This could be a fun game: Count the euphemisms in a really strident pro-abortion article. We’d need look no further than RH Reality Check, or, for example, this article from Feministing.

Start with “Abortion care.” It’s like the author and headline writer grew up in an Orwell novel.

This creeped me out and made me laugh at the same time. I have no idea why OB wants to apologize to me, but there ya go, I fell for the gimmick and put in my name. This one’s for women, although a man putting in his name would be pretty funny too.

What am I talking about? Click here.

I like this picture and slogan, because it’s true. And it’s pretty similar to our People for the Ethical Treatment of People line of t-shirts (Because you wouldn’t treat a dog like this). The environment, trees, animals–all get a higher  level of concern/empathy than the unborn child.

The thought has crossed my mind that one might get slightly more sympathy for being a pedophile than for espousing virginity until marriage. Read this infantile editorial and decide for yourself. The blog they are referring to is here.

I haven’t read much of the blog yet, but I will say this: Those are four brave women, taking on an untouchable topic. They are overtly religious about it, from what I can tell. As if there weren’t enough purely secular reasons out there to abstain from sex. I’ll never forget my decidedly non-Christian, non-virgin of a family doc, years back, wryly commenting how she had had it with meaningless sexual encounters and had practiced a newfound virginity of sorts with her now husband. It shocked the pants off me (not literal) because she was quite a curt, down-to-earth, very professional, non-emotional, and again, I’m quite sure, non-religious woman.

The hostility to four women who are not “telling you how to live” but rather providing an example of how one might consider doing things differently without growing an additional head beggars belief in an era of pain over misplaced, misused, misappropriated sexuality.

What a joke. A” study” with a test group of 23 undergraduates and sex “educators,” whose average age is about 21. The conclusions? That casual sex has “rules,” people know them, and sexual experimentation creates a foundation for good long-term relationships. Right.

They might as well open the study with “There was, like, this one time, at band camp.”

I would insert a quote from the article, but it is generally, from beginning to end, one terribly sad quotable quote.

Thank you, feminism! We truly all are equals, now:

One surprising trend, according to Dr. Mann, is that girls have caught up to boys when it comes to binge drinking, cannabis use and other problem behaviours. In many instances, it appears that while male substance use has remained relatively stable or even declined, the number of females engaging in those activities has risen significantly. For instance, in 1999, 20.3 per cent of boys and 15.7 per cent of girls reported hazardous or harmful drinking behaviour. By 2011, those numbers were 18.1 for boys and 17.6 for girls.

Of course, this falls into the category of things feminists will never “take credit” for, but I’ve read enough articles now about distraught feminist mothers, wondering how on earth their daughters could misconstrue their message of female empowerment by sleeping around, wearing atrociously skanky clothes, and generally avoiding engineering and math departments like the plague. They don’t see themselves as granting the “freedom” of licentiousness to their girls, at all. Doesn’t mean they didn’t do precisely that, though.

The Globe and Mail reports on a New Jersey lawsuit:

The nurses have filed a lawsuit against the University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey, claiming the institution violated the law earlier this fall by announcing that nurses would have to help with abortion patients before and after the procedure, The Washington Post reports.

The Globe asks “Up to what point should health-care workers be allowed to refuse involvement?”

I’d say they should be allowed to refuse all involvement at every stage. Prepping a woman for an abortion or doing post-op care simply frees up others to do the actual abortions. It’s a bit like giving money to Planned Parenthood and saying it’s not going to the side of the organization that does abortions, ie, not possible.

A great article about the Philadelphia “house of horrors.” The author is one Lea Singh, who I happen to know. (After all, how many pro-life Czech Canadians are there in Ottawa?) She highlights the obvious schizophrenia which has us declaring that the same action (killing babies) is in one circumstance abortion, ergo, acceptable, and in another, is murder, ergo, punishable by law.

She also asks where each one of us is at in this current social climate. Do we turn a blind eye? Have we braced ourselves to struggle through what we believe on this issue? Are we prepared to think things through to the point that we would reject abortion outright, and say so, whatever chance we get?

I often ponder how our children’s children will judge us. They would have every right to say we sanctioned barbarism.

This is not a guilt trip, by the way. Many of my readers are passionately engaged in some struggle, and no one person can be engaged in every struggle. But just because I am not an advocate against, oh let’s just insert a random example, human trafficking, doesn’t mean that when the subject comes up I justify why/how/when/how often it occurs. I don’t cast aspersions on the idea that human trafficking is wrong.

That’s the weird thing about abortion: that otherwise conscious folks, concerned about the world around them, can so easily adopt the propaganda of the pro-choice side.

So rise up, people! Consider the facts of the matter and worry less about the ramifications of your actions! Enjoy the idea that you are taking a stand. Live a little! This means doing what is right, not ensuring you get the appropriate job, at the appropriate time, followed by the appropriate pension. (Yawn…..)

Speaking up for the truth might make us look like fools. And that is just the beginning. Today, it is a sad fact that opposing abortion can cost a person their job and even their career. You might also lose your friends, your standing in a social circle, your invitations to events. One day, your position on abortion could even cost you your freedom.

To me, as a former political refugee from Communist Czechoslovakia, all this sounds eerily familiar. Back then, most people in our country were also silent, and many feared the repercussions that would follow if they openly opposed the regime. But we had a few dissidents, and they made a world of difference. One of them, Vaclav Havel, eventually became the first president of a free Czechoslovakia.

The truth is a powerful thing; over time, throughout history, it has always won the moral battles, and I have no doubt that one day, abortion will be rejected and recognized as an unspeakable evil. Until that day comes the journey continues to require courage and sacrifice on the part of those who carry the responsibility of knowing the truth. It is up to us to awaken the conscience of our society, one person at a time.

I’ve been thinking about the Occupy movement a bit. Many (and I’m not talking about the largely incoherent folks in the tents) presented this idea that capitalism is wrong. That capitalism has led to unfairness. That capitalism has trounced the little person. That capitalism makes people greedy.

I reject this.

Capitalism, in my mind, facilitates some pretty great outcomes: A decrease in poverty. An increase in ingenuity. The fulfilling of human potential in the creation of great new inventions, great new architecture, great new music. Capitalism does this better than socialism.

However, I’m not prepared to say I don’t see problems out there in the business landscape right now.

This is because capitalism is only as good or as greedy as the people trading on the capitalist market. The problem is not capitalism, but rather, people.

This amounts to a crisis of ethics.

Enter the great Chuck Colson. I do love Chuck Colson, ever since I stumbled across Born Again, a seriously great book with a truly terrible title.

Mr. Colson has put words to what I was feeling with Doing the Right Thing.com
(This site may not be at all new, but I’ve just found it.) It highlights the lack of ethics in the world around us. The lack of consensus on what it means to be ethical. Schools that abandon the pursuit of truth. A society that doesn’t even begin to know how to ask the right questions.

If any of this resonates with you, check out or watch the clip below.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3-IiAXURfY]

The mother of unborn twins decides to abort one of them at 32 weeks because of a congenital heart problem. But they abort the wrong one, and she loses both babies.

This is one moment where a graphic visual of what aborting at 32 weeks looks like might have prevented her from making this terrible, terrible “choice.”

I almost feel like we aren’t getting the full story here. Why on earth would you disturb the peace for your developing twins at 32 weeks? I’m trying to think as someone who isn’t against abortion here… What would make that tenable to you? You are about to deliver in any case, you will end up in delivery for sure… Maybe they told her the life of her healthy baby was threatened by the life of the unhealthy one?

Or maybe I’m just giving too much credit, and the woman simply didn’t care about the ethical ramifications of killing off one twin. I’m sure she does care a whole lot, now.