Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Family Research Council explains value of Santorum tripling child tax deduction
from the FRC email blast;
While the press picks on Rick Santorum for his social views, the Wall Street Journal is attacking the former Senator from another angle: his pro-family economic plan. In Monday's edition, editors complain that the "most disappointing" part of the Pennsylvanian's proposal is his idea to triple the child tax credit from $1,000 today, which the WSJ claims is "social policy masquerading as economics." The paper accuses Santorum of unfairly rewarding taxpayers who have children over those who don't. But at the root of these accusations is a fundamental misunderstanding about how the economy works. The child tax credit, which was originally conceived, developed, and promoted by FRC, recognizes that the American family is the engine that drives the U.S. economy. A world with fewer children means a world with fewer taxpayers.
Sen. Santorum recognizes, as we do, that a modest tax credit now is a small investment to make in the growth of human capital, which is shrinking at an alarming rate. Who does the Wall Street Journal expect to pay down the debt, fund social security benefits, and pick up the tab for big government programs in the future? Certainly not those who aren't having children. America's tax policy should reward the families who are raising taxpayers who will carry these economic burdens in the coming years. The principle of fairness applies to the tax treatment of the family: it should get the same deductions in the tax code as business does for similar investments in human capital. It's simple: if you're interested in growing the U.S. economy, you'll support tax credits for married families raising children.
When Christina was a baby, I brought her with me to protest my liberal Congressman's 'nay' vote on the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.
I made this point at a Town Hall Meeting of Rep Tim Bishop (NY-D) when I lived on Long Island. The assembled seniors who lived in the wealthy summer colony of Westhampton, NY were concerned about the future of Social Security. I reminded them that a 30% abortion rate for over a third of a century put their checks in danger. They were dumbfounded!
. When you lower the birth rate as dramatically as we have through abortion, failure to marry and delayed childbearing, you make Social Security a burden. It used to have 16 younger workers paying in for each retiree. Now that ratio is 3 workers for each retiree. Another factor which exacerbates this is the longer life span of older Americans, but good news or not, the Social Security System needs more workers. Santorum pointed out recently that if it had not been for an increase in legal immigration, Social Security would be in even worse trouble.
Want to help the economy? Have a baby!
While the press picks on Rick Santorum for his social views, the Wall Street Journal is attacking the former Senator from another angle: his pro-family economic plan. In Monday's edition, editors complain that the "most disappointing" part of the Pennsylvanian's proposal is his idea to triple the child tax credit from $1,000 today, which the WSJ claims is "social policy masquerading as economics." The paper accuses Santorum of unfairly rewarding taxpayers who have children over those who don't. But at the root of these accusations is a fundamental misunderstanding about how the economy works. The child tax credit, which was originally conceived, developed, and promoted by FRC, recognizes that the American family is the engine that drives the U.S. economy. A world with fewer children means a world with fewer taxpayers.
Sen. Santorum recognizes, as we do, that a modest tax credit now is a small investment to make in the growth of human capital, which is shrinking at an alarming rate. Who does the Wall Street Journal expect to pay down the debt, fund social security benefits, and pick up the tab for big government programs in the future? Certainly not those who aren't having children. America's tax policy should reward the families who are raising taxpayers who will carry these economic burdens in the coming years. The principle of fairness applies to the tax treatment of the family: it should get the same deductions in the tax code as business does for similar investments in human capital. It's simple: if you're interested in growing the U.S. economy, you'll support tax credits for married families raising children.
When Christina was a baby, I brought her with me to protest my liberal Congressman's 'nay' vote on the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.I made this point at a Town Hall Meeting of Rep Tim Bishop (NY-D) when I lived on Long Island. The assembled seniors who lived in the wealthy summer colony of Westhampton, NY were concerned about the future of Social Security. I reminded them that a 30% abortion rate for over a third of a century put their checks in danger. They were dumbfounded!
. When you lower the birth rate as dramatically as we have through abortion, failure to marry and delayed childbearing, you make Social Security a burden. It used to have 16 younger workers paying in for each retiree. Now that ratio is 3 workers for each retiree. Another factor which exacerbates this is the longer life span of older Americans, but good news or not, the Social Security System needs more workers. Santorum pointed out recently that if it had not been for an increase in legal immigration, Social Security would be in even worse trouble.
Want to help the economy? Have a baby!
Brian Burch tells Catholics to keep working for Santorum in SC!
Is Mitt Romney's victory in the GOP primary inevitable?
Not so fast.
Governor Romney's victory last night in New Hampshire was decisive, but hardly a surprise. He spent millions of dollars there, and has been campaigning in the Granite State for six years now. And of course he served as Governor next door in Massachusetts.
So what about Santorum?
Coming from behind in Iowa, Senator Santorum had little time to organize much of anything in New Hampshire. He spent the week campaigning door to door for voters, but his campaign made the decision to not run any TV ads. They chose instead to hold their fire for South Carolina.
Right now Rick Santorum is polling in second place in South Carolina. After that comes Florida. A brand new Quinnipac poll asked Florida voters who they would support in a hypothetical match between Barack Obama and Rick Santorum. The result was a statistical tie in the biggest swing state in the country.
The facts are clear: Rick Santorum can go head to head with President Obama if voters give him a chance.
But right now we are focused exclusively on the South Carolina’s primary -- just ten days from now.
We're raising as much money as we can to try and put Rick Santorum back on top in South Carolina. We can't predict the future. But candidates like Santorum will never succeed unless people like us get behind him.
If you haven't yet contributed, we definitely could use your help. Chip in here.
And stay tuned. This campaign has been one of the most unpredictable in recent memory.
The Santorum Surge is far from over.
All my best,
Brian Burch
President
CatholicVote.org
Partial Birth Abortion poster baby, Donna Joy Vance endorses Rick Santorum
Endorsement of Rick Santorum for PresidentBy: Donna Joy Vance
Donna Joy was the child whose mother Lori Vance spoke on the floor of the Senate against Partial Birth Abortion. Lori and Donna Joy were Rick Santorum's companions during that battle, on the Senate floor, even in the cloakroom where Donna Joy tried unsuccessfully to hug opponent Barbara Boxer. "She was drinking punch, she threw her cup away and ran out of the room," recounts Lori Vance of the incident. Now Donna Joy runs track in school and is proud to fill out her voter registration. Here's her endorsement of Rick Santorum. She and her mother are pro-life heroes and both are 100% behind Rick Santorum. Seems that the more you know Rick, the more likely you are to get behind him.
Dear America,
I want you to vote for Rick Santorum for President. I do not really like President Obama. President Obama likes abortion. I do not like abortion. Mr. Rick will make a really, really, really good president! Mr. Rick and his friends in Capitol Hill wanted to let me live. He does not like abortion. It is killing a baby. Other people did not want me to live. Mr. Rick wants me to live. Please vote for Mr. Rick to be my president and I will be really, really, really happy! I am voting for him!
Thank you!
Donna Joy Vance
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Bring Out Yer Dead, Mr. Santorum! – UPDATED
Elizabeth Scalia shares her column on how our reaction to death has been sanitized, and how natural a home wake was only 80 years ago.
Colmes and Robinson are not only part of the Culture of Death, but they are ignorant. They don't know what mothers know, that proper mourning a dead child is healthiest for the family. Karen Santorum is a mom of 8 and a neonatal nurse, she has training and life experience which she drew upon in her moment of crisis. What she and Rick did was the most healthy and loving for them and their children. How would the children know their brother Gabriel really ever existed without seeing him?
I lost three babies to miscarriage. The first time, I was in such shock, I allowed the OB to take the remains of my son to “the lab” without thinking about what that meant. The thought that my child may be disposed of like poor aborted babies, in medical waste, haunted me. Finally I researched and discovered that in my Catholic hospital, unborn children’s remains are put to rest in a common plot in a local Catholic cemetery. I felt comforted to know this.
The next two times I miscarried, I buried my children’s remains with their grandmother in our family plot in the same cemetery. My priest told me it was proper. I memorialized them in the book at the Shrine of the Holy Innocents in NYC. The book which inspired me to take such care of my children. to name them and bury them was Karen Santorum’s “Letters to Gabriel”.
Last night, I finally had the opportunity to thank Karen personally for her example and her book. If we truly want a culture of life, we participate in the corporal work of mercy and bury our dead with love, and dignity.
Just imagine how it would help the pro-life movement if we had Karen Santorum as First Lady, a promoter of the Culture of Life! Read more in Jill Stanek's column here.
Death, for the people of that era, and every era before, was no stranger and brought no squeamishness. There was nothing mysterious about death beyond those questions we still ask–will we see them again in the next life, and why, so often, do the good die young while old bastards hold forth for far too long? A family mourned and drank, and fought and keened and then stumbled into church for the funeral; they buried their beloved and stumbled about some more, and life went onPundits Alan Colmes and Edward Robinson mocked the Santorum's handling of the death of their son Gabriel was a mean spirited act of ignorance. It was far beyond the pale and at least Alan Colmes has had the grace to apologized, which the Santorums gracefully accepted. It shows the depth of their Catholic convictions, and their loving hearts. I would have had a difficult time being that gracious!
Colmes and Robinson are not only part of the Culture of Death, but they are ignorant. They don't know what mothers know, that proper mourning a dead child is healthiest for the family. Karen Santorum is a mom of 8 and a neonatal nurse, she has training and life experience which she drew upon in her moment of crisis. What she and Rick did was the most healthy and loving for them and their children. How would the children know their brother Gabriel really ever existed without seeing him?
I lost three babies to miscarriage. The first time, I was in such shock, I allowed the OB to take the remains of my son to “the lab” without thinking about what that meant. The thought that my child may be disposed of like poor aborted babies, in medical waste, haunted me. Finally I researched and discovered that in my Catholic hospital, unborn children’s remains are put to rest in a common plot in a local Catholic cemetery. I felt comforted to know this.
The next two times I miscarried, I buried my children’s remains with their grandmother in our family plot in the same cemetery. My priest told me it was proper. I memorialized them in the book at the Shrine of the Holy Innocents in NYC. The book which inspired me to take such care of my children. to name them and bury them was Karen Santorum’s “Letters to Gabriel”.
Last night, I finally had the opportunity to thank Karen personally for her example and her book. If we truly want a culture of life, we participate in the corporal work of mercy and bury our dead with love, and dignity.
Just imagine how it would help the pro-life movement if we had Karen Santorum as First Lady, a promoter of the Culture of Life! Read more in Jill Stanek's column here.
Sunday, January 08, 2012
My interview with the Long Island Catholic
Here's an excerpt;
You can read it on their website.
Velasquez said “A Special Mother is Born,” “my own story of Christina’s birth,” was first published in Faith & Family magazine in spring of 2007. “I received so many letters in response from women who had the same epiphany of being surprised by this powerful joy, this encounter with Jesus in the person of their special needs child, that I knew I was on to something,” she continued. “I began collecting stories from mothers three years ago, and was delighted to meet many courageous faith-filled women.” Reading former Senator Rick Santorum’s story in The Philadelphia Inquirer about his daughter with special needs inspired Velasquez to ask fathers to contribute to the book as well.
If you missed Saturday debate at St Anselm College
Tonight, Rick Santorum emerged as a front-runner for the Republican nomination for President. Attacked by his fellow contenders, Rick Santorum stood tall, calm, and collected - rebutting all scurrilous allegations with the fact that he has fought for causes he cares about. And when presented with the foreign policy challenges that face America, he stood head-and-shoulders above the fray as the best equipped, most knowledgeable, and with the fortitude to stand up for America's security interests.
Hogan Gidley, National Communications Director, said: "Rick Santorum stood on the stage tonight and emerged as a candidate ready to be commander-in-chief. Not just the Middle Class, not just Wall Street, but commander-in-chief for all Americans. Rick Santorum stood up for traditional values, stood up for the security of our nation, and stood up for all American workers. America needs such a leader, and it is becoming clearer and clear that leader is Rick Santorum."
SANTORUM SAID:
On CEO versus Commander-in-Chief:
"We need a leader, not a CEO. What we need is someone who can paint a positive vision for this country."
In Response To Rep. Ron Paul:
"If you haven't been accused by CREW, you're not a conservative. You should know better than cite a George Soros organization.
On The Right To Privacy:
"It created a right through something that wasn't there. I am for overturning Roe v. Wade, I do not believe we have a right to take a life. I do not believe the founders envisioned that. I do not believe the constitution enables that."
On Same-Sex Marriage:
"If the constitution says marriage is between a man and a woman, then marriage is between a man and woman."
On Securing Afghanistan (in response to Ambassador Huntsman):
"How long do you wait? Until the security of our country is ensured. That is the job of commander-in-chief."
On Iran (in response to Rep. Ron Paul):
"If we had your foreign policy there wouldn't have been a fleet to pick up the Iranian fishermen... The Iranian people love Americans because we stand up for the truth and call evil what it is."
On Manufacturing:
"I do something different than everybody else. I focus on one sector that has been hit hard - manufacturing. We eliminate the corporate tax for manufacturers... We eliminate all regulations that cost business over $100 million."
On The Middle Class:
"There are no classes in America... That's their (Democrats) job - divide, separate."
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Why Catholics should support Rick Santorum: Values and Economics
I don't understand conservative Catholics who won't support Santorum but they can be divided into several groups;
1. Ron Paul anti-establishment zealots- you can't talk to them
2. Pro-lifers holding a grudge against Rick for supporting Specter against Toomey in the PA Senate primary. We must remember Specter was brought into line and we got Alito and Roberts while he was chair of the Judiciary Committee. Toomey is now the Senator from PA.That was the reasoning behind Santorum's support of Specter and may explain the loss of his Senate seat in 2006.
3. Conservative Catholics who think he's unelectable. Rush Limbaugh said recently only a true conservative will beat Obama. Santorum is surging in the polls, and getting money and media hype he was long denied.
4. Conservative Catholics who don't like some other less important aspect of his policy (like foreign policy) than life issues. Nothing is more important than ending the holocaust of abortion. The Pope says so.
5. Derisive comments that he doesn't 'sparkle' on TV. Obama sparkled during his 2008 campaign, see where that got us?
Let me be perfectly clear; when I first interviewed Rick for Canticle magazine in 2008, Fr Edmund Silvia wrote a sidebar to my article "Catholics in the Public Square: Catholic Politicians who Stood Their Ground" about the so called "non-negotiables":which are the life issues(embryonic stem cell research, loning, abortion) and traditional marriage are THE issues where a candidate must conform to the age-old standard of Catholic moral teaching.
Rick is the Catholic candidate which has the best record on these issues, and I will never forget his defense of the dignity of the unborn child during the Partial Birth Abortion debate.
He has written a book "It Takes a Family" which explains in great detail the Catholic social teaching of subsidiarity, or letting the lowest level of government handle aspects of our lives, and the relationship between strong two parent families and a health economy.He argues that the family is the building block of society, NOT the federal government.
More broken families mean more broken people whom the federal government has to imprison, rehabilitate, house, feed, and re-educate. The Democrats know this well, products of single parent homes is the bulwark of their base, they need to vote Democrat to keep their checks. The Dems need to keep them dependent on entitlements to remain in office. While they refuse to strengthen marriage or offer educational choice, the true ways out of poverty. Is this true concern for the poor?
I have a personal reason for supporting Rick. We are both parents of special needs children. He has a special needs daughter, three year old Bella who has trisomy 18 and has promised to champion such children if elected. This truly comforts those of us who have a deep-seated fear that, in a couple of years we will be fighting the Obamacare system for medical care for our special needs children. We had a conference in 2009 entitled Healthcare for Gunner. where we joined parents from Canada who had experienced discrimination against their disabled children under their socialized medical system.
That would not happen under a Santorum presidency.First of all, he promises to abolish Obamacare. In addition, I am confident that instead of NIH funding research into pre-natal testing which results in a 92% abortion rate for children like his Bella and my daughter Christina with Down syndrome, increased funding would go towards the promising research to improve their learning and memory skills.Many promising research projects are in clinical trials but would be farther along if they had as much funding as is given to the search-and-destroy prenatal testing methods.
Pro-family, pro-life, and pro-freedom, Rick has an immaculate record in his personal life and an outstanding record of public service to back up his detailed, populist economic plan according to Mark Sticherz of Catholic Vote. and Rich Lowry of National Review;
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/16/a-santorum-surge-or-a-jindal-j
1. Ron Paul anti-establishment zealots- you can't talk to them
2. Pro-lifers holding a grudge against Rick for supporting Specter against Toomey in the PA Senate primary. We must remember Specter was brought into line and we got Alito and Roberts while he was chair of the Judiciary Committee. Toomey is now the Senator from PA.That was the reasoning behind Santorum's support of Specter and may explain the loss of his Senate seat in 2006.
3. Conservative Catholics who think he's unelectable. Rush Limbaugh said recently only a true conservative will beat Obama. Santorum is surging in the polls, and getting money and media hype he was long denied.
4. Conservative Catholics who don't like some other less important aspect of his policy (like foreign policy) than life issues. Nothing is more important than ending the holocaust of abortion. The Pope says so.
5. Derisive comments that he doesn't 'sparkle' on TV. Obama sparkled during his 2008 campaign, see where that got us?
Let me be perfectly clear; when I first interviewed Rick for Canticle magazine in 2008, Fr Edmund Silvia wrote a sidebar to my article "Catholics in the Public Square: Catholic Politicians who Stood Their Ground" about the so called "non-negotiables":which are the life issues(embryonic stem cell research, loning, abortion) and traditional marriage are THE issues where a candidate must conform to the age-old standard of Catholic moral teaching.
Rick is the Catholic candidate which has the best record on these issues, and I will never forget his defense of the dignity of the unborn child during the Partial Birth Abortion debate.
 |
| Rick Santorum with Bella, Leticia and Christina Velasquez |
More broken families mean more broken people whom the federal government has to imprison, rehabilitate, house, feed, and re-educate. The Democrats know this well, products of single parent homes is the bulwark of their base, they need to vote Democrat to keep their checks. The Dems need to keep them dependent on entitlements to remain in office. While they refuse to strengthen marriage or offer educational choice, the true ways out of poverty. Is this true concern for the poor?
I have a personal reason for supporting Rick. We are both parents of special needs children. He has a special needs daughter, three year old Bella who has trisomy 18 and has promised to champion such children if elected. This truly comforts those of us who have a deep-seated fear that, in a couple of years we will be fighting the Obamacare system for medical care for our special needs children. We had a conference in 2009 entitled Healthcare for Gunner. where we joined parents from Canada who had experienced discrimination against their disabled children under their socialized medical system.
That would not happen under a Santorum presidency.First of all, he promises to abolish Obamacare. In addition, I am confident that instead of NIH funding research into pre-natal testing which results in a 92% abortion rate for children like his Bella and my daughter Christina with Down syndrome, increased funding would go towards the promising research to improve their learning and memory skills.Many promising research projects are in clinical trials but would be farther along if they had as much funding as is given to the search-and-destroy prenatal testing methods.
Pro-family, pro-life, and pro-freedom, Rick has an immaculate record in his personal life and an outstanding record of public service to back up his detailed, populist economic plan according to Mark Sticherz of Catholic Vote. and Rich Lowry of National Review;
In the debates, Santorum has constantly talked about increasing economic mobility. In a heresy for a Republican, he’s acknowledged that some countries in Europe are more mobile than we are, and he has noted the disparity between the unemployment rates of college-educated and non-college-educated Americans. Santorum proposes zeroing out the corporate tax rate for manufacturers to provide them a boost as a source of blue-collar jobs. “We need to talk about people at the bottom of the income scale being able to get necessary skills and rise so they can support themselves and a family,” Santorum said at the CNBC economy debate. He’s right, although he is one of the few Republicans who seem determined to have the conversation.Rick Santorum is the obvious choice for faithful Catholics.And values voters.And he has been proving in the last few days that hard work pays off as he surprised everyone but his followers, by his surge. We knew you could do it, Rick!
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/16/a-santorum-surge-or-a-jindal-j
The Dugggar family throws their support to Rick Santorum
From an official Santorum press release;
The Rick Santorum for President Campaign has received the endorsement of the Duggar Family, stars of TLC's "19 and Counting."
Michelle Duggar said: "This year's Presidential race outcome will set the course of America for the next several years! Rick Santorum is a pro-life, Christian conservative with the family values and common sense business perspective that we need to get our nation back on track, to create jobs and to stand for what is right! Rick has a proven track record as a leader in the US Senate he fought to end partial birth abortion, he has stood for defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Rick believes in lower taxes and less government control in our lives. He also will fight for drilling our own oil out of Alaska, which will lower fuel prices, create jobs and put thousands of dollars back in families pocketbooks. Rick is the man for the job, and the entire Duggar family asks those who are looking for a conservative candidate to support to join them in voting for Rick Santorum for President. He will be a voice for senior citizens, the working families and the unborn."
Rick Santorum said: "I am excited to receive the Duggar's endorsement, and even more excited that they are coming to Iowa to join us for the Caucus. The Duggars have lived out their lives and their faith in the public eye, and have stood up for the foundational principles not just in word, but in deed. I have campaign on the theme of faith, family, and freedom and the Duggars epitomize this in their daily lives. I welcome their support and am honored that they believe in our surging candidacy."
The Duggar Family has been prominently featured on several Discovery Health and TLC documentaries including "14 Children and Pregnant Again!," "16 Children and Moving In!," and "Duggar's Big Family Album." The Duggars have used these and other national platforms to profess their faith and belief in traditional family values such as the preservation of human life."The Duggar family has the moral authority to speak on behalf of life issues, they are a living epitome of the Culture of Life. I am so pleased they see in Rick Santorum the pro-life values I have come to appreciate about him. I hear that Jim Bob Duggar is driving the Santorum bus!
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Discrimination begins in the womb
My friend Gerry Nadal is confounded.
The man isn't confused often; he's a PhD in Microbiology, and is one of those rare people who makes full use of both hemispheres of his brain, he's as eloquent and insightful about historical perspective as he is brilliant about microbiology. So when Gerry is perplexed, its for a darn good reason. He, like me is absolutely flummoxed that the NAACP is opposed to the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011, Why would the NAACP among other so-called civil rights organizations, oppose a bill which would make it illegal to discriminate against unborn babies on the basis of sex or race?
He elaborates here;
"The Bill in question will make it illegal to target babies for abortion based on gender or race, and admittedly raises a problem for Planned Parenthood. Under the Bill, abortionists can be imprisoned for not determining if the race or gender of the baby was a determinative factor in aborting.
In practical terms, it’s doubtful that at the individual level this would affect many African American abortions, as the mothers aren’t aborting because of their child’s race. It does, however, have implications at the macro-level when an organization such as Planned Parenthood operates 78% of their centers in inner-city neighborhoods.
That said, why would any civil rights organization (and there are 45 others opposed to this Bill, including the National Council of Jewish Women) object to the Bill’s language or intent? Supposedly, the opposition is to the names of the two great leaders on the Bill, and therein resides a hornets nest of gender and racial politics, of political correctness. So, let’s lance the boil."
So, its the name is it? Those organizations can't state their true objective, undying allegiance to abortion as a way of life, so they have to find some detail to focus upon. But wait, what about this bill is incongruous to the legacy of tolerance and justice for which we honor Susan B Anthony(click here to see her pro-life views) and Frederick Douglass?
“The truth of the matter is that Douglas and Anthony belong to all of us, including those of us who fight in the modern abolitionist movement.”
As the mother of a child from another group targeted for abortion; those with Down syndrome, I rejoiced when I heard of this legislation. I thought, ‘if we can protect unborn babies from racial and sexual discrimination, maybe, just maybe we can protect them from genetic discrimination.’
I love all the races and both genders which God created. I love the genetic diversity displayed in the almond eyes of my daughter, no less a gift from His Hand than any other child.
We need to see that a love for diversity cannot be artificially begun at birth, it must begins when life begins, at fertilization!
Read Dr Nadal's riveting post on his blog Coming Home.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Think twice about dropping your donation into that Salvation Army kettle!
As a social worker in the eighties, I worked extensively with the Salvation Army, so I had a positive image of their good works, and regularly donated to their kettle campaign each Christmas. This all changed this week when Anita Crane, a reporter for World Net Daily sent me the Salvation Army's policy on abortion. It has loopholes which are unacceptable, too many babies fall through.
"The Salvation Army believes in the sanctity of human life. Humankind was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). All people – without exception – are of value to him, holding a special place in his creation (Psalm 8:5), irrespective of age, gender, race, religion, health or social status, or their potential for achievement."
But it also states, "A serious commitment to the protection and care of the unborn calls us to a commitment to the prevention of unwanted pregnancy through means such as access to reliable birth control, safety in relationships, and societal respect of women."
Specifically, it says the Salvation Army "believes that termination [abortion] can occur only when carrying the pregnancy further seriously threatens the life of the mother; or reliable diagnostic procedures have identified a foetal abnormality considered incompatible with survival for more than a very brief post natal period."
My reaction is contained within the article, but here is the long version:
As a peer minister to women facing a pre-natal diagnosis of Down syndrome, I have heard the horror stories of what the doctors tell women in order to convince them to abort their child. They are told their child will do nothing to help himself, will only live to 10 years of age, will be miserable, will make their siblings miserable, will never be able to tie her shoes, read, graduate high school, and ruin her parents' marriage. This information is patently false.
The truth is marriages last longer when a couple has a child with Down syndrome,according to this Vanderbuilt University Study, and more are graduating high school and college every day, thanks to inclusive education. No one can say how long a child will live based on information gathered pre-natally or what their IQ will be, and Dr Brian Skotko has just published the results of a survey in the American Journal of Medical Genetics saying how happy families who have a member with Down syndrome are.
I shared this in my article for the National Catholic Register;
“We mailed surveys to families around the country, and 3,150 mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and people with Down syndrome responded. Here is just a sample of what we found:
• 99% of people with Down syndrome said they were happy with their lives;
• 97% of people with Down syndrome liked who they are;
• 99% of parents said they love their child with Down syndrome;
• 5% of parents felt embarrassed by their child;
• 97% of brothers/sisters, ages 9-11, said they love their sibling.”
Now, some would interpret Down syndrome in the definition given by the Salvation Army policy statement as "a foetal abnormality considered incompatible with survival for more than a very brief post natal period."
Some babies with Down syndrome do not live long. Some live for decades, outliving their parents.
Take another 'abnormality' trisomy 18. Most babies with t18 don't live to birth, that is true, but there are exceptions. Tell that to Rick Santorum whose three year old Bella Maria is still with us, and Mary Kellett of Pre-natal Partners for Life whose son Peter was a blessing to his family and the world till his recent death at 6 and 1/2 years.
So, if Salvation Army says abortion is OK for babies with abnormalities, most women facing such a diagnosis will be told by their health care professional that that includes them.
It is beneath the dignity of a Christian organization to allow innocent unborn children to be killed. It is beneath the God-given dignity of the babies to be told their lives can be cut short because their mother was raped (the other exception) or they are not perfect enough. If God only gives them life while in their mother's womb, who are we to cut it even shorter?
It is the position of KIDS Keep Infants with Down Syndrome that possessing an abnormal prenatal diagnosis does NOT lower the God-given dignity of a baby. We believe that all human life is sacred from conception till natural death, and if, in the tragic circumstance that a baby is destined to live only the briefest of times, only within a mother's womb or a few brief moments or days afterward, that we must give that child the full span of life and not end her life by abortion.
There is always the possibility of an incorrect diagnosis, so we must always decide on the side of life, and trust God with the life of our beloved child.
The Salvation Army should re-consider their position on this critical issue, as it is not consistent with a pro-life stance.
Let them live, Salvation Army. Let the babies live.
Support their moms if they feel that they can't do it alone, and give them hope for their child's future, if not here on earth, forever in eternity.
That is what we celebrate with the birth of the Christ Child, the birth of the giver of Eternal Life.
Send Salvation Army a message that you will not be donating until they revoke the loopholes in their abortion policy using this contact information:
Commissioner M. Christine MacMillan
The Salvation Army
International Social Justice Commission221 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10022, USA
Phone: (212) 758-0763Email: IHQ-ISJC@salvationarmy.org
Read the entire article here.
"The Salvation Army believes in the sanctity of human life. Humankind was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). All people – without exception – are of value to him, holding a special place in his creation (Psalm 8:5), irrespective of age, gender, race, religion, health or social status, or their potential for achievement."
But it also states, "A serious commitment to the protection and care of the unborn calls us to a commitment to the prevention of unwanted pregnancy through means such as access to reliable birth control, safety in relationships, and societal respect of women."
Specifically, it says the Salvation Army "believes that termination [abortion] can occur only when carrying the pregnancy further seriously threatens the life of the mother; or reliable diagnostic procedures have identified a foetal abnormality considered incompatible with survival for more than a very brief post natal period."
My reaction is contained within the article, but here is the long version:
As a peer minister to women facing a pre-natal diagnosis of Down syndrome, I have heard the horror stories of what the doctors tell women in order to convince them to abort their child. They are told their child will do nothing to help himself, will only live to 10 years of age, will be miserable, will make their siblings miserable, will never be able to tie her shoes, read, graduate high school, and ruin her parents' marriage. This information is patently false.
The truth is marriages last longer when a couple has a child with Down syndrome,according to this Vanderbuilt University Study, and more are graduating high school and college every day, thanks to inclusive education. No one can say how long a child will live based on information gathered pre-natally or what their IQ will be, and Dr Brian Skotko has just published the results of a survey in the American Journal of Medical Genetics saying how happy families who have a member with Down syndrome are.
I shared this in my article for the National Catholic Register;
“We mailed surveys to families around the country, and 3,150 mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and people with Down syndrome responded. Here is just a sample of what we found:
• 99% of people with Down syndrome said they were happy with their lives;
• 97% of people with Down syndrome liked who they are;
• 99% of parents said they love their child with Down syndrome;
• 5% of parents felt embarrassed by their child;
• 97% of brothers/sisters, ages 9-11, said they love their sibling.”
Now, some would interpret Down syndrome in the definition given by the Salvation Army policy statement as "a foetal abnormality considered incompatible with survival for more than a very brief post natal period."
Some babies with Down syndrome do not live long. Some live for decades, outliving their parents.
Take another 'abnormality' trisomy 18. Most babies with t18 don't live to birth, that is true, but there are exceptions. Tell that to Rick Santorum whose three year old Bella Maria is still with us, and Mary Kellett of Pre-natal Partners for Life whose son Peter was a blessing to his family and the world till his recent death at 6 and 1/2 years.
So, if Salvation Army says abortion is OK for babies with abnormalities, most women facing such a diagnosis will be told by their health care professional that that includes them.
It is beneath the dignity of a Christian organization to allow innocent unborn children to be killed. It is beneath the God-given dignity of the babies to be told their lives can be cut short because their mother was raped (the other exception) or they are not perfect enough. If God only gives them life while in their mother's womb, who are we to cut it even shorter?
It is the position of KIDS Keep Infants with Down Syndrome that possessing an abnormal prenatal diagnosis does NOT lower the God-given dignity of a baby. We believe that all human life is sacred from conception till natural death, and if, in the tragic circumstance that a baby is destined to live only the briefest of times, only within a mother's womb or a few brief moments or days afterward, that we must give that child the full span of life and not end her life by abortion.
There is always the possibility of an incorrect diagnosis, so we must always decide on the side of life, and trust God with the life of our beloved child.
The Salvation Army should re-consider their position on this critical issue, as it is not consistent with a pro-life stance.
Let them live, Salvation Army. Let the babies live.
Support their moms if they feel that they can't do it alone, and give them hope for their child's future, if not here on earth, forever in eternity.
That is what we celebrate with the birth of the Christ Child, the birth of the giver of Eternal Life.
Send Salvation Army a message that you will not be donating until they revoke the loopholes in their abortion policy using this contact information:
Commissioner M. Christine MacMillan
The Salvation Army
International Social Justice Commission221 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10022, USA
Phone: (212) 758-0763Email: IHQ-ISJC@salvationarmy.org
Read the entire article here.
Sunday, December 04, 2011
Bishop Tobin lights a CHRISTMAS TREE in Providence
(PROVIDENCE, R.I.)-Father James Ruggeri, Pastor of St. Patrick’s Parish, 244 Smith Street, today announced that the parish -in conjunction with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence- will host a Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremony and Prayer Service on Tuesday, December 6 at 5:30 p.m.
The event was scheduled to provide those Rhode Islanders who wish to maintain the celebration of Christmas rather than secularize the season with the ‘holiday’ label.St. Patrick’s Church sponsors ‘MaryHouse,’ a parish ministry that operates a soup kitchen and food pantry that is open year-round responding to those in the greatest of need throughout the community. The parish also sponsors a unique Catholic high school that serves those who would not otherwise have the opportunity of a Catholic secondary education due to affordability. Through the school and ‘MaryHouse,’ the parish and volunteers of St. Patrick make a real difference for struggling Rhode Islanders each and every day.
A choir will provide music then following a brief prayer service led by Bishop Thomas J. Tobin and Father Ruggeri, two children of the parish will light the Christmas tree.
“Echoing Bishop Tobin, the decision to avoid the word Christmas at the State House is sad and unfortunate in a state that is overwhelmingly Christian,” said Father James Ruggeri. “St. Patrick’s Parish is pleased to extend an invitation to anyone who is seeking a deeper understanding of the Advent and Christmas season to join us for the Christmas tree lighting.”“Governor Chafee’s decision to avoid the word Christmas at the State House ceremony is most disheartening and divisive,” said Bishop Tobin last night in a statement. “It is sad that such a secular spirit has swept over our state. The Governor’s decision ignores long held American traditions and is an affront to the faith of many citizens. For the sake of peace and harmony in our state at this special time of the year, I respectfully encourage the Governor to reconsider his decision to use the word Christmas in the state observance.”
All Rhode Islanders are welcome to attend this community event.
from the Rhode Island Catholic
This Connecticut person just may bring her family to this event to support this valiant bishop!
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Sunday, November 27, 2011
I'll be speaking at the Museum of Motherhood in Manhattan on Monday Dec 5
My talk is "Towards a New Paradigm of Perfection" at 10:30 and I will be challenging my audience to consider how our paradigms of perfection often exclude people and reject their gifts. I did when my in-laws, country fold from El Salvador came to share my home and I was soon to find, by their bonding with my genetically diverse daughter Christina, that we often miss the contributions of others but rejecting them.
www.MOMmuseum.org
Museum Of Motherhood
Celebrating The Multicultural Family
WHAT: Day Conference & Luncheon. Multicultural Mothers: The Many Hats We Wear
WHEN: Monday, December 5, 2011, 9AM-4:30 PM
WHERE: 401 East 84th St. (@1st Ave), lower level, New York, New York
INFO: Available Online: www.MOMmuseum.org
WHO: The Museum Of Motherhood (M.O.M.) is a living, breathing, community-centered arts, media and social change museum focused on amplifying the voices and experiences of mothers, and connecting 'the cultural family' while pioneering new areas of academe in†mother studies.†We are the first and only facility of this kind
FEATURING: Global Organizations, Experts and Multicultural Voices: Tanya Fields, Executive Director, The Blk Projek, Rachel Ishofsky, Jewish Heart For Africa, Presentation Panel on Aid for Aids International, Keynote with Dr. Phyllis Chesler, signing anniversary edition of her book, Mothers On Trial, two short films on global motherhood with Elizabeth Mangum, Birth Focus on Nomadic Motherhood and The White Ribbon Alliance on Maternal Health Care, Saving Mothers.org, as well as museum tours, Cynthia Odell, Afya & Leticia Velasquez on adopting new paradigms.
WHY: When we say mothers wear many hats it is more than just a turn of the phrase or a fashion statement. Within a given family, multiple cultures often exist simultaneously, making the family structure a melting pot for ideas, traditions, folklore and more. As we acknowledge a multicultural world with global perspectives, so too our twenty first century homes and communities have become microcosms of this phenomenon, making creative, tolerant perspectives an imperative when it comes to keeping old traditions alive and cultural information available to the next generation. Now, more than ever, institutions and communities must work to preserve folk knowledge and family cultural traditions paving the way to a collective archive, such as the one emerging within the Museum Of Motherhood, for the sake of collecting, organizing, preserving and sharing matriarchal values, sister traditions, patriarchy as it relates to family structure, birth practices and so much more, so that we may examine these links from the past, to understand ourselves and best transform our future.
TICKETS: Suggested donation $55 in Advance by ordering online, and $74 at the door.
SPONSORS: Food Emporium, Realityworks" infant simulators & pregnancy vests, Mustela™, YWCA, Gymboree, Working Mother Magazine, Mamapalooza, Motherhood Foundation Inc., Minnesota State U. PRESS: The New York Post, NY Times, Our Town, San Francisco Chronicle, Brightside Global Trade Journal (BMSI USA Publication).
www.MOMmuseum.org
Museum Of Motherhood
Celebrating The Multicultural Family
WHAT: Day Conference & Luncheon. Multicultural Mothers: The Many Hats We Wear
WHEN: Monday, December 5, 2011, 9AM-4:30 PM
WHERE: 401 East 84th St. (@1st Ave), lower level, New York, New York
INFO: Available Online: www.MOMmuseum.org
WHO: The Museum Of Motherhood (M.O.M.) is a living, breathing, community-centered arts, media and social change museum focused on amplifying the voices and experiences of mothers, and connecting 'the cultural family' while pioneering new areas of academe in†mother studies.†We are the first and only facility of this kind
FEATURING: Global Organizations, Experts and Multicultural Voices: Tanya Fields, Executive Director, The Blk Projek, Rachel Ishofsky, Jewish Heart For Africa, Presentation Panel on Aid for Aids International, Keynote with Dr. Phyllis Chesler, signing anniversary edition of her book, Mothers On Trial, two short films on global motherhood with Elizabeth Mangum, Birth Focus on Nomadic Motherhood and The White Ribbon Alliance on Maternal Health Care, Saving Mothers.org, as well as museum tours, Cynthia Odell, Afya & Leticia Velasquez on adopting new paradigms.
WHY: When we say mothers wear many hats it is more than just a turn of the phrase or a fashion statement. Within a given family, multiple cultures often exist simultaneously, making the family structure a melting pot for ideas, traditions, folklore and more. As we acknowledge a multicultural world with global perspectives, so too our twenty first century homes and communities have become microcosms of this phenomenon, making creative, tolerant perspectives an imperative when it comes to keeping old traditions alive and cultural information available to the next generation. Now, more than ever, institutions and communities must work to preserve folk knowledge and family cultural traditions paving the way to a collective archive, such as the one emerging within the Museum Of Motherhood, for the sake of collecting, organizing, preserving and sharing matriarchal values, sister traditions, patriarchy as it relates to family structure, birth practices and so much more, so that we may examine these links from the past, to understand ourselves and best transform our future.
TICKETS: Suggested donation $55 in Advance by ordering online, and $74 at the door.
SPONSORS: Food Emporium, Realityworks" infant simulators & pregnancy vests, Mustela™, YWCA, Gymboree, Working Mother Magazine, Mamapalooza, Motherhood Foundation Inc., Minnesota State U. PRESS: The New York Post, NY Times, Our Town, San Francisco Chronicle, Brightside Global Trade Journal (BMSI USA Publication).
Monday, November 07, 2011
The face of pro-life
 |
| Nicole Taylor Peck of "Silent No More" addresses a pro-life rally |
But a brave Washington Post reporter ventured outside the office to actually view the March one year, being the sole representative of the Main Stream Media to do so, and was stunned. What he saw was wave after wave of vibrant, enthusiastic young people. Hundreds of thousands, in an endless sea of youthful dynamism. And the stereotype was shattered.
This article proves that the Washington Post knows that the Times they are a changin'. It describes the sweet Southern belle Marjorie Dannenelser of the Susan B Anthony List, the lovely Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life, and that human dynamo Kristen Hawkins of Students for Life.
I have experienced the youthful moms who are the movers and shakers of the pro-life movement in the Beltway. I spent an exhausting twenty four hours following Kristen, mother to a special needs son, and expecting her second child, in stiletto heels, and business suit, navigating the halls of Congress while calling familiar names to see where we could be most effectively placed to have the biggest impact. We attended a pro-life meeting in the Capitol Building, where Marjorie Dannelfelser advised members of Congress about upcoming pro-life initiatives in her gentle drawl, and I have been to Blogs for Life where Charmaine Yoest, surrounded by her teenagers addressed the movers and shakers of the pro-life movement. These high powered career ladies are proud mothers who are running the pro-life movement and changing the old stereotypes. And they have experienced unprecedented success.
Recent news stories about the new vitality of the antiabortion movement and its legislative achievements — more than a dozen states enacting record numbers of abortion restrictions this year — have glossed over one crucial fact. The most visible, entrepreneurial and passionate advocates for the rights of the unborn (as they would put it) are women. More to the point: They are youngish Christian working mothers with children at home.So, the pro-lifers are no longer stuffy old white men, and prudish older women. They are hip, young and effective. And they know how to use the media, like the doe-eyed college kid, Lila Rose who single-handedly put Planned Parenthood on notice that the era of the government gravy train to fund America's largest abortion business is about to end.
The ladies are soft spoken, but they mean business. And the other side is scared.
They should be. They are going to have to fight tooth and nail to keep abortion on demand legal, regardless of who is president.
Friday, November 04, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)