Archive for the ‘abortion’ Category

Opposing Barack Obama as Notre Dame University graduation speaker

March 27, 2009

The campus of Notre Dame University, a Catholic school in Indiana with a tradition of inviting US presidents as graduation speakers is stirred with controversy as the community struggles whether to allow Pres. Barack Obama to address students and receive an honorary degree in a commencement exercise on May 17.

“A public act of disobedience and grave mistake,” says Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of the Phoenix Diocese of Obama’s invitation.

Bishop John D’Arcy of the Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese refused to attend in protest against the president’s policies.

“Seventy percent of the alumni letters opposed having Obama giving the speech, while 73 percent of student letters supported his appearance.”—–AP (03/27/09, Coyne, T)

Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, one of the largest pro-life organizations in the United States committed to protect humans from conception to death issued a statement which read in part:

“American Life League joins the Cardinal Newman Society and all Catholics of goodwill in condemning Notre Dame University’s defamation of Our Lady through its unconscionable invitation of the leading symbol, hero, and darling of the culture of death.”

Objection against Obama has been sharp because of his staunch support for abortion and stem cell research which the Catholic Church condemns. The chief executive has recently lifted the ban for embryonic stem cell research and offered federal funding for its scientific investigation. He has extended tax-payer money in support to international groups which practice abortion as a way to control population. Angered Catholics feel having Obama and his liberal views contradict Christian moral values.

Those who favor Obama’s graduation appearance say that having the president in the university is an honor—a way of engaging him in a dialogue even when his opinions are diametrically opposed to the core beliefs of Catholics. (Photo Credits: BKWDayton; Hogan 27 world)

RELATED BLOG: “Obama’s stem cell research policy: the use of embryonic cells from helpless unborn sparks religious debate” Posted by mesiamd at 3/10/2009


Octuplets spark debate on medical, socio-economic, & moral issues of assisted pregnancies

January 31, 2009

The birth of 8 babies to an unmarried California woman who already have 6 children and lives with her parents sparked controversies which cover medical, social, economic, moral and rearing issues. The unusual multiple births by caesarian section of octuplets by 33-year old Nadya Suleman didn’t come without the help of fertility treatments. This is according to Angela Suleman, the 31 week-old babies’ grandmother who said her daughter, the mother has been “obssessed” of having children. In spite of having delivered babies in the past, she chose in-vitro fertilization because of clogged fallopian tubes.

In-vitro fertilization (IVF) usually involves implanting fertilized embryo (blastocyst stage,) normally no greater than six, usually 2 or 3 in the womb. If more than two embryos take, the patient is given the choice by her physician to keep the babies or kill some of them in an abortion-induced reduction procedure. Many doctors focus on giving the best medical care and they feel it’s not their duty to dig on abortion issues (rights of the unborn) or prescribe how many children their patients must have. Suleman opted to keep all babies whose number was erroneously determined by ultrasound as 7.

Certain religious believers and anti-abortion advocates decry the practice of pregnancy reduction by doctors. Although Suleman rejected the offer to have any of her babies aborted after they were artificially set to develop in utero, there are strong objections on the medical and ethical judgment of implanting the 8 embryos on her who already have six children. There are those who believe the fertility doctor must be investigated and sanctioned for a breach of standard practice.

In 30 years of practice, “I have never provided fertility treatment to a woman with six children,” or ever heard of a similar case, said Dr. David Adamson, former president of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine and director of Fertility Physicians of Northern California.—Yahoo.News/ AP (01/31/09 Watkins, T; Neergaard, L)

There are strong doubts if the unmarried Suleman has the capacity to care for the 6 boys and 2 girls born premature along with 6 older children, ages 2 to 7. It is unclear whether she is employed, though she lives with her parents who are not financially stable. The parents filed bankruptcy last year with more than $900,000 liabilities. Records show Suleman kept a psychiatric techinician license in 1997 to 2002.

The premature octuplets who are currently cared for in a Kaiser Permanente hospital surely need specialized care. With skyrocketing medical costs in a state teetering towards financial insolvency, many critics fear Suleman may not be able to sustain the duties of a single mom— the physical, psychological, social, and economic demands of rearing 14 dependents. If she can’t keep up with the burden of motherhood, she may require public assistance and the effects on the children are hard to know. It is likely the cost of rearing them will be passed on to taxpayers and society in general. (Photo Credits: byaconnel73170; Ekem PD)=0=

UPDATE: February 2, 2009. Many critics believe the doctor didn’t make good ethical judgmentt in placing at least 8 embryos on Nadya Suleman whose mother Angela is critical of her daughter’s “obssession” to have babies.


Obama reverses "Mexico City Policy" paving for funding for more overseas abortion

January 24, 2009

On January 23, 2009, a day after the 36th commemoration of the landmark decision of the Supreme Court to legalize abortion in USA and 3 days after his inauguration, Pres. Barack Obama reversed the Mexico City Policy—the ban against funding of international groups performing abortions.

“The Mexico City Policy specifies that federal funds for family planning are made available to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that agree not to perform or promote abortion as a method of family planning in other countries.”

A setback to pro-lifers who defend the rights of the unborn and promote respect for the human life, USA opens its door to more programs for population control (family planning) and termination of pregnancy (abortion) abroad at the expense of American tax payers. This was the same liberal policy Pres. Bill Clinton followed when he came to the White House in 1993. In support of the unborn, it was reversed by Pres. George Bush when he assumed the presidency in 2001. Obama’s reinstitution of Clinton’s policy in 2009 is a step towards the enactment of the greater pro-abortion legislation, the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which will be decided in congress. This is part of the social engineering critics have predicted with the new administration.

Vatican Protests Obama’s decision

The Vatican expressed objection to Obama’s pro-abortion stance and support of the culture of death. The same objection is expected when the new administration announces its unbridled pursuit for stem cell research—using human embryos which is against Catholic doctrine.

Monsignor Rino Fisichella, who heads the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, asked Obama to listen to all voices in America without “the arrogance of those who, being in power, believe they can decide of life and death.”—GMANews (01/24/05) (Photo Credit: Stanley Lansano/ AngkorWatDemon PD) =0=

Depiction of Demon Performing Abortion, Wall of Angkor Wat, Cambodia


Abortion issue in Obama’s administration, the pro-life vs. pro-choice controversy, & the 50 million unborn babies killed

January 23, 2009

January 22, 2009 is the 36th anniversary of the controversial Roe vs. Wade when the Supreme Court ruled against all state and federal abortion laws, making termination of pregnancy legal and leading to the indiscriminate killing of about 50 million unborn babies. Since 1973, pro-life groups have relentlessly campaigned in defense of the unborn with some success:

“Laws have been passed in 46 states that protect the right of conscience for individual health care providers. Laws in 27 states protect the right of conscience for institutions such as Catholic hospitals. The Hyde Amendment restricts federal funding of abortion. The partial birth abortion ban was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2007. “Mexico City Policy” has barred the use of federal tax money to pay for abortions in other countries.” —St. Gianna Respect for Life Committee, Immaculate Conception Church, Astoria, NY (01/09 Tabone, P)

Yet, with the Obama administration, the fight between pro-lifer and pro-choice may change in favor of abortion supporters. Obama expresses his approval for the pro-choice advocates saying that government need not intrude on private family matters.

“In consultation with a coalition of pro-abortion groups, which submitted a 55-page outline of pro-abortion policies to the Obama transition team, the Obama Administration has an agenda designed to repeal many, if not all, of the pro-life policies in place at the state and federal level.

Through their extreme agenda, the Administration wants to fund organizations that perform and promote abortion; force employer health insurance plans to cover abortion; force hospitals and health care professionals to provide abortions; and enact the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act” – a bill that would invalidate virtually all state and federal laws restricting abortion, including parental notification laws, and which would make partial-birth abortion legal again.” —

With few media outfit willing to cover, a huge crowd of anti-abortion advocates, numbering about 250,000 trooped to Washington DC two days after Obama’s inauguration to oppose the proposed Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) in congress. Obama is a supporter of abortion rights pushed by many liberals in the media and the Democratic party. Pro-lifers have mobilized themselves to fight the new administration’s abortion plan which when implemented is expected to increase terminations of unwanted pregnancy and the killing of more innocent unborn babies.

With the loss of 50 million babies since the “Roes” decided they could ignore moral considerations and rule on abortion, society must ponder on how many Albert Einsteins had been expended in clinics around the country. The sheer number had made people thinking what might have been God’s plan for America’s hapless victims of abortion. =0=


Cardinal Avery Dulles, SJ, 90, defender of the unborn & the dying

December 13, 2008

America’s champion of the unborn, Cardinal Avery Dulles of the Society of Jesus died at the age of 90 on Friday, December 12, 2008 in the infirmary of Fordham University in New York where he served as professor for 20 years.

A former disbeliever of God and convert to Catholicism, he served the Navy before he was ordained as a Jesuit in 1956. Fr. Dulles was appointed in the College of Cardinals by the late John Paul II in 2001. Considered by many as the dean of American Catholic theologians, the humble Jesus follower had strong opinion on abortion and euthanasia:

“Many politicians, like much of the American public, seem to be unaware that abortion and euthanasia are serious violations of the inalienable right to life. These are not just ‘Church’ issues but are governed by the natural law of God, which is binding upon all human beings. The right to life is the most fundamental of all rights, since a person deprived of life has no other rights.” Photo Credit: AP/ Massimo Sambucetti) =0=



Life versus abortion

November 23, 2008

Abortion is the leading cause of death in the black community. People are not aware of that. According to te US Center for Disease Control (CDC) Abortion Surveillance Report, 35% of abortions in the United States are performed on African American women, who make up only 12% of the U.S. population.” Beverly Anderson, National Black Catholic Apostolate for Life (The Southern Cross, July 2008)/Immaculate Conception Parish, Astoria, NY 11/23/08 (Photo Credit:

In the Philippines, the number of abortions is unknown since the procedure is illegal and often done secretly. In spite of this, about 1/4 of pregnancies is terminated amounting to an estimated 750,000 abortions per year.—


US Presidential Election and the Catholic Vote

October 15, 2008

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”—John Quincy Adams

Two weeks from the US presidential election, the economy is still the main issue that drives the choice of voters. With Sen. Barack Obama on the lead, Americans are still angry and confused. Months of explaining, he and Sen. John McCain have not really succeeded in making their platforms fully understood.

The Americans have a mouthful of promises from both candidates, but they aren’t sure. Partly because of the complexity of the issues, they rely on impressions and gut feelings to arrive on a decision. At the third and last presidential debate at Hofstra University in New York, on October 15, 2008, the two candidates will try again. Amid fears of recession and global depression, they will convince the undecided voters who are likely to influence the outcome of this election.

Wall Street greed, Fannie, Freddie, and others have been accused of destroying our economic system. But few are willing to admit that without a firm commitment to restoring the foundations of our country – namely, a dedication to protecting life, faith, and families – no economic bailout will ultimately work. We need something more than money.

The common thread connecting bad loans, greedy bankers, and power hungry politicians is the selfish disregard for our fellow human beings. Our culture has reduced people to objects and playthings, to be selfishly exploited, profited from, and discarded when they are no longer useful.

Politicians who pledge to protect the “right” to kill innocent children are deceiving all of us when they promise to help the innocent unemployed and uninsured. Don’t fall for their lies!

Many people accuse pro-life advocates such as of being single-issue voters. The assumption is that we don’t care about the economy, health care, or the poor. But they have it exactly backwards.” (10/15/08, Bruch, B)

The Catholics of America comprising about a third of the entire Christians in the United States with whom many Filipinos are affiliated by faith doesn’t have a major sway on the votes.

However, they are encouraged to see issues not only through the contracted prism of the economy, but on the whole culture the United States is heading. Specifically, the American Catholic clergy preaches against abortion which makes the contraceptive debate in the Philippines look puny.

Unlike Filipinos, most of the American public doesn’t think of artificial contraception vs. natural family planning as problem to resolve. Catholics and other Protestant denominations are taught more against killing the unborn, dishonesty, corruption, materialism, stem cell research, gay marriage, exploitation of the poor and helpless—issues which have been sidelined by the urgency of the economic problems.

America is gearing towards the extremes of secular liberalism and it doesn’t augur well for the future of Christianity and its moral tenets. The financial crisis is likely to stay (whoever wins in the presidential election.) It will probably stretch the coping mechanisms of the United States and the rest of the world.

Like those who have been repeatedly put down by the empty promises of Wall Street, the citizens who get carried away by eloquent words without reviewing records of action and credibility will likely be disappointed. With a biased liberal media tipping away from core conservative values, Americans, like the rest of the world, have little to depend on except themselves. They need to understand the small print in the candidate’s resume and platform. With two weeks to go, there is still time to think so one can vote wisely. (Photo Credits: cstein96; =0=

Let us more and more insist on raising funds of love, of kindness, of understanding, of peace. Money will come if we seek first the Kingdom of God – the rest will be given.“—Mother Teresa

In the US presidential election, the abortion issue matters

August 18, 2008

In a nation where separation of religion and state is asserted and at the same time politics and faith are brought together in public fora, John McCain and Barack Obama met for the first time in a discussion with Pastor Rick Warren (author of best-seller Purpose Driven Life) in Saddleback Church, a mega evangelical religious group in Lake Forest, California. (Photo Credit: NYTimes/Almeida, M) Listening to both candidates made it clear that it’s increasingly hard for voters to completely agree in all positions with the future president.

Governance covers a wide range of issues that makes disagreement more likely. During the presidential forum both candidates made clear their viewpoints on secular concerns and moral questions like abortion, stem cell research, wealth, evil in the world, etc. That’s why voters focus on the top issues to guide them which candidate they’ll choose.

Less than eighty days before the election, the race between Barack Obama and John McCain is tight. As the young Senator Obama goes with a forward-looking, secular vision of the world, McCain displays his sterling military background and experience as legislator of 25 years. In world realities which McCain knows have pretty limited choices, simple black-and-white options give room for quick answers that are more direct than his rival Obama.

That’s why when McCain was asked when life really starts to elicit his position on abortion, the Arizona senator curtly answered “at the time of conception,”—a view that Christian conservatives and Catholics want to hear. More popular than Obama among the evangelicals and conservatives, McCain was emphatic that he’ll be a pro-life president.

On the other hand, Obama, who is known for his pro-choice liberal view had to make qualifications and show that he hasn’t come to a firm resolution on the issue. Letting the audience know that he’s a Christian, he spoke of a familiar biblical maxim of “doing for the least of my brother,” yet he seemed to struggle with the idea that among the “least” in society must be the defenseless unborn who are killed by abortion that he supports. Obama approved of partial-birth abortion that other people consider as “infanticide.”

The abortion issue is just among the many concerns Americans want to settle with their presidential candidates. There are still many who can’t decide which of the candidates can deliver best for the Americans and the world on issues like the economy, healthcare, social security, international relations, homeland security, taxation, education, stem-cell research, immigration, among others. As the days close in for the Republicans and Democrats to choose their respective vice-presidential candidates, more realignments of voter are expected to follow.=0=

"Couldn’t you have given me a better face?"

August 6, 2008

According to family legend, when Sofiya discovered she was expecting another child, she wished to terminate the pregnancy. Elena Rostropovich, Sofiya’s granddaughter, explained the family was poor, and as both parents worked, one small child was enough to cope with.

A doctor friend prescribed various treatments, including some vigorous sporting activity, but they seemed to have the contrary effect. Indeed Sofiya Nikolayevna carried her child for a ten-month term and on 27 March 1927, she gave birth to a healthy boy.

Later her son Mstislav asked her, “You had an extra month, couldn’t you have given me a better face?” She answered philosophically, “My son I was more concerned with your hands….” —-Wilson E, Rostropovich: the Musical Life of the Great Cellist, Teacher and Legend, p.13-14, UK, Faber & Faber, 2008.

Mstislav Rostropovich, extraordinary Russian musician, freedom activist, accomplished conductor with a superb hand on the cello, is an example of a man whose musical gift, prodigious virtuosity, and incredible genius could have been lost due to abortion. We couldn’t have heard of him and his phenomenal talent. In his time, he might have missed great musicians like Britten, Casals, Khatchaturian, Bernstein, Prokokiev and a horde of music students whom he inspired. Had Rostropovich died in a planned abortion that his mom Sofiya desired when he was in utero, the world would have been poorer. The language of music emanating from the dexterity of his hands might have been silenced right before he was born.

The book about his life focuses on Rostropovich’s musicality and abortion is an inconsequential anecdote. It probably escapes the notice of the readers. Yet Rostropovich’s story is emblematic of what could have been for the millions of human beings mercilessly zapped from the womb of women. The world must be horrified by the mass deaths humanity inflict on the unborn.

My mom for a time thought of abortion too. Had she succeeded in her plan, I would not have been around (nor some of my elder brothers and sisters,) to write about it. Saddled by the burden of having to raise twelve children, she begged her doctor to do it. Fortunately, abortion was almost taboo 50 years ago. People believed it was morally wrong and the doctor refused to do it for her.

Today, in the Philippines, about half a million women undergo illegal unsafe abortions. Of this staggering number 79,000 had to be hospitalized to combat complications. About 800 of the women die. Of the half a million Filipino fetuses destroyed by abortion, how many could have helped make the world a richer place for us to live in? Your guess is as good as mine.

By estimates, there are 46 million abortions performed yearly all over the world, 20 million of which are considered unsafe, mostly in poor countries. The message from statisticians and abortion advocates make us feel that if abortion is made legal, it would eliminate health threats on women. But we know this is not necessarily true. Without improvement of medical care, legalization of abortion can only worsen women’s risks when they go for the procedure. =0=