Obama's inauguration offers no hope for women at home or abroad

Here are my comments on some extracts from President Obama's inauguration speech:

"I stand here today ... mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors." [JS: Like the sacrifices of your mother, Mr Obama, who did not seek to have you aborted.]

"America has carried on ... because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents." [JS: Such as the Declaration of Independence : "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life..." under which killing children before birth should be unthinkable.]

"The time has come ... to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. [JS: except for the millions that will be aborted under President Obama's laws and policies.]

"We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost." [JS: not by abusing and killing embryonic children!]

"America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity" [JS: except for millions of unborn children in America and elsewhere, who will be denied any sort of future by President Obama's pro-abortion policies.]

" ... those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents [JS: What else is abortion than slaughtering innocents?]

"To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish..." [JS: But in China, farms are destroyed for violations of the one-child policy, a policy in which President Obama has pledged to be complicit, through re-funding UNFPA and IPPF.]

"It is ... a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate. [JS: How does promoting abortion encourage this willingness? What about the majority of Chinese women who are willing to have another child, but will be denied one by an Obama-funded population control programme?]

It is chilling to note that the following information appeared on the White House website within minutes of Mr Obama's inauguration:

"Reproductive Choice

Supports a Woman's Right to Choose: President Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.

Preventing Unintended Pregnancy: President Obama was an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information, and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.

"Health Care

Supporting Stem Cell Research: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe that we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells to treat the millions of people suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which will allow research of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos must be deemed in excess and created based solely for the purpose of fertility treatment."

On the right-hand side of my blog I will be recording the life- and family-related actions of Mr Obama as US president. Please use this to keep up-to-date with the challenges that the pro-life movement will face in the coming years.

How can the dream survive if we murder the children?

Barack Obama's speech to the Democratic National Convention overnight was given on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King's famous "I have a dream" speech. Indeed, Mr Obama, the first African-American nominee for US president, ended his own speech referring to Martin Luther King's speech.

Dr Alveda King, Martin Luther King's niece, has led protests outside the convention against Mr Obama's extreme pro-abortion positions (see my 31 July blog about Mr Obama). Alveda has said:

“Senator Obama’s answer to the ills of society, such as continued tax dollars to Planned Parenthood, are diametrically opposed to everything African Americans truly believe and an anathema to the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr." [JS: Planned Parenthood is the American branch of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), the world's largest abortion provider and promoter.]

Alveda continued: "Every aborted baby is like a slave in the womb of his or her mother. The mother decides his or her fate.

"In the shadow of the famous ‘I Have a Dream’ speech by my uncle in 1963, as Barack Obama makes his speech in 2008, how can the Dream survive if we murder the children?”

John McCain, Mr Obama's Republican rival, has referred to Mr Obama's position on abortion:

"For a man who talks so often about 'hope,' Senator Obama doesn't offer much of it in meeting this great challenge to the conscience of America".

Also in contrast to Mr Obama and his Democratic party, the Republican party has approved a strikingly pro-life manifesto:

"Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed.

"We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children."

This approach mirrors the Amnesty for Babies campaign.

So we should warn people, especially those sympathetic to the other messages of Mr Obama and the Democratic party, not to get swept away by "Obamania".

Obama was not sent by God

SPUC has criticised the comments of an African bishop who said the election of Barack Obama as American president was a divine sign. Laurent Monsengwo Pasinya, archbishop of Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo, told the Synod for Africa currently meeting in Rome that the election of a black US president was a "sign from the Holy Spirit for the reconciliation of races and ethnic groups, for peaceful human relations." Anthony Ozimic of SPUC told LifeSiteNews.com:

"In their concern for the advancement of black people, church leaders must not omit to condemn President Obama's pro-abortion policies. Black Catholic and Christian pro-life leaders in both America and Africa regard Mr Obama's presidency as a disaster for black unborn children. Abortion is the deepest antithesis of reconciliation and peaceful human relations. If, instead of killing unborn children, Mr Obama's policies killed, for example, Catholic priests, would Archbishop Monsengwo regard Mr Obama's election as a positive, divine sign? Are unborn children any less deserving of the right to life than Catholic priests?"

Was Archbishop Monsengwo perhaps taking his cue from Obama himself, who told supporters the day after the feast of the Epiphany in 2008:

"My job is to be so persuasive that if there's anybody left out there who is still not sure whether they will vote, or is still not clear who they will vote for, that a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany ... and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama".

Obamania, a condition linked to Tonyblairmania, the symptoms being much the same: In Obama's case, a person welcomes Obama's election even though Obama is committed to extreme pro-abortion, anti-life policies; Tonyblairmania involves welcoming Tony Blair's reception into the Catholic Church even though Blair refuses to repudiate his political record on pro-life matters whilst he continues to seek high public office.

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
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Don't be fooled by Obama's speech tonight

President Obama is due to address a joint session of the US Congress this evening on the subject of health care reform. Here at SPUC we will be monitoring Mr Obama's speech closely. Americans United for Life (AUL) and the National Right To Life Committee (NRLC) in the US have published superb briefings (AUL, NRLC) exposing the way Mr Obama and his Democrat allies in Congress are misleading the public about the anti-life implications of the healthcare reform legislation currently being debated.

As a Christian, I am reminded of our Lord's Gospel warning: "For the children of this world are wiser than in their generation than the children of light." Mr Obama and his fellow pro-abortion activists, representing an anti-life culture of darkness, know very well how to conceal their true agenda behind a veil of obfuscation. I'm also reminded of Monsignor Michel Schooyans' masterly analysis of the Obama-Blair agenda to remake law and religion. And I am worried by a pro-Obama video made in January, in which Hollywood celebrities pledge (among other things) "to be of service of Barack Obama" and "to advance stem cell research" (implying the embryo-destructive techniques promoted by Mr Obama).

A worldwide movement is needed to stop Mr Obama's anti-life propaganda juggernaut.

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
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

The Obama-Blair culture of death will not prevail

A headline in the Financial Times (FT) last week "Obama to seal US-UN relationship" provides a timely reminder of the serious danger President Barack Obama poses to the building an "authentic civilization of truth and love" (as Pope John Paul II put it in Evangelium Vitae, paragraph 6).

The FT story begins: "Barack Obama will cement the new co-operative relationship between the US and the United Nations this month when he becomes the first American president to chair its 15-member Security Council".

A major aspect of this "new co-operative relationship" is funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) - funding that was cut under President Bush. One of Barack Obama's first actions as President was to restore funding to UNFPA which  is complicit in the promotion of the right to abortion throughout the world and in the forced-abortion, one-child policy, in China.

Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) said in Berlin this month: "We're sure happy that the US will come back as an active member in support of the UNFPA".

In connection with Obama's chairmanship of the United Nations Security Council, it's relevant to recall that earlier this year Dr Henry Kissinger, the former US Secretary of State, called on Barack Obama to "develop an overall strategy for America when, really, new world order can be created". Henry Kissinger, as US President Nixon's Secretary of State, was the author of the infamous NSSM 200 (National Security Study Memorandum 200), which recommended that the United States should promote population control in the developing world in order to secure American interests.

In addition, as Monsignor Michel Schooyans, one of the Vatican's leading scholars, has said, Barack Obama  can count on support for his worldwide promotion of the culture of death from Tony Blair, the UK's former prime minister, and his wife Cherie Booth: " ... This plan cannot be realized except at the price of the sacrifice of religious freedom, of the imposition of a 'politically correct' interpretation of the Sacred Scriptiures, and of the sabotage of the natural foundations of law ... ", Monsignor Schooyans has pointed out in a masterly analysis in which he describes the Obama-Blair agenda as an "unprecendented form of political-legal terrorism".

However, as I said at SPUC's national conference last week, the pro-life movement will prevail. For all their power and money, the leaders of the culture of death, have completely failed to change the universal consensus on the right to life expressed in human rights instruments agreed at the United Nations. And one of the greatest achievements of the worldwide pro-life movement is that we exist. We’re here; we’re growing; we’re passing on our experiences of failures and successes to the next generation who are beginning to join us in growing numbers. These present terrors will pass and our pro-life work, which already contains many signs of hope and encouragement, will succeed.


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
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

The party's over: Obama signs order to abort the world's poor

President Obama, America's abortion President, has wasted little time in using his powers to kill the unborn and, in my view, pro-life people worldwide are facing an historic challenge which can be summed up in two words: peaceful resistance.

This afternoon he signed an order "that will put hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of organizations that aggressively promote abortion as a population-control tool in the developing world" according to the US National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).

NRLC explains: "Obama's order overturns the 'Mexico City Policy', under which funds in the US 'population assistance' programme go only to overseas organizations that pledge not to 'perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning'.

My picture, above, shows children in Kenya where Dr Stephen Karanja, the head of the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association, said about the result of the US election: “They have no business electing a person who is going to destroy our countries. And that is what they have done. This is something that a lot of people don’t realise, that what these Americans do affects innocent people thousands and thousands of miles away.”

Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the NRLC, explains, "One effect of Obama's order will be to divert many millions of dollars away from groups that do not promote abortion, and into the hands of those organizations that are the most aggressive in promoting abortion in developing countries. President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control.”

NRLC goes on to explain that contrary to some misunderstandings, enforcement of the Mexico City Policy did not reduce the amount of money spent on the programme, nor will Obama's order increase the amount (which is $461 million in the current fiscal year). Rather, the policy affects what type of groups qualify for grants under the programme. Obama's order will result in a redirection of funds to groups such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which are ideologically committed to the doctrine that abortion on demand must be universally available as a birth control method."

Douglas Johnson of NRLC warns: "This is the first in an anticipated series of attacks on longstanding pro-life policies, as the new administration pushes Obama's sweeping abortion agenda. That agenda includes repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which would result in tax-funded abortion as a birth control method in the U.S., and imposition of sweeping pro-abortion mandates on private employers through health-care reform legislation."

The Obama phenomenon will affect political decision-making worldwide. All our lives will be affected. Pro-life people must organize and encourage powerful, peaceful resistance at every level in society. The right to life must be made the top priority issue at general elections in every country by all right-minded citizens. The great US election party is over. The first killings have been ordered by America's new abortion President - and we've all got a lot of work to get on with.

Black activist warns of the dangers of the Obama presidency

Here at the SPUC conference in Derbyshire, Rev Arnold Culbreath, Urban Outreach Director of Life Issues Institute, Inc., has been speaking about the dangers of an Obama presidency. Despite the dismal situation, he believes that the president’s heart could be changed on abortion. Arnold is not anti-Obama and prays for him daily. He says that God yearns to save abortion supporters. While we may hate the sin of abortion, we should not hate those who approve of it.

While it is significant that a black man had been elected president, Arnold is also uncomfortable about it. Mr Obama had consistently supported abortion yet this was by far the biggest cause of death among black Americans. More than half a million black babies were aborted each year. While black women were just some 13% of the population, they were involved in more than a third of all abortion.

Arnold pointed out that Hamilton County, Ohio, was nearly a quarter black black but more than half of abortions there were on black women. A quarter of black people in America had been aborted. Blacks and Hispanics were targeted by abortion providers, with a disproportionate number of abortion facilities in minority areas.

Mr Obama had immense charisma. Black people were so excited to have a black president that they did not notice the policy coming from the White House. White people also allowed their excitement to get the better of them. Too many church-going African Americans were Afro-centric rather than Christo-centric, Arnold observed.

Arnold told us that Mr Obama’s first 200 days had borne much pro-abortion fruit. There was a lot of rhetoric about building bridges but the administration had held many meetings with abortion supporters. Mrs Michelle Obama seemed to be even more pro-abortion than her husband.

However, pro-life people should not give in to despair. “If we lose heart, we lose the battle,” Arnold said. The battle would be won one person at a time, one baby at a time. The Obama presidency had actually caused more discussion of abortion among black Americans. Arnold is working behind the scenes to open a constructive dialogue with the Obama administration on life issues. He says: “You must lovingly and caringly draw people in and then drop the truth on them!”

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
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

My initial reaction to Obama’s Notre Dame speech

I will be posting a more extensive reflection on President Obama’s Notre Dame speech of yesterday, but I want to share with you some of my initial reactions to some of its content. Please see my comments in parentheses marked “JS”.

“We must decide how to save God's creation from a changing climate that threatens to destroy it.” (JS: Are unborn children not God's creation? The political climate you’ve intentionally created threatens to add to the 1.2 million abortions performed in America every year, and those funded by your administration overseas.) “We must seek peace at a time…when weapons in the hands of a few can destroy the many.” (JS: Yes, simple instruments in the hands of a few abortionists can destroy many unborn children.)

“[W]e must find a way to live together as one human family.” (JS: International human rights conventions include unborn children as members of the human family. Mr Obama, all your talk about inclusivity, diversity, common ground etc is rank hypocrisy as long as you exclude unborn children from protection.)

“Part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of man … all the cruelties large and small that those of us in the Christian tradition understand to be rooted in original sin … The strong too often dominate the weak … And so, for all our technology and scientific advances, we see around the globe violence…that would seem sadly familiar to those in ancient times.” (JS: The Christian tradition has always regarded abortion as cruel, a domination by the strong of the weak, a violence belonging to ancient times. Mr Obama, stop trying to appropriate the Christian tradition for your own anti-life political ends.)

“Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.” (JS: That is a patronising cariacature of the pro-life position. Pro-lifers are not opposed to stem cell research, but to embryonic stem cell research, because it kills human beings and it doesn’t work. In contrast, adult stem cell research is already being used to treat juvenile diabetes. Stop selling false hope to vulnerable families, Mr Obama.)

“So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies” (JS: But your policies, Mr Obama, will lead both to more abortions and more unintended pregnancies) "and making adoption more available" (JS: The number of children that might possibly be saved through better adoption services is small compared to the numbers of abortions that will result from your policies) "and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term" (JS: But you think abortion can be better than carrying a child to term, or as you put it, being “punished with a baby”. ) “Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause” (JS: So why have you repealed President Bush’s conscience protections and why are you threatening to abolish conscientious objection through the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)?) "and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women." (JS: Abortion and embryo research are neither ethical nor sound science nor good for women.)

"Each side [in the abortion debate] will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.” (JS: Too late, Mr Obama - you've already done it, not least in this very speech!)

“Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.” (JS: Why is your heart closed to the unborn, the most vulnerable? Why can’t you open your mind to a world in which there is no abortion? Why do you support those who use words like “products of conception”, “blob of cells” etc to depersonalise human beings?)

“You [Notre Dame graduates] will be called…to give future generations the same chance that you had to receive an extraordinary education.” [JS: Millions will be denied a chance to be educated because your policies, Mr Obama, because they will have been aborted.]

“It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what He asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that His wisdom is greater than our own.” (JS: But we can know with certainty that God wants us to uphold the sanctity of human life and ignore the man-made ideologies which promote abortion.)

“[M]ost of all [persuade] through an abiding example of good works, charity, kindness, and service that moves hearts and minds.” (JS: In what way is the killing of innocent human beings through abortion compatible with these things?)

“For if there is one law that we can be most certain of, it is the law that binds people of all faiths and no faith together … It is, of course, the Golden Rule - the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love. To serve. To do what we can to make a difference in the lives of those with whom we share the same brief moment on this Earth.” (JS: Mr Obama, were you not once an unborn child in your mother’s womb? Would you prefer to have been aborted?)

“[C]ivil rights for all of God's children.” (JS: How about civil rights for the unborn?)

“Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we all seek the same love of family and the same fulfillment of a life well-lived.” (JS: Forgetting the unborn again, Mr Obama?)

Obama-Clinton administration renews commitment to bankroll abortion worldwide

Yesterday Hillary Clinton, the pro-abortion US secretary of state, gave a speech marking the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo. In her speech, Mrs Clinton notably failed to remind the audience that the programme of action agreed by governments at Cairo says: "In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning". Mrs Clinton nonetheless confirmed the Obama administration's commitment to support and bankroll organisations which promote abortion as a method of family planning, notably the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Mrs Clinton frequently used the terms 'reproductive health' and 'family planning', making only one passsing reference to abortion. In April, following direct questioning by pro-life Congressman Chris Smith, Mrs Clinton was forced to admit that the Obama administration's definition of reproductive health includes abortion.

Here are some extracts from Mrs Clinton's speech yesterday, and my comments [JS] on them:

• "What is it we will do between now and 2015? Remember what was expected of us [at Cairo]. All governments will make access to reproductive healthcare and family planning services a basic right." [JS: This means the Obama administration believes Cairo requires all governments to provide abortion and contraception.]
• "We have made measurable progress since 1994 in improving the health and the lives of women and children, especially girls. For example, the use of modern contraceptives worldwide has increased from under 10 percent in the 1960s to 43 percent in 2008." [JS: As I blogged yesterday, contraception paves the way for abortion, and the physical and psychological damage abortion does to women.]
• "And 15 years after the Cairo conference, far too many women still have little or no access to reproductive health services, including family planning and maternal healthcare." [JS: This shows just how extreme the Obama-Clinton administration regime is. Even though almost every country in the world allows abortion and contraception, resulting in tens of millions of abortions annually and a growing under-population crisis, the administration wants more.]
• "More than 215 million women worldwide lack access to the modern forms of contraception, and this contributes to the nearly 20 million unsafe abortions that take place very year." [JS: I have blogged before about the pro-abortion lobby's outrageous manipulation of shaky statistics.]
• "[W]e are working with religious leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan to increase access to information about family planning" [JS: Obama-Clinton know that the anti-life juggernaut can be stopped by religious leaders.]
• "Uganda, where USAID works with the International Planned Parenthood Federation to provide reproductive health services" [JS: The pro-abortion lobby is determined to reverse the Ugandan government's emphasis on abstinence and fidelity, which has been successful in reducing HIV rates.]
• "So we are rededicating ourselves to the global efforts to improve reproductive health for women and girls ... One of President Obama’s first actions in office was to overturn the Mexico City policy, which greatly limited our ability to fund family planning programs" [JS: In fact, the Mexico City policy denied millions of US federal dollars to organisations which promote abortion, not just 'family planning'.]
• "We have pledged new funding, new programs, and a renewed commitment to achieve Millennium Development Goal Five, namely a [three-fourths] reduction in global maternal mortality, and universal access to reproductive healthcare." [JS: which means seeking to force governments to allow abortion on demand.]
• "This year, the United States renewed funding of reproductive healthcare through the United Nations Population Fund, and more funding is on the way. The U.S. Congress recently appropriated more than $648 million in foreign assistance to family planning and reproductive health programs worldwide. That’s the largest allocation in more than a decade – since we last had a Democratic president, I might add." [JS: which is why it's essential that more pro-lifers win seats in this year's mid-term elections, and that a pro-life candidate replaces Obama in 2012.]
• "[T]oday, the United States is proud once again to support the work of the UN Population Fund." [JS: despite that body's shameless complicity in the China's one-child policy of forced abortions.]
• "[E]very single child in this country – boy or girl – deserves a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential." [JS: There's a good Jewish-American word for such a statement: 'chutzpah'. Under Obama-Clinton, countless more children's lives will be extinguished.]

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
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Deadly agenda for US and the world prepared for Obama presidency

As Barack Obama prepares to become the 44th President of the United States next month it is not just Americans who should be concerned by the inauguration of a man who holds such extreme anti-life views.

Few politicians anywhere espouse policies as extreme as Mr Obama’s. In 2001, when as a member of the Illinois State senate, he repeatedly voted against a law requiring medical personnel to give treatment to babies who survived abortion.

In no sense could the survival of a child after an abortion be considered a threat to his or her mother yet Mr Obama believed helping such a baby to live would undermine the legal right to abortion. Explaining his opposition to the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act he said:

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

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

Although he sought to avoid the issue of abortion once he had secured his party's nomination, the abortion industry has not forgotten that he told them "...the first thing I’d do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act."

While the US Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade made legal efforts to limit abortion virtually impossible, a number of regulations have been successful in gradually reducing the abortions figures in recent years. The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) would remove these. It could end the bar on the the use of tax-payer's money to provide abortions, dispense with waiting periods and inform consent requirements and as well as parental notification laws of States where clinics are prevented from carrying out secret abortions to underage girls.

An insight into the radical agenda influencing the incoming US government is provided by “Advancing Reproductive Rights and Health in a New Administration,” a memorandum signed by 60 or so pro-abortion organisations, including International Planned Parenthood Federation, the biggest promoter of abortion in the world, and a group which calls itself Catholics for Choice.

Despite its publication by the Obama-Biden transition team on the President-elect official website, it is unlikely that such a detailed and wide-ranging paper was intended to be seen by the public. It is so precise in its demands that it even contains draft wording of executive orders the abortion industry wants Mr Obama to sign within the first 100 days of his presidency. It also lists abortion advocates suitable for government jobs and the names of those the abortion lobby would like to see appointed as judges to federal courts.

Amongst its demands is coverage in any tax-payer-subsidised national health care programme. Such a programme would almost certainly compel all major hospitals, including Catholic hospitals to provide abortions. Other proposals made in the 55-page document include:

• a dramatic increase in the funding for birth control clinics from its present $300 million to $700 million in the next financial year;
• allocation of $50 million on "comprehensive" sex-education promoting abortion and abortifacients birth control, while stripping abstinence-only sex-education programmes of all funding;
• $20 million to be spent on teenage pregnancy programmes;
• $10 million for the promotion of the morning-after pill;
• removal of budgetary restrictions on abortion in the federal sector, such as military facilities and prisons;
• "reinvigoration” of the National Task Force on Violence against healthcare providers, code for getting tough on pro-life opposition at abortion facilities;
• the appointment of only pro-abortion judges and officials;
• re-establish liasion between women's groups and the White House; and
• a review the Federal Refusal Rule proposed last August aimed at protecting medical personnel who object to involvement in abortion.

This last point is crucial since more and more doctors and medical staff want nothing to do with abortion. The abortion lobby realises that legalised abortion is of limited value if doctors are not available to perform the opperation. For its own survival, the abortion industry must ensure that doctors with a conscientious objection to abortion must be legally compelled to facilitate them.

In the international arena the authors of the memorandum want Mr Obama to:

• allocate $1 billion in funding for birth control and abortion programmes;
• give $65 million to the UNFPA, which is complicit in coercive abortion through its involvement in China’s coercive one-child policy;
• “reclaim” US leadership in the field of women's health in developing nations by providing $900 million for maternal mortality action, including action against so-called unsafe abortion - a public relations spin for pressuring governments of poor nations to legalise abortion;
• meet the Bush administration's spending plans on HIV/AIDS programmes but integrate birth control programmes with AIDS prevention schemes (Bush’s pledge not to support programmes which do not oppose prostitution should, however, be revised)
• issue new guidance on USAID policy so that it can fund programmes involving abortion.

And finally, the memorandum calls on Mr Obama to press for US ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women or CEDAW treaty. The CEDAW implementation committee is notorious for its attempts to bully countries into liberalising their abortion laws. It has repeatedly called upon the UK government to impose the Abortion Act upon the people of Northern Ireland. Ratification of the CEDAW treaty will be an early warning that the US is ready to use its wealth and considerable influence to pursue the goal of making access to abortion a human right. Although the CEDAW treaty does not mention abortion, its reference to "reproductive rights" is constantly, albeit wrongly, interpreted by the CEDAW committee to include the right to legal access to abortion.

If Barack Obama complies with each of these demands the effects will be felt for a generation not just in the US but across the globe. As I wrote recently the world is facing a time of unprecedented danger. This danger is intensified when leading world figures such as Tony Blair, (who refuses to repudiate, since his reception into the Catholic Church, the anti-life laws and policies he supported and promoted as prime minister and as a Member of Parliament) and Cherie Blair (who has a long track record of supporting anti-life groups and anti-family causes which she has failed to disown) appear to be manipulating the Catholic Church, which is the largest organization worldwide with a mission to defend human life and the family.

Excellent reflection on reaction to Obama's Notre Dame speech

I'm very grateful for the kind responses to my initial reactions to President Obama's speech at Notre Dame university. I had started that blog by saying that I would be posting a more extensive reflection on the speech, but I've since read an excellent reflection by Dave Andrusko of National Right to Life. Dave says what I'd like to have said (and more), so please read his column in full. Below are some extracts:

"[W]e're told by Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, 'Obama's opponents seek to reignite the culture wars. He doesn't.'... How in the world can someone possibly come to that conclusion, at least with respect to abortion? Simple. They are talking about Obama's soaring rhetoric. If they can convince you (and themselves!) to look up toward the clouds, you'll never notice the grim, anti-life details of his policy proposals on the ground.

"[P]ro-life critics of Obama...cite chapter and verse what he has done already (e.g. [revoking the] Mexico City [policy]); what he has steadfastly insisted he will do; and what he is already inkling he will do. With that evidence in hand, they reach the only conclusion anyone whose head is not in the clouds could come to: this is [Planned Parenthood's] heartthrob.

"[W]hatever short-term gains there undoubtedly were for Obama, long-term the only way pro-lifers could have lost would have been had they remained mute at the travesty of the most pro-abortion President in our history being honored by the best known Catholic University in our country. For now the winds remain at Obama's back. But they won't always."

We must move quickly to resist the growing attacks on conscientious objection

In a recent speech, 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"

and he 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, has made it clear that when her government speaks of reproductive health, it's a term which includes access to abortion.

We must understand that it's the intention of the Obama administration not to allow health professionals' conscientious objection to abortion to get in the way. "Universal access" to "reproductive health", to which the Obama government declares itself to be committed, cannot be "universal" if troublesome pro-life health professionals object in conscience to participating in abortion cases or referring them to colleagues.

Actions speak louder than words - especially for Barack Obama on abortion.  In his infamous speech at Notre Dame University , he declared: “Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause”. In his 9 September address to Congress on health care reform legislation that he promised that "federal conscience laws would remain in place". He has, in fact, taken action to reverse a regulation that allows health care providers the right to refuse perform services to which they object.

The attack on conscientious objection to abortion has become a top priority for the pro-abortion lobby elsewhere. At a Council of Europe meeting in Paris next month, one of the items on the agenda is "Women’s access to lawful medical care: the problem of unregulated use of conscientious objection". Forcing conscientiously objecting doctors to refer women to other doctors for abortion is another way in which pro-life ethics are being suppressed. And immediately on the horizon is the Brown government's anti-life legislative push expected in November - promoting access to abortion for schoolchildren without parental knowledge and consent.

There are many people who support or are sympathetic to pro-life values, but who do little to express that support or sympathy. We need to inform people that failing to defend the right to life of unborn children results in the erosion of the right of conscientious objection. Defending the right to life defends all other rights. Let's encourage as many people as possible to join the pro-life resistance revolution today!

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
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Don't be fooled by Obama's so-called common ground feint

Some media outlets, even ones usually supportive of the pro-life cause, have convinced themselves that President Obama is a moderate on abortion, who wants all sides of the abortion debate to find and stand on common ground. A recent meeting between White House staff and American pro-life groups, however, provides further evidence against that myth. Family Research Council (FRC), who were represented at the meeting, report:

"In answer to a question about reducing abortion, Obama staffers Joshua DuBois and Tina Tchen made it clear--the President's goal is not to reduce the number of abortions. It is to reduce 'the need for abortion' ... For President Obama, it's not only unacceptable to protect unborn life legally, but it is becoming clear that it is unacceptable even to influence a woman to 'choose' life ... Don't be fooled by the conciliatory rhetoric about 'common ground'. Barack Obama believes women 'need' to have abortions, and judging by his actions, he intends to make sure that they get them."

As I pointed out in my initial reactions to Obama's Notre Dame speech, while he runs his rhetorical campaign to bring people together to reduce abortions, he is ruthlessly pursuing policies which are aimed at providing more abortions and will lead to more unintended pregnancies. We cannot afford the indulgence of wishful thinking that Mr Obama is really some sort of Gandhi-like reconciler. Any such thinking by pro-lifers would result in more abortions, not least through an emasculation of the pro-life movement itself.

Obama's re-election is tragic, but failure to preach the Gospel of Life is worse

The re-election of Barack Obama, the most anti-life and anti-family president in US history, is indeed tragic. The truth, however, is that his re-election is but a symptom of a greater evil which extends not just across the US but across the world.

One clue is in the demographics of those who voted for Mr Obama. Analysts of the poll results pointed out that women, Hispanics, immigrants and young adults were more likely to vote for Mr Obama than for Mr Romney. A large proportion of those groups (which also overlap considerably) is Catholic - yet they voted to re-elect a president who has declared himself effectively to be a enemy of the Catholic Church over the issues of abortion, contraception and homosexuality.

Another clue is the fact that, as Fr Frank Pavone of Priests for Life said:

"Many in Church leadership failed to connect the dots between personnel and policy. They prayed and preached against the HHS mandate [President Obama's anti-life healthcare plan], but then were silent about the election, and called the police to remove citizens who leafleted the Church parking lot trying to inform voters about where the candidates stood on this issue."

A third clue is in a comment made to me recently by someone who has attended Mass every Sunday for four decades in Wales. He told me that he had never once heard a pro-life sermon.

These clues - and there are countless more I could list - tell me that the failure of Catholic leaders to preach and apply the Gospel of Life will make future elections of anti-life politicians inevitable.

It is all very well for Church spokesmen like Cardinal Dolan and Fr Lombardi to highlight the culture of life, religious freedom etc. in the wake of Mr Obama's re-election. But unless the Gospel of Life is actually used in practice to stop abortion, contraception and the destruction of marriage among Catholics themselves, there won't be any Catholics left for Mr Obama to persecute. This radical application of the Gospel of Life requires some of the following actions (and many other similar ones):

• the dismissal from office of prelates who give succour to the culture of death - such as Archbishop Rino Fisichella
• the banning from every Catholic church of publications which undermine the Gospel of Life - such as The Tablet
• the removal from Catholic schools of pornographic sex education programmes (such as "Living and Growing") and the unequivocal banning of government agencies committed to giving schoolchildren access to abortion which have operated in Catholic schools with the co-operation of the Catholic Education Service in England and Wales.

In 1988, Pope John Paul II said*:

"The common outcry on behalf of human rights is false and illusory if the right to life is not defended with maximum determination."

Last night's election results are a rude reminder to the Catholic Church today of that fundamental reality.

* My thanks go to Paul Kilbane of SPUC Crosby branch for reminding me of this quotation. 

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

The abortion president would gravely damage America's reputation worldwide

Senator Barack Obama, de facto Democrat candidate for US president, has said he will reinstate American funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). Such spending is presently prevented by the 1985 Kemp-Kasten Amendment which, according to the Population Research Institute "forbids U.S. funds from going to any organization or country that participates in a program of forced abortion or sterilization." Earlier this month, President Bush's government withheld some $40 million from UNFPA, making a total of $235 million withheld over seven years.

Reinstating funding for UNFPA will gravely damage America's reputation worldwide. Under the current president, the US has done a lot of good work to protect the unborn overseas and an Obama victory would throw all that away. He will also do immense damage in his own country. Mr Obama has said that, if elected, he will immediately sign the Freedom of Choice Act which would enshrine abortion in US law and overturn all state-based restrictions. No wonder the Christian Defense Coalition has called him the abortion president.

While SPUC never endorses candidates, least of all those in other countries, an Obama presidency would have bad effects throughout the world, so it is a legitimate concern for us and our pro-life colleagues elsewhere to know that a new administration would fund UNFPA. Obama's neo-colonialist abortion policies will kill unborn children, destroy the lives of women and families overseas, and gravely damage the good name of the US.

On a related note, the Democratic and Republican parties have yet to choose their candidates for US vice-president. The choice is an important one, because vice-presidents sometimes succeed the incumbent (e.g. Lyndon Johnson succeeded JFK; Gerald Ford succeeded Nixon) or can become influential, either while vice-president (e.g. Dick Cheney) or in later life (e.g. Al Gore). It stands to reason that Mr Obama's running mate will probably share his anti-life positions. John McCain, Mr Obama's Republican rival, said recently that his running mate should share his "values, principles, and priorities." Among those speculated as a possible running mate for Mr McCain is Condoleezza Rice, the current Secretary of State (equivalent to the British Foreign Secretary). It would seem that Miss Rice does not share what is reported to be Mr McCain's position on abortion.

Some human beings are more equal than others, according to MPs praising Obama

I've received a notification that Jim Dobbin MP, chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Pro-Life Group (APPPLG), has withdrawn his signature from a pro-Obama parliamentary motion (I blogged about this last week, pointing out the President-elect's extreme pro-abortion/anti-life political record and intentions). I'm very grateful to Mr Dobbin for withdrawing his signature.

I note with disappointment, however, that APPPLG vice-chairmen Claire Curtis-Thomas MP and Dr John Pugh MP, have signed a different pro-Obama motion, the wording of which is flawed.

Of course, it's perfectly normal and diplomatically desirable for politicians, Governments - and even for the Pope - to send messages of congratulation to new heads of state, not least the new head of state in the US. But it matters a lot what the message actually says.

Pope Benedict's message is personal and the full text is not available. CNS news reports that the Holy Father assured the President-elect of his prayers that God would help him with his high responsibilities for his country and for the international community - and I've no doubt we all say "Amen" to that.

However, the Early Day Motion signed by Claire Curtis-Thomas and John Pugh says, among other things:

"That this House [of Commons]... notes that even a few years ago it would have been unimaginable for an African-American man to run for President let alone win; [and] identifies [Mr Obama] as a shining example of how far America has come in respect of integration and equality".

What about the integration and equality of unborn children, both black and white, who will be killed in greater numbers under President Obama? Or are some human beings more equal than others, according to British MPs?

Anthony Ozimic, back from last week's MaterCare workshop in Rome, reports a particularly apposite comment made by Nicholas Nikas (pictured), a leading pro-life lawyer from the United States. Mr Nikas said:

"The world sees the first black man as president, which is a wonderful thing: but at what price? Martin Luther King Jnr had a dream, a nation where people will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character. What is the content of the character that does not see partial birth-abortion as a problem?"

Anthony reports another similarly apposite comment, made by Fr Thomas Williams of the Regina Apostolorum university. Fr Williams said that abortion was the central issue of social injustice of our time, by which individuals are oppressed in their most fundamental right; and that in the light of the American election results, Catholics may be considered unfit to work in certain areas or in certain jobs, because they hold pro-life and pro-family beliefs (as a result of the Freedom of Choice Act which Barack Obama has promised to sign as the first act of his presidency).

How do Mrs Curtis-Thomas and Dr Pugh (both Catholics) square that danger of segregation and discrimination with the "integration and equality" they claim Mr Obama's election represents?

Empty red envelope campaign: to President Obama at the White House

Readers might be interested in a campaign launched in the US: the Red Envelope Project. Brad Mattes, the chief executive of Life Issues Institute, wrote to me about it. In view of the worldwide implications of Barack Obama's pro-abortion policies (see my post: The party's over: Obama signs order to abort the world's poor), this is a campaign in which citizens of other countries may wish to become involved.

Dear Mr Smeaton,

If you’re not familiar with the Red Envelope Project, allow me to fill you in. It’s catching on like wildfire.

The idea is to send an empty red envelope to President Obama at the White House. On the back is this simple message: "This envelope represents one child who died in abortion. It is empty because that life was unable to offer anything to the world."

The red color represents the blood of over 50 million unborn babies who have been sacrificed on the altar of "choice". The goal is to have a tidal wave of red envelopes flood the mailroom of the White House.

The brainchild behind this project is Christ (rhymes with mist) Otto. The idea came to him during a time of prayer. He wants to send President Obama a message of moral outrage regarding his support of abortion-on-demand throughout pregnancy. Mr. Otto says the red envelope message would be "quiet but clear".

Life Issues Institute is proud to partner with Christ Otto to assist him in this noble and moving effort. Our goal is to streamline the process and make a terrific idea even more successful.We’re printing huge quantities of these red envelopes, complete with the President’s address on one side and the pro-life message on the other.

Purchasing them in large quantities affords everyone a better price; it eliminates the need to locate and shop for red envelopes; and they come preprinted and ready to be mailed. All participants need to do is seal the envelope, stick on a first-class stamp and mail. It’s easy!

This nonpolitical message makes it a great fit for churches. Imagine the number of red envelopes that can be inserted into Sunday bulletins in churches throughout the nation. It’s an excellent opportunity for the pastor to speak on the issue of abortion, remember the unborn and their mothers in prayer, and have the congregation participate in standing up for life. Those who don’t already know the President’s position on abortion soon will, and they can pray for his pro-life conversion.

The appeal of the Red Envelope Project is that it’s so easy and inexpensive to do!Ideas for getting others to participate are endless. In addition to churches, pro-life groups can include an envelope with newsletter and other mailings to its membership. Red envelopes can be given to neighbors, friends and coworkers.

Anyone and everyone who wants to send a message to President Obama that unborn babies should be protected from abortion should be given the opportunity to send in their envelope. Join a rapidly growing number of people who are sending an unmistakable message to President Obama.

It’s simple to order your preprinted red envelopes. Click on https://www.lifeissues.org/red/order.html and follow the easy directions. I’ve also posted various ideas on how you can get others to help send more envelopes to the White House at http://www.lifeissues.org/red/ideas.htm share this message with others in your email address book. Link our ordering page with your own website, Facebook page or other presence on the Internet. Include your friends around the world. We want everyone to participate.

Be a part of this new tidal wave of individuals who are standing up for America’s unborn babies!

Sincerely for the little ones,

Bradley Mattes, Life Issues Institute

Vatican condemnation of Obama's "arrogance" is well-judged

It's the morning after the night before as the world wakes up to the terrible reality of Barack Obama's presidency of the US.

In a well-judged response, the Vatican has been swift to pronounce a severe judgement on one of Obama's first presidential decisions: to sign an order to "aggressively promote" abortion as a tool of population control in developing countries - as I explained in my blog "The party's over ... " last week.

The BBC reports that: "Senior Vatican official Monsignor Rino Fisichella (pictured), President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, urged Mr Obama to listen to all voices in America without 'the arrogance of those who, being in power, believe they can decide of life and death' ... If this is one of President Obama's first acts, I have to say, in all due respect, that we're heading quickly toward disappointment".

His predecessor, Monsignor Eli Sgreccia, put it even more strongly, likening Obama's policy to that of King Herod and his slaughter of the innocents.

These strength of the Vatican's response to Barack Obama's action is well-judged, in view of the gravity of the situation. In addition, the new President has promised to sign the Freedom of Choice Act which seeks to compel medical professionals to provide abortions, with no opt-outs for conscientious objection. Such presidential action will only serve to strengthen moves elsewhere in the world - the Philippines, Kenya, the European Institutions, and Britain - where attacks on conscientious objection are either proposed (as in the Philippines and in Kenya); are government policy or enshrined in legislation (as in Britain) or are being powerfully promoted (as in the European institutions).

As I've mentioned before, peaceful resistance is the way forward for the pro-life movement worldwide - as well as continuing our existing educational, political, and compassionate caring work. SPUC's campaign of peaceful resistance is focused on resisting euthanasia at the bedside and the Society's Safe at School campaign. Please contact me at johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk for further details.

In addition, later this week SPUC is launching its campaign to make the right to life a top priority issue at the next general election. Abortion, euthanasia, IVF and embryo research cannot be dismissed as a "single issue" of no more significance than any other social justice issue. As Bishop Sgreccia says: we're fighting against the "slaughter of the innocents" and it's time for the campaign strategy of the pro-life movement, which includes our supporters in the faith communities, fully to reflect that reality.

Obama's hypocrisy on caring for children defies belief

I am most grateful to the wonderful blogger known to many of his readers as "Bones" for drawing my attention to LifeSite's video: Imagine if Obama were pro-life.

Barack Obama, the most pro-abortion president in US history,  made a speech which moved people throughout the world following the shocking massacre of twenty little schoolchildren and six staff members in Newtown, Connecticut. That incomprehensible tragedy was rightly marked by powerful presidential oratory and expressions of a political determination to stop such tragedies from recurring.

In his speech, Obama says: 

"This is our first task ... caring for our children ... If we don't get that right, we don't get anything right ... "

At this point it really must be said - in view of the countless children being killed right now by Obama's policies, his hypocrisy defies belief.

Few politicians anywhere espouse policies as extreme as Mr Obama’s (although Tony Blair, former UK prime minister, provides tough competition in this respect). In 2001, when as a member of the Illinois State senate, he repeatedly voted against a law requiring medical personnel to give treatment to babies who survived abortion.

In no sense could the survival of a child after an abortion be considered a threat to his or her mother yet Mr Obama believed helping such a baby to live would undermine the legal right to abortion. Explaining his opposition to the Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act he said:

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

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

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

Obamania spreads to Catholic bishops

Bishop Crispian Hollis (pictured) has posted a special message on the Portsmouth diocese website in which he rejoices at the election of Barack Obama - the most pro-abortion and anti-life president-elect in American history. The full message reads:

“With millions of others, I have been thrilled by Barack Obama’s victory and I thank God for it. For me, it represents a rare moment of hope and optimism which shows American democracy at its best and it is of seismic significance and potential for the whole global community. And so, more than ever now, he deserves and needs us to keep him in our prayers.”

I am increasingly concerned by the numbers of people who have endorsed Mr Obama. I suspect many of them are caught up in an unthinking Obamania.

Has Bishop Hollis overlooked the fact that the unborn are part of the whole global community? The only "potential" for the unborn under an Obama presidency will be that more of them will be killed. What "hope and optimism" can Catholic medics have following Obama's election, who will abolish conscientious objection to abortion, thereby threatening to destroy Catholic healthcare in the US? Can Bishop Hollis explains to Stephan Karanja, the leader of Catholic doctors in Kenya, why he also should be "thrilled" by Obama's victory? Is the poor doctor labouring under a misunderstanding when he says:

“[Americans] have no business electing a person who is going to destroy our countr[y] ... The truth is that they have put a bad man in the most powerful office in the whole world ... [T]his administration of Obama, is going to be a nightmare for our people."

I will be writing to Bishop Hollis, putting these and other questions to him.