The following is taken from the Priests for Life website http://www.priestsforlife.org/postabortion/postabortiontestimonymen.htm
In addition to the short article, there are quite a few stories; testimonies of fathers who have dealt with the issue of abortion. Their stories are heartfelt and some even devastating. These men are dealing with the abortion of their child, like many women, so many years later. I think it is VERY important to read about these men and keep them in our prayers!
Men and Abortion
Abortion has many victims, and one of them is the father of the child.
The laws of the United States do not acknowledge the right a father to stop the abortion of his own child, but rather place that act solely within the decision of the mother.
This raises a multitude of problems.
On the one hand, the father who wants to defend the life of his child is often accused of meddling in something that is not his business.
On the other hand, the father who wants to leave the (mistaken) decision of abortion in the hands of the mother alone is often accused of being uncaring and distant. This, in turn, can create feelings of isolation in the mother, which in turn makes it easier for her to resort to abortion.
Furthermore, the law is a powerful teacher. It says the father has no rights in the abortion decision. But the other side of the coin of "rights" is "responsibilities." The current state of the law regarding fathers and abortion can easily foster a sense of irresponsibility in young men.
Post-abortion counseling services are seeing an increasing number of men come forward, grieving their aborted children. Many of the same dynamics of post-abortion distress that we see in women are are also present in men.
We offer here some testimonies of fathers whose children have been killed by abortion, along with our prayers for such fathers, and our readiness to help them.
If you have a testimony, send it to us at testimony@priestsforlife.org
Eric Eckenrode website
Papa's Post-Operative Blues
The Awakening
I was her boyfriend of just a few months
I was a coward
I wasn't strong enough
A Father's Post-Abortion Testimony
Silent No More
A Dad Grieves and writes to his aborted son
Grief for an Aborted Son
Another Regretful Father Shares his Thoughts
Priests for Life Column on Abortion for Men
Abortion for Men
Fr. Frank PavoneInternational DirectorPriests for Life
One of the slogans used by extremists in the pro-abortion movement is, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." The slogan, besides being simply ignorant, is an insult to the Church and to the integrity of pro-life people. Less crude expressions of the same sentiment take shape in arguments like, "The prohibition of abortion discriminates against women," and "Pro-life people are intent on depriving women of their rights." In fact, pro-abortion forces took this argument all the way to the Supreme Court, but lost in their attempt to claim that women as a class were discriminated against by pro-life efforts.
The fact is that we oppose abortion both for women and for men. The fact that men do not get pregnant does not stop them from choosing abortion. Indeed, anyone who has worked directly to stop abortions has seen many instances in which the "choice" in question was being made by the man, not by the woman. In the thousands of case testimonies I have in my office, time after time I read these or similar words: "My boyfriend wanted me to have the abortion; I was unsure," or "The baby's father said that unless I aborted the child, he would leave."
Of course. Abortion is not about women's rights. It is often about men wanting the right to be able to continue to have sexual relations without the "intrusive burden" of the child that can come about.
Morally speaking, the sin of abortion is committed when it is chosen, knowingly and willingly. Many factors mitigate the guilt, but the point here is that the choosing of abortion does not require that one be pregnant. Men choose abortion; men perform abortions. Men are therefore often guilty of the sin of abortion.
Being pro-life is in no way to single out women for blame. Being pro-life is about helping men and women alike to have the courage to do what is right, namely, to conceive children only within the bounds of valid marriage, and to protect all children who have been conceived under any circumstances.
Ministry to men is increasingly important, and Christians are responding more and more. We see movements like Promise Keepers, St. Joseph's Covenant Keepers, and the Catholic Men's Fellowship striving to meet the pastoral needs of men in our day. We also see the post-abortion movement increasingly extending its resources of counseling and healing to the men who have become entrapped in the lie that abortion is a solution to their problems.
It was the promoters of abortion who from the beginning framed abortion as simply a "woman's issue." No, abortion involves everyone. Once, at a Life Chain, I was asked by a passerby what right I had, as a man, to say anything about abortion. "I'm a human being," I replied, "and when my fellow human beings are being killed, I have a right to stand up and say no." "No," that is, whether it is addressed to a woman or to a man.
Subscribe to Fr. Frank's bi-weekly prolife column (free): subscribe@priestsforlife.org
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Prayers Please
My cousin passed on a story of a couple in MN who are in the process of deciding whether or not to have an abortion. The wife does not want to keep the baby and her husband is completely opposed to her having an abortion. Even though she is carrying a child that is also his, the father has NO RIGHTS and can do nothing to stop her. The abortion is planned for tomorrow (11/26). PLEASE PRAY!!!!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Frustrations
I was at a meeting last night at our parish for Justice and Human Concerns. Each time we meet one person brings in articles on a topic from one of the Seven Catholic Social Teachings. It was my turn last night and I chose to discuss the Life and Dignity of the Human Person. I presented several articles and also included a message from Francis Cardinal George (see below) when he addressed the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops this week.
I assumed that at a meeting in a Catholic church, I would be among people who agree with me and the church. However, I sat in a room with four other Catholics, three of whom questioned me. They all agreed that the death penalty, euthanasia, and other killing is wrong, BUT three out of four felt it wasn't right to take away a woman's right to choose! One woman said something like this, "How can I say you can't have an abortion, when I'm not willing to adopt your baby?" As a woman who has been trying to conceive another baby for OVER TWO years unsuccessfully, I about flipped. As a PRO-LIFE Catholic, I almost cried. My response was "If a man killed another man after a fight could we justify that simply because we weren't able to help them resolve it?" She said, "Well no. But, he is alrady 'alive' so that is different."
Then, someone else started debating when life begins. Now, my brother and sister-in-law just went through a miscarriage a few weeks ago. Imagine telling them that the baby wasn't alive because he/she wasn't born yet?!?! Having experienced pregnancy I can tell you that there is most definitely a life and soul within you! It went onto stem-cell research, frozen embryos, etc. and all got to be so disheartening.
After a while, I just began to pray and stop listening to their "justifications" for killing babies. I try very hard not to judge people because I believe that God is the ulitmate judge. BUT, I do judge their actions and beliefs and these are things I cannot condone!
My prayer today is specifically for Catholics....that the church and pro-life supporters may uncover the blinders which have covered so many people's eyes.
Cardinal: Obama's Presidency Heals Racism, Now Time to End Abortion
By Tim Waggoner
BALTIMORE, November 10, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – During today's address at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) 2008 Fall General Assembly, Francis Cardinal George received a standing ovation from America's bishops for candidly contrasting the significance of a black president in the US with President-elect Barack Obama's radical support of abortion.
Cardinal George expressed his deep satisfaction with the American people's capacity to vote for a black president in light of a history marred by racism and slavery.
"We can also be truly grateful that our country's social conscience has advanced to the point that Barrack Obama was not asked to renounce his racial heritage in order to be president," said Cardinal George. "We are, perhaps, at a moment when, with the grace of God, all races are safely within the American consensus."
"If the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision that African Americans were other people's property and somehow less than persons were still settled constitutional law, Mr. Obama would not be president of the United States," he continued.
The President of the USCCB then reflected on the fact that even if a nation affirms certain rights, by failing to uphold the fundamental right of all human rights – the right to life - it fails to uphold the common good.
"In working for the common good of our society, racial justice is one pillar of our social doctrine. Economic justice, especially for the poor both here and abroad, is another.
"The common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed at choice. Today, as was the case a hundred and fifty years ago, common ground cannot be found by destroying the common good," said Cardinal George, to applause from the bishops.
This is not the first time Cardinal George has challenged Obama on his pro-abortion position. In his public official congratulation to the President, Cardinal George said, "Our country is confronting many uncertainties. We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world. We stand ready to work with you in defense and support of the life and dignity of every human person."
Pro-life groups have for years used the comparison of abortion to slavery as a pro-life tool. Roe vs. Wade and the Dred Scott decision, which legalized slavery in the US, both justified the removal of the right to life from a particular class of human beings by labeling them both as non-persons.
However, while Obama's election to the presidency is being hailed as a huge step forward in stamping out any remaining racist tendencies in the US, some commentators have observed that, ironically, the African American population may have great reasons to worry under an Obama presidency.
Currently the greatest killer of the US black population is abortion, with over one third, or 13 million blacks in America having been aborted. Obama's radical position on abortion, including his promises to increase federal funding for abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, which routinely target black neighborhoods for their abortion centers, is likely to increase the number of black unborn babies being murdered in utero during Obama's tenure as president.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/10/frj_1110/
I assumed that at a meeting in a Catholic church, I would be among people who agree with me and the church. However, I sat in a room with four other Catholics, three of whom questioned me. They all agreed that the death penalty, euthanasia, and other killing is wrong, BUT three out of four felt it wasn't right to take away a woman's right to choose! One woman said something like this, "How can I say you can't have an abortion, when I'm not willing to adopt your baby?" As a woman who has been trying to conceive another baby for OVER TWO years unsuccessfully, I about flipped. As a PRO-LIFE Catholic, I almost cried. My response was "If a man killed another man after a fight could we justify that simply because we weren't able to help them resolve it?" She said, "Well no. But, he is alrady 'alive' so that is different."
Then, someone else started debating when life begins. Now, my brother and sister-in-law just went through a miscarriage a few weeks ago. Imagine telling them that the baby wasn't alive because he/she wasn't born yet?!?! Having experienced pregnancy I can tell you that there is most definitely a life and soul within you! It went onto stem-cell research, frozen embryos, etc. and all got to be so disheartening.
After a while, I just began to pray and stop listening to their "justifications" for killing babies. I try very hard not to judge people because I believe that God is the ulitmate judge. BUT, I do judge their actions and beliefs and these are things I cannot condone!
My prayer today is specifically for Catholics....that the church and pro-life supporters may uncover the blinders which have covered so many people's eyes.
Cardinal: Obama's Presidency Heals Racism, Now Time to End Abortion
By Tim Waggoner
BALTIMORE, November 10, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – During today's address at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) 2008 Fall General Assembly, Francis Cardinal George received a standing ovation from America's bishops for candidly contrasting the significance of a black president in the US with President-elect Barack Obama's radical support of abortion.
Cardinal George expressed his deep satisfaction with the American people's capacity to vote for a black president in light of a history marred by racism and slavery.
"We can also be truly grateful that our country's social conscience has advanced to the point that Barrack Obama was not asked to renounce his racial heritage in order to be president," said Cardinal George. "We are, perhaps, at a moment when, with the grace of God, all races are safely within the American consensus."
"If the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision that African Americans were other people's property and somehow less than persons were still settled constitutional law, Mr. Obama would not be president of the United States," he continued.
The President of the USCCB then reflected on the fact that even if a nation affirms certain rights, by failing to uphold the fundamental right of all human rights – the right to life - it fails to uphold the common good.
"In working for the common good of our society, racial justice is one pillar of our social doctrine. Economic justice, especially for the poor both here and abroad, is another.
"The common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed at choice. Today, as was the case a hundred and fifty years ago, common ground cannot be found by destroying the common good," said Cardinal George, to applause from the bishops.
This is not the first time Cardinal George has challenged Obama on his pro-abortion position. In his public official congratulation to the President, Cardinal George said, "Our country is confronting many uncertainties. We pray that you will use the powers of your office to meet them with a special concern to defend the most vulnerable among us and heal the divisions in our country and our world. We stand ready to work with you in defense and support of the life and dignity of every human person."
Pro-life groups have for years used the comparison of abortion to slavery as a pro-life tool. Roe vs. Wade and the Dred Scott decision, which legalized slavery in the US, both justified the removal of the right to life from a particular class of human beings by labeling them both as non-persons.
However, while Obama's election to the presidency is being hailed as a huge step forward in stamping out any remaining racist tendencies in the US, some commentators have observed that, ironically, the African American population may have great reasons to worry under an Obama presidency.
Currently the greatest killer of the US black population is abortion, with over one third, or 13 million blacks in America having been aborted. Obama's radical position on abortion, including his promises to increase federal funding for abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, which routinely target black neighborhoods for their abortion centers, is likely to increase the number of black unborn babies being murdered in utero during Obama's tenure as president.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/10/frj_1110/
Friday, November 7, 2008
Life is sacred until NATURAL DEATH!
My first few posts have focused on the lives of the unborn. However, they are not the only lives I want to protect. I hope and pray that people learn to value EVERY life from conception to natural death!
You probably remember the story of Terri Shiavo. While her parents, family, and friends, as well as MANY strangers fought to keep her alive, her husband and the courts declared that her life was not viable. Below is an essay written by Msgr. James C. Brunner. It is long, but worth reading; very moving.
Please keep all of the people who are in risk of euthanasia in your prayers today.
Terri's slow-motion torture death
An essay by Msgr. James C. Brunner:
As this is written, the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo has been removed by order of Judge George Greer and, unless a federal court intervenes, she will die a painful death by starvation in a period ranging from four to 20 days. In all the discussion of this case it seems to me that its essential morality has been overlooked. The argument seems to rage about who has the final authority in sentencing her to death. Which legislature or court, state or federal? The husband or the family? This misses the central point: Should any political entity or any individual have the right to sentence a person in a "persistent vegetative state" to death?
We need to be clear. Removing the feeding tube from Terri is not "allowing nature to take its course" or "allowing her to die." If a man locks his daughter in a closet for two weeks and gives her no food or drink, he is causing her death. Nobody would speak of letting nature take it course but about homicide. We have here a court-ordered homicide. No governmental agency or private individual should have authority to impose a sentence of this sort on an innocent human being.
ANH, or assisted nutrition and hydration, means only the giving of food and water to persons who get hungry and thirsty. Pope John Paul II teaches that even when provided by artificial means, it remains a natural method of preserving life and not a medical act. No one thinks that spooning food into an infant's mouth when he is incapable of feeding himself is an unnatural or medical act.
Even convicted criminals and terrorists who have tried to kill us are entitled to three meals a day. On what grounds do we deny food to Terri? Judge George Greer must have graduated from the Dr. Kevorkian school of law. If he wanted to impose a death sentence why did he not just have the tube capped instead of imposing on her the additional pain of having the tube removed?
Terri is supposed to be in a "persistent vegetative state." That description has an unfortunate, dehumanizing aspect. A vegetable is something that we eat. Ironically, it derives from the Latin vegetare , which means to enliven, activate, animate or quicken. Terri is not brain-dead or comatose. She is a human who cannot function at full capacity. Humanity is something that we are, not something that we do. We are human beings, not human "doings." Dehumanizing the handicapped not only lessens them but us.
Michael Schiavo, Terri's estranged husband, reported (five years after she became handicapped) that Terri once remarked that she did not want to live on life support. If the report is accurate, does it also mean that she wished to undergo an agonizing death by starvation? Does the so-called right to die include the right to be tortured? There seems to be little difference between starving her and giving her strychnine except that the latter would be faster and perhaps less painful. Either set of circumstances would be a homicide.
How did we come to a point that we are arguing about denying food to a human being, about a culture of death rather than a culture of life? A review of developments in Nazi Germany might be enlightening. The Nazi atrocities were based on a philosophy that made the "quality of life" more important than the "sanctity of life."
The Nazis slipped into the holocaust by seven recognizable steps. 1) There was an acceptance of mercy killing to put people out of their misery. 2) When Germany suffered a severe economic crunch efforts were made to remove "useless" expenses from the budget. That led to the killing of the chronically ill with no hope of recovery (Terri Schiavo?). 3) Next came killing of the elderly who were without relatives and resources but were a burden to the state. 4) This was followed by the elimination of bums, beggars, gypsies and hopelessly poor people. 5) Then came the economy of eliminating people who were drawing welfare. 6) It was then the turn of the ideologically unwanted, political enemies of the state, "religious extremists," "disloyal" individuals who were holding the government back from providing every citizen a better quality of life. 7) Finally there came those who in the ideology of the Nazis were evolutionally unfit such as Jew and those who were not pure Aryans. Once the first step, acceptance of euthanasia was taken, all other steps followed logically.
Could a holocaust happen here? Yes. A philosophy like that of Peter Singer that would permit the killing of infants under certain circumstances could serve as its intellectual underpinning. Indeed, one may say it has already begun with the killing of 40 million unborn infants by "legal" abortion. Abortion, euthanasia, cloning and embryonic stem-cell research represent a belief that certain humans should control the making and taking of human life. This is not unlike the Third Reich. Things that were once condemned as a crime against humanity at Nuremberg are now regarded as acts of compassion.
Terri's death sentence has many implications. Women's and civil-rights groups are notably absent from defending Terri. Also missing are leftists who seem to believe in government by the judiciary since their positions do not gain approval in legislatures. They would like Judge Greer to be upheld because, as Cardinal Renato Martino remarked on Vatican radio: "If Mr. Schiavo succeeds legally in causing the death of his wife, this not only would be tragic in itself, but would be a great step toward the legal approval of euthanasia in the United States."
Liberals rightfully are opposed to torture – except for Terri. They give the "right to die" priority over the right to live. Some liberals complain that intervention by Congress is a violation of states' rights, but they had no such concern for authority of states in court decisions overturning sodomy laws and gay marriage bans.
Do we want the government to allow people to be starved to death? We are not speaking here of extraordinary means of life support, but human feeding. Are we now going to kill Alzheimer's patients who have lost all capacity for memory and are unable to function without guidance? What about Parkinson's patients? If sentencing the handicapped to death continues, people are going to die under the guise of compassion and understanding when the decision will not really be about them at all but about the convenience of others. We will be making life-and-death decisions based on how much trouble it will be for us to let them live.
There are millions in nursing homes who cannot wash and feed themselves. In that sense they are very much like Terri. Her lot may soon be theirs. Roe v. Wade allowed killing human beings in the womb. Now, beginning with Terri, human beings outside the womb can be destroyed. Now judges decide who gets food and water.
Dr. Kevorkian was jailed for helping to dispatch people who wanted to die. How is Terri's case any different?
You probably remember the story of Terri Shiavo. While her parents, family, and friends, as well as MANY strangers fought to keep her alive, her husband and the courts declared that her life was not viable. Below is an essay written by Msgr. James C. Brunner. It is long, but worth reading; very moving.
Please keep all of the people who are in risk of euthanasia in your prayers today.
Terri's slow-motion torture death
An essay by Msgr. James C. Brunner:
As this is written, the feeding tube of Terri Schiavo has been removed by order of Judge George Greer and, unless a federal court intervenes, she will die a painful death by starvation in a period ranging from four to 20 days. In all the discussion of this case it seems to me that its essential morality has been overlooked. The argument seems to rage about who has the final authority in sentencing her to death. Which legislature or court, state or federal? The husband or the family? This misses the central point: Should any political entity or any individual have the right to sentence a person in a "persistent vegetative state" to death?
We need to be clear. Removing the feeding tube from Terri is not "allowing nature to take its course" or "allowing her to die." If a man locks his daughter in a closet for two weeks and gives her no food or drink, he is causing her death. Nobody would speak of letting nature take it course but about homicide. We have here a court-ordered homicide. No governmental agency or private individual should have authority to impose a sentence of this sort on an innocent human being.
ANH, or assisted nutrition and hydration, means only the giving of food and water to persons who get hungry and thirsty. Pope John Paul II teaches that even when provided by artificial means, it remains a natural method of preserving life and not a medical act. No one thinks that spooning food into an infant's mouth when he is incapable of feeding himself is an unnatural or medical act.
Even convicted criminals and terrorists who have tried to kill us are entitled to three meals a day. On what grounds do we deny food to Terri? Judge George Greer must have graduated from the Dr. Kevorkian school of law. If he wanted to impose a death sentence why did he not just have the tube capped instead of imposing on her the additional pain of having the tube removed?
Terri is supposed to be in a "persistent vegetative state." That description has an unfortunate, dehumanizing aspect. A vegetable is something that we eat. Ironically, it derives from the Latin vegetare , which means to enliven, activate, animate or quicken. Terri is not brain-dead or comatose. She is a human who cannot function at full capacity. Humanity is something that we are, not something that we do. We are human beings, not human "doings." Dehumanizing the handicapped not only lessens them but us.
Michael Schiavo, Terri's estranged husband, reported (five years after she became handicapped) that Terri once remarked that she did not want to live on life support. If the report is accurate, does it also mean that she wished to undergo an agonizing death by starvation? Does the so-called right to die include the right to be tortured? There seems to be little difference between starving her and giving her strychnine except that the latter would be faster and perhaps less painful. Either set of circumstances would be a homicide.
How did we come to a point that we are arguing about denying food to a human being, about a culture of death rather than a culture of life? A review of developments in Nazi Germany might be enlightening. The Nazi atrocities were based on a philosophy that made the "quality of life" more important than the "sanctity of life."
The Nazis slipped into the holocaust by seven recognizable steps. 1) There was an acceptance of mercy killing to put people out of their misery. 2) When Germany suffered a severe economic crunch efforts were made to remove "useless" expenses from the budget. That led to the killing of the chronically ill with no hope of recovery (Terri Schiavo?). 3) Next came killing of the elderly who were without relatives and resources but were a burden to the state. 4) This was followed by the elimination of bums, beggars, gypsies and hopelessly poor people. 5) Then came the economy of eliminating people who were drawing welfare. 6) It was then the turn of the ideologically unwanted, political enemies of the state, "religious extremists," "disloyal" individuals who were holding the government back from providing every citizen a better quality of life. 7) Finally there came those who in the ideology of the Nazis were evolutionally unfit such as Jew and those who were not pure Aryans. Once the first step, acceptance of euthanasia was taken, all other steps followed logically.
Could a holocaust happen here? Yes. A philosophy like that of Peter Singer that would permit the killing of infants under certain circumstances could serve as its intellectual underpinning. Indeed, one may say it has already begun with the killing of 40 million unborn infants by "legal" abortion. Abortion, euthanasia, cloning and embryonic stem-cell research represent a belief that certain humans should control the making and taking of human life. This is not unlike the Third Reich. Things that were once condemned as a crime against humanity at Nuremberg are now regarded as acts of compassion.
Terri's death sentence has many implications. Women's and civil-rights groups are notably absent from defending Terri. Also missing are leftists who seem to believe in government by the judiciary since their positions do not gain approval in legislatures. They would like Judge Greer to be upheld because, as Cardinal Renato Martino remarked on Vatican radio: "If Mr. Schiavo succeeds legally in causing the death of his wife, this not only would be tragic in itself, but would be a great step toward the legal approval of euthanasia in the United States."
Liberals rightfully are opposed to torture – except for Terri. They give the "right to die" priority over the right to live. Some liberals complain that intervention by Congress is a violation of states' rights, but they had no such concern for authority of states in court decisions overturning sodomy laws and gay marriage bans.
Do we want the government to allow people to be starved to death? We are not speaking here of extraordinary means of life support, but human feeding. Are we now going to kill Alzheimer's patients who have lost all capacity for memory and are unable to function without guidance? What about Parkinson's patients? If sentencing the handicapped to death continues, people are going to die under the guise of compassion and understanding when the decision will not really be about them at all but about the convenience of others. We will be making life-and-death decisions based on how much trouble it will be for us to let them live.
There are millions in nursing homes who cannot wash and feed themselves. In that sense they are very much like Terri. Her lot may soon be theirs. Roe v. Wade allowed killing human beings in the womb. Now, beginning with Terri, human beings outside the womb can be destroyed. Now judges decide who gets food and water.
Dr. Kevorkian was jailed for helping to dispatch people who wanted to die. How is Terri's case any different?
Thursday, November 6, 2008
You Are Not Alone
The following quote has provided inspiration for many in the pro-life cause:
"When the time comes, as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I've often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God -- and a terror will rip your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there'll be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world -- and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, 'Spare him, because he loved us!'"
The Late Congressman Henry Hyde
Who is the chorus that Hyde speaks of? Each aborted soul!
"When the time comes, as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I've often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God -- and a terror will rip your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there'll be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world -- and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, 'Spare him, because he loved us!'"
The Late Congressman Henry Hyde
Who is the chorus that Hyde speaks of? Each aborted soul!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
So, I have never been to the NARAL Pro-Choice America site before, but tonight I took a peek to see where they're coming from so I know the army we're facing before we go into battle. Below is an excerpt they have about the Freedom of Choice Act:
"Following the Supreme Court's closely divided and bitter decision upholding the Federal Abortion Ban, it is clear that the right to choose is facing a new level of assault. That's why the pro-choice community is working to guarantee the right to choose through the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) – a measure that will codify Roe v. Wade and guarantee the right to choose for future generations of women. " www.prochoiceamerica.org
All I have to say is that if they think the right to choose is facing a new level of assault now, they haven't seen ANYTHING yet!
God bless every unborn soul!
"Following the Supreme Court's closely divided and bitter decision upholding the Federal Abortion Ban, it is clear that the right to choose is facing a new level of assault. That's why the pro-choice community is working to guarantee the right to choose through the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) – a measure that will codify Roe v. Wade and guarantee the right to choose for future generations of women. " www.prochoiceamerica.org
All I have to say is that if they think the right to choose is facing a new level of assault now, they haven't seen ANYTHING yet!
God bless every unborn soul!
Another message (from my wonderful husband)
I'm not only blessed with wonderful parents, I have been blessed with a fabulous husband. Like the rest of us, he is not perfect. But, he has a deep love of God and a strong passion for the Pro-Life movement! Here are some of his words from a recent letter he wrote.
It is often easy to feel complaisant with the choices we make, but howoften do we really think about the decisions we make? First I beg ofyou to read my longwinded diatribe in its entirety. I will ask a fewsimple questions, which I hope will cause you to reflect deeply onwhat it means to be a Christian. Before I do so I wish to take amoment to share a few salient thoughts. Unfortunately every electionyear we have the same old argument of separation of Church and State.However, such an argument does not apply to the individual ability tomake moral and ethical decisions based on their system of Faith inrespect to the way they vote. I also laugh when I hear people makesuch statements like this election should not be about morals andfaith. How interesting considering denying my morals and beliefs is todeny myself as my faith makes up much of whom I am.That being said I am far from a perfect person, and I do not wish todo anything more than to give you a moment of pause to reflect. I am100% pro-life, and by this I mean I oppose anyone who takes the life of another be it, genocide in Darfur, Capital Punishment, or Abortion. I did not always share this belief on Capital Punishment until mydear wife asked me a question that caused me to think and change mypoint of view. It was a very simple question yet challenged me in such a way, as I had never been challenged before. That is to say I calledmyself Pro-Life, but condoned the taking of life via CapitalPunishment. I often gave into my human side which was a thirst forvengeance for crimes done against others, a blood vengeance. That isthe human side of me speaking, not from the perspective of what Godwishes. The Bible often says that "My thoughts are not your thoughts,nor are your ways My ways,' says the Lord. Simply, just because Ithirst for vengeance does not make it right to take a life. I oftenhear an eye for an eye, this is not the covenant of the New Testament.If you are a believer in Jesus as Savior, of God made Man, then youmust not cling to this philosophy. I did and now I say let them servertheir time in prison and leave the ultimate justice to God. For eventhe guilty are loved by God. God does not wish anyone to perish. I amnow happy to say that in good conscience I am 100% Pro-Life, I believeand live for the Gospel of Life.It is contrary to the Gospel of Life to believe that abortion is everpermissible, let us put aside the argument of when does lifetechnically begin. Are we God do we really know conclusively when itbegins? No, we do not and thus are responsible to ensure that life isprotected in all stages from conception to natural death. If forexample, life did not begin at conception when does it start? Manypeople have different opinions and scientific arguments to make onthis point. I will tell you this for me it is simply put, if lifebegins at conception (I believe it does) and I choose to supportabortion I am supporting the murder and destruction of God's creation.I would then be culpable to the murder of millions of unborn. The"what if" question of does life begin at conception question is enoughreason for me to consider my choices careful. Obviously if it did notthere would be no harm no foul done, again I believe it does, but thehorror of the choice if wrong is a grave sin against the soul. Eitherway as a Christian I cannot take that chance that I could be wrong, ifI am their blood is on my hands, this same culpability is handed to uswhen we vote for a pro-choice candidate, doing so allows the genocideof God's creations. God precious gifts of life can not be treatedcavalierly. If you vote you are responsible for the choice you make,ignorance of the truth is no excuse, and no one can go before God andclaim ignorance because in our hearts we know the truth. This is amoral truth that can be ignored, but does not simply disappear justbecause it is inconvenient for us to pay for our choices. I imploreyou to search for God deep in your heart and hear what He has to tellyou. I am no longer going to sit here and be silent just because I amafraid to offend people, sometimes if you really care about the stateof someone's soul you must take that chance even if it offends themand causes them to no longer want to associate you. I would rather behated for following the ways of God, than to continue in my cowardiceand hold my tongue for the sake of being liked. That being said, God'sredemption is ever present He is waiting to offer it to you at anytime. All you have to is accept it repent of your evil ways, andembrace God's forgiveness. I have for my position I hope you will to.If you read this and have already voted, and chose poorly it is nevertoo late to ask for God's forgiveness for your error.
God Bless,Dave
PS. One interesting thought is if there were truly to be separation ofchurch and state, then why does the state prohibit the church fromspeaking openly and honestly about this matter with out threat ofloosing it's non-profit status. The unions aren't affected by this….something to ponder.
It is often easy to feel complaisant with the choices we make, but howoften do we really think about the decisions we make? First I beg ofyou to read my longwinded diatribe in its entirety. I will ask a fewsimple questions, which I hope will cause you to reflect deeply onwhat it means to be a Christian. Before I do so I wish to take amoment to share a few salient thoughts. Unfortunately every electionyear we have the same old argument of separation of Church and State.However, such an argument does not apply to the individual ability tomake moral and ethical decisions based on their system of Faith inrespect to the way they vote. I also laugh when I hear people makesuch statements like this election should not be about morals andfaith. How interesting considering denying my morals and beliefs is todeny myself as my faith makes up much of whom I am.That being said I am far from a perfect person, and I do not wish todo anything more than to give you a moment of pause to reflect. I am100% pro-life, and by this I mean I oppose anyone who takes the life of another be it, genocide in Darfur, Capital Punishment, or Abortion. I did not always share this belief on Capital Punishment until mydear wife asked me a question that caused me to think and change mypoint of view. It was a very simple question yet challenged me in such a way, as I had never been challenged before. That is to say I calledmyself Pro-Life, but condoned the taking of life via CapitalPunishment. I often gave into my human side which was a thirst forvengeance for crimes done against others, a blood vengeance. That isthe human side of me speaking, not from the perspective of what Godwishes. The Bible often says that "My thoughts are not your thoughts,nor are your ways My ways,' says the Lord. Simply, just because Ithirst for vengeance does not make it right to take a life. I oftenhear an eye for an eye, this is not the covenant of the New Testament.If you are a believer in Jesus as Savior, of God made Man, then youmust not cling to this philosophy. I did and now I say let them servertheir time in prison and leave the ultimate justice to God. For eventhe guilty are loved by God. God does not wish anyone to perish. I amnow happy to say that in good conscience I am 100% Pro-Life, I believeand live for the Gospel of Life.It is contrary to the Gospel of Life to believe that abortion is everpermissible, let us put aside the argument of when does lifetechnically begin. Are we God do we really know conclusively when itbegins? No, we do not and thus are responsible to ensure that life isprotected in all stages from conception to natural death. If forexample, life did not begin at conception when does it start? Manypeople have different opinions and scientific arguments to make onthis point. I will tell you this for me it is simply put, if lifebegins at conception (I believe it does) and I choose to supportabortion I am supporting the murder and destruction of God's creation.I would then be culpable to the murder of millions of unborn. The"what if" question of does life begin at conception question is enoughreason for me to consider my choices careful. Obviously if it did notthere would be no harm no foul done, again I believe it does, but thehorror of the choice if wrong is a grave sin against the soul. Eitherway as a Christian I cannot take that chance that I could be wrong, ifI am their blood is on my hands, this same culpability is handed to uswhen we vote for a pro-choice candidate, doing so allows the genocideof God's creations. God precious gifts of life can not be treatedcavalierly. If you vote you are responsible for the choice you make,ignorance of the truth is no excuse, and no one can go before God andclaim ignorance because in our hearts we know the truth. This is amoral truth that can be ignored, but does not simply disappear justbecause it is inconvenient for us to pay for our choices. I imploreyou to search for God deep in your heart and hear what He has to tellyou. I am no longer going to sit here and be silent just because I amafraid to offend people, sometimes if you really care about the stateof someone's soul you must take that chance even if it offends themand causes them to no longer want to associate you. I would rather behated for following the ways of God, than to continue in my cowardiceand hold my tongue for the sake of being liked. That being said, God'sredemption is ever present He is waiting to offer it to you at anytime. All you have to is accept it repent of your evil ways, andembrace God's forgiveness. I have for my position I hope you will to.If you read this and have already voted, and chose poorly it is nevertoo late to ask for God's forgiveness for your error.
God Bless,Dave
PS. One interesting thought is if there were truly to be separation ofchurch and state, then why does the state prohibit the church fromspeaking openly and honestly about this matter with out threat ofloosing it's non-profit status. The unions aren't affected by this….something to ponder.
Inspirational Letter (not just because it is from my Mom)
The following letter was written by my mom before the election. Even though the election has passed, there is some wonderful insight in her words. I'm blessed to have to strong, courageous, and good parents!
Dear Friends and Family,
I have been getting many e-mails during these weeks leading up to the election. None has had a more profound affect on me than one I received on October 23rd. It features a video that I can't get out of my mind. The web site is: www.durarealidad.com. I encourage all of you to check it out.
I know where some of you stand on the candidates in this election. I have no idea where others of you stand. I tend to send these sorts of things only to people that I think will agree with the message. I do this partly because I'm a coward and partly because I don't want to seem disrespectful to those that I know may not share my view. This time I have wrestled with who to send this to and I've spent a lot of time praying about what is the right thing to do. I have come to the conclusion that I cannot in good conscience not act on this. I feel an obligation to address this issue with all of you who are in my address book.
The issue is abortion. Not pro-life or pro-choice, but abortion. "Abortion" is a nasty word. It's sounds hard. It's edgy. I think that the abortion industry has done a masterful job of eliminating words like "abortion", "killing", "death" from the issue and replacing them with the word "choice." "Choice" sounds soft. It's like a whisper. It sounds civilized. In this case, "choice" seems to take the responsibility, the blame, the intrinsic evil out of the act of abortion. Choice in most cases is a very good thing, but the taking of an innocent life because of someone's choice is wrong. Life is God-given. We as humans do not have the right (choice) to take it away at any time, for any reason. Abortion is a deliberate act with the intention of ending a life.
I keep thinking about Mother Teresa and how vehemently she opposed abortion. She spent her life working with the poorest of the poor and yet she didn't feel that abortion was a viable option even for these women who faced obstacles that were unimaginable.
I have been accused of basing my vote on one issue. Call it what you will, pro-life issues are the bottom line for me, they are the deal breakers. If someone chooses to not protect the life of the most innocent and vulnerable in our society, than how can I trust that person in any other issue. Senator Obama has promised that the first thing he'll do as president will be to enact The Freedom Of Choice Act. This goes way beyond "choice" and takes the culture of death to a new extreme.
The outcome of this election, I believe, will be a turning point in our nation's history. A great deal hangs in the balance. Our nation will reap what we sow. God is full of mercy. He is also a just God. Please pray with me that HIS will be done.
With love, Amy
Dear Friends and Family,
I have been getting many e-mails during these weeks leading up to the election. None has had a more profound affect on me than one I received on October 23rd. It features a video that I can't get out of my mind. The web site is: www.durarealidad.com. I encourage all of you to check it out.
I know where some of you stand on the candidates in this election. I have no idea where others of you stand. I tend to send these sorts of things only to people that I think will agree with the message. I do this partly because I'm a coward and partly because I don't want to seem disrespectful to those that I know may not share my view. This time I have wrestled with who to send this to and I've spent a lot of time praying about what is the right thing to do. I have come to the conclusion that I cannot in good conscience not act on this. I feel an obligation to address this issue with all of you who are in my address book.
The issue is abortion. Not pro-life or pro-choice, but abortion. "Abortion" is a nasty word. It's sounds hard. It's edgy. I think that the abortion industry has done a masterful job of eliminating words like "abortion", "killing", "death" from the issue and replacing them with the word "choice." "Choice" sounds soft. It's like a whisper. It sounds civilized. In this case, "choice" seems to take the responsibility, the blame, the intrinsic evil out of the act of abortion. Choice in most cases is a very good thing, but the taking of an innocent life because of someone's choice is wrong. Life is God-given. We as humans do not have the right (choice) to take it away at any time, for any reason. Abortion is a deliberate act with the intention of ending a life.
I keep thinking about Mother Teresa and how vehemently she opposed abortion. She spent her life working with the poorest of the poor and yet she didn't feel that abortion was a viable option even for these women who faced obstacles that were unimaginable.
I have been accused of basing my vote on one issue. Call it what you will, pro-life issues are the bottom line for me, they are the deal breakers. If someone chooses to not protect the life of the most innocent and vulnerable in our society, than how can I trust that person in any other issue. Senator Obama has promised that the first thing he'll do as president will be to enact The Freedom Of Choice Act. This goes way beyond "choice" and takes the culture of death to a new extreme.
The outcome of this election, I believe, will be a turning point in our nation's history. A great deal hangs in the balance. Our nation will reap what we sow. God is full of mercy. He is also a just God. Please pray with me that HIS will be done.
With love, Amy
Let's start with my thoughts....
I have always been Pro-Life. I don't think it EVER crossed my mind not to be! As a young child, my parents would take my siblings and me to an abortion clinic in MN where we would march, picket, and pray on Saturday mornings. Some have told me that it was indoctrination that formed my opinions. If that is true, I hope I can indoctirnate everyone in the world so every soul on earth is Pro-Life!
So, througout my life, I've been amazed by the number of people who are Pro-Choice (or Pro-Death as I'm now calling it). I'm especially shocked because a good number of people in my life were from the Catholic schools and parishes I attended. I just don't understand what went wrong in our country.
I have so much to say and it seems fewer and fewer people are willing to listen. So I guess I'm starting the blog so I can have a place to vent and also hear from others.
Although talking and getting a message out is important, I also want it to be a place of prayer. We need, now more than ever, to be praying for government leaders, doctors and nurses who perform abortions, and PARENTS who are considering ending their child's life!
Love and prayers to all!
Liz
So, througout my life, I've been amazed by the number of people who are Pro-Choice (or Pro-Death as I'm now calling it). I'm especially shocked because a good number of people in my life were from the Catholic schools and parishes I attended. I just don't understand what went wrong in our country.
I have so much to say and it seems fewer and fewer people are willing to listen. So I guess I'm starting the blog so I can have a place to vent and also hear from others.
Although talking and getting a message out is important, I also want it to be a place of prayer. We need, now more than ever, to be praying for government leaders, doctors and nurses who perform abortions, and PARENTS who are considering ending their child's life!
Love and prayers to all!
Liz
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
