should be left to individual nations.

Dr Jeffrey Sachs, who is also addressing the meeting, is a well-known international proponent of population control and abortion. (2) Sachs is one of the architects of the millennium development goals and a member of the Executive Board of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. The Network has proposed draft Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which contain provisions that are radically antagonistic to the right to life from conception to natural death, to the rights and dignity of the family and to the rights of parents as the primary educators of their children.

Our concerns relate specifically to Goals 4 and 5.

Goal 4 is to “achieve gender equality, social inclusion, and human rights for all”. The call for an end to preventable deaths of infants and children under the age of 5 excludes unborn children, despite the fact that the Convention on the Rights of the Child in its preamble recognises that “The child by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.”

Goal 4d, which states “Ensure universal sexual and reproductive health and rights” is completely unacceptable. Such language is routinely used by the international pro-abortion and population control lobby to refer to the legalization of abortion on demand and access for children, without parental knowledge or consent, to abortion and birth control drugs and devices in countries throughout the world. (3)

Goal 5, “Achieve Health and Wellbeing at all ages”, also includes a reference to sexual and reproductive health and family planning. (4)

In the light of all that has been said, it will be clear why Catholic families all over the world are greatly concerned that Vatican institutions may embrace the language of the United Nations, which, on the surface, speaks of protecting the environment while in reality providing cover for an anti-life and anti-family agenda. Any discussion on the environment must stem from understanding that the family, defined correctly, is the key to sustainable development, particularly at this time when the Synod on the Family has been called by Pope Francis to consider problems facing the family.

The family according to article 16.3 of the Universal Declaration (1948) is the “natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State”.

Furthermore, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the post-2015 development agenda must take account of the family; this is, in fact, recognised by the UN Secretary General’s 2011 Family Report. (5)

Accordingly, Voice of the Family proposes that the SDGs should contain a goal to strengthen the family and include realistic targets in that regard.

The holding of this vitally important conference in the Vatican at this crucial time in-between the two family synods and in the lead-up to the publication of the Sustainable Development Goals, and with the participation of these leading international pro-abortion advocates, is all the more worrying in the light of the most recent statement of Hilary Clinton saying, effectively, that opposition to abortion must cease to exist, even in the teaching of the Church.

We wish to place on record our view that, in any international agreement concerning the future of the human family, it is indispensable to assert the obligation for states to provide for the legal protection of the right to life of every human being from the moment of conception until natural death and to uphold the family as the fundamental group unit of society.
Footnotes
(1) In September 2010 at the Human Rights Council in Geneva and Navanethem Pillay, the then UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, launched a report “on discrimination against women, in law and practice, and how the issue is addressed throughout the United Nations human rights system”. In that report they called for the policing of nations worldwide to “address the refusal of physicians to perform legal abortions”

(2) In his book Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet Paperback – 26 Mar 2009 which deals with “global warming, poverty, war, deforestation and mass extinctions”, Sachs argues for legalised abortion.

(3) For example, in a speech on October 12th 2009, Wellington Webb, appointed by Barack Obama as special adviser to the US mission to the United Nations, confirmed that the Obama administration will be promoting legalised abortion throughout the world, targeting adolescents in a worldwide abortion drive. The ambassador was speaking at the UN's 15th anniversary commemoration of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). His speech expressly committed the US government to promoting "access to reproductive health commodities and services for adolescents". Webb stated: "President Obama, Secretary Clinton and Ambassador Rice have all underscored the strong support of the United States for human rights, women's rights and reproductive rights as well as universal access to reproductive health and family planning".
Hillary Clinton, Obama's appointee as US Secretary of State, had already made it clear that when the US government speaks of reproductive health, it's a term which includes access to abortion. In April, 2009, Hilary Clinton told Congressman Chris Smith at a hearing of the US Congress Foreign Affairs Committee "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health and reproductive health includes access to abortion ... ”

(4) http://unsdsn.org/resources/goals-and-targets/

(5) “The majority of the Millennium Development targets, especially those relating to the reduction of poverty, education of children and reduction in maternal mortality, are difficult to attain unless the strategies to achieve them focus on the family.” (SG Family Report 2011 (A/66/62–E/2011/4)
“The stability and cohesiveness of communities and societies largely rest on the strength of the family.” (SG Family Report 2011 (A/66/62–E/2011/4)
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

Friday 14 March 2014

Summary and photos of SPUC's greatly successful youth conference

IMG_0572








Last weekend's SPUC 7th International Pro-Life Youth and Student conference was a great success. For a full report, read "Want to see how good the 2014 SPUC youth conference was?" on SPUC's youth blog "Why I am Pro-Life". You can also see a full slideshow of photos on SPUC's new Flickr photostream. Below is a summary of all the talks taken from SPUC's live Twitter feed of the conference. We hope to post videos of all the talks and other parts of the conference on SPUC's YouTube channel in the near future.

7 March:

Opening and introduction:
    _MG_9002
    Dan Blackman
  • 7th SPUC Int'l Pro-Life Youth conference, starting this eve in Telford and concluding Sun, is fully-booked. Live tweets of conf to follow.
  • Good evening from start of the 7th SPUC International Pro-life Youth conference, Telford, England. Great venue, nice dinner & now 1st talk.
  • SPUC's Anthony McCarthy introducing our youth conference. Conference serves youth, to educate them & help advance cause of truth. #prolife
  • Robin Haig, SPUC's chairman, encouraging dialogue & networking between #prolife youth. New ideas, new friendships will result.
  • Dan Blackman, SPUC youth officer, encourages #prolife youth to train as SPUC speakers in schools, using our modern presentation.
SPUC School's talk, given by Huda Alfardus:
    IMG_0416
    Huda Alfardus
  • Huda Alfardus, Nottingham student, now giving SPUC schools presentation. Slavery precursor of abortion: unborn deemed non-persons.
  • Human beings genetically complete at conception (fertilisation); separate, unique, human. Heart, spine, limbs, brain etc forms very rapidly.
  • "Foetus", medical term for unborn child at 9 weeks, is Latin for "little one". Movement in womb, taste, hair etc all develop quickly now.
  • Facts from Langman's Medical Embryology, 2004. Despite these moving facts, 200k abortions in UK p.a. Abortion methods chilling.
  • RU486 chemical abortion designed to kill baby & expel his/her body. Mother involved in whole process, which is very traumatic, admit makers.
  • Abortion in Britain allowed in law up to birth since 1990, including of disabled babies. #discrimination
  • Morning-after pill can cause early abortions. Makers say 1 mode of action is to prevent implantation, thus killing newly-conceived embryos.
  • Mother's health & wellbeing harmed by abortion. Possible risks may incl. blood loss, infertility, breast cancer, emotional harm→suicide.
  • Over 500 abortions every day in Britain. We never judge women who have abortions, but give them truth, support, alternatives. #LoveThemBoth
  • Huda is Princeton-educated geneticist. Young, brave, educated #prolife woman.
_MG_8968
Bumper Pro-Life Quiz
Now Bumper #Prolife Pub Quiz! Heavyweight speakers tomorrow.

8 March:

Good morning from 2nd day of 7th SPUC Int'l Pro-life Youth Conference, Telford, England. Great pub quiz last night and top breakfast!

Top Catholic academic Dr William Newton on 'Contraception and Abortion: Humanae Vitae and Evangelium Vitae".
    _MG_9177
    Dr William Newton
  • Fact: Big increase in contraceptive use was paralled by big increase in abortion in Spain, Turkey etc.
  • Contraceptive mentality is: more sex, no kids. Leads to unplanned kids being seen as unwanted, thus leveraging abortion.
  • Contraception not practical solution to abortion, let alone moral solution.
  • Contraception is a game-changer in how society thinks about sex, human life, the person, science and morality.
  • Contraception trivialises sex by removing the profound aspect of it, which is procreation.
  • Contraception leads to people taking risks with sex, and sleeping with people they wouldn't want to have children with. More teen pregnancy
  • Contraception enculturates mentality that pregnancy is like a disease. If "drug" of contraception fails, one kills the "disease" (unborn)
  • Contraception treats humans as if they are animals e.g. sterilising them if they breed too much. Tells people they can't control themselves
  • Science increasingly uninterested in question of its relationship with common good. Contraception wants power to neuter (not aid) nature.
  • In teaching of moral theology in most Catholic colleges, contraception is core issue which has corrupted thinking about moral absolutes.
  • Connection of the virtues: Lack of temperance inherent in contraception leads to selfishness, removes motivation to be sexually selfless.
  • Moral blindness caused by selfishness of contraceptive (i.e. loveless) sex, porn etc leads to failure to recognise humanity of the unborn.
  • Deep logical links between contraception and abortion.
Dr Helen Watt of Anscombe Bioethics Centre on "Cooperation with evil: how to think about the issue"
    _MG_9185
    Dr Helen Watt
  • Pro-lifers must remember: ends don't justify means. All our intentions must be good, not just some. One area of concern: abortion law reform
  • Regulation of legal abortion (as distinct from selective banning of some abortions) inevitably involves formal cooperation in evil. Wrong to tell women how to prepare for abortion, says Dr Watt
  • Material (as distinct from formal) cooperation in evil often (but not always) wrong. Depends on how close and on goods/harms at stake.
  • Avoiding scandal (e.g. giving impression of weak/absent opposition to abortion) requires prudence. Again, can depend on closeness/remoteness
  • Matters what type of people we become through our actions. Aim to follow our vocation w/out wrongful cooperation in evil, concludes Dr Watt.
Q&A with Dr Newton and Dr Watt:
  • Natural family planning (NFP) differs from contraception because NFP is open to life, simply making use of infertile part of cycle.
  • Extra-marital sex endemic in today's world, partly due to contraception. Illicit sex common in some eras, but esp. rampant today.
  • Contraception leads to dualistic view of human person, denying essential unity of soul and body.
  • Contraceptive sex doesn't give full soul-body union to sexual partner. Also, gift of fertility to spouse different to other gifts to others.
  • Dr Helen Watt: Men have everything to do with abortion because they have everything to do with how women get pregnant.
  • Very important to provide emotional support to women considering abortion or post-abortion, says Dr Helen Watt.
RT @CCFather: Bernie reports from @spucprolife youth conference: excellent morning, esp William Newton.

Robin Haig, SPUC chairman, ex-chairman of Association of Lawyers in Defence of the Unborn (ALDU), dispelling myths re British abortion law:
    _MG_9013
    Robin Haig
  • Myths: all abortion banned before '67, when abortion legalised. Facts: some abortion allowed '40s - '60s, abortion still crime in law.
  • Children of women who considered but didn't choose abortion have thanked SPUC for saving their lives. SPUC gave support, love. U can too.
Dr Thomas Ward on "Parents, the first pro-life teachers":
    _MG_9007
    Dr Thomas Ward
  • Pays tribute to SPUC as unrivalled in Europe in importance for pro-life
  • UN Declaration of Human Rights upholds parents' rights as primary educators as safeguard vs child indoctrination e.g. Nazi schooling.
  • Saul Alinsky was anti-family radical who dedicated book to Satan. Obama, Hillary Clinton are Alinsky's disciples.
  • Other anti-family radicals: Karl Marx, Lady Helen Brook. Agenda: take away children from parents' influence and give them to State instead.
  • Enemies of pro-life know that parents as 1st educators are bulwarks vs abortion agenda. Pro-life movement slow to catch-up with this fact.
  • Unlike pro-aborts, pro-lifers slow to realise that culture of death is underlined by contraception and homosexuality as well as abortion
  • Dr Tom Ward to young pro-lifers: don't make same mistakes of previous generations in ignoring role of parents.
  • Apart from a few brave bishops past & present, most bishops have failed to protect parents, thus damaging individual families, says Dr Ward.
  • In Germany, home-schooling families arrested, children taken away, forced into exile. Good parents just protecting their kids from bad ideas
  • Parents will become victims of the very ideas which they treat with indifference. John Paul II: all policies for the family, not at its cost
RT @spucscotland: Project Truth stall @ the SPUC Youth Conference pic.twitter.com/KDwp6ohyIl
    Project Truth stall
John-Henry Westen, co-founder & editor-in-chief of LifeSiteNews.com, on "Sexuality: Communicating the truth with love"
    IMG_0474
    John-Henry Westen
  • Pro-abortion and anti-family movements have long been cooperating. Media totally misrepresenting prayer vigils as angry, condemnatory.
  • Young pro-lifers called to be heroic, just like good people during the Holocaust. Abortion holocaust: 10s of millions killed every year.
  • Both founders of LifeSiteNews.com used to live pro-abortion, sexually liberal lifestyle.Soon realised it was a narrow hell.
  • Pro-life message of love for both mother and child is having beautiful effect.
  • Women like http://www.rebeccakiessling.com have found love, healing, hope in #prolife cause. Pro-lifers using love to move beyond standard debates
  • Pro-family movement is movement of love, though unpopular; gets false accusations of "hatred", "bigotry"; also anti-faith hostility.
  • Satan attacks married love cos God has made married love the exemplar of Heaven.
  • Cardinal Ratzinger told US bishops: pro-abortion politicians must be denied Holy Communion, out of love for their souls and truth re life.
  • Love is the easiest way for pro-lifers to get through to our opponents, esp. those hurt by harmful lifestyles (abortion, homosexuality etc)
  • Printers, sports presenters et al. in Canada being sacked for not going along with gay agenda. Some Catholic bishops complicit in agenda.
RT @crismunozbe: Around 140 young adults attending the Youth Prolife Conference at Telford,England cc @spucprolife

Panel discussion on male & female perspectives on abortion. Fiorella Nash, John-Henry Westen, Robin Haig, Anthony Ozimic (chair)
    _MG_9138
    Anthony Ozimic
  • Many men hurt, angry, emasculated by partner's abortion. Women patronised by abortion lobby, as incapable of responsible motherhood.
  • Abortion providers doling out operations, pills, drugs, devices which give men cover, excuses to abuse women further. Women deserve better.
Dr Helen Watt and Anthony McCarthy, mock debate on "Is abortion always wrong?":
    _MG_9237 _MG_9234
  • Dr Watt giving #prolife side. Pregnant women = mothers
  • Society must change to accommodate fertility, not make women non-mothers to fit society's perceived needs.
  • Anthony McCarthy giving (mock) pro-abortion side
  • Pro-aborts argue not all human beings are persons. Right to life not in play for unborn cos not persons.
  • Argument: direct abortions and double effect causing of miscarriage not really that different, so why not give jail time for both? Dr Helen Watt to reply
  • Distinction between killing and letting die. Legitimate choices about resource allocation not intentional homicide.
  • Mock debate now going through arguments around twinning, ensoulment. Aquinas good on soul-body but used now-outdated embryology
  • Ethical use of double-effect re abortion requires strong justification. Is pregnancy a special case?
  • Dr Helen Watt now answering question by rebutting Judith Jarvis Thompson's famous violinist scenario. Pregnancy very different situation.
  • Abortion is a violent separation of child from mother, not simply decision not to support another's life. Abortion = deliberate bodily assault on child.
  • If unborn was not a human being, it couldn't develop those capacities which are identifiably human. Mother's body welcomes human being.
  • Argument that unborn human is parasite never used by scientists to describe unborn of animal species. Shows anti-human bias.
  • Religious arguments not essential to show wrongness of abortion but can help give deeper, broader context for understanding wrongness.
_MG_9372
Eve Farren
Now hearing from Eve Farren of the Alliance of Pro-Life Students; SPUC Scotland's Project Truth and pro-life roadshow.

SPUC's Pro-Life Chains on 27 April, anniversary of Abortion Act coming into effect. Call SPUC on 020 7091 7091 for more info.

RT @AdamCC92: SPUC conference has been absolutely amazing! They do such great work

_MG_9295
Ceilidh (Irish dancing)

9 March:

Good morn. from SPUC's 7th Int'l Pro-Life Youth conference, Telford, England. Great dinner & dancing last nite, religious services this a.m.

_MG_9263
Fr Tony Kiely

SPUC's Fiorella Nash on "Men and abortion".
    _MG_9400
    Fiorella Nash
  • Abortion centre staff have reported horror stories re reality of killing babies.
  • RU486 is hit-and-run abortion, leaving women to deal with the appalling trauma of delivery & disposal of dead baby.
  • Men suffering from partners' abortions of their children, mocked by pro-abortion feminists. Depression, substance abuse, helplessness.
  • "Silent No More" help both men & women after abortion experience. One Army veteran: "I still grieve for [my aborted son]." Lost chances.
  • Abortion leads to relationship breakdown, contrary to promises of abortion advocates. Denial of abortion loss common early-stage bereavement
  • How should men work to stop abortion? Live life of personal integrity, not selective morality, don't sleep around, don't abandon women
  • Be with women during crisis pregnacies; speak respectfully to and about women; be confident in giving pro-life opinion, show compassion
  • Be concerned about common good; work with others; find common ground; don't be scared
  • Be bold, be active, be compassionate, be a man.
RT @JackStukel: People like Fiorella Nash restore my faith in human sanity and compassion @spucprolife #fourthwave #feminism

Patrick Buckley on "Ireland and the Global Pro-Abortion Agenda"
    IMG_0541
    Pat Buckley (right) with Irish delegates
  • John Smeaton, SPUC's chief exec, now introducing Pat Buckley, SPUC's man in Ireland; with Peter C Smith, one of SPUC's representatives at UN
  • Nuremberg trials declared abortion (whether voluntary or forced) to be "crime against humanity", "act of extermination"
  • UN human rights declarations, conventions etc actually protect unborn children from abortion but pro-aborts at UN misrepresent them
  • John Paul II, who lived thru Nazi occupation, said pro-abortion culture of death is more insidious & evil than Nazi culture of death
  • Ruling of Euro Court of Human Rights in Tysiac v Poland case was used later in same court in A, B & C case to pressure Ireland over abortion
  • PM Enda Kenny broke pre-election promise not to legislate to allow abortion. Pro-abortion lies re Savita case increased pressure on Dail
  • New Irish abortion law allows abortion up to birth in some cases; forces medics & hospitals to be complicit in abortion.Pro-abortion, anti-family Estrela report in Euro Parliament was defeated cos it exceeded Euro Parl's competence, plus big pro-life push-back
  • Pro-abortion lobby identifies Catholic Church, esp. Holy See delegation at UN, as main roadblock to advance of global anti-life agenda
Heartfelt thanks to Pat Buckley & Peter C Smith for their sterling work at UN for SPUC & helping Holy See et al. to fight for life & family

John Smeaton, SPUC's chief executive, on "The Pro-Life Battle"
    _MG_9416
    John Smeaton
  • Thanked youth delegates from Romania, US, Scotland. Youth part of pro-life movement much more advanced 2day
  • Some pro-life orgs (incl. SPUC in past) wasted efforts arguing for wrong legislation e.g. compromise bills. Let's never make mistake again.
  • As Dr William Newton showed, contraceptive mentality is at root (not merely fruit) of culture of death e.g. abortion.
  • SPUC defended pro-life counsellors when they were spied upon & defamed by pro-abortion groups via media fellow-travellers.
  • Right that SPUC concerned re what happens in Catholic Church b/c Church incl. some great clergy gives great strength to pro-life movement
  • Obama made abortion promotion worldwide, incl. to schoolchildren thru sex ed, one of his 1st priorities. We need strong RC Church to help us
  • Pro-life orgs can't defeat culture of death on our own. We need global strength & reach of Catholic Church leadership to back us solidly
  • Theologians who dissent from Catholic teaching on abortion undermine pro-life fight. Failure of bishops to discipline them thus harms cause.
  • Youth called 2 speak truth 2 power, secular or religious. Need 4 declaration of total resistance 2 abortion. Emergency calls 4 open prayer.
  • Some courageous pro-life bishops: Davies of Shrewsbury, Egan of Portsmouth, Olmsted of Phoenix.
  • "Work with the spirit you danced with last nite in the ceilidh and you'll dance with your grandchildren", John Smeaton to SPUC prolife youth
RT @nickmurf: Fantastic weekend at @spucprolife youth conference! Met great people who are paving the road toward a pro-life society.

_MG_9376
Nick Murphy @nickmurf

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

Monday 16 September 2013

Must-read pro-life news-stories, Mon 16 September

Top stories:

Hillary Clinton should not have been honoured by St Andrews University
The University of St. Andrews has 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." [BBC, 13 September] 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. [John Smeaton, 13 September]

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 the Safe at School campaign, which supports parents facing unacceptable sex education in their child's school. Antonia Tully of SPUC's Safe at School campaign said: "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." [SPUC, 13 September]

Other stories:

Abortion
Euthanasia
  • UK health service patients 50% more likely to die of neglect than in US, suggests study [Mail, 12 September]
Population
Sexual ethics
General
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

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

Friday 30 August 2013

Protest against St Andrews University honour for pro-abortion Hillary Clinton

The BBC reports:
"Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be honoured for her work when she visits Scotland next month.

She will address academics and students at St Andrews University before being given an honorary degree.

The visit on 13 and 14 September comes as the university continues to mark its 600th anniversary.

St Andrews principal Professor Louise Richardson said she was delighted the wife of former president Bill Clinton would be attending.

Mrs Clinton will be honoured for her efforts in championing the causes of education, human rights, democracy, civil society and promoting opportunities for females around the world.

Professor Richardson said: "We are absolutely delighted that Secretary Clinton will join us and other distinguished guests from around the world as we celebrate 600 years of university education in St Andrews."

...

"As one of the most influential women in the world, Hillary Clinton, as stateswoman, senator, and policymaker, never shied away from tackling difficult questions, working to make the world a better place, inspiring others, speaking out for the voiceless and striving ever to excel.""
Hillary Clinton is one of the world's most prominent pro-abortion public figures. For example:
  • at a major international conference in 1995, she said: “women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s rights”, which has been used ever since by the pro-abortion lobby at the UN to push for the so-called 'women's right' to abortion to be enshrined as a human right
  • as a US senator, Mrs Clinton had a 100% pro-abortion voting record
  • in April 2007, she condemned the US Supreme Court's upholding of the federal ban on partial-birth abortion, as contrary to "a woman’s right to choose" and "constitutional rights"
  • in July 2008, she attacked health professionals' right to conscientious objection to abortion and abortifacient birth control
  • in April 2009, Planned Parenthood, America's main abortion provider, awarded her the Margaret Sanger Award, the foundress of the worldwide pro-abortion movement. In her acceptance speech, Mrs Clinton said: "I admire Margaret Sanger enormously" and "I want to assure you that reproductive rights and the umbrella issue of women's rights and empowerment will be a key to the foreign policy of [the Obama] Administration". (Read SPUC's youth blog on The Life and Crimes of Margaret Sanger: Part I, II, III, IV and V.)
  • also in April 2009, she told the US Congress that: "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health and reproductive health includes access to abortion ... ”
  • in January 2010, she renewed the Obama administration's commitment to bankroll abortion worldwide
  • in March 2010, she called upon Brazil to consider legalising abortion, describing it as "a fundamental personal right"
  • later in March 2010, she said: "You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion".
Please write to Professor Louise Richardson, the Principal of the University of St Andrews, to protest at the planned honour for Mrs Clinton, explaining why Mrs Clinton's promotion of abortion is contrary to "education, human rights, democracy, civil society and promoting opportunities for females around the world" and " working to make the world a better place, inspiring others, speaking out for the voiceless". You can email Professor Richardson at principal@st-andrews.ac.uk or write to her at:
College Gate
North Street
St Andrews
Fife
KY16 9AJ

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

Wednesday 19 September 2012

UN High Commissioner seeks to criminalize opposition to abortion provision - worldwide action needed now

Navanethem Pillay (pictured right), the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who was recently re-appointed for two years, has made a shocking start to her new two-year period of office.

Under the guise of publishing "technical guidance" promoting maternal health, Ms Pillay has issued a report seeking to make effective opposition to abortion provision unlawful on the part of parents; and to criminalize health professionals, administrators and non-governmental organizations (NGOs, like SPUC) who seek to oppose abortion provision - including abortion provision to children under the age of consent.

Pat Buckley, SPUC's lobbyist at the Human Rights Council at Geneva, is now working flat out to warn country delegates about the serious dangers posed by Navanethem Pillay's report, entitled in full "Technical guidance on the application of a human rights-based approach to the implementation of policies and programmes to reduce preventable maternal morbidity and mortality".

Please contact your MP and your MEP (in Britain and Northern Ireland) or your political/parliamentary representatives in whichever country you live - especially political representatives who are pro-life -  and warn your church leaders, about Ms Pillay's shocking report. Please act now.

Pat Buckley sent me the following comments/analysis this morning:
"This technical guidance report purports to be about reducing maternal mortality and morbidity. However the main thrust of the document instead of focusing on issues central to the reduction of maternal mortality, contains a thinly disguised pro-abortion agenda.

"The guidance report includes, amongst other things, attacks on:
  • parental rights
  • freedom of conscience
  • and freedom of speech.
It contains 87 references to 'sexual and reproductive health', 27 of which also refer to 'sexual and reproductive health rights'. These are terms which are misused by powerful governments and politicians, like Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton, and UN bodies, to promote abortion on demand throughout the world.

"There are two references to comprehensive sexuality education and various references to goods and services in the context of sexual and reproductive health.

"The report identifies 'rights holders'and 'duty bearers' and stipulates the obligations of the duty bearers. Such obligations include the removal of all barriers to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services including abortion, abortifacients and contraceptives, which are defined as 'fundamental rights'.

"The technical guidance report in paragraph 22 stipulates that States should act against so called interference by third parties including NGO’s if they object to the agenda set out in the document.

"It also stipulates that States should enforce laws and policies and that 'States may be held responsible for private acts if they fail to act with due diligence to prevent, investigate and punish violations of rights'.

"The technical guidance doesn’t simply call on States to take action, it makes States liable if they do not act against anyone or anything seen as a barrier to the implementation of the sexual and reproductive health agenda set out in the document which as we saw includes abortion, explicit sex education for minors and paragraph 30 attacks laws that ban abortion, laws that uphold conscientious objection and laws that would allow for parental notification before providing contraception or abortion to children, as well as other issues.

"In other words" Pat Buckley, SPUC's Human Rights Council lobbyist, warns, "Ms Pillay is seeking to make effective opposition to abortion provision unlawful on the part of parents; and to criminalize health professionals, administrators and NGOs (like SPUC) who seek to oppose abortion provision - including abortion provision to children under the age of consent."
Pat Buckley continues:
"According to Ms Pillay's report, laws and policies that impede access to sexual and reproductive health services must be changed, including laws criminalizing certain services only needed by women; laws and policies allowing conscientious objection of a provider to hinder women’s access to a full range of services; and laws imposing third-party authorization for access to services by women and girls.

"The technical guidance calls for Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) in schools and for a budget to be available for dealing with teenage pregnancies through the education system in addition to budgets in the health system. The report footnotes the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, (UNESCO) International technical guidance on sexuality education"
Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE)

CSE is a highly controversial, rights-based approach to sex education that encompasses much more than simply teaching children and youth about sexual intercourse and human reproduction.

CSE programmes can be disguised under a variety of different names such as sexual and reproductive health counseling, information or services; HIV education; life skills programs; sex- education; sexual education; sexuality education; Social Personal and Health Education (SPHE) etc.

Common Components of CSE Programmes
  • They claim access to CSE is a human right
  • They encourage acceptance and exploration of diverse sexual orientation and gender identities,
  • They promote the use of condoms,
  • They promote abortion as acceptable, safe and without consequences,
  • They encourage youth to advocate for sexual rights
  • They teach youth without parental knowledge or consent under the guise of confidentiality or privacy rights
  • They promote sexual pleasure as a right and necessary for sexual health,
  • They promote masturbation as healthy and normal
  • They teach children and youth they are sexual from birth
  • They encourage anal and oral sex and peer to peer sexuality education
In 2009 UNESCO in partnership with UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO and UNAIDS published controversial International Guidelines on Sexuality Education which suggest among other things, teaching five-year-old children that they can touch their body parts for sexual pleasure.

After a number of UN Member States complained, UNESCO released a new publication called the International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education, which was not quite as controversial as their original guidelines although many of the objectionable publications were still footnoted.

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

Tuesday 10 July 2012

Microsoft first lady partners pro-abortion leaders

Melinda Gates, the “first lady of Microsoft”, who is giving US$4 billion to reduce births in poorer countries, is due to attend a summit with world abortion leaders on 11 July. Mrs Gates has said she does not want to fund and support abortion. SPUC challenges the suggestion that the money will not help promote abortions.

Mrs Gates wants to focus on contraceptives. In a recent interview she said: 'From the very beginning, we said that as a foundation [the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation] we will not support abortion, because we don’t believe in funding it'.  She is expected to reiterate this at the family planning summit in London this week.  Fiorella Nash, a SPUC researcher, responds in this video and asks whether Mrs Gates’ intervention will save lives or cost lives:



SPUC believes that efforts to elevate abortion as a human right will be a key policy aim of the summit, which is expected to be dominated by pro-abortion organisations such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), certain UN agencies, Marie Stopes International (MSI), and Ipas, the hand-operated abortion-device company.
  • Key stakeholders such as the British and US governments, IPPF, MSI, and Ipas are committed to pro-abortion policies and practices. These governments and groups include contraception and abortion in the same healthcare packages that they export to the developing world. Abortion and contraception are seen as part and parcel of family planning and so-called reproductive rights.
  • Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, has said that you cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. ‘Reproductive health’ includes abortion. Pro-abortion governments such as the UK refuse to differentiate between money spent on abortion and contraception overseas. 
  • Melinda Gates will be funding all types of hormonal contraception – pills, injections, implants, patches, IUDs, rings etc. Each of these has the potential to cause an abortion by preventing the human embryo implanting in the womb of his or her mother. Women are rarely told this when being given such drugs.
  • When 'contraceptive failure' occurs, and a baby is conceived, family planning NGOs will promote chemical or surgical abortion as a back-up. Far from avoiding abortions, the Gates family planning summit may increase the number. Increasing contraceptive prevalence may often increase abortion rates, contrary to expectations.
  • In a letter to The Financial Times, IPPF and Marie Stopes International say: “This initiative is invigorating the international sexual and reproductive health and rights community.” It is naive of Mrs Gates to think she can ring-fence the funding of contraception with these partners. 
  • In June 2011 Mark Pritchard MP asked the Secretary of State for International Development to look into how much the DFID spent on abortion. Andrew Mitchell replied that: “the Government have no such plans. It is not possible to disaggregate UK aid spending for safe abortion from wider expenditure on areas such as reproductive health care, maternal and neonatal health and health personnel development.”  
  • IPPF and allied groups refused to accept US government funds under the Bush administration when the funds were restricted to non-abortion family planning projects. 
  • In 2008, the Gates Foundation gave over US$2.4 million dollars to IPPF Europe Network, and over US$6 million dollars in 2009.
  • The Marie Stopes International Global Impact Report for 2010 estimated that MSI had performed 1.3 million abortion and post-abortion procedures.
  • The latest project launched by DFID is called Preventing Maternal Deaths from Unwanted Pregnancy (PMDUP). DFID will give £67 million pounds over 5 years from July 2011 to June 2016 via MSI and Ipas, to carry out and promote abortion and contraception in 14 countries.
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 3 May 2012

There's hope for unborn children in the Faroe Islands

Jógvan á Lakjuni and Karsten Hansen
I returned on Tuesday from the Faroe Islands where I was speaking at the weekend at a national meeting of ProVita, a pro-life group established there twenty years ago. The title of my talk was Protect women, men and unborn children from abortion.

On average, there are, 45 abortions annually in the Faroes. In a nation of 50,000 people, that’s 45 unborn children too many. A roughly equivalent number in Britain would be 54,000 abortions annually, or over 1,000 babies killed in the womb each week.
The fertility rate there is between 2.4 and 2.6 live births per woman, significantly higher than other countries in Europe. Prams are very much in evidence in Torshavn, the capital city, and in the other little villages, nestling beside the north Atlantic sea, which I visited. Somehow, this made the annual killing of 45 Faroese babies all the more poignant.

The Faroes is a largely self-governing dependency within the kingdom of Denmark and, although its population is tiny, it has virtually all the characteristics of a nation state, including its own Parliament, Prime Minister and ministers. Unlike Denmark, the Faroe Islands is not part of the European Union. The Faroese Parliament, or Løgting, can be traced back to the first Norse settlement of the Faroes in the year 800.

Hilda Videro and Jógvan á Lakjuni
I was encouraged to find that many of the Faroe Islands’ 33 Members of Parliament oppose abortion. Three Members of Parliament attended my talk. They were Karsten Hansen, the minister of health affairs, Jógvan á Lakjuni, the Speaker of the Parliament, and Dr. Jenis av Rana, a general practitioner as well as being an active Member of Parliament.

I was also encouraged to learn that it's government policy in the Faroe Islands to reduce the incidence of abortion.

My talk focused firstly on the worldwide powerful political forces promoting abortion on demand in every nation of the world, not least Barack Obama, the US president, and Hilary Clinton, the US Secretary of State – who have proclaimed their worldwide pro-abortion policy for all the world to hear. (By the way, our meeting began with a traditional Faroese song of which there are very many. Our song had ten verses to a simple tune in praise of God and the beauty of creation. When the Faroese visit each others' homes it's usual for them to sing. They love singing.)

I told them:
  • that top United Nations officials have called for the policing of nations worldwide to “address the refusal of physicians to perform legal abortions”
  • that the UNFPA's involvement in China’s forced abortion regime is very well-documented
  • that these pro-abortion forces are substantially supported by Denmark which is the fifth largest country donor in the world to the UNFPA
  • that the Faroe Islands has a reputation of championing the best interests of its people, not least in a recent fishing dispute with the European Union and other nations
  • that they should show the same David versus Goliath spirit in defying any pressures to make abortion even more widely available 
I urged this tiny nation to give the world a lead in changing the nature of the abortion debate; to bring about a paradigm shift in the national and global battle for the right to life of unborn children. I explained:
  • that humanity’s consensus, as expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other documents, upholds the right to life of unborn children from conception, and that the intentional killing of unborn children runs contrary to international human rights agreements
  • that just as all patients have a right to information about any medical procedure they are considering, this is even more the case with abortion: women and men have the right to information about the development of the baby, the nature of abortion, and its impact on the health of both women and men
  • that abortion is unlike any other procedure in that it involves always killing one person and possibly injuring another, the mother, who is otherwise usually completely healthy
  • that there is not one scientifically proven medical benefit of abortion but hundreds of studies linking it to a range of physical and emotional problems
  • that abortion is strongly associated with domestic violence and the abuse of women*
  • that ambivalence in women who may be considering abortion is common and ambivalence is related to post-abortion distress in the medico-scientific literature*
  • that there is a solid body of evidence showing that when an abortion is undertaken for reasons of foetal abnormality the after-effects can be particularly traumatic - for both women and men*
  • that it’s time to oppose the ideological agenda of Obama/Clinton - who shamefully mislead the public, doctors and politicians worldwide with their mantra that abortion must be safe, legal and rare
  • that Ireland, where there's historically a constitutional ban on abortion has had, over a number of years, either the lowest rate, or amongst the lowest rates of maternal mortality in the world; that Malta, where abortion is prohibited under the criminal code, has a very low maternal mortality rate; that Chile where abortion is illegal has the lowest maternal mortality in the whole of South America
  • that it's time to oppose the ideological agenda of influential bodies around the world like the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in Britain, who have recently advised doctors in Britain to stress that induced abortion is a safe procedure and that this should be repeatedly emphasised to women
  • that it should be a matter of public policy for government and parliamentarians, a matter of medical ethics for doctors, and a matter of educational policy on the part of ProVita to tell the public and, especially, mothers-to-be the real truth about what abortion involves.
Sofus Gregersen
Whilst in the Faroes Islands Sofus Gregersen, leader of ProVita Faroes, and I visited the Parliament for a meeting with Karsten Hansen, the minister of health affairs, who had attended the ProVita meeting.

We also met Dr. Jenis av Rana, a GP and a Member of Parliament (also at Saturday's ProVita meeting). Dr Jenis av Rana showed us around the historic Parliament building - providing me with another memorable highlight of my visit to this remarkable, beautiful, hospitable, independent nation.

Dr. Jenis av Rana
Dr Rana told us that amongst his patients there were children who might have been aborted. However, instead of saying to their mothers: "Yes, with your problem, I will refer you for an abortion" he would say: "Yes. I can see you have a real problem. Let's see how I can help you."

This is truly enlightened, compassionate and appropriate medical care in the light of the evidence that ambivalence about an abortion decision is common and that ambivalence is related to post-abortion distress.* I really feel there's hope for unborn children in the Faroe Islands.

*For a copy of Abortion and Women's Health compiled by Dr Gregory J Pike of the Southern Cross Bioethics Centre, please email me at johnsmeaton@spuc.org.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

Saturday 26 November 2011

My letter in this weekend's Tablet rebutting Clifford Longley's 'pro-choice' position

The 19 November edition of The Tablet (the de facto house journal of British Catholic dissent) contains a column-piece on abortion by Clifford Longley (pictured), the broadcaster (who inter alia assists Catholic Voices, co-run by former Tablet deputy editor Austen Ivereigh). My published letter responding to Mr Longley is immediately below, and below that is (for the sake of completeness) Mr Longley's column-piece. Tabula delenda est.

The Tablet, Letters, 26 November 2011
Catholic MPs must oppose abortion

Clifford Longley’s tendentious reasoning (“The argument that criminal law must mirror moral law is surely not tenable”, 19 November) supporting Catholic MPs embracing a “pro-choice” position does him little credit.

At the heart of Longley’s account is his flawed notion of the relationship between democracy and abortion. In Evangelium Vitae (nn. 69-73), Blessed Pope John Paul II makes it clear that democratic systems cannot operate without moral foundations. He critically refers to the “commonly held” view that “the legal system of any society should limit itself to taking account of and accepting the convictions of the majority”. This “commonly held” view is and always has been rejected by the Church. “Democracy cannot be idolised to the point of making it a substitute for morality or a panacea for immorality,” says Evangelium Vitae.

The fundamental values of society – in the case of abortion, the fundamental right of an innocent person to be protected from intentional killing – are not provisional and changeable “majority opinions”, says Blessed Pope John Paul II. Democracy can only flourish when fundamental human values are protected in law. Catholic MPs, and all MPs of goodwill, have a conscientious duty to protect fundamental human values.

Evangelium Vitae (n. 73) encapsulates the matter, where MPs are concerned, in these terms: “In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law, or vote for it’.”

John Smeaton
National director, Society for the Protection of
Unborn Children, London SE11
The Tablet, "The argument that criminal law must mirror moral law is surely not tenable", Clifford Longley, 19 November 2011
Is it plausible for a Catholic MP to be “pro-choice”? The issue is raised once more by the case of Jon Cruddas, Labour MP for Dagenham and Rainham and a practising Catholic, who has incurred church disapproval for saying that he thinks abortion should be – to quote President Bill Clinton – “safe, legal and rare”.

Cruddas has also said he is happy with the law as it stands in Britain, which is not quite a standard pro-choice position because of the 24-week time limit and because two doctors have to confirm that the statutory criteria have been met. But Cruddas’ views were nonetheless described by a spokesman from the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales as “significantly at variance with the Church’s position”.

That position is set forth in general in the 1995 encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, that “direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder”. It therefore follows, it goes on to argue, that the law must protect all unborn human life, from the moment of conception, from deliberate harm. It would not surprise me if a Catholic MP held the first of these two points, yet hesitated about the second. Indeed the first of these two positions is probably not far from what most people feel.

Even Ann Furedi, director of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service and therefore a major lobbyist on the pro-choice side of the argument, has said abortion is “always a personal tragedy”. She and many like her, however, would say it is sometimes the lesser of two evils. I have heard her liken a woman who seeks an abortion to a hunted animal caught
in a trap, which gnaws off its own foot in terror in order to escape.

The argument that the criminal law must in all respects mirror the moral law – and specifically the moral law as interpreted by the Catholic Church – is surely not tenable. Almost nobody thinks adultery, for instance, should be a crime. And while it is characteristic of the Catholic way of thinking about morality to say that ends can never justify means, there are instances where the “lesser of two evils” – killing an enemy in war, for instance – is regarded as acceptable.

Nor can we ignore the political reality. The present UK abortion law is supported by a large majority of public opinion and a large majority of MPs. The absolutist position – that every abortion from the moment of conception onwards should be punished as a crime – has minimal support. As far as I am aware, no attempt has ever been made in the House of Commons to repeal the Abortion Act, and the probability of such an attempt succeeding is zero.

Were such a law by some undemocratic means ever to be passed, with public opinion in its present state, the difficulties would be insuperable. Would juries ever convict anyone under a law they so strongly disagreed with? Would
judges, similarly ill-disposed, ever pass deterrent sentences? If not, where would be the law’s protection of the unborn? And what would this do for respect for the law, not to mention democracy?

This picture presents real dilemmas for a conscientious Catholic MP. He or she cannot simply advocate repeal of the Abortion Act without saying what should be put in its place. Repealing it would simply make all abortion legal. Yet the only option the Catholic Church would approve of on the basis of its teaching cited above, complete criminalisation, is in practice unrealistic. Are any Catholic MPs who would not support complete criminalisation for such reasons as these, therefore, to be deemed “pro-choice”?

This is the heart of the problem. Anything less than complete criminalisation would involve someone having to decide which abortions to allow and which to prohibit. The “choice” of the pregnant woman would necessarily figure in that decision. MPs in this situation would naturally prefer them to be as few as possible – or “rare”, to use one of Mr Cruddas’ terms. They would be bound to prefer them to be “safe”, to use another, rather than unsafe; and “legal”, to use the third, rather than illegal.

Would it not be reasonable for Catholic MPs to want to take into account the damage to respect for democracy and the rule of law that would follow if the criminalisation of all abortion had somehow been forced through Parliament in defiance of public opinion? Is that course of action really “the Church’s position” with which Mr Cruddas is said to be “significantly at variance”? Catholic MPs are not the only ones with a moral dilemma – it seems the bishops face one too.
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

Wednesday 19 October 2011

Parents, the primary educators, "are the most dangerous people of all"

Last week I wrote about my address to the ninth annual session of the Rhodes Forum: "Dialogue of Civilizations". I am very pleased to share with readers a talk given by Dr Thomas Ward (pictured) at the same conference. Dr Ward is a retired general practitioner, is the founder and former president of The National Association for Catholic Families (NACF) and a corresponding member of the Pontifical Academy for Life. He is married to Dr Mary Ward who are proud parents and grandparents.

Towards a new Civilisation of Life: Parents the Primary Educators and Protectors of their children

Madam Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen our Forum’s invitation to analyse the viability of global civilisation is timely. The word viability is from the French vie, life and able capable of – so capable of life. Of course, a viable civilisation depends upon the viability of its basic units, its families. My topic is the viability of the current paradigm of Western élites for the families of the world.

Alexandra Kollontai, (1872 –1952) the first Soviet People’s Commissar for Social Welfare wrote in 1920:
Communist society will take upon itself all the duties involved in the education of the child  Kommunistka (1920) Communism and the Family.
In 1922 Lenin called a meeting of Marxist intellectuals to study why the Bolshevik Revolution had not spread to the West. According to the major conservative thinker Ralph de Toledano “this meeting was perhaps more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself'”. The two key strategic objectives decided upon at the meeting were:

• Judeo-Christian belief was to be erased by the use of sexual instinct.
• The family and its rights over education were to be eradicated.

These intellectuals moved to Frankfurt becoming known as the 'Frankfurt School' and then to the United States where they used Ameriacn commercial, academic and media resources to spread their silent world revolution.

This silent revolution in the West has never stopped. For example Saul Alinsky who died in 1972 was an American transitional Marxist. He supported the Frankfurt School’s “long march through the institutions ”, churches, trade unions and existing political parties. He dedicated his creed in Rules for Radicals to Lucifer, whom he called the "first radical". His two best known disciples are Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton. In 2010 our U.K. Prime Minister, David Cameron, claimed Alinsky as the inspiration for his Government’s present agenda for Britain. This agenda was promoted in my own parish a few weeks ago.

Dr Brock Chisholm (1896 –1971) the first Director of the World Health Organisation in 1948 wrote:
Children have to be freed from.. .. religious and other cultural “prejudices” forced upon them by parents and religious authorities…
He went on to explain how:
…sex education should be introduced in the 4th grade, (i.e. for nine to ten year olds) eliminating “the ways of elders” if necessary by force. (ref: Valerie Riches, Sex & Social Engineering, 1986) 
A Family Planning Association spokeswoman:
Parents – they’re the most dangerous people of all - (The Times, 5 April 1974, ref: Valerie Riches, Sex & Social Engineering, 1986) 
Lady Helen Brook, (1907-1998) who was the successor to Marie Stopes and the first to make contraceptives generally available to the young in the United Kingdom, wrote in 1980:
It is now the privilege of the Parental State to take major decisions - objective, unemotional, the State weighs up what is best for the child.... (The Times, 16 February 1980)
The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), the world's largest abortion provider, say in their document 'FAQs on young people, their sexuality and their rights'
Parents ……do not have ‘rights’ over their children
And in their Youth Manifesto for the 21st Century they say
All young people (from the age of ten)* must have information and education on sexuality and the best possible sexual and reproductive health services (including contraceptives).

All young people must be able to choose from a full range of contraceptives including the latest advances in contraception.
In Germany in 2006, in the case Konrad v.Germany the European Court of Human Rights ruled that German Christians did not have the right to home school because it believed that it would set up “parallel societies”.

Again in Germany, in 2009 ten Christian parents who refused to allow their ten year old children to attend compulsory sex classes have now completed a second prison term (forty-three days) during which the State exercised even greater control over their children.

In Spain there are currently:

• 50, 000 parents formally complained to the government asking for the option to remove their children from classes promoting blasphemy against Our Lord, homosexual** behaviour and Communism. The Government refused.
• 2,000 parents brought law suits to obtain this opt out. The Government refused.
• 305 parents asked the European Court of Human Rights for this opt out. The judgement is awaited.

But the corpus of law protecting your rights as parents is overwhelming, particularly in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, which starts:
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind
And later continues:
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State. Article 16 (3)
Because Hitler had used the educational system to indoctrinate children the drafting committee added:
Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children. Article 16 (3)
This prior right to educate ones children with the support of society and the state is a fundamental human right which should be enshrined in every national constitution in the world.

How was this prior right removed in England?

English clerical liberalism has been an essential ally of the birth control lobby. The crucial year was 1930 when, for the first time in Christian history, the Church of England morally sanctioned contraceptives in marriage. This gave the Anglo-Saxon world, the dominant world culture, the moral justification for contraception. Contraception has been the locomotive of the sexual revolution.

The current head of the Anglican Church teaches that since non pro-creative sex is acceptable in contraception it must logically follow that homosexual acts are justifiable.

An affiliate of IPPF started the provision of contraceptives for the young. The international headquarters of IPPF are in London. Contraceptive provision and indoctrination in schools have been the locomotive of the removal of parents’ rights. This indoctrination now includes the promotion of homosexuality.

In 1974 in the U.K parental rights were removed on contraception based on advice given by an affiliate of IPPF. As direct legal consequences in 1985 parental rights to consent to general medical treatment were greatly diminished and in 2004 parental rights on abortion were removed. This May the last Catholic adoption agency was closed down by law because it refused to sanction homosexual adoptions. Currently the website of the British Foreign Office provides a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transsexual toolkit to promote these legal changes worldwide. Such changes bring a real risk that parents throughout the world who try to protect their children from homosexual indoctrination could themselves be charged with indoctrinating the “hate crime” of homophobia. There would then be possibility of their children being put into care. The parents would have no legal recourse if the carers appointed were homosexuals.

Some of the consequence of our broken society are:

• marriages down by 50%
• the mean number of sexual partners for adults is nine
• 45% of children illegitimate
• 40% of children aged fifteen or younger having sexual intercourse
• the subjective well being of our young people is the worst of the thirty-four states of the OECD
• Family breakdown costs £20 billion yearly.

Our Prime Minister speaking after the riots confirmed that our society is broken, immoral and irresponsible. He said:
If we want to have any hope of mending our broken society, family and parenting is where we’ve got to start... 
He continued:
The potential consequences of neglect and immorality on this scale have been clear for too long...Children without fathers; schools without discipline...crime without punishment; rights without responsibilities... 
So our Culture of Death is dying. We the Christians of East and West, both of the lungs of Europe, must replace it with God’s Civilization, the Civilization of Life based on love within the family. The Holy Church of God cannot accomplish its mission in society except through the family and its mission. Ladies and gentlemen, we have to go to the entire world to tell everyone that social, cultural, economic and political life must be for the family, and no longer at the cost of the family.

The first step towards this new civilization is to restore to parents their right to educate and protect their children in conformity with their moral and religious convictions. Parents are the primary educators of their children. This right is God given in the Commandment. “Honour your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:12). It is affirmed by Our Lord in His teaching and in his His life. “He went down with them to Nazareth, and lived there in subjection to them. And his mother kept all these words in her heart. And so Jesus advanced in wisdom with the years.” (Luke 2: 51-52)

This right is fundamental. It is founded upon parental transmission of life to and love for their child. The Social Doctrine of the Russian Orthodox Church teaches “Children become fruits of their love and communion, and their birth and upbringing belong, according to the Orthodox teaching, to one of the most important goals of marriage.”

This right is inalienable. It is irreplaceable. Again as the Social Doctrine of the Russian Orthodox Church teaches: “The role of family in the formation of the personality is exceptional; no other social institution can replace it”.

As a family doctor and a Christian father of seven children and nine grand children I will share with you my own thoughts on family life. Your homes where your children learn to love by knowing that you love them are the cradles of the new civilization. Your example as good Christian parents provides the role model for the next generation. Children will naturally absorb sound attitudes on love, marriage and the true meaning of sexuality from good parents.

Confidently forbid any damaging sex instruction. Teach each child individually the beauty of chastity, modesty and sexuality as appropriate to his or her maturity. Only you are in the position to know what, when and how. Form associations of families. Encourage your children to intensify their Christian lives through family prayer and closeness to the Church. Such beautiful families are the Civilization of Life

In conclusion: a new Civilization of Life is dawning. The Civilization of Life is God’s civilization. It is your civilisation.

*The words "from the age of ten" do not appear in the body of the text in the linked to document. However if you hover your cursor over the words "Young people" you will see that IPPF mean "[t]hose who are aged between 10-24 years". Interestingly, just above that the same device is used to provide the definition of "youth". You will see there that "The World Health Organization refers to those in the 15-24 age range as youth". I have used a bracket in my quote because that is the effect of this device, although on the webpage the information that IPPF think that all ten year old children must have sex education and access to contraception is not immediately apparent to the reader. I wonder why?

** Why is the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality (and sexual ethics generally) important specifically for the pro-life movement? The late Pope John Paul II, the great pro-life champion, taught in no. 97 of his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae that it is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not offer adolescents and young adults an authentic education in sexuality, and in love, and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection.

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