Thursday, February 9, 2017

The Citizens' Assembly: Shut it down now

It is with sadness that I watch the ongoing farce known as the Citizens' Assembly and I have to ask myself how is it that the killing of babies can even be contemplated let alone presented as an acceptable option by some members of our society? 

Everyone knows that certain members of the Irish Government are committed to changing the law but they are also keenly aware that a direct decision to do so would have a disastrous effect on their chances of re-election, hence the creation of the talking shop known as the Citizens Assembly to ‘investigate’ the issues.  The obvious purpose of this is to create the pretence that they are acting on the advice of the Assembly and are at arms length from the issue allowing them to  claim that a new referendum is the will of the people. 
It stands to reason that the Irish Government would not have appointed such a body if they really believed that the killing of babies is unacceptable and were intent on upholding the 8th Amendment.
To date the strategic direction of the Citizens’ Assembly appears to the onlooker as being substantially pro-abortion with an occasional nod towards the pro-life view.
The Assembly secretariat appear to have completely ignored the fact that the current law upholds the right to life of the unborn which has resulted in the development of a caring, 2 patient model for pregnancy and childbirth. It also ignores the achievements of the 8th amendment which include at least 100,000 additional citizens.

We have to ask how is it considered acceptable to introduce people who make their living from the killing of babies to take part of our national debate?
Patricia Lohr of BPAS for example, who infamously told a London audience last September that killing children by abortion is “extremely gratifying”, gave an address to the Assembly during its 3rd session.   
This lady also published a paper on Feticide[1] in which she chillingly tells us:
From a medical perspective, this term refers to modalities to induce fetal demise (1). Feticide is most commonly used for selective termination of higher order gestations to twins or singletons. It is also used by some providers before medical and surgical abortion in the second and third trimesters to avoid signs of life at induction or in the belief that it makes the procedure easier and safer. Several methods have been described including intra-cardiac injection of potassium chloride, intra-amniotic injection of digoxin, and transection of the umbilical cord (2). Older methods of medical abortion employed instillation of hyperosmolar solutions such as urea, which also variably induced fetal demise.  

The Assembly was also addressed by a representative of the Guttmacher Institute – the research wing of Planned Parenthood which is the largest abortion provider in the United States and throughout the world.

In recent decades we have witnessed a drift away from the understanding of natural law which includes the prohibition on killing as set out in the 5th Commandment to positive law which seeks to identify and implement all sorts of trumped up individual rights, in the name of liberty, regardless of the consequences of this approach. The twisted thinking of the liberal left which denies the humanity of unborn babies is rooted in Marxist ideology.

Shut down this unsatisfactory Assembly now.


Wednesday, December 14, 2016

ELN submission to Citizens' Assembly

European Life Network in a submission to the Citizens' Assembly has appealed for the retention of the 8th amendment and has included a link to the video prepared in conjunction with the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children as set out below

Appeal to uphold and cherish the 8th Amendment: with video link
European Life Network calls on the Citizens’ Assembly to uphold the 8th Amendment and reject all attempts to legalise the killing of unborn children. In support of this appeal, we have prepared a video presentation (produced in partnership with the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children) featuring Irish people, and people of Irish descent, with specialised knowledge and personal experience of these issues. We ask the Assembly to view this video, available here: 

Despite false claims, the 8th Amendment simply recognises that unborn babies have a right to life equal to that of their mothers. Ireland’s maternal health record, among the best in the world, also reflects the fact that Irish doctors are trained to treat a mother and her unborn child as two equal patients. 

In this presentation, Raymond Cardinal Burke argues that a clause similar to the 8th Amendment should be in the constitution of every nation. He notes the dedication of Ireland’s Constitution to the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom, is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred”. Through this dedication, Ireland provides a great example of a correctly ordered society.

Dr Patrick Fagan (Director of Marriage and Religion Research Institute) argues that when a nation starts to eliminate pain and suffering by eliminating people, there is no logical place to draw a line. Even limited relaxation of abortion law leads inevitably to widespread abortion. In the UK, the Abortion Act 1967, was not intended to introduce abortion on demand. Fifty years on, more than 8.4 million babies have been aborted. 

Evidence shows that abortion is physically and psychologically damaging, no matter where it takes place. Bernadette Goulding (Director of Rachel’s Vineyard, Ireland) who had an abortion herself, describes the trauma millions of women around the world have experienced following abortion. 

Former MEP’s Dana Rosemary Scallon and Kathy Sinnott highlight the huge international pressure on Ireland to introduce abortion.

Kathy Sinnott contrasts the terminal decline of European states as a result of low birthrates with the situation in Ireland. The repeal of the 8th Amendment would propel Ireland towards a similar demographic collapse. She also argues that seeking to dispose of children with life-limiting conditions or serious disabilities is modern day eugenics. 

Rebecca Kiessling, who was conceived in a violent rape, challenges the inherent injustice of punishing innocent babies for the crimes of their biological fathers.

Cliona Johnson tells the heart-rending story of her son John Paul who lived 17 minutes after birth. Their story offers a truthful and inspiring account of authentic compassion for the most vulnerable of all – unborn babies deemed incompatible with life”.

Finally, the video calls on the Irish diaspora to speak out now and to encourage the nation to maintain its pro-life culture that is identified and admired worldwide.

Monday, August 22, 2016

New post graduate course in Dublin City University (DCU) aims to hook children on sex!

Post by Marie Cummins.

The newest post graduate certificate in DCU entitled; Sexuality and Sexual Health Education is pointing towards an overly sexualised, secular society where anything goes, as long as you are in control. This collaborative partnership between DCU school of Nursing and the Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) states that it will help individuals to 'make healthy decisions about sexuality and sexual health regardless of their position in the life span'. This loaded statement indicates that no matter what age a child is, they will be educated about sexual decisions and explicit sexual terms and behaviours unsuitable for their age. Now that these explicit courses are beginning to emerge in Ireland, Irish citizens need to fully understand the consequences and implications of such sexual programmes being promoted in school settings and health care settings.

The course undoubtedly is promoting CSE (Comprehensive Sexuality Education), which essentially includes issues such as abortion, promiscuity and LGBTQIA rights. Sexuality education as proposed by this new course promotes sexual rights at the expense of sexual health. Ultimately the goal of such programmes is to change the sexual and gender norms of society. A more accurate name to this course would be abortion, promiscuity and LGBTQIA rights education.

As outlined on the DCU website the key objectives of the course include to;
Train a generation of educators in Sexuality & Sexual Health.
Elaborate on sexuality-related literary, artistic and cultural discourses.
Advocate for the implementation and where necessary the creation of social
  policy on sexuality, sexual health education, and sexual education promotion in
  relation to human rights that shape social justice and diversity.

Comprehensive sexuality education is promoted by powerful organizations such as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), and UN agencies such as the World Health Organization (WHO), UNAIDS, UNESCO, UNICEF, and UNFPA. Even the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGGS) promotes CSE.

The controversial nature of CSE promotes the following:
• Masturbation to children as young as 5 years old
• Encourages children to explore their gender identity
• Teaches children about orgasm, homosexual and heterosexual sexual acts
• Promotes abortion as safe and without consequences
• Promotes CSE as a human right and promotes high risk sexual activities as safe.
• The program also teaches children about the right to abortion, and encourages
   them to advocate for sexual rights in laws and policies.

This comprehensive approach to sexuality education is pornographic in nature and fails to include emotional, physical and psychological health risks of promiscuous sexual activity.

Despite the fact that the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in Article 26.3
Says that: “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children” these programmes are taught without adequate parental notification or consultation. This is a gross violation of parental rights.
Provision is also being made at an international level which grant children privacy and confidentiality further alienating parental rights.
The question to ask here is; confidentiality from whom? and privacy from whom? This violation of the constitutional rights of parents to guide and educate their children will make it very difficult for parents to know what their children are being taught and shown at school. This so called ‘sexual liberation’ of children from the parents conservative or religious views regarding sexuality and indoctrinating them in a new worldview that coincides with various liberal political ideologies is extremely dangerous. The purpose of such programs is to expose children to explicit sexual content without the knowledge or consent of their parents.
This new course offered by DCU is only the beginning, the dangers of such explicit CSE needs to be exposed and our children must be protected from ludicrous liberal sexual agendas.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

RTE found to be in breach of BAI standards following public complaints on their handling of the abortion issue

BLOG POST  by Marie Cummins
When will RTE adhere to the broadcasting laws of fairness and impartiality when dealing with the issue of abortion? Over the past six months, Ray D’Arcy, who presents an afternoon radio show for RTE, has twice been found to be in breach of the Broadcasting Authority if Ireland (BAI) standards in dealing with the issue of abortion and the right to life of unborn babies. 

The BAI decisions were handed down following a number of complaints by members of the public that D’Arcy’s handling of abortion was one-sided and biased. See articles in the Journal and the Irish Independent.

The first case arose during a programme on June 9th last year when D’Arcy interviewed Amnesty International’s Colm O’Gorman, in relation to the group’s pro-abortion report ‘She is not a criminal: The impact of Ireland’s abortion law’.  Following that interview  six complaints were lodged with the BAI on the basis that the programme was clearly in breach of Section 39 (1) of the Broadcasting Act 2009, which stipulates that ‘all news broadcast is reported and presented in an objective and impartial manner and without any expression of the broadcaster's own views’.

Recently another complaint was issued to the BAI following D’Arcy’s interview of creator of Father Ted, Graham Linehan and his wife Helen, on 19 October of last year, regarding their experience of abortion. The interview focused on the fact that at 12 weeks gestation their baby had been diagnosed as having a so called ‘fatal foetal abnormality’ and on their subsequent decision to have an abortion. The Linehans who were living in England at the time took part in an Amnesty International video, the purpose of which was to remove all remaining barriers to, and decriminalise abortion, in Ireland. The BAI upheld both complaints in separate rulings and ruled that the radio programmes did not meet the requirements for ‘fairness, impartiality and objectivity'.

Both programmes were blatant attacks on Ireland's pro-life laws and in particular on the Eight Amendment of the Constitution, which grants an equal right to life to a mother and her unborn child. These programmes were presented by D’Arcy during a period when the pro-abortion lobby is working hard to overturn Ireland’s protection of the unborn and he failed to provide balance by inviting someone to present a pro-life view, neither did he adequately challenge the position of the guests on the show. On the contrary he seemed to be in agreement with them and gave them a very soft interview.

The whole affair raises a number of poignant questions . First, why were there no balancing views during the programmes, there are a number of groups such as ‘one day more’ whose members have experienced similar heartbreak as the Linehans but carried their babies to term?
Another critical question relates to the interview with the Linehans and we ask, if pro -life people came on the air, would they be given the same soft approach?
Probably not.

The Irish media in general appears to have embraced pro-abortion stance and seem to waste no opportunity in promoting their views. The position of RTE however is somewhat different to the media in general, in that they receive public funding and it is incumbent on them therefore to be more careful about the presentation of one-sided views on critical issues such as this.
It is high time that RTE are taken to task about their broadcasting policies and their monitoring of individual programmes when dealing with the issue of abortion if they are to continue to receive public funding.

It is also clear that the time has come for RTE to take action in regard to Ray D’Arcy.