ProWomanProLife

You are here: Home / Archives for Andrea Mrozek

Russia’s population bust

by 1 Comment

Interesting article about Russia.

The current Russian depopulation—which began in 1992 and shows no signs of abating—was, like the previous episodes, also precipitated by events of momentous political significance: the final dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of Communist Party rule. But it differs in three important respects. First, it is by far the longest period of population decline in modern Russian history, having persisted for over twice as long as the decline that followed the Bolshevik Revolution, and well over three times as long as the terrifying depopulation Russia experienced during and immediately after World War II.

Second, unlike all the previous depopulations in Russia, this one has been taking place under what are, within the Russian context, basically orderly social and political circumstances. …

And finally, whereas Russia’s previous depopulations resulted from wild and terrible social paroxysms, they were also clearly temporary in nature. The current crisis, on the other hand, is proceeding gradually and routinely, and thus it is impossible to predict when, or whether, it will finally come to an end.

The author never mentions Russia’s astoundingly high abortion rates, which would certainly be part of the depopulation picture.

I might think, however, that high abortion rates are an effect of a society gone off the rails–not a cause. Happy cultures filled with hope, I’d imagine, don’t lead to high abortion rates… (I’m just thinking aloud here. Or rather, quite silently, as I type.)

______________________

Brigitte concurs (also silently, as I type): Cultures and societies that are characterized by a lack of hope aren’t doing well, demographically speaking. Sterile hedonism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Enduring religious doctrines–or whatever

by 1 Comment

This satire is bleak, but also very funny in places, as here:

Pausing momentarily to take a drink of water, Benedict went on to stress that certain religious doctrines no longer apply in today’s world, and that, perhaps, they ought to be weighed against more modern considerations, such as making a problem go away.

Other important factors outlined by Benedict included length of pregnancy, the possibility of health complications, and whether or not two people just met one crazy night, got a little carried away, and made the biggest mistake of both their lives.

“All women, particularly those by the name of Sheila, deserve the right to choose,” Benedict said. “And if they choose wrongly—if they choose to keep the child, even though that does not make any sense, and might very well ruin someone’s career—then maybe they should just leave the country and never come back.”

The Holy Father then called for a moment of silence while he tried to “figure some stuff out.”

At very least, our Anglican “minister” friend deserves this. If The Onion gets it, why doesn’t she?

(h/t) 

Learning from Pinocchio

by 1 Comment

This letter is in response to a freedom of conscience article in Saturday’s Post. I think it is cute:

Based on my informed moral and religious conscience, I am a doctor who refuses to refer for abortions. I refuse to co-operate with intrinsic wrongness.

How do I explain this to my own young children? Last night, I read them Walt Disney’s Pinocchio: ” ‘No, Pinocchio,’ she answered. ‘First, you must prove yourself to be brave, truthful and unselfish. You must also learn to choose between right and wrong.’

‘But how will I know what is right and wrong?’ he asked. ‘Your conscience will tell you,’ said the Blue Fairy. ‘What’s a conscience?’ asked Pinocchio. ‘That’s the small voice that people don’t always listen to.’ ”

Dr. Rene Leiva, Ottawa

When I listened to Dr. Garson Romalis explain why he does abortions last year, I thought it was interesting. I was struck by how he has layered so many justifications on top of his conscience–but ultimately justifying is what he was doing.  If he were Pinocchio his nose would be awfully long by now. Totally unwieldy, even.

“Disappointing but too too predictable”…

by 3 Comments

…Those words from this pro-abortion discussion about the Chatelaine piece. (Funny thing is that many a pro-lifer said the same thing.) But at Rabble, their concern is not over abortion but rather about how there should be no debate over abortion. We all agree. And if not, well, your views should be illegal.

Just when you think Canada has a slight chance of becoming progressive, they allow people to publish this sort of hatred encouraging the slavery of women. This should be illegal and the author of the article, as well as the editors of Chatelaine should be brought up on charges of hate crimes.

Wow. Talk about “too too predictable”–I don’t like your views–so Just Ban Them–that should take care of that. They’ve had some success, by the way, starting with telling pro-lifers where they are allowed to walk and what they can say within a certain distance of an abortion clinic. The positive side of this is that if pro-life arguments weren’t persuasive and powerful, our opponents wouldn’t have to limit free speech.

Go crazy, I say–bring out the Human Rights Tribunals and the hate speech charges and I as an ardent pro-lifer will defend Chatelaine‘s right to publish what was a pretty solidly pro-abortion piece.

_________________________

Tanya says:

This should be illegal and the author of the article, as well as the editors of Chatelaine should be brought up on charges of hate crimes.”

This quote automatically ran through my head in a Nazi-German accent. (The word ‘Chatelaine’ sounds pretty inaudible in that accent, by the way.) You try it. It’s fun!

Dads are, like, so 2005

by 5 Comments

I’m trying to think when Dads went out of style:

Iron Chef Cat Cora is cookin’ up a baby — and so is her wife Jennifer! Both expecting boys, Jennifer, 37, will deliver in April, while Cat, 41, is due in July. The couple’s new sons are from the same sperm donor as their older boys, Caje, 23 months and Zoran, 5. Zoran and the baby Cat is carrying are from Jennifer’s eggs, while Caje is from Cat’s. In Jennifer’s current pregnancy, both women’s embryos were transferred, so the biological mother is unknown. The couple do not to plan to conduct DNA testing to determine this. “[Jennifer] carried my embryo and I carried hers,” Cat explains. “It’s like surrogating, but obviously all of our kids are equal. “It’s really crazy! We decided that having them a year apart is harder than having kids as infants together.”

The good news is that in spite of dads being out, apparently babies are still in. No word yet on what’s going to happen to those huge 70s sunglasses people are wearing.

________________________

Tanya wonders: So when these kids are finally old enough to understand how babies are made (which, I’m thinking in this case will take way longer than the average bear) and want to know who their biological mother REALLY is… will the “mothers” cave and do DNA testing? Or will they insist beyond all reason that it’s really not important?

________________________

Brigitte says: I’m so glad the needs of the children always come first!

________________________

Rebecca adds: Call me a cynic, but I’m wondering how spectacularly ugly and complicated the (highly probable) custody suit will be.

Call it like it is

by 3 Comments

katyadonotcopy

I think this new test sounds like eugenics to me:

A new prenatal genetic diagnostic test may soon cause a substantial increase in the number of fetuses affixed with “syndrome” labels. The noninvasive test, called chromosomal microarray analysis, allows doctors to detect submicroscopic genetic abnormalities that no other test can find. Advocates of the technology say it is safer, faster and more accurate than invasive diagnostic procedures like amniocentesis. Despite the test’s benefits, however, some worry that it will result in a flood of prenatal genetic information of uncertain significance and will lead only to confusion and undue anxiety for expectant parents. Others question whether scientists should even be in the business of cleaning up the gene pool and have evoked the dreaded “E” word: eugenics.

The picture above is of a little girl, Katya, who has genetic abnormalities–trisomy 13. Let’s make this theoretical medical discussion real: It’s people like her we won’t–and don’t often, even today–see. Does that seem right to you? Doesn’t to me.

The noises you just heard?

by Leave a Comment

That’s the sound of my loud laughter over this piece.

Oh to have a job where you can declare success so easily with absolutely no proof.

That’s not to say that there isn’t a ton to make fun of in my world. Writing policy? Not always…as practical as it should be.

I have recently become concerned that I lack in the “practical skills” department. I therefore asked my mother how to make preserves. It’s very, very difficult, she assures me. Requires scientific accuracy, very, very clean jars, lots of sugar, but not too much sugar and the seal–the seal is critical. If you don’t have the right amount of suction when you put those jars on the shelf, you’ll have a winter of mouldy preserves.

Why do you ask? ask my parents, after a discussion of the percentage of bad preserves my grandmothers encountered on their shelves (2 of 12 jars, approximately). In case, I tell them, the economy gets really, really bad, and nothing is available. No food, like communist Poland.

Indeed, even my parents were looking at me like I have issues at this point. What did we do wrong? they think, looking at each other and shaking their heads.

OK–my dad consoles me–were it to come to communist times in Ontario–we’d be up the creek anyway. Because back in “the day,” city folks would take wheelbarrows of cash into the country just for a jar of sauerkraut. They recommend my purchasing jams and preserves from the local grocery store. Much more cost efficient.

But what I got from this discussion is that I need my very own farm. To grow the fruit before I preserve it.

Difficult, yes. But not totally impossible. I think I can do it so long as my farm has a good high speed internet connection.

From the “abortion as blessing” files

by Leave a Comment

You have anglican ministers saying it. You also have mainstream media saying it:

The recession is driving American demand for contraception. And for abortions. The media have been rife this past week with stories about the rising number of couples and single mothers doing the math and deciding this is no time to bring a child into the world—not when the economy is depressed, jobs are scarce, and family incomes are dropping. The media have also been rife with stories portraying this trend as something of a tragedy. Let me propose a counter view: It is not. …But in the long run, can we not agree that an unwed couple’s decision not to bring a fourth child into the world when they are having trouble feeding themselves and three children is no tragedy? It’s actually a fact-based, rational decision that in the end benefits the three children they already have and society as well.

I can’t help but think the more bold and extreme my opponents are, the more helpful it is to my cause. I’m sorry, but this gets into the realm of satire. I can see the USA Today headline now: “Why killing a child was the right thing to do in these tough economic times– When Jane Smith lost her job and got pregnant at the same time, she didn’t know what to do. ‘I was worried about feeding my family,’ said the grief-ridden young mother of three. ‘When I killed off my third I realized we would all do better. I felt really bad, but it was the right thing to do…'”

Meta