Euthanasia advocates are bringing an American euthanasia campaigner Yvonne Shaw, to raise support for the so called End-of-Life Choice Bill that Labour MP Maryan Street wants to pass through Parliament. Right to Life encourages concerned people in Whangarei to go along to this meeting to make their opposition known.
The meeting will be held in the Cafler Room, Forum North, from 7pm on November 1.
Forty photographers who are all avidly Pro-abortion got together to celebrate 40 years of killing unborn children. Rather strange is it not that professional photographers should want their work to be associated with the murder of the unborn. [Warning – Graphic dismembering of a living unborn person]
NARAL’s Choice Out Loud project explained the purpose of the video saying “It has been 40 years since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in the United States. In celebration of that freedom, we asked 40 pro-choice photographers to capture the next generation of choice on film.”
Consider the following three quotes which are typical of those made by these photographers and the comments made on these same quotes by Kristi Burton Brown of LiveActionNews a US Pro-life organisation.
Re 15 May. Kermit Gosnell the Philadelphia abortionist at the “house of horrors” forces us to look at the underlying conundrum of a society that accepts abortion as a legitimate choice, thereby admitting that the unborn child has no right to life. This gruesome case reminds us that the baby has a right to life after it is born but before it is born it has no standing, why is this? An abortionist may force his way into a mother’s womb and dismember the child limb by limb to kill it and this is legal. The baby is the victim of choice and its killing is deemed to be legal. This case reminds us that in every abortion an innocent and defenceless child is killed. It reminds us too that abortion hurts women. The Gosnell case raises the question are there unlawful abortions in New Zealand? Justice Miller stated in the High Court in Wellington in 2008 that, “there is reason to doubt the lawfulness of many abortions authorised by certifying consultants.” We therefore have many children being denied their right to life. When are we going to see abortionists in New Zealand before the court charged with the unlawful killing of an unborn child?
I would be grateful if you would give an assurance that the Labour Party will not support the decriminalisation of abortion at the 2014 general election.
It is understood that at the recent annual conference of Young Labour it was resolved to seek as a priority the decriminalisation of abortion. I wish to take this opportunity to share with you and your colleagues reasons why the decriminalisation of abortion is not in the best interest of women and their unborn.
The decriminalisation of abortion would result in the following consequences:
It is disappointing that Young Labour, the youth wing of the Labour Party has declared at its 2013 annual conference that they would make it a priority to decriminalise the killing of unborn children.
Right to Life is opposed to this violent assault on vulnerable women and their defenceless unborn. Should the decriminalisation of abortion be adopted by the Labour Party as policy for the 2014 general election, it will be vigorously opposed by the pro-life movement in New Zealand. It should result in a resounding electoral defeat of the Labour Party.
The determination of Young Labour to seek the support of the Parliamentary Labour caucus is a threat to the human rights of all. If today they attack the unborn, tomorrow they may well deny the human rights of other vulnerable people in society, the aged the invalided and the elderly.
If Young Labour is really concerned about the welfare of women they would be seeking to have the current legislation upheld. Instead of promoting a culture of death, why does Young Labour not make it a priority to promote a culture of life by promoting adoption as an alternative to abortion and promoting practical help and assistance to women who are being coerced into abortion?
The following post is from the AlbertMohler.com website. Although this is about the US situation, NZ faces similar issues.
Haven’t heard of him? Albert Mohler is arguably the most prominent Christian Apologist in the world. He has a lot to say on many topics and is well worth reading.
Reads….
Looking for evidence that our society is losing its mind? Just look at the controversy over so-called “emergency contraceptives” and a federal judge’s effort to make these drugs available, over the counter, to girls of any age.
Last month, Judge Edward Korman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York handed down an order forcing the Food and Drug Administration to make emergency contraceptives, sometimes called the “morning-after pill,” available without a doctor’s prescription or parental permission to girls without any restriction on age.
Judge Korman’s order would open the door for girls as young as 10 or 11 to obtain the morning-after pill without any involvement by either a doctor or a parent. That same girl, of course, could not be given an aspirin in a school clinic without parental permission, much less a simple antibiotic like penicillin. Nevertheless, this federal judge ruled that girls and women of any age must be allowed over-the-counter access to emergency contraceptives.
Thank you for your letter of 18 April. You are to be commended for polling every home in your electorate to establish your community’s support for retaining the institution of marriage as being exclusively between one man and one woman. Your survey revealed unsurprisingly that 73 per cent of your electorate were opposed to redefining marriage to include same sex couples.
Re 6 May. Dr Roke of Family Planning is promoting a culture of death and sterility by encouraging women to use Long Acting Reversible Contraception [LARC] such as the IUD and the Jadelle implant. Why is Family Planning encouraging women to fill their bodies with dangerous foreign objects which have serious health consequences? The Jardelle implant is carcinogenic and increases the risk of cancer, causes liver dysfunction, thrombosis, high blood pressure, nausea and headaches. They constitute a violent assault on women’s fertility. Both these LARCs are abortifacient and destroy human life by preventing the implantation of a newly conceived human embryo.
I would be grateful if you were able to assist me with information on an important matter. On 30th April in the Christchurch Press there was an article reporting on a recent decision of the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal. A Doctor had been found guilty of unlawfully prescribing the abortion drug Misoprostol to three of her patients. The doctor had been censured and suspended from practising for a period of six months. The name of the doctor was temporarily suppressed. I have been advised that the doctor is seeking permanent name suppression and is appealing against the release of her name in the High Court.
The doctor who unlawfully prescribed this dangerous drug has broken the law. The Crimes Act 1961, under section ‘eight’, Crimes Against the Person, has section 183, Procuring Abortion by any means. It reads, “Everyone is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years who, with intent to procure the miscarriage of any woman or girl, whether she is pregnant or not,-[a] Unlawfully administers to or causes to be taken by her any poison or any drug … “
These are serious crimes against the right to life of three defenceless unborn children.
Right to Life believes that these matters should be brought to the attention of the Police in order that they may be investigated with a view to having charges laid in the High Court. Our Society has been advised by the office of the Tribunal that this is not the responsibility of the Tribunal.
I would be grateful if you would advise me if it is the responsibility of your office to report these matters to the Police and if so, if it is your intention to take this action?
The following article is by By Brandon Vogt from the OSV Newsweekly website. Reads..
Examining the most common arguments for redefining marital unions …and understanding why they are flawed
Perhaps no issue is more nerve-wracking today than same-sex marriage. It’s a magnet for controversy, evoking strong reactions from those on either side of the debate. But beneath all the fiery passion and rhetoric, there are real arguments to evaluate. In this article, we’ll examine the 10 most common ones made in favor of same-sex marriage, many of which you’ve probably heard before. By pointing out the flaws, we’ll show how each argument ultimately comes up short.
However, before we begin, let’s note a few things. First, this article concerns civil marriage — marriage as defined and promoted by the state. It doesn’t deal with the Church’s sacramental understanding, although the two often overlap. Second, the responses to the arguments are emphatically nonreligious. They don’t depend on any sacred text or divine revelation. They’re based on reason, philosophy, biology and history. Third, this article only refutes arguments in favor of same-sex marriage. It doesn’t touch upon the many positive arguments supporting traditional marriage.
One more note: This is not an attack on people with same-sex attractions. All people, regardless of sexual orientation, deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. Instead, this article is a rational look at whether civil marriage, an institution that touches all people and cultures, should be redefined.
The following post if by Shelia Liaugminas at MercatorNet.
Revelations about the abortion industry are coming out at a new pace now and in greater detail than ever. It’s forcing a very public confrontation with the truth about abortion and getting people talking as some never have before. The cover-ups are getting uncovered, and Big Abortion is getting unprecedented exposure.
They got plenty of that at the Democratic National Convention last summer, which celebrated abortion as we’ve never seen in American politics. But that’s the kind of exposure the industry wants. What’s going on now is new for them and the American public and the connected global universe tuned in, and nearly 40 years after Roe, we’re finally talking about and looking at abortion in its raw reality.
It’s been sort of a perfect storm, what’s happened in the past few weeks to precipitate an unprecedented public and even media confrontation with the whole issue of abortion. The trial of infamous abortionist Kermit Gosnell finally made the news when Kirsten Powers, a “Democratic strategist” and liberal commentator started calling out the media on it, and savvy pro-life people launched a grassroots social networking campaign to shame the media into paying attention to crimes against humanity they’d known about for years now on full display in court.
This case took years to come to trial. To call that a travesty is a ridiculous understatement. The authorities in the state of Pennsylvania passed off on checking this and other abortion clinics for years and years.This Atlantic article details it all, from the grand jury report.
“I will argue that euthanasia” is defined by the intention to bring about a patient’s death, rather than by its being an active killing” — The weasel words of Dr Alberto Giubilini -Bioethicist?
The Fertility Industry’s Dirty Little Secret
Planned Bullyhood
Footprints Magazine December 2011 Now Up
Click on the Footprint Magazine tab at the top of the homepage to view or download a copy of the latest Right to Life Magazine which informs in detail about current news from RTLNZ
Early this year NARAL (the US based National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws) produced a video to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the infamous 1973 Roe V 
Wade case which opened the floodgates to abortion in the United States.
Mr David Shearer,
The following post is from the AlbertMohler.com website. Although this is about the US situation, NZ faces similar issues. 
Examining the most common arguments for redefining marital unions …and understanding why they are flawed
The following post if by Shelia Liaugminas at MercatorNet.
Loading ...
Recent Comments