From the US? Considering an abortion? Go to, a database of abortion malpractice information in the USA.

"When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." Elizabeth Cady Stanton



Monday, 30 April 2012

Sign Petition for Chen Guangcheng


Please sign and spread the word!

Jill Stanek and LiveAction have some great articles on where things currently stand.

UPDATE 03/04/2012:

Some other great articles from:

Chen was forced to leave the US embassy because his family's lives were threatened. "Like" the Free Chen GuangCheng Facebook page and make sure you sign petitions, tweet, or post about this story to help him and his family, and especially help the woman, He Peirong, who helped him escape and who is believed to have been detained by the Chinese government! This man and his supporters are ridiculously brave.

UPDATE 14/05/2012: An article from Catholic Lane

UPDATE 17/05/2012: An article from EWTN
                                     An article from Press of Atlantic City

Thursday, 26 April 2012

VOTE on CBC and CTV!

Hi Everyone! So there are two polls that I know of in the MSM on Motion 312, which was brought to the House by MP Stephen Woodworth. It is a review on the question of when human life begins because, according to Canadian law, someone is not a human being until the moment of birth.

Obviously that is the most archaic, unscientific definition of human life ever. SO! If you agree, you really should really go vote in the MSM polls. Currently, the pro-life side is not doing too well so it'd be great to even it out a bit and show that our voices can be heard! With the March For Life coming up, and this Motion being debated in Parliament, its more important than ever to make sure that you have a say in the public discussions on abortion and human life.

Here are the polls:
CTV (scroll about have way down the page for this one)

 And while you're at it, sign the petition in support of Motion 312!

A nice summary of the Motion from Fr. Raymond J. DeSouza.

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Back to the Question: Why Aren't More Pro-Lifers Violent?

A long while ago I wrote a response to a post by Ben From Canada, who claimed that if we pro-lifers really think the unborn are human, then we would do more to protect them. Essentially, his point was that we would resort to violence to save lives - by killing abortion clinic workers / bombing abortion clinics / (fill in whatever violent act you can think of).

Violence is totally the way, yo! Oh wait ...

I made the very obvious point that we are pro-LIFE - as in pro-[all human life]. Apparently he didn't quite understand that, because he wrote a response to the Anti-Abortion Gang's answer to his claims. I've been meaning to answer his blog post for ages now, just because I really do believe that a lot of people have opinions that are similar to his, but then I got really busy with school and forgot about it. Lo and behold, I'm procrastinating studying for an exam, and I find a link to his post as I am sorting through old bookmarks. So I suppose I will procrastinate even longer by finally responding to his claims. Hopefully others who share his point of view can get something out of my response.

So, before I get into the nitty gritty, let me just state once and for all: the pro-life community at large condemns violence and seeks to change our culture of death into a culture of life through peaceful protest, and practical aid to pregnant women and young parents.

Now lets deal with Ben From Canada:

"I’m not a “clump of cells” and neither are you. I’m a complex organism. This is not."

This is also not what is killed in an abortion. Ignoring the fact that even humans at their earliest stages of life are still humans, women typically find out that they are pregnant about two weeks after implantation (so ~four weeks into the pregnancy from my understanding) - at which point, the baby is already an embryo and looks like this. Its actually quite a complex organism at this point - it is already developing the neural tube, lungs, intestines, urinary system, placenta and umbilical cord. Not quite a "clump of cells", even according to Ben From Canada's point of view. Most abortions occur at less than 9 weeks. Hardly a clump of cells at that point either.

"pro-life doesn’t care about life. You a very large percentage of you guys support war and the death penalty. I would have linked a source to both of these, but one only needs to look at the Roman Catholic Church and every prominent conservative politician anywhere (especially in the USA) to see this."

First off, pro-lifers do care about life. I don't know anyone who thinks that war is a good thing, but I do know plenty of people who believe that there are things worth fighting for - in the proper context (a classic example would be fighting in WWII against Nazi Germany). Secondly, pro-life opinions on the death penalty are varied. I am against the death penalty, but many pro-lifers make the case that there is a huge difference between executing a rapist and murderer like, for example, Paul Bernardo, vs. killing an unborn baby who is literally innocent of any crime. Furthermore, support for the death penalty doesn't automatically mean you're against abortion.  Nor is it the case that conservatives are always against abortion. As for what the Catholic Church teaches, I will simply refer the readers to the Catechism (emphasis my own):

2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

So that means, in developed countries where we have a system that is able to imprison criminals for life, the death penalty is morally wrong.

Moving on.

"[T]he Trolley Problem. There are many variations, but all are essentially the same: You’re presented with a choice to doom one person or 5 (it’s always 1 and 5, it seems) [...] Yes, you’d be killing a person, but you’d be saving many lives, although it wouldn’t be even close to 1/5…it would be 1/several hundred [...] But doing something that won’t do anything is the exact same as not acting, and as I said before, abortion won’t be illegalized in anywhere that it is currently legal, at least not in our lifetimes. Peaceful protests will not make a difference."

Well, this argument assumes that killing abortionists and bombing clinics will make a difference, while peaceful protests will not. The author conveniently ignores the fact that pro-lifers have made a lot of strides in the past year, all through peaceful means. I claim that violence will not further our cause, in fact, it will hinder it. You can read my previous response as to why this is. Or you can just trot over to any pro-abortion blog and look for posts about violent pro-lifers, and see for yourself how little good violence does. Furthermore, in a simple Google search, Poland popped up as a country that had legalized abortion, and then made illegal again except in cases of rape, serious fetal abnormality, or to save the life of the mother. Additionally, Poland is becoming increasingly pro-life, with 75% of young people in favor of a total ban. So there is definitely a chance that abortion will be made illegal "somewhere that it is currently legal" in our lifetimes - all without a violent uprising.

"So, the only real way to save “babies” that will work is, essentially, terrorism."

Or pro-lifers could provide help to pregnant women. Or pro-lifers could pray at abortion clinics. Or pro-lifers could lobby governments for stronger abortion restrictions. Or pro-lifers could lobby for better treatment of pregnant women in the workplace and at school. Finding statistics on how well these things reduce abortions is hard to do because of the rhetoric on each side of the debate, but here's one estimate that ultrasound laws on their own reduce the abortion rate by ~10%. Never mind that giving women other options besides abortion is simply good practice, and is a great way to give women who don't want abortions a way out when they feel trapped. Planned Parenthood is notably lacking in this regard, so there is a lot of room for pro-lifers to improve and balance out crisis pregnancy care.

"Perhaps individual pro-lifers are OK with recreational sex and legitimately think they’re not opposing women’s rights by supporting the pro-life lobby. However, the vast majority are sexually repressive and at least somewhat misogynistic (note that the most outspoken pro-life organization, worldwide, is the Catholic church, which as an organization is more misogynistic and prudish than anyone outside of al-Qaeda) ..."

Nice anti-Catholic rant. How about learning about what Catholic women think about their faith before claiming we are just a shade less misogynistic and prudish than anyone outside of al-Qaeda? Also, "vast majority" is a really strong word. Its interesting how this blog post started with the thesis that pro-lifers should do more to save babies lives, and turned into a rant against what he feels are our beliefs.

"And even worse than this are the various personhood laws that have been proposed that outlaw birth control pills and miscarriage."

I'm curious, how exactly does one outlaw miscarriage? Miscarriages are people dying naturally. One might as well try to outlaw death from old age or disease. The "personhood amendments outlaw birth control pills" position is a somewhat more understandable position considering pro-life leaders just can't agree on that one.

And in the end, we finally get back to the point:

"Note that I’m not trying to advocate terrorism. I’m glad you guys don’t really think that embryos and zygotes and whatnot are people. I just wish you’d be more honest about what you really think."

So I guess what readers are supposed to get out of this blog post is that, unless we're willing to protect unborn babies by any means possible, we don't truly believe that they are people. So, according to Ben from Canada, the White Rose resistance to Nazism did not really believe that Jews were people, since their goal was to instigate a non-violent, intellectual movement against Hilter's regime. And Ben From Canada must also believe that other non-violent civil rights leaders, such as Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr., did not believe in the personhood of the people they were supporting since they also advocated for non-violent activism.

But instead of giving up and declaring the pro-life movement secretly pro-choice at heart, I'll simply let history speak for itself. So dear readers, do non-violent protests really constitute a denial of personhood?

Monday, 23 April 2012

Art Engages the World

For awhile now, I seem to be coming across a general theme in people's attitudes towards pregnancy and children. This theme always seems to involve the following words:


The perfect example of this mindset can be found here, courtesy of sasharusa. And for the life of me, I cannot understand her. And her thoughts can be found everywhere. For instance, go to DeviantArt (an amazing website btw, if you don't have an account, make one and browse through awesome art to your heart's content!). Look up anything pregnancy / baby related. My personal favourite is the "1st Trimester Embryo" by DraggyCat: 

This adorable little plushy got a DailyDeviation and when I saw it my first reaction was "AWWWWW". Many people had exactly the same reaction. Many other people thought it was weird, freaky, or creepy. 

 Another piece of art that had similar responses was "Birth" by Angela4:

I also thought this was adorable. Again, many people thought it was phenomenal, but there were still some who thought it was disgusting or creepy. 

So why is something so natural seen as something so unnatural? How can the way we all were brought into this world be disgusting / freaky? Are we really all just gross little parasites? 

But all is not lost :) Even though many people seem to find pregnancy and birth weird and terrifying, looking through some other pieces of art can be very encouraging. For instance, "Self-Portrait as a Garden" by KRIS-13 features the (accidental) mirror-image of a gorgeous wood carving:

 Every single person who viewed it saw this piece of art as touching, beautiful, magical, and adorable (and many people referred to the odd little guy in the womb as a baby!). "Concert for two" by serhatdemiroglu is a touching photo of his wife and son:

I think my point is embodied in "love for unborn" by anabi:

This beautiful tattoo was done for a man who lost his unborn child. The comments on this piece are very interesting. You have some, who simply think that this tattoo is far too large and excessive. You have others who think it is a lovely piece of art, both in the technique and meaning behind the work. You have many who understand and sympathize with this man's grief. And then you have some people who feel free to mention their opinions on abortion, on how they hope the baby didn't die that way, or how they do not believe the unborn are people, and that this man simply lost the "potential" of being a dad. They post these words on a piece of art that was made to commemorate the death of a man's child, a child he very clearly loved. 

So my point? Art engages people. Really good art forces people to face their opinions, rationalize their opinions, and then perhaps abandon them when the rationalizations fall short. Many of the artists above are pro-choice, and yet their pieces still managed to initiate discussion. Art is the perfect way to engage a culture. It can show people that pregnancy and birth aren't disgusting or freaky. It can show people that the unborn deserve love. And it can show people the fragility and beauty of every life. Art can demonstrate that there really are two (and often three!) people involved in every pregnancy, and that it isn't such a bad thing  (and maybe, that its actually a pretty amazing, powerful thing!). So if there is anyone out there who is artistically inclined, get creative! :)

PS You can also check out some specifically pro-life art that I've featured before here

Sunday, 22 April 2012

Quote of the Week: "I choose my own way to burn"

Sophie Scholl and other members of the White Rose resistance group. Image from Wikipedia.
“The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'survive.' The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, mate small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.”
-Sophie Scholl

Friday, 20 April 2012

Song of the Week: Listen Through Me by Thrice

This is a partial (belated) Happy Easter post, a partial post to promote one of my absolute favourite bands in the world, and partial first post for my re-vamped "_____" of the Week.

So first of all, Happy Belated Easter. I hope you all had a wonderful holiday, and long weekend. And for all you Christians who have been lamenting recently over the absence of truly great "Christian" music, here is a song about the Passion that everyone should listen to. Now never ever complain again, because Thrice is amazing, and many of their songs are based off of Christian morals, biblical stories, and Christian writers (most notably, C.S. Lewis). Your wishes have been fulfilled. Go forth and listen.

So, Listen Through Me also (conveniently) happens to be my first Song of the Week. This song is only one example of Thrice's impressive lyrical work (and it isn't even their best work). They are a phenomenal band, I really can't rave about them enough, so check them out!

Lyrics for Listen Through Me

I've seen his ragged shoes
The soles are worn straight through
Well I proclaimed
The king has sang the blues
If you've got better news
Then make it play

He laid aside his crown
All our crimes he carried
Was lifted from the ground
With our burdens buried

Listen to me
Though I speak of sober things
Listen through me
Though we're men of lips unclean
I speak truly
What you only think you've heard
Everything hangs on a word

Sparing no expense
He made recompense
For all the earth
The story's an offense
So get down from that fence
And bless or curse

He laid aside his crown
All our crimes he carried
Was lifted from the ground
With our burdens buried
The shadows all had flown
In the light diminished
He emptied out his lungs
Crying it is finished

Listen to me
Though I speak of sober things
Listen through me
Though we're men of lips unclean
I speak truly
What you only think you've heard
Everything hangs on a word

A word...

The shadows all had flown
In the light diminished
He emptied out his lungs
Crying it is finished

Listen to me
Though I speak of sober things
Listen through me
Though we're men of lips unclean
I speak truly
What you only think you've heard
Everything hangs on a word

A Misguided Sense of Empathy

I have only a few friends who are decisively pro-choice, and all of them are pro-choice because they are able to empathize more easily with the pregnant woman than with the fetus. When we talk about abortion, they always focus on the horror of finding your body change when you don't want it to, the injustice of having to cater your life to someone who you'd rather wasn't there, the difficulty of finding yourself pregnant with the child of a man you don't love, the options and opportunities that disappear once accidental parents are responsible for a new life, and the lives of women who have health risks which are compounded by a pregnancy. They never talk about the lives that are lost, or even the "potential lives" that are lost (if you're a pro-choicer who views an unborn baby as a potential) - in fact, the baby is rarely, if ever, mentioned by them.

My pro-choice friend, who I've mentioned before, also spends a lot of her time lamenting on the "poor young people" and "poor women" who have limited to no access to artificial birth control, and attacking the pro-life side for being largely against the pill, and to a lesser extent against all birth control methods except NFP. She goes into great detail about how difficult it is for her to afford birth control, and how it is a stress that she and her boyfriend should not have to go through. But when I asked her about failure rates, about how she could become pregnant even if she is using contraception, she acknowledged that she does worry about the possibility of becoming pregnant. And when I pointed out that this is a major reason that pro-lifers are against marketing contraception as a solution to abortion (though we are not necessarily against contraception itself) she side-stepped the issue and continued to act as if the pill would completely protect her against an unwanted pregnancy.

So then I brought up how it is horrible that pregnant mothers are not given more support, which often forces them into believing that abortion is their only option, and how this is not a very "pro-choice" state of affairs.  I brought up examples of programs (largely the work of pro-lifers) that help make life a possible choice for women facing unplanned pregnancies, and my friend went right back to the contraception issue - claiming that contraception would make my points completely moot because then there would be no unwanted pregnancies. She claimed all of this even though she had just admitted that contraception fails.

I have always found the focus of self-professing "rabid" pro-choicers to be quite odd. All of the focus is on the mother and on contraception ... the baby is ignored, the actual abortion procedure is ignored, and solutions which would enable women to keep their babies are dismissed as unnecessary "because we have abortion and the pill." The intrinsic morality of killing your child because you cannot deal with them is glossed over or dismissed, the psychological or health effects of the abortion procedure are unimportant when compared to the effects of childbirth.

So even though these friends of mine really do believe that they are being supportive of women, I do not see this worldview as compassionate towards surprise mothers in any way. Everything regarding pregnancy, childbirth, and motherhood is seen as evil, unless (of course) the pregnancy was explicitly planned.  As someone who knows and loves many "surprise" babies, I will never understand the misguided sense of empathy pro-choicers feel towards pregnant women. There is nothing compassionate about claiming that contraception will solve everything, and that providing pregnant mothers with help and support beyond the abortion clinic is a side issue not directly related to the abortion debate.

Petition in Support of Motion 312

Sign and spread the word! So far there are 2096 signatures - lets see if we can get that number up by a couple of orders of magnitude.

Seriously, share now. We have a really rare chance to be heard in parliament, another one might not come along for awhile!

Stephen Woodworth discusses the motion: