President Obama is adding his stamp of approval to our “Culture of Death”. Our new chief executive has already overturned President Bush’s eight-year ban on using U.S. taxpayer dollars to support overseas family planning services (read abortion). Now there is word that he is expected to loosen the federal funding restrictions against embryonic stem cell research, restrictions that have been in place since August 2001. Few Americans realize that his actions are placing this nation on a slippery slope which will lead to scientific perversions, perversions that will make Huxley’s Brave New World look like Mister Roger’s Neighborhood.
Along with the other arguments against embryonic stem cell research–such as its failure to produce any positive results–is the long term damage it will inflict on efforts to ban, or even limit, abortions. Why? The more funding this research receives, the more test subjects will be needed. Although limited numbers of test subjects are not a problem at present, they will be at some point. Embryos will need to come from somewhere. What better way of guaranteeing a steady supply of test subjects than by allowing abortion mills to continue their grisly procedures? Do not be surprised if the government eventually solicits volunteers to undergo impregnation for the sole purpose of providing embryos for research. It will be eerily reminiscent of Hitler’s directive that Nazi women deliver as many children as possible, a directive that even rewarded medals to women who bred at least five children (Medicine in the Twentieth Century, Roger Cooter and John V. Pickstone, Harwood Academic Publishers p 562). Just as women in Nazi Germany were rewarded for selflessly giving birth for the Fatherland, so will American women be praised for selflessly conceiving for science.
Supporters of cloning will also benefit from the lifting of federal funding restrictions against embryonic stem cell research. After all if an embryo is not considered a human being and worthy of rights, why would anyone argue differently for clones? Americans will argue that cloning is an extension of the Roe vs. Wade “Right to Privacy” ruling. People will kick and scream that they have “the right to do what they want with their bodies”, including cloning them for the purpose of harvesting organs and stem cells. Picture Robin Cook’s Coma or the film “The Matrix”. That is where we are headed.
Pretty frightening, isn’t it? And you don’t need to be Nostradamus to envision it happening.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Donald Tremblay
Catholic Agenda
Catholic Agenda
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Monday, January 26, 2009
Friday, November 7, 2008
Screening Out The Unborn
Now that Barack Obama has been elected president, Catholics can expect the battle to defend the unborn to be fiercer than ever. Feminist groups like NOW will demand legislation that removes all restrictions to abortion, and they will find a sympathetic ear in the White House. Pro-life supporters will need to join forces to withstand the onslaught, and one group whose assistance would prove invaluable is the medical community. Unfortunately, this group primarily has remained silent in defense of the unborn.
This realization struck me yesterday as I read the Wall Street Journal’s “Letters to the Editor” section. Two doctors had responded to an October 25 Wall Street Journal article entitled, “The Toughest Test”, which discussed how prenatal genetic testing is influencing parents’ decisions on whether to abort their children. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122238185398776759.html) Below are the two doctors’ letters in their entirety:
· “For-profit companies that offer prenatal genetic testing services are shameful; they play upon the fears of expectant parents, gladly accept testing fees, and then leave these parents and their (ill-equipped) doctors to deal with the aftermath.
I loathe the day that my daughter shows up at her first prenatal visit, only to be handed a list of "diseases" to test for, just to make sure that "everything is OK with the baby." This represents a giant step backward for modern medicine. We should remember that it is genetic diversity that is essential for the survival of all species, including human beings.”
Timothy P. Madion, M.D.
Fellow, American
Chief of
· As a physician who daily performs ultrasounds and has delivered many babies over the years, I read with sadness that physicians "tried, but failed to persuade" a couple to terminate a pregnancy that they felt wasn't worthy and that 80% of women choose to terminate their pregnancies after receiving a positive diagnosis of Down syndrome ("More Prenatal Testing Brings New Worries," Oct. 25).
As one who took the original Hippocratic oath that directs physicians to "first do no harm" and "never proscribe abortion," I find myself trying to persuade couples of the value of each human life whether disabled or not.
Prenatal testing itself may put a physician in material cooperation with the destruction of a human life whose future is uncertain. Let us give the unborn the benefit of life and support through possible cures or through hospice until natural death.
Mark Druffner, M.D.
Granted there are physicians who would disagree with the above assessments. Yet, I suspect there are many more who would agree but who remain silent.
Someone needs to remind them that the unborn cry out for their voices.
Donald Tremblay
Friday, October 24, 2008
It’s Just Business
Apparently there is an ethical code I am unaware of that allows people to act differently when conducting business than when they deal with people personally. It is okay to screw people, violate values, etc . . . because “it’s just business”. The bottom line is all that matters so morality has no place in business. Just ask those brokers who dabbled in derivatives and swaps, risking investors’ life savings for the chance to earn that ridiculous year-end bonus. Truly, greed makes people do strange things.
The Clarion Hotel in Cherry Hill, NJ and the Quality Inn in Maple Shade, NJ are offering discounts to women who stay with them after receiving abortions at local abortion facilities. (http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=30184&wf=rsscol).
“Based on reports from local citizens participating in the 40 Days for Life prayer vigil outside the Cherry Hill Women's Center, New Jersey Right to Life has confirmed that the Clarion Hotel in Cherry Hill offers a reduced rate of $59 for a room originally priced at $109 to those women who provide a receipt from the abortion mill that says they have to stay overnight. In addition, the Quality Inn in Maple Shade offers a discounted rate of $74.95 for a room originally priced at $99.99 and a free breakfast of eggs and pancakes for women who present a stamped pamphlet from the clinic.”
The Cherry Hill Women’s Center allegedly “performs abortions up to the sixth month of pregnancy” and is accused by Marie Tasy, Executive Director of New Jersey Right to Life, of having “a track record of aggressive advertisement in the Pennsylvania market to intentionally lure pregnant minor girls to the NJ abortion clinic in order to evade Pennsylvania's parental consent laws.”
Although this is just a guess, chances are both hotels are experiencing high vacancies and are looking at this as a gimmick to lure more guests. Some would say this advertising ploy is tasteless.
No, it’s just business.
Donald Tremblay
The Clarion Hotel in Cherry Hill, NJ and the Quality Inn in Maple Shade, NJ are offering discounts to women who stay with them after receiving abortions at local abortion facilities. (http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=30184&wf=rsscol).
“Based on reports from local citizens participating in the 40 Days for Life prayer vigil outside the Cherry Hill Women's Center, New Jersey Right to Life has confirmed that the Clarion Hotel in Cherry Hill offers a reduced rate of $59 for a room originally priced at $109 to those women who provide a receipt from the abortion mill that says they have to stay overnight. In addition, the Quality Inn in Maple Shade offers a discounted rate of $74.95 for a room originally priced at $99.99 and a free breakfast of eggs and pancakes for women who present a stamped pamphlet from the clinic.”
The Cherry Hill Women’s Center allegedly “performs abortions up to the sixth month of pregnancy” and is accused by Marie Tasy, Executive Director of New Jersey Right to Life, of having “a track record of aggressive advertisement in the Pennsylvania market to intentionally lure pregnant minor girls to the NJ abortion clinic in order to evade Pennsylvania's parental consent laws.”
Although this is just a guess, chances are both hotels are experiencing high vacancies and are looking at this as a gimmick to lure more guests. Some would say this advertising ploy is tasteless.
No, it’s just business.
Donald Tremblay
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Thank You, Camille
Finally one of them has admitted it. At last an abortion supporter acknowledges reality: “’I have always frankly admitted that abortion is murder, the extermination of the powerless by the powerful.’” http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08091204.html Wow! Camille Paglia’s confession in a recent Salon.com column must have set the ears of our nation’s pro-abortion lobby ringing.
Imagine one of the most-respected and most-popular liberal feminist academics admitting, in the words of lifesitenews.com author Tim Waggoner, “that in order to rationalize and accept abortion, one would have to not only accept, but logically condone other atrocities against life - that is, one would have to accept murder for the sake of protecting a particular, more important ‘right’, as she does.” Unbelievable. Excuse me if I sound giddy, but the image of abortion supporters trying to weasel their way around Paglia’s comments is amusing.
Paglia admits that in her view a woman’s right to choose supersedes a baby’s right to life. “’As an atheist and libertarian, I believe that government must stay completely out of the sphere of personal choice. Every individual has an absolute right to control his or her body.’" Unlike most abortion supporters who throw red herrings by questioning when life begins in the womb, Paglia unflinchingly faces the ethical ramifications of her belief: “’Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue.’”
In a final slap at her fellow-abortion supporters, Paglia criticized those who support abortion but reject the death-penalty: “’I have never understood the standard Democratic combo of support for abortion and yet opposition to the death penalty. Surely it is the guilty rather than the innocent who deserve execution?’”
As aptly pointed out by Waggoner, Paglia’s testimony exposes the utilitarianism that is increasingly infecting our culture. He also points out two other examples of it:
• The medical community recently acknowledged that “brain death” may not be an accurate way to determine if a person has died. In response, instead of questioning the concept of “vital organ donation”, Waggoner says a recent New England Journal of Medicine article argued that “the piece instead suggest[ed] that the criteria for dead donors should be eradicated altogether - thus sanctioning killing a potential organ donor in order to harvest his/her organs.”
• A report published in early 2008 in the highly-acclaimed bioethics journal The Hastings Center Report addressed infanticide. According to Waggoner “the authors advocate infanticide for those new born babies who may face a life of what medical personnel deem to be ‘unbearable’ suffering.” He adds that “under what is known as the Groningen Protocol, infanticide is already taking place on a regular basis in the Netherlands with government support.”
Individuals who recognize the evil of utilitarianism must stay alert because our society is clearly gravitating toward using the philosophical method as the barometer for gauging a decision’s morality.
Donald Tremblay
Imagine one of the most-respected and most-popular liberal feminist academics admitting, in the words of lifesitenews.com author Tim Waggoner, “that in order to rationalize and accept abortion, one would have to not only accept, but logically condone other atrocities against life - that is, one would have to accept murder for the sake of protecting a particular, more important ‘right’, as she does.” Unbelievable. Excuse me if I sound giddy, but the image of abortion supporters trying to weasel their way around Paglia’s comments is amusing.
Paglia admits that in her view a woman’s right to choose supersedes a baby’s right to life. “’As an atheist and libertarian, I believe that government must stay completely out of the sphere of personal choice. Every individual has an absolute right to control his or her body.’" Unlike most abortion supporters who throw red herrings by questioning when life begins in the womb, Paglia unflinchingly faces the ethical ramifications of her belief: “’Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue.’”
In a final slap at her fellow-abortion supporters, Paglia criticized those who support abortion but reject the death-penalty: “’I have never understood the standard Democratic combo of support for abortion and yet opposition to the death penalty. Surely it is the guilty rather than the innocent who deserve execution?’”
As aptly pointed out by Waggoner, Paglia’s testimony exposes the utilitarianism that is increasingly infecting our culture. He also points out two other examples of it:
• The medical community recently acknowledged that “brain death” may not be an accurate way to determine if a person has died. In response, instead of questioning the concept of “vital organ donation”, Waggoner says a recent New England Journal of Medicine article argued that “the piece instead suggest[ed] that the criteria for dead donors should be eradicated altogether - thus sanctioning killing a potential organ donor in order to harvest his/her organs.”
• A report published in early 2008 in the highly-acclaimed bioethics journal The Hastings Center Report addressed infanticide. According to Waggoner “the authors advocate infanticide for those new born babies who may face a life of what medical personnel deem to be ‘unbearable’ suffering.” He adds that “under what is known as the Groningen Protocol, infanticide is already taking place on a regular basis in the Netherlands with government support.”
Individuals who recognize the evil of utilitarianism must stay alert because our society is clearly gravitating toward using the philosophical method as the barometer for gauging a decision’s morality.
Donald Tremblay
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Who Are You?
A disturbing article has been posted on the Christian Newswire (http://christiannewswire.com/news/568387358.html) There is a group called the Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc (CRCOA) who are accusing the Knights of Columbus of failing to “to expel pro-abortion and pro-homosexual politicians” from their midst. Boston CRCOA member John O'Gorman accuses the Knights of Columbus of the following:
“On June 14, 2007, at least 16 members of the K of C in the legislature defeated the efforts of 170,000 signatories to put traditional marriage on the 2008 ballot. 170,000 signatures far exceeded the required number to place the question on the ballot! Seven of these K of C politicians have the highest ratings from the USA 's biggest abortionists, Planned Parenthood, who performed 289,000 abortions in 2006. On 4/May/08, Supreme Advocate (lawyer) Paul Devin, who gave money to Pro-Abortion politicians Ted and Joe Kennedy (OpenSecrets.org), ruled that a State Convention resolution by Grand Knight Joe Craven to suspend pro-abortion and pro-gay politicians was 'unconstitutional'."
This is a disgrace should any of it be true; though, I am hardly surprised by it. Groups like the Knights of Columbus may have been relevant in the 1950s and 1960s, but by the late 1970s and the 1980s they were virtually non-existent in many neighborhoods. The people of my generation probably knew more about Ralph Kramden’s raccoon lodge then we did about Catholic men’s clubs like the K of C. In fact, despite being a loyal Sunday churchgoer, I wasn’t even aware that the Knights of Columbus was a Catholic organization until I was in my late teens. What does that tell you about how it promotes itself as a Catholic organization?
Come to think of it I cannot remember a single time when the words “Knights of Columbus” were ever uttered by a priest before, during, or after Mass.
Donald Tremblay
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Oh, the Irony
If there weren’t human lives being lost, and many of them at that, the irony would be comical. Liberal feminist groups like NOW made abortion-on-demand their defining issue. What they never anticipated was that this “right” would be used to murder tens of millions of girls. Lifesitenews.com posted an article yesterday announcing that sex-selective abortions are now happening on a “wide scale” in the United States because of the influx of Asian immigrants from countries like China and India where the practice is widespread. (http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08072401.html) The United Nations says “this practice has already claimed the lives of over 100 million girls worldwide.”
Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute (PRI) is incensed because American feminist groups are silent on the issue:
"Where are the feminists when you need them? . . . I challenge the National Organization of Women," says Mosher, "and other feminist groups, to join us in the battle to ban this terrible form of sex discrimination that is killing so many unborn baby girls. Their continued silence only facilitates the killing."
Mr. Mosher should not hold his breath while waiting for this condemnation. You see, feminist groups have backed themselves into a philosophical corner. To criticize an abortion for any reason violates their 1st commandment: A woman has the right to do whatever she wishes with her body. Any restrictions on choice would compromise this tenet.
A corollary to this commandment is that everything, and everyone, must be sacrificed to the abortion-on-demand cause.
Back in the 1990s when President Clinton was accused of sexual harassing Paula Jones and of receiving oral sex from Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office, Americans openly wondered why liberal feminist groups were silent. Barely a word was heard in support of these women. Why?
President Clinton was the most pro-choice chief executive in our nation’s history and neither NOW nor or any other liberal feminist group was going to sacrifice his abortion support for any woman, regardless of the circumstances.
Oh, the irony.
Donald Tremblay
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Obama’s Hardly “Catholic Advisory Council”
This presidential campaign’s award for “Oxymoronic Term” goes to Barack Obama. Obama’s “Catholic Advisory Council” is Catholic in name only, which is fitting since Catholic ideals are as essential to Obama’s political platform as the appendix is to the proper functioning of the human body. Sure Obama may agree with the Church on issues such as the Iraq War or Immigration, but when it comes to the issues regarding life and its beginnings (abortion and embryonic stem cell research) his views could not be more anti-Catholic. For ex., in a Catholic News Agency column analyzing the members of Obama’s pseudo Catholic council, Deal W. Hudson states, “five senators and 13 House members have earned 100 percent pro-abortion ratings from NARAL” (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=216)
If you want to know where Obama really stands concerning Catholic teachings, just review his voting record.
· From 2005-2007 the NARAL Pro Choice America has given Obama a 100% for his Congressional Record on Choice. Here is a quote from a speech given by Obama celebrating the 35-year anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. It is posted on the NARAL website at http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/elections/statements/obama.html: “Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America”.
· As reported by the website www.HumanEvents.com, Obama voted against bill SB 1661 (2002), listed as a part of the Born Alive Infant Protection Package that “would create a cause of action of a child is born alive after an abortion and the child is then neglected through failure to provide medical care after birth”.
· A press release posted on Obama’s senatorial website (http://obama.senate.gov/press/070411-obama_renews_su/) expresses his support for embryonic stem cell research. The headline of the Wednesday, April 11, 2007 release reads, Obama Renews Support for Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Obama is then quoted saying, “I stand in full support of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act as I did when this bill was introduced and sent to the President’s desk in the 109th Congress. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill.” He also makes it clear that he understands little as to why opponents disagree, “I am frustrated by the opposition this bill has generated and saddened that we are preventing the advancement of important science that could potentially impact millions of suffering Americans.”
Forget Obama’s eloquence, his engaging smile, and his appeals to moderation. This is a candidate whose views are as antagonistic to Church teachings as any presidential nominee in American history.
Donald Tremblay
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
