Guys having Sex: So What?

Rebecca Mallory

Many girls ask the question, “What are the legal downsides to a guy having sex before marriage?”

While legality is certainly a concern, the emotional, physical, and financial aspects of premarital sex are as serious and can be even more damaging.  Girls definitely take the biggest consequential hit for having sex before marriage. If pregnancy ensues, she has life-changing choices to make, whereas a boy can just walk away. Or can he? Attempting to leave the moral and spiritual aspect out of the equation, let’s take a look at the reality of what frequently takes place in the aftermath of premarital sex.

Much of today’s culture tells us that having sex is OK. In fact, you’re considered weird or old-fashioned unless you’ve had sex with several partners before you get married. Reality TV and big screen movies paint most sexual encounters as exciting, normal, romantic, safe and without a care in the world. “Kicking the tires” lets you discover if you are sexually compatible, right?  Not true according to counselors, psychologists and professionals who treat both boys and girls for the unintended consequences of premarital sex. Remember your first heart-wrenching breakup with a boy or girl? Now add the emotional roller coaster of a sexual relationship and it’s almost like a mini divorce. Powerful and emotional feelings are dissolved and replaced with distrust and despondency that can last a lifetime.

Even though a contraceptive device may have been used to protect against pregnancy, these devices cannot protect the heart. Most people who engage in sex before marriage report a real sense of guilt and shame. Many professionals who promote birth control will never tell you about the heartbreak and guilt associated with premarital sex. Virginity can only be given away once.  When the heart is assaulted, defense mechanisms are automatically triggered that make trust a real issue in future relationships. Sex is one of the most powerful forces we humans experience. It can create or it can destroy.  It can bond a marriage relationship with deep devotion and true love, or it can leave lasting shameful images which ultimately destroys futures. “But what if we truly love each and plan on marrying later?” This makes little difference. Studies show that much of the excitement about illicit sex before marriage distorts the sweetness of the sexual relationship after marriage. Premarital sex can offer instant gratification, but each encounter robs a boy of the care and devoted tenderness that should have been saved for his future bride. But hey… if he doesn’t care enough about the girl he’s with, the more he does it, the less he’ll care, the more callused he’ll become. So what, right?

The more partners, the more frequent the encounters, the more devastating the results. Physical consequences of premarital sex are numerous and frightening.  Over 50% of people suffering with AIDS today are between the ages of 15 and 24.The younger a person engages in sex, the more susceptible they are to STD’s. They are also more easily spread through multiple partners and unprotected sex. Unfortunately, the only real protection and guarantee against STD’s is abstinence.  Sexually transmitted diseases are easy to prevent, but difficult to treat. Most are hard to detect and have no negative side effects for long periods of time.  Many people naively assume that STD’s are spread only through sexual intercourse. Wrong. They are spread through anal and oral sex or as innocently as skin-on-skin contact where an area has been affected. So someone unaware that he/she has an STD may continue to have sex with several different partners before a devastating disease is discovered.

How many people have now been affected? And where did it originate? Hard to tell. And get this. Professionals suggest that before you engage in sex, you and your partner go to the local clinic and get tested first. Sounds romantic, huh? Wonder what the statistics and success of that fun suggestion reveal? Not so great, according to numerous websites which is why sexually transmitted diseases are rampant. Why are STD’s still an issue in today’s world? Why haven’t they been wiped out with modern-day antibiotics, etc? According to Dr. Alan Christianson, because the organisms mutate and become an entirely new strain. “It’s a battle we cannot win,” he laments. He talks about a frightening “Super bug” for which doctors have no cure. This bug literally kills half the people it infects and there’s nothing to effectively treat it.

  “This might be a lot worse than AIDS in the short run because the bacteria is more aggressive and will affect more  people quickly,” said Alan Christianson, a doctor of naturopathic medicine. Even though nearly 30 million people have died from AIDS related causes worldwide, Christianson believes the effect of the gonorrhea bacteria is more direct. “Getting gonorrhea from this strain might put someone into septic shock and death in a matter of days,” Christianson said. “This is very dangerous.”

Sexually transmitted diseases are not only embarrassing and difficult to treat, but may lead to sterility or worse. Unintended pregnancies can lead to abortion, illegitimate children, and/or serious legal consequences. One young man, after a wild night of sex with a girl whose name he could barely recall, was informed two months later by her attorney that she was indeed pregnant and that he would be legally bound to financially support their child for the next 18 years. He must report his address, and income status to the court each month so that they can assess and collect child support if he somehow “forgets” about his obligations to that fun little one night stand. “Deadbeat dads” are hunted down and often prosecuted with felony charges.

Studies show that premarital sex affects social, academic and psychological development.  Family and friend relationships suffer as well as grades in school. Regardless of times have changed thinking, teens are generally too immature to handle the emotions and other consequences of the explosive sex drive that then tends to abnormally  dominate their lives and consumes all other normal emotions that they should be experiencing from sports, hanging out with friends, school activities, etc.

Let’s just be honest, guys. You’re being targeted by powerful advertisers because of crazy hormones and vulnerable changes in your bodies. Sex is big business and those purveyors don’t give a hoot about you, your future, or who you hurt… even yourself. They care about one thing; the almighty dollar. And the more they can squeeze from you, the better. They will tell you that it’s all good, that morals are a thing of the past; that remaining a virgin until marriage is weird or naive. Those are lies, plain and simple.

Yes, sex is a powerful force for good but must be harnessed and saved for marriage. I guarantee, as will any other parent, counselor or psychologist who truly cares about your well- being, that your joy will be full and your sexual relationship will be sweet and satisfying as it strengthens mutual devotion to your spouse if you practice self-restraint now and stay away from the lies and deceit of those who would tell you otherwise.

To see some of the implications of young women involved in premarital sex, go here.

Gosnell Convicted in the Murder of Three Infants

Diane Robertson

After a two-month trial and 10 days of deliberation the jury came back with a verdict of “Guilty” for the Pennsylvania Abortionist, Kermit Gosnell. The jury decided that Baby A, Baby C and Baby D were born alive and lived before their spinal cords were severed at Kermit Gosnell’s abortion clinic in West Philadelphia.

Jurors acquitted Gosnell of third-degree murder, instead finding him guilty on a lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter for the 2009 death of 41-year-old Karnamaya Mongar of Virginia, who died from a drug overdose while undergoing an abortion at his clinic.

The jury acquitted Gosnell of murder in the death of Baby E, citing not enough evidence that baby E lived outside its mother’s womb. Judge Jeffrey P. Minehart previously dismissed three additional first-degree murder charges against Gosnell, each involving infants.

While prosecutors sought the death penalty, on Tuesday, May 14^th, Gosnell received 2 life sentences without parole.

The gruesome details of Gosnell’s operation came out more than two years ago during a grand jury investigation seeking evidence for prescription drug trafficking. Instead, authorities raiding Gosnell’s clinic found fetuses in bags and bottles. Deceased infants were stashed in the same refrigerator employees kept their lunches.  Gosnell kept jars of severed feet. The furniture was filthy and bloodstained. Gosnell reused disposable medical equipment and did not clean medical instruments between abortions. Cats, cat feces and cat urine were found on the premises.

Untrained clinic workers testified that they and Gosnell regularly “snipped” the necks of babies during late term abortions. Of the three babies Gosnell has been convicted of murdering, one of the babies was said to be at least 30 weeks along and was so big that Gosnell joked that the baby could “walk him to the bus.”  Another baby was said to be alive for about 20 minutes before a clinic worker snipped the neck. A third was born in a toilet and was moving before another clinic worker snipped its neck. Pennsylvania’s law only allows abortion before the 24^th week of pregnancy.

The Gosnell trial has struck a nerve throughout the nation. Abortion supporter, Ilyse Hogue, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, said, “Anti-choice politicians, and their unrelenting efforts to deny women access to safe and legal abortion care, will only drive more women to back-alley butchers like Kermit Gosnell.”

Pro-life Congressmen are calling this what it is: murder. “Some abortionists may have cleaner sheets than Gosnell, and better sterilized equipment and better trained accomplices, but what they do — what Gosnell did — kill babies and hurt women — is the same,” Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.) said in a statement.

House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said he was “praying for the lives taken by Kermit Gosnell,” and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus tweeted that “the Gosnell ordeal shouldn’t slip quietly from our conscience.”

Fetuses, babies, toddlers, kids, tweens, teens, young adults, middle aged, and elderly– we have different words for every stage of human life. Our laws should treat each stage of life as valuable as the next. The Gosnell trial has opened the eyes of millions who believed a fetus is a mass of cells or a “choice”. Abortion is a synonymous word for murder. Other people in different stages of life should not be more important and more valued than the babies inside their mother’s wombs.

 

 

 

 

Proselytizing compared to rape? Really?

Rachel Allison

There are bombs going off on more fronts than I can name.  The attacks are relentless and escalating.

Abortion—Now the truth is coming out about the “safety” and “compassion” of abortion clinics.  And we thought the supposed “back-alley abortions” were bad?

Euthanasia—being legalized and accepted as “killing with compassion.”

Marriage—If the Supreme Court redefines marriage, marriage, completely severed from its original purpose, might never pull out of its death spiral.  Religious freedom and rights of conscience will be severely compromised.

Educational decline—we have all witnessed its decline, and with Common Core being rammed through at break-neck speed, it will continue to be an agenda driven program run by non-elected federal agencies.

And there’s so much more…

What’s most alarming, a majority of the people seem to be totally unaware and even apathetic to the bombardment.

The most recent bombshell: Court marshals for those who proselyte  in the military.

I quote Bethany Monk from CitizenLink

The Pentagon has released a statement, confirming its policy that would punish service members who share their religious beliefs.

That follows a private meeting last week between Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) and the Pentagon. Weinstein said military personnel who proselytize are guilty of sedition and “treason.” He said they should be punished to quell a “tidal wave of fundamentalists.”  

“If this policy goes forward, Christians within the military who speak their faith could now be prosecuted as enemies of the states,” according to the Family Research Council. “This has potential to destroy military recruiting across the services as Americans realize that their faith will be suppressed by joining the military. Our brave troops deserve better. If chaplains and other personnel are censored from offering the full solace of the Gospel, there is not religious freedom in the military.”

As I have studied this and other relevant reporting it looks like the Department of Defense has had this particular regulation in place prior to Weinstein’s demands.

“Air Force Culture, Air Force Standards,” published on Aug. 7, 2012.

Section 2.11 requires “government neutrality regarding religion.”

“Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion,” the regulation states.

Military leaders were admonished not to use their position to “promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion.”

Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council has said Weinstein’s hands are all over this work.  I wish I understood better whether MRFF could actually have had imput into the writing of the militaries’ regulations. Weinstein, an avid atheist is now demanding that the DOD start implementing it.

I quote Todd Starnes from Fox News

President Mikey Weinstein and others from his organization met privately with Pentagon officials on April 23. He said U.S. troops who proselytize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished – by the hundreds if necessary – to stave off what he called a “tidal wave of fundamentalists.”

“Someone needs to be punished for this,” Weinstein demanded to Fox News.  “Until the Air Force or Army or Navy or Marine Corps punishes a member of the military for unconstitutional religious proselytizing and oppression, we will never have the ability to stop this horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.” He compared the act of proselytizing to rape.

“It is a version of being spiritually raped and you are being spiritually raped by fundamentalist Christian religious predators,” he told Fox News.

He said there is a time and a place for those in uniform to share their faith – but he took issues with fundamentalism that he says is causing widespread problems in the military.

Perkins and members of the Family Research Council were stunned that the Pentagon would be taking counsel and advice from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

“Why would military leadership be meeting with one of the most rabid atheists in America to discuss religious freedom in the military,” Perkins said. “That’s like consulting with China on how to improve human rights.”

If Weinstein has his way, and apparently he has the attention of military leaders “it threatens to treat service members caught witnessing as enemies of the state.”  “Non-compliance,” the Pentagon suggests, “even from ordained chaplains could result in court-martialing on a case-by-case basis.”

Does this sound like something that should be happening in the United States of America…or Hitler’s Germany?

With all the social, moral, and religious bombardment taking place we need to choose our battles wisely…but for America’s sake let us choose to fight! Apathy is a killer.

The FRC has launched a petition drive urging Defense Sec. Chuck Hagel to protect the religious freedom of troops “and not to proceed with the purge of religion within the ranks called for by anti-Christian activists.”

“House of Horrors?” Country of Horrors?

Maddi Gillel

By now you’ve read about Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his Philadelphia abortion clinic also known as the “house of horrors.” It is exactly that.  I’ve heard bits and pieces of the case and don’t want to hear anymore; it’s too heartbreaking and disturbing.

Gosnell has committed extraordinary atrocities and hopefully will never be allowed to harm another woman or child.  But the bulk of abortion doctors are performing a legal ‘medical’ procedure. They are doing what the ‘mother’ asks and pays them to do, and what our society allows them to do! Nevertheless, where are their hearts/did they ever have one?

So, we’ve talked about the doctors. Number two on the list are the women who request this procedure. I have no sympathy or tolerance for women who do this.  Do they not know what causes pregnancy? With all the birth control so available in our society, there isn’t any excuse for abortion!  Do these women have no moral code in their heart/mind/life that tells them that pre-marital/extra-marital sex are wrong and that ending their unborn child’s life is not the way out of their predicament?  Last but not least – where are these women’s hearts?  How can they allow a tiny helpless baby to be killed – inside their uterus, OR outside!?  Where is their tenderness, sympathy, their motherly intuition? Can they feel any emotion at all?

Now, third on the list is our society.  I would venture to say that if we think nothing of killing the smallest and most helpless in our society – the sky is the limit.  Then we have no sympathy or tenderness for old people, the maimed, physically or mentally impaired, how about minority groups?  By the way, Planned Parenthood’s founder stated that the program’s purpose was to get rid of and prevent the birth of the undesirables in our society.  Planned Parenthood performs the most abortions per capita on women of minority groups with African Americans at the top of the list. You do the math and draw your own conclusions.

Remember Nazi Germany. They started out exterminating the Jews, the mentally and physically disabled, homosexuals, and moved on to religious groups.  Evil usually begins small, and then, incrementally and insidiously, takes over: Nazi Germany and WWII.

The actress Ashley Judd and her batty views have been in the news lately. God is ambiguous to her and she believes it is abominable to “breed.”  She’s white and beautiful.  She would be the last in Nazi Germany to have been given any grief.

This is the state of many in our society today: heartless, Godless, narcissistic, unsympathetic, past feeling.

So, who should really be on trial in the above case?  The mother?  Probably. The Doctor? For sure.  Our society? Absolutely.

Shame on us.

 

Free Birth Control: There may be Pros but don’t Discount the Cons

Rachel Allison

This week I received an email from a good friend. Among other news, she wrote that she had gone to pick up her birth control pills and was told, “No Charge.”

My first thought? “It has begun! Unrestricted sex for everyone!

With her email she sent a link to an article  entitled  “Free Birth Control Means Drastic Drops in Unplanned Pregnancies.” The article triumphantly touts that  “the number of unplanned pregnancies and abortions didn’t just go down, they plummeted.” This was the result of a study that was done between 2007 and 2011.

“Birth control was offered to more than 9,000 St. Louis teens and adults who were also educated about their options. The study subjects were aged 14 to 45…. All were considered at risk of unplanned pregnancies and were willing to try a new birth control method.”

Results?…”Drum roll: The free birth control program reduced unplanned pregnancies substantially and cut the abortion rate by 62  to 78 percent over the national rate…

The results were published online recently in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology. They found that from 2008 to 2010, the abortion rate ranged from 4.4 to 7.5 for every 1,000 women. For 2008 (the last year calculated) the national abortion rate was 19.6 per 1,000 women.”

“The birth rate among the girls aged 15 to 19 in the study was 6.3 per 1,000. That’s far below the U.S. rate of 34.3 for every 1,000 girls of that age range.”

The article was a “feel good” read.  We should cheer the results and expect no less from Obamacare’s free birth control mandate.

However, I hit reply to my friend’s email and sent her an article of my own that I’m sure dashed her jubilation to pieces. It’s title, “24,000 U.S. Women Become Infertile Every Year From Undiagnosed STIs”  tells in part the disheartening results of unabated sexual freedom.

 “Many tend to think of HIV or maybe syphilis as the serious one. But gonorrhea and chlamydia can and do cause a lot of infertility. Twenty-four thousand women in the U.S. become infertile every year as a result of undiagnosed STIs according to the same CDC data. Most women who have chlamydia or gonorrhea have no symptoms, which make awareness and access to screening especially important. We’re still catching so few of the cases. Among 15-24 year-olds infected with Gonorrhea only 200,000 of the estimated 570,000 who have the infection are diagnosed and treated.

Chlamydia:  Only 1 million of the  estimated 1.8 million are diagnosed and treated.

After I sent the email I remembered an interview I read recently touting a book written by Ms. Donna Freitas entitled, “The End of Sex: How Hookup Culture is Leaving a Generation Unhappy, Sexually Unfulfilled, and Confused About Intimacy.” According to the author students have come to realize that even though “hook ups” are supposed to symbolize the modern mind set,  “Don’t get attached,” many students are finding that it is almost impossible to “walk away emotionally unscathed and not caring.”  They’re just not good at it.  I haven’t read the book, but Ms. Freitas claims that it is the males who are being hurt.  I will have to read her book to figure out her reasoning.

Dr. Miriam Grossman’s book entitled “Unprotected” which I have read sights the opposite.  It is the young women whose lives are being robbed of the normalcy that accompanies healthy, loving, and loyal relationships.

After reading “Unprotected” I had a knot in my stomach that made me physically sick.

This sexual freedom that is supposedly liberating both male and female from “all consequences” is a big lie.  The men involved may be dealing with concern and regret, but it is the women who are being hurt…wounded…damaged…injured…I can’t find a strong enough word that describes the consequences to a woman having sex with multiple partners.  Over time the giving of herself, and then the rejection that follows will destroy a woman…if not physically, then emotionally.

Katie Collins, Research Assistant to Dr. Grossman wrote, “Our culture does not properly honor sexual intimacy, and the cost is the health and hearts of countless young people.”

Sex without consequences is one of the biggest lies being disseminated across this country.  Free contraceptives may reduce unwanted babies from becoming the victims of this sex-crazed society, but young women of caliber are being broken, confused, misled and defeated.  That is a travesty in this world of “caring” and “compassion” and so called “women’s rights.”

Countries Manipulated by the Media

Carol Soelberg

Late on Friday, the UN negotiating room erupted in cheers as anti-family activists welcomed the adoption of the “Agreed Conclusions” for the Commission on Status of Women (CSW) 57th session.  Two weeks of intense negotiations had produced a document that was less than favorable to the cause of family and of life.  United Families representatives, along with other members of the pro-family/pro-life coalition, had gone late into the night monitoring negotiations, providing options for language, and working to shore up the family-friendly delegations.  In the end, however, it became clear that one of our biggest opponents had been the media.

Before CSW even began, media was circulating the meme that the delegations of Russia, Iran, the Holy See, Pakistan, were going to work to stymie negotiations.  The articles (examples here and here) implied that nations that are conservative in worldview and adhere to religion and traditional cultural values were complicit in promoting violence against women.  (Eliminating Violence against Women and Girls” was the theme of the two-week gathering.)  The news articles made it clear that if the outcome document failed (as it did last year) that it would be the fault of these nations and their delegations.

At about 5:30 pm on the final day, the negotiation’s facilitator announced that a “Chairman’s text” was now going to be used as the final version.  There was no word as to who had actually been involved in compiling the text. It was a stunning turn of events because the Chairman’s text retained much of the language that pro-family countries had opposed for weeks and yet the compilers of the text had simply dropped many of the pro-life/pro-family phrases and paragraphs.  In the end, few delegations spoke out against the Chairman’s text or registered reservations and it was adopted.

The anti-family contingents at CSW were not going to let this document fail and it appeared that the media campaign against the pro-family position had done its job.  The voices of our usually out-spoken and assertive pro-family delegations had been tempered.  Long-time UN watchers observed that if the text had gone to an actual counted vote, pro-family delegations did not have sufficient enough numbers to defeat the Chairman’s text so why should they risk the wrath of the media and the liberal delegations, when opposing the draft in the final moments would not have affected the outcome anyway.  “It was a done deal from the beginning,” one observer noted.

Specific Outcomes of CSW 57 “Agreed Conclusions”

Some of the troubling language:

• Multiple references to “sexual and reproductive” health care/services/rights (used to promote abortion).

•   “gender-related crimes” in the context of the International Criminal Court; “gender-based violence” causing “…psychological harm or suffering…”  (“Gender” is often used in the context of acknowledging and promoting homosexual behaviors.)

• Deletion of the paragraph supporting a nation’s sovereign rights, “…with full respect for the various religious and ethical values and cultural backgrounds of its people, and conformity with universally recognized international human rights.”

Some successes:

• Gone from text are references to “sexual or gender orientation” or “gender-identity”  (The opposition was saddened by its loss, noting that it referred to “women who love other women”.)  References to “intimate partner” “intimate relationships” were also removed.  (This is language intended to normalize out-of-wedlock sexual relations.)

• Retention of ICPD language in reference to abortion.

• An inclusion of the troubling language of “comprehensive sexuality education” but qualified with this important phrase: “…with the appropriate direction and guidance from parents and legal guardians…”

• Inclusions of need to eliminate “prenatal sex selection,” “forced hysterectomy,” forced sterilization,” forced use of contraceptives”

A Bad Document, but a Great Education!  

United Families International conducted a parallel event called:  “Eliminating Violence against Women and Girls: What does the research say?”  To a packed room, we presented a wealth of evidence that the safest place for women and children is in a stabled, married, heterosexual household.   Included in the event was a short presentation on the horrific practice of sex-selective abortion (the systematic termination of unborn females).   At the completion of the presentation, a young Hungarian woman approached one of the college students who was part of the UFI team and mentioned that prior to our presentation she “had never before considered how women, and human beings in general, have rights before they are born.”

The UFI team was pleased to recognize once again that the real win is in the heart and mind of each individual.   We came away with a long list of individuals from around the world who requested a copy of the power point so they could share the research with others.  Every individual who becomes convinced of the necessity of the family in providing a safe place for women, adds one more powerful voice in defense of the family.

The UFI team, which consisted of six college students, their two professors, and UFI’s other volunteers, were able to visit twelve UN Missions.  They delivered UFI’s Negotiating Guide and the book on the importance of Family Capital in meeting the Millennium Development Goals.  Mission visits are a wonderful way to become acquainted with the delegates, offer support and encouragement for their difficult task of standing firm against the huge wall of opposition, and to spread a pro-family/pro-life message.

Lastly, we were also supported by a group of dedicated students from Patrick Henry College.  We thank them for their work.  Please take a minute to check out some of their blog posts (below).  You’ll gain some interesting insights into the Commission on the Status of Women.

It does not surprise us that the UN commissions become increasingly resistant to family-friendly documents.  But we will not give up!  We will continue to work with the International pro-family coalition to discover ways to protect the family and stop the progress of the opposition.  We learned this time the power the media can play in the UN and we will be prepared to fight that battle in the future.  We know that those of our team who experienced the UN for the first time have seen another side of the opposition and they left more empowered to defend the family on all levels.

We wish you could all have that experience and hope that our report lights a fire in your hearts to continue the critical work of protecting and strengthening the family.

Carol Soelberg
President, United Families International

 

The Face Behind the Story

Editor’s note:  Another in a series of articles describing the various “parallel events” at the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) 2013.

by Callan Goodwin

A few weeks ago I was sitting around a table discussing the ethics of abortion with 20 conservative, politically-aware college students. Their arguments against abortion were based on the philosophy of what life is, or theoretical second hand experiences. During the discussion I had a sense of unease with how the discussion was being approached. Everything being said was statistics and personal opinion; there was a lack of humanity in the discussion. Because abortion kills a human before it is even born those who are left alive don’t think to put faces to the lost babies. Abortion becomes less of a human problem and more about how it affects public policy. This approach was what caused my unease in ethics class. On Monday evening I attended a parallel event put on by Real Women of Canada and Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. That evening I put faces on two survivors of abortion, a raped mother and a child conceived by rape.

Liz Carl was drugged and raped while still in high school, a few weeks later she tested positive for pregnancy. She was frightened, confused, and ashamed. Her friends encouraged her to get an abortion. The night before her appointment a friend looked her in the eye and said, “You know that it is a baby.” Miraculously Liz didn’t wake up in time for her morning appointment. That evening she finally told her mother the whole story and began to receive support and therapy she needed. In the next nine months Liz picked a family to adopt her son so she could stay in contact with her. Today Liz is part of her son’s life and is attending college. According to her, abortion supporter’s arguments are nullified because of her story. She said, “I have never looked and seen my rapist in my son, I have only seen joy.” Liz believes abortion would have been her worst decision because she has found healing from the rape in spending time with her son.

Rebecca Kiessling also gave her story. She was adopted by a loving family and when she was 18 she began to search for her real family. The records of her biological mother’s name were confidential but she was able to obtain information such as health records and a physical description of her mother. But only her father’s height, build and eye color, a description straight from a police log. Eventually Rebecca was able to find her mother, and when they met for the first time her mom told her about the brutal rape she endured and why her mother had decided against aborting Rebecca. When the assault had been committed abortion was still illegal. This saved Rebecca’s life and led to her mother’s healing. According to Rebecca’s mother she, “forgot the rape because she saw her beautiful child.” This mother also found joy in her child, just like Liz.

Rebecca’s story is one of a close call because Roe vs. Wade was past just three months after her birth. If it had been past just a few months earlier Rebecca would have become a statistic that people now use to discuss abortion. Rebecca points out that her mother didn’t choose to save her “the law did.” These women are the human faces to an issue that even conservatives disagree on, is rape a condition to allow abortion. When you look at their faces my qualms were answered.

Callan Goodwin is a senior Government Major at Patrick Henry College in Northern Virginia. One of her interests is international affairs and its impacts on American government policy and society.

Why then, UN?

Brian Scarnnecchia

This year’s Conference on the Status of Women (CSW) is directed to the elimination of all forms of violence against women and girls. A New York Times article (March 12, 2013) entitled “Unholy Alliance” claims that Russia, Iran and the Vatican are in league to use “custom, tradition and religion” to “control women” and provide cover for rogue governments to duck their obligation to eliminate all forms of violence against women.

However, the statement of Archbishop Paglia, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, to the delegates gathered at the UN for the 57th CSW lent little support to this allegation. In fact, he said the opposite:

“Many women and girls, from the moment of conception until natural death, face an array of immoral and dehumanizing acts of violence. In addition, degrading practices, such as female genital mutilation, child marriage, forced sterilization and forced abortions, characterize this continuum and constitute heinous forms of oppression trampling upon the dignity of women and girls. This reality demands that Governments as well as all societal institution undertake concerted and comprehensive efforts to address this grave problem.”

So, why the negative New York Times’ spin directed against the Holy See? Last year the 56th CSW failed to produce an outcome document because of the push-back from UN delegates of the developing world to the radical positions that were advanced by the Obama administration, the EU and their allied pro-abortion non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Basically, last year’s CSW was a big waste of time and money. This year the developed nations, including the Obama administration, are pulling all stops and are intent on forcing poor countries into accepting an out-come document that enshrines abortion as a fundamental right and that classifies restrictions on homosexual sex as “crimes against humanity” to be prosecuted by International Criminal Court.

Many delegates from the developing world are complaining that the CSW has lost its direction and is simply focused on forcing abortion and unrestricted homosexual sodomy on the third world. The real issues plaguing women in the developing world such as potable water, sanitation, and basic health care such as antibiotics and blood banks are being given little attention, they say. Earlier in the negotiation process the Holy See sought to insert language into the proposed out-come document grounding the rights of women and girls in the foundational documents of the United Nations. All reference to those documents, the UN Charter (1945) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) which guarantees the right to life to all persons, was struck from the latest draft of the out-come document.

There was dead silence in the room when law professor, Helen Alvere, read the Holy See statement that tagged abortion as an inherent form of violence against women:

“Hence, as many women who have undergone this experience know, abortion, in all its forms, can never be considered as a right solution to any of the plagues that target women; rather, compounding the violence with violence increases social trauma and cannot but contribute to aggravating the spread and the pain of violence in our societies… encouraging her to perpetuate the cycle of violence.”[1] She warned the delegates, in the words of Pope John Paul II, that they must not foster a “war of the powerful against the weak.”[2]

It remains to be seen if the rich nations and their media pundits will succeed in twisting the arms of the UN delegates from the developing world and force them to sign a post-modern ideologically driven outcome document. If this occurs, it will signal that the rich nations have tightened their grip over the least developed nations and that the founding Charter of the UN has been ignored. Why then, UN?

–Brian Scarnnecchia J.D.

Human Life Studies and Legal Studies Professor, Franciscan University of Steubenville

Reporting from the floor of the UN[1] Citing Pope Benedict XVI, Caritas in veriate, #15.
[2] Pope John Paul II, Evangelium vitae, #12.

 

Greater Love Has No Man…Choosing Life

Jenifer Moss and Diane Robertson

Diane

The high-powered and overwhelming Commission on the Status of Women is taking place this week at UN headquarters in New York.  While political groups’ pressure delegates to introduce a document that would include abortion as “reproductive right” for women, I want to share a continuing, beautiful story about faith and choosing life. I am honored to introduce the lovely, Jenifer Moss.

Jenifer

Hello! My name is Jenifer and I am a stay-at-home mother to seven, wonderful children (2 boys and 5 girls).  I am currently pregnant with my eighth child (A BOY!!) and was diagnosed with Complete Placenta Previa (CPP) and Placenta Percreta.  I also have Beta Thalassemia Minor which contributes to severe anemia.  Two of my previous births were emergency C-sections, I had one prior D&C after an incomplete miscarriage, and a surgery on my small intestines when I was in middle school.  (Previous uterine surgeries do increase your risk of Placenta Accreta.)

My placenta is on the anterior wall of my uterus adhered to the myometrium, directly over my previous C-section scars, and has spread (like a cancer) to other organs in my abdomen.  Doctors also note that my Percreta covers almost my whole placenta, not a small portion.

Diane

With this severe pregnancy condition, Jenifer is well aware of the 10% maternal mortality rate.  Despite being pressured to choose an abortion, Jenifer is choosing life for her son.

Jenifer

This afternoon I was talking with a family member.  I said that things don’t look good for my insides, but that the baby looks perfect.  They replied.  “I don’t care about the baby.  I’m worried about you.  You already have seven children.  You have to take care of yourself and them.”  From the rest of the conversation and previous conversations, I get the impression that some people think I should abort this baby.  Not only that, I feel that they think I’m stupid for not considering abortion more seriously

At 18 weeks gestation Jenifer wrote: This time I got the VERY direct abortion talk.  (It felt much like the “how babies are made” talks of my youth.)  My new doctor wanted me to understand that we were not talking about aborting a baby because it might not be born “perfect”; we were talking about aborting a baby, to save my life– for my other seven children.  She specifically said that this surgery WAS much less dangerous at 19 weeks than it would be as my baby and placenta grows.  She wanted to be sure that if I was considering terminating this pregnancy (i.e. killing the perfectly healthy baby that I had just spent an HOUR watching suck his thumb and kick in our ultrasound) we needed to decide NOW not LATER.  I wanted the doctor to understand that I was very aware of the CHOICE I was making and it was a decision that we had not made lightly.

The last two cases that were similar to mine ended up almost dying in the OR.  The last case, the mother needed over 40 units of blood.  She said, “If you are not scared, I have not done my job.”

I wish I would have said, “The last two cases, the mother and babies both lived!!”  Scary, yes… but I still have a 90% chance of living!!!  I can handle 40 units of blood to save the life of my baby.  I am not ignorant.  I am CHOOSING this dangerous surgery to bring this baby into this world.  I understand the risk; I am willing to take this risk… NOW, let’s talk about how we’re going to WIN this battle.

Diane

Jenifer has found peace and courage in her faith.

Jenifer

I am grateful for modern-day medicine and I completely believe in a God of miracles and a Great Plan of Happiness that includes sickness, sorrow and death.  I find joy in the sometimes difficult journey of life.  Finding peace in the midst the uncertainty is going to be my mental struggle.

Sure, I let myself grieve and be afraid and be angry.  But ultimately, I feel the best when I get to the place of just taking one day at a time.  I know that I am known.  There is a God and He has a specific plan for me.  Whatever happens, it will be alright.  I live in America, I have great insurance and incredibly skilled doctors, this is the 21st century and I’m grateful for this experience, no matter the outcome.

Diane

You can continue following Jenifer’s journey on her blog:  Moss Moments.

Incremental and Insidious

Maddi Gillel

You’ve all heard the story of how to cook a frog?  First you put the frog in a pot of room temperature water, then you slowly, slowly turn up the heat, and before the frog figures it out and can jump out, he’s cooked.

Do you remember the uproar years and years ago when Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) said the ‘damn’ word at the end of the movie?  The public was outraged.  This was in 1939.   Now we would love to have the movie in which the only objectional word was ‘damn.’

Let’s review some history on the subjects of abortion, homosexuality, divorce, and euthanasia.

When Roe v. Wade became law in 1973, the abortion fight began in earnest in the U.S.  At that time, abortion was only allowable in the first trimester. Even as citizens who valued the life of the unborn fought valiantly to overturn Roe, the Supreme Court ruled on another case and abortion then became legal, in effect, through the entire nine months of pregnancy.  Not even the horrific procedure known as “partial birth” abortion (killing the baby as it is being born) is illegal in most states.  Abortion has become so common and accepted that many women use it as a form of birth control.  Incremental and Insidious.

Homosexuality has probably always existed to some degree.  In our modern times, however, it has evolved from something that occurred among a small, discreet, minority of the population to a behavior that is increasing accepted, normalized, validated and even given the stamp of approval by those who wish to alter the definition of marriage to include homosexual relationships.  Those who participate in the behavior have commandeered the word “gay” (instead of the word “queer”) to describe their “lifestyle.”  Now the “gay” lifestyle is glamorized and promoted by TV shows, movies, and media with prominent Hollywood types, musicians, politicians and business rallying to the cause of “gay rights.”  While NAMBLA (North America Man/Boy Love Association) along with those who promote all types of “inter-generational sex” continue to gain respectability and endorsement inside the ivy halls of high-end academic institution.  Incremental and Insidious.

Divorce began to be more common than ever around World War ll, but that was just the beginning.  There had to be some serious accusations against a spouse to have a divorce granted.  The Catholic Church was openly against divorce and forbade it.  Many couples stayed together until the children were raised only then would they divorce. But then came the push for divorce Laws to be relaxed with the legal world claiming that strict divorce laws served no purpose.  In 1970, California instituted ‘No Fault Divorce’ and by 1973 most states had followed suit.  This ushered in “unilateral divorce” where one party in the marriage (against the wishes of the other spouse) can ask for a divorce – no questions asked.   This opened the flood gate for disposable marriages.  You “fall out of love” you get a divorce – no matter what is does to your children or to the still-committed spouse.   No-Fault divorce makes it clear that adults needs supersede the needs of children.  Some 40 years later, the havoc that this has wreaked on society is still being analyzed and calculated, but one thing is clear – no one came out further ahead.  Incremental and Insidious. 

In all of these topics, would any of us who have seen the progression of these movements have realized how far it would go?  In fact, if someone would have told us where it was going, we would not have believed them and considered them to be  an alarmist.

INCREMENTAL – gradual, phased, piecemeal, step-by-step

INSIDIOUS – 1- awaiting a chance to entrap- treacherous 2- harmful but enticing  3- having a gradual and cumulative effect – subtle   4- developing so gradually as to be well established before becoming apparent

Now, euthanasia is more and more raising its ‘ugly’ head along with its many euphemisms: quality of life, compassion, death with dignity, right to die, choice.  All of this is based, of course, on the premise that it is the patient’s wish.  At what point, however, will it cross over into being against the patient’s wish?

In Compassion in Dying v. State of Washington (decided Mar 6, 1996) the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a decision written by Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt:

“Known as a slippery slope argument or what one commentator has called the ‘thin edge of the wedge’ argument, the opponents of assisted-suicide conjure up a parade of horribles  and insist that the only way to halt the downward spiral is to stop it before it starts . . .

The same nihilistic argument can be offered against any constitutionally-projected right or interest.  Both before and after women were found to have a right to have an abortion, critics contended than legalizing that medical procedure would lead to its widespread use as a substitute for other forms of birth control or as a means of racial genocide [blacks have more abortions than any other group]. Inflammatory contentions regarding ways in which the recognition of the right  would  lead to the ruination of the country did not, however, deter the Supreme Court from first recognizing and then two decades later reaffirming a constitutionally-protected liberty interest in terminating an unwanted pregnancy.  In fact, the Court has never refused to recognize a substantive due process liberty right or interest merely because there were difficulties in determining when and how to limit its exercise or because others might someday attempt to use it improperly.

Recognition of any right creates the possibility of abuse.  The slippery slope fears of Roe’s (Roe v Wade) opponents have, of course, not materialized.  The legalization of abortion has not undermined our commitment to life generally;       nor, as some predicted, has it led to widespread infanticide.  Similarly, there is no reason to believe that legalizing assisted suicide will lead to the horrific consequences its opponents suggest.”

INCREMENTAL AND INSIDIOUS