Hillary Clinton should not have been honoured by St Andrews University

Hillary Clinton (left) at St Andrews

Today the University of St. Andrews awarded former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton an honorary doctorate for her (alleged) championing of:

“education, human rights, democracy, civil society and promoting opportunities for females around the world”.

However, Clinton is radically pro-abortion and works to promote abortion in the developing world. Abortion is contrary to human rights and opportunities for females, born and unborn. Hillary Clinton supports the killing of unborn children in the developing world. She should not have been awarded a doctorate by the University of St. Andrews.

Hillary Clinton supports the appalling procedure of partial-birth abortion. The child is delivered up to the neck; then a sharp instrument is inserted into the back of the head to kill the child; then an aspirator is used to suck out the brain so the head can be crushed and pass through the cervix.

Hillary Clinton received the Planned Parenthood ‘Margaret Sanger Award’ in 2009. Clinton said of Sanger:

“I admire Margaret Sanger enormously... I am really in awe of her.”

Margaret Sanger believed the following:

• "The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." Woman and the New Race
• "The most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children”. “The large family... is therefore a greater evil than any one of them [war, poverty, child labour, prostitution]."
• "Keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as the feeble-minded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class."
• "Apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted."
• "Feeble-minded persons, habitual congenital criminals, those afflicted with inheritable disease, and others found biologically unfit by authorities qualified to judge should be sterilized or, in cases of doubt, should be so isolated as to prevent the perpetuation of their afflictions by breeding." America Needs a Baby Code.

Clinton opposed plans for conscientious objection for healthcare professionals to abortion.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Local Authorities should tell primary schools: no more sex ed in science lessons, says Safe at School

Local Authorities should advise that primary schools will not be permitted to include sex education in Key Stage 1 and 2 science lessons under the new National Curriculum, said SPUC's Safe at School campaign, which supports parents facing unacceptable sex education in their child's school.

Antonia Tully of Safe at School told the media today:

"Every parent should now feel confident that their primary-aged child will not be subjected to graphic information about sex in compulsory science lessons. Where local authorities advise schools of the requirements of the national curriculum, from 2014 they must stop advising both schools and parents that there is mandatory sex education in science lessons.

The outgoing primary science curriculum contains the word 'reproduction' in the statutory requirement for teaching the human life-cycle. Schools are viewing this as a green light to teach children about sexual intercourse in science lessons from which their parents could not withdraw them. Similarly under the outgoing curriculum, many schools are teaching children at Key Stage 1 (aged 5-7 years old) to identify their sexual organs. The incoming curriculum does not mandate schools to teach children about human genitalia or sexual reproduction. Sexual reproduction is only covered with reference to animals, with the suggestion that children should hatch and rear chicks to observe this. (See notes below for relevant extracts from the new curriculum).

Safe at School is warning parents that vigilance by parents is still needed. The new science curriculum does suggest that Year 5 children (aged 9-10) could be taught about "the changes experienced in puberty". Parents must ask their child's teacher to show them exactly what will be shown in class if this is covered.

Meanwhile thousands of primary schools will have to update their Sex and Relationship Education (SRE) policy before 2014 to state clearly that no part of sex education is taught in science lessons. Safe at School will be advising parents and governors on this matter." 

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

New Australian archbishop has clear pro-life/pro-family messages

The Vatican announced today that Pope Francis has chosen Bishop Christopher Prowse to be the new Catholic archbishop of Canberra-Goulburn, Australia. Bishop Prowse is currently bishop of Sale, Victoria, and was previously an auxiliary bishop in Melbourne. He holds a doctorate in moral theology from the Lateran in Rome. Below are some clear pro-life/pro-family messages from Bishop Prowse in recent years:

Abortion

"The Victorian Abortion Reform Bill should be rejected by Parliament and the community as a breach of fundamental human rights. Good legislation is supposed to protect the weak, but this is a death sentence to many of the tiniest Victorians in the womb, right up to 40 weeks' gestation. ... The existence of each person, their capacity to enjoy life and all other rights, the viability of community and the common good depend profoundly on the right to life ... Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions and will not provide referrals for the purpose of abortion ... The Bill ignores the fact that there are two persons, not just one, affected by every choice about abortion."

"A mockery of human rights", Herald Sun, 9 September 2008

Euthanasia

"Those whose lives are diminished through suffering deserve special respect. The sick and those people with handicaps are deserving of special help. Euthanasia is never acceptable and is morally inadmissible. (CCC 2276-2277) It is an offence against the dignity of the human person and is an insult to the giver of all life, God."

Paper on death and dying, April 2010

Marriage

"Proposals to give same-sex relationships legal marital recognition is something the Catholic Church will never endorse. Such ideas are an attack on the institution of marriage that has served us so well for millennia – long before Christianity ... We believe that marriage is between a man and a woman who intend a permanent bond of love that is open to the possibility of the gift of children. In other words, it is both love sharing and life giving. This stance is based on reason – what we call the natural moral law. However, Christians see the institution of marriage in the light of faith. We see marriage in the light of God’s plan for man and woman. ... Children have human rights too. They are rarely mentioned in the current debate. Tragically, they are not mentioned much either in the abortion issue that stills troubles the social conscience. But children have rights to have a mother and father. Marriage and family life are already very fragile societal institutions. For the sake of peace and stability in the world, we must do all that we can to protect it."

"Marriage, family and the World Youth Day", Catholic Life, August 2011

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

My letter in The Telegraph on sex-selective abortion

Andrew Lansley, former health secretary

Yesterday The Telegraph published a letter from me about sex-selective abortion and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)'s decision not to launch prosecutions. The letter as published was edited - see the Letters page for 11 September and scroll down 12 letters to "Abortion law". Here is the original version submitted for publication:

SIR - Andrew Lansley told Parliament yesterday that dealing with breaches of the abortion law was “the responsibility of the prosecuting authorities.” No doubt he meant the decision about whether to prosecute individual doctors, and he has a reasonable point.

The Telegraph reported (22 March 2012), http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9161735/One-in-five-abortion-clinics-breaks-law.html , that:

Mr Lansley warned that so-called abortion on demand was not acceptable. “It’s not what Parliament intended and it’s not what the law provides for,” he said. “My job is to enforce the law.”

At the time he was health secretary. And he did not enforce the law – abortion for any reason at all was, and continues to be, the order of the day at the department of health. The department enforces only protocols aimed at reducing (maternal) fatalities to an acceptable level. The requirements for a medical reason for any abortion were and are routinely disregarded.

So why are “wrong-sex” abortions controversial, if any other reason will do? It may be because the advocates of abortion on demand are maddened by women using freedom of choice to choose against their own kind.

John Smeaton
Chief executive, Society for the Protection of Unborn Children
London SE11

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Parliamentarians & pro-family groups will "fiercely resist" Daily Telegraph sex education campaign

Yesterday's Daily Telegraph newspaper  published a joint letter by parliamentarians and civil society pro-family groups, who oppose the Daily Telegraph’s campaign to “bring sex education into the 21st Century”. The entire letter is reproduced below.

Commenting on the Daily Telegraph campaign, Antonia Tully (pictured), Coordinator of SPUC's Safe at School, said

“Any change to the sex education guidelines could be dangerous in the current climate of calls for the inclusion of pornography in sex education. The Sex Education Forum has published an online magazine showing teachers how to introduce children and teenagers to pornography. These lesson ideas are not about teaching children and teenagers about how to avoid pornography, but normalising it. The Daily Telegraph campaign is calling for so-called sex education "experts" to teach children.  It's time to recognise that parents are the experts when it comes to their own children. As readers will see, the joint letter is signed by a range of parliamentarians and pro-family groups, demonstrating the broad body of individuals and groups who are opposed parents being undermined. Safe at School  will fiercely resist the Daily Telegraph campaign”.  

Sir,

The “Telegraph Wonder Women” campaign to “bring sex education into the 21st century” by redrawing the official guidelines on teaching sex education, makes scant reference to parents.

 Any moves to redraw these guidelines must involve organisations which recognise parents as the primary educators of their children on sexual matters.  

Children and teenagers accessing online pornography is a problem which urgently needs to be addressed.  Parents have a vital role in teaching their children about how to avoid pornography. The government should be supporting parents in this task.

Current government guidelines on teaching sex education contains over 90 references to the importantance of involving parents in teaching children about sexual issues.  Any new guidelines should place the same emphasis on parents.

Yours faithfully,

Antonia Tully, SPUC Safe at School
Norman Wells, Family Education Trust
Colin Harte, Director, Christian Institute
The Lord Carey of Clifton
Philip Davies MP
Mary Glindon MP
Jim Shannon MP
Revd  Andrew Symes, Executive Secretary, Anglican Mainstream
Dr Chris Richards, MB BS FRCPCH, Lovewise
Professor David Paton, Nottingham University Business School
Dr Trevor Stammers FRCGP
Kathy Gyngell, Research Fellow, Centre for Policy Studies
James Wiltshire, Campaign to Protect Children
Dr Lisa Nolland
Yusuf Patel, SRE Islamic
Marie Peacock, Chair, Mothers at Home Matter
Edmund P Adamus, Director for Marriage & Family Life, Diocese of Westminster
Imam Sulaiman Gani
Tahera Ayazi, Tower Hamlets' Parents Action Group - SRE
Sue Relf, Challenge Team UK

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Daily Telegraph sex ed campaign is misleading parents

The Daily Telegraph's campaign calling for school lessons about the dangers of pornography is misleading, according to SPUC's Safe at School campaign, which supports and advises parents whose children are subjected to unacceptable sex education in school.

Antonia Tully, national co-ordinator of Safe at School, told the media earlier today:

“What the Daily Telegraph campaign doesn't say is what will actually be taught in schools. My fear is that parents, and many people who have signed their petition, don't realise that current proposals for teaching children and teenagers about pornography are not about warning them of the dangers.

The influential Sex Education Forum has published an online magazine showing teachers how to introduce children and teenagers to pornography. These lesson ideas are not about teaching children and teenagers about how to avoid pornography, but normalising it.

The prime minister has pointed to the fact that most internet access among children takes place at home. This means that parents are literally best placed to protect their children from pornography. The Daily Telegraph campaign is calling for so-called sex education 'experts' to teach children. It's time to recognise that parents are the experts when it comes to their own children.”

David Cameron has rejected The Telegraph's call for sex education guidelines to be withdrawn, saying that “teachers can talk about porn within the existing guidelines”.

Safe at School has said that any change to the sex education guidelines could be extremely dangerous in the light of the Sex Education Forum's proposals for the inclusion of pornography in sex education.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

SPUC challenges CPS decision not to prosecute sex-selective abortionists

SPUC's general secretray and senior political officer Paul Tully has sent me the folllowing commentary:

The announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service that it is not going to charge doctors for offering ‘sex-selection’ abortion smacks of a politically influenced decision.

There is little appetite in the pro-life movement for vindictive prosecution of doctors or others who kill babies, but we should expect the rule of law to be upheld, fairly and justly.

The CPS’ decision that it is not ‘in the public interest’ to bring charges is clearly wrong by at least six of the seven points in its code of practice, The Code for Crown Prosecutors, CPS, Jan 2013.  This spells out (section 4.12) seven questions to help determine whether a prosecution is in the public interest. How do they apply in this case?

Here are the questions, with my comments:

“a) How serious is the offence committed?”
These doctors planned to kill children. Whether charged under the law on abortion or the law on child destruction, the crime carries a life sentence. It is among the most serious crimes on the statute book. 

“b) What is the level of culpability of the suspect?”
The suspects (the doctors) in these cases were professionally trained, and were evidently prepared to falsify statutory declarations (abortion registration forms) to achieve their purpose. It is hard to think of any situation where a higher degree of culpability could be shown.

“c) What are the circumstances of and the harm caused to the victim?”
The intended victims would technically have been ‘under the care’ of the doctors aborting them; and the harm intended was to kill them.

“d) Was the suspect under 18?”
No.

“e) What is the impact on the community?”
A lack of prosecution may suggest to the communities that seek sex-selection abortions that they can continue breaking the law with impunity (see The Telegraph report "The abortion of unwanted girls taking place in the UK").

“f) Is prosecution a proportionate response?”
The Code for Crown Prosecutors makes clear in its explanatory notes that the concern here is that some prosecutions are very expensive to mount, involve complex crimes like fraud, and take months and months in court.  None of that seems likely to apply here.

“g) Do the sources of information require protecting?”
The sources of key information are named journalists who published the story in the national press – of course they don’t need protecting. While clearly wrong, the decision is less hypocritical than the faux prosecution of Dr Anthony Hamilton in 1980, who was charged with attempted murder (but not abortion or child destruction) after aborting a disabled baby well over the legal time limit which then prevailed.  The prosecution failed, predictably, for lack of evidence of intent to commit murder.

Discrimination

In the more detailed notes, under question (c) the Code says:

Prosecutors must also have regard to whether the offence was  motivated by any form of discrimination against the victim’s  ethnic or national origin, gender, disability, age, religion or  belief, sexual orientation or gender identity; or the suspect  demonstrated hostility towards the victim based on any of  those characteristics. The presence of any such motivation  or hostility will mean that it is more likely that prosecution is required.

Does hostility toward a baby girl, motivated explicitly by her gender, and perhaps also by her age, not merit prosecution in this situation?

The fact that the child is in her mother’s womb makes a difference in the eyes of the law, but not for the doctor who must kill her either surgically (by means such as dismemberment), or more commonly now, by use of chemical agents.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Advertising Standards Authority accused of gross interference in political free speech

SPUC has accused the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) of "gross interference in political free speech", following a ruling issued today against an advertisement opposing same-sex marriage.

The ASA's ruling applies to an advertisement published earlier this year by SPUC, which predicted some of the negative consequences govermment's Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill (now Act) 2013.

SPUC's advertisement warned that "gay relationships will be promoted in schools" and that "NHS-endorsed websites, which promote high-risk sexual practices, will be mainstreamed in secondary schools". The ASA has deemed the advertisement "misleading", taking issue with the words 'promoted' and 'NHS-endorsed'.

SPUC stands by every word we included in the advertisment.

As I told the press today:

This ruling is ridiculous. It is based on semantics, as if it was an exercise in proper English usage totally removed from what will happen in practice as the bill is implemented. Are we to receive a list of acceptable adverbs and adjectives?

There is no logic to the ASA's conclusion. The ASA fails to address the whole rationale of the Bill - that there is to be equality between same-sex and different-sex marriage. If it is 'misleading' to state that same-sex marriage will be promoted, then it must be also be 'misleading' to say that different-sex marriage will be promoted.

The ASA's position is fatuous. Is the ASA going to monitor how the legislation works in practice? The ASA should not seek to police the public debate about forthcoming legislation.

SPUC has cited the conflict of interest at the top of the ASA, which is chaired by Lord (Chris) Smith, the former Labour minister and prominent homosexual, who is also chairman of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality. It is axiomatic that an organisation’s   chairman will take a direct interest in its affairs. It is just too simplistic to say that the issue of bias is addressed by stating that Lord Smith took no part in this ruling. The complaints, the decision to select them for consideration and the ruling itself are plainly consistent with Lord Smith’s political views. The ASA, with or without Lord Smith’s direct involvement, is well aware of those views and of where he stands in the debate. In no other sphere would this be considered acceptable or consistent with the absence of actual or perceived bias. If the ASA intends to seek to police the political debate, then common sense dictates that it cannot be run by a politician.

The ASA said that SPUC's advertisement was "misleading" in describing third-party websites listed on the NHS website as "NHS-endorsed". The NHS website carried no disclaimer regarding the third-party websites. If a group posted a link to a third-party site offering bomb-making advice, the police would not excuse the group on the basis that it was not responsible for the third-party site.

It is dispiriting that in an area of fundamental free speech we have been reduced to debating semantics with an organisation who believe that politics can be reduced to measurable objectivity, as if it was a spat between Tesco and Sainsbury’s. Advertising is not our business and in the future we would certainly question the wisdom of engaging with the ASA on any level.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Telegraph campaign for better sex ed “a slap in the face for parents” says leading parent advocacy group

The “Telegraph Wonder Women” campaign for better sex education is a slap in the face for every parent in

this country, said Antonia Tully of Safe at School, a campaign of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children which supports and advises parents facing unacceptable sex education in their children's schools. Antonia told the press today that:

“Children and teenagers accessing online pornography is a growing problem which urgently needs to be addressed, but I have no confidence that including pornography in updated sex education, as the NSPCC recommends, will make young people safer” .

Antonia continued:

“The NSPCC is a member of the Sex Education Forum (SEF) which has published an online magazine about how to teach school pupils about pornography. The content of the SEF magazine makes it abundantly clear that pornography lessons will not be about how to avoid pornography. These lessons are all about dangling pornography in front of teenagers with the absurd expectation that aroused adolescents will calmly analyse whether the images they are looking are “real” or photo-shopped. This madness will drive teenagers further into pornography.”

Claire Perry MP, an adviser to David Cameron on “preventing commercialisation and sexualisation” of children, is calling for government guidelines on teaching sex education to be redrawn. The current guidelines on sex and relationships education include numerous references to the importance of involving parents in teaching children about sexual issues. Safe at School believes that the government should be emphasising these guidelines and supporting parents, particularly in teaching their children about how to avoid pornography.

Mrs Tully said:

“Parents have been systematically side-lined on sex education and have been made to feel that they are too stupid and inadequate to talk to their own children about sexual issues. No wonder, according to The Daily Telegraph, school children are three times more likely to go online for advice on sex and relationships rather than their parents.”

SPUC Safe at School launched a nationwide petition in July calling on the Secretary of State for Education to prohibit the promotion of pornography in schools.


Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Protest against St Andrews University honour for pro-abortion Hillary Clinton

The BBC reports:

"Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be honoured for her work when she visits Scotland next month.

She will address academics and students at St Andrews University before being given an honorary degree.

The visit on 13 and 14 September comes as the university continues to mark its 600th anniversary.

St Andrews principal Professor Louise Richardson said she was delighted the wife of former president Bill Clinton would be attending.

Mrs Clinton will be honoured for her efforts in championing the causes of education, human rights, democracy, civil society and promoting opportunities for females around the world.

Professor Richardson said: "We are absolutely delighted that Secretary Clinton will join us and other distinguished guests from around the world as we celebrate 600 years of university education in St Andrews."

...

"As one of the most influential women in the world, Hillary Clinton, as stateswoman, senator, and policymaker, never shied away from tackling difficult questions, working to make the world a better place, inspiring others, speaking out for the voiceless and striving ever to excel.""

Hillary Clinton is one of the world's most prominent pro-abortion public figures. For example:

• at a major international conference in 1995, she said: “women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s rights”, which has been used ever since by the pro-abortion lobby at the UN to push for the so-called 'women's right' to abortion to be enshrined as a human right
• as a US senator, Mrs Clinton had a 100% pro-abortion voting record
• in April 2007, she condemned the US Supreme Court's upholding of the federal ban on partial-birth abortion, as contrary to "a woman’s right to choose" and "constitutional rights"
• in July 2008, she attacked health professionals' right to conscientious objection to abortion and abortifacient birth control
• in April 2009, Planned Parenthood, America's main abortion provider, awarded her the Margaret Sanger Award, the foundress of the worldwide pro-abortion movement. In her acceptance speech, Mrs Clinton said: "I admire Margaret Sanger enormously" and "I want to assure you that reproductive rights and the umbrella issue of women's rights and empowerment will be a key to the foreign policy of [the Obama] Administration". (Read SPUC's youth blog on The Life and Crimes of Margaret Sanger: Part I, II, III, IV and V.)
• also in April 2009, she told the US Congress that: "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health and reproductive health includes access to abortion ... ”
• in January 2010, she renewed the Obama administration's commitment to bankroll abortion worldwide
• in March 2010, she called upon Brazil to consider legalising abortion, describing it as "a fundamental personal right"
• later in March 2010, she said: "You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion".

Please write to Professor Louise Richardson, the Principal of the University of St Andrews, to protest at the planned honour for Mrs Clinton, explaining why Mrs Clinton's promotion of abortion is contrary to "education, human rights, democracy, civil society and promoting opportunities for females around the world" and " working to make the world a better place, inspiring others, speaking out for the voiceless". You can email Professor Richardson at principal@st-andrews.ac.uk or write to her at:
College Gate
North Street
St Andrews
Fife
KY16 9AJ

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Must-read pro-life news-stories, Tue 27 Aug

Top story:

Pro-abortion journalist calls for polyamory following same-sex marriage law

A prominent pro-abortion campaigning journalist has called for legal recognition of polyamourous arrangements. Laurie Penny wrote in The Guardian: "During the recent debates around the legalisation of gay marriage, Tory critics warned that the next, unthinkable step would be multiple marriage. I can't be the only one who wondered if that'd be such a bad idea." [Guardian, 20 August] Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager, commented: "True marriage both protects children and provides a lifelong commitment affirming the irreplaceable dignity of a complementary spouse. These are among the main reasons why societies have always been more favourable towards monogamy and less favourable towards polyamourous arrangements, which historically are very rare. The fluidity, complexity and individualism inherent in polyamory makes such arrangements highly unstable and therefore poorly suited to responsible parenthood. One fears a ready recourse to abortion in the event of an unplanned conception within a sexually uncommitted polyamourous arrangement. It is therefore unsurprising that an active campaigner for abortion such as Laurie Penny is also now arguing for polyamory. Legally-recognised polyamorous arrangements would be a logical progression from the same-sex marriage law, as both are based on a separation of sex from responsible parenthood. Children both born and unborn are best protected by the natural family based on the union of one man with one woman ordered towards childbearing." [John Smeaton, 27 August]

Other stories:

Population

• Read this young woman's bold defence of Africa [John Smeaton, 22 August]
• Nearly a quarter of German men believe perfect family size is ‘zero’ [LifeSiteNews.com, 22 August]
• Catholic Relief Services leaves many questions unanswered [PRI, 22 August]

Sexual ethics

• Germany to allow third ‘blank gender’ for birth certificates [LifeSiteNews.com, 22 August]
• US education programme's reading list includes paedophilia, incest and graphic sex [The Blaze, 22 August]
• Macmillan Dictionary revises definition of marriage to include same-sex couples [Guardian, 21 August]
• French Government foists ‘gender theory’ on schools [Christian Institute, 21 August]
• Forced sterilisation: past and present [SPUC youth blog, 20 August]

General

• New Bioethics journal launched focussing on interface of technology and the human body [Peter Saunders, 23 August]
• HLI leads pro-life march in Austria [LifeSiteNews.com, 22 August]

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Pro-abortion journalist calls for polyamory following same-sex marriage law

Laurie Penny

A prominent pro-abortion campaigning journalist has called for legal recognition of polyamourous arrangements. Laurie Penny wrote (Guardian, 20 August]):

"During the recent debates around the legalisation of gay marriage, Tory critics warned that the next, unthinkable step would be multiple marriage. I can't be the only one who wondered if that'd be such a bad idea." 

Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager, has sent me his comments in response:

"True marriage both protects children and provides a lifelong commitment affirming the irreplaceable dignity of a complementary spouse. These are among the main reasons why societies have always been more favourable towards monogamy and less favourable towards polyamourous arrangements, which historically are very rare. The fluidity, complexity and individualism inherent in polyamory makes such arrangements highly unstable and therefore poorly suited to responsible parenthood. One fears a ready recourse to abortion in the event of an unplanned conception within a sexually uncommitted polyamourous arrangement. It is therefore unsurprising that an active campaigner for abortion such as Laurie Penny is also now arguing for polyamory. Legally-recognised polyamorous arrangements would be a logical progression from the same-sex marriage law, as both are based on a separation of sex from responsible parenthood. Children both born and unborn are best protected by the natural family based on the union of one man with one woman ordered towards childbearing."

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Read this young woman's bold defence of Africa

Obianuju ("Uju") Ekeocha, founder and president of Culture of Life Africa, was interviewed (see YouTube recording below) recently on EWTN's Catholic Connection programme about her pro-life/pro-family work. Readers may recall that Uju was instrumental in the fantastic pro-life/pro-family conference and march in Nigeria in June, which was supported by SPUC. Amidst much positive feedback to Uju's appearance, the presenter Teresa Tomeo received an anonymous email attacking Uju's opposition to contraception:

"If your friend from Africa is opposed to birth control, she doesn't have to use it.

It's none of her business, or yours for that matter, if non-catholics in Africa or anywhere else use it.

Your approach is one of extremism and fanaticism, which I find disturbing at best."

Uju replied with a bold defence of Africa against the imposition of contraception by Western agencies which is well underway. Among many excellent things, she said:

"I worked in a major hospital in my country long enough to see first-hand the detriment of wide-scale government or donor-sponsored contraception programs in Africa."

...

"[T]he cheapest products in our African pharmacy stores today are contraceptive drugs and devices (condoms, etc.). It is even cheaper for a woman to get contraceptives for herself than for her to buy life-saving antibiotics for her child. Why? Because, contraceptives have been heavily subsidised by the big international aid organisations and pharmaceutical companies".

...

"Today, in Abuja (the capital of my country), Marie Stopes International (prominent abortion provider founded in the UK) have their family planning clinic located on the busiest street of the city."

...

"[W]hat Africa needs at this time is not a sexual revolution (which has not worked well in the Western world), rather what we need is authentic and sustainable development within the social and cultural frame work of our faith and family-oriented values."

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

SPUC comments on British PM's pub meeting with gay activist comedian

location of Cameron & Fry meeting

Top story:

SPUC comments on British PM's pub meeting with gay activist comedian
SPUC has commented on the meeting between David Cameron, the British prime minister, and Stephen Fry, the homosexual activist and comedian. The two were invited to meet by Evgeny Lebedev, the owner of the pro-homosexual London Evening Standard newspaper, at a London pub owned jointly by Lebedev and Sir Ian McKellen, the homosexual activist and actor. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the UK's response to Russia's laws on homosexuality. Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager, told LifeSiteNews.com: "David Cameron's pub meeting suggests that he is now an actual leader of the homosexualist lobby, and that he prefers the company of his party's left-wing opponents to its own traditional supporters. One suspects that Mr Cameron is privately pleased that huge numbers of pro-family Tories are fleeing from the Conservative party. All prime ministers are desperate to leave their mark on history, and Mr Cameron is delighted to leave the destruction of true marriage as his legacy. The cost, of course, will be be paid by future generations, especially children both born and unborn." [LifeSiteNews.com, 19 August]

Other stories:

Abortion

• Abortion doesn’t kill babies, abortionists do [SPUC youth blog, 20 August]
• Abortion rates rising in Wigan, north-west England [Wigan Today, 19 August]
• Hard working abortionists should motivate us [SPUC youth blog, 13 August]

Embryology

• 3.8 million human embryos created to produce 122,000 live births – success rate of 3.2%  [Peter Saunders, 18 August]
• At 60, Britain's oldest mum of IVF twins finally admits: I wish I had a man to help me [Mail, 15 August]

Euthanasia

• Rugby star with motor neurone disease says he's "very positive, very happy" [BBC, 20 August]
• Shape up or close down, 800 care homes are told [Times, 20 August]
• Euthanasia fears as Irish government introduces mental incapacity bill [Pat Buckley, 19 August]
• Neighbour tells mother to "Do the right thing and…euthanize" autistic 13-year-old son [LifeSiteNews.com, 19 August]
• English pair arrested over assisted death claim [BBC, 18 August]
• Eleven arrests over care home death [Telegraph, 13 August]

Sexual ethics

• Outgoing Chief Rabbi accused British PM of failing stay-at-home mothers [Telegraph, 19 August]
• Leading Catholic academic shows why Catholics may not support civil partnerships [John Smeaton, 13 August]

General

• Hard working pro-life volunteers should motivate us too! [SPUC youth blog, 19 August]
• Alfred Rosenberg and Nazi racial theory [SPUC youth blog, 14 August]

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Leading Catholic academic shows why Catholics may not support civil partnerships

Professor Roberto de Mattei

Professor Roberto de Mattei, a leading Italian Catholic academic, has written an excellent article entitled: "Can a Catholic support civil unions to prevent gay ‘marriage’?", answering the question with a strongly-argued 'no' - see below for key extracts. Professor de Mattei's article is a powerful antidote to those "personalities from the Catholic world" such as David Quinn and Dr Austen Ivereigh of "Catholic Voices" who have supported civil partnerships. The article's thesis is entirely at one with Pope Benedict's words of 2 December 2010 that:

"The church cannot approve legislative initiatives that imply a valuation of alternative models of the life of the couple and the family".

Key extracts from "Can a Catholic support civil unions to prevent gay ‘marriage’?" by Professor Roberto de Mattei:

• "A dangerous belief is gaining ground, even among Catholics, that a juridical recognition of homosexual cohabitation is the only way to avoid "gay marriage." "No to gay marriage, yes to the rights of de facto couples and homosexuals" is the watchword of those who want to organise a line of resistance based on the disastrous policy of "giving in so as not to lose." This is not only a colossal strategic error but also - and above all - a grave moral one."

• "If the principle is accepted that the lesser evil can be committed in order to obtain a larger good, then Catholics would be able to promote therapeutic abortion in order to avoid selective abortion; they could promote homologous artificial insemination in order to avoid heterologous artificial insemination; they could support civil unions in order to avoid homosexual marriage. But, doing this, the whole edifice of morality would collapse because, from lesser evil to lesser evil, every single moral choice could be speciously justified."

• "[E]ven some personalities from the Catholic world are saying that the recognition of homosexual unions is de facto a "lesser evil" which might be undertaken in order to avoid the "greater evil" of "gay marriage." But from the moral point of view, the legal recognition of homosexual unions is just as grave as putting them on the same level as marriage. This is why the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons (3 June 2003) and approved by John Paul II, sets down that "respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.""

• "Voting in favour of a law such as this is to make oneself complicit in an evil which is in no way destroyed by the supposed "damage limitation." If there were two laws in Parliament, one which legalised homosexual marriage and the other which recognised the rights of homosexual couples but did not equate their union with marriage, Catholics could not vote in favour of the latter on the basis that it was "less bad" than the first. If the worse law were to pass, then the responsibility for it would fall on those who had signed it."

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Irish Catholic hospital not allowed to opt out of abortion

Irish Catholic hospital not allowed to opt out of abortion requirement: government [LifeSiteNews.com, 12 August]

Pope Francis issues pro-life/pro-family mission statements for all Catholics
Pope Francis issued two strong pro-life/pro-family messages last week. In a message to Brazilian families, he said: "In a particular way, faced with the culture of waste, that relativizes the value of human life, parents are called to pass on to their children the understanding that this must always be defended, already in the mother's womb". And in a message to a Catholic men's fraternity, he called upon them to "bear witness to the authentic nature of marriage and the family, the sanctity and inviolable dignity of human life, and the beauty and truth of human sexuality." John Smeaton, SPUC director, commented: "It is clear, from both the details and the contexts, that these are mission statements, not just for parents or for the Knights of Columbus, but for all the faithful." [John Smeaton, 12 August]

Concern about maternity unit closures and midwives shortages
The group "Save St Helier" is concerned that the proposed closure of the maternity unit at St Helier hospital, Sutton, will jeopardise the safety of expectant mothers and their unborn children, by forcing them to travel all the way to the maternity unit at St George's hospital, Tooting. They argue that St George's is already under increasing strain, and that many such journeys would have to be undertaken during rush-hours on already traffic-jammed roads. SPUC is encouraging its members to read more about these issues and make their concerns known to their local MP and GPs. [John Smeaton, 9 August]

Other stories:

Embryology

• Stem cells: what happened to the radical breakthroughs? [Observer, 11 August]

Sexual ethics

• "Threats to marriage and family", warn the Bishops of the Province of Ibadan [News.va, 12 August]
• Brazen David Cameron claims after legalising gay mariage that he’s an active Christian who avoids ‘pick and mix’ discipleship [Protect the Pope, 10 August]
• Scottish man fined £40,000 for ‘homophobic’ Twitter message [LifeSiteNews.com, 9 August]

General

• Madrid Declaration on Science and Life [FIAMC, 13 August]
• Dr John Kelly, veteran English OB/GYN, dies [MaterCare International, 9 August]

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Pope Francis issues pro-life/pro-family mission statements for all Catholics

Evangelium Vitae Day, Rome, 17/6/13

In a letter dated 6 August from Pope Francis to Brazilian families marking National Families Week, the Holy Father says:

"In a particular way, faced with the culture of waste, that relativizes the value of human life, parents are called to pass on to their children the understanding that this must always be defended, already in the mother's womb, recognizing in it a gift from God and an assurance of mankind's future, but also in the care shown to the elderly, particularly to grandparents, who are the living memory of a people and the transmitters of life's wisdom."

And last week the text of a pro-life/pro-family message from Pope Francis to the Knights of Columbus was published. The message, sent via a letter from Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, was sent to greet the Knights during their annual Convention. The Knights of Columbus are a Catholic charitable fraternity. I am a knight of the equivalent fraternity in England, the Knights of St Columba (KSC), which has given decades of wonderful support to SPUC and the pro-life movement generally.

The letter from Cardinal Bertone says (my emphases in bold):

"His Holiness was pleased to learn that this year’s Supreme Convention has drawn its theme — "Be Protectors of God’s Gifts" — from his homily at the Mass inaugurating his papal ministry, which by a happy coincidence fell on the Solemnity of Saint Joseph. As protector of the Holy Family, the humble carpenter of Nazareth is a model of the manly virtues of quiet strength, integrity and fidelity which the Knights of Columbus have sought to preserve, cultivate and pass on to new generations of Catholic men. It was in fact as a protective association that your Order was founded in the late nineteenth century, in response to the need to promote the material and spiritual welfare of working men and their families, the dignity of labor and the demands of social justice, and the advancement of the Church’s mission. In fidelity to this founding vision, the Knights continue to play an outstanding role in helping Catholic men to respond to their vocation to be “protectors of creation, protectors of God’s plan inscribed in nature, protectors of one another and of the environment” (Homily, 19 March 2013).

Among the first acts of his pontificate, the Holy Father wished to add the name of Saint Joseph to each of the Eucharistic Prayers of the Mass. It is his hope that the Knights, in venerating the memory of this great Saint, will beg his intercession for the protection of the many blessings which the Lord has poured out upon them and their families, and work with ever greater commitment for the spread of the Gospel, the conversion of hearts and the renewal of the temporal order in Christ (cf. Apostolicam Actuositatem, 7). Conscious of the specific responsibility which the lay faithful have for the Church’s mission, he invites each Knight, and every Council, to bear witness to the authentic nature of marriage and the family, the sanctity and inviolable dignity of human life, and the beauty and truth of human sexuality. In this time of rapid social and cultural changes, the protection of God’s gifts cannot fail to include the affirmation and defense of the great patrimony of moral truths taught by the Gospel and confirmed by right reason, which serve as the bedrock of a just and well-ordered society.

For this reason His Holiness once more expresses his appreciation of the clear public witness offered by the Knights of Columbus in protecting the right and duty of believers to participate responsibly, on the basis of their deepest convictions, in the life of society. In his Encyclical Lumen Fidei, he pointed out that faith, precisely because it embraces God’s truth, sheds light on the authentic meaning and purpose of life, strengthens the bonds uniting individuals and communities, and thus serves as a trustworthy foundation for building a just and humane society (cf. 50-51)."

It is clear, from both the details and the contexts, that these are mission statements, not just for parents or for the Knights of Columbus, but for all the faithful.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Concern about maternity unit closures and midwives shortages

Mothers from Save St Helier

In June The Telegraph newspaper reported that:

"Maternity wards in England are shutting their doors a total of more than 1,000 times a year forcing expecting mothers to seek care elsewhere or give birth at home, according to new figures ... Maternity wards are facing growing pressure because of a shortage of midwives and the increasing birth rate, which rose to 688,000 live births in England in 2011 — the highest total since 1971."

 And earlier this month The Evening Standard reported that:

"The number of London hospitals with maternity units could be almost halved to concentrate specialist care on fewer larger sites."

The group "Save St Helier" is concerned that the proposed closure of the maternity unit at St Helier hospital, Sutton, will jeopardise the safety of expectant mothers and their unborn children, by forcing them to travel all the way to the maternity unit at St George's hospital, Tooting. They argue that St George's is already under increasing strain, and that many such journeys would have to be undertaken during rush-hours on already traffic-jammed roads.

I would encourage SPUC supporters to read more about these issues and make their concerns known to their local MP and GPs. Among SPUC's official aims are:

• To reassert the principle laid down in the United Nations 1959 Declaration of the Rights of the Child that the child "needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth."
• To defend, assist and promote the life and welfare of mothers during pregnancy and of their children from the time of conception up to, during and after birth.

You can contact your MP via the Contact your MP page on SPUC's website.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Brazilian president signs law permitting abortion after papal visit

Brazil's pro-abortion president during World Youth Day

Top stories:

Brazilian president signs law permitting abortion after papal visit [CNA, 2 August]

Austria police arrest 34 after pro-abortion attacks on peaceful pro-life rally
34 anti-life/anti-family protesters have been arrested after trying to disrupt a pro-life rally in the Austrian city of Salzburg. Joannes Bucher of Human Life International (HLI) reported that the protesters "carried a big black banner depicting the HLI logo inside of a condom which read, “Prevent forced reproduction. Abortion on demand for everyone!" The 1,000 Crosses for Life march has also been attacked in the past. [LifeNews.com, 1 August]

Other stories:

Abortion

• Peter Singer: apes should have similiar rights as humans, but not unborn babies [LifeNews.com, 5 August]

Embryology and stem cells

• Sperm donor named legal parent and ordered to pay £300,000 [BioNews, 5 August]
• Top French court backs stem-cell research [Chicago Tribune, 1 August]

Population

• Time Magazine promotes childless lifestyle [RINF, 6 August]
• Most Chinese want to have second child, says survey [SCMP, 5 August]

Sexual ethics

• Anti-homophobia, ‘transphobia’ bill could silence Christians, Italian family groups warn [LifeSiteNews.com, 5 August]
• Croatian government to introduce homosexual unions [Gay Star News, 5 August]

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Must-read pro-life news-stories, Mon 1 Aug

Top stories:

Nicklinson-Lamb euthanasia ruling welcomed but 'Martin' assisted suicide ruling carries danger for disabled people
SPUC Pro-Life has welcomed the fact that the murder law has been upheld in today’s judgment in the Nicklinson and Lamb euthanasia cases. However, the majority judgment in the case of the anonymous third man, 'Martin', is deeply disturbing. Paul Tully, SPUC Pro-Life's general secretary, said: "If implemented it could encourage the pro-euthanasia lobby to recruit paid medical and legal professionals to organise the suicides of suffering and disabled people. [SPUC, 31 July]

Ethical campaigners saddened by final approval of Wales opt-out organ bill
Ethical campaigners have expressed their sadness following final approval of a bill in Wales to create an opt-out system for organ transplantation. Members of the Wales region of SPUC are saddened that the Secretary of State for Wales has decided not to use his powers to block the Human Transplantation (Wales) Bill from being sent to Her Majesty the Queen for Royal Assent. Michael Wendell Thomas, vice-chairman of SPUC's Wales region, said: "A collective weight of opinion has demonstrated that implementation of the Bill will be fraught with risk. "Members of SPUC's Wales region will remain vigilant regarding this ill-considered piece of legislation. We will campaign wherever possible to mitigate the effects that it may have on the weak and vulnerable in our midst. [SPUC, 31 July]

Family campaigners worldwide must protest against Cameron’s plan to export same-sex marriage
SPUC is calling upon family campaigners worldwide to protest against the British prime minister’s plan to export same-sex marriage, following David Cameron’s speech last night at a reception at No. 10 Downing Street, the prime ministerial residence, to thank those who had engineered the rail-roading of Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act through Parliament. John Smeaton, SPUC’s chief executive, called for international resistance to the British prime minister’s global plans to impose sexual licence on children and poor families. He said: “SPUC will be contacting church leaders, politicians and family campaigners worldwide to alert them to this threat by the British government, asking them to protest to the British embassies in their countries. Same-sex marriage is a counterfeit version of marriage and thus undermines real marriage, which is the best protector of children, both born and unborn. [SPUC, 25 July]

Other stories:

Abortion

• Ireland’s pregnancy law open to challenge [Pat Buckley, 30 July]
• Congresswoman rejects abortion, baby becomes first ever to survive Potter’s syndrome [LifeSiteNews.com, 30 July]
• Mother, 20, who was repeatedly told to abort baby lost him 19 minutes after birth [Mail, 29 July]
• Realistic description of abortion necessary in sanitised debate of half-truths [Pat Buckley, 26 July]
• I faked a student pregnancy, and I was horrified by the reaction [Independent, 23 July]

Embryology and stem cells

• Scientists grow human tooth using stem cells taken from urine [Independent, 30 July]

Population

• Madagascar bishops and clergy complain about Catholic Relief Services' activities [Population Research Institute, 1 August]
• China slammed by US State Department for policies that encourage trafficking in persons [Pat Buckley, 31 July]

Sexual ethics

• UK: Gay couple to sue church over gay marriage opt-out [Christian Institute, 1 August]
• Court asked to sterilise man with learning difficulties [Telegraph, 1 August]
• School bins sex education DVD for being too graphic [This is Sussex, 1 August]
• France: Sperm donor granted visiting rights to the child of a same-sex couple [Pink News, 1 August]
• Local Tories ‘still very unhappy’ over gay marriage [Christian Institute, 31 July]
• Stay-at-home mothers are the happiest [Mail, 31 July]
• Some Minnesotans are more sad than bitter over gay marriage [StarTribune, 31 July]

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy