Doctor: 'To the outside observer, nothing looks more peaceful'
(Warning: This story contains content that may offend some readers.)
Elderly people are now buying their loved ones suicide kits as Christmas gifts, according to a prominent euthanasia physician nicknamed "Dr. Death."
Dr. Philip Nitschke, founder of Exit International and author of "The Peaceful Pill Handbook," has explained the use of legal drugs, inert gases, plastic bags and other methods for committing suicide to audiences all over the world, including in U.S. cities such as San Francisco, Calif., and Anaheim, Calif.
He told Australia's Herald-Sun a so-called "peaceful pill" is being developed from Nembutal, the favored drug for ending life. Nembutal is the same drug that killed famous actress Marilyn Monroe. It's mostly used by veterinarians as an anesthetic and euthanasia drug for animals.
The drug is widely available in Mexico for around $30 a bottle, and Nitschke told ABC News in September he has accompanied terminally ill patients to buy the drug.
"You pour it into a glass. You drink it. You follow that with your whiskey, and I've never seen anyone finish their whiskey," he said. "They put the glass down, and they're gone – gone to sleep, and death follows shortly thereafter. To the outside observer, nothing looks more peaceful."
Nitschke conducts closed workshops around the world, open to people older than 50 who pay $40 and are of "sound mind." He also sells testing kits that detect levels of Nembutal.
According to his biography, in 1996, Nitschke "became the first physician to administer a legal, lethal voluntary injection, under the world's first assisted-suicide law – the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act of Australia."
Nitschke told ABC News, "I bought a machine. They pressed a button on the machine. The machine delivered the drugs, and they died in the arms of the persons they loved. … I knew I was doing the right thing."
He helped four people kill themselves before the law was overturned. Nitschke argued that if he weren't providing the information, people "would probably go out and hang themselves."
"This is peaceful. It's quick. It works," he said of one suggested inert gas method.
Nembutal pills (photo: Exit International)
Asked why he was promoting the "peaceful pill" for Christmas, Nitschke told the Herald-Sun his methods would always attract criticism.
"Our main opposition is from religious groups who would still be getting outraged at Easter, or any other time of year for that matter," he said in a "peaceful pill" seminar Dec. 16. "There are people here in this room who I know have bought that (euthanasia medication) for their loved ones as Christmas presents."
Right to Life Australia Queensland coordinator Graham Preston said, "A pill to kill yourself and your loved one as a Christmas present is absolutely reprehensible."
Nitschke's "The Peaceful Pill Handbook" also includes information on the use of an "exit bag." His website features a video called "Doing it with Betty," in which a nurse explains how to assemble a plastic hood used to place over a suicidal person's head.
She even suggests people get their hair done if they "want to look nice."
"At Exit International, we believe that with knowledge comes self-determination," Nitschke's website states, "and that means a good life and good death."
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Although the full text of Sen. Bob Casey's (D-PA) proposed abortion-funding health bill compromise has not yet been released, major pro-life organizations have already called the new funds-segregation scheme "completely unacceptable" and a violation of the Hyde amendment.
Because Casey is widely regarded as one of two pro-life Democrat Senators with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), his amendment might be seriously considered by Nelson, who has been holding out against the bill because of its violation of the Hyde amendment. If Nelson agrees to the compromise language, it may be the magic bullet Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been looking for to win the last vote needed to overcome a GOP filibuster of the bill.
"I don't know at this point in time. Constituency groups haven't responded back yet," Nelson said when asked early on whether the new language was satisfactory, according to the Associated Press.
National Right to Life Committee legislative director Douglas Johnson said today in an e-mail to reporters that the new amendment was a "far cry from the Stupak amendment."
"This proposal would break from the long-established principles of the Hyde Amendment by providing federal subsidies for health plans that cover abortion on demand. This is entirely unacceptable," he said. "It is particularly offensive that the proposal apparently would make it the default position for the federal government to subsidize plans that cover abortion on demand, and then permit individual citizens to apply for conscientious objector status.
"This is an exercise is cosmetics - like putting lipstick on a legislative warthog."
In an interview with the New York Times, USCCB Deputy Director of the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities Richard Doerflinger said that, while the bishops appreciated the goals of some of Casey's proposals, none of the proposals addressed the bill's use of taxpayer money to fund abortion-covering insurance plans.
The bishops have vigorously and consistently rejected such funding regardless of the use of segregation schemes, as Pro-Life Chairman Cardinal Daniel DiNardo affirmed in a Dec. 13 letter to senators. "Attempts to achieve such segregation are irrelevant to current policy, which bars federal funds from being used for any part of a package that covers elective abortions," he wrote.
In a very similar scenario, the same pro-life leaders bluntly rejected a last-minute attempt at a funds-segregating compromise in the House of Representatives offered by Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.) last month. When Ellsworth failed to find support from conservative Democrats, House leadership was forced to capitulate to the full Hyde-amendment protections presented by the Stupak amendment.
Meanwhile, Sen. Ben Nelson continues to buck immense pressure from party leadership to vote for the bill despite the abortion funding. Unlike the House's Rep. Stupak, who had the backing of 39 other legislators, Nelson appears to be entirely alone among Democrats in holding out for Hyde-amendment restrictions.
Following a private meeting with President Obama on Tuesday, Nelson stated that he was sticking to his guns against the bill's abortion funding, as well as other issues. He said the meeting was his third in eight days with the President, who has tirelessly lobbied Congress to pass his health care overhaul as soon as possible.
While Obama "made a strong case for passing health care reform now," Nelson said, "I think it still remains to be seen if it was compelling."
"I do say if nothing is done, I'm not sure what Plan B is," he said. "If Plan B is start over...it's quite possible that it just won't happen. It seems to me that we have a chance right now to fix a flawed bill."
A healthcare reform expert says even though some liberals are wavering in their support for the current Senate healthcare bill, the modified measure is still extremely dangerous.
Senate Democrats are bent on passing a healthcare bill before Christmas, but they still lack the 60 votes necessary to get the job done. They have scrapped the "public option" and their alternative to that, a Medicare "buy-in" for people 55 and older, leading many liberals to complain that the bill was gutted to appease insurance companies.
Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, says she believed all along that Democrats' promotion of the public option was merely a smokescreen to divert attention away from other disturbing aspects of the bill.
"This bill still has huge, huge problems," says Turner. "It still is going to increase healthcare costs for not only the federal government, but for the average American family." She explains that "it's going to put huge new requirements on businesses to go through an amazing number of hoops and hurdles, regulatory requirements, new fines and penalties on business."
And as far as individuals are concerned, the healthcare expert says "they're not only going to be required to buy this expensive new government health insurance, but they're going to be fined on their taxes if they don't -- and in the House bill, they can be thrown in jail."
Turner notes that in addition to taxpayer funding of abortion, the bill also includes half-a-trillion dollars in new taxes on businesses and individuals, and half-a-trillion in cuts to the Medicare program.
NEWS SHORTS FOR THURSDAY (Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
Second in a series of excerpts from the pro se brief being submitted by Scott Roeder to answer how the Necessity Defense justifies his shooting of Wichita's late term abortionist, George Tiller, May 31. Slight changes are made to make the excerpt more readable to non-lawyers. Technical citations are simplified or omitted. Click here for the full article.
During Advent, Christians love to tell their children the story of Mary, great with child, arriving in Bethlehem to give birth to her Son. It's a heartwarming image. But for many Chinese women, it's one that brings back horrible memories. Memories of their own pregnancies that ended, not in birth, but in the death of their babies through forced abortion. A Chinese woman called Wujian—not her real name—recently testified before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission about China's brutal one-child policy. Four years ago, Wujian became pregnant with an "illegal" baby—one conceived without a birth permit. Click here for the full article.
Democratic majority leaders in the US Senate have presented a new amendment to the proposed health-care reform bill, hoping to satisfy concerns about abortion subsidies. But pro-life leaders said the proposal is "unacceptable," and a Democratic lawmaker who might hold the deciding vote said that the new language "isn't sufficient." Click here for the full article.
The new law would replace a policy that allows abortion only in cases involving rape, fetal deformity, or a danger to the health of the mother. Although in practice that last provision has been interpreted to allow early abortion in nearly all cases—with thousands of women saying that a continued rregnancy would endanger their emotional welfare-- the new bill formally embraces a policy of abortion on demand. Click here for the full article.
Billions will be spent on government services, but little if any of the money will go to family-friendly causes.
Both the House and Senate have passed an omnibus spending bill totaling more than $1.1 trillion. Family advocates are concerned because it contains more lenient policies on money for abortion services, but pulls funding from family-friendly programs like abstinence education.
Max Pappas, vice president of public policy for Freedom Works, said it increases federal spending by 25 percent.
"A staggering increase," he said, "especially at a time when the economy is struggling and every taxpayer out there is trying to find a way to save money."
Along with the $2 trillion in the Department of Defense bill, which is expected to pass, this makes the debt ceiling about $14 trillion – a 55 percent increase since 2007.
"If there was such a thing as a thousand-dollar bill," Pappas said, "the stack you would need to reach a trillion dollars would reach into outer space."
U.S. Rep. Jerry Moran said the bill is full of problems.
"There is no ban in this bill on the funding of abortions in the District of Columbia," the Kansas Republican said. "It phases out the voucher system in the D.C. school districts and increases family planning money internationally by 20 percent."
That's $648.5 million going to fund international abortions.
The spending bill also cuts funding for abstinence-education programs.
Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association, said the measure creates a new funding stream for teen pregnancy prevention and moves the oversight of that program to the secretary of Health and Human Services, a highly political office.
"While they're creating a new teen pregnancy prevention program," she said, "they're creating a new office of adolescent health, and there is not one penny devoted to primary prevention or risk avoidance for teens."
Our message is clear. You cannot vote for cloture and consider yourself pro-life.
WASHINGTON - Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, will join Pennsylvania pro-life leaders in a "pray-in" at the office of Senator Casey this afternoon in Washington DC.
Activists also plan a series of public events around the state of Pennsylvania over the next two weeks to encourage Senator Casey to embrace human rights and refrain from voting for cloture on the Senate health care legislation.
Cloture is a parliamentary procedure in the Senate where debate is ended and an immediate vote is taken on the matter being discussed.
A cloture vote in the United States Senate needs 60 votes.
Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, states,
"The pro-life community wants to make it clear to Senator Casey and Senator Nelson that a vote for cloture is a vote for abortion. Since the United States Senate has enough votes to pass health care reform in it's final version, a cloture vote is a final vote. It is a vote to support the bill.
"Even if Senator Casey and Senator Nelson vote against the bill in it's final passage, they cannot make the claim that they are pro-life or they are interested in protecting the rights of America's children.
"It is hard to imagine that Senator Casey and Senator Nelson would sponsor an amendment prohibiting public money from being use to pay for abortions and then turn around and vote for cloture which guarantees that the health care bill would include taxpayer funded abortions.
"I will be joining with pro-life activists from Pennsylvania today in a 'pray in' at the office of Senator Casey. I will also be working with them over the next two weeks in a public campaign around Pennsylvania challenging Mr. Casey to embrace human rights and social justice and protect America's children.
"Our message is clear and unambiguous. You cannot vote for cloture and consider yourself pro-life."
Melissa Ohden's 19 month old daughter, Olivia, was not supposed to have a chance at life because of abortion. Not because Melissa ever considered aborting her, but because Melissa, herself, was aborted at approximately 24 weeks of gestation and survived.
Abortion attempt survivors, in and of themselves, are rare in our society. Having an abortion attempt survivor become a mother, herself, and speak out against the intergenerational impact of abortion, is certainly even more of a rarity. But by all appearances, Melissa is up for the challenge that faces her in her ministry. "It's my calling," states Melissa. "This is who I am; I wouldn't change a thing."
Although adoption was an intrinsic part of her family and life, Melissa didn't learn that she was the survivor of a failed saline infusion abortion attempt until she was in the 8th grade. Finding out the painful reality of how she entered the world truly changed her life and the lives of all of those around her forever, and understandably, it hasn't always been easy.
"Ashamed, guilty, and embarrassed," is how Melissa describes the predominant feelings she had for many years after finding out about surviving the abortion attempt. Even though Melissa felt an overwhelming sense of gratitude for being saved from certain death, for many years shame and embarrassment at being "so unwanted," and guilt for growing up to be perfectly happy, healthy and successful rendered her silent.
After a long journey of healing, and a decades-long, but successful search for her birth records and biological family, however, Melissa came forward publicly in 2007 to share her story with the world and provide a voice to the millions of voiceless, aborted children just like her. Since that time, Melissa's life has come full circle, as she gave birth to her first child, Olivia, at the very same hospital where her own life was supposed to end.
In spite of all the blessings that Melissa has received in her life, her search for the truth has not been painless, and many of her experiences have been emotionally and spiritually challenging. Sadly, even though Melissa had discovered that she was living in the same city as her biological father in 2007, he passed away in 2008, prior to ever meeting her. With his passing, however, many gifts have come. Although her father had never told anyone about Melissa, after discovering a letter that she had sent him months prior to his passing, her biological father's family contacted her after his death.
"There's still so much grief," Melissa says about her father's passing. Since initially being contacted by the paternal side of her family, Melissa has now met her grandfather and great-aunt, whom she sees on a regular basis. She has also spoken to her grandmother by phone and her father's wife by email. The pain of losing her father and discovering that he carried the secret of Melissa with him all of his life, and ultimately to his death, is still too much for many in his family to handle, yet Melissa hopes that she will someday meet other family members, including a younger half-sister, that is unknowingly living in the same city as her currently.
Although Melissa has never had the opportunity to meet her biological mother, she has communicated with her maternal grandparents by letter, and she hopes to someday have contact with her mother, also. She is grateful that she has been given the opportunity to reach out to both of her biological parents and their families to let them know that she has forgiven them for the decision that was made to end her life, and has lived a full, blessed life.
"One decision, one single moment, can have such a detrimental impact on so many people, living and dead, born and yet to be conceived," is the driving point of Melissa's message. Melissa's life and her ministry speaks to the true reality of abortion and the impact it has on not just women and children, but men, grandparents, aunts and uncles, siblings, cousins, friends, and communities. Yet it is also about so much more.
Melissa shares her inspiring story of survival and the awesome power of faith, hope, love and forgiveness in by speaking at Christian and pro-life events across the U.S. and Canada, through radio and TV interviews, and through her website-- www.melissaohden.com. Previously a speaker with Feminists for Life's College Outreach program, Melissa is now a member of the Ambassador Speaker's Bureau-- www.ambassadorspeakers.com.
Earlier this year, Melissa spoke at the fundraiser and Day of Prayer for the International Week of Prayer and Fasting in Washington, D.C. She also spoke at fundraising events for Right to Life groups and pregnancy resource centers and also at colleges and various religious events. Melissa has been a guest on Gus Lloyd's Seize the Day, and will be a guest on Daily Life News, a National Pro-Life Radio program, with Day Gardner on December 16th, 2009. Melissa's ministry will be featured on Phil Waldrep's Living with Joy radio show in January 2010.
APPLETON, WI, - Following the release of an undercover video revealing Appleton Planned Parenthood employees giving information called "absurd and scientifically erroneous" by two medical doctors, the organization has released a statement claiming that "Planned Parenthood's standard is to provide honest, medically accurate information" and calling Live Action's claims "false and inflammatory."
On December 9th, Live Action Films released a video showing a Planned Parenthood counselor claiming that fetal heartbeats begin at 17-18 weeks, over twelve weeks later than heartbeats in fact begin. Wisconsin informed consent law requires that women receive medically accurate information before undergoing an abortion.
The counselor's claim and others like it led Dr. Dianne Irving of Georgetown University and Dr. Ward Kischer of University of Arizona to conclude that Appleton Planned Parenthood counseling practices "would violate the legally valid 'informed consent' on both the 'information' level and on the 'consent without duress or pressure' level." They called for the parties involved to "be held accountable for their inherently unethical and destructive lies and procedures."
In a response to the video, Teri Huyck, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said that Live Action "has made false and inflammatory claims about our services" and that "we cannot verify the accuracy of these edited tapes." She said that all Wisconsin Planned Parenthood "patients receive the legally mandated information about fetal development as well as medically accurate answers to questions."
She also stated that the organization has "reviewed and reinforced organizational protocol regarding answers to pregnancy-related questions with staff members at this facility."
David Schmidt of Live Action argued that such a response "makes no sense."
"Either Planned Parenthood gave women false counsel and needs to be investigated, or they didn't and they don't need a review of protocol," he continued. "They can't have it both ways. There is a growing gap between what Planned Parenthood says and the truth, and their credibility is quickly slipping away."
The undercover video also shows Planned Parenthood employees variously claiming that a fetus becomes a baby only at birth or at six to seven months of pregnancy.
"Two people both confidently answer the same question with different answers and we are supposed to believe that they are both right?" Schmidt asked. "If this is 'accuracy' from Planned Parenthood, I can't imagine what inaccuracy is like."
The film is the first from Live Action's newly launched "Rose Acuna" project. Previous Live Action films have revealed Planned Parenthood accepting donations to abort black babies, covering up apparent statutory rape, and claiming that images of aborted babies found online were "not real"; the Rose Acuna project aims to uncover Planned Parenthood abortion counseling practices.
Judie Brown of the American Life League complimented Live Action for their latest video. "Planned Parenthood has spent years crafting a shiny public relations veneer to cover up the abuse of women and babies," she said. "Piece by piece, that veneer is being shattered with the help of a small student group in California dedicated to exposing the truth."
Peggy Hamill, of Pro-Life Wisconsin, similarly told WBAY news that "Pro-life Wisconsin has known for years, and this video proves, that Planned Parenthood cares to ignore the basic facts about human development and worse yet, refuses to relay the truth about that development to vulnerable patients in their clinics."
"Live Action is very credible. The videos that they have done are very effective, and they're very well documented. They reveal that Planned Parenthood is completely unscrupulous."
Population control groups have been using the hype surrounding the Copenhagen climate change conference to promote their solution to hypothetical impending environmental catastrophes. Earlier this month, two pieces appearing in the same edition of the Guardian revisited a report by Britain's Optimum Population Trust (OPT) that suggests that people in wealthy first-world countries should "offset" the carbon cost of their jet-setting lifestyles by paying to prevent the births of poor children in the developing world.
John Vidal, the Guardian's environment editor, wrote that the OPT's report suggesting a "radical" plan to cut carbon emissions was the "best bet" to reduce global warming trends. In August, the OPT issued a report claiming to have made a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis to work out exactly how much "carbon emission" a child born in the developing world costs.
Vidal pointed to the claim in the OPT report that the 10 metric tons of carbon emitted by a single return flight from London to Sydney could be "offset" by "enabling the avoidance of one unwanted birth in a country such as Kenya."
In the same issue of the Guardian, David Burton wrote in an editorial that the OPT offset scheme, called "called PopOffsets," could be used to save the environment and "to help the world's poorest women."
The OPT scheme, Burton wrote, "will give practical help: both to the poorest women in the world to enable them to control their own fertility and to humanity by tackling the threat posed by human-induced climate change."
The report, published in August and titled, "Fewer Emitters, Lower Emissions, Less Cost: Reducing Future Carbon Emissions by Investing in Family Planning," said that "family planning" is cheaper than low carbon technologies like windmill power generators and low-consumption light bulbs.
"Based on the study's findings, it is proposed that family planning methods should be a primary tool in the optimum strategy for reducing carbon emissions," the report said.
OPT insisted that only "unwanted" children would be targeted for elimination by the scheme that would provide artificial contraception to those who currently cannot obtain it.
The OPT scheme has been blasted, however, even by some on the far left, as a manifestation of a "crusade against the unique quality of human life" that typifies the environmentalist movement.
Frank Furedi, a secular humanist, author and professor of sociology at the University of Kent, and a noted climate change skeptic, minced no words in his assessment of the OPT's suggested scheme.
Calling them a "zombie-like Malthusian organisation devoted to the cause of human depletion," Furedi wrote in Spiked that he was shocked by the lack of outrage at the suggestion from humanists and religious leaders alike.
"There was a time when people who measured the value of human life through sombre calculations based on cost-benefit analyses were regarded with suspicion and contempt."
"Why is it that, today, the provision of contraception can be promoted as a sensible way of reducing carbon emissions? How do we account for the silence of religious movements whose theology still upholds the unique status of human life?" Furedi added.
The human population is now about 6.8 billion and world population is expected to peak at about 9 billion in 2050 and then begin to decline. In many countries, particularly in the developed west, the process of de-population is already well under way, with negative fertility rates and rising median ages.
Duncan Green, head of research at Oxfam, wrote in an op-ed in the New Statesman that assumptions such as those in the OPT report equating population growth and environmental degradation are a "gross oversimplification."
Green points to the rapid slowing of population growth around the world and fears by some governments, like South Korea, that diminishing population will lead to economic slow-downs. In one sense, he said, "the 'problem' is self-solving, and indeed, if the transition gets any faster, the world could be faced by a serious shortage of working age people to look after the rising numbers of elderly."
"If their arguments were based on logic alone, the population control lobby would probably be advocating compulsory euthanasia rather than birth control, but its preponderance of elderly white male members makes that pretty unlikely," Green added.
NEWS SHORTS FOR TUESDAY (Referral to Web sites not produced by The Illinois Federation for Right to LIfe is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
CARSON CITY, NV - Planned Parenthood and the ACLU have filed a lawsuit against the sponsors of a Nevada ballot initiative defining the term "person." The simple, one-sentence amendment states, "In the great state of Nevada, the term 'person' applies to every human being." . . . "This is now the third time that the ACLU and Planned Parenthood have ganged up to silence the voice of the people, and their right to ballot initiatives," concluded Keith Mason. "In Colorado, they failed. They are trying to silence us, and to keep the vote away from the people. The citizens have a right to ballot initiatives, and human beings have a right to live." Click here for the full article.
On December 10th, the House of Representatives debated and passed an omnibus spending bill for fiscal year 2010 containing a significant funding increase for family planning and reproductive health (FP/RH) programs. . . . Funding: The bill includes a total of $648.5 million for bilateral and multilateral FP/RH programs, an increase of more than $103 million or 19 percent above the FY 2009 enacted level and $55 million more than the President’s budget request. Of the $648.5 million total, $593.5 million is provided to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) for bilateral field and centrally-funded programs and $55 million is earmarked for a U.S. contribution to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The $593.5 million allocated for bilateral programs represents an increase of about $98.5 million above the comparable FY 2009 level of $495 million. FP/RH programs fared well compared to other non-HIV/AIDS global health programs, which nevertheless enjoyed modest increases such as $54 million more for maternal and child health. Click here for the full article.
ST. LOUIS - Missouri's Secretary of State and Auditor manipulated ballot language to prejudice state voters against a proposed constitutional amendment by a group that opposes stem-cell research, the group claims in Federal Court. The Missouri Roundtable for Life claims Secretary of State Robin Carnahan and Auditor Susan Montee intentionally manipulated ballot language to prejudice voters against their proposal. The group and its director and co-plaintiff Frederic Sauer want voters to approve a state constitutional amendment that would require that in any fiscal year the first $200 million disbursed from the Life Sciences Research Trust Fund be spent on primary health care for poor Missourians, but not for abortion services or human research, which includes stem cell research. Click here for the full article.
Eco-socialists have devised a system called “cap-and-trade,” in which businesses are required to buy permits to cover so-called greenhouse emissions, with the option of selling permits they don’t use. Human population growth may eventually be regulated in much the same way. In a December 8 editorial prompted by the UN global warming summit in Copenhagen, Canada’s National Post insisted that “A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate.” The Chinese government used the Copenhagen conference to extol the supposed virtues of their totalitarian program. Click here for the full article.
The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data. Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months — and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted. Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time -- in pay and hiring -- during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector. Click here for the full article.
Illinois Federation for Right to Life PAC Announces 2010 Primary Endorsements
The Illinois Federation for Right to Life (IFRL) Political Action Committee (PAC) has published its endorsements for the upcoming 2010 Illinois Primary to take place on February 2nd, 2010.
Anyone can view and download the endorsements by visit the IFRL website at www.ifrl.org and clicking on the 2010 Primary Election Link near the top of the page.
Published are the Candidate Surveys, Candidate Responses and IFRL-PAC Endorsements.
The IFRL-PAC's mission is to help those who want their vote to protect the unborn, the disabled and the elderly. Those endagered innocent lives that are being threatened need men and women in government who respect all human life.
It is not the PAC's intent to control any political party. It the PAC's intent to elect men and women of all political parties who will speak for and vote for legislation to protect the first and most important right for all of us - our right to life.
When more than one pro-life candidate seeks the same office, IFRL PAC always endorses the pro-life incumbent. There are a few candidates who we recommend over the opponent. The IFRL PAC has even endorsed a candidate who had no opposition. The purpose of that endorsement is to keep you informed that we continue our support because the candidate continues to support the right to life issues.
The IFRL-PAC Endorsements page is paid for by the IFRL-PAC, connected with the Illinois Federation for Right to Life, Inc. and was not authorized by any of the candidates. James M. Quirke, Treasurer. A copy of our report is on file and is available for purchase from the Federal Election Commission, Washington, D.C., and the Illinois State Board of Elections, Springfield, IL.
VOTING WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE
1. Vote!
First, make sure you actually vote. Primary Election Day is Febraury 2nd, 2010. Take advantage of early voting if your state allows it, and if you’re going to be out of state or are homebound, use an absentee ballot! Bring your voting decisions to prayer.
2. Know the candidates.
Be sure you know where the candidates stand on the issues.
3. Reject the Disqualified.
If a candidate came forward and said, “I support terrorism,” you wouldn’t say, “I disagree with you on terrorism, but what’s your health care plan?” Similarly, those who permit the destruction of innocent life by abortion disqualify themselves from consideration.
4. Distinguish Policy from Principle
Most disagreements between candidates and political platforms do not have to do with principle (“Is there a ‘Right to Crime?’”), but rather with policy (“How do we reduce crime?”). But the dispute over whether there is a right to life does deal with principle, and is therefore more fundamental.
5. Weigh other issues properly.
Not all issues have equal weight. The Catholic Church teaches that war and capital punishment, for example, may at times be morally justified, but abortion and euthanasia never are.
6. Keep your loyalty focused on Jesus.
Your loyalty to Jesus Christ must be stronger than your loyalty to any political party.
7. Remember, the Party Matters.
Elections do not only put individual candidates into power; they put political parties into power. Consider what the parties stand for, and how the outcome of the election affects the balance of power.
8. Distinguish “choosing evil” from “limiting evil.”
If two opposing candidates both support abortion, then ask: Which of the two candidates will do less harm to unborn children? This is not "choosing the lesser of two evils," but rather choosing to limit an evil, and that is a good.
9. Support the candidate with more than your vote!
Additional activities include donating to the campaign, volunteering for the campaign, handing out literature for the candidate, making phone calls and visits on the candidate’s behalf, sending emails, using yard signs and bumper stickers, and praying for the candidate.
Elections are not contests between two candidates. They are contests between two teams. The bigger and more active team will bring in the most votes.
10. Mobilize as many other voters as possible!
Each of us has one vote, but each of us can mobilize hundreds, even thousands of votes. Focus on mobilizing those who agree with you rather than convincing those who don’t. If you can take the day off on Election Day, do so. Spend the day contacting people by phone and email, reminding them to vote, and helping them get to the polls.
By: Fr. Frank Pavone, MEV
NO APOLOGIES FOR BEING SINGLE ISSUE VOTERS
Some well intentioned but misguided friends often suggest that a vote based only on a candidate's position on Life Issues is simply narrow. Doesn't single issue voting disclose a lack of interest in and knowledge of other vital issues-especially education, immigration and health care matters?
Absolutely not! A citizen's right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness are worth nothing if he/she can be put to death without trial. A very wise man once said, "You can be more or less poor; you can be more or less hungry; but you cannot be more or less dead."
The Non-negotiable issues of abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, human cloning, traditional marriage, have been set apart. The first four are life issues dealing with deliberate homicide against which we have always had protective laws. If a candidate is willing to express his support for any one of these forms of homicide, what difference should it make what his position is on education or health care? Father Pavone of Priests for Life asks: "If your candidate declares his support for terrorism, would you even ask him how he stood on immigration or any other matter?"
How can it be possible that more than thirty-four years have passed without these specific instructions being promulgated? The problem heretofore could have been our rather reasonable assumption that the value of innocent human life is far too obvious to call for special instruction on how to vote, allowing consciences to become plastic. Now, we face the assertion that it's the law and we just have to get used to it. Did we get used to slavery when it also was the law? Will we be more ready to defy God's law than to reject our allegiance to one political party?
A criticism frequently leveled at single-issue voters has to do with capital punishment. Some will contend that we have no right to support the cause of Life if we do not at the same time and with the same force denounce capital punishment. Misinformation abounds on the position of the Catholic Church on capital punishment. The Church officially condemns abortion; it doesn't forbid capital punishment in principle. Pope John Paul II merely gave it his own considered view that in our time capital punishment will no longer be defensible. His personal judgment carries weight but does not have the status of official teaching.
Bishop Rene Gradida, Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Corpus Christi, declared: "There is no clear unequivocal position of the Church on such issues as minimum wage, education, health care matters, immigration etc." From this we are to understand there is no moral equivalence between these lesser issues and the intrinsic evils, which are always gravely evil in themselves and prohibited by absolute moral norms derived from the natural law.
