Archives for 2011

Not too long ago, I posted this, a link to a review I wrote about the book Giving Sorrow Words. In that review, I mentioned an Australian columnist, Evelyn Tsitas, who, in our global village read what I wrote and wrote a rebuttal:

That acceptance with their decision is something the women in Giving Sorrow Words do not have. Why? Because they obviously wanted the baby, but lacked the courage of their convictions and now want to blame others for their regret. Women who really want the baby they are carrying will do anything to keep it. Women in a high-risk pregnancy require frequent hospitalisation, invasive tests, months of bed rest, painful daily injections – the list goes on. Birth is also a risky business for them. …

So I have no time for the women who can’t get over their abortions. They obviously didn’t want to have a termination in the first place. While I feel sorry for them, I also refuse to buy into the pro-life line that every abortion will cause grief.

Ignoring the callous, staccato tone of her piece, I will say that to a very small extent I agree with her. Women ought to be stronger and stick to their guns. I wish many more were able to do that. But she entirely missed my point, which is this: Our culture talks about abortion as being easy and valid. And so it is absolutely no surprise that many women go against their impulse to keep a baby and have an abortion instead. The women chronicled in the book Giving Sorrow Words are women who learned the very hard way that oftentimes, not every time, but oftentimes, that simply isn’t true. And they have suffered as a result.

That’s why I compared having an abortion to trying drugs. Not everyone will become an addict. But many will, and it’s a reasonable outcome. When we talk about drugs, we understand that addiction and all the harms that come from that is a reasonable outcome. And thus we have campaigns against drugs: Just Say No. When we talk about abortion we talk about nice, comforting concepts like “choice,” and it’s deceptive.

There’s a new news site out, Heroic News:

Heroic Media, a faith-based company that promotes alternatives to abortion through mass media, has launched an online news portal at Heroicnews.org. The initiative is aimed at making a broad cultural impact, complementing its current outreach to women in crisis pregnancies. “Heroic Media has always had two goals: to provide women facing unexpected pregnancies with hopeful alternatives through mass media advertising, and to create a culture of life,” explained Heroic Media founder Brian Follett.

Can’t say I know too much about them, but it might be worth bookmarking and checking from time to time.

We’ve covered a lot about breast milk in the past couple of months on PWPL, and finally, here’s a story about putting it to good use.

Several Nova Scotia mothers have donated their breast milk to help a terminally ill girl in British Columbia.

Julie Bickford was so moved by the story of little Anaya Cassin-Potts, she organized a milk drive through her infant’s clothing store.

The response was overwelming, she said.

“I had so many comments that they’d read it and got goosebumps or cried. It just touches home for so many people.”

Anaya has infantile Krabbe leukodystrophy, a degenerative disorder that attacks the nervous system. The 19-month-old can only digest breast milk.

Anaya drinks about one litre of milk a day. Her mother, Camara Cassin, reached out to nursing mothers across the country when her own breast milk began to dry up.

Cassin’s heart warms every time a frozen package is delivered to her door in Nelson, B.C.

“I pumped myself for 11 months. You know, it’s not fun, and it takes time and commitment, and I just really appreciate every drop,” she said.

Bickford has collected a deep-freeze full of milk — enough to feed Anaya for four months.

Anaya is not expected to live past her second birthday. Cassin hopes the gift of milk gives her more time with her daughter.

If you would like to donate or learn more, here is Cassin’s blog Healing Anya.

…in a pop can?

The Christian media is swarming with accusations that Senomyx, a San Diego-based research and development company, whose clients include food heavy-hitters Nestle, Campbell’s Soup, Kraft Foods, and PepsiCo, is conducting research with HEK293, originally derived from human embryonic kidney cells.

These accusations began with an action alert issued by Largo, Florida-based Children of God for Life, a nonprofit, pro-life organization focused on the “bioethical issues of human cloning, embryonic, and fetal tissue research.” In the alert, Debi Vinnedge, executive director of Children of God, calls for the public to “boycott products of major food companies that are partnering with Senomyx, a biotech company that produces artificial flavor enhancers, unless the company stops using aborted fetal cell lines to test their products.”

[…]

I asked Rosenberg if Senomyx had a position on stem cell research. “We’ve never been asked that,” she replied, “We don’t have a position on anything. We’re dedicated to finding new flavors to reduce sugars and reduce salt. Our focus is to help consumers with diabetes or high blood pressure have a better quality of life.”

[…]

So what exactly is HEK293? It’s a cell line that started in the 1970s from human embryonic kidney cells. The line was cultured by scientist Alex Van der Eb in the early 1970s at his lab at the University of Leiden, Holland. Since then, the cell line has been cultured and grown in laboratories (you can buy some here). It’s primary use is as a protein or a protein vessel — sort of a natural test tube. It’s also pretty common and seems to be available at most laboratory supply companies and used by many R&D facilities. In short, maybe not such a big deal.

[…]

The cells they’re talking about have “technically” originated from aborted fetus cells, but it’s not like scientists are putting fetus body parts into blenders while laughing. Think of the fetus cells as sort of “ancient ancestors” to the new cells that are readily used today as “building blocks” and receptors in many commonplace scientific experiments in universities, hospitals, and commercial labs.

If we’re going to discuss whether or not to use these cells, wouldn’t we all rather be arguing over something more important than ‘flavor flakes’? And if not, maybe it’s time to reassess our relationship with food:

There is nothing to be ashamed of in enjoying your food: there would be everything to be ashamed of if half the world made food the main interest of their lives and spent their time looking at pictures of food and dribbling and smacking their lips. -C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

 

__________________________ 

Andrea adds: I read the article, and the author draws attention to this issue, while thinking that it doesn’t matter. I personally do think it matters. I very much wish we wouldn’t ever use a fetus at any stage for scientific experimentation or development. But once we as a culture decide we are, I’m not sure it matters whether it’s for taste development at a food company or vaccines: both are equally disturbing to me.

I went for a swim at one of Ottawa’s fine universities yesterday and in the changeroom I overheard this conversation.

Girl 1: Did you know that [fill in name here] lost his virginity at 17? To a prostitute?

Girl 2: No. A prostitute?

Girl 1: Ya, his dad took him.

Makes you rethink parental consent laws.

Stephen Harper will not raise the abortion issue if he becomes Prime Minister. This is no surprise, since he has been saying the same thing more or less on repeat for at least five years now.

That said, I’m not sure why social conservatives swing in the national imagination between omniscient and powerful (The Armaggeddon Factor) and “spent.”

Harper is not the pro-life man of the hour. Maybe someday we’ll have a leader with this conviction on his/her heart. But it’s not Harper and I’m not particularly bothered by that.

From last night’s Country Music Awards. Your feel-good story of the day. Enjoy.

If Marie Stopes International and the International Planned Parenthood Federation could be personified into a cartoon character, it would have to be Ursula from the Little Mermaid. They basically deliver the same message and ask for the same payment. Have a look and see whether you don’t agree.

Comparing child sacrifice in Peru from over 500 years ago and prenatal screening today is not quite the way we like to think about this, is it:

The findings lend credence to the accounts of Spanish conquistadors that described how children were selected for sacrifice from all across the empire, based on their physical perfection. We shudder at such brutal backwardness. Today, using prenatal screening, we scour the empire for children with physical imperfections and sacrifice them to ourselves.

I think this is a painful and offensive comparison. Also that he makes a valid point. We ain’t all as civilized as we’d like to believe.

For all the ills Canadians suffer: high taxes, higher gas prices, even higher food costs, and an ever increasing general cost of living, they have always had better federal health care coverage than their American counterparts. But this beautiful system has one pitfall, abortion, because elective abortion isn’t “health care”. Elective procedures, teeth whitening, nose jobs, hair plugs, abortions, ought not be part of a federal system, and Americans are determined that during their health care overhaul they don’t make the same mistakes as their northern neighbors.

Virginia Gov. Robert F. Mc­Don­nell has added an amendment restricting insurance coverage for abortion into a bill approved by the General Assembly establishing a health insurance exchange as part of the federal health-care overhaul.The health insurance exchange would be managed by the state and allow individuals and some small businesses to pool together to buy insurance at lower rates. Some who cannot afford insurance would receive government subsidies.

Under the federal law, states were given the option of creating their own exchanges or using ones operated by the federal government.

The bill approved by the General Assembly stated Virginia’s intent to create its own exchange, and directed state regulators to figure out how to run it.

After the bill reached Mc­Don­nell (R) for his signature, he added an amendment that would prohibit any insurance plan offered as part of the exchange from including coverage for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at risk.

“The governor does not believe elective abortions should be covered through the exchange or with taxpayer dollars,” said Mc­Don­nell spokesman Tucker Martin. “This is consistent with his pro-life position and policies passed with bipartisan backing at both the state and federal levels.”

Abortion opponents across the country have been working to get the health-care exchanges to exclude abortion coverage, and similar measures are pending in more than 20 states. They say a government-managed market should not allow dollars to be spent on the procedure.

[…]

She said seven states have adopted similar legislation.

Advocates for abortion rights say the measures are part of a national drive by conservatives to restrict access to abortion.

Federal and state law prohibit using tax dollars for abortions except in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at risk. McDonnell’s amendment would extend such prohibitions to insurance plans purchased by individuals in exchanges.