MORE COMPANIES OFF BOYCOTT LIST [1/13/08]

MONTHLY UPDATE & ACTION MEETINGS [1/13/08]

THREE WAYS TO SUPPORT CHESTER COUNTY PRO-LIFE COALITION [1/13/08]

EXCITING NEWS FROM CCWS MEDICAL [1/13/08]

I believe God is the Author of the word "Amaze". Someone once told me that where God leads He provides. I've come to learn this is true of not just the small stuff in life but also the Goliath size callings. In 2007, CCWS Medical heard the call of God and the cry of the community to open a location in the heart of West Chester. After much prayer and guidance our Board of Directors was in full agreement that it was time to expand our territory into the borough of West Chester. Then the "amazing" journey officially began!

We found a building that was too expensive to our human eyes but God provided through His faithful children. In a very short time He provided $75,000 to cover the down payment and closing costs. This building at 27 South Church Street has three apartments which provide approximately $2,000 per month income toward the mortgage payment. The remaining payment amount is less than we were paying for rent at our previous West Chester location! That's Amazing!!

Once we purchased the building we needed to build out the office and also meet current building codes. We put out the word in the form of emails and mailings and once again the children of God stepped up and were willing to put forth the effort to complete these needed renovations. We've experienced Godly men and women from throughout Chester County working together at our new location. It's a pleasure to be on site with them…to hear joking, laughter and conversation. So much has been completed in just one short month. In just two more weeks we will be finished! That's Amazing!!

We then began praying for more volunteers to serve our clients once the doors open in West Chester as well as increase our Coatesville hours. In the last month we have had over 20 women contact us regarding joining our staff of volunteers. That's Amazing!!

We look forward to opening our doors mid-January 2008 to women seeking hope in their time of crisis! Through our counseling services and our ultrasound technology we will introduce mothers and fathers to their pre-born children. Currently we are experiencing 90-95% of our clients choosing life for their pre-born children. With ultrasound in the borough of West Chester we believe we will increase the number of mothers choosing life and decrease the number of abortions! That's Amazing!!

IS THE END OF EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH NEAR? [1/13/08]

INCONVENIENT TRUTH ABOUT ORGAN DONATIONS [10/29/07]

By Steve Jalsevac

September 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - There has been growing concern over the past several years about increasingly aggressive measures undertaken to harvest human organs from dying patients. Dr. John Shea, a Toronto physician who has specialized in researching the issue, has just completed a report, Organ donation: The inconvenient truth, that sounds an alarm about the unethical or at least highly questionable practices of the organ transplant industry. The article is published in the September issue of Catholic Insight magazine.

The magazine editor states the article is offered to inform the public about "the moral principles and scientific facts pertaining to both the donation and harvesting of human organs for transplantation purposes. Many physicians have serious and well-considered concerns about the morality of human organ transplantation and about the fact that the general public has not been properly informed about what really happens when organs are retrieved."

Dr. Shea reports on the modern and still very unsettled definition of "brain death" used by many organ transplant physicians to justify declaring organ donors dead and therefore fair game for immediate organ harvesting.

Shea points out, "There is no consensus on diagnostic criteria for brain death. They are the subject of intense international debate. Various sets of neurological criteria for the diagnosis of brain death are used. A person could be diagnosed as brain dead if one set is used and not be diagnosed as brain dead if another is used."  It depends on what hospital or which doctor is involved in a particular case. 

In fact, says Shea, "A diagnosis of death by neurological criteria is theory, not scientific fact. Also, irreversibility of neurological function is a prognosis, not a medically observable fact."

The coldly utilitarian goal of promoting the acceptance of brain death, says Shea, "is to move to a society where people see organ donation as a social responsibility and where donating organs would be accepted as a normal part of dying." In fact, he says, the specific wishes of a donor opposed to having his organs removed would be bypassed by putting skilled pressure on surviving family members to approve the organ removal.

The apnea test, or removal of a ventilator, that is often used to determine brain death, says Dr. Shea, is the thing that often ends up killing the patient. "The test", he reports, "significantly impairs the possibility of recovery and can lead to the death of the patient through a heart attack or irreversible brain damage."

Shea reveals there are some preventive measures taken by organ removal teams that bring in to serious question whether their donor body, kept functioning through artificial means to preserve the organs, is really, fully dead.

"Some form of anesthesia is needed to prevent the donor from moving during removal of the organs. The donor's blood pressure may rise during surgical removal. Similar changes take place during ordinary surgical procedures only if the depth of anesthesia is inadequate. Body movement and a rise in blood pressure are due to the skin incision and surgical procedure if the donor is not anesthetized. Is it not reasonable to consider that the donor may feel pain? In some cases, drugs to paralyze muscle contraction are given to prevent the donor from moving during removal of the organs. Yet, sometimes no anesthesia is administered to the donor. Movement by the donor is distressing to doctors and nurses. Perhaps this is another reason why anesthesia and drugs to paralyze the muscles are usually given."

Since the definition of brain death was invented in the late 1960s "as a means for the moral validation of the retrieval of human organs for transplant", says Shea, the demand for organs has increasingly exceeded supply and so a new definitions of death had to be created to help meet the demand. The concept of "cardiac death" was developed but this also has serious ethical challenges and test measures that also kill a possibly still alive patient. Another "ominous and disturbing development" is the recent recruitment of palliative caregivers by the organ harvesting industry. "Those care givers" says Shea, "in effect… are to be the agents of a soft-sell program to make the family 'feel comfortable and supported during this extremely difficult time.'"

Shea covers the changing Vatican debate on these end of life issues and the need for more definitive and better informed direction from the Church on the issues. An Italian researcher is quoted stating, "The concern of many is that the Vatican has not taken the appropriate position when doubts exist about the end of human life."

Organ donation: The inconvenient truth contains many references to support its statements and is a timely paper on the human transplant trend that is fast becoming ethically out-of-control. Many political jurisdictions are considering radical legislative measures, such as presumed consent, without being fully aware of the major ethical dilemmas related to organ transplants. Most are not aware, for instance, that organs are often taken from persons who are likely, in many ways, still alive.

SUPPORT A PRO-LIFE BUSINESS [10/29/07]

AWARD WINNING MOVIE, BELLA, OPENS OCTOBER 26 [9/25/07]

You don't want to miss this winner of the "People's Choice" Award at the Toronto Film Festival that provides a look at the abortion debate from the perspective of a man who learns to have an appreciation for the value of human life after an automobile accident in which a young girl is killed. Changing the way the public approaches the issue of abortion is the top goal of the producers of Bella. Without an over-the-top approach that features content directed at the pro-life community, it takes a more subtle tack that could cause millions of Americans to rethink their own views supporting abortion.

The actors and producers in the movie are stars in their own right who are all strongly pro-life Catholics and have formed a production company to impact the culture. Eduardo Verastegui is one of the most successful Mexican actors in Hollywood today and has become one of the strongest voices against the legalization of abortion in Mexico City. Like his character in Bella, he gave up the glory of the world to focus on making movies that advance values and ethics. Since rediscovering the faith of his parents, he has no fear of public rejection for denouncing the holocaust of abortion

The movie is racking up strong reviews from media outlets including, the New York Times, Fox News and the New York Post. At numerous private showings, audiences have risen to their feet with teary eyes, thunderous applause and offers to help promote it. Now that it has finally received a major distribution deal, it will hit theaters nationwide on October 26th. So gather as many people as you can to come out to, not only be enthralled by this stunning movie, but to help support those who have used their money, talent, and faith to speak out on the sanctity of human life.

WAWA OFF THE BOYCOTT LIST [9/25/07]

PRO-LIFE GROUP NAMES NEW BOYCOTT TARGETS [9/1/07]

Life Decisions International (LDI), a group that monitors corporations that give contributions to Planned Parenthood has released a new boycott list. They hope that pro-life advocates will consult the list before making purchases at some of the leading companies in the United States because they support the number one abortion business.

Doug Scott, president of LDI, confirms that the boycott list has proven effective over the past 15 years. He says, "As a direct result of the commitment, action and prayers of pro-family people, at least 153 corporations have stopped funding Planned Parenthood." Several well-known companies are appearing on the LDI boycott list for the first time, including:

Allstate Insurance Company, CCA Global (the parent of Carpet One and other flooring stores), Chevron, Texaco, Comcast, DuPont, eBay and PayPal, the Four Seasons Hotels, GlaxoSmithKline, Marriott, OSI Restaurants (which includes Outback Steakhouse), Sears and Kmart, Sonic, and Wawa convenience stores [NOTE: Wawa is now off the boycott list!].

Some of the companies that remain on the boycott list include: Wachovia, Nike, Time Warner, Bank of America, CIGNA, Walt Disney, Johnson & Johnson, Wells Fargo, Whole Foods, Nationwide Insurance.

THREE CHESTER COUNTY FACILITIES REPORT ABORTIONS IN 2006 [6/23/07]

Planned Parenthood - 1008
Phoenixville Hospital - 23
Paoli Hospital - 6

INFORMED CONSENT: IT'S REALLY QUITE CLEAR [6/23/07]

1. At least 24 hours prior to the abortion, the physician who is to perform the abortion or the referring physician, has orally informed the woman of:

	i. The nature of the proposed procedure or treatment and of those risks and alternatives to the procedure.
	ii. The probable gestational age of the unborn child at the time the abortion is to be performed.
	iii. The medical risks associated with carrying her child to term.

This above is part of the information a mother is to receive during her "informed consent" visit at least 24 hours before an abortion. Planned Parenthood of West Chester has their clients watch a video instead of speaking with a physician during their "informed consent" visit. Does it seem obvious that a physician speaking on a video has no way of telling the abortion client what the gestational age of the child is?

We have been back and forth with both the PA Dept. of State (who is supposed to enforce this law) and the Chester County District Attorney's Office (who also has jurisdiction) for well over a year to have this law enforced. The former has decided there is no violation - without giving any explanation; the latter is still researching it!!!

THE GOLDEN RULE [6/23/07]

"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you" (Matthew 7:12)

This teaching of Jesus, called the Golden Rule, makes it pretty easy to evaluate how we should treat others, particularly others in need. Jesus tells us it applies "in everything." That includes in pro-life strategy. �

"Do to others what you would have them do to you." It applies when the "others" are unborn children, living and growing in their mothers' wombs, and scheduled to be aborted. We are to do to them what we would want others to do to us if we were in the same situation. �

I once asked a pro-abortion person if he would prefer to have been aborted.� His response was, "I would not have known the difference." And thus he avoided answering the question, which was whether he would prefer (now) to have been aborted (then), not what he would or would not have known then. Put another way, if you were in danger of losing your life and could not rescue yourself, what would you want others to do for you? �

The answer for every sane person is that we would want others to rescue us, to save us. According to the teaching of Jesus, then, we have to do save and rescue the unborn. "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you." Yet most believers in Jesus do not follow this advice. �

Were we in danger, would we want others to speak up for us, even if they would face ridicule, opposition, and accusations of being fanatical single-issue people? The answer is yes. Were we in danger, would we want preachers to sound the alarm and rally people to come to our aid and protect our lives? The answer is yes. Were we in danger, would we want public officials and candidates for public office to make an issue of saving our lives, and restore to us the protection of which we were deprived? The answer is yes. �

If, then, we follow the teaching of Jesus, we know what we have to do. "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you." �

A lot of pro-life people lose time and sleep figuring out how much risk they should take in their pro-life activity - how many people should they risk offending, how many positions should they risk losing, and how many legal entanglements should they risk incurring. It's time to stop wondering. "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you." Just ask the simple question, "If it were my life at stake, how much risk would I want others to take to save me?" �

Some people today, including me, are even evaluating whether they should physically intervene by blockading the doors of abortion facilities to separate the babies from the instruments that will kill them. Jesus' words convey an uncomfortable answer: "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you."

NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOC. HAS RADICAL AGENDA [6/23/07]

It will come as no surprise if NEA delegates propose a resolution at the convention condemning the recent Supreme Court decision against Partial-Birth Abortion.

Most Americans are unaware of the NEA leadership's radical agenda. In 1985 its �Family Planning� Resolution (I-13) was adopted. It 1986 it was amended and is reaffirmed annually at every Convention. It reads, "The National Education Association supports family planning, including the right to reproductive freedom. The Association urges the government to give high priority to making available all methods of family planning to women and men unable to take advantage of private facilities. The Association further urges the implementation of community-operated, school-based family planning clinics that will provide intensive counseling by trained personnel."

In 1990 NEA delegates passed New Business Item 1990-65 - "NEA will oppose any legislation which will erode the status of Roe v. Wade and/or which impedes access to and choice of reproductive health care options, by providing technical assistance to state affiliates."

The NEA leadership is one of Planned Parenthood's primary advocates. The NEA leadership co-sponsored the pro-abortion rallies in Washington, DC in 1989, 1992, and 2004 along with the ACLU, National Abortion Rights Action League, and other liberal and feminist groups.

ONGOING VISITS TO LEGISLATORS [5/7/07]

The legislative efforts being pursued include: An "Ultrasound Bill" which will enable mothers to view their unborn child before an abortion, a "Conscience Bill for Pharmacists" to give them the right to refuse filling prescriptions that can cause the death of an unborn child, the "Marriage Amendment" to declare marriage as between one man and one woman, a "Psychological Harm Bill" which would require telling mothers coming for abortions about the risks of psychological problems following abortion, and the removal of "family planning" money from the budget which uses our tax dollars to promote promiscuity among the young.

Anyone wishing to join in future trips to Harrisburg, contact Jack O'Brien at 610-692-2122.

2005 ABORTION STATISTICS: WHERE DO WE STAND? [5/7/07]

Statewide, 6 girls, 12 years of age or younger, had abortions � and in Chester County alone, 4 abortions were done on girls under the age of 15.

The majority (almost 60%) of all abortions were performed at 8 weeks or less. This means that these mothers lost children who already had heartbeats, brainwaves, and were moving around of their own free will.

Over 34% were obtained by 20-24 year olds, making them the majority of women seeking abortions. The next largest group was 25-29 year olds.

Complications occurred in 121 reported cases, most of which were problems with �retained products of conception'. And most of these complications occurred in abortions at 8 weeks or less gestation.

Repeat abortions accounted for 44.8% of the abortions, with 18.8% on women who had two or more previous abortions.

White women had 56.9% of the abortions, while black women accounted for 38% and those of Hispanic origin had 6.4%.

In Chester County, 1,117 residents had abortions in PA, while 1,162 abortions actually occurred in Chester County. The number of residents having abortions has been slowly increasing over the past three years. In 2004, there were 1040 and in 2003, there were 983. The number of abortions occurring in Chester County in 2004 was 1173 and in 2003 there were 1129.

Anyone wishing to receive the complete report from the PA Department of Health, please call our office at 610-692-4463.

CANCER GROUPS AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD [5/7/07]

Both of these organizations insist on ignoring the evidence that abortion can increase the risk of breast cancer and that Planned Parenthood is the number one provider of abortion in this country. Please let these seemingly good organizations know why you cannot contribute or participate in their "races" as long as they are involved with Planned Parenthood.

According to "Life Decisions International" other groups with relationships with Planned Parenthood are Camp Fire Girls, The Dr. Phil Foundation, Girl Scouts, Human Rights Watch, some Kiwanis Clubs, the March of Dimes, some Rotary Clubs, and the YWCA.

30 DAYS OF PRO-LIFE PRAYER [5/7/07]

The National Pro-Life Religious Council, which represents a wide variety of different Christian denominations, has recently completed a prayer outline to help pro-life people conduct 30 days of personal prayer, based on a solid Biblical foundation.

"30 Days for Life - A Prayer Devotional" begins each day's devotional with a scriptural quote followed by several thought-provoking and inspiring paragraphs, which offer reflections on that day's scripture. Each day's devotional is then closed with a brief pro-life prayer.

In all, there are 15 contributors to the book, representing 14 different denominations or organizations with outreach programs to religious groups. Some of the contributors include pro-life clergy who have worked steadfastly for 20 or more years to change their denominations' position from pro-abortion to pro-life. And through their work and prayer, some of these denominations are beginning to move, ever so slowly, toward a pro-life position.

Through prayer, we honor God, ask for His assistance in our struggle to protect all innocent human life, and thank Him for the help He has already given us. I believe this book will provide everyone with an opportunity to spend a few minutes a day, for 30 consecutive days, to pray and to reflect on various aspects of the pro-life movement. I hope this book will fill your hearts with a sense of peace and purpose that only prayer - personal communication with God - can bring.

30 Days for Life - A Prayer Devotional may be purchased for $3.50 plus $1.00 postage. Please send your order to National Right to Life, 512 Tenth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20004. You can also call (202) 626-8811.

By Ernest L. Ohlhoff, National Right to Life Director of Outreach

PA CHOOSE LIFE LICENSE PLATE [3/21/07]

WHO WILL DECIDE FOR YOU? [3/21/07]

In the absence of a chosen health care agent or representative, this law sets forth who may act by default as the representative to make medical decisions. The list in descending order of priority is: 1.Spouse and adult child who is not the child of the spouse 2. Adult child. 3. Parent. 4. Adult sibling. 5. Adult grandchild. 6. Close friend.

It is impossible to know what medical situations will arise in the future. Pro-life attorneys and organizations recommend naming a health care representative you trust to make the best moral and ethical decisions if you are unable to speak for yourself instead of using living wills.

THE CHANGING FACE OF THE MARCH FOR LIFE [3/21/07]

The face of the March for Life has changed. Even in the brief five years that I have been working in pro-life efforts such as volunteering at pregnancy centers and public outreach through education, I can see the large steps that have been taken by the movement to incorporate the voice of post-abortive women and men. At every turn I am further heartened by the compassion, the unity, and the single vision that is becoming more and more a part of the pro-life environment today.

No event is such a marked testament to this change than the March for Life. My first March was five years ago, in 2002. I remember going with my church, as a senior in high school. It was less than a year after my abortion � I was 17, and the only person who knew about my abortion was the friend who accompanied me to this event. I remember standing at the rally before the March, listening to senators talking about women who "sacrificed their children on the altar of convenience." I was ashamed � they were talking about me. That day I walked by several men with bullhorns, shouting that women who aborted their children were going to hell. The final straw came later when a friend in my pro-life college group (who didn't know my history) stated unequivocally that women who had abortions were excommunicated without question. It hurt to go to the March. It hurt to take a pro-life stance with an abortion in my past. I felt like I couldn't share my past with those I struggled to help.

How far we have come!!! This past year, I had the honor to join Silent No More Awareness Campaign throughout the rally � holding up an "I Regret My Abortion" sign; right next to my sisters and brothers who had withstood the same loss I had suffered. I felt a great sense of gratitude and support standing with them. I didn't feel ashamed before that vast crowd; I didn't feel like I had to hide my past. I felt like all those people were there to mourn with me, to cry out for justice with me, and to rejoice in healing with me.

Today, thanks to a better understanding of post-abortion trauma, mothers and fathers of aborted children are helped every day through ministries like ours. The vast majority of friction and static I get about my past comes from those who claim to be pro-choice. I attended the so-called "March for Women's Lives," with Silent No More and was openly mocked by the opposing side. We were sneered at, made fun of, and I remember one woman in particular screaming, "You should be ashamed of yourselves!" I have never been less ashamed of myself in my life than when I stand up for my rights, for the rights of the son I lost, for the rights of my sisters and friends and the generations that will come after me.

At a Silent No More Gathering that took place after the March for Life this year, women and men gave their brave testimonies about their abortion experiences. The speakers were completely composed and shared their stories with powerful emotion, but not histrionics. There were tears, but they were gentle, and each participant took time to mention the great healing they had experienced. Many cited Rachel's Vineyard Ministries as being responsible for the transformation of their hearts and their lives. In contrast was the short-lived protest by NARAL, which featured the screaming of meaningless slogans, and attempts to silence the voices of the very women that pro-choice groups claim to represent. They came and went briefly � their impact hardly felt in the face of the truth we proclaimed.

My most vivid memory of the March this year was a wonderful man who spoke to the assembled women of Silent No More before the Gathering. He held his fist in the air, smiled proudly at those holding "I Regret" signs, and said, "Regret but not shame, ladies, regret but not shame!" His words echoed one theme that must be highlighted � this was not an event designed to revel in the guilt and grief of abortion, but a chance for us as parents who had lost children to abortion to finally have the chance to stand up for our true rights, the right of their children to life, and to decry the lie of abortion. I regret, but I am not ashamed. I cry out, but not in pain � I cry out for justice, and I cry out with the voice given to me by the dedicated representatives of Rachel's Vineyard who helped heal me from my pain.

(Andrea is currently working for Rachel's Vineyard and the newest member of the Chester County Pro-Life Coalition Board of Directors.)

GARDASIL - SHOULD IT BE MANDATORY? [3/21/07]

Currently, there are efforts underway in our own state legislature to make this vaccine a requirement for school-age girls. Traditionally, mandated vaccines are for easily communicable diseases such as mumps and measles, which can be spread through casual contact like coughing. The vaccine only protects against four kinds of HPV. There are currently more than a hundred recorded variations of this disease infecting people all over the world. In fact, 30% of cases of cervical cancer caused by HPV will not be affected by this vaccine at all. In addition, the incubation period for the HPV virus to develop into cervical cancer is 10 � 15 years. The Gardisil vaccine is only effective for 4 �5 years. If it is mandated to inoculate 6th grade girls, as is currently being proposed, it will have worn off before any cancer occurs.

Another important note to take into consideration about this new vaccine is the fact that this drug with a life-long impact has only been tested for four years�there is no current information about the long-term effects. Dr. Jon Abramson of the Center for Disease Control has come forward to say that he strongly opposes mandating Gardasil as a vaccine.

It is important that we as consumers, as parents and siblings and friends, understand the facts about Gardasil.

EXPOSE THE EVIL [1/6/07]

I have spent more than half my life strategizing about how the people of God can most effectively fight and end abortion. There is no one line that summarizes my conclusions better than what St. Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:11, "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them."

Evil flourishes when it is hidden: injustice festers when the victim is unseen. And history demonstrates that those who have overcome social injustices have followed Paul's advice to expose the evil. For instance, those who fought the slave trade in Britain went to the ports to draw pictures of the boats and how the slaves were kept in them like sardines.

Exposing evil causes it to collapse under its own weight, as it confronts the light of human conscience. Overcoming injustice does not require that everyone believe it is injustice. There is, rather, a critical mass at some point in the spectrum, when "enough" people are so convinced. The good news is that those people already have the conscience to reject the evil. The problem is that the evil hasn't been sufficiently exposed for them to see it.

So it is with abortion. The more it is exposed, the more people reject it. Public opinion on abortion in America has been amazingly stable since Roe vs. Wade. The most significant shift occurred when the details of the partial-birth abortion procedure were exposed in the mid-nineties. Never did a larger audience see and hear in more detail what abortion actually is. Abortion needs to be exposed in five distinct ways:

10 YEARS OF ABORTION AT PLANNED PARENTHOOD [9/30/06]

MORE FROM "ADDRESSING ABORTION WITH CONFIDENCE" [8/11/06]

UMBILICAL CORD BLOOD BANKS ACCEPTING DONATIONS [8/11/06]

It was not widely publicized, but in December 2005, The Stem Cell Therapeutic Research Act was passed by Congress and signed by President Bush. This bill established a national databank of umbilical cord blood and bone marrow that allows doctors to quickly find a match for patients. Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ), who spearheaded the legislation for three years said, "Umbilical cords are a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells, but currently hospitals throw millions of them away each year . . . The best kept medical secret has been that thousands have been successfully treated with cord blood stem cells for more than 67 diseases including Leukemia and Sickle Cell Anemia. The infusion of federal funds will make this medical miracle available to thousands more and will ensure that research continues so that this source of stem cells can treat many other debilitating diseases."

Karen Wack, a resident of Downingtown, recently donated the umbilical cord blood of her baby boy, born this past April. Karen wrote to us, "When I was pregnant I had heard a lot of information about cord blood banking. We decided to see how we could donate it to possibly save someone else's family member or for research."

Karen contacted Cryobanks International, located in New Jersey, and found that the process was easy, free, and worthwhile. She filled out a questionnaire and checked that her doctor would not charge a collection fee. After returning the questionnaire, she received a collection kit, instructions for the doctor and hospital, and a phone number to call when she went into labor and within 2 hours after giving birth. A representative from the cord blood bank came to the hospital to pick up the donated cord blood. Karen is thankful for her baby boy and the opportunity to help a good cause.

PRESIDENT TAKES STRONG MORAL STAND ON STEM CELL RESEARCH [8/11/06]

President George W. Bush courageously vetoed the Congressional bill that would have used taxpayer funds to pay for stem cell research using human embryos. He said, "This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses a moral boundary that our society needs to respect." Referring to the children in the room who were adopted as frozen embryos, the President also said, "These boys and girls are not spare parts. They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells. And they remind us that in our zeal for new treatments and cures, America must never abandon our fundamental morals."

He then encouraged government agencies to pursue other research using adult stem cells, including umbilical cord blood. In fact, the day after his veto, The University of Louisville reported that studies have confirmed its research that adult stem cells can mimic the properties of embryonic ones. Researchers in Illinois, Germany and New York have identified similar embryonic-like stem cells in umbilical cord blood. The use of adult stem cells is much preferred for two reasons � human embryos will not be destroyed and they will not have the same rejection issues that embryonic cells do.

Reports of successful treatments using adult stem cells are increasing. New studies show that adult stem cells taken from the patient's own nose have restored motor function and sensation to some with spinal cord injuries. Irish researcher, Colin McGuckin, will present new information at a conference in September showing it is possible to use stem cells from the umbilical cords of living babies to produce insulin in diabetics and to grow blocks of human tissue for use in drug tests.

Many are confused about the difference between embryonic and adult stem cell research. We thank President Bush for not backing down on his belief in the sanctity of human life and taking such a strong moral stand on this issue.

THE LINK BETWEEN ABORTION & BREAST CANCER [5/9/06]

SOMETHING FOR OUR CLERGY [5/9/06]

Is addressing the abortion issue something you do with fear, hesitation or confidence? Regularly or once a year?

Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, has put together a 16 page booklet titled, "Addressing Abortion with Confidence" that addresses many of the major concerns clergy of all faiths have expressed at seminars and through surveys. It is in a question & answer format. An Ecumenical Version titled "A Clergyman Answers the Fears Pastors Face as They Address the Issue of Abortion" is also available, as well as a Spanish version.

A few examples follow.

Question: Do I see the issue as too emotional and sensitive?
Answer: Many aspects of abortion are very sensitive. That means they have to be dealt with in a sensitive way; it does not mean they should be ignored. The impact of abortion on the lives of our people � physically, spiritually, and emotionally � is all the more reason for a shepherd to pay attention to these wounds, and to help people avoid them in the first place. Ministry necessarily involves confronting problems that provoke emotions within us and among our people. In this case, ministry regarding abortion involves nothing less than life and death.

Question: Will I increase the sense of guilt and pain of women who have had abortions?
Answer: (Excerpts) An understanding of the dynamics of post-abortion women and men is extremely helpful in dealing with this fear. Many priests are silent out of the best of good intentions towards such people in their congregation. Silence, however, does not interpret itself. The person in the pews hurting from abortion may interpret our silence to mean, "He doesn't know my pain." Or, "He doesn't care about it." . . It is not silence that helps one break out of denial, but rather an honest and compassionate word about the reality of what they have done. We preach on abortion to save post-abortive people, and to protect others from making the same mistake.

YOUR PA TAX DOLLARS FUNDING PLANNED PARENTHOOD [4/17/06]

Governor Ed Rendell has once again included money for "Family Planning" in the PA budget for 2006-2007. In 2004 over $5 million went to so-called "Family Planning Councils," who funneled it to organizations such as Planned Parenthood.

A LIVING WILL OR A "WILL TO LIVE?" [4/17/06]

(excerpts from "Straight Talk" by Michael Galloway, Catholic Online)

Most estimates say there have been 40�50 million unborn children aborted since 1973. Why the absence of alarm? What does 40-50 million dead people look like anyway?

You could lose the West Coast -- everybody in California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska. Or you could lose most of the East Coast, if you preferred. It's a matter of choice, and it's fifty million people. It's similar to the numbers of people who vote as either Republicans or Democrats in a national U.S. presidential election. Choose. Eliminate everybody who voted in the last election as a Democrat or as a Republican.

Think of each deserving aborted baby strolling across a graduation stage at the announcement of each name, at least five syllables each. Maybe you could read as many as 30 or more a minute. If a team of readers read 40 million names taking turns for ten hours a day, they'd still be reading the names of the dead nearly seven years later!

Fifty million people? Can you grasp it? End the slaughter. Stop it now. Embrace a future in which the value of each life is cherished as vital�those born, those unborn, and those now aborted. Will you proclaim that truth? Will you stand up for the pre-born? Will you speak up?

ATROPHY OF COMPASSION [4/17/06]

(Following is an excerpt from comments by Fr. Frank Pavone, Director of Priests for Life, following Terri Schindler Schiavo's autopsy report.)

Terri did not die from atrophy of the brain. She died from an atrophy of compassion. Too many people, starting with Michael, were unwilling to accept the fact that profoundly injured people require profound compassion and care. Even if this autopsy report showed that Terri was ten times more damaged than she was, our moral obligation to respect and protect her life would not change at all. We don't have to pass a test to qualify for our human rights. An autopsy is a measure of physical damage, not of human rights.

The autopsy says Terri was blind. That is not the morally relevant point. The point is that we are blind...blind all too often to the fact that even the disabled and the severely injured have the same dignity and worth as the rest of us, and show forth the image and glory of God even in their brokenness.

The autopsy says that Terri was beyond repair or rehabilitation. But that does not mean we are supposed to throw her away, like we throw away a car that is beyond repair. Again, there is no problem accepting this medical conclusion. But morally speaking, our compassion is not beyond repair. We can build a society that respects and protects all our brothers and sisters, recognizing that their value does not come from how well they perform, function, or produce.

I will never forget my hours with Terri, both before and after her feeding tube was removed. She responded to me, and she responded to others who visited her. She laughed, she tried to speak, she returned her parents' kisses, she followed us with her eyes, she closed her eyes when I prayed with her and opened them when we were finished. Medical examiners can offer their conclusions because of what they saw, but none of that changes what we saw. But both we and the medical examiners were looking in from the outside. Any honest medical expert will admit that there is so much about the human brain we still don't know. What Terri experienced on the inside is a mystery that only she and God know.

The challenge at this moment is simply this. Whatever she experienced, to whatever extent she was damaged, and even if she were totally unresponsive, Terri was one of us. She was our sister, she was a child of God, she was fully in possession of her human rights, and nothing can ever justify what was done to her.

KEEPING AN EYE ON PRO-LIFE LEGISLATION [2/28/06]

There are two important bills making their way through the U.S. Congress which have great potential for saving lives:

The Right to Life Act of 2005 (HR 552) was introduced by Cong. Duncan Hunter (R-CA). This bill will extend the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to include the right to life of every born and pre-born individual. In the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court said "If the suggestion of personhood is established, the appellants' case (for abortion) of course collapses, for the fetus' right to life would be guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment."
   A list of co-sponsors of this bill shows that two out of the three Chester County Congressmen have not signed on. Only Congressman Joe Pitts has become a co-sponsor. Both Congressman Jim Gerlach and Congressman Curt Weldon say they are "considering support, but [are] still studying it."
    They need to hear from you! Thank Congressman Joe Pitts for his support of this bill (610-444-4581). Request support for the bill from Congressman Weldon (610-259-0700 or 202-225-2011) and Congressman Gerlach (610-594-1415 or 202-225-8440).

The Elizabeth Cady Stanton Pregnant & Parenting Student Services Bill (HR 4265 and SB 1966) was introduced last November in the House by Cong. Melissa Hart (R-PA) and in the senate by Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC). This bill will establish a pilot program to provide grants to encourage eligible institutions of higher education to establish and operate pregnancy and parenting student services offices for pregnant students, parenting students, prospective parenting students who are anticipating a birth or adoption, and students who are placing or have placed a child for adoption.
   This bill is important because the rate of abortions is highest amongst college age women, who often feel they have to choose between their education and the life of their child. A support system right on campus will save many lives. Congressman Curt Weldon is a cosponsor of the bill, and as of this writing, Congressman Jim Gerlach says he will support it. Congressman Joe Pitts is still reviewing the bill.

In the Pennsylvania House of Representatives a powerful bill is being introduced this month, which, if passed, will also save many lives.

The Ultrasound Access Bill, will be introduced by Rep. Mike Turzai, and will require a quality ultrasound be performed at least 24 hours before an abortion. The screen is to be positioned to enable the pregnant woman to view the images. A video print is also to be provided. The mother may waive in writing her right to view the image of her baby. This bill will greatly enhance the information that each woman is to receive before an abortion as stipulated in the "Informed Consent" mandate by the PA Abortion Control Act.
   As of this writing, Chester County representatives who have signed on as co-sponsors include: Rep. Art Hershey, Rep. Tim Hennessey, Rep. Elinor Taylor, and Rep. Curt Schroder. Rep. Stephen Barrar supports it, but is waiting for the final wording before co-sponsoring. Rep. Bob Flick is still uncertain, and there has been no response from Reps. Chris Ross or Carole Rubley.

CAN YOU FATHOM THE NUMBERS? [2/28/06]

(excerpts from "Straight Talk" by Michael Galloway, Catholic Online)

Most estimates say there have been 40�50 million unborn children aborted since 1973. Why the absence of alarm? What does 40-50 million dead people look like anyway?

You could lose the West Coast -- everybody in California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska. Or you could lose most of the East Coast, if you preferred. It's a matter of choice, and it's fifty million people. It's similar to the numbers of people who vote as either Republicans or Democrats in a national U.S. presidential election. Choose. Eliminate everybody who voted in the last election as a Democrat or as a Republican.

Think of each deserving aborted baby strolling across a graduation stage at the announcement of each name, at least five syllables each. Maybe you could read as many as 30 or more a minute. If a team of readers read 40 million names taking turns for ten hours a day, they'd still be reading the names of the dead nearly seven years later!

Fifty million people? Can you grasp it? End the slaughter. Stop it now. Embrace a future in which the value of each life is cherished as vital�those born, those unborn, and those now aborted. Will you proclaim that truth? Will you stand up for the pre-born? Will you speak up?

TRULY MAKING AN INVESTMENT IN ABSTINENCE [1/9/06]

The following article was written by Judi McLane, the high school outreach coordinator for Generation Life, and published in the Philadelphia Inquirer on Friday, August 12, 2005.

No need to look to surveys, polls or long-winded studies. Abstinence-only education works. How do we know? Because NARAL, Planned Parenthood and NOW have shifted into crisis mode to save the pro-abortion, procontraception and pro-promiscuity agenda. The "safe, legal, and rare" mantra has been reduced to flippant I Had an Abortion T-shirts and scare-tactic posters declaring the comeback of the chastity belt. These are frantic measures to cling to relevance as the rest of America goes in a different direction. The pro-choice cry has evolved into "Everyone is free to make choices regarding their sexual health as long as it's not abstinence."

How's that for tolerance? Despite claims to the contrary, there are scientific evaluations showing that real abstinence programs for youth can be highly effective in reducing early sexual activity. An article in the Sept. 10, 1997, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association by Michael Resnick titled "Protecting Adolescents From Harm" shows that abstinence pledge programs are effective in reducing sexual activity in grades seven through 12. Based on a large national sample of adolescents, the study concludes that "adolescents who reported having taken a pledge to remain a virgin were at significantly lower risk of early age of sexual debut."

A Department of Health and Human Services-funded study (available in PDF format at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/abstinence), started in 1998, tracked 2,310 students. The results showed that teens in abstinence programs are more likely to be in favor of sexual abstinence and against out-of-wedlock sexual relations than counterparts not enrolled in such programs. Those enrolled also were far more likely to understand the negative consequences of sex.

Planned Parenthood has inundated schools with its safe-sex agenda for an exhausting and frustrating 45 years. The results from this human experiment are in. Two million teenagers contract a sexually transmitted disease each year; 1 million become pregnant. Every 23 seconds, a woman will lay down her body to be exploited by abortion, and 45 million babies have been killed in the name of reproductive health since 1973. I think it's safe to say it's time to pass the baton.

Even Planned Parenthood's "safe sex" slogan has changed to "safer sex" because they have come to realize that anything not rooted in the truth has an expiration date. This leaves abstinence-only education with the only superlative that really matters: Waiting until marriage is the safest sex of all.

Abstinence is a dirty word; it is free. It is clear that safe-sex supporters want our kids to be sexually active because, let's face it, promiscuity is darn good business. Abstinent kids don't buy condoms, pills, pregnancy tests, or emergency contraception. Abstinent kids do not need STD testing, genital herpes cream, or cryotherapy to remove HPV-infected cervical tissue. Abstinent kids don't need abortions. This abstinence craze might actually put some people out of business.

Abstinence cannot be taught in an hour-long class period. It is a lifestyle the whole nation must adopt for the safety of its children. Teaching them about the beauty of our sexuality requires us to be prayerful, informed, and committed to talking often about it. The point of abstinence education is to counterbalance a sex-infused culture and to influence teen attitudes for the better.

Abstinence-only programs help young people develop an understanding of commitment, personal responsibility, fidelity and intimacy that will serve them well as the foundations of healthy marital life. Our country needs to set aside selfishness and politics and finally put our children first.

MORE WOMEN DIE FROM ABORTION PILL: RU486 NOW A DANGER TO MOTHER AND CHILD ALIKE [8/20/05]

RU486 or Mifeprix, the abortion drug that was "fast-tracked" for approval during the Clinton years, has been named as the cause of death of five women in the past three years. Four were in California; one occurred early this summer. These are the reported cases. It is very possible the death rate is much higher because coroners may be listing the cause of death as infection while the abortion drug may have initially triggered it.

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and Danco Laboratories, maker of the drug, are sending letters to doctors that warn of possible infections leading to death. The Centers for Disease Control is investigating the five deaths and has confirmed that it will examine whether "off-label" use played a role in the women�s deaths. Apparently, Planned Parenthood frequently tells women to insert the drug vaginally, when the FDA protocol specifies the pills should be swallowed. Planned Parenthood has also prescribed the drug in different doses than recommended by the FDA.

David Stevens, M.D., director of the Christian Medical Association, says the warning to doctors is not enough. "With every death of another woman due to RU-486, the FDA's mandate grows clearer -- to pull this drug for an objective safety review," he said. Lawmakers, as well, don�t believe letters to doctors and warning labels are doing enough to protect women's lives -- not to mention the babies. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R, MD) is sponsoring a bill (HR 1079) that would remove RU486 from the market while the FDA launches a thorough review of its safety. Senator Jim DeMint (R,SC) has a similar bill in the Senate.

What is Planned Parenthood's response to all this? "Medication abortion is extremely safe and effective," says Karen Pearl, interim president of Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood also states that at their nationwide facilities which sell the abortion pills, they advise women to wash their hands prior to inserting the drug vaginally. So when are they going to investigate Planned Parenthood?

THOUGHTS BY FATHER FRANK PAVONE ON TERRI SCHIAVO AND LIVING WILLS [5/30/05]

My dear friends of Priests for Life,

What a week we have just been through! United in faith and in the pro-life cause, we are grieving the murder of Terri Schiavo. Likewise, whether Roman Catholic or not, we are mourning the passing of one of the greatest voices for the right to life, Pope John Paul II.

First of all, thank God we are at the height of the Easter Season! Death, in all its forms, has been conquered by Christ! We are called to rejoice in that victory and keep it uppermost in our minds as we battle the Culture of Death. Isn't it amazing that both Terri and Pope John Paul II died so close to each other, and within the Easter celebration! Is God speaking to us? He certainly is!

You may have seen on the news that I was at Terri Schiavo's bedside during the last 14 hours of her earthly life, right up until five minutes before her death.... Terri's brother, sister, and I read Scripture, prayed the rosary, and had times of silence during Terri's last hours. We held her hand and stroked her head. During all that time, there was always at least one police officer in the room, watching our every move, and several more immediately outside the door.

As you may have also seen, those who killed Terri were quite angry that I said so. The night before she died, I said to the media that her estranged husband Michael, his attorney Mr. Felos, and Judge Greer were murderers. I also pointed out, that night and the next morning, that contrary to Felos' description, Terri's death was not at all peaceful and beautiful. It was, on the contrary, quite horrifying. She was dehydrating to death, and looked it. Her face had an expression of dread and sorrow. In my 16 years as a priest, I never saw anything like it before....

Another aspect of the Terri Schiavo tragedy is that many people misunderstand its cause and therefore its solution. They think the problem was that Terri did not leave any written instructions about whether she wanted to be kept alive. In order to avoid any such problem in their own lives, they are now told that they have to draw up a "living will." This is both erroneous and dangerous.

Terri's case is not about the withdrawal of life-saving medical treatment, but rather about the killing of a healthy person whose life some regarded as worthless. Terri was not dying, was not on life support, and did not have any terminal illness. Because some thought she would not want to live with her disability, they insisted on introducing the cause of death, namely, dehydration.

So what good is a living will supposed to accomplish, aside from saying, "Please don't argue about killing me, just kill me?" The danger in our culture is not that we will be over-treated, but rather that we will be under-treated. We already have the right to refuse medical treatment. What we run the risk of losing is the right to receive the most basic humane care--like food and water--in the event we have a disability.

Our culture also promotes the idea that as long as we say we want to die, we have the right to do so. But we have a basic obligation to preserve our own life. A person who leaves clear instructions that they don't want to be fed is breaking the moral law by essentially requesting suicide.

SUSAN G. KOMEN BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION SUPPORTS PLANNED PARENTHOOD [5/29/05]

The list of Planned Parenthood (PP) donors is constantly changing. We celebrate when an organization is removed from the list and express disappointment when others are added. We recently learned of a new PP donor: The Susan G. Komen Foundation. This news is very disturbing, more so than when we learn of other donors. Why? The Susan G. Komen Foundation uses events such as the "Race for the Cure" to raise money to fight breast cancer.

"You can't affirm life with one hand, and support an organization that kills people with the other," said Eve Sanchez Silver, a medical research analyst and two-time breast cancer survivor who severed her ties with the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation after learning that its chapters supplied $475,000 in grants to local PP affiliates in 2003. Silver and many others in the medical and scientific community believe that abortion makes a woman more vulnerable to developing breast cancer. The fact that Komen is awarding grants to the nation s top abortion provider "proves to me that the foundation s perspective is not for the safety of women. It can't be," Silver said. (For the full article, go to www.CNSNews.com and type, Susan G. Komen Foundation, in the search engine.)

On a positive note regarding PP donors, LifeNews.com reported in an article dated March 2, 2005, that PP has lost $35 million in donations over the last 13 years. This loss is due to the nationwide boycott of corporations and businesses backing PP. Life Decisions International (LDI) started the boycott in 1992 and continues to sponsor it today. LDI's president, Doug Scott, states that "Once corporate leaders are made aware of Planned Parenthood s true agenda and activities and start receiving letters from concerned customers, most of them quickly decide that they want nothing to do with the group."

ABORTIONS AT PAOLI HOSPITAL ARE INCREASING [3/1/05]

For many years Paoli Hospital did not appear on lists of hospitals that did abortions. But new numbers indicate a dramatic increase in abortions there. They began in 2000 with two abortions reported. This number jumped to 16 for just the first 3 quarters of 2004 (numbers for the 4th quarter are not yet available).

Bryn Mawr, Jefferson, Lankenau, and Temple Hospitals, all known for doing abortions, reported fewer than Paoli Hospital for the same period. Paoli Hospital needs to hear from the pro-life community.

We welcome information anyone has concerning this apparent change in Paoli s abortion policy.

Hospitals in Chester County that do not commit abortions are Chester County, Brandywine, Pottstown, and Southern Chester County.

PA ABORTION STATISTICS FOR 2003 [3/1/05]

As we report the following numbers published by the PA Dept. of Health, we reflect on the fact that these are not just numbers, but represent the loss of innocent human lives. The total number of abortions in PA was 36,908 -- an increase of 5% from the previous year.

• 56.1% were performed on white women, 39.1% on black women and 6% on Hispanic women.
• 84% were unmarried women.
• The largest age group, 20-24 accounted for 33.3%; ages 17 and under accounted for 6.5%.
• Of all abortions in PA, 92% occurred in only 7 out of 67 counties -- Allegheny, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Lehigh, Montgomery, and Philadelphia.
• There were 102 abortion facilities registered with the state -- 4 less than the previous year.

WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ABOUT STEM CELL RESEARCH? [3/1/05]

From a pro-life position, it is critical to understand why stem cell research is such a hot topic, and which forms of stem cell research are acceptable. Let s begin with some basics.

What is a Stem Cell?  The powerful stem cell is the cell which creates our somatic cells. There are many types of somatic cells including liver, skin, lung, and heart cells.

Why the research into stem cells?  While somatic cells are limited to reproducing themselves (i.e., liver cells can only reproduce liver cells), scientists can induce stem cells to become cells with special functions. For example, a stem cell can be induced to become the beating cells of the heart muscle or the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas. The goal of this research is to use these cells for curing diseases such as Parkinson's.

Where do stem cells come from?  Stem cells can be obtained from a number of sources -- adults (bone marrow cells), umbilical cord blood, placenta, human embryos, and fetuses. These sources of stem cells are the source of the debate over stem cell research.

Why is stem cell research an ethical issue?  The media usually does not distinguish between the different types of stem cell research -- it just uses the all-encompassing phrase, "stem cell research." Therefore, many people are confused by the media's messages, and don't understand

THE FUTURE OF THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT -- BE ENCOURAGED!

The following essay was written by Kaalyn Zizus, a senior at Downingtown High School, as part of her college applications. She was to "discuss some issue of personal, local, national, or international concern and its importance to you."

The compassionate Christian leader, Mother Teresa, once stated that, "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so you may live as you wish." Her inspiring declaration summarizes the pro-life sentiment embraced by millions of individuals throughout the modern world. I first came to support and understand the pro-life message as a young child. One day, during my early childhood, I remember asking my mother, "Mom, what is abortion?" After she explained it to me (in simple terms for little ears), I was nothing less than appalled. Even as a child, I viewed the issue in moral terms, and ignored the factors of religion and politics. I simply could not fathom bringing harm to an innocent little baby, much less ending a life. As I grew older, the issue started to grow in complexity. I began to face opposition that did not exist during my childhood, but I was still young and did not yet feel a call to action.

It was not until my junior and senior years of high school that I came to realize the profound meaning behind Mother Teresa's brief statement. Suddenly, girls in my school were getting abortions. As a result, the problem became more than an abstract idea, topic of debate, or cold statistic. I would voice my frustrations to my friends about the irresponsibility of these girls, and their blatant selfishness; yet despite my anger and desire to end such cruel injustice, I was unaware of groups or organizations in which I could not only express my opinion, but also contribute to positive change.

I then experienced a moment of clarity on this very personal issue after I was assigned an interview project for my government class this year. The project required me to choose an issue, and then conduct an interview with a person who possessed significant knowledge of the topic. My mother recommended a woman at our church who had taken part in pro-life demonstrations and groups. The interview was more than enlightening, it was inspiring, and I quickly decided it was time to get involved.

Since the interview, I attended the annual "Stand Up for Life" dinner in Philadelphia. I was ecstatic to find that the dinner was teeming with people my age who were all willing to ignore the overwhelming pro-choice opinions of the 18 to 25 year-old crowd and truly "stand up for life." Currently, several classmates and I are trying to introduce a "Respect Life" group at our high school and are looking for a faculty member to sponsor it.

Through this issue, I have experienced a reaffirmation in my faith in God, my peers, and in mankind as a whole. I have also come to terms with my own set of steadfast morals. As I continue my journey toward adulthood, I intend to continue to break down the barriers that surround pro-choice minds and ultimately convince more people to choose life.

Notable Quotables on Voting [9/27/04] "Ultimately, our loyalty belongs not to any political party or candidate but to God Almighty." - Richard Land "Bad politicians are elected by good people who don't vote." - Billy Graham "If a candidate who supported terrorism asked for your vote, would you say, 'I disagree with you on terrorism, but where do you stand on the other issues?'.... Abortion is no less violent than terrorism. Any candidate who says abortion should be kept legal disqualifies him/herself from public service." - Fr. Frank Pavone, Priests for Life "The separation of politics from faith and morality, allows the erosion of the moral foundations of society." - Cardinal Justin Rigali "The separation of church and state does not require division between belief and public action, between moral principles and political choices.... It is the particular vocation of the laity to transform the world." - U.S. Catholic bishops "There is something very wrong when one's loyalty to a political party is greater than one's loyalty to God and basic moral principles." - Fr. Frank Pavone, Priests for Life "The hottest spot in hell is reserved for those who, in time of moral crisis, choose to remain neutral." - Dante

OUR PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT [8/5/04]

Our Pro-Life Movement: We Mourn, We Pray, and We Act We present here some recent abortion statistics for Chester County: Planned Parenthood of Chester County, West Chester: 2002: 880 2003: 1,076 Phoenixville Hospital: 2002: 30 2003: 31 Paoli Hospital: 2002: 4 2003: 7 (Source: PA Dept. of Health)

ABORTION IS NOT NECESSARILY SAFE [5/25/04]

Women still run huge risks and need to be told that (Philadelphia Inquirer, April 29)

A Response to "Keep Abortion Safe and Legal" by KATHY BOND

In the early 60's I worked in New Orleans as a Medical Technologist while my husband was in graduate school. The emergency room called for a blood draw on a woman who had just arrived. She was suffering from an overwhelming septicemia from an abortion. I don't know who performed the abortion or where it was performed, only that she had arrived at the hospital in this condition. It was the 60's; abortion was illegal. Her boyfriend held her hand, watched her in her agony as he hovered in absolute helplessness. It was a disturbing and poignant scene. Later I learned that she died.

The saddest part of this story is that neither the mother nor the baby needed to die. Even then, I knew of places to go-such as homes for unwed mothers, foundling homes and orphanages to care for the baby. Often girls in this situation were sent off to visit an aunt or grandmother. My family even took a few young women into our home until they gave birth to their babies.

Tragically, we have taken the back-alley abortionists and given them a building and allowed them to charge women for their services. These abortion providers will typically use ultrasound to verify the age of the baby, but the mother won't be allowed to see the picture. Why? Because they know that the ultrasound picture has changed the heart of many a woman contemplating abortion.

From the moment of conception the DNA with all the inherited characteristics are present. A new human being is formed-a new life that, until a split decision on the Supreme Court, had the "inalienable right to life." No other human being had the authority to take away that life. There is no question that abortion destroys the life of the pre-born baby. Abortion providers, however, would like for everyone to believe that abortion does not harm or injure the mother. In recent months a 15-yr-old and 19-yr-old died from uterine infections as a result of their abortions. The women of a new and growing organization Silent No More Awareness Campaign want all to know that the "abortion is safe" rhetoric-such as that in Lisa Bergson's April 13 commentary-is a lie. They are testifying to the physical, emotional and psychological trauma they have suffered from abortion.

They assert that a woman should have the right to know the risks of abortion.

In Pennsylvania, the Abortion Control Act provides a modicum of protection for the mother. It requires that 24 hours before the procedure, the pregnant woman is to be provided with information that describes the risks, development of the baby, and the places where the women can get help for carrying the baby to term. This information is designed to allow the women to make informed choices. Unfortunately, they do not always receive it, even though receiving the patient's informed consent is standard for all medical procedures.

The abortionists oppose informed consent and even sued to stop it. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected their arguments (Planned Parenthood vs. Casey) stating, "The waiting period helps ensure that a woman's decision to abort is a well considered one, and rationally furthers the State's legitimate interest in maternal health and in unborn life." Unlike Pennsylvania, many states have no such act, hence limiting their oversight of abortion facilities. Women who suffer physical trauma from their abortions (e.g. bleeding, infection, perforation of the uterus etc.) are referred to hospital emergency rooms. Stand-alone abortion facilities do not provide this care for injured women.

In contrast, the pro-life community has over 4,000 facilities available in the United States that offer counseling, housing, medical assistance and the support needed to carry the baby to term. They also provide day-care centers so women can resume their education and work.

Since that fateful day January 22, 1973 (Roe v. Wade) more than 40 million babies have died from abortion, as well as hundreds of women who believed the lie that abortion is a safe and easy procedure. Just as I was there with that poor woman in New Orleans, I, too, stand with my fellow anti-abortion sisters to protect women and their babies from the devastating effects of abortion.

KATHY BOND is Political Director of CCPLC and speaker for Pennsylvanians for Human Life/Pro- Life Education Services.

FDA WON'T ALLOW SALES OF "MORNING AFTER" PILL [5/25/04]

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) - In a decision that is receiving praise from pro-life organizations, the Food and Drug Administration decided late Thursday that it will not allow over-the-counter sales of the so-called morning after pill. Pro-life groups oppose the use of the drug because it is dangerous for women and can sometimes cause abortions. The FDA made its decision based on concerns about the effects of the drug on teenagers. However, it left the door open to allowing the drugs to be sold to adults. The agency also said it would reconsider its decision if Barr Laboratories, maker of the Plan B morning after drug, would provide more details on teen's use of the drugs. Barr Labs said it was disappointed by the FDA's decision. Barr chief executive Bruce Downey said his company would seek nonprescription sales approval again, but this time for people 16 years or older.

PARENTS BEWARE! GIRL SCOUTS SERVING UP MORE THAN S'MORES [4/15/04]

Girl Scouts of America CEO Kathy Cloninger, appearing on NBC's "Today" (3/5/04) said: "We have relationships with our church communities, with YWCA's, and with Planned Parenthood organizations across the country, to bring information-based sex education programs to girls."

Genevieve Wood, Vice President for Communications for Family Research Council (FRC), responded to the news in a March 8th release, saying: "Parents have every right to be troubled by an alliance of the Girl Scouts and an organization like Planned Parenthood, the nations most prolific provider of abortions." By using Planned Parenthood sex education materials, the Girl Scouts are giving 10-year-old children graphic information that promotes conduct that is unhealthy, immoral, and sinful. If you doubt that, just visit the Planned Parenthood web site and you will very quickly learn what they have been up to for a couple of generations.

According to the FRC release, the controversy exploded around the Waco, Texas Girl Scouts organization, where all but two girls have been pulled from the Girl Scouts program there and a Brownie troop has been completely dismantled. The Waco group now says they have severed ties with Planned Parenthood. Nevertheless, parents should not be complacent if they discover that their local troop is not connected with Planned Parenthood. This is a national policy. Girl Scout troops often go on group outings with troops from other areas. If you as a parent are not present at these events, you won't know what is going on, will you?

Source: Republican National Coalition for Life, Fax Notes, March 12, 2004.

MORNING AFTER PILL IS NEITHER SAFE NOR PRO-LIFE [3/28/04]

Know the Facts: Local Abortion Stats, 2002 [3/28/04]

PA Abortion Statistics were released a few months ago. The total number of 35,167 was a 4.5% decrease from 2001 and is the second lowest annual number ever recorded. What follows are significant facts from the PA Department of Health report:

• As in previous years the largest single age group of 20-24 accounted for the largest percentage of the total number - 33.3%. Teens age 17 and younger were 6.3% of the total.
  
  
• 45% of abortions in Pennsylvania were performed on women who had had previous abortions. 55% were performed on women who had not had a previous abortion.
  
  
• Of all the abortions committed in PA, 54% occurred in the five county Philadelphia area. 90% occurred in six counties (Allegheny, Dauphin, Delaware, Lehigh, Montgomery, and Philadelphia). Of the 67 counties in PA, abortions were reported from only 14 of them.
  
  
• In 2002, 55.6% of all abortions performed in PA were to white women, while 40.7% were to black women. The U.S. Census data for 2002 reports that blacks make up 12% of US residents. This is a striking statistic and one that reflects the abortion industry's focus on minorities. Abortions to women of Hispanic origin accounted for 5%.
  
  
• The number of abortion facilities registered in PA in 2002 was 106. The number registered in 2001 was 110.
  
  
• In 2002 there were 106 reports of complications of abortions submitted by physicians. In 2001 the number reported was 72.
  
  
• Another serious change, which appeared in 2002, was the increase in "Chemical Abortions" that would include RU-486. They rose from 2,109 to 2,713.

LETTERS FOR LIFE [2/14/04]

Q:  How can I help the pro-life movement from my own home?

A:  This question is often answered with the suitable response of telling people to "write letters!" But some people may not know where to begin or may need some practice writing pro-life letters. An excellent way to get well-acquainted with writing clear and informed letters is through a program called "Letters for Life" which is sponsored by the Pro-Life Union of South Eastern Pennsylvania. The program works by sending participants a monthly letter which provides information on a specific pro-life topic or legislation and provides the address where the letter should be directed. You simply return a postcard to the Pro-Life Union once you have sent your letter. To sign up for this unique program, please call the Union at (215) 885-8150.

CCPLC PRESIDENT RESPONDS IN PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER [1/11/04]

ETHICALLY-PRODUCED VACCINES, PART II [12/5/03]

MIXED SIGNALS

POST-ABORTIVE WOMEN SEARCH FOR HEALING AND SPEAK OUT

PRO-LIFE ACTIVISTS have long recognized that there are at least two victims in every abortion . . . the child and the mother. Though we cannot hear the cries of the pre-born victims, after 30 years, many of the mothers have decided to be "silent no more." Such women appeared this past January at the Supreme Court during the March for Life and recently at courthouses across the country holding signs reading "I Regret My Abortion" and "Women Deserve Better."

One organization that ministers to women and men who have been injured emotionally and spiritually by abortion is Rachael's Vineyard, which began in Philadelphia a few short years ago. Rachel's Vineyard "retreats" have since spread all over the United States, Canada, Australia, Chile, Mexico, New Zealand, Portugal, and just last month, Cameroon, Africa.

The weekend retreats offer an effective process designed to help women and men experience the mercy and compassion of God. The intensive retreats help participants release the deep feelings of anger, shame, guilt, and grief that accompany an abortion experience. Rachael's Vineyard is "therapy for the soul" which combines a unique and creative process for psychological and spiritual healing.

MAKE YOUR UNITED WAY DONATION A PRO-LIFE ONE

Remember that if you give to United Way, you have the right to direct your funds toward pro-life charities. Call your local pro-life group and get their United Way number. Some local United Way numbers are listed here for your convenience: Birthright - 03825; Chester County Women's Services - 5823 for Southeast Pennyslvania or 002200 for the state of Delaware); Pennsylvanians for Human Life - 200482. Don't miss out on this pro-life giving opportunity.

PEDIATRICIANS SPEAK OUT ABOUT THEIR RESPONSIBILITES TO PRE-BORN CHILDREN

SEVEN YEARS OF ABORTION IN WEST CHESTER This August, 2003, marks the seventh year of the persistent and premeditated killing of pre-born children and harming of women by Planned Parenthood staff and supporters. According to records from the PA Department of Health, 5,201 babies have lost their lives at this abortion mill during the following years: In 2002, a total of 880 babies were aborted. In 2001, a total of 964 babies were aborted. In 2000, a total of 847 babies were aborted. In 1999, a total of 812 babies were aborted. In 1998, a total of 785 babies were aborted. In 1997, a total of 728 babies were aborted. In 1996, a total of 185 babies were aborted. For six years abortions were committed once a week, but this past year another killing day was added. Abortions are now scheduled for Tuesday and Friday mornings. Please try to remember the mothers and babies coming for their appointments with death on these days. An extra prayer, some fasting, or your presence in front of Planned Parenthood at these times are important activities that many can do. You can let these mothers and babies know that they are not forgotten and that their lives have meaning.

A DAILY PRO-LIFE NEWS FIX

WHO IS REALLY "PRO-WOMEN'S HEALTH?"

The Problem with Categorizing Abortion as "Women's Health"

Guest Column by Claire Valente

The effort to ban partial-birth abortion is now in its final stages. On June 4, the House passed H.R. 760, outlawing any procedure in which the baby is delivered alive and is partially outside the body when killed. The Senate has already passed similar legislation; the bill now goes to conference and President Bush has urged Congress to act quickly so that he can sign it into law. Without question, this is a great, if incremental, victory for the pro-life movement.

One of the many unsuccessful tactics used by pro-abortion lobbyists to forestall passage was to argue that the measure would increase risk to women's health by taking options away from doctors. As outlined in an April 22 New York Times article,"doctors" (i.e. abortion providers) are "uneasy" because of the restrictions, which they claim, inaccurately, might apply to other second trimester abortion methods. The article is an example of the misleading categorization of abortion as part of "reproductive health," or, even more euphemistically, "women's health." By employing such Doublespeak, NOW, NARAL, and their allies further desensitize Americans to the violence inherent in abortion. Unfortunately, some politicians also employ Doublespeak and are easily taken in by such tactics. Efforts have been made in several states to mandate that all hospitals and health systems either provide "reproductive" care or ensure alternative providers exist (e.g. CA AB 525, introduced in 1999, thankfully dead in committee). There have also been many attempts, some successful, to prevent mergers with religious hospitals and health systems which would result in the elimination of abortion. Efforts are doubtless on the horizon to overturn the Church Amendment, passed in 1973, which ensured that receipt of federal funds not require individuals or institutions to perform abortions if they object on religious or moral grounds. The pro-life movement needs to be vigilant on this issue: abortion advocates are more and more insisting that state intervention is necessary to insure proper women's "health" coverage, particularly in areas where religious institutions are the sole providers of care.

What would be the real impact on women's health of such intervention? Those of us opposed to abortion know that it is an attack on the mother as well as the child and that far from being crucial to women's health, abortion is just the opposite. Such legislation also clearly conflicts with the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, although one can never be sure that the courts will concur.Aside from this, however, the most likely impact is not that Catholic, Baptist, and Seventh-Day Adventist hospitals (all of which refuse to carry out elective abortions, as do some Lutheran institutions) would change their policies, but rather that they would be forced to close. This would produce a true women's health crisis throughout the country - but especially in rural areas and for the poor, uninsured, and chronically ill in urban centers.Although religious hospitals make up only 13% of hospitals in the United States, and contain only 18% of beds, their impact as the primary safety net for the most disadvantaged Americans is far out of proportion to their numbers. In many rural areas, religious hospitals are the sole providers of health care; in 1998, there were 91 such"sole providers" in 26 states. Moreover, religious hospitals, including those in urban areas, are much more likely to have trauma centers, substance abuse programs, and HIV care centers, and thus to be "core safety net providers," in the terminology of the Institute of Medicine's report, "American's Health Care Safety Net." Catholic hospitals in particular are the single largest non-profit hospital group (75% of religious hospitals; Adventists are the second largest religious group with 7.5%) and have rescued many failing public and private hospitals in poorer areas since the 1990s.

The growing role of religious hospitals has provoked an outcry from the pro-abortion lobby. One would think religious institutions would be praised for not only maintaining an open door policy but further increasing their exposure to the economically disadvantaged, despite the financial risks inherent in caring for the uninsured. NARAL, "Catholics" for a Free Choice, and other groups, however, view the development as "alarming," and paint the mergers in a conspiratorial light, almost implying that the "scooping up" of troubled institutions, particularly by Catholic groups, is a deliberate plot to end access to abortion and other "services" like sterilization. It never seems to occur to them to ask why Catholics and Adventists are the ones responding to the health crisis in poor and rural areas, the ones willing to take on failing institutions and/or establish new ones, even though they hemorrhage money as a result. Could it be for the same reason that such hospitals so strenuously refuse to provide "reproductive" services, i.e. that they have a solid and seamless pro-life ethic?

Since NARAL et al. are unwilling to open hospitals and clinics from rural Appalachia to inner-city Los Angeles, their complaints about the dangers to women's "health" posed by those taking up the care of the indigent on a daily basis ring hollow at best. Once again, the Doublespeak of the abortion lobby condemns itself, and it is the pro-life movement which is truly pro-women and pro-reproductive health.

Claire Valente received her Ph.D. in History from Harvard University, and she taught for several years at the University of Portland. She writes from Rosemont, PA.

SURPRISE, MOM: I'M AGAINST ABORTION

NEW PRO-LIFE WEB-SITE FOR TEENS LAUNCHED

JIM SEDLAK ON PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S HEALTHCARE HOAX

FOUNDER and executive director of STOPP International, Jim W. Sedlak, was recently a guest lecturer at St. Joseph's Catholic Church in Downington. Jim Sedlak is a nationally known pro-life speaker and has been identified by Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) as one of the 15 "most active" fighters against PP sex education programs. His work to stop the activities of Planned Parenthood is tireless. Below we print a synopsis of his recent talk on how Planned Parenthood's new 25-year plan, Vision 2025, exposes the true nature of the organization. This summary is meant to offer a brief comment on each of PP's 10 goals in its 25-year plan.

Planned Parenthood will ensure that sexuality is understood as an essential, lifelong aspect of being human and that it is celebrated with respect, openness, and mutuality.
Although PP proclaims itself as a "health care" organization, it doesn't see a cure for cervical cancer, or stopping the spread of pelvic inflammatory disease or chlamydia as its number one goal. Rather, it will focus on making sure that sex is celebrated! Thus PP's #1 goal is the same as its founder's (Margaret Sanger) #1 goal in 1916 - uninhibited sex.

Planned Parenthood will ensure access to reproductive and sexual health care for all.
The only specific example given by PP is: "We will push the edge for universal access to birth control." Thus, PP's 2nd goal is the same as Sanger's #2 goal - birth control. But where is the health care?

Planned Parenthood will secure passage of laws and policies, including state and federal constitutional amendments, that guarantee reproductive freedom for all.
This sounds like a goal of a political lobbying group - not a so-called health organization. Of course, "reproductive freedom" is Planned Parenthood's code word for abortion. PP, just like Sanger, includes abortion as a method of birth control.

Planned Parenthood will ensure worldwide implementation of a human rights and well-being agenda as currently expressed in the Cairo Agreement, with the U.S. fulfilling its financial commitment and implementing those principles in the U.S.
The United Nations' International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), which was held in Cairo, Egypt in 1994, was widely considered a watershed event. The program's acknowledgment that legal abortion could be part of health care was a major coup for PP. It was the first time abortion was written positively into international documents. It is no wonder PP wants it moved forward with U.S. taxpayer money.

Planned Parenthood will control a successful, diversified media company that creates and distributes the most popular, critically acclaimed health and sexuality programming.
With PP in complete control of the production of the media message and the distribution of the message (without censors), we can expect a glut of very graphic sexual images that PP tries to convince everyone is just "health education," but what will be material that robs our children of their innocence.

Planned Parenthood will be the model for embracing diversity and expanding the decision-making power base of its stakeholders.
A "diverse" community is desired by PP as long as all of the "diverse" people are willing to follow Sanger's legacy and have no recognition of any absolute moral authority. Throughout this entire plan God is not mentioned once. PP's rejection of Christian values is illustrated in its "Choice on Earth" holiday card.

Planned Parenthood will be a significant catalyst for the development and universal dissemination of new reproductive technologies.
None of the products Planned Parenthood will be bringing to us are intended to treat a woman whose body is malfunctioning. All of them have the intention of taking a woman whose body is operating in a perfectly normal manner and make it operate abnormally. This is a strange concept of health care.

Planned Parenthood will be an authoritative voice on bioethical standards related to reproductive health and sexuality.
PP has shown its intent with regard to biotechnology. It has issued press releases supporting the use of embryonic stem cells (whose harvesting always kills a human being) and its web site shows a widespread use of terms (e.g. pre-embryo and fertilized egg) that are meant to dehumanize the human being created at fertilization and set the ground for all kinds of utilitarian experimentation. If PP is allowed to be the "authoritative voice," then bioethical standards will result in more deaths and total disregard for the sanctity of human life.

Planned Parenthood will build the largest donor and citizen activist base of any social movement in this country.
Note, PP did NOT say that it wanted to build the largest donor and citizen activist base of any health care organization in the country. Instead, it proudly labeled its efforts as that of a social movement. Anyone who can read this plan and still maintain that PP is a about health care simply did not understand what's written.

Planned Parenthood will be acknowledged as one of the 10 best places to work and volunteer.
Planned Parenthood acknowledges it has employee morale problems as it states in the document: "we have often struggled to attract and sustain the workforce we need to serve our clients and other stakeholders." True health care organizations can offer their employees the knowledge that they are offering their patients services that will restore their health and better their lives. But, as this plan shows, PP is NOT a health care organization and cannot offer its employees any such comfort.

Conclusion: Throughout this entire 25-year plan, this supposed health care organization does not mention the word "patient" even once. If you disregard everything else presented here, this one fact should tell you all you need to know about Planned Parenthood.

CLONING FACT SHEET

THE LINK BETWEEN ABORTION AND BREAST CANCER:
Studies suggest that the risk of developing breast cancer may be increased by induced abortion

The month of October is host to two very important education campaigns. The Pro-Life movement has dubbed October as Respect Life Month, and the medical world garners much attention each October by promoting Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Both abortion and cancer have people fighting for their lives every day, but we thought at this time it was important to highlight the very specific medical connection between abortion and breast cancer.

In the United States, one in 2,525 women in their thirties and one in eleven women in their seventies will be affected by breast cancer. ¹  Factors that may contribute to the risk of developing breast cancer include a family history of breast cancer, an early age at the onset of menstruation, a late age at menopause, a late age at the time of the first full-term birth of a child, and certain breast conditions. However, recent studies suggest that the risk of developing breast cancer may also be increased by induced abortion. Twenty-seven out of 34 independent studies conducted throughout the world, including 13 of 14 conducted in the United States, have shown a relationship between induced abortion and breast cancer. Seventeen of the studies showed a statistically significant relationship.

Dr. M. Pike at the University of Southern California conducted the first major study investigating a relationship between abortion and breast cancer in 1981. His study showed that women who aborted their first pregnancy were 2.4 times more likely to develop breast cancer. ²  Other studies have revealed similar results. Dr. Janet Daling's study in 1994 found that an induced abortion before the age of 45 increased the risk of developing breast cancer by 50%; if a woman had the abortion before the age of 18, her risk of developing breast cancer increased by 150%. All twelve women in Daling's study who had a family member with breast cancer and who had an abortion before the age of 18 developed breast cancer before age 45.

In spite of statistically significant results in many of the studies, the public remains uninformed about the potential risks associated with induced abortion and breast cancer.

"The public was informed when only five out of seven studies linked cellular phones with brain cancer," argues Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/ Breast Cancer, "so why aren't women entitled to know that more than two dozen studies implicate abortion as a risk factor for this deadly disease? Tragically, the bar has been raised for this risk factor, and one in one hundred women will die of abortion-induced breast cancer."³ 

During pregnancy, a woman's ovaries begin producing extra estrogen, as well as other hormones used to stimulate breast cell growth. In the first trimester, the level of estrogen produced rises by 2,000%, causing both normal and pre-cancerous cells to multiply dramatically. During the last eight weeks of pregnancy, other hormones differentiate these cells into milk-producing cells, thus eliminating any further growth potential or cancer forming potential. An induced abortion prevents the differentiation from taking place, leaving more undifferentiated cells in the woman's breasts, which make her more vulnerable to developing breast cancer.

Unfortunately, some of the evidence of a direct relationship between induced abortion and breast cancer is inconsistent. While most of the studies reveal a small, but statistically significant relationship between abortion and an increased risk of developing breast cancer, a few of the studies show no risk associated with abortion. However, the abortion industry and its supporters rely solely on the evidence from the latter, ignoring the potential risks that have been revealed in the majority of the studies. This is similar to how the tobacco industry denied claims of a relationship between smoking and cancer before there were definitive results.

As a society, we would not accept any other industry ignoring statistically significant data that suggested an increased risk of cancer. For the sake of their health and their lives, women must be informed of the potential risks associated with induced abortion and breast cancer. Additionally, further studies must be conducted to definitively determine this relationship.

Breast cancer is one of two most common cancers afflicting women; it is the second leading cause of death from cancer, after lung cancer. In 2001, approximately 190,000 women are expected to be diagnosed with breast cancer in the United States alone; 40,000 women will die from breast cancer.⁴  With numbers this high, we cannot ignore any potential risks. And so, during the month of October-which has been declared National Breast Cancer Awareness Month-we urge you to contact your legislators and insist that they push for an investigation into the potentially deadly relationship between breast cancer and induced abortion.

EXPELLING THE MYTHS ABOUT RU-486

by Nancy Shanfelt

The National Abortion Foundation is currently funding a $2-million, six-month ad campaign promoting RU-486, the abortion pill, in magazines including People, Vanity Fair, InStyle, Jane, Mademoiselle, Glamour, Fitness, Health, Self, First for Women and Essence. Redbook has refused to run the ad. The ad shows a well-dressed young woman looking out a window. The text reads, "You have the freedom to choose. And now you have another safe abortion choice." But what the ad doesn't say is how quickly the FDA approved the drug or who its manufacturers and distributors are. It doesn't mention that the companion drug has not been approved for use in abortion and that its manufacturers warn against its use by pregnant women. It doesn't warn women about the many serious side effects that accompany the abortion drug. A closer look would reveal the following details.

Fast Track Approval: On September 28, 2000, the Food and Drug Administration approved use of the drug Mifeprex (Mifepristone), more commonly known as RU-486. The drug was approved after a six-month review (instead of the usual 6-plus years required by FDA regulations) under a regulation called "Subpart-H" which allows for a fast-track approval of experimental drugs that have been developed to treat serious or life-threatening illnesses such as HIV or cancer. Under this regulation, which was drafted in 1992 specifically with HIV in mind in an effort to save the lives of those dying from the disease, drugs are not required to undergo the same amount of testing before approval. Additionally, Subpart-H limits the legal rights of drug users, making it possible for manufacturers to escape liability for injury associated with use of the drug. The FDA's approval of RU-486 limited use of the drug to the first seven weeks of pregnancy; therefore, the doctor must first determine the age of the unborn child and ensure that it is a uterine pregnancy before prescribing an abortion by RU-486. In addition, the doctor must be able to arrange for a surgical abortion if the drug does not completely destroy and expel the baby from the uterus. The FDA also stated, "Mifeprex must be provided by or under the supervision of a physician¼" which could be interpreted to include administration of the drug by a member of a doctor's staff rather than the doctor himself. RU-486 is being marketed to physicians and the general public as a safe, private and easy method for terminating a pregnancy.

How It Works: RU-486 is a synthetic steroid with anti-hormonal properties, which enable it to block the pregnancy hormone progesterone. Without progesterone, the lining of the uterus rejects the attachment of the fetus, thus preventing or destroying the baby's life support connection to its mother, causing him to starve to death inside the uterus.

It's History: Roussel Uclaf, a French company and subsidiary of the German pharmaceutical company Hoechst, originally manufactured RU-486. Hoechst, originally named I.G. Farben, changed its name after World War II. During the war, it manufactured the cyanide gas, Zyklon-B, that the Nazis used to exterminate the Jews in the concentration camps. When Roussel Uclaf decided not to seek approval of the FDA to market and sell RU-486 in the United States, they donated the patent to the Population Council who conducted the clinical trials required by the FDA for approval. Danco Laboratories is currently distributing the drug in the United States. Both the Population Council and Danco Laboratories reportedly receive funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, an avid supporter of the pro-abortion movement. Hua Lian Pharmaceutical Company in Shanghai, China, is manufacturing the drug. Hua Lian has recently been cited for exporting tainted drugs to the United States and has been charged with labeling irregularities.

The Procedure: When a woman decides to have an abortion using RU-486, she must first have a blood test and a pelvic exam to confirm she is pregnant and a sonogram to determine the age of her unborn child. After a waiting period determined by the laws of the state, she returns to her doctor's office to take three RU-486 tablets registered under her name. Once she has taken the pills, she will wait 48 hours. During these 48 hours, RU-486 blocks the progesterone in the uterus. Without the progesterone, the lining of the uterus becomes very thin and begins to disintegrate, making it difficult for the fetus to attach itself and obtain the necessary nutrients to survive. The baby in its mother's womb begins to starve to death.

Companion Drug Declared Unsafe: After 48 hours, the mother will return to her doctor's office where she will undergo another examination to determine if she has already aborted her baby. Studies show that approximately 3% of women will have already had an abortion at home within the 48-hour waiting period. If she has not yet aborted her baby, the woman will take Cytotec (Misoprostal), a prostaglandin that induces the uterus to contract and push the dead baby out through the vagina. Cytotec is manufactured by Searle Drug Company, a subsidiary of Pharmacia Corporation, to prevent gastric ulcers in patients taking large doses of anti-arthritic medications. Cytotec has not been approved by the FDA for use as a companion drug to RU-486, nor has it been approved for the inducement of labor or abortion. Searle issued a warning against such uses of Cytotec that included the following statement:

Serious adverse events reported following off-label use of Cytotec in pregnant women include maternal or fetal death; uterine hyper-stimulation, rupture or perforation requiring uterine surgical repair, hysterectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy; amniotic fluid embolism; severe vaginal bleeding, retained placenta, shock, fetal bradycardia and pelvic pain.

Side Effects & Complications: After taking Cytotec, the woman will wait in her doctor's office for four hours to be monitored for any severe side effects that may occur. All women who take RU-486 will bleed heavily from the uterus for an average of nine or ten days, though some have bled for more than a month. In addition to heavy bleeding, the side effects that will most likely result include abdominal and pelvic pain, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, headache, fever and viral infection. Less common, life-threatening complications that have occurred include blood clots, pulmonary embolism and sudden inability of the blood to clot. Approximately 54% of abortions will take place during this four-hour waiting period in the doctor's office. However, the remaining women will have their abortion away from the doctor's office, delivering a dead baby wherever they may be. If the woman does abort outside the doctor's office, she may need to bring the dead baby in a container to the doctor's office during her next visit.

One to two weeks later, the woman must return to her doctor's office for an examination to ensure that the abortion was complete, to monitor her bleeding, and to treat any additional side effects. The doctor may conduct a D&C (dilation and curettage) to scrape any remains of the baby from the uterine walls in order to avoid infection. Studies show that the pills fail to abort the baby in approximately 3-5% of women. In such cases, these women will have to schedule another appointment with their doctor to have a surgical abortion at an additional cost.

Psychological Effects: In addition to the physical side effects of RU-486, women will also likely encounter psychological side effects that often accompany an abortion. However, RU-486 carries an additional psychological burden. Because women who chose RU-486 will actually take the pills themselves, their ability to distance themselves from the abortion and place the blame elsewhere -- for instance on the doctor who performed the abortion -- is removed. Therefore, they may see themselves as directly responsible for the baby's death. Additionally, if her baby is delivered away from the doctor's office, the mother will likely see the child she has killed. Depending on the stage of development when she has the abortion, she could see a well-proportioned, small-scale baby, an image she will carry with her the rest of her life.

Further Deception: No, the National Abortion Foundation's ad doesn't give any details about the background and complications of this drug. And there is one other detail it omits. It doesn't show us the child growing inside its mother's womb - the child whose heart is beating after three weeks, whose skeleton is completely formed after six weeks, who will suck her thumb after 9 weeks -- who will starve to death if her mother chooses to take RU-486.

FERTILIZED EGGS DON'T IMPLANT

STEM CELL RESEARCH - A PRO-LIFE PERSPECTIVE

The following was taken from an article by Bill Wohlgemuth & Joe deSimone in the SS. Simon & Jude Parish newsletter.

The embryonic stem cell is a versatile human cell present during the earliest days of embryonic development. Once fertilization occurs and cells multiply, an embryo - a human life - comes into being. Stem Cells have the potential - the genetic blueprint and the biological know-how - to become any cell, any tissue, any organ in the human body. For example, with the proper biochemical coaxing it can turn into heart muscle, which could replace tissue damaged by a heart attack. Or into brain cells, which could be used to treat Parkinson's disease. Scientists call these "pluripotent stem cells."

Research scientists believe that they need these embryonic stem cells to conduct experiments that may lead to the regeneration of body parts. For the first time in our history, guidelines proposed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) involving human pluripotent stem cells authorize the federal government to approve and regulate the destruction of innocent life for research purposes. They instruct researchers in how to harvest versatile "stem cells from living week old human embryos, a procedure that terminates, or kills the embryo." Other methods involve "isolating pluripotent stem cells from non-living fetuses obtained from pregnancies that had been terminated." The use of Federal funds, our tax dollars, to violate fundamental moral norms on human experimentation appears to exceed the authority of the NIH.

On January 31, 2000 the National Conference of Bishops voiced their concerns in a letter to the NIH, stating, "The NIH guidelines demean human life and undermine longstanding federal policy on protection of human subjects." Using tissue that is properly donated is permissible. For example, fetal tissue obtained from a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) or a stillborn may be used for therapeutic purposes only if proper safeguards are followed. Destruction of a human being for research purposes constitutes one of the most serious abuses of science.

Remarkable and unprecedented discoveries have shown that adult stem cells in bone marrow are capable of becoming anything if you gave the right signal! . . .These findings, confirmed by researchers in this country and abroad, raise the possibility that adult human stem cells may some day be coached to grow into organs, regenerating damaged tissue or reconstruct the immune system. Equally significant is the fact that the problem of immune rejection may also be circumvented if individuals own cells can be used.

Congress, on November 29, 1999, stated, "Funds may not be used for the derivation of human pluripotent stem cells from early human embryos." Astoundingly, three days later NIH issued the pending guidelines to allow "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed," using federal funding. A responsible course of action is to use federal funding to explore the promise of adult stem cells and other alternatives. Why must we try and tinker with the essence of life? Why can't we respect the creation of life as a Divine event and find other means of exploring this hot and morally charged research?