by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- Real Choice points out the strange pro-choice phenomenon which ignores women’s deaths due to abortion quackery and instead expresses outrage over slain abortionists.
- Mommy Life shares photos and the wonderful story of a recent visit from the birth family of their son Justin, who was born in the U.S. while his Taiwanese parents were here on student visa. Justin’s birth parents made the sacrificial and loving decision to make an open adoption plan for their son, who has Down syndrome, so he could stay in the United States, where he could receive the best health treatment and education.
- Secular Pro-Life continues to encounter opposition from other secularists and atheists, who believe the group is “secretly religious.” SPL points out that according to Gallup, “1 out of every 5 [or 19% of] non-religious people considers themselves pro-life.”
- John Smeaton responds to the claims from Save the Children that “family planning saves children’s lives”:
The report relies heavily upon claims by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the Population Reference Bureau, the Guttmacher Institute and the Population Council, as well as officials in the relevant sections of WHO, UNICEF and DFID. But these people are basically one group: the abortion-contraception lobby.
- ProWomanProLife links to some commentary on the “war on women” and notices several euphemisms for abortion in a recent Planned Parenthood Action Fund graphic. How many can you find?
- Pro-Life in TN reports that word South Carolina and Tennessee abortionist Gary Boyle will no longer face felony charges for brandishing a loaded gun at prayer vigil participants in 2010. He will now only pay a $100 fine.
- Stand for Life agrees with a Pro-Life in NJ post pointing out why pro-lifers should not use the “potential for good” argument against abortion.
- Wesley J. Smith lambasts the Australian government for awarding eugenicist Peter Singer with the country’s highest civic award:
A Peter Singer world would be profoundly immoral. It would be a society in which babies that did not suit the interests of their parents could be killed. It would be an era in which the most vulnerable human beings — living fetuses, unwanted infants, people with profound cognitive impairments — could be used in medical experiments of the kind decried by the Nuremberg Code and/or be subjected to death by organ harvesting. It would be a world in which universal human rights would have been discarded and replaced by a society in which our rights were subject to revocation based on our quality of life. And yet, despite these and other awful consequences, he’s the most celebrated bioethicist and moral philosopher of our times.
Here’s the hard truth: The problem isn’t Singer. The real source of the moral collapse comes because too many of us are unwilling or unable to defend the intrinsic dignity and importance of human life.