Tag Archives: Rome

Pro-life blog buzz 5-22-15

pro-lifeby Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

  • Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) calls out the World Health Organization for falsely associating high maternal mortality rates to legal restrictions on abortion:

    … WHO states in its report that “treaty monitoring bodies have … linked elevated rates of maternal mortality to … restrictive abortion laws [and] unsafe or illegal abortion.” But WHO cites only old, and flawed, country reviews. The truth is that maternal mortality depends on the quality of maternal health care, not the legal status of abortion. Some countries prohibit abortion and have very low MMRs; others permit abortion and have very high MMRs. Legalizing abortion is demonstrably unnecessary to improve maternal health and save women’s lives.

  • The Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust Blog addresses questions on abortion like, “Isn’t the world already overpopulated?” and “Isn’t it better not to bring a child into the world if there aren’t enough resources?” Answers to these questions often get people on college campuses to re-think their position on abortion.


  • Secular Pro-Life wonders why the group calling itself 4000 Years for Choice would try to “make abortion appear to be something innately human, by highlighting how long women have sought out abortions and abortion inducing concoctions.” After all, lots of things – not all of them good – have been around for a very long time:

    You know what else was popular in the time of ancient Rome? Slavery, human sacrifice, and mass infanticide. A real hotbed for morality. So what on earth would prompt this organization to promote ancient practices of abortion as proof that abortion is good?

  • At the Daily Caller, Michael New says pro-lifers have good reason to oppose Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion:

    The federal Hyde Amendment limits the extent to which federal Medicaid funds pay for abortion. However, 17 U.S. states fund elective abortions though Medicaid with their own tax dollars. There is a considerable body of research which shows that Medicaid funding of abortion increases state abortion rates. In 2009, the Guttmacher Institute published a comprehensive review of the research on Medicaid funding of abortion. Of the 18 studies included in the literature review, 15 found that public funding of abortion through Medicaid resulted in statistically significant increases in the incidence of abortion. Additionally, in many states, the percentage of abortions funded by Medicaid is dramatically rising. For instance, between 1990 and 2010 the percentage of abortions performed in Washington state that were paid for by Medicaid increased from 24 percent to over 67 percent.

  • Wesley J. Smith is not surprised that the California Medical Association has changed its position on assisted suicide, now claiming to be “neutral” on the issue:

    I am not surprised at this downward turn. The CMA has been seriously courting the culture of death for more than forty years. Here’s a quote from a California Medicine editorial from 1970 – published by the CMA – supporting “death selection.” From, “A New Ethic for Medicine and Society”:

    The traditional Western ethic has always placed great emphasis on the intrinsic worth and equal value of every human life regardless of its stage or condition . … This traditional ethic is… being eroded at its core and may eventually be abandoned…. [H]ard choices will have to be made… that will of necessity violate and ultimately destroy the traditional Western ethic with all that portends. It will become necessary and acceptable to place relative rather than absolute values on such things as human lives…. One may anticipate… death selection and death control whether by the individual or by society.

Screen Shot 2015-05-21 at 4.13.36 PM

  • Pregnancy Help News features the story of a heroic teen who chose an open adoption plan against many obstacles, including temporary opposition from the birth father, the baby’s deafness and unfeeling remarks from school friends. Kudos to the pregnancy resource center that ministered to her during this time:

    In light of the fact that fewer than 1 percent of teen births end in adoption, Jess, Zoe and Brandi’s story is an important reminder of the great love and sacrifice that birth moms demonstrate when they choose adoption….

[T]he adoption process was fraught “with hope, love heartache, grief and, ultimately, sacrifice.” The first adoptive family she chose “returned” the baby when they was discovered she had incurred significant hearing loss due to an infection Urban had contracted while pregnant. While in the foster care system, however, little “Zoe” learned sign language.

The second set of adoptive parents Urban chose were a gift from God. Both deaf, the Rarus family had three boys and had diligently prayed for a little girl for years. To them, Zoe’s hearing loss turned out to be an added blessing.

Christianity helped to change pagan views of children

Ancient childrenby Carder

Various pagan authors describe children as being more like plants than human beings. And this had concrete consequences.

Well-to-do parents typically did not interact with their children, leaving them up to the care of slaves. Children were rudely brought up, and very strong beatings were a normal part of education. In Rome, a child’s father had the right to kill him for whatever reason until he came of age.

One of the most notorious ancient practices that Christianity rebelled against was the frequent practice of expositio, basically the abandonment of unwanted infants….

This is the world into which Christianity came, condemning abortion and infanticide as loudly and as early as it could.

~ Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, The Week, April 23

Pro-life blog buzz 4-29-14

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.

  • Wesley J. Smith says that in an attempt to further normalize the killing of others, comedies are now being made about euthanasia.
  • At Stand True, Bryan Kemper wonders why society seems outraged over the burning of aborted baby parts for fuel, while there is little outrage over abortion itself. If these children are mere medical waste or products of conception, then why should we care about the inhumane disposal of their remains?


  • Reflections of a Paralytic links to bioethicist Jennifer Lahl’s article on “social” surrogacy, which is “defined as the use of a surrogate mother to carry your pregnancy to term for social reasons vs. medical reasons.” Lahl continues:

    There is no medical reason the intended mother can’t get pregnant and carry her child to term; she just doesn’t want to get pregnant for a variety of reasons.

    In this article, we learn about women whose careers are taking off and they find that taking time out of the work force for pregnancy and childbirth would be a career breaker. One doctor at a fertility center in Los Angeles is happy to offer social surrogacy and says he’s been involved with about 20 such cases. He states, “They’re for reasons most people would find offensive” and “I don’t ask these people too many questions because I don’t want them to feel judged.”

  • ProLifeBlogs notes a post at Life Site News which states that President Obama sent abortion-supporting “Catholics” to represent the United States at the canonization of two former Popes in Rome:

    According to a White House press release, Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-CA, and Katie Beirne Fallon, assistant to the president and director of legislative affairs, will be part of a delegation led by Obama counselor John Podesta. Becerra, who chairs the House Democratic Caucus, praised former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius when she retired and has received 100 percent ratings from the Human Rights Campaign and NARAL at least once.
  • At Real Choice, Christina Dunigan continues to point out how legal does not necessarily mean “safe” when it comes to abortion. The deaths of two women are mentioned in her post, one pre-Roe and one post-Roe.


  • Secular Pro-Life posts damning testimonials of abortion workers who became pro-life. The recurring theme is greed and a lack of care for women:

    Joy Davis [pictured right], who directed six abortion clinics in Alabama and Mississippi but later became a pro-life activist, said that her boss, Dr. Tommy Tucker, was so greedy that he fired his anesthesiologist, the registered nurses and the lab technician. He trained Joy Davis to act as an abortionist. “I never spent the first day in medical school. I really know nothing about medicine, other than what I had seen other doctors do, but I started doing abortions.” Ms. Davis, who was only trained as an ultrasound technician, explained that staff had watched the doctors put women under anesthesia. “We started putting patients asleep ourselves, and we had no idea what we were doing.”
  • ProWomanProLife has some interesting thoughts about pro-life incrementalism:

    This matters, greatly. It’s no great secret that the pro-life movement is not unified on this matter. And we need unity if we are going to stand up and fight together.I personally think, without wanting to be insulting, that those who are against incrementalism in the political sphere aren’t actually called to fight abortion in the political sphere. We need educators in the cultural sphere who won’t waver one bit: We know when life begins and we should teach this. But to preach non-incrementalism in the political environment is an exercise in futility.

    I say this as someone who is more on the educational side of the battle myself. (Three arms to being pro-life these days: Educational, Political and Charitable.)

  • Reproductive Research Audit gives facts to support the idea that the Affordable Care Act does indeed fund abortion with taxpayer dollars.
  • Right to Life of Michigan posts a slightly older man-on-the-street interview which proves that the media blackout on Kermit Gosnell was effective. (All the more reason to help fund the Gosnell drama.)
YouTube Preview Image

[Photos via wellsphere.com and prolifeaction.org]

Pro-life news brief 6-17-13

by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

  • One of Steven Brigham’s Maryland abortionists had his license reinstated:

    Dr. Mansour Panah’s license has been restored….

    Meanwhile, the board upheld the license suspension of Dr. Michael Basco while the license for a third doctor Iris Dominy is still in summary suspension.

  • Police in Rome arrested two men who were beating a woman in an attempt to kill her unborn child:

    The Bulgarian woman’s assailants were her 26-year old ex-partner – the father of her two children – and an 28-year-old male accomplice. The men, who are also Bulgarian, allegedly attacked the woman as a vendetta against her pregnancy by new companion.


  • The Georgia State Supreme Court refused to dismiss charges against abortionist Tyrone Cecil Malloy (pictured left). Malloy has been charged with defrauding Medicaid and works at a clinic housed in a building owned by Attorney General Eric Holder’s wife
  • Looks like Governor Cuomo’s plan to make New York even more permissive of abortion is cooked, at least for this year:

    Gov. Andrew Cuomo says he expects his women’s rights agenda and the abortion proposal that threatens its passage will be taken off the negotiating table so it can be taken up again next year when he and lawmakers are running for election.

  • West Virginia’s attorney general is looking into regulating abortion clinics in light of a recent lawsuit:

    [AG Patrick] Morrisey said the state regulates numerous health professionals, including massage therapists, chiropractors and acupuncturists.

    “But abortion clinics are neither licensed nor regulated by the state,” he said. “Regardless of one’s position on abortion, the state needs to evaluate this basic fact.”

[Photo via gadailynews.com]

Vatican clears Father Pavone’s name but leaves him with his accuser

UPDATE 6/29, 11:21a: My friend within six degrees of separation of this controversy reminded me last night that the Vatican would not have declared Father Pavone unsuspended and a priest in good standing had it not examined Priest for Life’s financial records for itself. After all, this was the foremost reason Bishop Zurek gave for his suspension. I agree that the Vatican would take absolutely no chance of having its withdrawal of suspension come back to embarrass it, especially in this day and age of priest scandals. So I have removed “(sort of)” from my headline. I think the Vatican indeed exonerated FP by its nod in his favor.

My friend said his first take was that the Vatican’s clearance opens the door for Father Pavone to pursue incarnation in a pro-life friendly diocese.

6/28, 12:01p: On Tuesday night came good news on Priests for Life’s website:

We are happy to announce that the Vatican has upheld Father Frank Pavone’s appeal and has declared that Father Pavone is not now nor has ever been suspended. Father Pavone remains a priest in good standing all over the world.

We were confident all along that a just decision would be made by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy. While we fully agree that Bishop Zurek has rightful authority over the priests of his diocese, we also see the urgent need for Father Pavone to be allowed to conduct his priestly ministry outside the diocese of Amarillo for the good of the pro-life movement.

From the onset we have been closely following the curious situation between Priest for Life’s Father Frank Pavone and his bishop, Patrick Zurek, of the Amarillo Diocese.

Last September Bishop Zurek abruptly ordered Father Pavone to report back to his diocese from New York, on the heels of a letter the bishop sent to his colleagues (subsequently leaked to the press) all but accusing FP of insubordination and mishandling of PFL funds, beginning with the apocalyptic sentence, “I have decided to suspend Father Frank A. Pavone from public ministry….”

Now the Vatican has overruled Bishop Zurek. Father Pavone was not suspended.

But as CatholicCulture.org (read that entire editorial – it’s good) points out:

[A]nyone familiar with canon law knew from the outset that “suspension” was the wrong term for the bishop’s action. As canonist Edward Peters explained last September, Bishop Zurek “should not have used the term ‘suspend’ in regard to Pavone, for ‘suspension’ is a canonical penalty for crime (c. 1333), and Pavone has not been accused of any crime.”

So the Vatican agrees.

But Father Pavone has not been reassigned to an unhostile bishop or perhaps to answer directly to Rome.

Thus, questions remain. Perhaps Bishop Zurek can’t “suspend” FP, but can he still curtail his activities, or worse, ban him from working with PFL? It appears so. Here was Bishop Zurek’s statement on the Vatican’s decision:

In its decree of May 18, 2012, the Congregation for the Clergy has sustained Father Frank A. Pavone’s appeal of his suspension from ministry outside the Diocese of Amarillo and his appointment from me on October 4, 2011 as Chaplain of the Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ in Channing, Texas.  Father Pavone is to continue his ministry as chaplain until further notice. As a gesture of good will, I will grant permission to him in individual cases, based upon their merits, to participate in pro-life events with the provision that he and I must be in agreement beforehand as to his role and function.

Yes, that convoluted statement has to be read several times to understand. Bottom line: Father Pavone isn’t suspended but remains assigned as a chaplain to a tiny convent in the middle of the desert. And Bishop Zurek can call him back there for full time duty per his whim, when his sense of “good will” toward Father Pavone’s pro-life activities ceases and he is overcome by bad will.

And Bishop Zurek’s “good will” comes with a very short rope. Father Pavone must get his permission before doing any pro-life work. Bishop Zurek will decide whether each bit of pro-life work Father Pavone wants to do has “merit.”

The Amarillo Globe-News further quotes Bishop Zurek as stating the Vatican’s decision “makes it clear I am free to restore him to full religious ministry, if I wish. … But he must have my permission for anything in regard to work in pro-life, and in particular Priests for Life, because that is where the issue arose to begin with.”

So aside from maintaining the show of a pretty big ego. Bishop Zurek has purposefully left hanging his accusation that Father Pavone may have mismanaged PFL’s finances, which is inexcusable.

Outlawed bizarre ritual of “baby dropping” continues

From OddityCentral.com, April 9:

The devotee scales the high walls of the religious shrine on a rope, a bucket dangling off his back. Once he is at the top (typically about 30ft high), he miraculously retrieves a baby from the bucket, handing it over to a bunch of men standing on the balcony.

One of these men takes hold of the baby’s hands and feet, holding the child as though it were a basket. He swings the kid back and forth in the air, exclaiming a chant in the praise of the Lord. And then, shockingly, the baby is dropped.

Baby dropping could be India’s most bizarre ritual. Screaming, wailing babies are dropped from several meters into the air, and there are a group of 14 to 15 men standing right below, holding a blanket that breaks the baby’s fall. Just as it bounces on the blanket once, it is caught by one of the men and handed over to the mother. Understandably, it takes several minutes before the baby recovers from the shock.

[I]t has apparently been in practice for the past 700 years by Hindu and Muslim Indians alike in the states of Karnataka and Maharashtra. The ritual happens only once per year, and is believed to bring good luck to the baby, keeping it safe and healthy. It also ensures prosperity for the entire family. The ritual is generally meant for babies less than 2 years of age, and is so absurd that it seems to blatantly defy all reason and logic.

However, locals are pretty staunch in their belief and in spite of all the hue and cry raised by human rights activists, and even a ban on the ritual in 2011, this year’s ceremonies were carried out as usual. The most recent baby dropping event was held,  last week, at the Digameshwara temple in Nagrala village, Karnataka….

Although no child has been harmed so far, the practice seems extremely unsafe, since mistakes can happen at any moment.

Here’s the stomach-churning video…

YouTube Preview Image

A couple points.

First, these people need Jesus. From first century Rome to 19th century Hawaii, and everywhere in between and beyond, the Good News has gratefully brought with it an end to dangerous rituals, infanticide, and human sacrifice.

Second, this is as close to Scott Klusendorf’s example of “trotting out the toddler”  as I want to get. As he writes, the “justification for abortion also works as a justification for killing toddlers or other humans.” Whatever reason abortion proponents may give to decry the baby tossing ritual  is a reason they would give to defend abortion.

Here’s one who doesn’t, a commenter at The Daily Mail. Note how this moral relativist throws similar mud against the wall in an attempt to squelch anti-baby tossers as others do to attempt to squelch pro-lifers…

A tradition thats gone on for years, dont get involved with your false concern…if your really concerned about childrens health then bin your huge 4x4s you drive them to school in poluting the planet and dont feed them mcdonalds becasue its easy…!

[HT: Randi]

Jivin J’s Life Links 9-14-11

web grab.jpgby JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

Continue reading

Today! “Ask Them What They Mean By ‘Choice’” Blog Day

FINAL UPDATE, 1/24, 5:30a: I continued to receive requests to participate in our “Ask Them What They Mean By ‘Choice'” Blog Day from pro-lifers even as the day ended. I have updated the list to showcase the 111 pro-life bloggers who used January 21 to expose “choice” as the code word for killing preborn innocence children with only 2-1/2 days notice.

NARAL posted its list of 90 participants for its “Blog for Choice” Day that morning, fewer than ours with much more notice.

And, as previously discussed, we completely overwhelmed the pro-aborts on Twitter.

This was quite a positive learning experience for me, and I have used the example of what you accomplished by this endeavor many times the past couple days here in Washington when discussing online pro-life activism with friends and colleagues.

Perhaps liberals owned social media back in the day but no more, that’s for sure. I think this was definitely an indicator that pro-lifers have come into our own for online advocacy of the sanctity of preborn human life.

Continue reading