DriveThru – Get What You Need

Negative influences from pop culture are easy to spot so when entertainment offers up a healthy message, that’s an exception worth noting. 

A recent example is the country music song, “The Call,” by Matt Kennon.  Regardless of your opinion of country music, ballads like Kennon’s (based in part on his own life experience)  use lyric and melody to constructively draw us into a larger story and a bigger purpose.  In this instance, it’s the impact each of us can have in encouraging others to embrace the value of life – their own or someone else’s.

You may remember a time in your life when the right word or encouragement changed your attitude, or even life direction.  I certainly recall when that’s happened to me, as well as who made “the call” that enhanced my life. Most often, human life is best defended by reaching out with love and concern.  Kennon’s “The Call” demonstrates the opportunity we have to love, and in the process change the direction of another’s life in a life-affirming way.

If you’re the kind of person who likes to put your money where your values are, you might consider putting a pair of Dockers pants on your Christmas list.  The company’s web site features a landing page it calls “Man-ifesto” – a bold plea for men to be men. 

The quasi-humerous narrative describes a “genderless” world where men no longer take charge and lead.  The message isn’t anti-woman, it’s
pro-manhood. Of course, Dockers wants to sell its product. Still
it’s refreshing to see a corporation encouraging men to “wear the pants.” 

“What I wear is pants.  What I do is live.  How I pray is breathe.” 

Day of a Stranger by Thomas Merton

About once a year, the Guttmacher Institute (which operates as the research arm of the abortion industry) releases a report on the number of illegal abortions in the world and uses the report to argue for legalizing abortion in those nations.  The latest report was released yesterday.

Abortions are illegal in many developing nations, including in Latin America and Africa.  Guttmacher’s report contends that making abortion legal in these places would make abortion safe – thus saving women’s lives.  (This apart from the fact that abortion is always fatal for the woman’s preborn baby.)  

Yet, a broader look at the status of overall medical care in these developing nations leads to a different conclusion: it’s a lack of sanitary, quality medical care, including obstetrical care, that brings about a high mortality rate for women surrounding pregnancy – not bans on abortion.  

This is documented in an on-line report by Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Global Outreach entitled, “Does legalizing abortion protect women’s health?”   Its research found that the best way to reduce maternal mortality is to provide women in developing nation’s access to the same quality health care available to women in developed ones.

Experience tells us that legalized abortion leads to more abortion, and in developing countries without adequate medical care, more women would die or be harmed if abortion is liberalized.  Women in developing nations don’t need abortion; they need clean water, food and education for their children. The Guttmacher Institute should get in touch with the real needs of these women and stop promoting death for their children instead.

It’s been strangely quiet on the “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA) front of late. 

Back in March, a staffer for U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y) – who sponsored the legislation in 2007 – said reintroducing FOCA was a priority and that the measure would be submitted “sooner rather than later.”

Then, dead silence.

No legislation dropped in the Congressional hopper.  No fundraising emails from pro-abortion groups.  Nada.

So, what happened?  Federal healthcare reform legislation happened.

Pro-life groups began to decry FOCA and President Obama’s pledge to sign it as soon as he stepped into the 2008 presidential race.   FOCA is so radical that once exposed, the public would never go for it.  That fact coupled with the roaring voice of opposition rallied by pro-life groups and FOCA faded into the background.

Yet, a close look at the current healthcare reform legislation before Congress reveals that FOCA hasn’t gone away; it’s just changed vehicles. 

Under the Democratic proposals, abortion becomes a federal healthcare right with required coverage in the policy of every American and paid for by both private insurance premiums and taxpayer dollars.  Any federal or state law that conflicts by limiting abortion will be suspect and in jeopardy of being struck down for violating federal law.

What a coincidence!   That sounds alot like FOCA.  

The moral of this story is if you cannot pass a piece of legislation that’s upfront about enshrining abortion into federal law, do it through a back door.   Either way, the outcome will be the same.

Between Congressional actions on “hate crimes,” mandated abortion coverage in healthcare reform legislation and the Sotomayor nomination to the US Supreme Court, this blog needs a lighter post.  So, here’s one out of Great Britain:

 A Telegraph newspaper article highlights the results of a book that aims to put a monetary value of what we value most.  Before you scroll away, the findings are interesting as authors Steve Henry and David Alberts (You Are Really Rich, You Just Don’t Know It Yet) reveal what most people already know – that money isn’t everything.  

 For the book, a research group asked more than 1,000 people what made them happy, and then ranked those findings with a calculated monetary value ( converted in this post from British Pounds to US Dollars) derived from how they’d feel about winning the lottery.   

At the top of the list is good health, roughly valued at $295.  Hearing the words, “I love you,” is the next highly valued experience at $267.  Other top rated experiences include having children ($202), spending time with family ($180) and laughing ($177).  

The list goes on but the point is made:  People still highly value family, children and interactions in those relationships – the very elements of life we promote here at Focus on the Family.   So, even in these tough economic times, you can “spend” generously on your friends and family.  A simple “I love you” is worth a lot.

What will Democratic members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee put in a healthcare reform package?   And, what will they exclude?

That question was answered yesterday when they included abortion and excluded euthanasia. 

So, now we know where the line is: it’s okay to use taxpayer dollars to subsidize healthcare plans that kill preborn children but not okay to use the same dollars in plans that kill our elderly and terminally ill.

Good to know.

Add another one to the list: A survey finding that a majority of Americans (polled) oppose abortion as it exists today in the U.S.  Conducted in May by The Marist Poll for the Knights of Columbus, the poll found 86% of Americans believe abortion should be “significantly restricted.”  

Remember that the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton, declared abortion legal for any reason during the entire term of pregnancy.   Do most Americans support that?  No, not according to this poll – or any other I recall seeing.

It continues to be true that Americans don’t like abortion and want much less of it. 

Some of the poll’s other findings:  79% believe “health care workers should not be mandated to perform an abortion if it conflicts with their personal values,” including 64% of strong “pro-choice” supporters polled who agree with this statement, and 53% of those polled think abortion “does more harm than good for a woman in the long run.” 

This follows a May 2009 Gallop poll, finding that more Americans identified as “pro-life” than as “pro–choice” for the first time since Gallop began asking that question in 1995.   The Pew Research Center released a poll in late April revealing that the number of Americans saying that abortion should be legal in all or most cases declined from 54% to 46% since 2008. 

Certainly poll questions can influence results but these are the same questions asked by pollsters on the topic of abortion for years – and the outcomes continue to point to a public ready for policy and legal change. 

Keep it up, pro-life America!  The tide is turning!

The story may qualify as “old” as far as the daily news cycle is concerned but the impact of New York State’s decision to buy women’s eggs for stem cell research will be felt long after reporters  move to another topic.    

Last month, the Empire State Stem Cell Board gave approval for state-funded researchers to purchase women’s eggs for embryonic stem cell research, offering women as much as $10,000.  That’s a lot of cash. 

And, it’s a lot of risk for women who subject their bodies to the egg donation process and its list of possible complications: blood clots, kidney and liver damage, future infertility and death.   

The lure of cold, hard cash for what’s perceived as a simple medical procedure will be attractive to many and, during tough economic times, more women may consider this as a way of paying their bills.  For young women and women facing of economic challenges, the offer of “cash for eggs” will be tempting. 

Women’s voices from both sides of the political (and abortion) spectrum have questioned egg donation for research based on the financial exploitation of the women involved.  For more on this question and other resources, see Egg Donation: Good Deed or Risky Venture?

Women aren’t the only ones exploited through this plan.  The eggs will be used for state-funded research to create living human embryos to be destroyed in the process of creating stem cell lines.  The eggs may also be fodder for human cloning experiements where – again – human embryos are created and killed in the name of scientific advancement. 

Only one member of the board – Rev. Thomas Berg – voted against payments for egg donors.  Fellow board member and egg purchase supporter Dr. Samuel Packer said of Berg, “At some point the dissenting voice can’t stop the progress of science or anything else in society.”

Apparently, even when the dissenting voice is right.  

The people of  New York need to pay attention to this misuse of their tax dollars.  And, they need to speak up.

Media was a buzz today with news that President Obama nominated famed geneticist Francis Collins to head the National Institutes of Health (NIH).  It’s a prestigious position and Collins’ qualifications are impeccable.  

Not unexpectedly, The New York Times report  on the nomination focused less on Collins’ expertise but rather his religious faith.  You see, Collins is a professing Evangelical who believes in God and that’s a clear violation of scientific standards for some on the Left, regardless of his expertise in the field.  For some, it’s impossible to be a person of faith and of science.  However, Collins proves one of many exceptions to that thought.

Before pro-lifers get too excited about one of their own holding the reins at NIH, reasonable expectations of Collins are in order.  Collins supports destructive embryonic stem cell research – a prerequisite for the president to appoint him to this post since part of the job is to implement Obama’s policy to fund increased research in this area.  

 So, what can we expect?  As Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity executive director, Paige Cunningham, told CitizenLink, “I think we can be confident that he will approach every ethical question with integrity,” she noted. “And that is as much as you can ask for in a political appointment like this.” 

Let’s pray for Collins and for his influence at NIH to be both God and life honoring.