Revista Times: Promotores do aborto têm perdido as batalhas contra os pro-vidas nos EUA

__

WASHINGTON DC, 04 Jan. 13 / 03:50 pm (ACI/EWTN Noticias).- Na capa de sua edição de janeiro de 2013, a famosa revista americana Times, assegura que embora “40 anos atrás, os ativistas do direito ao aborto obtiveram uma épica vitória com (a sentença da Corte Suprema no caso) Roe vs. Wade“, que permitiu a legalização do aborto nos Estados Unidos, “eles estiveram perdendo desde então” para os pró-vidas.

Capa deste mês da Revista Times

Capa deste mês da Revista Times

Conforme explica Kate Pickert, autora do artigo de capa, desde que em janeiro de 1973 a Corte Suprema dos Estados Unidos converteu em um direito federal o acesso ao aborto, “o movimento pro-choice (abortista) vem  perdendo” as suas lutas.

“Em muitas partes do país, atualmente, recorrer a um aborto é mais difícil que em muitos lugares desde a década de 1970”.

Pickert assinalou que “há menos médicos dispostos a realizar o procedimento e menos clínicas abortistas no negócio”.

“Os ativistas pro-choice (abortistas) foram ultrapassados por seus contrapartes pró-vidas, que pressionaram exitosamente para obter regulações estatais que limitam o acesso” ao aborto, escreveu.

“Muitos estados requerem atualmente que as mulheres passem por aconselhamento, períodos de espera ou ultrassons antes de submeter-se a abortos”, indicou.

Para a jornalista americana, “a causa pró-vida esteve ganhando a guerra do aborto, em parte, porque buscou uma estratégia organizada e bem executada”.

Além disso, reconheceu, “a opinião pública está crescentemente” do lado pró-vida.

“Graças ao ultrassom pré-natal e aos avanços da neonatologia, os americanos podem agora saber como se vê um feto e que os bebês nascidos tão prematuramente como às 24 semanas agora podem sobreviver”, assinalou Pickert.

A jornalista da Times disse que “apesar de que três quartos dos americanos acreditarem que o aborto deveria ser legal em alguns ou todos os casos, a maioria apoia leis estatais que regulem o procedimento, e cada vez menos se identificam a si mesmos como ‘pro-choice’ nas pesquisas de opinião pública”.

Pickert também retratou a divisão geracional que destrói por dentro a causa abortista, pois “os jovens ativistas do direito ao aborto reclamam de que as líderes das organizações feministas”, que tinham 20 ou 30 anos quando se legalizou o aborto nos Estados Unidos, “não estão dispostas a passar a tocha às novas gerações”.

Entretanto, para Kate Pickert, um dos principais motivos da derrota dos promotores do aborto é que “em uma democracia dinâmica como os Estados Unidos, defender o status quo é sempre mais difícil que lutar para mudá-lo”.

Uma das expressões mais claras do avanço da causa pró-vida nos Estados Unidos é a multitudinária marcha nacional pela defesa da vida que mobilizam centenas de milhares de pessoas, com frequência ignoradas pelos meios, todos os anos em janeiro, no aniversário da sentença de Roe vs. Wade.

A última marcha, em 2012, reuniu mais de 400 mil pessoas que durante várias horas suportaram intenso frio, neblina e até chuva enquanto percorriam as principais ruas da capital americana até a sede do Capitólio.

Corte Judicial ordena para ONG abortista informar relação entre aborto, suicídio e saúde mental – Court Orders Planned Parenthood: Inform Women of Abortion-Suicide Link

__

by Steven Ertelt | Pierre, SD | LifeNews.com | 7/24/12

A federal appeals court has upheld a provision of a South Dakota law requiring the states lone abortion business, operated by Planned Parenthood, that it has to inform women of the validity of the link between abortion and suicide. With women facing a host of mental health issues following an abortion, Planned Parenthood can no longer keep women in the dark about them.

An en banc panel of the court declared that South Dakota’s statute that requires abortion doctors to disclose to pregnant mothers that an abortion places the mother at increased risk for suicide ideation and suicide constitutional because the disclosure is truthful, non-misleading, and relevant to the pregnant mother’s decision of whether or not to consent to an abortion.

Harold J. Cassidy, a pro-life attorney who represented Leslee Unruh, president of the Alpha Center of Sioux Falls, and Stacy Wollman, president of Care Net of Rapid City — two pregnancy centers that provide abortion alternatives — sent LifeNews details about the decision.

He called the decision “a fabulous victory for the women of the State of South Dakota.”

“The Court ruled that the women will now be given additional important information before they consent to an abortion: that the abortion places a woman at increased risk of suicide ideation and suicide,” he said. “This victory represents the fourth separate decision of the Eighth Circuit reversing the District Court in this one case, two decisions issued by en banc Courts four years apart – a rare occurrence that underscores the importance of the issues presented by the case.”

As a result of the decision, upholding all eight major provisions of South Dakota’s Abortion Informed Consent Statute, pregnant mothers will now be informed:

(1) that “an abortion terminates the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being;”
(2) that the mother’s “relationship with that second human being enjoys protection under the Constitution of the United States and the Laws of South Dakota;”
(3) that relationship and all rights attached to it will be terminated; and
(4) the abortion places the mother “at increased risk for suicide ideation and suicide.”

“Any decision that a pregnant mother makes in the context of her considering an abortion that will deprive her of the joy and fulfillment of a life long relationship with her child, must be totally voluntary and well informed. The victory today is a step towards achieving that goal for the women of South Dakota,” Cassidy said.

The case ends a several-year-long legal battle Planned Parenthood pitched over the law.

Cassidy stated: “The people of the State of South Dakota have stood up to the threats, false accusations and litigation tactics of Planned Parenthood. In the process, the people of South Dakota have shown that they will not be intimidated by threats of litigation, threats of payment of attorneys’ fees, and will hold fast to their conviction that a handful of people in New York, with a radical philosophy, will not dictate to the people of South Dakota, when, if, and how they will protect their women from harm, pressure, coercion and false and incomplete information when making the most important decision of their lives.”

There have been numerous studies that found an association between abortion and suicide. Other studies have found a link between abortion and depression (which is a major risk factor for suicide). For example:

A 1995 study by A.C. Gilchrist in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that in women with no history of psychiatric illness, the rate of deliberate self-harm was 70 percent higher after abortion than after childbirth.

A 1996 study in Finland by pro-choice researcher Mika Gissler in the British Medical Journal found that the suicide rate was nearly six times greater among women who aborted than among women who gave birth.

A 2002 record-linkage study of California Medicaid patients in the Southern Medical Journal, which controlled for prior mental illness, found that suicide risk was 154 percent higher among women who aborted than among those who delivered.

A March 2004 report from the National Institutes of Health revealed that suicide is now the third leading cause of death among America’s young people. In fact, for teen girls and young women, the suicide rate has tripled over the past 25 years.

While suicide among women in the typical abortion age range is rising, suicide rates for Americans in general are dropping across the country. Dr. David Reardon, director of the Springfield, Illinois-based Elliot Institute, says abortion is partly to blame for the increase.

“Given the fact that more than half of all women having abortions are under the age of 25, and more than 20 percent of women having abortions are teenagers, the increased suicide rate among teens and young women is sadly not a surprise,” Reardon said.

One study published in August 2003 edition of the British Medical Journal found that women who had abortions were seven times more likely to commit suicide than women who gave birth.

Reardon says unwanted abortions are a reality for teens and young women who are often pressured by boyfriends or parents to have abortions. e says as many as one in six abortions are performed as a result of such coercion and a study the Elliot Institute conducted among women experiencing post-abortion problems reveals that 80 percent said that would not have had an abortion if they had received support from others to have the child.

“Even if their families might give them the support they need to have their babies, many teens often undergo secret abortions without telling their parents,” Reardon said. “Either way, these girls and young women often have no one to turn to when they are in despair over an abortion.”

Fonte: http://www.lifenews.com/2012/07/24/court-orders-planned-parenthood-inform-women-of-abortion-suicide-link/

__

Prejuízos do fumo na gravidez. Como evitar. Vídeos legendados em português

Pro-Abortion Movement Finds Ultrasound Images Threatening

English: fetus sonogram

English: fetus sonogram (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

O movimento pró-aborto encontra ameaça em imagens de ecografias  na gravidez postadas no Facebook

 

The pro-abortion movement finds itself once again between a rock and a hard place as technology advancements shed greater light on the humanity of the unborn child.

From the advent of 4-D ultrasounds to Facebook  allowing parents to list their unborn child as a family member on their profiles, technology has only aided the pro-life cause. The latest trend to give voice to the voiceless child in the womb is the Photoshopping of sonogram images onto a picture of the mother’s belly.

 

According to The Daily, “Shelly Kuhn, a family portrait photographer from Tonawanda, N.Y., has Photoshopped clients’ sonogram images onto their maternity shoots several times, and sees it as an artistic portrayal of pregnancy.

“Clients have asked me for it. Women love seeing what their children look like on their belly, they find it intriguing,” Kuhn told The Daily. “I would love to do more of these. But there is a debate over whether it’s morbid and disgusting or beautiful.”

It should come as no surprise that the pro-abortion movement ardently opposes the images. An editor of the Tumblr “STFU Parents” said parents are “doing it because they’re a little obsessive. There’s something inherently narcissistic about taking the time to create this ‘art.’ ”

Andrea White, a client of photographer Shelly Kuhn, says, “These photos are something I really cherish, I thought it was so neat,” said White. “As for the people that think it’s creepy, I can’t say I really understand where they are coming from, but to each their own, I guess.”

The outrage from the pro-abortion movement has little to do with artistic preferences but more to do with what they view as a threat to their political agenda.

Allison Benedikt from Slate wrote that the images “got us thinking about how the more we treat fetuses like people—including them in our family photo shoots, tagging them on our Facebook walls, giving them their own Twitter accounts—the harder it will be to deny that they are people when the next, say, personhood amendment comes up, with legislators and activists arguing that “the unborn child” inside a pregnant woman’s womb should have the same rights as the living among us.”

The headline of the Slate article reads: “Photoshopping a sonogram onto your pregnant stomach isn’t just tacky, it’s bad for women.” When they say “bad for women,” they really just mean bad for the agenda of the pro-abortion movement. It’s as if abortion advocates know life exists long before birth but are making a deliberate effort to hide that inconvenient fact.

At the time Roe vs. Wade was decided in 1973, little was known about life before birth. The child in the womb was largely a mystery. But today, with the ability to watch unborn children on sonogram monitors, see them swim about, make facial expressions and move their little fingers, there is little doubt life is present. There is also considerable evidence that unborn children experience pain even prior to 20 weeks after conception. Sonogram images, including those now used in family portraits, mark a significant milestone in our growing understanding of human life.

However, in many places throughout the country, our laws do not reflect this advanced understanding. For instance, in our nation’s capital, abortion is legal for any reason whatsoever right up until the moment of birth. It’s time to leave the mentality of the 1970’s in the past and for our laws to match what we now know to be true about unborn human life.

 

Fonte:  http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/22/pro-abortion-movement-finds-ultrasound-images-threatening/

__

Half of Young Adults Don’t Know Planned Parenthood Does Abortions

English: Prevention Park, is the largest Plann...

 Aborto: uma lucrativa atividade que precisa isentar médicos de  responsabilidades criminais para continuar a prosperar 

Metade dos jovens adultos nos EUA não sabem que a Planned Parenthood também faz abortos.  No Brasil, provavelmente este percentual de desconhecimento alcança a quase  100% de jovens e adultos.   A Planned Parenthood é o maior negócio abortista  do mundo  e, sempre que consegue a legalização do aborto em algum país, lá se estabelece com  clínicas particulares de aborto e obtém lucros cada vez maiores com esta prática.  O  maior interesse dela, portanto, é isentar de responsabilidades criminais os médicos que  praticarem o aborto mediante pagamento;  o que,  no Projeto do Novo Código Penal, elaborado por comissão de juristas da confiança do Governo Federal – inconstitucionalmente – está liberando em todas as hipóteses no Brasil, mediante novo artíficio jurídico. Para o público é dito que apenas foram “ampliadas” as hipóteses de aborto no Projeto do Novo Código Penal: mentira, ele já está encaminhado para aprovação no Congresso com artifícios que permitem – na prática – o aborto em qualquer hipótese.

(…) “On December 27, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) released its latest Annual Report for 2009-2010. The report indicates PPFA had a total budget of $1.04 billion and an excess of revenue over expenses of 18.5 million dollars — a net profit. The new report also revealed 46 percent of the total PPFA budget comes from taxpayer dollars in the form of government funding.” (…)

Veja:  Projeto do Novo Código Penal: aborto, desinformação e impedimentos legislativos

Celso Galli Coimbra
OABRS 11352

___

A question in a new survey Students for Life of America released last week should cause alarm for pro-life advocate working against Planned Parenthood, the nation’s biggest abortion business.

In the Students for Life nationally-commissioned poll, young, college-aged adults, were asked a variety of questions on abortion issues. One question queried, “Do you believe it is (ROTATED) mostly true or mostly false that Planned Parenthood clinics offer abortion to pregnant women?”

Alarmingly, despite the fact that Planned Parenthood does more than one-quarter of all abortions in the United States and is one of the leading worldwide abortion businesses, the plurality of respondents – 48% – said they did not know or could not judge whether Planned Parenthood clinics offered abortions to pregnant women. While half had no idea Planned Parenthood is an abortion business, 37 percent understood the true nature of the organization while another 11 percent said Planned Parenthood doesn’t do abortions.

The poll also found pro-life advocates have significantly more work to do to expose Planned Parenthood, its abuses, violations of law, botched abortions, how it misleads women and how it promotes abortions nationally and globally. The poll found 66 percent of those young adults surveyed have a favorable view of Planned Parenthood while 11 percent have an unfavorable view, 14 percent are unsure and three percent had never heard of the abortion giant.

“Respondents’ favorability towards Planned Parenthood was a strong indicator of whether they believed the organization to be an abortion provider. Those who were unfavorable toward Planned Parenthood were much more likely than its supporters to know about their abortion offerings (69%-40%),” the SFLA poll indicated. “However, respondents that identified as pro-choice on both the 2-point and 6-point scales were more inclined than pro-lifers to know about Planned Parenthood’s abortion offerings (45% vs. 40%, 2 pt.; 48% vs. 32%, 6pt). This demonstrates a messaging opportunity to pro-life and conservative young adults, as well as those who straddle the fence on the issue.”

The most recent annual report from Planned Parenthood showed it helped fewer pregnant women with prenatal care and the number of pregnant women it referred for adoptions declined as well.

On December 27, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) released its latest Annual Report for 2009-2010. The report indicates PPFA had a total budget of $1.04 billion and an excess of revenue over expenses of 18.5 million dollars — a net profit. The new report also revealed 46 percent of the total PPFA budget comes from taxpayer dollars in the form of government funding.

The report also broke down the “services” Planned Parenthood offers in addition to abortions. Planned Parenthood has always come under fire from pro-life groups for doing hundreds of thousands of abortions but providing little in the way of help for pregnant women wanting to keep their baby or considering adoption. The new report showed that hasn’t changed.

The document the abortion organization posted shows Planned Parenthood did 329,445 abortions in 2010 while it provided prenatal care to only 31,098 women and referred only 841 women to adoption agencies.

The number of women receiving prenatal care dropped significantly from 2009 to 2010, as the abortion business helped 40,489 women in 2009 — meaning almost 10,000 fewer women received prenatal support from Planned Parenthood last year than the year prior, or a drop of almost 25 percent. The number of women getting adoption referrals also declined — from a low 977 in 2009 to 841 last year, or a decline of 14 percent.

Examined another way Planned Parenthood does 391 abortions for every adoption referral it makes and almost 11 abortions for every woman it helps with prenatal care.

The trend at Planned Parenthood has been for its non-abortion services for pregnant women to decline while its number of abortions performed has increased. The 2009 annual report Planned Parenthood released earlier this year showed a 25 percent drop in prenatal care clients and a whopping 59 percent decline in adoption referrals from the 2,405 adoption referrals in 2008.

Planned Parenthood’s own records now show 5,364,540 surgical and medical abortions done at Planned Parenthood centers from 1970 through the end of 2009.

Fonte:  http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/25/half-of-young-adults-dont-know-planned-parenthood-does-abortions/

__

Arizona passes law restricting abortion

Enquanto no Brasil procura-se “legalizar” o aborto via Judiciário, nos EUA há mostras de uma tendência contrária à amplitude do aborto em nível nacional, através de legislação. Inclusive, reconhecendo que o feto pode sentir dor.

__

April 13, 2012

LAS VEGAS — Following a national trend of new get-tough abortion legislation, Arizona has passed a law that severely restricts the procedure, banning most abortions after 20 weeks — setting the stage for another showdown between social conservatives and women’s rights groups.

With GOP Gov. Jan Brewer’s signature on the Republication-sponsored legislation, Arizona took a stand on an issue that could become fodder during this year’s presidential campaign. Proponents say the law protects fetuses, which they say can feel pain after five months of development.

Fonte: http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/13/nation/la-na-arizona-abortion-20120414
__

Abortion, Contraception Legislative Battles Escalate In States

Nos EUA há uma forte tendência legislativa para limitar o aborto, conforme pode ser lido no noticiário daquele país. No Brasil, o seu governo eleito com o compromisso de não promover o aborto, está novamente IMPONDO o aborto a seu povo, que em sua grande maioria é contra esta prática. Democracia?
__

Mar 21, 2012

All across the country, state legislatures and governors are grappling with bills designed to limit access to abortion or contraception. In Virginia, it’s affecting a U.S. Senate race.

Bloomberg: Contraception Fight Shapes Virginia Race For U.S. Senate

Former U.S. Senator George Allen, a Virginia Republican who is running to return to the chamber, backs the “personhood” measure and would like to make it federal law. … The race between Allen and Democrat Tim Kaine is among the most watched in the country, pitting two former Virginia governors in a contest for an open seat with majority control of the U.S. Senate at stake. Democrats see proposals to curb reproductive rights as a way to drive female independent voters back to the party in the November election (Przybyla, 3/20).

Reuters: Utah Governor Signs Law Mandating 72-Hour Wait For Abortion

Utah’s Republican governor signed a law extending a required waiting period for women seeking an abortion to 72 hours on Tuesday, even though a similar requirement in South Dakota has been blocked in court, a spokeswoman said. … The state currently requires a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion (Dobuzinskis, 3/20).

The Associated Press: Idaho Lawmaker Sparks Anger With Abortion Comments

A Republican Idaho lawmaker’s suggestion on the Senate floor that a doctor should ask a woman who says she was raped if the pregnancy could have been “caused by normal relations in a marriage” brought a rebuke from another legislator who said it’s insensitive and suggests women may lie to get an abortion. Sen. Chuck Winder of Boise, the Senate assistant majority leader, was speaking during closing testimony on a bill to require a woman to get an ultrasound before an abortion, when he addressed foes of the legislation who said it provided no exemptions for medical emergencies — or in cases of rape or incest (Miller, 3/20).

The Associated Press/(St. Paul) Pioneer Press: Medical Group Asks Walker To Veto Wisconsin Abortion Bill
Wisconsin’s largest medical association asked Gov. Scott Walker on Tuesday, March 20, to veto a bill that would add new requirements for doctors to ensure a woman isn’t forced into an abortion. Walker’s office said the governor is evaluating the bill. The Wisconsin Medical Society’s letter said the bill passed by the Republican-controlled state Legislature this month would infringe on the physician-patient relationship (Rodriguez, 3/20).

Arizona Republic: Arizona Lawmaker Wants To Go Further On Abortion Laws

Arizona has become the national epicenter in recent weeks in the battle over abortion and contraception regulations. … at least one lawmaker doesn’t believe Arizona has yet gone far enough. … The e-mail [from Rep. Terri Proud], which has not been edited, said: “Personally I’d like to make a law that mandates a woman watch an abortion being performed prior to having a ‘surgical procedure'” (Rau, 3/20).

The Associated Press/The Seattle Times: Lawmakers Vow to Push Abortion Insurance Bill

Democratic lawmakers said Tuesday that they will try to pass a bill during the current special session requiring insurers who cover maternity care — which Washington insurers are mandated to provide — to also pay for abortions. The measure passed out of the House during the legislative session that ended March 8 but failed in the Senate after a dramatic attempt to bring it to the floor during a Republican budget coup (Kaminsky, 3/20).

The Dallas Morning News: Women Get Into Perry’s Facebook

Rick Perry’s presidential campaign Facebook page … has been inundated by angry women who are making pointed comments regarding his efforts to defund Planned Parenthood. A woman who identifies herself as a gynecologist is referring questions to him, since (I am sure this is sarcastic) he knows more about reproductive health than she does (Hoppe, 3/20).

This is part of Kaiser Health News’ Daily Report – a summary of health policy coverage from more than 300 news organizations. The full summary of the day’s news can be found here and you can sign up for e-mail subscriptions to the Daily Report here. In addition, our staff of reporters and correspondents file original stories each day, which you can find on our home page.

Fonte: http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/daily-reports/2012/march/21/states-abortion-contraception.aspx
__

19 Facts About Abortion In America That Should Make You Very Sick

__

The American Dream
February 11, 2012

Every single day, a silent horror kills more Americans than were killed on 9/11. Every single year, this silent horror kills about as many Americans as have been killed on all the battlefields in all of the wars in U.S. history combined. This silent horror is called abortion, and it is a national disgrace. Overall, more than 50 million babies have been slaughtered since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. We have become a nation with so little regard for human life that nobody even really talks that much about this issue anymore. But the truth is that it is at the very core of what is wrong with America. As I have written about previously, we have become a nation that is obsessed with population control, and we have been exporting this sick philosophy all over the globe. As you read this, there are workers from U.S. organizations and UN organizations (both funded by your tax dollars) that are on the other side of the world setting up “family planning services” for women in poor countries. The goal of these organizations (just like we see in the United States) is to reduce the number of poor children being born. The sick control freaks that run things have decided that overpopulation is a plague that must be eradicated and that mass murder is the answer. Unfortunately, there are very few people that are still willing to speak out strongly against abortion in America. So the carnage is just going to go on and on and on.

What will the history books say about a nation that murdered 50 million of its own babies?

The following are 19 facts about abortion in America that should make you very sick….

1 – There have been more than 53 million abortions performed in the United States since Roe v. Wade was decided back in 1973.

2 – When you total up all forms of abortion, including those caused by the abortion drug RU 486, the grand total comes to more than a million abortions performed in the United States every single year.

3 – The number of American babies killed by abortion each year is roughly equal to the number of U.S. military deaths that have occurred in all of the wars that the United States has ever been involved in combined.

4 – Approximately 3,000 Americans lost their lives as a result of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. Every single day, more than 3,000 American babies are killed by abortion.

5 – It has been reported that a staggering 41 percent of all New York City pregnancies end in abortion.

6 – According to Pastor Clenard Childress, approximately 52 percent of all African-American pregnancies now end in abortion.

7One very shocking study found that 86 percent of all abortions are done for the sake of convenience.

8 – According to the Guttmacher Institute, the average cost of a first trimester abortion at the ten week mark is $451.

9 – The average cost of a vaginal birth with no complications in the United Statesis now over $9,000.

10 – A Department of Homeland Security report that was released in January 2012 says that if you are “anti-abortion”, you are a potential terrorist. Unfortunately, there have also been other government reports that have also identified “anti-abortion” protesters as potential threats.

11 – A while back one Philadelphia abortionist was charged with killing seven babies that were born alive, but witnesses claim that he actually slaughtered hundreds “of living, breathing newborn children by severing their spinal cords or slitting their necks.”

12 – Some abortion clinics have been caught selling aborted baby parts to medical researchers.

13 – Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger once said the following….

“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

14 – In a 1922 book entitled “Woman, Morality, and Birth Control”, Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger wrote the following….

“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”

15 – Planned Parenthood performs more than 300,000 abortions every single year.

16 – Planned Parenthood specifically targets the poor. A staggering 72 percentof Planned Parenthood’s “customers” have incomes that are either equal to or beneath 150 percent of the federal poverty level.

17 – There are 30 Planned Parenthood executives that make more than $200,000 a year. A few of them make more than $300,000 a year.

18 – Planned Parenthood received more than 487 million dollars from the federal government during 2010.

19 – The following is one description of the five steps of a partial birth abortion….

1) Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby’s legs with forceps.

2) The baby’s leg is pulled out into the birth canal.

3) The abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head.

4) The abortionist jams scissors into the baby’s skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the skull.

5) The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child’s brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.

How can we murder our own children?

Unfortunately, there are organizations out there such as Planned Parenthood that spend millions upon millions of dollars trying to convince the American people that abortion is okay. Just check out this jaw dropping propaganda video.

And every single year, politicians from both political parties continue to vote to give hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to Planned Parenthood.

Our politicians talk about how we need to spread our values to the rest of the world, but what kind of “values” do we really have when we have such little respect for human life?

There is no hope for America as long as this mass slaughter of innocent children continues to go on all across the United States.

Please share this list of facts about abortion in America with as many people as you can. We need to wake the American people up. Most Americans spend their days in an entertainment-induced haze and take very little time to think about the issues that really matter.

And if you think that the issue of abortion does not matter, then you are dead wrong.

The mass murder of more than 50 million American babies is something that cannot be ignored.

Their blood is crying out to us from the ground where it has been spilled.

Yes, this article is going to make a lot of people uncomfortable, but it is the truth.

Isn’t it time that someone started telling the truth in America?

Fonte: http://www.infowars.com/19-facts-about-abortion-in-america-that-should-make-you-very-sick/

The right to conscientious objection reaffirmed by the Council of Europe

_

“No person, hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to an abortion, the performance of a human miscarriage, or euthanasia or any act which could cause the death of a human foetus or embryo, for any reason,”

_

Last evening, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) rejected 56 to 51 British MP Christine McCafferty`s proposal to “regulate” conscientious objection to abortion in European countries.

Titled “Women’s access to lawful medical care: the problem of unregulated use of conscientious objection,” the McCafferty Report was the latest effort of the pro-abortion lobby to establish abortion as a universal human right and a “health treatment” that requires compulsory participation of hospitals and doctors.

Re-titled “The right to conscientious objection in lawful medical care,” Resolution 1763 reaffirmed instead their right to refuse: “No person, hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to an abortion, the performance of a human miscarriage, or euthanasia or any act which could cause the death of a human foetus or embryo, for any reason,” the text reads.

The Resolution’s second paragraph affirms the universal right to freedom of conscience, saying, “The Parliamentary Assembly emphasizes the need to affirm the right of conscientious objection together with the responsibility of the state to ensure that patients are able to access lawful medical care in a timely manner.”

Resolution 1763 also affirm that “in the vast majority of Council of Europe member states, the practice of conscientious objection is adequately regulated” and invites the 47 member states to “develop comprehensive and clear regulations” that protect the right to freedom of conscience.

A series of amendments proposed by parliamentarians Ronan Mullen (Ireland) and Luca Volonte (Italy) were approved by the majority and reversed the direction of the report, forcing McCafferty and other pro-abortion Assembly members to vote against their own original report.

http://federation-pro-europa-christiana.org/wordpress/?p=1389

***

Historic Turnaround in Europe Preserves Conscience Rights

By Terrence McKeegan, J.D.

STRASBOURG, October 14 (C-FAM) A dramatic legislative reversal reaffirmed the conscience rights of medical professionals and institutions in Europe last week.

The Council of Europe’s legislature considered a resolution calling for onerous restrictions on conscientious objection, including stripping protections for doctors who object to performing abortions.

Led by two politicians from Italy and Ireland, a coalition of legislators secured the passage of 29 amendments that transformed the resolution into one that upheld universally recognized rights to freedom of conscience.

The original resolution, known as the McCafferty report, sought to punish medical professionals for refusing to perform procedures against their conscience.  It even called for a new registry of conscientious objectors.

Christian McCafferty, a British politician and main author of the original resolution, said during deliberations that she sought to force private and religious hospitals and clinics to perform abortions.

A committee voted for McCafferty’s original resolution, but was overruled by the final legislative vote.  Most observers assumed the draft resolution would pass in substantially the same form, and the final resolution shocked nearly everyone, especially McCafferty.  She ended up voting against her own resolution.

The adopted resolution says that no “hospital, institution or person may be subject to pressures, or be held liable or suffer discrimination of any kind for refusing to perform, allow or assist an abortion…”

“This resolution will have a real impact on case law of the European Court of Human Rights,” said Gregor Puppinck, Director of the European Centre for Law and Justice. He said the court often quotes resolutions of the European legislature as a reflection of opinion in the continent’s broader society.

Puppinck told the Friday Fax that the legislature often holds votes on the most contentious issues on Thursday evening or Friday.   As more conservative members tend to live further than liberals from the Strasbourg meeting site, travel arrangements often make it more difficult for them to stay for votes late in the week.  Puppinck credited much of the success of the final resolution to efforts to keep the conservative members in the room for the Thursday evening vote.

The amendments’ backers widely credited the final result to the leadership of Sen. Luca Volonte of Italy, chairman of the European People’s Party, and Sen. Ronan Mullen of Ireland.

“Mrs. McCafferty and her supporters should ask themselves why so many healthcare professionals object to being involved in abortions in the first place,” said a press release from Mullen. “It’s because they regard abortion itself as a breach of human rights, and not part of responsible medical treatment.”

Several binding international agreements guarantee the right to conscientious objection, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

A number of medical associations, including the French National Medical Council, condemned the original McCafferty report.  Prominent figures, including a former judge of the European Court of Human Rights and a former professional conduct chairman of the United Kingdom’s chief medical council, spoke out against the original resolution at an event held the day before the vote.

__

 

Aborto: Dinheiro de Sangue. Por que sua “legalização” é tão importante no Brasil?

__

Este vídeo mostra os enormes lucros proporcionados pela promoção do aborto e, portanto, quais as razões de tantos interesses ocultados, especialmente estrangeiros, quererem sua legalização: nada tem a ver com a alardeada “saúde pública”, mas com investimento em uma indústria genocida altamente lucrativa e em expansão a qualquer preço, que precisa primeiro —  para continuar em crescimento —  impedir a punição dos profissionais da saúde e dos hospitais que se envolverem com suas atividades.  Aqui no Brasil, o partido político formalmente comprometido com estes interesses é o PT – Partido dos Trabalhadores – de Lula e Dilma, visto que o Estatuto deste partido manda seus filiados aceitarem e defenderem a “legalização” do aborto no Brasil.  Vale tudo para os mal informados eleitores, em especial, mentir, quando por exemplo, é utilizada a batida retórica: “pessoalmente sou contra o aborto, mas devo considerar o aborto uma questão de saúde pública”.  Tanto Lula quanto Dilma usaram deste expediente e enganaram muitos de seus eleitores.  Assista este e também o outro vídeo indicado no link ao final.  Se quiser aprofundar o assunto, leia os artigos e capítulos publicados em meios de interesse público, que indicamos junto.

Celso Galli Coimbra
OABRS 11352

Mais informações sobre aborto:

Vídeo e textos publicados sobre a legalização do aborto no Brasil

Aborto: debate na TV Justiça, no STF, em junho de 2007

__

UN: discussion about maternal health

__

While world leaders are meeting at the United Nations this week to discuss progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), Chris Smith, member of the American Congress, explains in the Washington Post that a strong reduction in infant and maternal mortality remains very uncertain if the Obama administration “either directly or covertly” integrates abortion into the final document.

He recalls that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “has said publicly that she believes access to abortion is part of maternal and reproductive health, thinking that runs contrary to the understanding of the more than 125 UN member states that prohibit or otherwise restrict abortion in their sovereign laws and constitutions.” For Chris Smith, reducing maternal and infant mortality are the two most realisable objectives today, but they would be compromised if the UN summit is influenced by the demands of pro-abortion activists.

To achieve Millennium Development Goal No. 4, which is to reduce infant mortality rates by two thirds from 1990 figures, Chris Smith explains that numerous cost-effective actions must be expanded, notably “treatment and prevention of disease, as well as greater access to adequate food and nutrition, clean water, childhood vaccinations, oral rehydration packets, antibiotics, and drugs to inhibit mother-to-child HIV transmission”. He adds that there is an immediate need for care of unborn children to optimise their health before and after birth, good health starting in the womb. Chris Smith recalls that abortion is by definition the death of a child and as such compromises Goal No. 4. In addition, it is heavy in negative consequences for the health of women, affecting them emotionally and psychologically.

Goal No. 5, the reduction in maternal mortality by 75% from 1990 figures, can be achieved by “skilled attendance at birth, treatment to stop hemorrhages, access to safe blood, emergency obstetric care, antibiotics, repair of fistulas, adequate nutrition, and pre- and post-natal care”.

Chris Smith quotes a study* that appeared in April 2010 in the British journal The Lancet and was financed by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which reports a global decline of 35% in maternal mortality, which went from 526 300 in 1980 to 342 900 in 2008. These figures confirm those of the World Health Organisation report entitled “Trends in maternal mortality” made public on 15 September 2010. Chris Smith stresses that “contrary to prevailing myths, the study underscored that many nations that have laws prohibiting abortion also have some of the lowest maternal mortality rates in the world – Ireland, Chile and Poland among them”. LifeNews adds The Lancet researchers were surprised to discover that three of the richest countries of the world had rising figures of maternal mortality: the United States, Canada and Norway, which have liberal laws on abortion.

* The Lancet, “Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980—2008: a systematic analysis of progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5”, Margaret C Hogan MSc, Kyle J Foreman AB, Mohsen Naghavi MD, Stephanie Y Ahn BA, Mengru Wang BA, Susanna M Makela BS, Prof Alan D Lopez PhD, Prof Rafael Lozano MD, Prof Christopher JL Murray MD

Washington Post (Chris Smith) 19/09/10 – Medical News Today 21/09/10 – Lifenews (Steven Ertelt) 15/09/10 – Nouvelobs.com 15/09/10

__

Council of Europe: conscientious objection under threat

__

At the request of members of The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ) has prepared a memorandum examining the principal positions of the proposed resolution entitled “Women’s Access to Lawful Medical Care: The Problem of Unregulated Use of Conscientious Objection” presented by Christine McCafferty (see Press review of 21-25/06/10). This memorandum warned the members of the PACE that several recommendations of this resolution seriously violated doctors’ freedom of conscience as it is enshrined in European and international law.

Among other unacceptable positions, the proposed resolution asks the European member states:

to “oblige the healthcare provider to provide the desired treatment to which the patient is legally entitled [i.e. abortion] despite his or her conscientious objection“;
– to oblige the health professional to prove that “their objection is grounded in their conscience or religious beliefs and that the refusal is done in good faith“;
– to deprive “public/ state institutions such as public hospitals and clinics as a whole” of the “guarantee of the right to conscientious objection”;
– to create a “registry of conscientious objectors“;
– to create “an effective complaint mechanism” against conscientious objectors.

The ECLJ memorandum recalls and describes the main aspects of health professionals’ right to conscientious objection, based on a vast research of laws protecting their conscience in the 47 member states of the Council of Europe and the 50 states of the United States of America. Among others, it appears clearly in these legislations that the right to conscientious objection is guaranteed in European and international laws and by international laws of professional ethics, that it applies equally to individuals and institutions and that it is well regulated in the majority of democratic societies.

__

Argumentos contra el aborto: Manifiesto De Más De 300 Profesores Universitarios De Granada Contra El Aborto

Aborto: debate na TV Justiça, no STF, em junho de 2007

__

Argumentos contra el aborto – Document Transcript

  1. Argumentos contra el aborto Los 10 principales argumentos contra el aborto y topicos pro aborto Despreciar la vida con el criterio de un mero plazo de tiempo es inhumano. Pero no es más humano suponer que otras circunstancias hacen indigna la vida. Juan Cruz Cruz / Santiago Mata TÓPICO I y argumento contra el aborto I La mujer es dueña de su cuerpo El feto se considera asimilable al organismo materno y eliminable como un trozo sobrante. Parece que tener un hijo concerniese exclusivamente a la mujer. La realidad es que el óvulo fecundado o cigoto posee, reunidos en parejas, 23 cromosomas de la madre y 23 del padre. El ser fecundado es un individuo irrepetible, dotado de una estructura genética única, programada por el ADN, distinta a la de la madre. Nadie se ha dado a sí mismo ni el cuerpo ni ningún componente de su ser. El padre y la madre son dueños del acto sexual, pero no del fruto de ese acto. Aunque jurídicamente la mujer sea dueña de su cuerpo, éste también es un núcleo de responsabilidades sociales, por ser el lugar en el que ha comenzado una nueva vida. Y esta vida nueva plantea derechos y responsabilidades. La responsabilidad que contraen la mujer y el hombre al engendrar no conlleva un derecho de condenar a muerte al hijo. El nuevo ser depende de condiciones externas, ambientales y maternales; pero eso no añade nada a su ser sustancial, ni lo define como parte del organismo materno. Tampoco después de nacer puede un niño vivir independientemente de la madre o de los cuidados apropiados. No es independiente hasta la madurez. A este niño, ¿cabría negarle el derecho a seguir viviendo? TÓPICO 2 y argumento contra el aborto 2 El embrión es una masa sin actividad ni personalidad Lo que crece en el vientre de la mujer no es un ser humano. A lo sumo el embrión es un proyecto, una posibilidad, un dibujo remoto de una persona. Carece de identidad orgánica y genética. No es viable. a) Identidad genética. Los conocimientos biológicos confirman que en los 46 cromosomas del óvulo fecundado están ya inscritas todas las características del individuo: sexo, talla, color de los ojos y de los cabellos, forma del rostro y hasta temperamento.
  2. El embrión muestra una enérgica individualidad en su funcionamiento. Al sexto día, con sólo milímetro y medio de longitud, comienza a estimular, con un mensaje químico, el cuerpo amarillo del ovario materno para suspender el ciclo menstrual y no ser expulsado. Es una primera afirmación de autonomía. Al decimoctavo día de vida (cuatro después de la falta de la regla) empieza a formarse el cerebro. Su minúsculo corazón late desde el día 21. A los 45 días después de la falta de la regla, el embrión mide 17 milímetros de largo. Tiene manos, pies, cabeza, órganos y cerebro, pudiéndose registrar ondulaciones en el electroencefalograma. A los 60 días de la falta, funciona ya su sistema nervioso. Después de la concepción, no hay un paso del no ser al ser humano. La vida humana está siempre en despliegue, y sólo relativamente pueden distinguirse fases en ella. b) La viabilidad es también relativa: hace cuarenta años un niño era viable a las 30 semanas. Hoy puede serlo a las 20 semanas; y sobran indicios para pensar que en breve lo pueda ser a las 12 o 15 semanas. ¿El embrión es sólo humano si tiene actividad eléctrica cerebral? Es cierto que el cerebro es el sustrato biológico necesario de toda actividad intelectual humana. Cuando la actividad cerebral falta, se obtiene un electroencefalograma plano. Puesto que el electroencefalograma de un embrión es plano hasta la octava semana del embarazo, ¿significa eso que no es vida humana? Aparecen aquí dos nuevas cuestiones: en primer lugar, el problema decisivo de saber si lo que otorga carácter humano al embrión es primariamente el funcionamiento del cerebro. En segundo lugar, si pueden equipararse las dos situaciones aludidas de no funcionamiento del cerebro: la actividad que no ha aparecido todavía y la que ya ha desaparecido. a) El embrión tiene carácter humano desde el momento de la fecundación. El dato básico de toda la Biología moderna es la célula, o sea, la más pequeña cantidad de materia que reúne todos los requisitos de un sistema viviente. El hombre es un ser pluricelular, cuya individualidad biológica se constituye en la célula originaria, que surge al fusionarse la célula reproductora masculina con la femenina. A los 43 días de la fecundación se detecta ya una actividad eléctrica cerebral subcortical; a los 90 días aparece la actividad eléctrica cortical. Este desarrollo cortical del cerebro es a su vez muy lento. Ni siquiera el niño recién nacido posee la plenitud del despliegue cortical; es más, puede decirse que el recién nacido se comporta como un ser falto de corteza cerebral, ya que no ha culminado en su sistema nervioso ni la mielinización ni la formación neuronal. Sólo hacia los seis años queda acabado anatómicamente el cerebro. Si el criterio diferenciador de la vida humana fuese la existencia y funcionamiento, más o menos perfectos, del cerebro, entonces ni el recién nacido estaría en situación de ser considerado como pleno ser humano. Negar al embrión sin actividad cerebral la condición de hombre es tan falaz como negar la condición humana al adolescente porque todavía no es adulto.
  3. b) Por lo dicho se comprende que no pueden equipararse las dos situaciones de no funcionamiento del cerebro: la del que no funciona todavía y la del que no funciona ya. En el caso de la muerte de un individuo es síntoma de un proceso irreversible. En cambio, en el comienzo de la vida embrionaria, es síntoma de una plenitud de potencialidades, rebosantes de vida. ¿Puede decirse que el feto no tiene ni alma ni personalidad? No puede decirse que la inteligencia racional aparezca en el niño una vez acaecido el nacimiento. Los psicólogos explican que las funciones específicas de la inteligencia, como intuir, razonar y abstraer, llegan a su plenitud en la adolescencia: ni siquiera están acabadas en la infancia. El tópico confunde la posesión de inteligencia con su ejercicio actual. La inteligencia racional, como facultad espiritual cognoscitiva del hombre, se despliega en la medida en que el sustrato orgánico o cerebro lo permite. Pero puede permitirlo sólo porque está ya animado. El alma es el principio espiritual por el que el embrión humano desarrolla una corporalidad precisa y un cerebro complicadísimo que permite que se ejercite una de las funciones anímicas: el entender racional. Incluso los autores que estuvieron a favor de que el alma racional no aparecía en el feto desde el principio, no por ello dejaban de considerar el aborto como un delito contra la vida humana que, según su opinión, era persona en potencia. Porque aunque no tuviésemos certeza del momento exacto en que el alma humana entra en el cuerpo, no podemos matar un feto si solo es probablemente no humano, de la misma manera que no enterramos a un adulto que sólo está probablemente muerto. TÓPICO 3 y argumento contra el aborto 3 Una cosa es el ‘aborto’ y otra la ‘interrupción voluntaria del embarazo’ Con la llamada ley del aborto sólo se presupone la interrupcion del embarazo; muchas personas que serían contrarias a un aborto avanzado, sin embargo son partidarias de la interrupción voluntaria del embarazo en sus comienzos. El tópico supone que la falta de regla en la mujer por causa de embarazo puede considerarse como algo anormal que ha de atajarse en cualquier momento; por ejemplo, impidiendo enseguida la anidación del óvulo fecundado, mediante los llamados anticonceptivos orales, muchos de los cuales tienen efectos abortivos sobre el óvulo fecundado, efectos que son suavizados con expresiones como “control de la ovulación, reposo ovárico, regulador del ciclo”, etc. De hecho estos anticonceptivos orales actúan primero sobre el hipotálamo, por cuyo
  4. mecanismo bloquean la ovulación; después sobre las trompas: bien con estrógenos que, al aumentar la movilidad, hacen que el óvulo fecundado llegue al útero antes de estar preparado para la anidación; bien con gestágenos que, al disminuir la movilidad, hacen que el óvulo llegue tarde al útero, cuando ya ha muerto por falta de nutrición. Asimismo el anticonceptivo actúa sobre la mucosa del útero, impidiendo que el endometrio quede dispuesto para recibir y anidar el óvulo fecundado. La interrupción del embarazo, por contraceptivos orales en su primera fase, o por métodos más violentos en fases avanzadas, es siempre un aborto; o sea, un atentado que pone fin a una vida humana inocente. Al contrario de las cosas que se interrumpen, no hay modo de volverla a poner en marcha. Tópico 4 y argumento contra el aborto 4 Legalizar no es aprobar La ley civil no coincide con la ley moral. Según este tópico, una ley del aborto no intenta promover abortos, sino regular su práctica sanitaria fiable. La ley ha de procurar el remedio para una situación, sin entrar en indicaciones éticas. Los abortistas confunden realidad con situación de hecho. Esta última es la opresión de un hombre en un campo de concentración, en una explotación minera antihumana, en un aborto provocado. Realidad, en cambio, es el ser del hombre, cuyo desarrollo hay que favorecer. Y la ley no está para mantener situaciones de hecho, sino para lograr que el hombre alcance lo que potencialmente es, protegiéndolo y estimulándolo. Si la función de la ley fuese consagrar las situaciones de hecho, tendría que ser así en todos los casos, y no sólo en el del aborto. Es cierto que la despenalización (y legalización) no convierte la acción criminal en buena. Pero las estadísticas muestran que, en la práctica, la despenalización del aborto ha implicado su aumento. Este tópico se mezcla en los siguientes argumentos: Bien está que la criatura nazca cuando es querida previamente por sus progenitores, pero si no la desean o no la han planificado, es una amenaza al equilibrio amoroso de la pareja. Este argumento responde a un enfoque individualista, propio de capitalistas y liberales. El mayor número de abortos se produce motivado por la afirmación de la libertad sin responsabilidades, o sea, por razones de conveniencia y bienestar. Hay dos tesis capitales del invidualismo. Primera: que todos los hombres son buenos, libres
  5. e iguales por naturaleza, con derecho a esa forma de felicidad que se llama amor, buscado libremente. Segunda: que, por la bondad natural del hombre, las tendencias amorosas están en nosotros para que las sigamos, sin considerar sus consecuencias. El individualismo ignora que el verdadero ámbito interpersonal es la unión moral de sujetos que realizan un fin conocido y querido por ellos: su bien común. En un ámbito interpersonal con unidad de fin y unidad de voluntades, las relaciones entre personas no están determinadas puramente por los individuos sino por el bien común. Aquí se cumple el adagio: el todo es más que la suma de sus partes. Y es así porque nosotros no nos hemos hecho sexualmente complementarios; ni físicamente aptos para procrear. Asumimos el proyecto de fecundidad en el hijo. Los esposos no son rivales, ni hace cada uno su negocio. Hay un consorcio de vida, una comunidad donde lo primario no es el acuerdo de voluntades, sino el fin por el que se unen libremente. Una señal de la especificidad racional del hombre es que puede prever las consecuencias de sus actos y responder de ellos. Su conducta sexual no es una excepción. Traer una nueva vida es justamente uno de los fines del amor conyugal. ¿Lo engendrado es humano sólo si los padres lo aceptan? Este argumento supone que la vida humana carece de valor intrínseco, independiente de lo que hacen los otros para hacerla verdaderamente humana. Responde al enfoque colectivista, propio del socialismo marxista y del fascismo nazi. El colectivismo subraya algo cierto: que el hombre vive en sociedad. Su inteligencia, su voluntad y sus sentimientos no podrían desplegarse adecuadamente sin la presencia de los demás. La sociedad no es una simple suma de individuos, sino la suma de esos individuos, más unas relaciones originales que tienen leyes propias. Pero esas relaciones no son el hombre, sino que son del hombre, cuyo ser es más original y profundo que las relaciones que lo ligan a los demás. La persona posee anterioridad natural respecto de la sociedad, de tal manera que sus derechos no le vienen del medio social en que vive, sino de su condición sustantiva de ser persona. Tópico 5 y argumento contra el aborto 5 La ley que penaliza el aborto es represiva, en cambio la que lo liberaliza es democrática Es de aplaudir la reforma de leyes represivas cuando éstas se dirigen a limitar o impedir la libertad debida del individuo; pero no cuando coartan las acciones de una libertad que atenta contra el derecho de otra persona, en nuestro caso el niño no nacido. La madre sabe que la ley del aborto ha sido represiva sólo para el hijo que ha llevado en sus entrañas.
  6. ¿Exigen la democracia y el pluralismo ideológico despenalizar el aborto? De ningún modo es aceptable que la mayoría pueda decidir acerca de lo que es o no conforme con el bien natural del hombre. En tal caso desembocaríamos una vez más en la tiranía de la mayoría. En el aborto, nadie ha pedido su opinión al que está por nacer a propósito de si quiere o no nacer, ni se le podría pedir. Lo único que aquí cuenta es la naturaleza del embrión, cuya tendencia fundamental es a seguir siendo. No se trata de una materia opinable, sino del hecho cierto, atestiguado por la ciencia, de una vida humana, que no espera para ser real el acuerdo en las opiniones de los mayores. Quien debe ser respetada es toda persona, no toda opinión, puesto que hay opiniones falsas como la que sostuviera la licitud del aborto. No se puede invocar la libertad de opinión y la democracia para atentar contra los derechos de los demás, especialmente contra el derecho a la vida de un inocente. El tópico olvida que análogamente a como la libertad cuenta con condicionamientos naturales, también tiene en la conformidad con la ley moral su meta: se trata de un vínculo que no es establecido por la propia libertad. Y el verdadero progreso está en que la actividad del hombre y las leyes sociales se conformen cada vez más a esa meta moral. Jean Toulat, autor de Le Droit de naitre, afirmaba en Le Monde: “la actitud de progreso consiste en promover una real libertad de no abortar. Hay que tomar medidas de orden familiar y social para favorecer la protección de la vida. Estas medidas ayudarían a que la mujer evitara esta prueba del aborto”. Tópico 6 y argumento contra el aborto 6 Es necesario impedirlos abortos clandestinos Se empieza acudiendo a casos dramáticos, confesiones de mujeres que han sufrido un aborto clandestino en pésimas condiciones sanitarias; a embarazadas que han muerto tras un aborto clandestino, etc. La verdad es que como, una vez aprobado, no todas las mujeres pueden ampararse en la ley, se siguen produciendo abortos clandestinos. Ello lleva a liberalizar en mayor grado la ley, para que no exista discriminación y así consagrar el aborto a petición. Christopher Tietze, experto en estadísticas sanitarias, asegura que es dudoso que en los países que aceptan legalmente el aborto haya descendido el número de abortos clandestinos. A la misma conclusión llegan los doctores Hilgers y Shearin.
  7. Y es que muchas personas, para evitar la publicidad y oficialidad, los papeleos, las certificaciones, la inspección pública, con el riesgo de divulgación que acarrean, se inclinan por la clandestinidad del aborto. Sólo cuando a la sociedad se le haya extirpado la conciencia que dicta la inmoralidad de un crimen acabarán las mujeres sometiéndose al aborto en una institución pública, oficial. Tópico 7 y argumento contra el aborto 7 No se debe nacer para el hambre y la miseria. Es injusto que sólo puedan abortar los ricos Es el argumento más hipócrita que se conoce: Podrías vivir, pero como quizá te falte cariño, medios de vida, etc., te mato. El aborto permitido no va a nivelar las diferencias económicas, sino que va a extender un mal; y va a gravar las conciencias de las madres con una acción que ellas reconocen como injusta. Lo que se debe buscar no es facilitar tal acción, sino asistir en los momentos difíciles a las madres, evitándoles que sean víctimas de su debilidad. Los médicos que practican abortos salen siempre favorecidos económicamente. Un médico abortista neoyorkino declaró en la revista Medical Economics: “En lo económico, después de tantos años de lucha, no puedo dejar de sentirme un poco como el tejano que cavó buscando agua y dio con petróleo”. Con la legalización del aborto, se pretende que esta matanza la pague el contribuyente español, incluido el que rechace el aborto por razones científicas o incluso morales. Si la sociedad no debe pagar este precio de sangre, ha de proporcionar a las madres que pasan por situaciones difíciles otras soluciones que no sean la del aborto. Y por lo que hace a los pobres, el Estado debe elevar su nivel de vida y hacer que su existencia sea cada vez más digna. No se elimina la pobreza eliminando a los inocentes o matando a los pobres. Este milagroso remedio, aplicado a cualquier territorio tiene indiscutiblemente un efecto boomerang que acaba por golpear al país que lo aplica. Muchas naciones que practican el
  8. aborto (La peste blanca, según el título del conocido libro de Pierre Chaunu y Georges Suffert) están por debajo del crecimiento cero, demográfico y económico. Se encuentran en la vía del autogenocidio. TÓPICO 8 y argumento contra el aborto 8 Exigencias de la salud física y psíquica de la madre Este tópico pretende justificar el llamado aborto terapéutico, destinado a eliminar al feto por razones médicas o terapéuticas: el peligro para la salud física o psíquica de la mujer. a) Salud física de la madre. En los rarísimos casos en que se verifican las dos condiciones de peligro de muerte inminente y de seguro agravamiento del estado de la madre en el transcurso del embarazo —cardiopatías graves o formas nefropáticas crónicas—, la medicina está hoy en condiciones de salvar tanto la vida del niño como la de la madre. Hasta el punto de que es fácil hacer una intervención quirúrgica de corazón o recurrir al empleo del riñón artificial durante la gestación, sin perjuicio para nadie. Cada vez son más imaginarios —o poco reales—, los casos en que hubiera que salvar una de las dos vidas a costa de la otra. Teóricamente sería lícito pretender la curación de la madre, aun cuando de modo indirecto y no pretendido se cause perjuicio al feto. El aborto es indirecto cuando la muerte del feto se sigue como efecto, quizá necesario pero no principal, de un medicamento o de un acto médico (como la extirpación de un cáncer de útero) para curar una enfermedad de la madre. Aquí resultan dos efectos de una misma acción: uno bueno, directo y principal (salud de la madre), otro malo y secundario (muerte del feto). De estos dos efectos, uno es el buscado y otro el que puede seguirse de un modo incidental. b) Salud psíquica. La alteración nerviosa puede estar causada o bien por la futura existencia del niño —no deseada o temida desde el comienzo del embarazo—, o bien por la gestación en sí misma, como fenómeno fisiológico. En el caso del niño no deseado, la pérdida de la serenidad psicológica podría servir como argumento para quitar la existencia a todo hombre adulto que alterase a otro. En el caso de que la gravidez fisiológica provoque alteraciones nerviosas (esquizofrenia y psicosis
  9. maníacodepresivas), los neurólogos y psiquiatras más autorizados afirman que “no conocemos, directamente por nuestra experiencia ni a través de escritos, casos de este tipo que exijan como única solución el aborto”. Así se expresa el neurólogo holandés J. J. Patrick. La dificultad estriba en admitir sencillamente que el feto es una vida humana, por la que de alguna manera merece la pena aceptar algún riesgo medido, algún sacrificio no mortal por parte de la madre. La mujer, después del aborto, lejos de conquistar la serenidad psíquica, se ve sometida normalmente a un sentimiento de culpa y a una desorganización psíquica comprensible. “Las probabilidades de trastornos psiquiátricos serios y permanentes (después de un aborto) son del 9% al 59 %”, dice un estudio recogido en el Congreso de la Real Academia de Obstetricia y Ginecología de Inglaterra en 1966. TÓPICO 9 y argumento contra el aborto 9 Hay que evitar el sufrimiento de los hijos con malformaciones genéticas En el fondo de este argumento no hay un sentimiento de piedad, sino un concepto equivocado del hombre, cuyo valor existencial es absoluto, intocable. El hecho de que, como indica Rosalie Craig, nunca una organización de padres de niños retrasados haya favorecido el aborto, indica a las claras que el contacto directo y vivo con estos disminuidos ofrece la experiencia de que se trata de seres humanos, cuyo apego y disfrute de la vida tiene para ellos un valor absoluto. Incide aquí un tópico ya expuesto: el feto no sería ser humano hasta que los padres lo aceptaran; sólo a través de las relaciones que estableciera con la comunidad podría hacerse hombre. Si una mujer, a través de exámenes médicos, sabe que su concebido tiene síndrome de Down, estaría en su derecho para rechazarlo. Un ser inútil —le dirán— es una carga social y nunca llegará a ser hombre. No se le puede imponer a la sociedad el peso de tal ser. Ahora bien, ya vimos que la respuesta a dicho tópico es que el hombre no se reduce a la suma de relaciones que puede guardar con los demás; su esencia profunda reside en su índole espiritual, por la cual podrá ejercer, aunque sea tenuemente, la libertad. Nadie ha podido demostrar que un discapacitado carezca de pensamiento y de libertad, por disminuido que esté su ejercicio.
  10. ¿Nos hemos preguntado qué es un discapacitado para sí mismo? ¿Hemos considerado que para él su existencia, su vida, es lo único que tiene? ¿Qué pensarán los discapacitados físicos—tetrapléjicos, etc.— cuando oyen que lo mejor para ellos es no haber nacido? ¿Dirán que han tenido suerte de nacer porque al ser concebidos no existía todavía una ley que permitiera matarlos? En una carta publicada por el desaparecido diario Ya el 10 de febrero de 1983, se leía: “Soy una chica de 28 años que en el vientre materno sufrió una malformación, por lo que nacería sordomuda… Quisiera hacer patente la gran labor que hicieron mis padres por sacarme adelante y ofrecerme los medios posibles para desarrollarme tanto física como intelectualmente… Puedo decir que he conocido, aprendido y experimentado como la mayoría de las personas, excepto en una cosa, que es el sentido de la audición y del habla normal. Algo que, efectivamente, eché de menos con frecuencia, pero que jamás me quitó la alegría de vivir. También tuve la oportunidad de conocer a muchas personas, hombres y mujeres, que tienen otra deficiencia (ceguera, parálisis, retraso mental…) y viéndolas y hablando con ellas jamás tuve la imbecilidad de pensar que sería mejor para ellos renunciar a su primer derecho fundamental”. ¿Quieren las personas con discapacidades que las maten? La experiencia dice que no. Quienes no dejan vivir a un ser humano al que consideran subnormal estiman que los contenidos de una calidad de vida son superiores a la vida misma. Una vida de escasa calidad no merecería ser vivida. El metro de esa calidad de vida es, para estos salvadores, meramente utilitario, a saber: hay calidad de vida cuando se está en el confort prefabricado (tener coche y electrodomésticos), en el bienestar sobreentendido, en el lujo ofrecido (viajar y gozar ilimitadamente del ocio), en el nivel intelectual de una sociedad consumista. Este es el único patrón por el que se mide y decide qué existencias son dignas o indignas de ser vividas. El sufrimiento que posiblemente padezca un discapacitado en el curso de su desarrollo no lo podemos medir con la vara del sufrimiento de una persona con su total capacidad psíquica desarrollada. Jamás sabremos qué destino puede hacer un disminuido de sus escasas dotaciones. Pero lo cierto es que lo único que para él vale la pena es vivir. Los hijos deficientes y subnormales son, con frecuencia, los más queridos por sus padres, aun cuando antes de nacer hubieran sido no deseados. Si el aborto es un sistema de prevención de la subnormalidad, prevenir los accidentes en carretera exigiría matar a todos los conductores. Si no se justifica la muerte del malformado ya nacido, ¿por qué se va a justificar la muerte del no nacido?
  11. Es un racismo intolerable conceder la existencia sólo a los bien dotados. Ello llevaría análogamente a quitar la vida a los ancianos improductivos y a los enfermos incurables, etc. Eso hizo Hitler, ejecutando primero a los discapacitados, después a los asociales de las prisiones y finalmente a los judíos, considerados racialmente defectuosos. ¿Qué línea racional separa el matar a un no nacido del eliminar a un ser con alguna falta? TÓPICO 10 y argumento contra el aborto 10 Solución en casos de violación Según este tópico, el aborto habría que permitirlo cuando el embarazo haya sido consecuencia de una violación, para evitar que una muchacha indefensa quede marcada por el horror y la vergüenza ante la sociedad. Una vez más, hay que respetar los derechos del viviente humano, sin que ello pueda ser modificado por las circunstancias anormales en que se produjo el embarazo. Tales circunstancias atenúan la gravedad de la acción, pero no la modifican sustancialmente. Con el aborto sólo añade una nueva culpa a la anterior. El niño concebido es aquí inocente; no ha tenido parte ni culpa en la violación. El injusto agresor de la mujer no es el niño, sino el violador. ¿Por qué no matar al violador? ¿Por qué el delito cometido por el padre ha de ser pagado con la vida por el hijo inocente? ¿Dónde hay en el mundo una legislación que sentencie a muerte al hijo de un criminal? Conviene aclarar que el embarazo por violación es raro. Los Willke indican que un estudio llevado a cabo en St. Paul de Minneapolis sobre 3.500 casos de violación, durante un período de diez años, no pudo registrar un solo caso de embarazo. La circunstancia anormal en que una violación se produce impide la concepción. En España, los casos declarados en que se ha abortado bajo este supuesto han pasado de uno por cada 5.000 en 1996 a uno por cada 11.214 en 2007. La angustia de la mujer violada (angustia que la sociedad y la familia tienen la obligación de comprender y dulcificar) no se elimina, sino que se incrementa con el trauma de muerte inhumana del hijo.

The consciousness objection of pharmacists

__

Whereas Italia has just authorised the delivery of RU 486, Benedict XVI, on the occasion of the World Congress of physician international federation held in Poznan (Poland), called the pharmacists to put forward the clause of consciousness against the sale of products which undermine human life. “The pharmacist cannot renounce to the requirements of her/his consciousness in the name of the laws of market, or in the name of certain complaisant legislations“, he stated reminding that the economic saving should be subordinated to the respect of the moral law.

This call was greet with gratitude by the professionals who, in France, are the last ones among the health professionals to which the consciousness objection was refused. However this is a “fundamental human right which, precisely as a right, the civil law must recognise and protect1 as the same time as a duty: “when they [men] are called to collaborate to morally bad actions, they must refuse it2. Particularly as the admission of VTP “in town” places from now the pharmacists in the first line. “One would misunderstand that the pharmacist, now implicated, is the unique health professional to whom we do not recognise such a clause“, declared in 2002 the central council of the College of Pharmacists.

Pursuant to the civil law, abortive products are considered as drugs and can only be delivered by a pharmacist, who must have them in reserve. In case of inventory shortage, he/she must order them, without waiting for the demand. Moreover it is prohibited to the pharmacist to refuse to a consumer the sale of a product or a service, except for legitimate reason. The Court of Cassation pronounced a judgement in 1997 according which “personal convictions do not constitute for the pharmacist, titular of the monopoly of drug sale, a legitimate reason to refuse to sell…” This decision was confirmed by the European Court of Human Rights. In an order of 2nd of October 2001, it concluded that “from the moment the sale of this product is legal, is under medical prescription only and is mandatorily in the pharmacies, the petitioners must not make prevail and impose to others their religious convictions to justify the refusal of selling this product, the manifestation of abovementioned convictions which can be exerted in several manners outside the professional field“. In case of resistance to the law, the French Code of Consumer Law foresees a fine of €1,500 or €3,000 in the event of subsequent offence.

Whereas the physicians, nurses and midwives benefit from legal resort to the consciousness objection, such penalties obviously show a difference of treatment between health professionals.

__

Aborto na Europa – Abortion in Europe

__

The IFP (Institute for Family Policies) drew up a report on abortion in the European Union. In 2007, 1,200,000 abortions were recorded in Europe, the equivalent of an abortion every 25 seconds.

Over the past ten years, 13 million abortions have been carried out in Europe. According to the IFP, this is one of the main causes of population decline in Europe. Spain recorded the highest increase of 126% in ten years. In Germany and Italy, however, the number of abortions has fallen.

Zenit  09/09/9

__

Does Legalizing Abortion Abroad Protect Women’s Healt?

__

Analysis shows that modern medicine, not abortion, holds the key to reducing maternal mortality in the developing world.

Abortion supporters claim that legalization of abortion reduces abortion-related deaths, but the evidence suggests that modern medicine and quality health care — not legal abortion — hold the key to reducing maternal mortality in the developing world.

An analysis of World Health Organization and U.N. documents released today by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Global Outreach (MCCL) shows the impact of improved medical care and legalized abortion on maternal mortality rates in several countries.

Scott Fischbach, executive director of MCCL, presented the findings today in Geneva and called on the World Health Assembly to focus on the improvement of women’s health care in the developing world.

“We have known for decades that most maternal deaths can be prevented with adequate nutrition, basic health care, and good obstetric care throughout pregnancy, at delivery, and postpartum,” Fischbach said in a statement. “Yet some in the international community have focused resources primarily on legalizing abortion, in many cases at the expense of women’s lives.”

The analysis, “Does Legalizing Abortion Protect Women’s Health?” reveals that legal abortion means more abortion. In South Africa, abortions rose from an estimated 1,600 in 1996 — the year before abortion was legalized — to 85,621 in 2005. In the U.S., abortions have increased from an estimated 500,000 a year just before Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 to a peak of 1.4 million in 1990.

In the developing world, the danger of legalized abortion is profound, the analysis found.

For example, in India, abortion is broadly legal, but maternal deaths are common due to dangerous medical conditions.

“Women generally at risk because they lack access to a doctor, hospital or antibiotics before abortion’s legalization will face those same circumstances after legalization,” Fischbach said. “And if legalization triggers a higher demand for abortion, as it has in most countries, more injured women will compete for those scarce medical resources.”

Sri Lanka — where abortion is largely illegal — has reduced its maternal mortality rate by making professional midwives and supervisory nurse-midwives available in rural areas and by providing appropriate drugs and equipment, improved communication and transportation.

As one of his first acts in office, President Barack Obama lifted the Mexico City Policy, which means U.S. tax dollars now fund groups that perform or promote abortion overseas.

“We’ve seen evidence in the Obama administration of trying to tie legalization of abortion to aid in the developing world,” said Bill Poehler, communications director for MCCL.

“We don’t believe other countries should be held hostage and (forced to) change their pro-life laws so they can receive aid for health care and other needs.”

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Read the MCCL report.

http://www.citizenlink.org/CLtopstories/A000010076.cf__

Aborto: seleção de acordo com o sexo

__

In Australia, pharmacies can henceforth sell a new kit (for AUS$95), called IntelliGender, enabling parents-to-be to detect the sex of a foetus aged seven to nine weeks. Already on sale in the United States, this test is as quick and easy to use as a pregnancy test.

Moreover, in Sweden, the National Board of Health has stated that selective abortions based on sex were not illegal, and such a practice could not be halted.

Life News 11&12/05/09

__
%d blogueiros gostam disto: