Jivin J’s Life Links 6-23-09
by JivinJ
Officers allege [Charles] Daniels abused the woman, hitting her in the stomach, putting his hands around her throat and telling her she would never see her children again, an arrest report stated.
Daniels had been dating the 36-year-old Gainesville woman about a week and wanted her to have an abortion because the child wasn’t his, the report stated.
But while this shift in focus from rhetoric to morality will ensure that the pro-choice movement will lose ground, it does not necessarily mean a win for the pro-life cause. A primary reason is that the number of morally serious pro-choicers willing to confess in public to harboring such qualms remains discouragingly small. Even more importantly, the bar for what constitutes moral seriousness has been set so low for the pro-choice cause that people like Saletan and Kissling can admit that a viable fetus is a living human being yet still maintain that people should have the legal right to kill them.
Nevertheless, pro-choicers expressing pangs of conscience is a trend that should be encouraged. Pro-choice apologists may be able to live with the cognitive dissonance but others who are forced to face the morality of abortion may choose differently. And in the Age of Obama, that may be the best we pro-lifers can hope for.
Jessica at Feministing has linked to the piece mentioned above by former Catholics for a Free Choice head Frances Kissling (pictured below left) in which Kissling notes there are some abortions she thinks shouldn’t be performed. The majority of Feministing’s commenters oppose Kissling’s view and some even refuse to oppose women getting abortions because they wouldn’t like the astrological sign their child would be born under (an example given by Kissling).
Their views may be abhorrent but at least they’re consistent. If you think women have a right to complete bodily autonomy, then you shouldn’t have a problem with a woman having an abortion because she prefers to have a child born under a certain astrological sign.
In a study published this month, Dr. Kuypers’ team documented that stem cells taken from the placenta survived transfusion into animals, and indeed began producing healthy blood cells. That is the key to their effectiveness in treating diseases of the blood, like sickle cell anemia….
Placenta blood also has advantages over options like bone marrow transplant because the donor match does not have to be as exact.
The plan to allow pregnancy advisory services and abortion clinics to advertise on TV and radio was announced earlier this year by the Committee of Advertising Practice and the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice.
They believe it could reduce the UK’s teenage pregnancy rate – the highest in Europe – and sexually-transmitted infections.
How would abortion advertising lower STIs and the teen pregnancy rate?
[Photo attribution: musawah.org]

lol, wut?
Do these people not realize that only pregnant women seek abortions?
seriously?!
Science steps over the line more often than not.
seriously?!
Science steps over the line more often than not.
Posted by: mary at June 23, 2009 3:50 PM
“Science”
Except, in all reality, science is on our side. Because at conception, we’re talking about a living human being. At conception, we’re talking about pregnancy. And it takes a pregnant woman to get an abortion, doesn’t it now?
So it isn’t really science that steps over the line. It’s “science.”
Agreed. Couldn’t have said it better myself, MaryRose.
So much for women’s lib and reproductive freedom, as the second paragraph of this post on the FL man relates, anyone want to take a guess how many women are brutally assualted, beaten or killed for refusing to have an abortion? I bet no one keeps statistics on that. God help this nation.
Posted by: Prolifer L at June 23, 2009 4:48 PM
——
What’s really bizarre is listening to legislative testimony from Planned Parenthood, NOW, NARAL et al, and one minute the pro-aborts will claim that the woman is making the choice on her own, and a couple of sentences later explain she can’t discuss WRTK info re: keeping the child due to violent threats from the overhearing boyfriend.
If you point out their hypocrisy, they give you the “What are you, stupid?” look.
There no rationale or logic in abortion. Just money. And power.
Chris,
There’s logic and rationale in how to use innocuous appearances to GET money and power…
There’s logic and rationale in how best to hide the brutal reality of what abortion is….
That’s where the “logic” and “rationale” lies in the PC agenda. The “logic” and “rationale” of how best to blind the most people. How best to get the most money from those people.
Hi Lacy.
**
“They believe it could reduce the UK’s teenage pregnancy rate – the highest in Europe – and sexually-transmitted infections.”
Are these statistics for only unmarried teens or for both married and unmarried ones? You can’t compare one country to another if they don’t all use the same parameters.
Thanks Chris. The hypocrisy and and lies are horrific. The young girls that are being raped by their mother’s boyfriends, husband’s etc. Lila Rose goes in catches them red-handed protecting these child predators and they are enraged not by the criminals but at pro-lifers who uncover the crime. The girls’ babies are aborted and then they are sent home to the abusers to be raped over and over again. Who are they kidding “women’s freedom of choice in reproductive health”. LIES, LIES AND MORE LIES.
I wish there were statistics of how many cases of girls and women there were that were abused and battered to force them to have abortions. Your are right just money and power no logic.
Where did Lacy’s post go?
Prolifer L,
“I wish there were statistics of how many cases of girls and women there were that were abused and battered to force them to have abortions.”
There may be. It would take some searching….
Prolifer L,
Maybe Carla’s organization would have those statistics.
Prolifer L,
Maybe Carla’s organization would have those statistics.
Janet, thanks can you tell me how I might get access to that info through Carla’s organization. Do we have a link for her organization on this website already? Sorry I am not too computer savvy.
Breaking News!!!!!
Senate Passes Abortion Bills/Call Governor Brewer Today
June 23, 2009
On Tuesday, the Arizona Senate passed two bills to clarify and update Arizona abortion laws:
HB 2564, the Abortion Consent Act, establishes informed consent procedures for women considering abortion, fixes problems in Arizona’s parental consent law, and protects health care workers from being forced to participate in abortion against their moral and religious beliefs. It is the most significant pro-life legislation to pass in Arizona.
HB 2400 bans partial-birth abortions from being performed in Arizona. It mirrors the federal law, making sure that this horrific procedure will not be available in Arizona.
Governor Jan Brewer now must sign these bills for them to become law. Governor Brewer and her spokesman repeatedly have stated that Gov. Brewer is pro-life!
But Gov. Brewer needs to know that the pro-life community strongly supports these bills. She needs to hear from you today!
ACTION REQUESTED:
E-mail or call Governor Brewer’s office TODAY, thank her for being pro-life and ask her politely to sign the two abortion bills.
E-mail webform
Phone: (602) 542-4331 or (800) 253-0883
Forward this e-mail to like-minded friends and family.
Pray!
For more information on these two bills, including talking points, visit http://www.azpolicy.org
YAY! Thanks for the info HisMan!
“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” – Richard M Nixon.
If Nixon supported abortion, maybe I have to rethink my position….
Prolifer L & Janet:
Reading your posts brought to mind this article about women coerced into aborting. It’s got some numbers and is at least a starting point.
from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/18/forced-to-abort/ “An astounding 64 percent of women say they were intensely pressured to abort their fetus, according to a 2004 study published in the Medical Science Monitor”
After reading the Penelope Trunk blog entry cited yesterday, I linked to this incredibly eloquent and moving story from a postabortive mom. Though I don’t agree with all of her conclusions, this is the most thought-provoking piece (actually, there’s 3 parts) on the subject that I’ve ever read.
http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2005/01/note_this_essay.html
http://www.marklevinshow.com/goout.asp?u=http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/5448
Off topic but relevant.
Link to video, audio and transcript of President Ronald Reagan’s address on December 23, 1981 to the American people and to the world concerning the communist Polish government’s harsh suppression of it’s own citizens.
Contrast this bold and decisive leadership to that of pbho and his lame excuses for inaction, because the mullahs of Iran might accuse the United States of meddling in Iran’s internal affairs.
The mullahs are already blaming America for the unrest.
Freedom and liberty anywhere are a threat to tyrany everywhere.
If pbho, who said through his spokesweasle, that pbho he unaware of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who gathered in cities across the country on April 15th to voice opposition to his policies, then we cannot be surprised that pbho would be oblivious to hundreds of thousands of Iranians half way around the globe voicing opposition to their own government.
It was only after being prodded by the members of his own lap dog media that he expressed verbally his disappointment with the Iranian government. No warnings of sanctions to the tyrants or solidarity with the political opposition.
This girly man pbho who is a tennant in the people’s house, as Reagan so accurately described the ‘White House’, is an enemy to freedom and liberty everywhere.
pbho’s is not the crime of misfeasance, but malfeasance; a calculated and deliberate act of betrayal to libery and freedom.
The Iranians are setting an example for us.
This fourth of July find a ‘tea party’ some where and add your body and your voice to the assembled masses.
yor bro ken
Ken:
I’ll do that if you’ll do this:
(I encourage everyone to do this)
Perhaps you heard about the effort in Congress to pass so-called “Hate Crimes” legislation that is a stepping-stone to regulating the speech of people who support family values.
I just signed a petition to stop such “hate speech” laws from going into effect. Congress is getting ready to vote on this issue and I understand this bill could be passed quickly unless citizens rise up.
Please join me. Go here to sign:
http://www.libertyaction.org/292/petition.asp?PID=21307904&P=1&NID=1
“In this fatherless world, where did you learn to love?”
~ CBS’s Harry Smith’s June 19 question to Barack Obama, as quoted by NewsBusters, June 22, 2009.
—————————————————–
This was not a rhetorical question on the part of Harry Smith. It was an ‘informed question’ based on observation and anlysis of the available data.
It was an expression of incredulity on mr. Smiths part that pbho was even capable of receiving/expressing or even recognizing ‘love’.
Folks, we are dealing with a narcisist in chief.
The only ‘love’ pbho knows is own self awareness.
visitor to the White House: Knock, knock.
pbho: Who’s there.
visitor: The one who loves you the most.
pbho: That’s impossible. I am over here.
yor bro ken
Please join me. Go here to sign:
http://www.libertyaction.org/292/petition.asp?PID=21307904&P=1&NID=1
Posted by: HisMan at June 23, 2009 8:10 PM
—————————————————
Done deal dude.
yor bro ken
‘Complete bodily autonomy’
When a woman consents to sexual intercourse she has freely surrendered her ‘bodily autonomy’ to another.
Her physical integrity has been compromised.
If the act results in contracting an STD and/or conception, (not the same thing) then her ‘bodily autonomy’ is a moot point.
(This does not mean she has lost forever the right to ‘bodily autonomy’ and/or the right to require her informed consent before she surrenders her ‘bodily autonomy’ the next time.)
Doesn’t the pregant woman have to subsequently surrender her bodily autonomy to the abortionist if she chooses to violate her prenatal child’s ‘bodily autonomy’?
You cannot unring that bell.
No one I have ever met or heard has objections to medical treatment to cure the STD.
I do not know of any moral ambivalence associated with the decision or the act.
The pregnancy is another matter because now there is a third person who has inherent bodily autonomy which should be respected as much as the pregnant woman’s.
How can you clamor for your bodily autonomy on one hand and on the other left hand arbitrarily disregard the bodily autonomy of another, particularly your own child’s, who came to reside within your ‘bodily autonomy’ by an act of your own free will.
Is that another example of ‘female’ logic that men ‘just don’t get’ because their understanding is poisoned by the presence of the testosterone in their system?
If a man submits to gender reassignment, will he be able to ‘get it’ then or does he have to have portions of his brain augmented or removed along with his testosterone producing organs?
Just curious.
yor bro ken
“In this fatherless world, where did you learn to love?”
~ CBS’s Harry Smith’s June 19 question to Barack Obama, as quoted by NewsBusters, June 22, 2009.
No wonder Rush calls it the state run media. This is Pravda at it’s finest. All the networks except Fox are fawning over him and the first lady to the point even some liberals are saying it’s gone too far.
I guess this is CBS’s idea of a “hard hitting interview.”
Posted by: MaryRose at June 23, 2009 4:28 PM
“And it takes a pregnant woman to get an abortion, doesn’t it now?”
—————————————————-
Some abortionist have been known to preform abortions on women who are not pregant.
Some abortionists do it by ‘choice’, some do it by accident.
You don’t get paid if you do not at least go through the motions of delivering the sought after service.
yor bro ken
klynn73 @ 7:00,
Thank you for both links!
* * * *
Prolifer L @ 6:02,
Carla is with Operation Outcry.
http://www.operationoutcry.org/
Also, check out:
“from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/18/forced-to-abort/ “An astounding 64 percent of women say they were intensely pressured to abort their fetus, according to a 2004 study published in the Medical Science Monitor”
Posted by: klynn73 at June 23, 2009 7:00 PM
“Some abortionist have been known to preform abortions on women who are not pregnant.”
I’ve heard this too. Isn’t that special? (Rule of thumb ladies, take the pregnancy test and confirm the pregnancy before arriving at the abortuary.)
Thanks for the link for Operation Outcry, Janet!!
I just read that Arkansas has a law on the books that you cannot force or coerce a woman/little girl to get an abortion. There is some legal recourse for those that WANT to carry their child. I am not sure about other states. WI was considering a no coercion bill as well, but I am not sure where that is right now.
Rule of thumb. Take the pregnancy test. If it is positive and you don’t know what to do, feel lost, alone, and unsure of where to turn, call your local Pregnancy Care Center. :)
Thanks klynn73 and Janet for the links and info. Talk about “freedom of choice for reproductive rights”, this is a real travesty. That is why I think the term “pro-abort” is appropriate because when have any of the leaders of the so-called “pro-choice” movement called for the prosecution of anyone who would force a girl or woman to abort? When have they ever expressed outrage that women are beaten and murdered because they choose NOT to kill their unborn? Would it help for CPCs and sidewalk counselors to have a place to report the numbers that they are aware of to a pro-life organization, get documentation from women who would be willing to expose their abuse and put together a legal or legislative response. Just curious. I wonder how many post-abortive women would come forward.
In Solidarity
The Polish people, hungry for justice, preferred “cowboys” over Communists.
by LECH WALESA
Wall Street Journal
Friday, June 11, 2004 12:01 A.M. EDT
GDANSK, Poland–When talking about Ronald Reagan, I have to be personal. We in Poland took him so personally.
Why?
Because we owe him our liberty.
This can’t be said often enough by people who lived under oppression for half a century, until communism fell in 1989.
Poles fought for their freedom for so many years that they hold in special esteem those who backed them in their struggle.
Support was the test of friendship.
President Reagan was such a friend.
His policy of aiding democratic movements in Central and Eastern Europe in the dark days of the Cold War meant a lot to us.
We knew he believed in a few simple principles such as human rights, democracy and civil society.
He was someone who was convinced that the citizen is not for the state, but vice-versa, and that freedom is an innate right.
I often wondered why Ronald Reagan did this, taking the risks he did, in supporting us at Solidarity, as well as dissident movements in other countries behind the Iron Curtain, while pushing a defense buildup that pushed the Soviet economy over the brink.
Let’s remember that it was a time of recession in the U.S. and a time when the American public was more interested in their own domestic affairs.
It took a
leader
with a vision to convince them that there are greater things worth fighting for.
Did he seek any profit in such a policy?
Though our freedom movements were in line with the foreign policy of the United States, I doubt it.
I distinguish between two kinds of politicians.
There are those who view politics as a tactical game,
a game in which they do not reveal any individuality,
in which they lose their own face.
There are, however,
leaders
for whom politics is a means of defending and furthering values.
For them, it is a moral pursuit.
They do so because the values they cherish are endangered.
They’re convinced that there are values worth living for, and even values worth dying for.
Otherwise they would consider their life and work pointless.
Only such politicians are great politicians and
Ronald Reagan was one of them.
The 1980s were a curious time–a time of realization that a new age was upon us.
Communism was coming to an end.
It had used up its means and possibilities.
The ground was set for change.
But this change needed the cooperation, or unspoken understanding, of different political players.
Now, from the perspective of our time, it is obvious that like the pieces of a global chain of events, Ronald Reagan, John Paul II, Margaret Thatcher and even Mikhail Gorbachev helped bring about this new age in Europe.
We at Solidarity like to claim more than a little credit, too, for bringing about the end of the Cold War.
In the Europe of the 1980s, Ronald Reagan presented a vision.
For us in Central and Eastern Europe, that meant freedom from the Soviets.
Mr. Reagan was no ostrich who hoped that problems might just go away.
He thought that problems are there to be faced.
This is exactly what he did.
Every time I met President Reagan, at his private estate in California or at the Lenin shipyard here in Gdansk, I was amazed by his modesty and even temper.
He didn’t fit the stereotype of the world leader that he was.
Privately, we were like opposite sides of a magnet: He was always composed; I was a raging tower of emotions eager to act.
We were so different yet we never had a problem with understanding one another.
I respected his honesty and good humor.
It gave me confidence in his policies and his resolve.
He supported my struggle, but what unified us, unmistakably, were our similar values and shared goals.
——————————————————
What are pbho’s morals and values?
pbho’s moral compass has nothing inherent in it that points him to the fixed north pole. His moral compass is as freewheeling as the wheel of fortune.
It is more like the magic 8 ball which gives random answers to any question you pose, but is no value in determining where you have come from, where you are and where you are headed.
yor bro ken
Some abortionist have been known to preform abortions on women who are not pregant.
Some abortionists do it by ‘choice’, some do it by accident.
You don’t get paid if you do not at least go through the motions of delivering the sought after service.
yor bro ken
Posted by: kbhvac at June 23, 2009 9:17 PM
Okay, *true*… but it’s not the purpose of the procedure and it doesn’t actually have the intended result, that is, the death of a fetus.
So it’s only *kind-of* an abortion.
I’m trying to think of an adequate comparison. It’s like getting antibiotics for an infection you don’t have. Even if the doctor gets paid for it, they haven’t ACTUALLY done anything, so it isn’t REALLY what was advertised, is it?
Carla, Prolifer L,
I agree, CPC’s are the answer. If a woman feels coerced and in emotional distress and even in danger at home, a CPC will help her find shelter if needed. She won’t get that help at the local abortion clinic.
I wonder if ABUSE Hotlines ever get calls from women who feel coersion? It would be a logical place to call, IMHO. The ABUSE hotline could refer them to a good CPC or even a pastor or minister.
One-on-one counseling is available through Project Gabriel which is sponsored by churches. The woman will receive support throughout a pregnancy and even beyond with one volunteer.
Call: Pregnancy Helpline:
1-888-4-Hope-4-1
What is Project Gabriel?
Project Gabriel is a group of parishes committed to offering practical assistance to women and families who are facing crisis pregnancies. The Project is sponsored in Northern Illinois by the Archdiocese of Chicago, the Diocese of Joliet and, most recently, the Rockford Diocese.
As an outreach ministry, parishes which are enrolled in Project Gabriel, work to provide ongoing emotional, spiritual and material support to as many women, infants and families, as God entrusts to our parishes.
http://www.projgabrielicbwd.org/
More on Project Gabriel:
h i s t o r y
Following the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court Decision in 1973 which made abortion legally permissible in all states, the Rev. Msgr. John Perusina, late pastor of St. Michael’s Parish in the Diocese of Galveston-Houston, placed a sign in front of his church. It offered help to any woman in a crisis pregnancy. The sign read ‘If you will have your baby, this parish will help you in every way.’ The original sign still stands today.
This was the beginning of Project Gabriel/The Gabriel Project. In 1990, Cathy McConn from St. Cecelia Parish and her friend, Rex Moses from Corpus Christi, saw the sign and suggested it as an apostate for the Corpus Christi Diocese. By 1991, sixty churches in the Corpus Christi area, Catholic and non-Catholic, were participants in Project Gabriel. During this time, the Galveston-Houston Diocese “rediscovered” the idea and began to develop in at the diocesan level. Since then it has spread to several areas in Texas, including the dioceses of Austin, Tyler and Dallas (1994). The Project has also spread to Maryland; Washington, DC; California; Florida; Indiana (1999); Michigan (2005), and is currently being launched at several parishes in the Joliet Diocese of Illinois.
Like all true pro-life efforts, Project Gabriel has at its heart, concern for both the mother and the child. Its approach is inclusive, optimistic, practical, and evangelical. It reflects our Christian witness to charity and proclaims clearly to all:
Life is God’s greastest gift.
Life is what we believe in.
Life is what we stand for.
This work is evidence of our Faith in Action.
http://www.freewebs.com/projectgabriel-stmike/history.htm
Loved the Lech Walesa article. Went to see my cousins in Poland in 1986, still get the occasional letter (maybe twice a year?) and have many good friends in Poland. I am quite sure they would all concur… haven’t asked them what they think of Obama, though. Might have to dash off a letter…
Ken there is no womens logic or any logic for that matter involved in abortion.
Good grief we have women who support killing their baby if they don’t have an acceptable astrological sign. How much more pagan can you get than that?
I wonder which sign is undesirable? Virgo?
Elisabeth,
I think your Polish friends would have one word to describe him.
Socialism.
I’m not overly fond of Pices, but I’d still love my baby if they were one. :)
Thanks you guys for all your info about help for women who are forced to perform abortions.
I just talked to some directors at some CPCs who said they are concerned they are seeing more girls whose mother’s threaten to throw them out on the streets unless they abort, even though many of them were teen moms themselves and had their daughter at 15 or 16, they tell their daughter “If you keep this baby you have to find a new home”. What is up with that? We need to get to these mothers who don’t “get it” that their daughter will have to live with this regret and pain the rest of their life and may NEVER forgive them as well.
ProLifer L,
How sad that the mothers of pregnant teens threaten to throw them out of the house unless they abort. A child should be protected from this type of coercion from a parent.
Janet,
I have asked this before here but what does Planned Parenthood offer a 16 year old girl who has been kicked out of the house, has no job and no money and WANTS to keep her baby?
Gee. One guess.
Carla,
Condoms?
Too late for condoms but yeah….fill her purse with free condoms, tell her buh bye, good luck and show her the door….
Seriously,
what is the best course of action for a minor whose parents want her to abort against her will?
answering my own question….
This is good news – Just found this (State of Delaware):
§ 1786. Coercion prohibited.
No parent, guardian, or other person shall coerce a minor to undergo an abortion or to continue a pregnancy. Any minor who is threatened with such coercion may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for relief. The court shall provide the minor with counsel, give the matter expedited consideration, and grant such relief as may be necessary to prevent such coercion. Should a minor be denied the financial support of her parents or legal guardian by reason of her refusal to undergo abortion or to continue a pregnancy, she shall be considered emancipated for purposes of eligibility for assistance benefits.
70 Del. Laws, c. 238, § 1; 70 Del. Laws, c. 186, § 1.;
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title24/c017/sc08/index.shtml
This is so cool!!
I just received the newsletter for Concepts of Truth which runs the National Helpline for Abortion Recovery. 1-866-482-LIFE
ANYWAY,
they were counseling a young girl whose mother was trying to force her to abort. She was in Arkansas.
The Justice Foundation(Operation Outcry is a project of TJF)emailed them the form about minor’s rights/fetal protection law. Arkansas has that law on the books. A minor who wants to keep her baby has rights.
In states that have this law in place it is illegal for parents to force, coerce or pressure their minor daughters for an abortion. In Arkansas parents can be charged with fetal homicide!!
I do not know how many other states have laws like this……I gotta hit the hay….
http://www.txjf.org
Website for Texas Justice Foundation.
Yay Delaware and Arkansas!!
EXCEPT
for the fact that if I lived in Delaware and my daughter came to me and told me she was pregnant I couldn’t encourage her to keep her baby?? Is that considered pressuring her to continue the pregnancy?
Law against coercion of abortion of a minor (State of Pennsylvania)
(g) Coercion prohibited.–Except in a medical emergency, no
parent, guardian or other person standing in loco parentis shall
coerce a minor or incapacitated woman to undergo an abortion.
Any minor or incapacitated woman who is threatened with such
coercion may apply to a court of common pleas for relief. The
court shall provide the minor or incapacitated woman with
counsel, give the matter expedited consideration and grant such
relief as may be necessary to prevent such coercion. Should a
minor be denied the financial support of her parents by reason
of her refusal to undergo abortion, she shall be considered
emancipated for purposes of eligibility for assistance benefits.
http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/crimes-and-offenses/00.032.006.000.html
“EXCEPT”
“for the fact that if I lived in Delaware and my daughter came to me and told me she was pregnant I couldn’t encourage her to keep her baby?? Is that considered pressuring her to continue the pregnancy?”
Posted by: Carla at June 24, 2009 10:44 PM
Good eye for catching that! I think encouraging is OK, maybe making a serious threat against the daughter who want is not? Hmmm… That’s a very tricky piece of legislation.
It doesn’t appear that Pennsylvania’s law has that twist to it.
Good nite, Carla!
Carla @ 10:33,
“This is so cool!!”
“I just received the newsletter for Concepts of Truth which runs the National Helpline for Abortion Recovery. 1-866-482-LIFE”
http://www.nationalhelpline.org/links.htm
That looks like a great resource.
Thanks for the links guy. I am adding them to my bookmarks. God bless.
Sorry. I just re-read my post. I meant “guys”, meaning everyone who gave me the info. Did not mean to thank only one person, realized it sounded like I was addressing men only.