by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
- Wesley J. Smith says the French are trying to bring euthanasia in gradually, by first offering to sedate terminally ill patients until death. Smith discusses the difference between palliative and terminal sedation, and explains why terminal sedation is not so humane:
That’s killing by slow motion because it involves putting a patient into a coma and depriving them of food and fluids so they dehydrate to death. Pushing terminal sedation is egregious for another reason: It confuses people as to whether the legitimate pain controlling technique – palliative sedation – is killing by another name.
- ProLife NZ announces the continuation of a downward trend in abortion that started in 2007. Good news!
- John Smeaton says that “[o]f the 184,571 abortions performed in England and Wales last year[,] over 80% were performed on unmarried women and girls.” He quotes Paul Tully of SPUC, who suggests that marriage – the mere suggestion of which is often met with shock by women dealing with unplanned pregnancies – is often “hugely important to providing women with the security to continue their pregnancies.”
- Secular Pro-Life posts an interview with a gay atheist who converted from pro-abortion to pro-life and now believes “[h]omosexuals are natural pro-lifers because they are still insufficiently legal persons, like the preborn” and “The very same artificial legal boundaries that define what rights I may or may not have are the very same artificial legal boundaries that objectify our youngest human beings as mere body parts that could be thrown away at will.” The interview is an interesting read.
- At ProWomanProLife, Faye Sonier points out an essay from a self-described college-educated, pro-abortion liberal atheist who credits her mother’s conservative pro-life beliefs with her very existence. However, she seems to reject those beliefs herself.
- At Women’s Rights without Frontiers, Reggie Littlejohn shares an article by Paul Strand on the real reason for China’s one child policy, which goes far beyond population control. The goal is absolute control of the population by use of terror. But some effects were not intended:
… [D]emographer Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute… said the one-child policy has been so ruthlessly effective at killing hundreds of millions of unborn Chinese – especially baby girls – the country now faces a dangerous dearth of workers and women.
“It has helped create a declining labor force for the future,” Eberstadt explained, “a rapidly aging society, a marriage squeeze for prospective brides and grooms from the gender-imbalanced generation, and a fragmentation of family.”
[Photo via theidomoment.com]