Gospel of Life Society
The Pro-Life Heartbeat of CT!










Legislative Page -- Introduction

Use this page to review the Catholic position on political issues, new think-tank ideas, and to become inspired to go the extra mile for the vulnerable in our world:

    • Review Catholic and Political Responsibility", May 8, 2004 -- updated Nov 21, 2008 with Bishop's statements,
      selected articles & commentaries, and Cardinal Ratzinger's memorandum.

    • Notice that human freedoms are under serious attack as you review legislative issues here.  Especially targeted are the freedom of speech and of worship.  This is a major Catholic concern, particularly after the forced implementation of Plan B in Catholic hospitals and imposition of same sex marriage in our state of Connecticut over popular vote. 

    • Notice also that our representative form of govenment is increasingly being abused. It will be hard to openly enjoy our religions in the public square in a non-representative government.

For each issue discussed, recommendations are made to take action, such as writing to legislators, informing doctors, priests, or other professionals, etc. But, once done, what else can we do? We are all called to live "In the Image of Christ".  By doing so, we become strengthened to carry on this work despite discouragements, hardships, etc. It may help to:

    • Read the minutes posted (since January, 2007) located in the Library page.  You can get to it from the Navigation Table. Read the review of Evangelium Vitae by Fr. Markey for each month, and put it all into action in your life.  Spread the word. 
    • The Feb 2009's review includes a statement by Fr. Markey that summarizes it all, "Only 'in the image of Christ' can we restore our identity, fellowship and true identity as a Church and nation".



Here are just some key sites to monitor for legislative issues. 

There are many others that you know and have found to provide truthful reporting -- do you have some favorites I should add?  Be ready to take the action they request (ie, sign a petition, write a letter, send one of their letters, etc.).  With all 450+ of us doing this, we can make a difference. When asked to fill in the name of your organization, feel free to use Gospel of Life Society.


Human Life International     Life News    Priests for Life     National Catholic Register     USCCB   Catholic University of America (News Releases)  Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute  EWTN - Worldover    National Catholic Bioethics Center   Judicial Watch Catholic World News   Alliance Defense Fund     Catholic Online    Diocese of Bridgeport   CT Catholic Conference   LifeSiteNews.com  Don Feder Associates (recommended by Peggy Noonan-EWTN)      Physicians for Life  Family Research Council (Tony Perkins)  American Life League    Feminists for Life  Population Research Institute Family Institute of CT   Catholics in Alliance   Catholic in Alliance News Room  Catholic Culture   Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM)     One More Soul   Concerned Women for America   Women in Faith and Politics   National Committee for Human Life Amendment   The Wanderer  (A Catholic Weekly)  Catholic News Service (a USCCB offering)

“The highest form of resistence is to give hope to those who have none.” Adam Stephan Cardinal Sapieha to then Seminarian Karol Jozef Wojtyla

Communicate freely any of the information from these sources and Gospel of Life
to pro-life legislators in CT. Ask them to manage up -- share information with federal legislators.

For archived documents pertaining to religious liberty
Check out the Religious Liberty Archive for the below. 

We cannot have pro-life without religious liberty and so it falls on us to also learn as much as possible about the history and laws that support our religious freedoms.

  • Federal Constitution
  • Federal Statutes
  • State Statutes
  • Cases
  • Historical materials
  • Articles & Treatises

For historical information pertaining to today's issues:
See the Family Research Institute.

To obtain replica copies
Of United States Historical Documents, visit WallBuilders.  Sometimes it is necessary to go back to them and quote from them. There you can purchase replicas of historical documents including:  the

  • Declaration of Independence,
  • Bill of Rights,
  • Northwest Ordinance of 1787,
  • Mayflower Compact of 1620,
  • Patrick Henry's "Liberty of Death" speech, and, of course, the
  • United States Constitution.


Jefferson's intention was to separate church and state to support and promote religious freedom:

It was not to diminish it.  Jefferson separated Church and State to ensure that all people could enjoy religious worship of their choice. Two key 1801 letters show Jefferson's purpose was religious freedom -- one by the Danbury Baptist Association asking for religions freedom, and the second letter by Jefferson responding affirmatively.  Let's scrutinize the letters closely. Examine this paragraph by Jefferson in reply to the Danbury Baptists who asked for religious freedom: 

...."Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature would "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem. Th Jefferson Jan. 1. 1802"

It is important for us to understand that the motive behind the separation of church and state by Jefferson was religious freedom and not the opposite.  Interestingly, "Separation of Church and State" is not in our national Constitution -- not in word or indirectly implied. Yet, in many of the political arguments and campaigns used by the opposition, it is treated as if it is law, and suggested that the original intention of Jefferson was to minimize religion..Their misrepresentations are being used to justify the below:

  • Force religion out of the public square and especially governmental criteria in direction setting, global affairs, and policies such as healthcare.
  • Publish propaganda that religious people are fanatical, intolerant of diversity, and obstacles to the implementation of governmental procedures and policies -- pointing to the "tea party movement" as an example.
  • Define pro-life people and groups as being religious fanatics and terrorists -- subject to surveillance and restrictions of freedom of speech.
  • Keep new pro-life candidates from winning office.

    Where pro-life areas of focus, truth and healing include abortion, same sex attraction, patient assisted suicide,
    patient euthanasia, embryonic stem cell, cloning, contraceptives, IVF, sterilizations, etc.. 

Commentary by RJ&L Religious Liberty Lawyers

Their archived documents state emphatically that Jefferson's letter was intended to assure the Danbury Baptists that he would support their rights to religious freedom -- and that the American people would not pass legislation that promoted one religion over others or prevented the exercise of religion. It also offers good reasons to dispel all doubts:

In 1803, one year after the Danbury letter, Jefferson made a treaty with the Kaskaskia Indians, wherein he pledged money to build them a Roman Catholic Church and to support their priests — all from federal funds. (We accidentally hit on another issue here -- how did the IRS get the right to prohibit churches from supporting candidates under penalty of withholding federal funds? It's joyful to read history and get the truth!) Jefferson apparently saw no conflict between asking Congress to implement the treaty's provisions by appropriating funds, and the prohibition that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion . . ."

In addition, Jefferson signed three extensions of "An act regulating the grants of land appropriated for Military Services, and for the Society of the United Brethren for propagating the Gospel among the Heathen." This act granted free of charge titles to sections of land to the United Brethren. In addition to holding the land in trust for Indians who were already Christians, the United Brethren used resources derived from cultivating and leasing the land to send out missionaries to proselyte among the non-Christian Indians. Once again, had Jefferson been an absolutist, as the Everson Court suggests, he would have vetoed not one, but all three extensions of this act.

Other support given by Jefferson gave to the Roman Catholic Church. 

Some reporters of that time said Jefferson was an atheist.  Perhaps.  Yet, he shows here a respect for religions and human religious rights.  For further reading, see The Danbury Baptist Association Correspondence.  And, just to be sure we realize that Jefferson supported religious freedom -- including in classrooms  -- read several paragraphs from "answerinsingenesis.org.:

When the use of the Bible was threatened to be diminished by an abundance of new textbooks available around 1800, prominent American educators spoke up to ensure the Bible’s place as America’s premier textbook. Fisher Ames, an educator and prominent statesman, said, “[I]f these [new] books … must be retained, as they will be, should not the Bible regain the place it once held as a school book?” In a widely distributed pamphlet, Benjamin Rush (the “father of public schools under the Constitution” as well as a signer of America’s Declaration of Independence) argued from reason and revelation for the continued use of the Bible as a schoolbook.

Even Thomas Jefferson was involved in religious aspects of education, for while US president, he made the Bible a primary reading text for Washington, D.C., schools.

Noah Webster, one of the greatest of American educators, wrote an appendix to his 1832 school history text reminding students of the importance of the Scriptures, and warned that “miseries and evils” result from a lack of following the Bible. In 1844 the US Supreme Court ruled that a college could not be built that excluded teachings from the Bible.

In fact, it was lawyer and senator, Daniel Webster, the famous “defender of the Constitution,” who argued before the Supreme Court that Christianity is inseparable from education.


God implanted natural law in each of us.  As the Catholic Catechism points out, with the help of the Holy Spirit , Gospel, Sacraments, Tradition and Catholic teachings, our internal natural law enables us to desire to live the Gospel Life, including Beatitudes.  We derive joy from doing so, because our actions are consistent with who we are and with our God who abundantly nurtures us on a personal level and showers each of us with his loving mercy and graces.

When society tries to take away religious freedoms, it is doing more than asking us to put aside our understanding of what we humans are.  It is asking us to NOT BE what we humans are.

If we react to the Culture of Death by succumbing and repeatedly ignoring our religion, the natural law within us and the  promptings of the Holy Spirit we would literally be suppressing/ignoring the best aspects of ourselves.  This is the Godly part which helps us to behave more like  “children of God”, to live as God wished us to, in alignment with Him, to enjoy the fruits of such a life, to gracefully deal with life’s hardships, and have a chance to share Eternity with God, Our Father.  We cannot suppress this divine part of us, we must also help our loved ones and friends who have, and we should work politically to make sure natural law is manifested by us in the world reflected in our civil laws. We should not omit it from ourselves or our government, which is a government for people as we have been created (not as degraded people living without the God in us).       

If you have loved ones or friends who have, ask God to have mercy on them and nurture them to put them back in touch with who they are. The below from our Catechism is very helpful.

Our Catholic Catechism says:

The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties: For there is a true law: right reason. It is in conformity with nature, is diffused among all men, and is immutable and eternal; its orders summon to duty; its prohibitions turn away from offense . . . . To replace it with a contrary law is a sacrilege; failure to apply even one of its provisions is forbidden; no one can abrogate it entirely.9

1957 Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles.

(Eileen comment: Think of natural law as an internal sets of behavior standards that all peoples on this earth have in common. If we ignore this, we betray not only ourselves and God, but all other peoples. Because we wisely share this set of standards, we enjoy a natural feeling of "oneness", a realtime system of checks and balances among each other, and intuitive influences on each other. This enables free will. Thus, we can be free people but law obiding. A basic structure of state and federal laws that support the constitution is adequate to keep us behaving with responsibility toward each other. Thus Big Government or a Big Brother type of government is not necessary. What is necessary is for each of us to know and live our religion, to the extent that we have developed a strong connection with this natural law which manifests as a strong conscience (the conscience of a saint which we are all called to have). Those individuals or organizations who seek to impose such governments on the rest of their brothers have, to various degrees depending on the individual, lost touch with their internal natural law, Holy Spirit and God. In this, they are operating out of God's natural network.)

1958 The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles. Theft is surely punished by your law, O Lord, and by the law that is written in the human heart, the law that iniquity itself does not efface.11

1959 The natural law, the Creator's very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.

1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known "by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error."12 The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.For those who cannot detect natural law or the promptings of the Holy Spirit, God also provided the Gospel. 


1965 The New Law or the Law of the Gospel is the perfection here on earth of the divine law, natural and revealed. It is the work of Christ and is expressed particularly in the Sermon on the Mount. It is also the work of the Holy Spirit and through him it becomes the interior law of charity: "I will establish a New Covenant with the house of Israel. . . . I will put my laws into their hands, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."19

1966 The New Law is the grace of the Holy Spirit given to the faithful through faith in Christ. It works through charity; it uses the Sermon on the Mount to teach us what must be done and makes use of the sacraments to give us the grace to do it:
If anyone should meditate with devotion and perspicacity on the sermon our Lord gave on the mount, as we read in the Gospel of Saint Matthew, he will doubtless find there . . . the perfect way of the Christian life. . . . This sermon contains . . . all the precepts needed to shape one's life.20

1967 The Law of the Gospel "fulfills," refines, surpasses, and leads the Old Law to its perfection.21 In the Beatitudes, the New Law fulfills the divine promises by elevating and orienting them toward the "kingdom of heaven." It is addressed to those open to accepting this new hope with faith - the poor, the humble, the afflicted, the pure of heart, those persecuted on account of Christ and so marks out the surprising ways of the Kingdom.




http://www.lifenews.com/nat4827.html  According to LifeNews, Komen chapters gave $711,485 from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006 to Planned Parenthood affiliates (see http://www.lifenews.com/nat3849.html and  http://www.lifenews.com/nat2640.html). This is not the first reported incident. Plan to read the above articles and spread the word. 


On Thursday, Jan 22, masses of people from the world converged in Washington D.C. for the 36th Annual March for Life!  It was breath-taking experience with about 250,000 there. The speaker issues, shown below, were also exciting.  Of them the demand for mandated use of ultrasounds -- as the #1 enemy of the abortion movement -- rang loud. Logistically, it would not be difficult to implement as abortion clinics usually have ultrasounds. They are commonly used as an essential tool to date the child, get a clearer picture of the child's position, and later to be sure they had removed all parts of the child. "Sixteen states have laws requiring an abortion provider to give a mother an opportunity to view an ultrasound prior to undergoing an abortion," said Mary Spaulding Balch, who directs NRLC's State Legislation Department. "Proving a 'window on the womb,' this type of legislation is instrumental in ensuring that mothers in crisis pregnancies make truly informed decisions."  Without legislation, perhaps we can do ultrasound campaigns to fund ultrasounds for some of the pregnancy care centers in CT.

  • The current quest for life is the greatest human struggle on this planet!
  • We must continue to work to stop abortion!
  • Donate for Ultrasounds!  –  The #1 enemy of the abortion movement -- A Window On the Womb!.
  • We need to give unwed mothers more information on new adoption methods , and increase  sources of assistance to them in the community and on campuses.  Let’s make an unexpected pregnancy be an unexpected blessing!
  • Mr. President, abortion is the #1 killer of the African Americans! This is Phase II of the civil rights movement!
  • Today is the inauguration of the new civil rights movement – on pro-life!
  • Mr. President, your election has not fulfilled Martin Luther’s dream.  Today we witness to the unfinished part of that dream."

In summary, the overall tone of the crowd was filled with a commitment to continue their work to protect the vulnerable:

  • The #1 moral concern: was the majority of Catholics, Christians, and those of other religions who had not supported pro-life in the 2008 election. 
  • The #1 political concern: was FOCA, of course.  Many people made it a point to go to Washington to protect our rights.
  • The #1 hope was that the value of all humans from unborn to natural death would be realized and prioritized over economy and self interests.  


Catholic Awareness Day, which took place at the State Capitol, covered several of the key pro-life issues. Let us not forget that, as shared by Deacon Reynolds in one of our meetings, the abortion statistics for CT are alarming. Where the rest of the U.S. had a drop in abortions in 2007, CT had a 17% increase!

Gallop shows:

  • support for open-ended abortion is minimal with most for rape
  • abortions are across all age groups
  • RU-486 is used more than in previous years (different from Plan B).  It could be administered up to nine weeks of pregnancy.
  • In 2007, there were approximately $11 million in surgical abortions and $2 million is RU-486
  • In 2007, there were over 144,400

Areas of challenge still are:  younger girls coming into our state for abortions (hundreds), lack of tracking, abuse, minors.

An Incremental Strategy was defined in 2008 by the Ct Catholic Conference, CT Right to Life Organization, and Family Institute of CT that involved first getting the below two bills passed, in a bare-bones form, and then later adding more to them.

1)  parental notification
2)  increasing the age from 15 to- 17 years and under for mandatory counseling

If the parental notification and the age of counseling are passed, next steps would be to add detail and enforcements.  For example, for the counseling bill:

  • specify that the counseling be from an unbiased source -- not associated with the clinic or hospital. 
  • We would also design the procedures to be followed -- which should include showing an ultrasound, the use of pre approved and documented check off list of counseling points that must be covered, a parent present during counseling, and sign off by both the girl and parent. The talk should offer alternatives with the names and phones of at least five pregnancy centers.
  • Mandate that the girl have at least 2 days to consider alternatives with her parents, relatives, clergy. 
  • Her doctor should be involved and approve her for this operation just as he would if she were to go for any other type of operation while under the doctor's care (she may have high blood pressure, diabetes, PMS, or other conditions that must be taken into account).

The abortion industry  can be expected to fight against this bill and the one below to raise the age of counseling from 15 to 17 years and under for the below reasons. 

1)  They would increase the paper work and management of an abortion.
2)   They would increase costs (which the abortion industry tries to keep low to influence insurance companies to cover and promote abortions)
3)   They would reduce the numbers of abortion patients.  

Another bill, not part of the current strategy, but will surface again, are the HR 6099 - Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act .  It may be an easier one to pass.  In CT, we have not passed any pro-life bills.  We need to get several passed for our Washington elected officials to perceive pro-life supporters as a viable source of votes.




Parental notification is required for any stage a teen's pregnancy, because an abortion is a major procedure with many risks.  As of Oct, 2008, 37 states have parental consent or parental notification laws in place that reflect parental wishes.  Some require both parents.  CT has nothing.  Particularly distressing is the increasing numbers of girls who come from other states with Parental Notification Laws to get their abortions in CT.  CT is currently doing over 35 abortions a day!

At the federal level, both houses of Congress have passed bills to protect the rights of parents to be notified before an abortion is performed on a minor daughter – but, according to NRLC Director, Douglas Johnson, Senate Democratic leaders have put up obstacles. Mr. Johnson says, "The Senate Democratic leadership is doing the bidding of the abortion industry, obstructing parental notification legislation that is supported by over 80 percent of the public,"... "The House has passed versions of the legislation four times since 1998.  Each time, the bill has been killed by actions of the Senate Democratic leadership".

Opponents say that in states where there is parental consent or notification, the numbers of abortions have not dropped significantly. They are undermining the major reason for parental involvement -- safety of the child.  Only parents will stop to check out the credentials of a doctor, make sure the doctor has insurance, make known their daughter's medical history and conditions that could pose problems (such as high blood pressure, diabetes, etc), stay with the girl throughout the procedure, and make sure an ambulance is called immediately if there are complications.  A mom can tell from her daughter's look, skin color and walk if there is something seriously wrong and take action. Girls have died because their parents were not there to help them. A parent is what the girls need at a time like this -- not a friend or boyfriend.

Opponents also downplay the risks associated with abortion.  They claim it is just like a routine D&C after a miscarriage.  This, it is not.  Dr. Carolyn Westhoff, M.D., Assn. of Reproductive Health Professionals and Professor at Columbia Unv Medical Center, NY, clarifies all. She says that  “abortion is very different from a  D&C”.  “For instance, most miscarriage patients are already dilated, while those seeking abortions are not.”  Another article explains that the body initiates a miscarriage and all bodily processes therefore cooperate with it. Whereas, in an abortion,  the doctor initiates the process and suddenly interrupts body-wide child-bearing processes.  The body does not cooperate with an abortion.  Abortion, then, is disruptive shutdown; not an ordered shutdown, requiring new skills, instruments, and safeguards, and presenting new problems that are not typically encountered in miscarriage D&C that is compliant with natural body processes.  Dr. Westhoff said the risks have "not changed much since abortion first became legal, and large medical schools and teaching hospitals have not treated abortion as an important area of training", she said.

For a clear idea of the level of risk associated with an abortion, review the below table of operations/procedures that are similar in nature to abortion (researched by Eileen, and reviewed by Dr. J. Mascolo, M.D.).  They all involve surgery to take something out of the body. 

Similar Procedures
to Abortion

Similar Complexity
& Risks

to Abortion

  • Colonoscopy
    (with polyp removal or biopsy)

  • Prostate Transurethral Resection of the Prostate

  • Gall Bladder Cholelithotomy

  • Lung Bronchoscope Biopsy

  • Kidney Stone Operations

  • Hysterectomy

  • Weight-Loss Operations
  • Caesarean Section

An incomplete procedure (some part of the object to be removed may be left inside to cause problems, just as baby parts can be left in the mother)

Introduction of a severe infection

An allergic reaction

Puncture of an adjacent organ (such as the uterus)

Any of these may require transport to a hospital and conversion to an open operation such as a hysterotomy (similar to a Caesarean Section) or hysterectomy.

Excessive bleeding, may require a transfusion. 

Any of these risks may also require a prolonged hospital stay, etc.
Some of these risks could be life threatening.

(c) eileen bianchini 2007. All rights to massively reproduce reserved, but feel free to share with doctors and legislators.

Dr. Beverly McMillan is an ob/gyn. In 1975, reports on specific risks.  She became the first woman to open an abortion clinic in Mississippi. She ceased doing abortions in 1978 when she became convinced that the abortions she was performing were causing everyone involved far more harm than good. Below are her answers to two common questions about abortion.

What are the physical complications of abortion?

The most common, immediate, and short-term complications include excessive bleeding, chronic and acute infections, intense pain, high fever, convulsions, shock, coma, incomplete removal of the baby or placenta (which can cause life-threatening infections and sterility), pelvic inflammatory disease, punctured or torn uteruses, and even death. 
Abortion can also result in uterine scarring, a weakened cervix, blocked fallopian tubes, and other damage to reproductive organs that can make it difficult to conceive or carry a child to term in the future. This latent morbidity of abortion results in long-term and sometimes permanent damage.  Women who have had abortions also experience more ectopic (tubal) pregnancies, infertility, hysterectomies, stillbirths, miscarriages, and premature births (the leading cause of birth defects) than women who have not had abortions. Abortion has also been linked to increased risks of developing breast, cervical, and uterine cancer.(1)

But don't you have to admit that legal abortion is safer than illegal abortion?

No. More than 90 percent of illegal abortions were already performed by doctors. When abortion was illegal, abortionists had to be very careful to avoid infection, laceration, and puncturing of the uterus, since a visit to the emergency room was an invitation for a police investigation. Not anymore.  Today, abortionists are free to operate on an assembly-line basis. The faster they work, the more money  

For more information on the risks of abortion (http://www.ct4women.com/pc_abortion.html 

Action to be Taken: Write your legislators. 
Please write your legislators and ask them to do the humane thing == get parents involved in their daughter's abortions.


The Select Committee on Children Representative jack Thompson documented the reasons for the bill: To keep up with state statutes that were created last year that considers juveniles to be those under eighteen, mandated counseling for girls who are considering abortion, a major and potentially life changing decision, is necessary for those who fall under this age requirement. At the hearing, on Oct 28, 2008, the committee recorded the following inputs from Gospel of Life and lobbyists supporting the raising of the age of teens for mandatory counseling from 15 years to 17 years and below.


Eileen Bianchini, CT Right to Life Corporation: She supports the modification of the statutory age requirement to counseling of teens by abortion providers, prior to receiving any type of abortion procedure, which would reflect the recent statutory changes recognizing those under the age of 18 to be juveniles. She lists good reasons for this bill to be a) even though abortion is legal, it is not necessarily safe b) just because they are legal does not mean they are routine and that consultation is not necessary for adults or teens. She also recommends that girls under the age of 18 receive a consultation by a counselor (defined as: “cannot be an employee of the facility, or a permanent or standby member of the team directly involved in the teen's abortion or any other abortions at that facility or hospital”), be shown a sonogram of their baby, told the baby's sex and size, and provide information on alternatives. She also thinks that the following should be disclosed to the patient: “the abortion method to be used, how the process differs from a miscarriage D&C, ways the abortion can fail, all possible risks, that a prolonged hospital stay or readmission may be needed to treat complications, asked if she has medical insurance, encouraged her to tell her parents, a trusted adult, or member of the clergy, encouraged to bring that person to the abortion, of all post-abortion risks including the psychological, that some studies show failing to carry one's first pregnancy to term can increases a women's change of getting breast cancer.” She says the teens should sign a document affirming the previous statements and that the counselor should sign this document as well.
Peter Wolfgang, President, Family Institute of Connecticut: While in support of the bill, he would like it expanded to include parental notification. “Forty-four out of the 50 states have passed laws requiring that a minor girl seeking an abortion must first obtain either parental consent or—at least—parental notification.” In CT, a 13 year old needs parental permission to receive medicine but can receive an abortion without her parents' knowledge. Parental notification would allow parents to be notified before the decision is made; even those who considered themselves “pro-choice” have shown support of this with 80% approval of such laws. He urges to amend the bill to “require that counseling be done by someone not affiliated with the abortion provider—or, better yet, by the parents themselves.”
Robert E. Muckle Sr., Vice President, Connecticut Right to Life Corporation: He feels that because abortion is a business, “any counselor at a clinic would be inclined to steer pregnant women, not just teens, to have the so called procedure.” He quotes Carol Everett of Texas who ran a number of clinics as saying that the “majority of women were counseled to have an abortion.” He believes that to make a real difference, the committee should opt for “Abstinence Until Marriage” programs. He believes then “there would be no abortions for these clinics to perform and they would go out of business.”
Bill O'Brien, President, Connecticut Right to Life Corporation: He believes the age for counseling should be raised to 21, as the decision to have an abortion is just as lofty a decision as buying alcohol. The counseling should be extended to tell the girl how it will affect her physically, emotionally, or psychologically. The girl should also be made aware that there is an increased risk of infertility, ectopic pregnancy, depression, breast cancer, and suicide. Counseling could also include seeing an ultrasound picture. He believes any child has the “necessity of having a parent informed before any medical procedure is performed on them.” The age should be raised for counseling.
Michael C. Culhane, Executive Director, Connecticut Catholic Conference: This bill would bring the state statutes requiring counseling into line with other legislation that was passed last year that those under the age of 18 are to be considered juveniles. The legislation reflect the “incomplete maturation and judgment attributes of young people within this age group.” The counseling would help the girl understand her options, potential health risks, and would aide in discovering any cases of sexual assault or abuse. In 2006, there were 1147 abortions performed on girls under the age of 18; only 240 received counseling. If this law had been enacted, 6153 girls would have received counseling prior to having an abortion. The Catholic Conference is supporting the bill with reservation. The counseling provided under the current law is done by an abortion provider, who could have conflicting interests. Parents would be the best protectors of a child's interests. The Conference believes that this is a step in the right direction in protecting the interest of girls who are faced with this decision.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:  Those who opposed included: 

Amy Breakstone, MD, Obstetrician Gynecologist: Among other things, she said "The experience of becoming pregnant and the decision whether or not to bring it to term is a “serious life experience” that allows teen girls to exercise their judgment and autonomy".
Susan Lloyd Yolen, Vice President, Public Affairs & Communication, Planned Parenthood of CT:The crux of the teen sexuality issue in Connecticut is that everybody's doing it, and that few adults are talking openly, honestly and realistically about it.” She recommends that the legislature makes a “commitment to guaranteeing that teens get the medically accurate information about sexuality that they need to make responsible decisions before they need to exercise their right to choose whether or when to bear a child.” Connecticut's children would benefit from state resources being allocated to “proven prevention programs such as comprehensive sex education, than by unnecessarily regulating the relatively few abortions to teenage girls.”
Jillian Gilchrest, Executive Director, NARAL Pro-Choice CT: She believes that what the bill is trying to require is already happening in the state. “Reproductive healthcare facilities across the state that provide abortion services offer all of their patients counsel.”
Stacey Violente Cote, Esq., Director, Teen Legal Advocacy Clinic, Center for Children's Advocacy: The Center for Children's Advocacy opposes this bill because they “believe an increase in the age for mandatory counseling is an unnecessary encroachment on teens' access to confidential healthcare…Connecticut's current law, and the related body of law regarding teens' access to confidential health care, is a carefully coordinated statutory scheme which has for decades protected adolescents' access to sensitive healthcare.”

Reported by: Kelly A. Juleson-Scopino

Date: 03.12.08

Action to be Taken: Write your legislators.
Please keep writing your legislators on this one too.  We need to require that these teens get counseling, and then later specify who and what.  It is an incremental strategy.  We need your help to succeed.





We lost. It was on the ballot initiative in the Nov 4 election, regarding the Constitution Convention (the vote YES on #1) we were working for. 

Why is this still important in 2009Why should we stay aware of this issue?

Review of a little history is helpful. Just prior to the election, on September 28th, the Family Institute of Connecticut held a rally for marriage on the steps of the state capitol, Hartford, Connecticut  -- 2,800 or more people came out to rally to protect traditional marriage.  In previous years hundreds of people came out to support traditional marriage. In various other ways, the people of CT have been letting their legislators and supreme court know they favored traditional marriage. They were not a fanatical, border group (as some individuals and papers portrayed them), but folks from mainstream CT -- representing all religions, races, and demographics in CT. Nor, did these people have any argument with the main population of homosexuals, as many individuals and papers said. The were not against homosexuals -- but were simply wishing to protect their religious rights to have traditional marriage remain consistent with their religion.

Pastors, priests, legislators, and other leaders also communicated that regarding the homosexual community - we love the people, but not the sin.  That means, we may fight against the sin -- using our voice, media, and other methods of free speech that are protected by the constitution to let our opinions be known to our legislators, clergy, other professions, and each other. One Reverend pointed out - - we must love the homosexual 1) because we are all sinners here on this earth and who can throw stones and 2)  we realize that in some cases choosing this lifestyle is an unconscious reaction to neglect or abuse (for example, little boys of absentee fathers seek fatherly love from other males to subdue their pain)  3) we also see that this is a hard lifestyle for them, and we regret any extent to which we in our society, with so much emphasis on financial gain, have abandoned them. We forgive and hope to be forgiven. These religious men repeatedly made it clear that they were not out to convert, but simply to protect marriage.

The problem:

It was clearly communicated by them and the FIC that the greater community of homosexuals are good people, see the value of traditional marriage, and support it in the ballots.  However, there is a small splinter group of back-door organizations that have combined forces across America to influence Supreme Court Justices in some states (such as California and Massachusetts) to implement laws that make same-sex marriage legal.  They had targeted CT.  On Oct 10, we learned that a number of gay couples sued on grounds of discrimination and the Supreme Court in CT did decide to make same sex marriages legal, ignoring the will of the people to protect traditional marriage.  (When a Supreme Court acts contrary to the will of the people and ignores the constitution, this is called judicial activism, and is not within the scope of a Republic.


Why do we care?

In states, where same sex was already legal, it is becoming more and more illegal to express religious beliefs against same sex and to refuse to support it (SEE VIDEO BY TONY PERKINS, PRESIDENT, FAMILY RESEARCH INSTITUTE).  Already, we see signs of this in New England.
or example, when religious people fight against the giving of  same sex education at early grades or in Christian schools, when priests refuse to marry such couples or to open their churches for gay events, when religious Web sites reject their ads, when religious adoption agencies refuse to provide children to same sex marriages or single parents, or when parents speak out against same sex education in schools, lack of parental rights in schools, the absence of equal space for Christian literature in schools, and trans gender dressing. This persecution is delivered in other states and other parts of the world on the grounds of "discrimination against legal same sex- marriage" – irregardless of religious beliefs, and people who have protected their Catholic and Christian rights have been put into jail..  See the videos below.

The California Defense of Marriage, Parts 1 - 8, are packed with more information. The 4 videos are below and should show.  But, they take a lot of memory and sometimes disappear.  If you do not see them , us the below links to get to them on UTube. So, here are parts 1 - 4 (videos and links or just links):.

(If you wish to turn off the site's music to hear this video, go to the black music panel at the top of the page and click on the arrow to the far left. It's a toggle, so you can click again to turn the music back on.  Some of us find the music very soothing.)








Repeated Tactics:  Used Against Marriage and Religious People

1)  Involve implementing a statewide support structure for same-sex marriage which includes the police force and court systems (which is how innocent people can be put in jail when they politely protest).  In Ct, they have been working to convert organizations and institutions to support same sex -- in advance of the legality of same-sex this month.  For example, Catholic Charities (adoption service) was pressured in 2005 to let same-sex couples adopt.  Because it refused, based on numerous and solid studies -- that children need both a mommy and a daddy --  it was forced out of the adoption business. In CT, the same-sex ruling was just passed in 2008.

2)  A.  In trying to convert organizations and institutions (including the Catholic Church), they use accusations of "discrimination against legal same-sex marriage"
For example:

Read the first paragraph of a Nov 25, 2005, Archbishop O'Malley wrote a letter regarding pressures to let same-sex couple adopt..

A more recent example was in December, 2008, when a same-sex couple won a ruling that forces a Methodist organization to rent their facilities for a civil union ceremony.

In a recent conflict in October, 2008, a Catholic Church in Lancaster, U.K.,is being forced to consider backing out of ties with an adoption agency (with which they have had links and helped to support since its inception) while under pressure to act "against it religious beliefs and conscience"..


3)  In CT, this homosexual splinter group have already addressed themselves as mainstream and refer to  the real mainstream -- thousands of mothers, fathers and grandparents from all religions, races and demographics --  as an intolerant specialty group.  They especially like to refer to them as the "Catholic specialty group of bishops and fanatics" -- in so many words -- as we have seen in a number of CT newspapers. They, this splinter group, unfortunately, have the ear of the supreme court in CT and most newspapers.  CT readers are NOT getting the truth.  These are the ones, who joined forces to fight against the Constitution Convention with negative propaganda and untruths.  One of them involved the damage that would be done to the public schools.  As our priests pointed out, our schools are already lost -- on moral groups -- with schools that promote contraceptives, free sex, abortions and now same sex.  Even if the academics are superior, the children will be so hampered by interests in sex and slowed down from the sexually transmitted diseases they get (which do not wait until they are older to do their damage), they could not compete as well against students in other nations.

4)  As in #3 above, in varieties of ways, they attempt to discredit and diminish the practices of the Catholic Church and Christian religions.

5)  Whenever we publicly express our religious beliefs – they shout “separation of church and state”, call for traditional religious opinions to be taken “out of the public square”, and scream "discrimination!".  In Europe, this is already happening. As you saw from discussions on this page, the separation of Church & state was created to prevent the state or government from imposing one religion on all people and to create an environment where all religions could flourish.  What were are seeing here is the opposite -- a diminishing of religious freedoms. This is, as you can see, the opposite of what Jefferson intended when he separated Church & State. 

Actions Recommended

Keep writing your legislators. 

  • The same-sex ruling imposed on people in Connecticut by the Connecticut Supreme Court is not in alignment with God's intentions for us, His design, and most religions on which our government was founded. 
  • It is not supported by the constitution, and it is detrimental to our Republic as are other similar rulings that hurt humans such as those favoring, abortion, pornography, diminished prayers in schools, and restrictions on religious freedoms. 
  • The ruling did not represent the will of the people.  Share info from the segment below on "RESTORING OUR REPUBLIC".


For those who are experiencing a same sex attraction or looking for answers

The Roman Catholic Church offers professional information and assistance through its worldwide apostolate Courage Organization which was founded 30 years ago to assist men and women dealing with same sex attractions.  It is headed by CEO, Fr. Paul N. Check, who was scheduled by the Gospel of Life Society to speak on June 13, 2009, to discuss SSA.  In answer to the Society's request, he covered how we can "love the sinner while we continue to fight against the sin -- to protect our children and traditional marriage". The minutes from that talk will be posted in the Library -- get to it from the Navigation Table on the Home page.

Fr. Check started his ministry as a Chaplain for Courage in Bridgeport, appointed by Bishop William E. Lori, in 2002.  Fr. Check  now ministers, with the love of a true father, personally and nationally to thousands of EWTN radio listeners and members of Courage.  The apostolate seeks to foster chaste friendships among its members. The Courage Web site offers resources and articles by Fr. Check and other globally known authors.  In Fr. Check's article “Courage and the Cross - The Problem of SSA”, it is pointed out that  "The problem of same sex attraction is often vexing to those who encounter it and it is not easily vanquished.  Shame, loneliness, and a sense of hopelessness are frequent the enemies.  With abundant charity, the Catechism of the Catholic Church acknowledges that those who have homosexual tendencies are many, and that this inclination "constitutes for most of them a trial" (par 2358)....some of them also struggle with sexual addition, drug or alcohol abuse, depression, anxiety or other mental illness... 40% are very likely to have suffered sexual abuse as a child. St. Paul offers a way forward: "We know that in everything God works for good with those who love HIM" (Rom 8:28)".  A source of Catholic help for parents and other loved ones of those with SSA is Encourage http://couragerc.net/ . At this site also find a DVD that is very popular called "Portraits of Courage" -- a compilation of case studies. A Catholic blog is ListServs http://couragerc.org/  A great conference is coming up in July in PA.  For info on it, see http://couragerc.net/Conference2009.pdfi  

Help for Spouses of those with SSA

A source of help recommended by a Catholic therapist for spouses is S-Anon http://www.sanon.org/sanondef.htm 

Ways parenting can interfere with a healthy psycho-sexual development
or help change a child's other-sex identification (gender identification disc order)

A typical mistake made by parents of children with SSA, involves neglecting to help their child acquire a solid identity with his or her sex.  According to most articles by top therapists (a list is given below), a strong identity with one's sex is enabled by a stable, warm and loving relationship with a father who shares quality time with female and male children.  From the parent of the same sex, they can learn the behaviors of their sex. However, it is from the father that they learn to feel comfortable with their sex and to identify with their gender -- enough to embrace it.  For girls, the love of a father results in a knowledge and admiration of men, helps her to know she can be adored by a man, helps her feel inwardly comfortable as a female, gives self-respect, is calming, and imparts the degree of self esteem that is necessary to resist peer pressure. Her "daddy" does this for her.  A strong daddy substitute such as an uncle can also be effective if he is available enough. Little boys do the rough and tumble playing and sports with their dads, build objects, work on household projects, go fishing, etc.  In so doing they learn how to do these things well enough to be accepted by peers, about manliness, have a chance to learn how to manifest their maleness by mimicking the father, see the father's enjoyment in being with them, and receive acknowledgement and recognition for their success -- such as a good game played, the fish they caught, the ball they threw, the bike they fixed, etc. They learn how to move and speak like a man.  Along these lines, boys also need to acquire from their dads knowledge that helps them to become good husbands and providers -- for example, how to create an environment of protectiveness, be head of family, seek to meet the needs of other family members, be a church goer, set a Christly example, be a member of the community, be benevolent, warm, and show good will and love.  Loving mothers can inadvertently interfere by structuring too much time in non-dad activities, and by being too overprotective, needy, and demanding of the boy.  Loving dads often minimize time with their son by spending too much time working away from home or in the home. In Gospel of Life meetings, several women shared that they dealt with the husband's overwork by taking a part time position.  This eased the financial burden on the father and permitted the father to spend more quality time with the children.  Circumstances such as the illness or death of a parent, or divorce, can also interfere.  Of them, divorce has been found to be the predominant cause of fathers being absent. A number of the Gospel of Life single-parent moms, and wives with with husbands who were ill (that was me), compensated by arranging for father substitutes through schools and organizations. This works if the interactions are loving enough and frequent enough and their relationship is managed by a therapist.  If there is no father or father figure present in the home and these exchanges are minimized or do not happen, the son may turn to male peer relationships to obtain masculine tutoring, characteristics, acknowledgement, and reinforcement needed to teach and heal the emotional wounds caused by neglect of this parent. Strengths that are admired in males of the same sex, could become misunderstood as love, and same sex relationships could be entered into to fill the deep need for fatherly love. It is unfortunate, that in most cases, the partner also has similar needs.  It is not likely they can help each other to the same extent as the alternative -- a father or father substitute who is part of a healing team with a diligent mom, therapist, and priest -- as suggested in the paragraphs below. 

Gender Identification Disorders - Basic Information

In an article by Dr. Rekker, he makes it clear that parenting is more often the cause of other-sex identification -- not hormones.  In a study of 70 boys with clear other-sex identification or gender identification disorder, the hormones tested normal. He wrote, "All 70 of the gender disturbed boys were found to be normal physically with the single exception of one boy with one undescended testicle (Rekers, Crandall, Rosen & Bentler, 1979). No evidence was found for maternal hormone treatment during pregnancy nor were there any histories of hormonal imbalance in the mothers." However, in checking family histories and profiles, it was found that the fathers were absent from the homes of these boys for longer than usual periods of time.  The article also states that this is important to know, because, as we said above, the father is the parent whose role behaviors are most likely to generate sex appropriate behaviors in the children in a family unit (Mead & Rekers, 1979). Dr. Rekker gives an indication of how much time the child requires of the dad or father substitute to have a normal sex identification or change a abnormal sex identification. The article will also gives an understanding of the type of time a father or father substitute should be sharing with a son to influence a healthy sex orientation or change other-sex identification. It further indicates that boys, who have eye-hand or other difficulties that make it challenging to perform in sports, may need sports tutoring which is arranged for by a therapist or school -- just as children who are weak in math or chemistry skills use tutors. As the Rekker article points out, children with severe other-sex identification (which includes the body behaviors movements, language and dressing of the opposite sex) have been cured through years of hard work by the mother working with therapists to insert ways to discourage other-sex behaviors and insert father substitutes into their lives. The Catholic Medical Association article and other articles listed below by therapists offer a great deal of insight and equip us with enough information to create effective programs for our loved ones.. I have a number of therapists looking at the material here and may add additional articles, books, and other resources.  Keep returning to this site for updates.

The role of a priest

Most therapists also agree on the need for a priest to be successful.  The priest can also act as a father substitute (along with a more dedicated father substitute). The priest can additionally introduce the family and child to a regular sacramental life which will give healing graces, help the child to acquire a receptive attitude to the program, and assist the child to forgive any mistakes unknowingly made by parents, any type of abuse by parents, lack of parental time or attention, lack of love, parental hostility or disdain, parental alcoholism, etc. In studies cases that involve both a therapist, parent(s), and priest are the most effective, with documented success rates of 60-70%.

Mistakes by society

A huge mistake by society and many participants in the SSA life style is to label a person a homosexual. We should not label anyone -- it damages their self-respect, dignity, and self-love. Doctors, the clergy and families in general are also negligent in noticing the signs that indicate a child moving in a SSA direction.  Fr. Check suggested we all become educated enough to spot problems in our immediate and extended families.  Years ago, when families were larger and lived closer, extended family members automatically monitored each and were more likely to notice unusual behavioral developments.  They did not hesitate to voice opinions about concerns.  Today, family members are distant and the sharing of parenting methods and advise no longer exists.

For some of us who have loved ones in SSA life styles share the truth

When we do not help those with SSA
to realize the truth, we perpetrate the lies. 
Learn and share our many truths.

Share the Catholic position on SSA

When parents discover that their child may have a SSA or is already living the life style, it is devastating.  It is easy at that time to be confused and refrain from researching or sharing the Catholic position, yet this is a time when the child needs it most as a guideline. This is true for adults too. Most importantly, they need to know 1) he or she is a true child of God (and that is why the rest of us are called to love the sinner while we fight against the sin.)  2) The child's SSA desire is disordered  3) The SSA action is always immoral ....when measured against our true human good (the best of our humanity, not the worst or our peers). 4) that human beings have an essential nature -- either male or female based on chromosomes -- and that SSA inclinations -- are constructed and can, therefore, be deconstructed.  5)  That it is not just a law to refrain from SSA actions, but it is part of our faith required for alignment with God's intentions for us and society.  Read the below from the Catholic Catechism:.

2333 Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity. Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. The harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.

2334 "In creating men 'male and female,' God gives man and woman an equal personal dignity."118 "Man is a person, man and woman equally so, since both were created in the image and likeness of the personal God."119

2335 Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way. The union of man and woman in marriage is a way of imitating in the flesh the Creator's generosity and fecundity: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."120 All human generations proceed from this union.121

2336 Jesus came to restore creation to the purity of its origins. In the Sermon on the Mount, he interprets God's plan strictly: "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."122 What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.123

Here are additional inputs from the Catholic Medical Association article, Homosexuality and Hope, according to the Catholic Catechism:

  • "All the baptized are called to chastity." (CCC, n.2348)
  • "Married people are called to live conjugal chastity;
  • Others practice chastity in continence." (CCC, n.2349) "...
  • Tradition has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered...under no circumstance can they be approved." (CCC, n.2333)
  • God is a sign of the love of Christ, the bridegroom, for his Bride, the Church, and therefore sexual activity is appropriate only in marriage. Healthy psycho-sexual development leads naturally to attraction in persons of each sex for the other sex.
  • Typical factors that interfere with a healthy psycho-sexual development include, trauma, erroneous education, and sin

Point out the misleading information from SSA promoters

Multiple articles, by a variety of sources including the Catholic Medical Association, repeatedly warn us to be brave it and to share the truth that there is no evidence that SSA is biological. To the contrary all the evidence shows that it is environmental (as with tests between identical twins).  However, for various reasons, there have been attempts to promote SSA as being biological and fixed. 

The motives to promote SSA as biological, may not be in the interests of those who have SSA.  Natalie Angier wrote in The New York Times on September 1, 1991 that this would give strong political advantages to the homosexual activites (extremists).  She wrote, "If homosexuality were viewed legally as a biological phenomenon, rather than a fuzzier matter of "choice" or "preference," then gay people could no more rightfully be kept out of the military, a housing complex or a teaching job." 

To confuse issues further, homosexual promoters have reinforce the erroneous belief that a if SSA feelings go back as far as the person can recall, then that is proof that they were born that way. 

False studies went further and tried to prove SSA biological origins.  In a Focus on the Family article, by Jodi Carlson, some of these are discussed with explanations on how they were shown to be inaccurate.

In addition, the American Psychiatric Institute, did not agree that same sex attractions could be changed until May 2000 when they issued a fact sheet which reversed their previous statements,"Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues," according to an article by Robert H. Knight, Concerned Women of America: http://www.cwfa.org/articles/5458/CFI/papers/index.htm


Here are some articles that share studies on large percentages of those with same sex attraction were cured, are happy, and live great life styles -- lots of choices for them!  Some even got rid of the basic inclinations to SSA, which many in the life style say cannot be done.  Read about it!


Homosexuality 101: What Every Therapist, Parent, And Homosexual Should Know,
Julie Harren, Ph.D., LMFT

Statement Of The Catholic Medical Association

Gender Identity Disorder (and successful treatment programs)
George A. Rekers, Ph.D


Educating the Public on the Causes of Homosexuality
Presented by Julie C. Harren,
Palm Beach Atlantic University

Working with Teenagers,
presented by Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D

In addition, here is a CMA site to purchase pamphlets and the popular book  "Homosexuality and Hope";

or call CMA, at 1-617 782-3356

Repeatedly invite your older child or loved one to consider a change

If you have a child who has a SSA and has suffered disappointing relationships, perhaps the time is right to offer an alternative to their entering into yet another relationship. Realize that the reason most children surrender to a SSA life style is becuase  1)  they need fatherly love   2)  they believe that the other-sex traits they have (sometimes since ages 2-4) are biological and cannot be changed -- that they are permanent (so they might as well join the SSA life style), and 3) they were hurt by family and peers who did not understand their other-sex behaviors and may have ridiculed them, called them fag, or in other ways made fun of them in classes, in sports, in church youth groups, etc.  They have been hurt and wounded.  The only beings they have had to turn to for understanding are others who are suffering that same wounds -- in the SSA life style. Yet, there are points in thier lives when the alternative you offer may be welcomed. Perhaps this is the right time to give your child the chance to consider this. Your alternative, is a long-term program with a Phase I that will bring some immediately relief. It would be type of program we discussed above, but for an adult -- it too would be designed by a therapist and would include you and your spouse, a therapist and a priest, and the Holy Sacraments. On the other hand, you may have to ask your child many times; every 6 months or so. 

But, with the help of God, at some point in time, your child may become interested and have the chance to become one of the 60-70% who make the change.  But, before you talk with your child, increase your own sacramental life and faith -- talk with Fr.Check or another priest.  Find a good therapist.  Contact the Encourage group -- perhaps they can help. At any appropriate time with your child, be prepared to ask for foregiveness for any errors you may have unknowingly made in parenting them -- any things done or things not done, any neglect, indifference, etc. Above all, gather graces, and prepare yourself to step out in faith (just as Moses put his foot into the Red Sea and then it parted). 

For all with SSA, speak out with Courage!

When we do not help those with SSA to realize the truth, we perpetrate the lie.  We also help a person in a SSA life style to think there is no hope for change -- because it is biological.  As a result, they more easily get locked into it.  I heard several young men and women speak with Fr. Check over the EWTN radio -- one after the other -- about how misable they were, stuck in this life style that could not fulfil their needs and dreams.  They told sad stories. Let's get smart on this subject.  Let's stop perpetrating the lies.  Truth given with love, is okay.  But, truth withheld, is never love and is never okay. 

What do do in rare cases -- when an infant may be born with ambiguous genitalia

Articles on genital defects, such as one by Duke University https://www.activhealth.com/adam/HIE/003269.htm clarify that a child's sex is biologically fixed as a male or female by the chromosomes.  In fact, the father, who has both an X and Y chromosome, determines the sex.  Though a very small fraction of those in the homosexual community have been born with genital defects, it must be discussed, because cases of ambiguous genitalia have been used wrongly to prove that SSA is biological and fixed. Also, we want to warn parents to monitor the types of hormones being in treatments.

The Duke article reports in a minimum number of cases it may be difficult to visibly discern whether the infant is male or female.  However, tests may be taken to identify the chromosome sex of the child.  In most cases, the variances in genitalia can be handled through surgery, and the child can have a normal life.  Parents should seek research information from reliable resources such as the Catholic Medical Association,   Courage, and top universities -- not from local doctors, pharmaceutical companies (who have a vested interested in selling their hormonal treatments), etc.  However, sometimes a hormonal treatment might be appropriate to correct the deformed genital, such as a small penis. 

If your child is a female, be sure natural hormones are used by the doctor.  Natural hormones mirror the hormonal formulas used by the body, are identical, fully accepted by the body, and utilized by it to support all reproductive functions and related bodily processes.  Artificial formulas, to be patented, cannot be identical.  They vary from pharmaceutical to pharmaceutical.  They are not familiar to the body and cannot be fully or properly utilized.   1)  The results desired may not be obtained.  2)  In addition, when used over time, they may present the same types of difficulties that women who are on the pill encounter -- initially symptoms like the below. 

Weight gain
Menstrual Cramps
Premenstrual syndrome
Ovarian cysts
Abnormal bleeding
Poly cystic ovarian disease
Continued hormonal abnormalities
Chronic discharges
Loss of female libido
Brain fog

Over the long term, ovaries, suffer reduced used or disuse and begin to atrophy, which may lead to infertility problems, repeated miscarriages, and cancers. Treatments with natural hormones can reverse much of this if caught in time in combination with other types of treatments such as diet, nutrients, etc. Unfortunately, many doctors, even pro-life doctors, are not educated on the risks of artificial hormones or the use of natural hormones, vitamins, etc.  The only trustworthy sources of natural hormones for women of all ages are FertilityCare system doctors.  FertilityCare is a system of natural hormonal treatments that cooperate with the body.  It was advanced by Dr. Hilgers and is based on NaproTECHNOLOGY. Below is a chart with information and ways to find practitioners in your area.

If your infant is a male, the use of natural only hormones may also be helpful.  FertilityCare system doctors may be able to help or direct you to doctors who specialize in male issues. 

Creighton Model FertilityCare System, by Dr. Hilgers, M.D.

http://www.fertilitycare.org/   (to locate a center or teacher)
http://www.creightonmodel.com/    (introduction)
http://www.naprotechnology.com/   (woman’s health issues)
http://www.popepaulvi.com/   (international recognition & events)
http://www.aafcp.org/    (overview)

Information and Discussions on Infertility and Repeated Miscarriage

http://www.aafcp.org/infertility.html   (chronic infertility)
http://www.fertilitycare.org/napro/abortion.htm   (repetitive  miscarriage)


Recommended Action to be Taken: Share the truth with your legislators, editors and loved ones.  Find out more about the use of natural hormones through FertilityCare which may give more hope to those who have taken artificial hormones and run into difficulties.  Ask cured loved ones to spread the word! 


We must  continue to fight for the elimination of partial birth abortion and live birth abortions.

1)  If the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) (covered in below paragraphs) is passed, it would permit Partial Birth Abortion as well as Live Birth Abortion
for flimsy health reasons across the United States.
2)  There are weaknesses in the partial birth abortion ban law that enable doctors to continue to legally perform this gruesome abortion.
3)  Though the partial birth abortion ban law only restricts a type of abortion and does not eliminate abortions.
4)  The partial birth abortion ban law is strategic and important in an overall fight to abolish abortions. It is one of the few laws that recognizes an unborn
child as a human.  Another is the Unborn Victims Act. 

For these reasons, we must continue sharing scientific evidence that an unborn is a human in all stages of its development, from conception.  This fact makes any form of abortion unconstitutional.  You may find our CT for Woman Site's Baby Development Page to be helpful.


I am pleased that the Supreme Court upheld a law that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial-birth abortion.  Today's decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America.  The partial-birth abortion ban, which an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Congress passed and I signed into law, represents a commitment to building a culture of life in America. 

The Supreme Court's decision is an affirmation of the progress we have made over the past six years in protecting human dignity and upholding the sanctity of life.  We will continue to work for the day when every child is welcomed in life and protected in law.

To obtain a snapshot of the history and supreme court decisions on partial birth abortion, check out this American Center for Law and Justice site. Also see Fr. Frank Pavone article. In it, he writes that "Today's decision also reminds us that elections matter. The work done by so many pro-life people in the elections of 2000, 2002, and 2004 made this decision possible. The lawmakers who passed the ban were elected, as was the President who signed it into law. The Senators who confirmed the two new Supreme Court Justices were elected, as was the President who nominated those Justices". The Catholic News shares key historical information.  From that article and others, here is a summary of the on-again, off-again evolution of this act which communicates to us the need to be persistent.

In the 1990s, Congress had twice passed a ban on partial-birth abortions. Both times the bills were vetoed by President Bill Clinton.

In 2000, the Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska ban on partial-birth abortions. Writing for a 5-4 majority at that time, Breyer said the law imposed an undue burden on a woman's right to make an abortion decision. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who died in September 2005, and now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor were both on the high court at the time this ruling was issued. O'Connor sided with the majority, and Rehnquist with the minority.

In 2003, Congress again passed a ban on partial-birth abortions, and this is the bill that was signed into law by President George W. Bush.  The Supreme Court upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act by a 5-4 vote April 18. Justice Anthony Kennedy, wrote that the law's opponents "have not demonstrated that the act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases." Also voting in the majority were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Below are two paragraphs from the 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Act

(1)  A moral, medical, and ethical consensus exists that the practice of performing a partial-birth abortion -- an abortion in which a physician delivers an unborn child's body until only the head remains inside the womb, punctures the back of the child's skull with a Sharp instrument, and sucks the child's brains out before completing delivery of the dead infant -- is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary and should be prohibited.

(2)  Rather than being an abortion procedure that is embraced by the medical community, particularly among physicians who routinely perform other abortion procedures, partial-birth abortion remains a disfavored procedure that is not only unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother, but in fact poses serious risks to the long-term health of women and in some circumstances, their lives. As a result, at least 27 States banned the procedure as did the United States Congress which voted to ban the procedure during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses.

In the following video, the procedure used for a partial birth abortion is shown using a doll. You may have to wait awhile for this video to appear or use the URL http://www.youtube.com/v/A6vnOaq7nWU&hl=en&fs=1. 


In this next video a mother who experienced a Partial Birth Abortion discusses her experiences. The mother reviews a five-day process that she went through which ultimately suffocated and burned her baby to death.  The process involved putting her in a large room with other women until she was dilated enough, and then having her sit on a toilet to push her baby into it.  She only saw the doctor twice -- when he injected the saline solution and at the end. No one ever explained the process beforehand or the risks.



H.R. 2175 was intended to address the rights of a mother to have an abortion result in a dead baby even up to 7-9 months.  The baby does not have any rights. In the below video we hear from Gianna Jessen who survived a botched abortion only because the abortionists was not there when she entered the world alive, or he would have killed her. 

A born-alive child is human and entitled to the full protection of law. In 2000, Jill Stanek a nurse testified before a congressional panel that they witnessed premature infants left to die without comfort care after early labor was induced as an abortion method. The article also discusses the evolution of the act, participation by legislators.

In its early introduction, BAIPA flew through the Senate by unanimous vote including Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry who all agreed a mother’s right to “choose” stopped at her baby’s delivery. There is nothing in Roe to support the claim that infants who are born alive may be considered anything less than legal persons, regardless of their stage of lung development. But, to address this objection, in 2001, a "neutrality clause" was added to explicitly state that the bill expressed no judgment, in either direction, about the legal status of a human prior to live birth. It read, "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being 'born alive' as defined in this section."   On Aug 5, 2002, the president signed the federal bill into law. The National Right to Life gives a detailed timeline of events and provides a copy of the BAIPA act to satisfy some legislators.  Yet, at a state level, in Illinois, in 2003, it was voted against though it was identical to the federal bill. Here are some reasons states might not wish to give support from various sources:

1)  Tramples on the rights of the parents
2)  Tax payers would pay bill for health care as long as the child was alive
3)  Trial lawyers could sue all parties

Jill Staneck's explanation of the procedure is based on the hospital where she worked.

... In this particular abortion procedure doctors do not attempt to kill the baby in the uterus. The goal is simply to prematurely deliver a baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward.

To commit induced labor abortion, a doctor or resident inserts a medication into the mother’s birth canal close to the cervix. The cervix is the opening at the bottom of the uterus that normally stays closed until a mother is about 40 weeks pregnant and ready to deliver. This medication irritates the cervix and stimulates it to open early. When this occurs, the small second or third trimester pre-term, fully formed baby falls out of the uterus, sometimes alive. By law, if an aborted baby is born alive, both birth and death certificates must be issued and are. Ironically, at Christ Hospital the cause of death often listed for live aborted babies is "extreme prematurity," an acknowledgement by doctors that they have caused this death.

It is not uncommon for a live aborted baby to linger for an hour or two or even longer. At Christ Hospital one of these babies lived for almost an entire eight-hour shift...

In the event that an aborted baby is born alive, she or he receives "comfort care," defined as keeping the baby warm in a blanket until s/he dies. Parents may hold the baby if they wish. If the parents do not want to hold their dying aborted baby, a staff member cares for the baby until s/he dies. If staff did does not have the time or desire to hold the baby, s/he is taken to Christ Hospital’s new Comfort Room, which is complete with a First Foto machine if parents want professional pictures of their aborted baby, baptismal supplies, gowns, and certificates, foot printing equipment and baby bracelets for mementos, and a rocking chair. Before the Comfort Room was established, babies were taken to the Soiled Utility Room to die.

Following is a video sharing some of the testimony given by Jill Staneck.

In her video, sums it all up nicely.  Gianna Jesson, bluntly asks us -- whose side are you on?  The mother who wants a dead baby, or the baby's?  On your own side, or God's side?  How far have we come away from God that we can condone doing this to a born alive baby?  Sometimes, it is hard to see how far humanity traveled away from God.  Fr. Markey has an answer -- see it in the Feb 14 minutes of the Gospel of Life Meeting.  Read the notes on Evangelium Vitae by Pope John Paul II. They are accessible off the Library page on the Navigation Table. For information on other types of abortions see the CT4Women abortion page -- -- the site constructed for the youth of Connecticut -- http://www.ct4women.com/



Our nation is at a critical point in the fight to protect the unborn. The latest proposed legislation, the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) is the most radical pro-abortion bill ever introduced in Congress. It would go well beyond the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in imposing an extreme abortion regimen on our country. For the first time, abortion would become an entitlement.  It would eliminate good bills that many states had passed that required parental notification, counseling for teens and women, and the ability of pro-life doctors and nurses to act according to their conscience, and eliminate procedural regulations that protect women from unsafe practices. It would also permit abortion at any time, at any age, and for any reason, including late-term partial-birth abortion and increase taxpayer funding of abortion.  Though this bill has been around since 1989, it was not promoted until now. 

calls for a significant increase in unlimited amount of abortions in this country. But FOCA goes far beyond that - it seeks to force hospitals and health care providers to violate their own consciences by requiring that abortions and abortion referrals be made available to clients seeking such services. This legislation seeks to eliminate the choice for those whose beliefs would preclude their participation in the acts of death which the proposed law would require. The impact on the lives of those who practice medicine and those, such as the Catholic Church, who provide hospitals and health care facilities, would be profound. This is on top of the "rights" which the bill purports to protect that virtually eliminates any restrictions on abortion and removes parental rights of notice when abortions are performed for minors. Watch the below video which summarizes our direction.


Action to be Taken:

Fight FOCA Petition
The petition, by Americans United for Life (AUL) -  has over 600,000 signatures as of Jan 09!  Pass it out to all your friends and loved ones! (Many of you sent this and the articles on the emails.  Thanks!  Good finds!   Good teaming!)
Click here to go to it!

Read Bishop Lori's Message on FOCA

National Electronic Pro-Life Postcard Campaign to Congress
The Bishops of the United States had asked all Catholic organizations to support a campaign that was rolled out through parishes throughout the country - called the National Pro-Life Postcard Campaign to Congress. Cardinal Justin Rigali referenced this campaign. It was successful in that it communicated to our current administration the people's displeasure with FOCA.  Bishop Lori's site provides the reasons, and there is additional discussion below.

Educate Your Loved Ones & Community
Most importantly, we must evangelize those who are dear to us and help them to migrate from pro-choice which puts their souls in jeopardy. By doing this, we do two things:  1)we addresses the #1 moral issue in our world, and 2) we are carrying on God's work -- turning souls toward heaven..  Our pro-choice loved ones need to become educated by those of us who know better and care.  
Feel free to use the articles listed in the discussions below or click to them..

Convert Elders from Living Wills to Loving Wills

Monitor the new Healthcare Plan 
Because of the success of the post card and other campaigns, the administration may ignore FOCA for awhile and simply shift focus to the new Healthcare Plan which achieves many of the same objectives such as stepped up contraceptive programs, abortion programs, and other aspects of population control.

Consider the Definition of Coercion
:  Coercion (by the Free Dictionary) The intimidation of a victim to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will by the use of psychological pressure, physical pressure, ...".  The abortion industry is already coercing women into abortions by means that compile to compel a women toward having an abortion  Consider, they discourage communication with parents, encourage participating by boyfriends who typically encourage girlfriends to abort, rush females through the process, omit counseling, omit substantial information on alternatives to abortion, forbid the showing of baby ultrasounds to the girls, do not involve the woman's family doctor, etc.).  See the below statistics.  There are more on the abortion page.

  • 64% of women surveyed report being pressured by others into unwanted abortions
  • 52% felt rushed
  • 84% reported that they did not receive adequate counseling.
  • 79% were not informed about alternatives.
  • In 95% of all cases the male partner played a central role in the decision.
    [1] Portraits of Coercion, America's Silent Epidemic, Abortion is the Unchoice / Elliot Institute; Forced abortions in America - A Special Report

The Freedom of Choice Act is actually a legal form of stepped up coercion.  Women will be isolated from those who really care and encouraged to get abortions for the slightest reasons.  Imagine, if they can encourage partial birth abortions just for a headache, which are the most extreme of abortion, what they will do with such a law.  Worse, women of less popular races, may become penalized for NOT having abortions under certain circumstances -- as when there is no husband and no non-government income, when the baby will be born with defects, or when families are too large -- in cases where it will cost the government more money in care or schooling for these children.  For example, the large organizations and foundations in America and the world, that fund development projects around the world, forced China to implement a " one child per family" to get funding.  If abortion becomes the norm, because it is further institutionalized, those who pressure women into getting abortions will have more support from the abortion industry and government. This act is one step closer to regulating the reproductive destinies of women and families in the United States, as is already being done in other parts of the world.  Please do this law will result in making abortions safer -- not so.  Legal does not mean safe.Abortions  became legal 30 years ago and they are still not safe  (see the testimonies by doctors toward the bottom of the page on abortion).  They may say they will put regulations in place.  Again, 30 years later, and there is little regulations and the few that are in place are not enforced.  With greater than 4,000 abortions being performed daily, why didn't they raise this issue sooner?  Or, they may claim that only licensed doctors will perform abortions.  Licensed doctors have not been trained for the past 30 years -- they use miscarriage D&C methods.  See the testimonies from doctors on the abortion page which goes into more detail.  Already, there is a migration of better doctors, especially OB/GYN's, who have a religious conflict out of medical organizations that are trying to force them to either do abortions or refer for abortions.  When these good doctors leave, what types of doctors will be left to do abortions? 

Today, Nov 20, on EWTN discussions posed some questions:  what will happen to these good doctors? Can Catholic and Christian hospitals exist without them?  Similarly, what will happen to good religious teachers when they refuse to teach or support the homosexual agendas?  What will happen to home education and funding for training in chastity and abstinence?  Who will fight against forced Euthanasia if specialty groups threaten to sue or put loved ones in jail?

To gently inform and nudge friends and loved ones into seeing the truth, introduce them to what is happening to these institutions, to the old or chronically sick, and to women in the U.S. in in other parts of the world


As of Jan 23, a ban has been imposed on the Pro-life Mexico City Policy.  The policy had been restored by President Bush to prevent global policies that require foreign governments, who are recipients of American funding, from being forced to implement wide abortion programs. For details, read about the basic information provided by Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), on the policy put in place by President Bush. The policy required that private overseas organizations that wanted to receive funding from the U.S. under the foreign aid "population assistance" or "family planning" programs must agree

1)  not to perform abortions (except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest), and

2)  not to "actively promote abortion as a method of family planning" -- for example, by campaigning to
weaken or repeal the pro-life laws of foreign nations -- either with U.S. funds or any other funds.

Johnson shared that "under the first Bush Administration, over 350 overseas organizations accepted funds under the Mexico City Policy. 

For up to date information, see the Feb 4, 2009 analysis by Mr. Johnson.  In it, he reminds us that as a result of the ban under the previous administration, there is much resentment towards the United States among the governments and peoples of those nationsTo confirm this and understand the reasons why, read an article by the USCCB http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-018.shtml , an explanation in favor of the MCP by Cardinal Justin Rigali, and a comprehensive article by LifeSite News article, Jan 2009. As a people, we must persistently communicate with our elected officials to "life the ban on the Mexico City Policy."

Write your state and federal elected officials to

lift the ban on the Mexico City Policy

which prevented the promotion of forced abortions and sterilizations on women in countries

that receive US financing under the foreign aid "population assistance" or "family planning" programs.

Here are just some key articles:

Some articles provided are older, which is good.  They show a progressive escalation of atrocities and without conscience.   We should understand this because the forces that promoted a ban are trying to incrementally brain wash us into supporting more of the same and worse. Using the same justifications, similar policies can be instituted against the poor and certain races in the US.  Read these articles, but don't stop there.  Try to find some yourself.  Google 'population control' 'eugenics' 'population re-engineering', FEMA, the HYDE act, http://www.nchla.org/factdisplay.asp?ID=41, and keep monitoring the links at the top of this page.  We should know this well enough to clearly explain it to others. 

British MP Applauds 400 Million Missing Chinese

LifeSiteNews: More Oct, 2008, More Updates on Population Control

China's One-Child Policy: Twenty-five Years Later

40m Bachelors And No Women

Japanese Companies Switch to Full-time Workers as Abortion Causes Shortage

Deaths Exceed Births in Increasing Number of Major US Cities (5/08)

Nicaraguan President Denounces International Media for Campaign
Against Country's Anti-Abortion Laws

How to Take the Chill out of Demographic Winter

Gonzalez v Oregon: the Supreme Court expands
the Reach of the Culture of Death

"Land of the rising geriatrics" . 

A childless culture

Canadian National Newspaper First to Warn of Impending Population Collapse

Philippines Legislature Attempting to Impose Two Children-Only Policy

No Mention of Most Obvious Solution to Canadian Fertility Decline
in Report Urging Change to Immigration Policy

New, Evolving Tactics of Pro-Euthanasia Movement Highlighted at Symposium

Urge Congress to Support the Mexico City Policy

500,000 Girls Aborted Per Year in India new Study Finds 

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology - A 13- Year Study shows:
The annual death rate of women who had abortions in the previous year
was also 46% higher than that of non-pregnant women.


Their tactics of coercion also include DECEPTION. For example, they deny links between contraception and abortion and breast cancer (there is plenty of solid info and links on this the birth control page and abortion page).  When they bring their pro-choice campaigns to others countries and the instances of breast cancer increase proportionately to the increases in contraception distribution and abortions, they donate mammogram machines to detect breast cancers early and applaud themselves for caring.  You may have perceived some of this. Show your friends the truth.  We need people in masses to be aware and take action such as writing letters, signing presented petitions and in all ways staying informed and acting against this. For us Catholics, it is our obligation. We must fight evil as well as promote love.


Though this bill passed both the House and Senate, and on April 1, 2004 was signed into law by President Bush, it may be another one of the many laws that will be in jeopardy if FOCA is passed. As of March 31, 2004, twenty-nine (29) states have laws that allow a homicide charge to be brought for the unlawful killing of an "unborn child" or "fetus" in a state crime. Of these, 16 provide this protection throughout the period of in utero development, while the other 13 provide protection during certain specified stages of development, which varies from state to state.  These laws are sometimes referred to as "fetal homicide" laws.  Enactment of the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act did not 1)  supersede state unborn victims laws, nor did it apply such a law for state crimes in a state that has not enacted one.  Rather, the federal law applies only to unborn children injured or killed during the course of the federal crimes of violence that are listed in the law. 2)Unborn victims laws (also known as "fetal homicide" laws) do not conflict with the Supreme Court's pro-abortion decrees (Roe v. Wade, etc.).  The  state laws mentioned above have had no effect on the practice of legal abortion. 

Pregnant women could be in danger from physical abuse as others attempt to physically force them into having abortions they do not want.  Studies show that abortion often stems from the demands, threats or non-support of others who may have significant influence and/or deceptive or false information from trusted authorities such as doctors, clergy or parents.  In some cases, the coercion gets physical, even violent. At the Unfair Choice site, http://www.unfairchoice.info/unwanted.htm , we are told that murder is the leading cause of death among pregnant women.  For case studies, see our CT4Women site, http://www.ct4women.com/pc_abortion.html and scroll down to the paragraph, "Statistics on Why Women Abort".

The NCHLA tells us that "those opposed to the bill object to any reference to the unborn child as a separate existing being. State laws of this kind have had to withstand challenges in the courts. We can expect this bill to come under attack. To see a copy of the bill.  For details on the bill, see the National Right to Life site, http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/index.html

HYDE AMENDMENT - NO on Medicaid-Paid Abortions

The HYDE AMENDMENT, passed by Congress in 1976 limits funding of abortions by the federal Medicaid program, and protects medical professionals from being forced to participate in an abortion in any way.  For information, refer to information provided by the National Committee for Human Life Amendment.  For a recent status of this amendment see an overview of a letter by Justin Rigali, Chairman of the Bishops' Committee for Pro-life Activities, to all Senators and Representatives. This amendment also has"Provider Conscience Regulation" to protect medical professionals. Those knowledgeable about FOCA are concerned that if passed, this amendment would be in jeopardy .

To Take Action:

Use the NCHLA action site to communicate with your US Senators and Representatives.



Your Action Needed by April 9  and thereafter  --  Read On....

On January 20, 2009, the "Provider Conscience Rule" went into effect.  It was created by the Bush Administration to guarantee that all recipients of federal aid under federal health programs will not discriminate against hiring medical professionals who have moral objections to abortion and abortifacient birth control. The proposed regulations would require that hospitals, clinics, researchers, and medical schools sign "written certifications" before receiving federal funding under any program run by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

General Information and History

"This is a huge victory for religious freedom and the First Amendment,"  Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said in a statement. "This regulation ensures that health care providers with objections to committing abortion and other morally abhorrent procedures will not be discriminated against and driven out of their profession," said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, in a statement.

Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt said that health care professionals should not face retaliation from employers or from
medical societies because they object to abortion.

"Freedom of conscience is not to be surrendered upon issuance of a medical degree," said Leavitt. "This nation was built on a foundation
of free speech. The first principle of free speech is protected conscience."

Leavitt said the regulation was intended to protect practitioners who have moral objections to abortion and sterilization, and would not interfere with patients' ability to get birth control or any legal medical procedure.  "Nothing in the new regulation in any way changes a patient's right to any legal procedure," he said, noting that a patient could go to another provider.

However, the American Medical Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Hospital Association had opposed the measure along with pro-abortion groups.   Some of these and other groups are concerned that because it is written vaguely, it might be used to also apply to "contraception, fertility treatments, HIV/AIDS services, gender reassignment, end-of-life care, or any other medical practice to which someone might have a personal moral (not even religious) objection.”  These groups are pressuring Obama to review the ruling and do something about it during the first few months of his presidency.  In addition, the Attorney General's Office of CT, joined by seven states, has filed a lawsuit to quash the regulation.

 In response, the HHS with pro-groups, such as the American Association of Pro-life OB/GYNs, are making the actual purpose of this new regulation clear which is to increase awareness of, and compliance with, the following main laws (and the Hyde Amendment) on this subject that have been already in place but abused.  (Note, even here in CT we are aware of some of the GOLS people who have had difficulty because the below laws were ignored. Also, if FOCA happens, we need to ensure that doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals, who have moral objections to abortion, Plan B, giving contraceptives, sterilizations, sex changes, IVF, embryonic stem cell work, or other non-pro life procedures will be protected.).

First, in the 1970s, the Church Amendments were enacted at various times in response to debates over whether receipt of federal funds required recipients to provide abortions or sterilizations. The Amendments also protected health care providers and other individuals from discrimination by recipients of HHS funds on the basis of their refusal, due to religious belief or moral conviction, to perform or participate in any lawful health service or research activity.

Second, in 1996, section 245 of the Public Health Service Act was enacted to prohibit the federal government and state or local governments that receive federal financial assistance from discriminating against and institutional health care providers, including participants in medical training programs, who refused to, among other things, receive training in abortions; require or provide such training; perform abortions; or provide referrals for, or make arrangements for, such training or abortions.

Third, the Weldon Amendment to the Department's fiscal year 2005 appropriations act, and to subsequent years’ appropriations acts, prohibited the provision of HHS funds to any state or local government or federal agency or program that discriminates against institutional or individual health care entities on the basis that the entity does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortion.

HR 570  -  Threatens to Abolish Bush Freedom of Conscience Law

Immediate Action Necessary - By the April 9 deadline,  but continue to provide thereafter.  

Below is an Action Alert from Ralph Miech, M.D., Ph.D, Catholic Medical Association.  Dr. Miech asks us to take multiple actions against HR 570.  HR 570 would nullify the Dec 19, 2008, Provider Conscience Rule passed by President Bush.  It is imperative that we all do this. 

We must all follow instructions precisely.  It is also is important to use the provided http://www.freedom2care.org/  to enable CMA to count alerts. FYI - the Feedom2Care coalition's goal is to educate and persuade the public, policy makers and the medical community regarding conscience rights in healthcare. It is a movement of organizations and individuals who recognize the value of preserving historic American civil rights and freedoms in healthcare.  The immediate goal of the Freedom2Care coalition is to protect the federal "provider conscience" regulation finalized in December 2008 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Everyone is asked to:

  • communicate concerns with friends, co-workers, peers, loved ones, a
  • communicate with legislators CT and Federal legislators -- you can use the CMA site to do that. 
  • ask recipients of your emails to send the alert to their mailing lists, organizations,
  • send Letters to the Editor -- specifically to the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today and your newspapers. 
  • Use the CMA site "SHARE" tool to share the web site with your contacts.
  • If you feel comfortable sharing, send me copies which I can share as samples for the others 449 Gospel of Lifers to follow. 

At the http://www.freedom2care.org/  site, you may send your own message up to 2,500 characters (425 words) or their prepared message. If you do not follow instructions, your comments will not count.  In particular, be sure to put "Rescission Proposal" in the Subject line of your email and reply to the 4 specific questions listed only.  A general commentary is not what is wanted. Also be sure to check out the guidelines for each of the below.  Below are just some of the action items offered at this site. use this site to speak out on this.


Health Care Professionals

On publishing An Opinion (Gives tips on composing and writing your email)

Reporting a Personal Discrimination Case  -- if you are a medical professions (nurse, doctor, pharmacist, midwife, etc. -- they need many of these) 

Think about it  -- did you get transferred, fired or suffer a position change because of your beliefs and inability to participate in an abortion, sterilization, the distribution of birth control, IVF, or other non pro-life treatment or procedure.  Once your beliefs became known, did you get overlooked for a promotion, forfeit a raise, get an inhuman amount of work while others sit around, or get harassed in any other way? Was the nature of your work changed drastically?

To Just Share Your Discrimination Story with CMA (you have a choice to keep it private)

In our last round of mailings on this, the many comments we got from opponents and news editors centered on a concern that some patients would have difficulty getting  "controversial" treatments that must be administered within hours. The typical example provided is a woman who needs Plan B.  Our response was that Plan B or any medical treatments can be readily provided by medical staff and pharmacists who do not have objections.  For a hospital or pharmecist, it just a matter of personnel scheduling to ensure that there is always someone available who does not object. Additionally, very few procedures are so time sensitive -- in terms of hours. This law is not necessary and is harassment against the Catholics and religious and doctors and nurses of any religion who seriously follow the Hippocratic Oath (though many new doctors may not have had to swear to observing the oath, most doctors of all ages act by it.  It is through their desire to help, not kill people, that they become doctors.)

We need to arose all Catholics on this one
If this law goes through, we may drive good doctors and nurses out of the profession.  Consider....how good would the resulting quality of healthcare be?  Will there be enough doctors and nurses for the aging baby boomer population?  If there are not enough doctors and nurses available, how often can one expect to be seen?  be treated?  be healed?  What could might the healthcare environment be like if this bill is passed and combined with the new Stimulus Health Care Plan which was already passed (go to information on it from the Table of Contents).  Care-fully consider all of the possibilities and consequences, and go into action for us in America.  

As of April 7,
Gospel of Life has been responsible for
action alerts sent to this site according to the
Catholic Medical Association
who has been tracking sources.

ngoing Action To Take -- even if the bill passes:

Keep sending your action alerts to the above site.  Especially send cases of discrimination (you do not have to put your name, though it would be helpful).

Keep writing your legislators (state and federal) in support of this. Emphasis should be on:

Freedom of conscience regarding abortion, sterilizations, abortifacient contraceptives -- our CT4Women site provides a great deal of medical and psychological information on these issues. 

Voice your concern about Catholic and secular hospitals and pharmacists being forced to provide Plan B.  Read about the ACLJ Legal Win in a Pharmacist Case in Illinois.

Your concern about doctors being forced to participate in the withholding of typical treatments for seniors and the chronic or terminally ill, assisted suicide, etc. See the Catholic News Service article.

The baby boomers are growing older, but with abortion, there will not be enough health care workers to take care of them.  We do not need to force the small ratio of medical professionals we will have into other careers or force Catholic Hospitals to close down.

Your interest in protecting Catholic medical institutions which give high quality services as well as religious support.  Share info from Thompson Reuters annual list of 100 Top Hospitals in the US -- it includes 9 Catholic hospitals and 28 centers.  St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix is in the No. 1 spot!!!  Please write to prevent our president from forcing these institutions to act their conscience and close.

The fact that destroying freedom of conscience is against our freedom of religion and speech, guaranteed by the constitution, 

Question how can the government justify this which is a migration away from being a constitution-based form of government -- a republic. Have we voted on becoming something other than a republic?

Reflect inputs from the USCCB:

USCCB Web site for this issue

Bishops urge new president to keep laws on conscience rights, Jan 19, 2009

USCCB comments cite reasons for HHS to keep conscience regulation, Mar 23, 2009

Efforts to end conscience protections threatens all rights, says bishop, Mar 25, 2009


As we know, the ban on Mexico City Policy is really a form of population control. There are myths about over-population and the need to manage its growth.  See:

 Forces in our world use the myths to justify poor healthcare, abortion, sterialization, Euthanasia, war and other human-killing programs throughout the world.

Discussion:   In our meetings, we have talked about the role the U.S. has played in global population control including the ban on the Mexico City Policy, 1-Child Only program across China, India, and other territorys and countries, with forced abortions and sterilizations.  We also named certain organizations have been known to fight for human rights, were discovered not to support pro-life, and to support individual abortion and abortion programs other countries. As an example, see the news releases on Amnesty International, UNICEF, and the U.S. Agency for International Development and U.N.

A release on the USAID and UN, by Hilary White, exemplifies the plight of other countries -- "the leader of the Pro-life Indian group, Trust God Ministry, told LifeSiteNew.com editor John Henry Westen that moneyed interests and western-based population control groups were creating an environment of coercion among Indian families to avoid children. Kattukaran explained, "The Americans, the UN and other funding agents, when they release some funds as loans they ask our statistics on birth control, and insist on family planning criteria, only then do they pump money." "Our politicians," he says, "take that money and promise" to carry out the population control agenda. Kattukaran said that the population problem in Kerala is not too many, but too few children and an ageing population. The birthrate is already below replacement among most of the families in this state that has the highest education level in India. 

It is interesting that an area that has the "highest education level" is included in these forced abortion/sterilization programs.  If this comes to America, under the FOCA or other program, will a high education and professional career safeguard the reproductive freedom of some American families? 

The United Nations Grand Award will be presented in November, in London as part of the annual awards ceremony of the International Public Relations Association". 

Take A Minute - Take Action -  Sign a Petition:
To sign this petition sent by Bob Muckle, CT Right to Life (CRLC), just click HERE and fill in the blanks .

General Information and History

For background on the thoughts and ideas behind worldwide 'population control' programs, watch the below video by Richard Weikart, is head of department of history at California State University, Stanislaus, and is a senior fellow for the Center for Science and Culture of the Discovery Institute.[1] In 1997 he joined the editorial board of the Access Research Network's Origins & Design Journal.[2]


In this video, below,
Dr. Richard Weikart is an extremely insightful,
relating in science, history, and theology in such a way that
he gives solid visibility to the real and immediate dangers we are in.


It explains the history that has led up to implementations of massive population control in this century (which has included the aborting of 1/3 or the American population at the rate of 4,000 babies or more per day.  He points out that population control is an application of Eugenics, Darwinism, and Moral Relativism -- replete with ideas of the useless or negative value of some inferior human qualities that made humans a burden on others and injurious to society -- especially with reference to the mentally ill, those with disabilities, skull structures that remind of primates, and certain races. He demonstrates that many leading Darwinian biologists and social thinkers in Germany believed that Darwinism overturned traditional Judeo-Christian and Enlightenment ethics, especially those pertaining to the sacredness of human life. Those ideas supported human inequality, devaluation of humans, led to the idea there was not a human soul separate from the body, which led to the justification of infanticide to reduce births of what were considered to be unfit people. Justifications extended to killing at all stages of life, first abortions, then elders and terminally, compulsory sterilization, and including the killing of "unfit" children.   Hitler, who implemented much of this, imposed forced sterilization on some groups and forced Euthenasia. The demise of Hitler did not stop the currents, which actually existed before Hitler, carried him along, and now are interfering with the natural evolution of humanity -- especially in the past 30 years since Roe vs. Wade.  Those who favor this will be against any ban on partial birth abortion because it would admit that the baby is human, and put an end to all abortion, and injure global Eugenics campaigns.

"The History of the Culture of Death"  by Fr. Greg Markey

This was a presentation given by Fr. Markey during our Jan 1, 2008 meeting. (To review the minutes, go to the library and 2008 table. It is at the top of the table).

Fr. Markey confirms that the Culture of Death, is an outcome of forces present in the U.S. and world that are seeking to re-engineer populations -- justifying this by promoting the noble goal "to improve mankind".  This philosophy was previously called Eugenics, Darwinism, and Moral Relativism.  As people throughout the world began to catch on to it and perceive it more as a "Frankenstien Philosophy" or realize that it was really about gaining world power over the masses, rather than something that will improve mankind, it became re marketed as 'population control'. Pranks at various universities about world statistics instilled fear about running out of food for the large populations won this disguised philosophy popular support. These forces have supported Hitler and the contraceptive-abortion industry, and they have been gaining tremendous momentum through the decades, moving toward having global stronghold. Review the minutes of Fr. Markey's presentation to track developments. 

The Good News - They Can Only be As Strong As We and the Vatican Let Them

The Vatican has been a strong anti-Eugenics, anti-population control force, in the world.  This is why opposing forces are using multiple strategies to severely damage the Catholic Church.  They include the planting enemies within the Church that work to immobilize it or steer it in wrong directions.  Sometimes, hostility is directed toward the Vatican from outside of it, such as from the UN.  For example, in a July 19, 2007, issue of The Economist, written by an unsigned opposing group, called on the Vatican to remove itself from its permanent observer status at the United Nations and become a non-governmental organization alongside the myriad of pressure groups which form the UN's body of NGOs."  The Vatican stood firm. Yet, there opposing currents within the Church which is why, we the laity, must be clear minded, persistent, and focused on the goal at hand -- to fight against population control and for Pro-life on all levels -- community, national and global, and to support our good clergy.  For instance, it was wonderful how so many of you wrote to the Bishops and Cardinals who spoke up when certain legislators, such as Nancy Pelosi misrepresented our faith. This support is tremendously helpful to them.  Also helpful to them is knowing that we are becoming wise and doing what is on this page. 

In the 1968 Humanae Vitae Encyclical Letter, Pope Paul VI made a strong stand against these forces.  He wrote:

The transmission of human life is a most serious role in which married people collaborate freely and responsibly with God the Creator. It has always been a source of great joy to them, even though it sometimes entails many difficulties and hardships.

The fulfillment of this duty has always posed problems to the conscience of married people, but the recent course of human society and the concomitant changes have provoked new questions. The Church cannot ignore these questions, for they concern matters intimately connected with the life and happiness of human beings.

In his talk, Fr. Markey emphasized that:

  • That marriage must be both procreative and unitive, and that "removing the procreative aspect" makes it an unnatural act.
  • Humanae Vitae is an infallible teaching and is binding on all Catholics. 
  • The Catholic Church has been protected from embracing any of the predominent false teaching about population control by the protection of the Holy Spirit given to Peter in Scripture. While all the other churches and theologians became blinded or fell to the pressure, Pope Paul VI spoke out against it.  His teachings went against the masses and the reaction was vocal dissent -- theologians absolutely opposed this encyclical and invited the laity to join them. 

Pope Paul VI prophesied the consequences we are experiencing now of artificial birth control including:

o The general lowering of morality
o The loss of respect for women
o Governments that force contraception upon the people ........

We see our government beginning to do this now by rescinding the Mexico City Policy.  Contraceptives will be distributed massively.

The opposition who promote population control, like to try to win our minds and hearts by claiming they are helping third world countries to do better "Family Planning" or "Natural Family Planning".  Beware - this is all hype.  Natural family planning systems do not give the pill and do not use artificial hormones of any kind. Nor do they suppress aspects of a woman's natural cycle, but instead cooperate with its phases.  To postpone pregnancy, they require the couple to abstain during fertile times in the month.  For Church approval, there must be a good reason to postpone pregnancy. 

This is nothing like the programs being generated in other countries and in the U.S. where contraception has become the norm.  Students have been brain washed to embrace it "because it gives them freedom and independence".  But, contraception also leads to more sex.  I spoke with a transfer student from China and she could not see anything wrong with this picture. When I pointed out that contraceptives, such as the pill, can fail up to 30% of the time when medicines and histamines are taken, she still did not see anything wrong.  Her friend, who goes to a university in the US, told me she was told in her health clinic that it was okay to have up to three abortions before you get married, and that this was common. (She's in a university with 40,000 students.) . In China, I was told, it is noble to get abortions because China is a growing and upcoming country, and having too many children to care for would hold China back.  The Chinese student thought the whole Chinese plan and government funding of China was very sophisticated and she was pleased to be part of it by dutifully getting her abortions.  When we discussed how prolonged use of contraceptives or botched abortions could lead to infertility and miscarriages, she finally took my business card.

This brainwashing has been happening in parallel with the development of the population control philosophy for decades, here in the US, and in the world.

Actions to Take:

  • Educate yourself and loved ones through recommended books and links. 
  • Read the below three books that Fr. Markey recommended to us:

    "The War Against Population" -  by Jacqueline Kasun

    "Architects for the Culture of Death"  -  by Donald DeMarco

    "The Facts of Life" -  by Brian Clowes, PhD. 
    (Fr. Markey stressed the importance of this reference book in particular)

  • Vote for pro-life everywhere on the globe - we must work to help the vulnerable who live in remote areas and cannot help themselves in legislative arenas. 
  • Keep encouraging and educating your clergy so that they can speak out for us (share information from meetings and this site)..
  • Keep writing your state and federal legislators of you disapproval of the rescinding of the Mexico City Policy and share information from meetings and this site.

    Give legislators at least 5 solid reasons why fighting against the Mexico City Policy ban or other forms of population control (massively promoted contraceptive, abortion, Plan B, and sterilization programs) should matter to the legislator -- your goal is to change their opinion so much so that they would be willing to work against their peers.  Essentially, to convert them.

    A way to be effective is to paint a picture of what could happen to them and their families if the forced abortions and sterilizations that they permit to happen in other countries were to come to the U.S. (which they probably will.) Realize too that they have hardships too that they are dealing with. Help them to connect the dots.  For example, they may have a Down Syndrome child or grandchild, daughters who have had multiple abortions, sons who have fathered a child outside of marriage, have a daughter on contraceptives, have a daughter who had IVF and multiple births and the children have severe learning disabilities, have older parents who require allot of nursing care, and so on.  If population control comes to the US, to the degree it is implemented in other places in the world, the Downs babies may not be allowed to live, multiple births could be limited to 2, children with learning disabilities may not be helped that much, boys who keep fathering children might be sterilized, girls on contraceptives who get pregnant too many time may become sterilized, children with mental disabilities or severe learning disabilities would be sterilized, older people would be euthanized when their care costs mount, etc.  Help them to think ahead to the horrific damage that could be done right here.  Pray before you write anything, if possible, fast, do research and then ask the Holy Spirit to guide you. Plant some seeds, and keep writing to water them.



All legislators, on both sides, agree that improvements are necessary to make health insurance more affordable to all groups of people. However, there are many issues and most concerned Americans are wondering why the rush.  Most people take more time to plan their next year's vacation or select a new family car.  Many are also wondering why we are being pushed to trash a healthcare plan that is working well, that people from Canada and the UK visit for, and that only needs some thoughtful modifications  -- such as those listed below -- some of which are part of the Patient's Choice Plan presented by Senator Coburn, the suggested plan put forth by the John Mackey, the CEO of Whole Foods, the plan by Sen. Charles Grassley's Senate Finance Committee, suggestions offered by other Senators, and ideas delivered by business executives who have C-level corporate and infrastructure integration experience such as the CEO of Whole Foods.   These wisely achieve the desired goals to improve care while cutting costs (the Patient's Choice reduces costs by 20% rather than increasing costs to $1.6 trillion over 13 years), eliminate THE NEED FOR BIG BROTHER TYPE METHODS, keep patients feed, treated and hydrated to natural death, keep doctors empowered, provide doctors with salaries appropriate for their specialties, ensure conscience protection, and retain the intimate patient-doctor relationship.  Proposed ideas by Republican and business executives would also give visibility to hospital mortality rates, collect and report statistics, give visibility to cost metrics, and offer more P/L accountability...while they also:

  • tune health policies and procedures to improve care using latest technologies, methodologies, and treatment systems
  • reduce costs by eliminating redundancies, waste and fraud, and by leveraging systems
  • decrease government regulations, involvement and red tape by streamlining and consolidating operating and partnering procedures and processes
  • support reduced private provider costs by supporting holding companies, partnering, innovative outsourcing services, etc.
  • drive costs down by increasing competition between private insurance agencies -- easily done by repealing some of the laws that restrict competition such as the
    laws that prevent us from purchasing out of state insurance, giving incentives to companies to make policies mobile, and to offer timeframe packages to patients, offer patients incentives to maintain health (not smoke, exercise, etc.) rather than penalize them.  

We Catholics also need both contraceptive and abortion programs to be deleted --  for our votes in upcoming elections. Catholic Bishops are asking for life to be respected from conception to natural death. They also want their doctors to be protected by conscience laws.  Yet, the Capps Amendment, was rejected by a forced second vote.  It would have controlled or eliminated abortion. 

On initial consideration of this amendment, the committee members agreed by a 31 to 27 vote to include it. The approval was made possible by eight Democrats who joined Republicans voting in favor. However, a few hours after passage, Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) made a motion for the committee to reconsider the amendment, and only Stupak of Michigan broke ranks with Democrats to oppose reconsideration.

When the amendment was given reconsideration, it was defeated by a vote of 30 to 29. Waxman, who voted in favor initially (likely so that he could bring the amendment back before the committee), voted against. U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN) changed his vote to oppose the amendment during reconsideration, and U.S. Rep. Zack Space (D-OH), who had not voted initially, also voted against.

Notice, when it was finally rejected, the vote was 30 to 29 (this close vote shows why it is critical to write your legislators).  At this point it is prudent to remind us all that abortion is an intrinsic sin like Euthanasia, see http://deacbench.blogspot.com/2009/04/on-intrinsic-evil.html.  To refrain from fighting against it, is also a sin.  Let's educate and encourage legislators who are pro-life to keep those amendments happening despite setbacks.  Please write them.

Tax payers, who are accustomed to paying for bridges, roads, and generic people services, do not want to pay for abortions, especially in an atmosphere where contraceptives will be promoted massively, and the numbers of abortions will increase.  Parents, too, are alarmed.  They are already disrespectfully left out of the loop on abortions in many states that have not legalized parental notification and allow late term abortions.   Parents, with teenagers who are under the age of 25, when the frontal lobes of their brains are not yet fully developed (latest research based on MRI findings) , suffer knowing that if their gullible teen becomes pregnant, she may be herded into an abortion clinic, that will damage her body, mind and soul forever.  Young girls are taken advantage of by the abortion industry and will be further abused by a health care system that includes abortion.   We must fight this intrinsic sin.

People who are part of minorities that require more health care, such as the disabled or those with HIV or AIDs, want to be treated with dignity and do not deserve treatment rationing (see Sec. 1177), Pg. 354   -- consider the indignity to elders who dutifully have paid their health insurance premiums, on time, every month, for most of their lives and now have the length of their lives threatened and why?  to reduce costs.  For efficiency, they are being robbed of the opportunity to have a rich end-of life experience that brings family and God close, forced to suffer pain without treatments, and to consider ending their lives before they intended

Some say the "big rush" is to help those who do not have health insurance.  Republican Senators suggest we can handle this easily by making the poor aware of programs already in place for them like Huskies, medical drop-in clinics, and the proper use of ER. They also disclose that of the 47 million uninsured, most are young people who are healthy and prefer to be uninsured, leaving only 15 million who are involuntarily uninsured. To service this segment well is an important goal but not at the expense of the natural end of life of our elders and other Americans.  Pope John Paul II has repeatedly told us that an evil means does not justify a good end.

Issues that concern Americans, which were first proposed in the Stimulus Healthcare Plan and were carried over to HR 3200, have been added to. Concerns now cover a wide range and include healthcare costs that will escalate rather than decrease (as they do in monopolies), a 2.5% gross income tax for younger people who do not have public insurance (Section 401.59B Pg. 167 Lines 18 to 23), government access to private bank accounts for insurance and taxes  (Section 163, Pgs 58 to 59, line 5 and lines 21 to 24), electronic health records for all people--

  • Sec. 1401, Pg. 503, Lines 13-19 - The government will build registries and data networks from YOUR electronic medical records. “The Center may secure directly from any department or agency of the United States information necessary to enable it to carry out this section.” 
  • Sec. 1401, Pg. 503, Lines 21-25 - The government may secure data directly from any department or agency of the US, including your data. 
  • Sec. 1401, Pg. 503, Lines 21-25 - The “Center” will collect data both “published and unpublished” (that means public & your private information). 
  • Sec. 1401, Pg. 506, Lines 19-21 - An “Appointed Clinical Perspective Advisory Panel” will advise The Center and recommend policies that would allow for public access of data. 
  • Sec. 1401, Pg. 518, Lines 21-25 - The Commission will have input from HC consumer representatives. 

state databases of newborn DNA (implemented 10 years ago in most states), discouraged competition between private insurance companies which has kept costs high, availability of private insurance plans (must purchase government plan on re-employment), rationed health care, and the promotion of the living will which was designed by Euthanasia promoters and discouraged by the American Life League and by Fr. Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Ph.D., with good cause, forced end-of life counseling (Sec. 1233, Pg. 425, Lines 4-12) at a time in the loves of patients when they tend to be depressed over their illnesses and typically feel they are a burden to others (this is a delicate situation that the government should stay out of).  There is no right to die. The Vatican statement on this is that "It is I who bring both death and life" (Dt 32:39).

Most importantly, these plans replace the patient-doctor relationship with a government-doctor-patient relationship.  Most people would not want the government telling them how to treat their animals or telling them when to put them down.  We do not want the government involved in any way in these private or family matters. 

Using Catholic logic, if we let this happen, we can expect government involvement in other private family matters such as which universities our children will go to (based on their analyzed DNA), family life, use of Natural Family Planning, volunteerism, and parent-child relationships, and so we slowly begin to move toward seriously interfering with God's plans for us as a human race.  What is pushing us in this direction, and why the need for deception and speed?  The following paragraphs discuss of just some of these concerns.

Recent 2008-9 History Leading up to HR 3200

When the Stimulus Plan --an economic plan -- was first provided, it was found to include a healthcare plan with provisions that scared many individuals across the nation, such as Senators, medical professionals, hospital C-level officers, pro-lifers, and Catholic clergy who challenged the designers of the healthcare provisions in news releases and articles -- some of which are provided here.

Much of HR 3200's legislation was migrated from the Stimulus Plan and is discussed below.

1)  The health care legislation provided in both the previous Stimulus Plan and the new HR 3200 infringes on the freedoms and privacy of all segments of society.  It specified an electronic health records system to include medical information on all Americans such as their age, treatments. history, conditions, legal data, mental health, abortions, impotence, sexual problems, STDs, patients labeled as a non-compliant, lawsuits against doctors, etc. Review the article by Bob Unruch, Jan 27, 2009, entitled "Economic stimulus? Feds want your Medical Records" located at http://revolutionradio.org/2009/01/28/economic-stimulus-feds-want-your-medical-records/ . These articles also share a concern that 1)  all data in the health records database is unprotected and may be shared with over 600,000 organizations in the industry,  2) it may be shared outside the industry (imagine credit cards, student loan orgs, or mortgage lending orgs), and 3) there are no provisions to give American a choice (in a pro-Choice country, this is interesting) and Americans would not have the choice to opt out  4) pre-existing conditions may also be known and made known to all who have access (patients pre-existing conditions will travel with them) 5) the structure will permit sliding payment scales of treatment and fees depending on pre-existing conditions, family history, behavioral habits, environmental exposures, and other variables. Sue A. Blevins, president of the Institute for Health Freedom shared in the Bob Unruch article, “Therefore the freedom to choose not to participate in a national electronic health-records system must be upheld.”

2)  The groups at greatest risk are the unborn and elderly followed by the chronically ill, the mentally ill, terminally ill and people who belong to groups prone to particular diseases through heredity or behavior (such as those at higher risk to get STDs), the disabled, and others who are vulnerable (born and unborn) . Some state lawmakers are already trying to authorize the collecting and storing of newborn DNA information. Twila Brase, president of Citizens' Council on Health Care, said “researchers already are looking for genes related to violence, crime and different behaviors.” -- see http://www.patientprivacyrights.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=7207.

3)  There has also been consternation and alarm that the public healthcare plan, which was designed to affect every part of healthcare -- from medical and nursing education to how patients are treated or not treated -- was provided as part of the Stimulus Plan and not as a standalone package that could be openly reviewed by a bipartisan community. In fact, little review time was provided for Stimulus Plan and now HR 3200 is being pushed through without much time for Replication review and bipartisan participation.  It may be passed as a partisan act without representation from Republican legislators or people.

4)  See the following articles by Betsy McCaughey, the former Lt. Governor of New York, and adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, promptly documented and precisely addresses some of the the key concerns with the proposed plans.  She clearly states that health care reform was deliberately being pushed through fast and refers to confirming statements in a book by Tom Daschle, "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis", who admits "the proposed healthcare reform will not be pain free".


5) The HR 3200 health care reform affects life and death health issues of “every individual in the United States”. Like the stimulus Plan it allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined". "It would impose an electronic health records system on every person in the U.S., would reduce both the quality and amount of health care Americans will receive, and it will require that Americans change their attitudes and expect less from healthcare systems..

6) ."Older citizens will especially be hit...by applying a cost-effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council ... A Federal Council is recommended in this bill and is modeled after a U. K. council -- a board that approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit.. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis ..Seniors in the U.S. would face greater rationing".

7) The cooperative has recently been mentioned by lawmakers as an alternative. Cato scholar Michael F. Cannon shares why this is not so different.  http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/08/17/co-ops-a-public-option-by-another-name/

High-Level Social Concerns:

The proposed plan and various versions promoted by the current administration contain hidden, long-term downsides that have been identified and carefully and thoughtfully review by some Democrats as well as many Republicans, clergy, and medical care professionals who are 1) educating and voicing concerns, 2) offering alternative 3) designing and presenting complete alternative plans. 

Rationed benefits for those on public healthcare: There is concern over the administration's plan(s) to reduce healthcare benefits to basics and implement a form of selective rationing. This would cause those on public healthcare, which would be predominantly the poor, to receive a lessor form of healthcare --  as they do in the UK and other countries that support government provided care. Timeliness of healthcare to the poor would also be decreased. 

Most private plans will be forced out of business - giving the government power over the health and life of the masses of Americans including middle and higher-come groups: These involve big government -- with governmental control of the health and life of a majority of American people. We are told that the new public healthcare plan would be provided along with Private Plans.  It is said that private plans would not be eliminated and competition would be encouraged in accordance with the American system. Senators argue soundly against this propaganda, saying that because Medicare and Medicaid support such large masses of people, Medicare/Medicaid get tremendous discounts from insurance providers, which they can pass on to the public and to medical groups.  There is great concern that most of the private insurance providers will not be able to compete and will almost disappear, except perhaps for those who can maintain their fees schedules and keep some loyal patients. The government's competitive advantage and elimination of most private providers would give the government power over the health and life of most in America. 

Much of the middle class American would be clearly impacted.  Families and individuals who have always had private insurance, through employers or privately, will increasingly find it difficult to continue to afford it, especially if required to pay higher taxes (as is currently planned) to pay for Stimulus Plan economic package as well as the healthcare of others, including immigrants and those who do not have healthcare and those who have been using hospital emergency rooms as clinics. As the numbers of illegal immigrants who come across our open borders increase and as many more unemployed are forced to use emergency rooms for medical care, the costs of healthcare will increase, because taxes will increase.  Many middle classes Americans, who remained loyal to their providers, will be forced away from private healthcare and onto government healthcare.

Some of those in higher-income America will also be impacted. How will private healthcare providers maintain full services, sufficient revenues and keep fees somewhat reasonable, even for those in higher income brackets, if the numbers of their members decreases yearly and while they continue to compete with public healthcare?  Already, some of the best doctor medical groups in New York are no longer accepting private healthcare plans and only Medicare/Medicaid because they get more money. Some are associated with several of the best hospitals in New York. 

HR 3200 - Articles and news releases by Senators


Rep Todd Tiahrt -- Kansas, 4th District
About Todd http://tiahrt.house.gov/?sectionid=45&sectiontree=45

Congressman Jerry Lewis, 41st Congress
http://www.house.gov/jerrylewis/february132009.html and also read....
http://www.house.gov/jerrylewis/january212009.html (a nice background)
About Jerry http://www.house.gov/jerrylewis/bio.html 
Jerry shaking hands with Pope John Paul II http://www.house.gov/jerrylewis/photos.html Includes a Jerry Lewis quote: Let us join hands with our Founding Fathers and eliminate the inordinate impact of the tyrant — spending — upon our way of life. In this time of war and economic challenges, all must make sacrifices. But the American taxpayer has limits. We must not ask him or her to shoulder the burden of our unchecked government spending. It is time to join together and say, “Enough is enough.” Lewis is the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee.

Republican on Senate Finance Committee - Letter by all but one of ten - Oppose Public Health Care Plan All but one of the ten Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee signed a letter to President Obama today outlining their opposition to a so-called public option in a health care overhaul, illustrating what has become the sharpest divide between the two parties on this issue. "Washington-run programs undermine market-based competition through their ability to impose price controls and shift costs to other purchasers," the Republicans wrote. "Forcing free market plans to compete with these government-run programs would create an un level playing field and inevitably doom true competition." For the full article by Perry Bacon Jr, Washington Post, see:

Senator Chuck Grassley, R - Iowa (the top Republican on the Finance Committee),
and Senator Mike Enzi, Wyoming (top Republican on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee) 
They each sharply criticized the public plan. 
Refer to the article in the Phoenix paper, the East Valley Tribune. http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/140059  The Senators said bipartisan efforts to design reasonable plans were thwarted -- almost halted -- when it was imposed by the administration that the overall plan design must have a public health care component. They said this was a tremendous setback. Obama wrote "keep insurance companies honest," but these and other Senators are against the inclusion of a public plan because it will force private plans out of business and give the government a monopoly. This is overkill.

Senator Grassley, in another article, shared that he had not determined whether the spending cuts Mr. Obama has outlined were realistic. He offers suggestions in his article, "Health Care in America".

Senators Coburn, Burr and Rep Ryan, Nunes
Offer a Better Plan on Health Care Reform
called the Patient's Choice. On the cost front, our bill gives every American a generous tax credit ($2,290 per individual, $5,710 per family) to purchase health insurance. We do this by ending the current discrimination in the tax code that gives people a tax break if they receive health coverage from their employee but no benefit if they are self-employed or unemployed. The rules governing our current, employer based, health care system were made in the 1940's when Americans stayed in the same job far longer than they do today. Ending the employee exclusion will end job-lock and put the individual and their doctor back in charge of health care. This is a bold proposal that would dramatically reform our health care system. We address a number of questions related to this provision in our materials...Many people ask: How will a $5,710 tax credit help someone buy coverage when the average plan costs about $13,000? ...Our plan works because the employees only pay about one-third of their plan's premium. For example, the average family's annual employer-provided health insurance plan cost about $13,000 last year, with an employer paying about $8,600, while the employee only paid about $4,200 in annual premiums. Under the Patients' Choice Act, that family would have more than enough to cover their share ($4,200) and have a significant sum left over for any additional medical expenses. It's true that the funds the employer provides would now be taxable income just like salary but the point critics ignore is that the typical individual and family will still come out way ahead under our plan.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “We know that, if the government gets in this business, pretty soon nobody else will be in the business.” ... Mr. McConnell further said "Similar plans in other countries have led to delays in medical care, and that improvements to the system could be made with litigation reform and government incentive for wellness programs. “There are a whole lot of other things we can agree to do on a bipartisan basis that will dramatically improve our system,” -- he adds that “Americans are increasingly frustrated with the U.S. health care system as we know it — and they expect real reform, not just the promise of a reform that never comes, or the illusion of a reform that ends up destroying what’s good about the current system and replacing it with something worse,,,All of us want reform, but not reform that denies, delays, or rations health care. Instead, we need reform that controls costs even as it protects patients". see http://mcconnell.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=314172&start=1http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/health/policy/15healthcare.html?ref=us Eventually, Americans would be stuck with government-run health care whether they like it or not. That’s when the worst scenario would take shape, with Americans subjected to bureaucratic hassles, hours spent on hold waiting for a government service rep to take a call, restrictions on care, and, yes, lifesaving treatment and lifesaving surgeries denied or delayed. “Medical decisions should be made by doctors and patients. But once the government is in control, politicians and bureaucrats will be the ones telling people what kind of care they can have. Senator McConnell warns against those to suggest that a public plan need not be competitive against the private sector; that controls can be put in.  He said this is bait and switch.  Eventually any added controls will be lifted and we will wind up with a public plan and failed private plans where Americans could find themselves being told they’re too old to qualify for a procedure, or that a treatment that could extend or improve their lives is too expensive. And if anyone doubts this could happen, they should consider what happened to Bruce Hardy see http://mcconnell.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=313972&start=1.



The probability is high (over 80%) that most of the private plans will become eliminated over time, leaving the government with a near-monopoly. As with any monopoly, there are too many opportunities for conflicts of interest and misuse.  The government would have an unfair advantages over Americans, just as it does over private healthcare providers.  Americans would be at the mercy of current and future administrations just as private healthcare providers are now at the mercy of our current administration.  This we do not want.  We do not want American freedoms to be compromised by a monopoly over services that are necessary to health and life. 

Despite what we are told by legislators who promote a single governmental healthcare system, we do not know that we can trust any government or administration to behave fairly while in possession of a monopoly like healthcare.  Consider.....

  • Could a government monopoly on healthcare actually become another tool for global population re-engineering, or control?
  • Can the will of the American people for fair and just healthcare become secondary to satisfying the requirements of our global alliances? 
  • Can American's be forced to act against their conscience or abstain from their religious practices in order to have healthcare? Under what circumstances?
  • Can our government use healthcare as a way to drive Americas toward becoming a non-Republic, non-free, secondary country?

Consider some "What if's"

We can expect that the numbers of people on public healthcare will increase dramatically yearly.  To cover rising costs, fees and taxes will have to increase.  How will the government make healthcare available to Americans who cannot afford to pay? Can we trust any administration to provide help without strings, in the right and moral way if:

  • Our previous and current administration have already shown that they are committed to helping to improve the economic financials of global alliances such as China by reducing their populations, through massive abortion and sterilization programs 
  • These programs are not likely to decrease (Clinton supported them, Bush did not, and now Obama supports them).  They achieve population reduction in ways that are more socially acceptable (than mass annihilation) and ways that their more sophisticated citizens could be convinced to buy into and even support.  Families, women, and university students are encouraged to abort to help the economy of their country -- be patriotic.  They are rewarded -- treated as heroes.  Poorer citizens, in remote territories, who find it more difficult to buy in and resist, are being forced to comply and penalized.  Fathers are put in jail, mothers are sterilized, and homes are burned down. (See the many articles provided in the subsection called Mexico City Policy.)
  • In return, our government receives loans with good terms -- trillions of dollars.

Could our government, which has installed programs across the globe -- to murder masses of unborn innocent children and sterilize mothers (God's gift to mankind) -- be capable of implementing similarly abusive programs on Americans to achieve similar goals? Is it unthinkable that such one or more of its administrations would use similar techniques on us.  For example, that they might help families who cannot pay for public healthcare to have it by aligning with government requirements, such as the requirement to keep families small by aborting additional children and giving them financial incentives to do so? Or, could it be capable of encouraging abortions rather than births by not fully covering births in healthcare plans and totally covering abortions? See Sec. 203, Pg. 85, Line 7 - Perhaps, the poor families will also be helped with more assistance for college. Is it possible that this government might also require assisted students to participate in government programs -- such as volunteer programs, army or join UN troops (see Sec. 205, Pg. 95, Lines 8-18).  Could such families and students be required to support an increasing less-Republic form of government, such as a subdued socialistic or communistic government? What choices would families have if they want to stay insured? To receive services from doctors and hospitals?  Is it possible, that all persons in the US will be forced to carry public insurance? Is it possible, that all doctors and hospitals will be required to help only those with public insurance. Already, the HR 3200 contains some of these provisions.  What about non American citizens (see Sec. 59B, Pg. 170, Line 1?


Recommended Actions: 

Review the Plan and research possibilities, and S ign the Declaration of American Values   Also:

1) Keeping investigating and discerning the issues -- educate and write your legislators about them.

2) Request bipartison involvement by the many Senators shown on this page and others who have good ideas to contribute to the plan

3) Ask legislators to promote the wishes of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops especially check the new Web site.  Insist that the plan not include abortion or contraceptive programs, respect life from conception to natural death, and protect conscience laws for medical professionals. At risk here are 624 Catholic hospitals. Please do your utmost to fight to our Catholic requirements.  Ask that we Catholics be represented.  We do good in the world that cannot be replaced by a socialistic government.  

4) Write editorials -- use the Senator news releases, quotes and information as your sources.

5)  Spread the word to your loved ones and friends.  Help them to understand the key function the abortion industry plays in America's role as a global partner and alliance.

Act quickly. Decisions will be made soon.



FEB 9 --  GOOD NEWS ON CLONING!  Click to the subsection below.

FAMILY INSTITUTE OF CONNECTICUT - Pro-Family Candidates Hold the Line!           

The Family Institute of Connecticut Action Committee endorsed 8 candidates for the State Senate—including 3 pro-family incumbents—and 40 candidates for the State House of Representatives—including 28 pro-family incumbents. We expected the Democratic tsunami to sweep many of our best legislators from office. Consequently, our #1 goal was to play defense: to save as many pro-family incumbents as we can and focus on replacing retiring anti-family Republicans in the Senate with pro-family Republicans.

As a result, 29 of the 31 pro-family incumbents won their races. A State Senate seat held by a retiring legislator with a 0% pro-family voting record has been won by a legislator with a 100% pro-family voting record! And another State Senate seat held by a retiring legislator with only a 40% pro-family voting record was won by an FIC Action Committee-endorsed candidate who defeated a Love Makes a Family-backed candidate!  In fact, most of our Senate candidates—5 out of 8—won. In a year that saw enormous gains for anti-family candidates in other states, these are extraordinary accomplishments.

According to unofficial results, we lost only two pro-family incumbents. Connecticut's pundits are declaring the election a major blow to the GOP in our state. But the results listed above show that a strong and successful pro-family movement is emerging out of the death of northeastern liberal Republicanism....

There are dark days ahead for the pro-family cause in Connecticut. But we can face them knowing that FIC Action Committee "held the line"...and that—come what may—the pro-family movement will continue to be the first line of resistance against the secularist Left's attack on our values.


David Crary - Associated Press Writer - 11/5/2008 6:10:00 AM

WASHINGTON - Pro-family forces scored major victories in at least three states last night with passages of marriage amendments and a ban against homosexual adoption. California's Proposition 8 to protect traditional marriage is still too close to call.  Of the 153 measures at stake nationwide, the most momentous was the proposed constitutional amendment in California that would limit marriage to heterosexual couples.

Similar measures had prevailed in 27 states before Tuesday's elections, but none were in California's situation - with thousands of gay couples already married following a state Supreme Court ruling in May. The opposing sides together raised about $70 million, much of it from out of state, to wage their campaigns. The outcome, either way, will have a huge impact on prospects for spreading same-sex marriage to the 47 states that do not allow it.

According to exit polls:

blacks were far more likely than whites or Hispanics to support the ban.

voters under 30 opposing the ban by a 2-to-1 ratio

most voters 60 and older supported the ban.

the YES forces for the ban led the NO camp by a 52 to 48 percent margin. 

Amendments to ban gay marriage were approved in Arizona and Florida.  

And homosexual forces also suffered defeat in Arkansas, where voters approved a measure banning unmarried couples from serving as adoptive or foster parents.


Kingdom First Ministries wanted to ministry to inner-city residents, reaching out also to drug addicts, the homeless, and the like. But Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney David Cortman tells OneNewsNow that church officials ran into a stumbling block.
"They had found an area [of town] that they wanted to minister to," the attorney explains. "It was a high-crime area, a lot of at-risk kids, plenty of empty buildings and rundown shops. And so they entered a lease [in November 2007] to begin their church ministry, only to find out that the city had changed its zoning code." Under the new zoning code, restaurants, bars, and other non-profit groups were permitted -- but churches were not. ADF filed suit in federal court, and at that point Atlanta backed down deciding to permit the church to operate after fighting them one year in which the church had to pay for the lease and renovation, lost staff, and lost members. Cortman says Atlanta owes his client damages.
"That's actually a part of the case that continues to go on," says Cortman. "Getting them in the building, of course, was the first priority. But now we have to work with the city to get those damages recouped, because it cost the church thousands and thousands of dollars." 
Still, ADF says it commends the city for not trying to "bully" the church and, instead, agreeing to the court order that allows the church to begin meeting in its rented building immediately.




To be an instrument of God, individuals must be free. 
Freedom thrives only in a Republic.
With decades of non-constitutional Supreme Court Rulings on state and federal levels,
We no longer live in a Republic.


The same-sex ruling imposed on people in Connecticut by the Connecticut Supreme Court is not supported by the constitution and is not in alignment with our Republic as are other similar rulings such as those favoring homosexuality, abortion, pornography, diminished prayers in schools, and restrictions on religious freedoms -- which restrict the freedoms of the majority. 

Distinguished Fellow, Robert Bork, Hudson Institute and Ave Maria School of Law states in his book The Tempting of America, that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the Framers' original understanding of the constitutional text. An advocate for judicial restraint, he reiterates that it is the Court's task to adjudicate, not to legislate, from the bench. He further clarifies that Supreme Courts who impose rulings that are not supported by the constitution, are engaging in judicial activism, which is "legislating from the bench on issues that would not pass muster at the ballot box (and are not constitutional), even when the decisions 'cannot plausibly be connected to the law [justices are] citing.' "

In a C-Span broadcast, Nov 9, he explained the danger -- we are moving away from being a Republic form of government.  He explained any rulings courts impose on states and governments that are not consistent with our constitution change our government into something other than a Republic.  Thus, with a good number of non-constitutional rulings (such as rulings that favor abortion, homosexuality, etc.) we can now say that we lack a Republic -- that we have another variant form of government.  This trend should be of great concern to the American people.  In this book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah, he blames "liberals" for America's "cultural decline.

Bork discussed a trend over several decades for the courts to become the principality of a "New Class" composed of liberal journalists and academics, fueled by radical activists -- he also refers to them as the "Olympians in that they believe themselves to be superior and do not care about procedure or accountability, but only about getting the results they want. Their thoughts are that leaving public policy up to the people would be a political nightmare. They are global and are systematically imposing their views on worldwide governments. Their impact is as deep as it is wide.  For example, in the US, President Bush's capacity to wage war was strangled by them.

What to do? 

1) We need to become smarter and more effective in politics.

We need to be smarket at higher supreme court and executive branch levels, more familiar with our constitution, better know our CT state elected officials and federal officials, efficiently track upcoming bills, and effectively respond to them.  We must also strategize with our lobbyists and elected officials to select judges that will support the constitution and not try to set policy for Americans.  Bork said we can still turn things around, but we must be wise.  We must be careful of the opposition's major argument to justify ignoring the constitution and moving away from a Republic form of government -- that is, that rulings must take into account the conditions of today's world.  Bork says "Yes, but the principles do not change though the world changes-- the broad principles of 'life' 'freedom', 'liberty', of 'free government', etc, do not change -- to suit Olympians, homosexuals, and females seeking independence from their bodies.  

Abortion murders -- robs humans of the freedom of life

Abortion strips women and men of their dignity

Same sex marriage is against religious freedoms

Plan B is against religious freedoms

For Pro-life movement to exist, free speech must be preserved

Equality to all people must be ensured


2)  Learn from some of our neighbors.  Specifically, listen to Daniel Hannan, a member of the Parliament in the UK.  Enjoy: 



2)  Become cognizant of the real, developing dangers to our freedoms to empower ourselves. 

For example, read a 2007 article by the NRLC.  A coalition of special-interest groups, funded in large part by unions and liberal foundations, is working with the new Democratic leadership in Congress to enact laws that would restrict what they call "grassroots lobbying" – by which they mean organized efforts to motivate members of the public to communicate with their congressional representatives about pending legislation.  Section (Section 220)  defined "grassroots lobbying," as "the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same." Under Section 220, a group or individual who engaged in "paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying" would have been forced to register with Congress as a federal lobbyist or even as a "grassroots lobbying firm," and to file complicated quarterly reports with Congress.  This requirement would have applied, for example, to some paid staff members of state right-to-life organizations, and many other citizen activists across the political spectrum .Violation of the bill's requirements would be punishable by a civil fine of up to a $200,000 fine per infraction.  "Corrupt" violations would also be punishable by up to 10 years in federal prison – all with the determination of whether a given violation was considered  "corrupt" to be made by a U.S.agency (no jury).  

Here's another thought.  What will happen to American people if we keep letting our govt force abortion and sterilization on other countries. What will happen to us when our government cannot pay back the money we owe China. Who will be blamed. Will our non-Republic and China impose a 1-child per family on us until we pay our debts back. Do we have any masses of people that might be used as scapegoats? 

4)  We must form and build a strong Legislative Committee and to enable us to be proactive.

Let's check with our CT lobbyists regularly, know what issues they are working on, know what candidates they are donating to, visit the NRLC and sites at the top of this page regularly, and meet to in "think tank" fashion to design a "go forward" plan for ourselves. Let's also start talking with lobbyists and right to life orgs in other states to identify what we can jointly do as as the people in a nation to discourage further abuses of the constitution and our Republic.

a)  The Declaration of Independence says that when there is a "long train of abuses and usurpations" it is the right of the people to provide new "Guards for their future Security". 

b)  Bork says that if there is little that can be done politically at the state level (with its supreme court rulings etc), then operate on a federal level or operate on a global level or both. Get educated on the protocols and methods. Below this section is a global petition that was presented by a group of scientists to the UN on Oct 28, 2008, to define "human" as starting at conception. It is a good example of things we can do above the heads of our supreme court to influence outcomes. The Internet offers many national and global levels pro-life sites that keep us up to date on for-action issues, and support the networking that we are beginning to do with national and global Pro-life organizations.  We are headed in the right direction.

5) We also need to engage more of the Catholics in CT. 

Perhaps the key is to form pro-life groups in parishes, but this time use a different name -- call them the "Society" and give them an exciting new agenda that involves giving to their parishioners some things that are needed.. Steer away from old connotations of pro-life groups and start with a fresh new image.

For example, train the Pro-life group to give new moms books on parenting, introduce them to FertilityCare, bring home made dinners during the first weeks after birth, bring youth to the Annual March for Life, schedule speakers from universities for youth, set parents of teens up with a Chastity/Abstinence program (DVD on Theology of the Body for Teens, books, instructions on how to facilitate parent group meetings in the homes, how to stage monthly dances for the teens (to control who they socialize with), etc.  

6) Only support legislators and organizations that are pro-life.

In CT and across the globe such as the NRLC. But, beware, as some large and global organizations that fight for rights are not necessarily supportive of pro-life -- they may impose abortion or euthanasia program. Do not give money to any charities or groups you are not fully aware of.  Better to give your money to your Church where you know the people. 

7)  Educate loved ones and friends -- and get the elderly online and give the kids and teens some grownup education on pro-life. 

Gift all loved ones and friends with some education and some assistance for a birthday present.  The opposition is good at targeting the young and old in their campaigns to promote liberal agendas.  The elderly miss out on so much by not being able to check out Web sites like those above.  Let's help them to stay in step.   (This is a major reason why we send copies of major flyers and minutes to all of the Gospel of Life people who do not have computers or have sight problems.  But, they still miss out on so much and we need their full participation.)  As for the children and teens, take them to Hartford, introduce them to legislators, teach them the issues, keep them informed, etc.   Above all, take them all to our Life Chain in Oct to introduce them to the joy of fighting for pro-life (it's fun holding signs, praying, and waving to cars that honk when they go by). 

We CAN make a difference - on earth and in heaven!   See a sampling of short videos on various global and US issues by Mike Huckabee video .



Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 11/5/2008 9:40:00 AM, http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=311636

The Colorado "personhood initiative" failed in Tuesday's election, but it has served as motivation to move forward on the issue. Amendment 48 -- which was handily defeated 73 to 27 percent -- was designed to declare that human life begins at conception, thereby legally defining an embryo as a person. Keith Mason of the Colorado campaign explains why that distinction is important.
"The court decision [in] Roe v. Wade...said if a case for personhood was ever established for the pre-born child, the case for abortion would fall apart," Mason explains. Roe v. Wade is the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.
Mason shares that the vote on the Colorado proposal was invigorating, even though it did fail. "During the campaign here in Colorado -- the first personhood amendment to reach the ballot -- we've received overwhelming support and encouragement from around the country," he says, "and enthusiasm to get personhood amendments going in different states around the nation."
That enthusiastic support has been sufficient to convince Mason to take the campaign nationwide.


The below petition is by Dr. James Sherley M.D., Ph.D,, Senior Scientist, Programs in Regenerative Biology and Cancer Biology - Boston Biomedical Research Institute (he spoke to the Gospel of Life Society last year). This is a step on a road to converting the definition of "human" to be "from time of conception".  This would automatically overturn all previous laws that support abortion, including Roe v Wade, FOCA if it passes, and any new health care plans or programs that include abortion. This petition was sent to key persons and organizations in the medical-scientific communities, and signatures collected.  We must keep adding to it. Send it to friends here in the U.S. and around the globe. Particularly members of the World Health Organization, Catholic Medical Association, Heritage Foundation medical professionals, and other high-visibility, financially leveraged organizations and donars.

Dr. Sherley’s Concern:
"The key issue is that in the UN's last consideration of this issue in 2005, the beginning of human life was not defined That's the key status that we need to change.  If embryos and unborn babies are internationally recognized as living human beings, then it follows, necessarily, according to UN precedence that they most be accorded human rights, which protects them from embryonic stem cell research, therapeutic cloning, and abortion.  Moral, compassionate, ethical scientists and physicians, must rush forward en mass to make this case clear and resounding."

The Gospel of Life Society’s Concern:  
If the UN continues in its current thinking, it could become a general immoral practice in the US to fund and support all forms of embryonic stem cell research and products.  It is also becoming a general practice to use all forms of adult stem cell that involve cloning, as a step, in the scientific research process and procedures to create products for the human market.

The Vatican is clear on its response to this -- this is morally evil in that  "Human cloning directly offends the dignity of the human being and God's plan for procreation". Also see http://www.americancatholic.org/News/Cloning/vatican_cloning.asp  and to verify that cloning and Euthanasia are intrinsic sins like abortion, see http://deacbench.blogspot.com/2009/04/on-intrinsic-evil.html.  There could also be all other varieties of atrocities including hybrid animal-humans -- which are already beginning to quietly happen across the globe -- for various reasons and for profit.  There is already the national promotion of abortion and the selling of body parts of aborted babies.   See http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Baby_Body_Parts/viewpage2.cfm?dirid=09&fname=9AGF-Price-list.jpg ).  If we can kill and sell the parts of human babies, it is only a matter of time when we will also justify growing and killing cloned babies for parts, and then the assisted suicide of the weak or elder humans, on demand, for the selling of their body parts and organs.  The Living Will makes it easy.  How removed is this from reality -- not at all. When we started killing babies, we began our slide down the slippery slope. 

Can we let all this happen? Absolutely not.  One thing we are here in America -- we are tough.  We can face ourselves and circumstances, take the steps necessary to stop destructive patterns. We are also smart enough to reject change for change's sake.  Look at all we went through to come to America -- all of us from all races.  Let's build on what our forefathers intended for us in America.  We have taken a wrong turn.  Let's turn back.  We are mentally strong, and, as Catholics or Christians, we can align ourselves with God and put God on our side. Maximize your Catholic strength and stand with God who says, "It is I who brings death and life" (DT 32:39) at http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0141/__PR.HTM.  Why not take steps to stop this spiral downward now. What can you do? Start by signing this petition, writing your legislators, creating a group, maybe a Gospel of Life Chapter.  Join us!  




Dear Colleagues and Friends:

    We are needed by the weakest of the human family.  We are scientists and physicians who can, by acting together, start the change that will safeguard the lives of countless innocents.   I am writing to each of you now in a crucial hour of need for securing human rights for human embryos and fetuses.  This hour of need can only be met by scientists and physicians who are knowledgeable of human biology and committed to ensuring ethical scientific research
that, in all things, respects the lives of all innocent human beings.

   Amnesty for Babies is continually making the case to the International Bioethics Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (IBC-UNESCO) that human therapeutic cloning violates the human rights of embryos.  IBC-UNESCO's ruling on this question has far-reaching implications for the UN's future position on embryonic stem cell research, cloning research, and abortion.  A future UN resolution to ban all such inhumane acts would be a significant deterrent to these practices worldwide.

    I have worked with members of Amnesty for Babies and the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children to develop a declaration from scientists and physicians to state their collective well-reasoned objection to practices that promote the death of embryos and fetuses.  Such a declaration will be a powerful message for change, not only to the UN, but also to the world at-large.

    I am writing to each of you to ask you to join me in immediately meeting this moment of urgent need with our virtuous caring collective action.  Please, visit this web site (http://www.amnestyforbabies.com/scidec) to read and ENDORSE the declaration.  Also, just as I have reached out to you, because I recognize you as someone who cares deeply about this issue, so too, please, reach out to those who you know of like mind and spirit, and
ask them to do the same.  

If you have questions or concerns, please, let me hear from you!

Best regards,
James Sherley

P.S.  I and others have already endorsed the declaration; and our names are listed at the web site.  More will be added as their qualifications are verified.  PLEASE, JOIN US!
James L. Sherley, M.D., Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Programs in Regenerative Biology and Cancer Biology
Boston Biomedical Research Institute
64 Grove Street
Watertown, Massachusetts 02472
Phone: 617-658-7892
Fax: 617-658-7896


Start praying and thinking about what you can do to help this cause now! 

Actions to Take:

  • Letters to legislators, to editors, congress, UN
  • Monitor the Action Alert links at the top of this page and take the actions requested
  • Design objections to arguments against a redefinition and share them with us (In arguments against a redefinition of human, opponents site
    the confusion it would cause if embryos were to be treated as legally human -- inheritance, insurance, etc.)  


Dr. James Sherley sent the following.  Please pray for him and his colleagues in their fight against human cloning on this globe, and take the action requested on the amnestyforbabies site.  Dr, Sherley writes:


Dear Friends and Colleagues:

    Please, spread the word: "The end of human cloning is near":
    Please see, http://spuc-director.blogspot.com/

    Also, for many of you, your support is still needed and awaited at:

Best regards,

James L. Sherley, M.D., Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Programs in Regenerative Biology and Cancer Biology
Boston Biomedical Research Institute



THANK YOU FOR VISITING US!  TO LEAVE OUR SITE WITH HOPE AND AN INSPIRING PATH TO FOLLOW, READ http://www.bridgeportdiocese.com/columns.saint.paul.08.shtml#1  


Donations Are Gratefully Accepted!!!

The Gospel of Life Society has made it a decision to operate solely on your donations. 
There is no funding from the Diocese, Vatican or government agency of any kind.

Please sponsor one or more of our projects with an automatic monthly donation.
Make checks payable to ST. MARY CHURCH.  Send to 669 WEST AVE, NORWALK, CT 06850. 203-866-5546

Specify that it is for the GOSPEL OF LIFE SOCIETY and the project to apply your donation to.  
To review our projects, click on the 'Projects' off the Navigation Table on the HOME page.  

Help us get the information into the right hands at the right time.

 Thank you for your heart and good wishes!


Blessings In Christ! 

Eileen Bianchini, SFO
Gospel of Life Society, Chairperson
203) 847-5727

Saint Mary Church
"The Mother Church of Norwalk"
Pastor: Rev. Greg J. Markey