Josh Brahm comments on this week’s news:

I argued in that talk that my primary concern about human cloning is not that it’s “playing God,” but that we will dehumanize the new human being we’ve “created” in the lab. Notice the way the NPR article talks about the living, human embryos that were created, the same embryos that because they were able to live for several days, made the experiment a success:

The experiments involve creating and then destroying human embryos for research purposes, which some find morally repugnant. The scientists also used cloning techniques, which raise concerns that the research could lead to the cloning of people. (emphasis mine)

The pro-life argument is that human beings are valuable, or “persons,” from the moment they begin life as a unique organism. This article only uses the word “person” to refer to human beings that are cloned and then allowed to live until birth.

And should cloned humans be assigned any worth or dignity?

You have to scroll down to the bottom of the article to read the worst assertion from the lead scientist:

But Mitalipov dismisses those concerns. He says the embryos he created aren’t the equivalent of a human being because they weren’t fertilized naturally.

Don’t miss this. The sole reason given that the cloned human embryos aren’t valuable is because they weren’t fertilized naturally. Why in the world should I believe that matters?

The things my nightmares are made of…

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.

I was mulling the pro-life movement’s engagement this weekend. Our message isn’t being ignored. Pro-life stories and the abortion debate are all over the news. Our message is ridiculed by some and others are, well, “fighting” us, I guess you could say.

We are winning hearts and minds, one person at a time.  If Gandhi’s stages are correct, I’d say we’re hovering between stages three and four.

So what’s a “win”? For PWPL, it’s a desire “to bring an end to abortion, not by coercion, but by choice.” For others, it’s via legislation, restricting abortion.

Food for thought.

What an incredible story of hope and redemption:

One of the most powerful forms of social justice is adoption, because it unleashes purpose, love, and mercy, says Ryan Bomberger, co-founder of the Radiance Foundation.

Adoption is the solution to the social injustice of abortion, he told the 2013 Youth Conference May 10 which was held in conjunction with the National March for Life.

“I am that one per cent used to justify abortion,” said Bomberger, who said he was conceived after rape. […]

Those who are pro-abortion conclude the only outcome of an unwanted pregnancy is misery and tragedy, whereas everyone has an unwritten story. “Possibility is crushed every day by abortion,” he said. “Men and women are lied to by abortion.”

h/t Foolishness to the world

I love this story!

A photographer has commemorated her daughter’s fifth birthday by dressing her up as five different influential women from history – Amelia Earhart, Coco Chanel, Susan B Anthony, Helen Keller and Jane Goodall – and capturing the images for a photo series.

Breaking news from LifeNews:

The jury in the murder trial of abortion practitioner Kermit Gosnell returned a verdict and found him guilty on three of the four first-degree murder charges he faced.

Gosnell was found guilty of killing Baby A, Baby C and Baby D and found not guilty of killing Baby E. He was also convicted on hundreds of lesser charges ranging from infanticide to running a corrupt organization.

The guilty verdict on these three counts subjects the abortion “doctor” to the potential he will face the death penalty when a second jury considers his sentencing on the convictions.

One local reporter covering the trial indicated Gosnell “heard verdict passively, with small bitter faced smiles.” A Fox news reporter added, “Our Fox producer in the courtroom says Gosnell looked mad when the verdicts were read.”

Multiple reports indicate an assistant prosecutor sobbed as the verdict was read.

Ten days…wow. The jurors do have a lot of information and evidence to sift through…

Jurors here informed a judge Monday morning that they were hung on two charges in the capital murder trial of abortion provider Kermit Gosnell, who is accused of severing the spinal cords of babies born to women during procedures at his clinic.

It remained unclear which of the many charges he faces had caused the stalemate. When jurors were brought into the courtroom around 11:15 a.m., Judge Jeffrey P. Minehart gave them what is commonly called a Spencer charge, telling them to re-examine the evidence and continue trying to reach a verdict…

Monday’s impasse came as jurors began their 10th day of deliberations, which now have stretched into their third week.

Gosnell, 72, faces four first-degree murder charges in connection with babies identified in court as A, C, D and E. He originally faced seven first-degree murder charges, but Minehart previously dismissed three of those charges.

I recently discovered Michael Kiwanuka and I’m loving his song Bones. It’s beautiful. He has a few songs that are apparently inspired by his faith, like this one. I’d love to see him in concert. He’s currently touring with Mumford and Sons. Maybe I’ll make a road trip out of it.

Check out the new and improved site here. LifeCanada did a great job. It includes so much great information. According to their press release:

The AbortioninCanada.ca is one of the most comprehensive sites covering almost every aspect of abortion, including funding, methods, public opinion and statistics. It has becomea top hit for searches on abortion, garnering some 150,000 unique visitors every year.

“LifeCanada has chosen to use this already well-visited site as an outreach to women who might be in a state of indecision about their pregnancies”, said Natalie Sonnen, Executive Director of LifeCanada. “Apart from the current and accurate statistical information that we present, we also felt the need to reach these women with messages of hope.  It is not easy to find positive messages in a culture that so readily promotes abortion as the only option for women experiencing unplanned pregnancies.”

A number of media outlets picked up stories on yesterday’s March for Life.

Some report attendance of only 10,000 whereas LifeSiteNews reports that a record-breaking 25,000 people participated in this year’s March. Twenty-one Members of Parliament attended as well as two Senators.

Laura Payton and Kady O’Malley live tweeted the entire event for CBC and wrote a few pieces as well.

The National Post ran some stories, including the following:

• John Invinson wrote about the March, MP Mark Warawa’s statement on gendercide, and the importance of taking small practical steps:

The pro-lifers in the House have learned the lesson of the Harper playbook that helped take the Conservative party from the wilderness to power: Make progress in small, practical steps.

• Michael Den Tent wrote about how PM Stephen Harper is “de facto leader of Canada’s pro-choice movement.”

There was also coverage by Canada.com, iPolitics, London Free Press, NG News, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Sun, The Star Phoenix, Ottawa Citizen, The Gazette, Time Colonist, Leader-Post,  and The Guardian. (I don’t have links for the last few as I came across them through a subscription-based database.)

Is this more coverage than years past?

_______________________

Andrea adds: Yes, that’s my impression. I also heard radio coverage on CBC and 580 CFRA.

…because the abortion debate never ended, closed or died. I hate reading that phrase in news articles and blogs. I’ve heard both pro-lifers and pro-choicers use that expression. Let’s drop it. It’s not honest and it’s most often used to discredit the pro-life perspective.

I write about that today over at ActivateCFPL, the EFC’s blog,

The abortion debate has never closed, died or ended. To argue otherwise is to argue that those who want to rationally discuss the issue are to be marginalized as fringe elements of society; that the pro-life activists who came to Ottawa last year to march for life are 19,000 anomalies; and, that their perspective is inconsistent with some greater enshrined Canadian value of “choice.”

To contend that the abortion debate is over is to declare that there is consensus in Canada on an issue where no such consensus exists.  In reality, it’s an intellectually lazy attempt at discrediting those who legitimately question the appropriateness of our nation being the only western country in the world that lacks abortion legislation.