ROME, August 31, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In remarks given during his weekly audience, during which he meets with pilgrims around the world, Pope Benedict XVI focused on the gift and the beauty of the large family, while citing a “demographic deficit” that he says is depriving Western nations of “freshness, energy, and the future incarnate in children.”
“With the Lord,” said the pope, commenting on the text of Psalm 126, “there is prosperity and fruitfulness, a family rich with children and serenity, a city well supplied and protected, free from fears and insecurities.”
“The father who had children in his youthful days,” he continued, “will not only enjoy them in all their vigor, but they will be his support in his old age. Thus he is able to look forward to the future with security, becoming like a warrior, armed with all those sharpened and victorious arrows that are the children.”
“The image which emerges from the culture of that time has the purpose of celebrating security, stability, the strength of a large family, as will be repeated in Psalm 127, which paints a portrait of a happy family.”
“The final frame [of the psalm] presents a father surrounded by his children, who is welcomed with great respect at the city gates, the center of public life. Fathering children is thus a gift carrying life and the well-being of society.”
Linking his remarks on the psalm to the modern-day world situation, he lamented that “We are noticing it in our own day with nations where the demographic deficit is depriving them of freshness, energy, and the future incarnate in children.”
Pope Benedict’s message is viewed by orthodox Catholics as especially timely, since the frightening demographic collapse across the Western world has become increasingly apparent in recent years. For years, large sections of the developed Catholic world have ignored the Church’s prohibition on birth control, despite warnings by the Church and pro-family activists of the negative impact this would have on Church and society and the entire culture.
(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).
NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesitenews.com or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444
Donate to LifeSiteNews.com at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/
8.31.2005
8.27.2005
New Study Finds Babies Cry in the Womb
– "Even the Bottom Lip Quivers"
CHARLOTTE, North Carolina, August 26, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A new study has revealed that unborn babies cry within the womb. Ultrasound videos taken of infants within the womb revealed 28-week-old babies crying in response to a noise stimulus.
Scientists played a 90-decibel noise to the unborn child, roughly the equivalent of a tummy rumbling, and recorded the effect the noise had via ultrasound. “It was strikingly like an infant crying,” said New Zealand pediatrician Ed Mitchell, who contributed to the US study, according to New Zealand's The Age. “Even the bottom lip quivers.”
Up until now, it was known that infants born very prematurely at 28 weeks could cry, but it was believed that the infant only cried when air had entered the lungs after birth.
The findings, published in the journal, Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition, reinforce the fact that babies experience pain and discomfort well before many abortionists claim. “We actually still do things to babies without anaesthesia,” professor Mitchell added. “Maybe this is a wake-up call to obstetricians and neonatologists.”
Commenting recently on the issue of fetal pain, Dr. Paul Ranalli, professor of neurology at the University of Toronto, said: "Across the nation, Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) are full of bravely struggling preemies . . . The only difference between a child in the womb at this stage, or one born and cared for in an incubator, is how they receive oxygen -- either through the umbilical cord or through the lungs. There is no difference in their nervous systems.
See a remarkable video of the fetal cry provided by The Age newspaper here
8.25.2005
Think before you drink (that grande latte)
Starbucks funds and promotes homosexual activism
Starbucks: A habit
easily broken
By Meghan Kleppinger
It’s been two weeks since my last Starbucks coffee.
Admittedly, I am one of those who don’t think twice about dropping $4 for a cup of coffee that costs less than $.50 to make. I am a self-proclaimed coffee house junkie and need that wonderful yuppie, intellectual “atmosphere” and freshly brewed aroma as much as the caffeine.
When I moved to D.C. right out of college, I encountered my first Starbucks drink, or should I say “experience”? Growing up in a military family, I loved chain restaurants because of the sense of familiarity they offered in every new town we moved to. So, to be able to get the same type of specialty coffee – grande, iced, skim, sugar-free vanilla, latte – everywhere, was an addiction waiting to happen.
Fast forward four years, and about 800 lattes later – I’m a Starbucks addict!
When a report came out earlier this year showing that none of Starbucks’ charitable contributions went to conservative causes, I didn’t blink, I bought a latte. When I walked by a liquor store in Northeast D.C. with a big advertisement for Starbucks liquor, I kept walking, stopped in at Starbucks and bought a latte! When I was at work a couple weeks ago, reading an e-alert from our California organization (yes, latte in hand), I finally had a wake-up call. more...
More Starbucks News:Officials at Baylor University told the Starbucks store on its Waco, Texas, campus to remove a cup said to promote homosexuality.
8.24.2005
Fetal Pain Study Refuted
Abortion Fetal Pain Study Authored by Abortion Rights Activists
SAN FRANCISCO, August 24, 2005 LifeSiteNews.com - The mainstream media are reporting on a "study" (actually, an interpretation of existing medical literature) published in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The authors argue that there is no good evidence that unborn humans feel pain before the third trimester (after 29 weeks gestational age).
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) points out that "Most of these stories have failed to report important information on the origins of this 'study.' The lead author, Susan J. Lee, is a medical student and former NARAL employee."
The connection to pro-abortion activism doesn't end there. The Knight Ridder news service reveals that one of the physician authors, Eleanor Drey, is the director of an abortion clinic in San Francisco. Dr. Drey is also on the staff of the Center for Reproductive Health Research and Policy, a pro-abortion advocacy center at the University of California-San Francisco.
JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine D. DeAngelis told Knight Ridder she was unaware of the authors' connections, and acknowledged it might create an appearance of bias that could hurt the journal's credibility. "This is the first I've heard about it," she said. "We ask them to reveal any conflict of interest. I would have published" the disclosure if it had been made.
Fetal pain laws are being proposed in many jurisdictions as a means of slowing down the abortion rate and, in the words of one Minnesota pro-life lobbyist, to remind the public of the humanity of the unborn.
Numerous other studies have shown that children start feeling pain as early as 20 weeks, with UK pain experts demanding that anaesthesia be used for any surgical procedure beginning at the 18th week of development.
Reuters quotes Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand, a fetal pain researcher at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences saying, "This is going to inflame a lot of scientists who are very, very concerned and are far more knowledgeable in this area than the authors appear to be. This is not the last word…definitely not."
However, for pro-lifers, the pain issue, although very likely a brutal reality in many abortions, is beside the point. Fr. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life said, "There are many painless ways to kill both born and unborn. That doesn't make it right."
Jim Hughes, President of the International Right to Life Federation, concurred with Fr. Pavone, saying, "Of course this is important work and we need to know at what point the various physical systems are in place. But about abortion this really is a side issue. Abortion kills an innocent child, that's what makes it wrong, not whether the child feels pain in the process."
The columnist and blogger at Catholic World News, Diogenes, said that issue is really a smoke screen for politicians. Responding to Rosen's comment Diogenes wrote, "If you're going to kill the child anyway, why worry that it's going to feel pain?"
The fact that so many scientists and politicians are so interested in proving that the unborn cannot feel pain is a strong indicator that the discussion and research on the issue is about finding justification for preserving the legal status quo on restriction-free abortion.
Diogenes asks the rhetorical question about what the discussion of fetal pain really means. "Can a 'blob of tissue' feel pain? Or are we staring at yet another clear piece of medical evidence showing that the thing inside the womb is a fellow human being?"
SAN FRANCISCO, August 24, 2005 LifeSiteNews.com - The mainstream media are reporting on a "study" (actually, an interpretation of existing medical literature) published in this week's Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). The authors argue that there is no good evidence that unborn humans feel pain before the third trimester (after 29 weeks gestational age).
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) points out that "Most of these stories have failed to report important information on the origins of this 'study.' The lead author, Susan J. Lee, is a medical student and former NARAL employee."
The connection to pro-abortion activism doesn't end there. The Knight Ridder news service reveals that one of the physician authors, Eleanor Drey, is the director of an abortion clinic in San Francisco. Dr. Drey is also on the staff of the Center for Reproductive Health Research and Policy, a pro-abortion advocacy center at the University of California-San Francisco.
JAMA editor-in-chief Catherine D. DeAngelis told Knight Ridder she was unaware of the authors' connections, and acknowledged it might create an appearance of bias that could hurt the journal's credibility. "This is the first I've heard about it," she said. "We ask them to reveal any conflict of interest. I would have published" the disclosure if it had been made.
Fetal pain laws are being proposed in many jurisdictions as a means of slowing down the abortion rate and, in the words of one Minnesota pro-life lobbyist, to remind the public of the humanity of the unborn.
Numerous other studies have shown that children start feeling pain as early as 20 weeks, with UK pain experts demanding that anaesthesia be used for any surgical procedure beginning at the 18th week of development.
Reuters quotes Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand, a fetal pain researcher at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences saying, "This is going to inflame a lot of scientists who are very, very concerned and are far more knowledgeable in this area than the authors appear to be. This is not the last word…definitely not."
However, for pro-lifers, the pain issue, although very likely a brutal reality in many abortions, is beside the point. Fr. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life said, "There are many painless ways to kill both born and unborn. That doesn't make it right."
Jim Hughes, President of the International Right to Life Federation, concurred with Fr. Pavone, saying, "Of course this is important work and we need to know at what point the various physical systems are in place. But about abortion this really is a side issue. Abortion kills an innocent child, that's what makes it wrong, not whether the child feels pain in the process."
The columnist and blogger at Catholic World News, Diogenes, said that issue is really a smoke screen for politicians. Responding to Rosen's comment Diogenes wrote, "If you're going to kill the child anyway, why worry that it's going to feel pain?"
The fact that so many scientists and politicians are so interested in proving that the unborn cannot feel pain is a strong indicator that the discussion and research on the issue is about finding justification for preserving the legal status quo on restriction-free abortion.
Diogenes asks the rhetorical question about what the discussion of fetal pain really means. "Can a 'blob of tissue' feel pain? Or are we staring at yet another clear piece of medical evidence showing that the thing inside the womb is a fellow human being?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)