A Busy Day!

One day last week, we had quite the busy day.  I had four errands to run, all in the same area of town.  This all took place after we did our morning schoolwork.

1) I went to get some blood work done to follow hcg levels after the miscarriage.  When the lab called my name to come in, all the kids trooped in with me.  The two ladies in there didn't bat an eye and didn't seem annoyed or anything!  If you are ever nervous about getting blood drawn, here's what you should do:  have a bunch of kids with you and make sure one of them is a squirmy toddler whom you have to hold on your lap and keep contained with one arm while they poke your other arm.  I barely even registered that the needle was going in my arm! 

2) I dropped off some 2 pocket folders at Kansans for Life.  They collect them to make information packets, which they hand out to all sorts of groups.  When there are good sales on folders, I always pick up a few extra, and then save them for KFL.  This was my first time dropping them off, though, so I had a lot of them.  I did not want to have to unbuckle Anthony when we got there, so I called them and one of the staff came out and got the folders. 

3) We dropped off some electronics at A Better Choice, the crisis pregnancy center for whom I look at sonograms.  There we did go inside, because I wanted the kids to see their really neat fetal models, The Touch of Life 1st Trimester Set.  After we lost Teresa Marie (this happened when Mary Joseph died, as well), the girls begged to see her.  Well, when the baby dies and then is miscarried weeks later, you can't really distinguish much.  So letting the girls see was out of the question.  It bothered me a little, though, until they got to see the Touch of Life models.  They are detailed, with a life-like feel, and accurate in size.  They have 7, 8, 9, and 10 week babies in a velvet-lined display box.  The kids all got to hold the babies who were Teresa Marie's and Mary Joseph's sizes.  They were enthralled, to say the least.  Anthony kept saying, "Baby!"   I think it really helped the girls, too, and they have quit asking why they couldn't see the baby.  I'm telling you this because the ladies at ABC are so very nice and they would be more than happy to show these or any of their materials to your children. 

4)I took all the kids to the doctor.  Yup, I saved "the best" for last. Three of the kids (Dominic, Anne, and Anthony) got checkups, which I've now decided is the maximum I want to schedule for one trip.  All five of the kids got flu vaccines, luckily 3 of them could get the squirt in the nose, but still 3 of the kids had to get shots.  Unfortunately, Anthony was one of them, and he had to get 5 shots!  He did okay for about the first 15 minutes in the exam room, then he was just mad the rest of the time, because he wanted out of that room!  Everyone checked out fine, except it was something to see all of Anthony's scrapes and scratches, bumps and bruises all at once in the bright light of that room.  He is quite the little boy. 

Dominic got two shots and didn't make a peep, but poor Anne was crying and resisting, and I had to pick her up and put her on the table.  Then she settled down so she could get her one shot in her arm instead of her leg.  (I'm not sure why that is better, but I'll take it!)  Then it was Anthony's turn.  The nurse went out to get another nurse to help, and he just got even more mad waiting in the room.  Then the nurses came in, and in that split second, when I looked away, Anthony head-butted me so hard in my face that it left a mark on his forehead, and I had a spot on my face that was sore for a couple of days.  He was getting in his payback before he got his shots! 

I'm sure the doctor's office was rather glad to see us leave.  We made quite the commotion. 

5) Then we were all very happy to go back home! 

Time For Action!

I am sure all of you have heard about our Kansas governor, Sebelius, being nominated by Obama to be Secretary of Health and Human Services. Most of you probably also know that she has been buddies with the infamous late-term abortionist, Tiller, who is Kansas' greatest thorn. She has accepted money from him for her campaigns, has had him to dinner at the governors' mansion, and I know has made things easier for him to do the evil that he does. She has vetoed every pro-life piece of legislation that has made its way to her desk (except for the recent Women's Right to Know, which allows women the right to see the sonogram that the abortion center does, among other things. I know she just signed this for political gain, i.e. not to seem so pro-abortion now that she has been nominated for this position.) It is a disgrace to Kansas to have these two in our state.

As much as I would love to get Sebelius out of Kansas, this position that Obama has nominated her for is not good. She has got to be one of the most pro-abortion politicians out there. All the while claiming to be "pro-woman." And claiming to be Catholic, which is even more disgraceful.

Now is your chance to voice to your senators how you feel about her nomination. Go here to the Americans United for Life Action website and your can plug in your information and they will email your letter to your senators. You can even use a letter they already have written. I just did it and it was so easy. Took only a few minutes! So go, now!

The Pope Is Her Shepherd Too

Pope Benedict strongly rebukes Pelosi over abortion

House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s photo-op with Pope Benedict XVI turned sour when the Pontiff used the 15-minute meeting to reaffirm the teachings of the Catholic Church on the right to life and the duty to protect the unborn.

No photo of Nancy Pelosi and the Pope will be forthcoming, since the meeting was closed to reporters and photographers. The two met in a small room in the Vatican just after the Pope's weekly public audience.

Immediately after the meeting, the Holy See’s press office released a statement saying, "following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage."

"His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

Go here to read the full article.

Now we all have to remember to pray for Nancy Pelosi, that the words she heard will sink in and affect her heart and more importantly, her soul.

I am glad she won't get a picture.

Thanks to Cottage Blessings for the story.

Calling All Mothers Who Have Had a Miscarriage

On this day, as thousands of people have been marching in Washington, D.C. in the March for Life, here is a prayer that all women who have miscarried (and men, too, just tweak the prayer) can say to their babies in heaven for an end to abortion:

To An Infant In Heaven (a prayer of petition)

My darling [mention the child's name] you are now in joy in the presence of our God; and in your spotless innocence, which He loves, you can speak to Him with a voice that He will heed. You are still my little baby and will surely regard the prayers of your mother, who bore you. So with confidence, then, I speak to you. Intercede for me to obtain the favor that I here ask as a mother through her child who stands before the throne of God [here mention petition]. But, if what I ask is not according to the wisdom and loving designs of almighty God for me and others, then ask Him to grant what is best according to His good pleasure and to give me the wisdom and faith to conform my will to His.

This prayer has already brought me comfort as I have come to realize that we now have an advocate in heaven. Through the grace of God, she is already interceding for us. Who better to plead before God for an end of abortion than a little miscarried unborn baby, who is as innocent as the poor little ones who are aborted.

And don't forget to pray for the conversion of all those involved in abortion, from the abortionists, to the staff who assist, to those in the organizations which promote it, to the politicians who advocate it as a "woman's choice," especially those who call themselves Catholic. May God save their souls.

Something Less Than Human

Go read this post by Jen at Conversion Diary.

In it she talks about times in history where ordinary people were surrounded by evil and goes on to wonder if she herself would have recognized the evil for what it was:
"If were a 31-year-old woman with three little kids in a busy house in Germany 1941, would I have fully understood the evil that surrounded me?"

Then she asks how you would know if you were surrounded by such evil when the forces of evil tell such slick lies to make it all seem okay:
"What litmus test could you offer that would apply to all places and all times as a way for a person to look around themselves with completely clear eyes, piercing through even the thickest fog of self-delusion and widespread cultural acceptance, and see that they are surrounded by grave evil?"

Finally, she offers a common denominator in all of the cases:
"One thing that stands out in all these examples is that the victims of the widespread evil were categorized as something less than human."

What is it is our time that is of such grave evil? Well, she knows and we know, that it is abortion. What can we do to speak out against such evil? What work can we do now to stop it? These are questions we can all ask ourselves, especially now that we will have a pro-abortion president and Congress majority.

PLEASE READ!!!

This is an article written by Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of the Kansas City, KS archdiocese for the Leaven, the diocesan paper. See the original article here.

‘The most important crisis in our nation is a moral crisis’

One of the saddest moments for me during this year’s election campaign occurred during the vice presidential debate, when the “Catholic” vice presidential candidate, Senator Joseph Biden, bragged about his role in preserving Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision which in effect legalized abortion through all nine months of pregnancy.

This outburst of pride by Sen. Biden occurred as part of his response to a question inquiring how his thinking had changed since he first entered public life. Senator Biden answered by noting that when he first became a member of the Senate, he believed judicial appointments should be made purely on the basis of the legal competence of a candidate. However, at some point in his Senate career, his thinking evolved. Senator Biden now believes that ideology must also be a factor in evaluating the suitability of a judicial candidate.

By his own admission, Sen. Biden’s leadership on the Judiciary Committee was critical in defeating a nominee who in his opinion, except for his opposition to Roe v. Wade, was qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. By helping preserve Roe v. Wade, Sen. Biden was also assuming a share of responsibility for the deaths of millions of children who have died from abortion because of that Supreme Court decision.

Senator Biden’s debate comments serve as a reminder that our current permissive policies sanctioning abortion have come from the courts — not from Congress, the state Legislatures, or a referendum of the people. It was the decision of the Court in 1973 that struck down all the state laws restricting abortions.

Senator Biden says that he accepts the Catholic Church’s teaching on when human life begins, but asserts that it would be wrong for him to impose this belief on others. At the same time, he is happy and even proud to cooperate in preserving the Supreme Court’s imposition of abortion public policy on the entire nation.

Inadvertently, Sen. Biden also reminded American voters that ultimately we have the ability to change public policy, even those imposed by an over-reaching Court. One of the most important responsibilities of any president is the appointment of federal judges and, in particular, appointments to the Supreme Court.

Senator Biden’s assertion that he preserved Roe v. Wade makes clear that it also matters whom we elect to the U.S. Senate. The Senate has the ability to block any presidential nominee. Also Governor Sarah Palin’s meteoric rise to national prominence demonstrates the importance of electing pro-life candidates as mayors and members of public school boards because of the values they bring to these important local offices and because they form the pool of potential candidates for higher office.

There are those who argue that there were illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade, so what difference does a law make? This is like arguing that since there are still murders, rapes, and thefts, we should just decriminalize these actions.

Of course, there will always be those who will not comply with the law. This does not mean that such laws are ineffective or unnecessary. There are no accurate records of the number of illegal abortions before Roe v. Wade. Doctor Bernard Nathanson, a former abortionist and one of the founders of NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) admits that abortion advocates made up the statistics they used in their propaganda efforts to promote abortion’s legalization. The more honest estimates indicate that abortions increased by more than 10 times with legalization. This means that there are more than a million additional abortions annually because of Roe v. Wade. The law really does make a difference.

Senator Barak Obama says that he does not believe in litmus tests for Supreme Court nominees, but he also pledges to protect Roe v. Wade. Senator Obama has also stated that he wants, early in his presidency, to sign into law the so-called Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would eliminate the modest limitations of abortion permitted under Roe v. Wade. Informed consent and parental notification statutes have reduced the number of abortions.

FOCA, in its present form, would also take away conscience clauses. In other words, it could be used to coerce doctors, nurses, hospitals and health care systems to participate in abortion. We should take Sen. Obama’s promises seriously because they are very consistent with his record as Illinois state senator and his brief career as a U.S. senator.

There are many in political life who would like the abortion issue to just disappear. They argue that abortion distracts from the much more important issues of the economy and the national security. The most important crisis in our nation today is a moral crisis. It is a crisis about fundamental values and beliefs. The foundational issue of this moral crisis is whether we will continue to permit the state-sanctioned killing of our own children.

In a recently published interview Sen. Biden said that he is a “John XXIII guy” and “not a Pope John Paul guy.” I hope that he is not trying to imply that Pope John XXIII would bless or approve his action in support of legalized abortion. It is not my responsibility or my role to tell the people of the archdiocese for whom to vote. However, I can tell you there is no such thing as a “John XXIII Catholic” or a “John Paul II Catholic.” There are, however, “faithful” and “unfaithful” Catholics.

Senator Biden is proud to have helped preserve Roe v. Wade and thus to share responsibility for its consequences. Consider this when casting your vote: Are you ready to accept some responsibility for the more than a million unborn children who are killed every year by abortion? Think about it!

Letter From Bishop of Salina, KS

This is the main reason why Barack Obama is a morally unacceptable candidate:

November 1, 2008
All Saints Day
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
On Tuesday the citizens of the United States will elect the leaders who will govern our nation during a time of national turmoil unprecedented in recent memory. We are in the midst of a severe economic crisis, a housing crisis and an unpopular and protracted war against extremists who threaten our national security.
But the fundamental crisis, and the one we hear least about in the media, is a moral crisis. It is a struggle to determine the kind of nation we will be as measured by our treatment of the weakest and most vulnerable among us, the innocent unborn. As Pope Benedict XVI teaches, "The fundamental human right, the presupposition of every other right, is the right to life itself. This is true of life from the moment of conception until its natural end. Abortion, consequently, cannot be a human right—it is the very opposite. It is a deep wound in society."
Protecting innocent human life is not just one issue among many. From a moral perspective it is the foundational issue of our time. It is likely that the next president will decide the fate of the "Freedom of Choice Act". If passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president, it will eliminate every single limit on abortions which have been achieved over the last thirty-five years. It would be catastrophic. This is an example of how much is at stake.
We Catholics have a duty to be actively engaged citizens. Before we vote we must be sure we know where the candidates stand on all the issues, particularly the most fundamental. If we are not well-informed voters we can do actual harm by our vote. As faithful citizens we have a duty to allow our Catholic principles and convictions to form our consciences and guide our decisions in the voting booth.
Please join me in praying for our nation during these final days before this momentous election. Pray for wisdom for all of our fellow citizens that we may choose well on November 4. So much depends on your vote!
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Most Reverend Paul S. Coakley
Bishop of Salina

Barack Obama has told Planned Parenthood that the first thing he will do if elected President is sign FOCA into law. He is pro-abortion down to the core! If you vote for Obama you are cooperating in a grave evil. Don't do it!

Before you vote for Obama, watch this....

CatholicVote.com
http://www.catholicvote.com/

Obama vs Archbishop Chaput

complete article here

Little Murders
by Charles J. Chaput
Oct 18, 2008

In an address delivered on October 17, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput stated that ''Prof. Douglas Kmiec has a strong record of service to the Church and the nation in his past. But I think his activism for Senator Barack Obama, and the work of Democratic-friendly groups like Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, have done a disservice to the Church, confused the natural priorities of Catholic social teaching, undermined the progress pro-lifers have made, and provided an excuse for some Catholics to abandon the abortion issue instead of fighting within their parties and at the ballot box to protect the unborn.''

The following is condensed and adapted from an address Charles J. Chaput delivered at an ENDOW (''Educating on the Nature and Dignity of Women'') dinner, October 17.

Can a Catholic Support Him? Asking the Big Question about Barack Obama

I began work on Render Unto Caesar in July 2006. I made the final changes to the text in November 2007. That's a long time before anyone was nominated for president, and it was Doubleday, not I, that set the book's release date for August 2008. So - unlike Prof. Douglas Kmiec's recent book, Can a Catholic Support Him? Asking the Big Question about Barack Obama, which argues a Catholic case for Senator Obama - I wrote Render Unto Caesar with no interest in supporting or attacking any candidate or any political party.

The goal of Render Unto Caesar was simply to describe what an authentic Catholic approach to political life looks like, and then to encourage Americans Catholics to live it.

Prof. Kmiec has a strong record of service to the Church and the nation in his past. He served in the Reagan administration, and he supported Mitt Romney's campaign for president before switching in a very public way to Barack Obama earlier this year. In his own book he quotes from Render Unto Caesar at some length. In fact, he suggests that his reasoning and mine are ''not far distant on the moral inquiry necessary in the election of 2008.'' Unfortunately, he either misunderstands or misuses my words, and he couldn't be more mistaken.

I believe that Senator Obama, whatever his other talents, is the most committed ''abortion-rights'' presidential candidate of either major party since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973. Despite what Prof. Kmiec suggests, the party platform Senator Obama runs on this year is not only aggressively ''pro-choice;'' it has also removed any suggestion that killing an unborn child might be a regrettable thing. On the question of homicide against the unborn child - and let's remember that the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer explicitly called abortion ''murder'' - the Democratic platform that emerged from Denver in August 2008 is clearly anti-life.

Prof. Kmiec argues that there are defensible motives to support Senator Obama. Speaking for myself, I do not know any proportionate reason that could outweigh more than 40 million unborn children killed by abortion and the many millions of women deeply wounded by the loss and regret abortion creates.

To suggest - as some Catholics do - that Senator Obama is this year's ''real'' prolife candidate requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse. To portray the 2008 Democratic Party presidential ticket as the preferred ''prolife'' option is to subvert what the word ''prolife'' means. Anyone interested in Senator Obama's record on abortion and related issues should simply read Prof. Robert P. George's Public Discourse essay from earlier this week, ''Obama's Abortion Extremism,'' and his follow-up article, ''Obama and Infanticide.'' They say everything that needs to be said.

Of course, these are simply my personal views as an author and private citizen. But I'm grateful to Prof. Kmiec for quoting me in his book and giving me the reason to speak so clearly about our differences. I think his activism for Senator Obama, and the work of Democratic-friendly groups like Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, have done a disservice to the Church, confused the natural priorities of Catholic social teaching, undermined the progress prolifers have made, and provided an excuse for some Catholics to abandon the abortion issue instead of fighting within their parties and at the ballot box to protect the unborn.

And here's the irony. None of the Catholic arguments advanced in favor of Senator Obama are new. They've been around, in one form or another, for more than 25 years. All of them seek to ''get beyond'' abortion, or economically reduce the number of abortions, or create a better society where abortion won't be necessary. All of them involve a misuse of the seamless garment imagery in Catholic social teaching. And all of them, in practice, seek to contextualize, demote and then counterbalance the evil of abortion with other important but less foundational social issues.

This is a great sadness. As Chicago's Cardinal Francis George said recently, too many Americans have ''no recognition of the fact that children continue to be killed [by abortion], and we live therefore, in a country drenched in blood. This can't be something you start playing off pragmatically against other issues.''

Meanwhile, the basic human rights violation at the heart of abortion - the intentional destruction of an innocent, developing human life - is wordsmithed away as a terrible crime that just can't be fixed by the law. I don't believe that. I think that argument is a fraud. And I don't think any serious believer can accept that argument without damaging his or her credibility. We still have more than a million abortions a year, and we can't blame them all on Republican social policies. After all, it was a Democratic president, not a Republican, who vetoed the partial birth abortion ban - twice.

The truth is that for some Catholics, the abortion issue has never been a comfortable cause. It's embarrassing. It's not the kind of social justice they like to talk about. It interferes with their natural political alliances. And because the homicides involved in abortion are ''little murders'' - the kind of private, legally protected murders that kill conveniently unseen lives - it's easy to look the other way.

The one genuinely new quality to Catholic arguments for Senator Obama is their packaging. Just as the abortion lobby fostered ''Catholics for a Free Choice'' to challenge Catholic teaching on abortion more than two decades ago, so supporters of Senator Obama have done something similar in seeking to neutralize the witness of bishops and the pro-life movement by offering a ''Catholic'' alternative to the Church's priority on sanctity of life issues. I think it's an intelligent strategy. I also think it's wrong and often dishonest.

It's curious that nobody seems to worry about the ''separation of Church and state,'' or religious interference in the public square, when the religious voices that speak up support a certain kind of candidate. In his book, Prof. Kmiec complains about the agenda and influence of what he terms RFPs - Republican Faith Partisans. But he also seems to pay them the highest kind of compliment: imitation. If RFPs are bad, is it unreasonable to assume that DFPs - Democratic Faith Partisans - are equally dangerous?

As I suggest throughout Render Unto Caesar, it's important for Catholics to be people of faith who pursue politics to achieve justice; not people of politics who use and misuse faith to achieve power. I have no doubt that Prof. Kmiec belongs to the former group. But I believe his arguments finally serve the latter.

For 35 years I've watched thousands of good Catholic laypeople, clergy and religious struggle to recover some form of legal protection for the unborn child. The abortion lobby has fought every compromise and every legal restriction on abortion, every step of the way. Apparently they believe in their convictions more than some of us Catholics believe in ours. And I think that's an indictment of an entire generation of American Catholic leadership.

The abortion conflict has never simply been about repealing Roe v. Wade. And the many pro-lifers I know live a much deeper kind of discipleship than ''single issue'' politics. But they do understand that the cornerstone of Catholic social teaching is protecting human life from conception to natural death. They do understand that every other human right depends on the right to life. They did not and do not and will not give up - and they won't be lied to.

So I think that people who claim that the abortion struggle is ''lost'' as a matter of law, or that supporting an outspoken defender of legal abortion is somehow ''prolife,'' are not just wrong; they're betraying the witness of every person who continues the work of defending the unborn child. And I hope they know how to explain that, because someday they'll be required to.


Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., is the author of Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life (Doubleday, 2008). The views expressed here are his own, and do not represent those of the Archdiocese of Denver. Copyright 2008 The Witherspoon Institute. All rights reserved.

No Respect For Life Obama

I found this poster at Mama Says, a blog by a mother of seven. This is a picture of a 20 week old fetus, safe in his mother's womb. Isn't he beautiful? Here and here are her posts which talks about the poster.

NOBama

Just a few quotes I dug up for all you Catholics who think its ok to vote for Obama.

If I had more time I would list them all...

NOBama

"The Church is never partisan but that doesn't change the fact that abortion is the central social issue of this moment in our national history -- not the only issue, but the foundational issue; the pivotal issue. For Catholics to ignore it or downplay it or 'contextualize' it would be an act of cowardice."

Archbishop Charles Chaput - Denver, CO

NOBama

"At this point, the Democratic Party risks transforming itself definitively into a party of death"

Archbishop Raymond Burke
Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, President of the Commission for Advocates - Vatican

NOBama

"To vote for a candidate who supports the intrinsic evil of abortion or “abortion rights” when there is a morally acceptable alternative would be to cooperate in the evil – and, therefore, morally impermissible.

Bishop Kevin J. Farrell- Dallas, TX
Bishop Kevin W. Vann - Fort Worth, TX

NObama

"Catholics would commit moral evil by voting for a candidate who embraces abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning and same-sex “marriage,” when a morally acceptable candidate is available. "

Archbishop Joseph Naumann - Kansas City, KS

Bishops Ronald Gilmore - Dodge City, KS

Bishop Paul Coakley - Salina, KS

Bishop Michael Jackels - Wichita, KS

Did She Not Listen to the Pope?

Here is one to get your blood boiling. From LifeSiteNews.com:

Catholic Kansas Gov. Sebelius Vetoes Restrictions on Late-Term Abortion
Bill's sponsor pledges to work to override veto
By Michael Baggot

TOPEKA, KS, April 22, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Pro-abortion Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius vetoed a bill on Monday that would regulate abortion procedures in the state that is infamous for its high number of late-term abortions.
Senate Bill 389 would have offered women the optino of viewing ultrasound images of their preborn child, tightened up the requirements for obtaining a late-term abortion, and would have allowed a patient, spouse, or family to sue an abortion provider over a suspected unlawful late-term abortion.
"Over the last several years, we have worked on lowering abortion rates in Kansas by focusing on adoption incentives, extended health services for pregnant women, providing sex education and offering a variety of support services for families," wrote Sebelius in a Monday press release.
"SB 389 allows a variety of individuals to seek a court order preventing a woman from obtaining an abortion, even where it may be necessary to save her life," she added.
Sebelius also argued that SB 389 "unnecessarily jeopardizes the privacy of Kansas women's confidential medical records." She concluded, "As Governor, nothing is more important to me than the safety, health and privacy rights of our citizens. I am vetoing SB 389 because it endangers the health of women and is likely to be found in violation the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Kansas."
In a March 31 Kansascity.com editorial, Mary Kay Culp, State Executive Director of Kansans for Life, noted, amogst other things, that Sebelius' concerns about privacy were moot, since under the House equivalent of SB 389, the attorney general or district attorneys involved in investigating abortionists would receive nameless files, not personal medical records of patients.
"Sebelius gave all kinds of false excuses, but the real question Sebelius must answer is why she would veto a law which simply gives women more information when considering abortion, allows them to see their baby on ultrasound if they so request, attempts to avoid coerced abortions of sexually abused minors, and in no way prevents a legal, non-coerced abortion from taking place," said Culp.
"I will do everything in my power to work to override this veto," stated Rep. Lance Kinzer, the bill's sponsor.
While the House passed the bill with enough votes to override the veto, the bill passed through the Senate with two fewer votes than needed to override the veto. Rep. Kinzer and other supporters of the bill will have another chance to override the governor's veto when the legislature resumes on April 30.
In May 2006, Sebelius vetoed Senate Bill 528, which would have required documentation justifying the performance of late-term abortions. Sebelius claimed at the time that her Catholic faith taught the sanctity of human life and that she was personally opposed to abortion.
In response to Sebelius's call to make abortion "safe, legal, and rare," Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City wrote, "Abortion is never safe because it always results in the death of a child. One can hardly call abortion rare when there are more than a million performed every year in the United States and more than 45 million performed since abortion's legalization in 1973."
"It is never permissible for a Catholic to support the legalization of the killing of innocent lives by abortion, much less to lead the fight for legal abortion."
"Reviewing the record of Gov. Sebelius when she served in the Kansas House of Representatives, it is difficult to find a single instance, either in a procedural or substantive vote, where she acted in a manner that would afford unborn children the maximum protection. In the 1980s and 1990s then - Representative Sebelius voted to weaken or eliminate even such modest measures as parental notification, waiting periods and informed consent," added Archbishop Naumann.
Noting the political corruption that may have influenced Sebelius's voting record, Archbishop Naumann wrote, "Her vetoes of these clinic regulation bills were even more troubling in light of her history of accepting campaign contributions from George Tiller, the Wichita abortionist, who has gained a national reputation for performing late term abortions."
Tiller has donated over $38,000 in political funding to Sebelius since 1994.

Contact Gov. Sebelius:Office of the GovernorCapitol, 300 SW 10th Ave., Ste. 212STopeka, KS 66612-1590Voice 1-877-KSWORKS (1-877-579-6757)Local 785-296-3232For the Hearing Impaired 1-800-766-3777http://www.governor.ks.gov/comments/comment.htm

I emailed my comment to the governor. Will you?

Amazing Story

Amazing story about a woman whose twins kicked loose her cervical cancer while in the womb and saved her life. And her refusal to abort her babies to give herself a better chance of survival.

A Mother's Love

A woman faced with terminal cancer was given 2 choices: 1) Kill your unborn baby so you can start chemo which may extend your life up to to years before you die, or 2) Don't kill your unborn baby and don't start chemo until your baby is born, and die sooner rather than later. She chose life for her baby.

How many women these days kill their unborn babies simply because it might be an "inconvenience"? They should read this story. This story sounds similar to that of St. Gianna Beretta Molla.

By ANDREW LEVY
Last updated at 14:20pm on 25th January 2008
read original article here

A mother made the ultimate sacrfice by refusing cancer treatment to give birth to a healthy baby boy. Lorraine Allard was told four months into the pregnancy the devastating news that she was in the advanced stages of cancer. A further blow came when doctors advised her to terminate the foetus, which was 23 weeks old, and start chemotherapy straight away.

Instead, she insisted on waiting long enough to give her unborn son a chance to survive, telling her husband, Martyn: "If I am going to die, my baby is going to live."

A Caesarian section was scheduled at 26 weeks but Mrs Allard, 33, went into premature labour a week before and Liam was born on November 18.

She then began chemotherapy but passed away on January 18, having left her sickbed a handful of times to cradle her son in her arms beside his incubator.

Yesterday, Mr Allard said: "Lorraine was positive all the way through. She had strength for both of us. I can't begin to describe how brave she was. Towards the end we knew things weren't going well but she was overjoyed that she had given life to Liam."

Mr Allard, 34, an oil field technician from St Olaves, near near Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, and his wife already had three daughters, Leah, ten, Amy, eight, and Courtney, 20 months, when they learned they were expecting their first boy.

"We were going to have the full set and didn't plan to have any more children after that," Mr Allard said. But in October last year, Mrs Allard started getting stomach cramps and tests at James Paget Hospital in Gorleston revealed her liver was riddled with malignant tumours.

It is believed the disease spread from bowel cancer that had been growing unnoticed for years. Mr Allard said: "The doctors said they couldn't do anything because she was pregnant. She told them straight away they were not going to get rid of it. She'd have lost the will to fight."

His wife went into labour just a couple of weeks after the diagnosis and gave birth at the Norfolk and Norwich University NHS Hospital in Norwich.

"He was so tiny, just 1lb 11oz, so the nurse grabbed him and allowed Lorraine to give him a little kiss before he was taken to an incubator," Mr Allard said.

"She was so emotional. She had been so determined to give him the best chance and was happy that he had been born naturally, which meant she wouldn't have to recover for a couple of weeks after a Caesarian before beginning the chemotherapy."

The course began almost straight away and Mrs Allard spent her time recuperating at home, apart from four visits to her newborn son.

The first time was when he was two weeks old, during which a treasured photo of her cuddling him was taken.

Liam has responded well to his care and it is hoped he will be released from hospital in early March. But his mother's health began to deteriorate just before Christmas and a CT scan on January 17 revealed the tumours were still growing. She died the following day.

Mr Allard said: "The doctors had said the cancer was no longer curable, although they were trying to shrink the tumours which they thought might give her a couple of years.

"On the day Lorraine died she hadn't eaten for two weeks and couldn't drink. I laid beside her and she was gripping my hand quite tight. We were like that for about half an hour.

"I could feel against my chest that her heart was slowing down. She just slipped away after that. It was very peaceful."

He added: "When Liam is old enough, I won't tell him that Lorraine gave her life for him but I will say she made sure he had a good chance of life. She told me she didn't want him to feel bad about it."

Mrs Allard's father, Tom Berry, said: "I was overwhelmed by the way Lorraine took it. She lived for her husband and children. She was a big personality with a heart of gold."

Dozens of friends and family will say a final emotional goodbye to Lorraine at her funeral on February 4th in the same Hopton church where she married Martyn, her partner since she was 16.

DailyMail.co.uk

35 Years and Nine Months Ago

35 years and nine months ago I was born. I often think about what might have happened if it was a year later with a different mom and a different doctor. My mom had a serious infection while pregnant with me and then they told her I was dead. My mom remembers the nurse telling them that it was probably a good thing as I would likely be seriously damaged had I lived. Her doctor let her go home to "let Nature take it's course." You cannot imagine the joy quickly followed by anxiety when my mother later felt me moving.

At that point, what if it was a year later, when abortion was legal? What if my mother's doctor had been quick to suggest abortion when there could be a problem with the baby? What if my parents hadn't been faithful Catholics who trusted in God? The outcome of the story might be different and I might not be writing this today. As it turned out, I was born, completely normal and healthy (my husband might debate the normal part, ha!). And then, nine months later, came Roe vs. Wade.

Now, 35 years later, 50 million babies have been destroyed. The number is almost too staggering to comprehend. Abortion is the number one cause of death in the world. I sat watching the coverage of the March for Life Rally earlier today surrounded by my 4 innocent children. How on earth could our country come to the point where it is legal to destroy babies in their mother's womb when in just a few short months and years they look like this? All I have to do is look into my little 8 month old baby's face to see the horror of abortion.

As a doctor, I cannot comprehend how doctors, who take the Hippocratic Oath pledging to first do no harm, can perform abortions. I personally have been privileged to have the opportunity to counsel pregnant women at our local crisis pregnancy center and to offer them sonograms. Almost invariably, they stare transfixed at the sight of their little baby's heartbeat and movement. They know they are looking at a baby and the majority of the time, an abortion becomes unthinkable.

It is easy to get complacent about abortion when it is ever present and seemingly never-ending, and I know I am guilty of this at times. Let us support each other to continue the good fight and to above all, pray, pray, pray, and to remember to offer up our sufferings for an end of abortion. May it soon become unthinkable to this country and the world.

Doctor Death to Speak at University

Doctor "Death" Kevorkian to Speak at Florida University for $50,000 Speaking Fee
Brother of Terri Schiavo spearheading petition effort to stop event



I suppose if the Iranian president can speak at a university in the USA, so can Dr. Kevorkian. I don't know which is more scandalous!