The Realities of Abortion

Life Site News reported that a 15-year-old girl died after receiving an abortion. She did not take the antibiotic prescription home with her and died from a bacterial infection 5 days later. Her death was preventable in so many ways.

The article also gave some statistics that refute an argument that many pro-abortionists use: if abortion were illegal, a huge number of women would die from "back-alley" abortions. These statistics indicate that this argument is false.

by Hilary White, www.LifeSiteNews.com

"Despite the claims of the abortion lobby that legal abortion has answered the problem of the "thousands" or "tens of thousands" of women dying from "illegal back-alley abortions," researchers have found that legal abortions rank as the fifth leading cause of maternal death in the United States. In 1972, the year before abortion was legalised in the US, the Centers for Disease Control reported 39 abortion related deaths.

A recent study of pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland has shown that the risk of dying within a year after an abortion is several times higher than the risk of dying after miscarriage or childbirth. The statistical analysis unit of Finland's National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health found that women who obtained abortions were 76 percent more likely to die in the following year than non-pregnant women. The research found that of 281 women who had died within a year of their last pregnancy between 1987 and 1994, 27 died after giving birth, 48 after having had miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies, and 101 after having had abortions.

The leading causes of abortion related deaths are haemorrhage, infection, embolism, anaesthesia, and undiagnosed ectopic pregnancies."

Read the full story here.

Marriage...It's That Simple

Take a few minutes to watch this great video on the importance of preserving families.



One Man. One Woman. It really is that simple.

Hawaii Civil Unions Bill Stalls

The bill that would legalize civil unions in Hawaii is stuck in a Senate Committee after committee members voted against sending it to the Senate floor for a vote. They did not believe there is enough support to pass it before they adjourn in May.

Read the story here.

Vermont Governor Will Veto Gay Marriage Bill

Just announced this afternoon. Thank goodness!

Good Sense Politics has more info on contacting your Vermont legislators to let them know how you feel about legalizing gay marriage. Take the time to do it so they know where the people stand.

**Update: Opine Editorials has a great list of links on the gay marriage battle in Vermont.

Update: Vermont Gay Marriage

Beetle Blogger reports that the Vermont Senate has passed a bill legalizing gay marriage. The House will vote later this week.

If you live in Vermont, contact your representative now!

Obama Wants to Repeal the Conscience Clause

by Kathleen Gilbert, www.LifeSiteNews.com

President Obama is facing heavy criticism from pro-life politicians and activists for setting to work dismantling the Bush era federal regulations that uphold doctors' conscience rights.

The Health and Human Services (HHS) Department Friday confirmed that the president has begun the process of repealing the regulations that had been passed by the Bush administration and that went into effect Jan. 20. The regulations enforce pre-existing federal law that protects healthcare workers' right to conscientiously refuse implementation of or involvement in abortions, including dispensation of the abortifacient morning-after pill.

Read the full article here.

The Obama Administration is giving the public until April 9 to respond to the proposal. You can email your opinion to proposedrecission@hhs.gov or sign a petition here. You can also submit comments on the proposal at www.Regulations.gov (by entering 0991-AB49 in the search box).

If you want to use snail mail, send one original and two copies of written comments to:

Office of Public Health and Science, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: Rescission Proposal Comments, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence Ave. SW, Room 716G, Washington, DC 20201.

Check out the end of this article for ideas on how to focus your comments on the issue.

Pro-Abortion Judge Named Obama's First Fed. Court Pick

Kathleen Gilbert, www.LifeSiteNews.com

Obama's first judicial appointment, billed by White House officials as a moderate pick designed to ease partisan confirmation scuffles, has sparked concern among conservatives who are pointing out the nominee's liberal record on life and other issues and say the pick sets a trend for future left-leaning appointees touted as "moderates."

Obama on Tuesday picked U.S. District Judge David F. Hamilton to the 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, saying Hamilton "has a long and impressive record of service and a history of handing down fair and judicious decisions." The GOP senator from Hamilton's home state of Indiana, Richard Lugar, paved the way for Senate confirmation with a statement that he would "enthusiastically support" the pick.

But conservative and pro-life leaders say they are wary of Hamilton, a former ACLU board member, whom they claim has a history of handing down activist decisions. Prominent among the concerns was Hamilton's handling of an Indiana abortion consent law, which would have required abortionists to give patients information on abortion alternatives at least eighteen hours before the scheduled procedure.

Ed Whelan, President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, wrote ironically: "It's far from clear what justifies the ... characterization of Hamilton as a 'moderate'…. maybe Hamilton's extraordinary seven-year-long series of rulings obstructing Indiana's implementation of its law providing for informed consent on abortion?"

Read the rest of the article here.

Is anyone even surprised at this point?

Does the Dictionary Definition Matter?

Apparently some time ago, Merriam-Webster Dictionary added a second definition to the word marriage:

"the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage."

Read the article here.

Do you think it was changed as a result of prevailing attitudes about marriage, or to influence people's attitudes about homosexuality? And does it even matter that the dictionary definition of marriage has changed?

Obama Administration to Sign UN Declaration to "Decriminalize Homosexuality"

Hilary White, www.LifeSiteNews.com

WASHINGTON, March 18, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Obama Administration has confirmed that it will endorse a United Nations declaration that will call for the global "decriminalization of homosexuality." The State Department today endorsed the U.N. statement, saying that it did so out of concern over for "violence and human rights abuses against gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual individuals" and "the criminalization of sexual orientation in many countries."

The declaration in question, which former president George W. Bush refused to sign, has been heavily criticised by pro-family groups as a significant step towards the worldwide outlawing of religious opposition to the homosexualist political agenda.

State department officials said Tuesday that they had notified the declaration's sponsors that the administration wants to be added as a supporter. The declaration is being sponsored by France and the Netherlands at the request of homosexualist activist Louis-Georges Tin. It has been signed by all 27 European Union members of the UN's General Assembly, as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries, making a total of 66 of the UN's 192 member states. 70 UN member states outlaw homosexual activity and more than 50 nations opposed the declaration. The US was the only western country that had refused to sign.

Read the full article here.

Same-Sex Marriage Battle in Vermont

From Secular Heretic:

Vermont lawmakers are starting a week of hearings on a bill to legalize same-sex marriage.

In 2000, Vermont became the first state in the U.S. to adopt civil unions. Supporters claim "gay marriage" would give same sex couples additional rights related to insurance, health care and Social Security benefits.

Rep. Tom Little says that same-sex marriage legislation is "a better course" for Vermont because the terminology (civil union v. marriage) is unfair.

The situation in Vermont is an excellent example of how civil unions work. They are a stepping stone to marriage access—which people openly hope will grant the homosexual lifestyle more social acceptance. However, in the mean time, it literally strips marriage of its core meaning: the unification of opposite genders for the benefit of society.

As a society, we do not give benefits to citizens because of their love, sexual orientation, or for social acceptance.

Hundreds of marriage supporters are lobbying at the Vermont Statehouse. They say the bill would undermine the institution of marriage and harm children.

Read more at
Preserving Marriage
The Opine Editorials
Beetle Blogger