Posted on: 27 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
The New York Times It has been reported that an employee for Ansett Australia (Airlines), who happened to have the last name of Gay, got on a plane recently using the company's "Free Flight" offer for staff. However, when Mr Gay tried to take his seat, he found it being occupied by a fare paying passenger.
So, not to make a fuss, he simply chose another seat. Unknown to Mr Gay, another Ansett flight at the airport experienced mechanical problems. The passengers of this flight were being re-routed to various other airplanes. A few were put on Mr Gay's flight and anyone who was holding a "free" ticket was being "bumped." Ansett officials, armed with a list of these "freebee" ticket holders boarded the plane, as is the practise, to remove them in favour of fare paying passengers. Of course, our Mr Gay was not sitting in his assigned seat as you may remember. So when the Ticket Agent approached the seat where Mr Gay was supposed to be sitting, she asked a startled customer "Are you gay?" The man, shyly nodded that he was, at which point she demanded: "Then you have to get off the plane."
Mr Gay, overhearing what the Agent had said, tried to clear up the situation: "You've got the wrong man. I'm Gay!" This caused an angry third passenger to yell "Hell! I'm gay too! They can't kick us all off!"
Confusion reined as more and more passengers began yelling that Ansett had no right to remove gays from their flights.
Posted on: 23 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Everything you do has its consequences - be it good or bad. The following pictures show a woman before and after her addiction to Facial Injections. She got so addicted to these Botox injections that she started to inject oil into her face as well :(
Macology
Posted on: 21 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
The following tips (for the mac) have been taken from Digital Life (dated November 19):
Spotlight is a powerful search tool built into the Leopard OS on the Mac. It searches files, acts as a calculator, a dictionary, and is just plain cool.
Say you want to search for a document with "proposal" in the file name and the file is a presentation.
You've got several presentations from different years, for instance, Proposal 2007, Proposal 2008, and so on. You want to find all the Proposal files that are not, say, done in 2006.
In Spotlight, type: "proposal NOT 2006".
You can use different operators but they must be in capital letters, for example, NOT , AND, Or.
Or, you have "DVD Proposal 2007" and "Blue-Ray Proposal 2007" and you want the DVD file.
Type: "proposal AND DVD".
To play Tetris in Terminal, type "Terminal" into Spotlight and click on the Application result.
Type "emacs" and hit return.
Hit Esc and type "x" followed by "tetris". A tetris game will pop up. Graphics are really awful but it's an awesome discovery :P
Posted on: 20 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Another interesting article I found online:
Last week was my birthday and I didn't feel very well waking up that morning. I went downstairs for breakfast hoping my wife would be pleasant and say, "Happy birthday!", and possibly have a present for me.
As it turned out, she barely said good morning, let alone "Happy birthday".
I thought... well, that's marriage for you, but the kids will remember. My kids ate breakfast and didn't say a word.
So when I left for the office, I was feeling pretty low and somewhat despondent.
As I walked into my office, my secretary, Jane said, "Good morning boss, happy birthday!" It felt a little better that at least someone had remembered.
I worked until one o'clock and then Jane knocked on my door and said, "You know, it's such a beautiful day outside, and it's your birthday, let's go out to lunch, just you and me".
I said, "Thanks Jane, that's the greatest thing I've heard all day. Let's go!"
We went to lunch. But we didn't go where we normally would go. We dined instead at a little place with a private table. We had two martinis each and I enjoyed the meal tremendously.
On the way back to the office, Jane said, "You know, it's such a beautiful day... We don't need to go back to the office, do we?"
I responded, "I guess not. What do you have in mind?"
She said, "Let's go to my apartment". After arriving at her apartment Jane turned to me and said, "Boss, if you don't mind, I'm going to step into the bedroom for a moment. I'll be right back".
"OK", I nervously replied.
She went into the bedroom and, after a couple of minutes, she came out carrying a huge birthday cake... followed by my wife, kids, and dozens of my friends and coworkers, all singing "Happy Birthday".
Posted on: 19 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Taken from 9News
Below is the complete email conversation that Adelaide man David Thorne claims he had with a utility company chasing payment of an overdue bill.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Wednesday 8 Oct 2008 12.19pm To: David Thorne Subject: Overdue account
Dear David, Our records indicate that your account is overdue by the amount of $233.95. If you have already made this payment please contact us within the next 7 days to confirm payment has been applied to your account and is no longer outstanding.
Yours sincerely, Jane Gilles
From: David Thorne Date: Wednesday 8 Oct 2008 12.37pm To: Jane Gilles Subject: Re: Overdue account
Dear Jane, I do not have any money so am sending you this drawing I did of a spider instead. I value the drawing at $233.95 so trust that this settles the matter.
Regards, David.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Thursday 9 Oct 2008 10.07am To: David Thorne Subject: Overdue account
Dear David, Thankyou for contacting us. Unfortunately we are unable to accept drawings as payment and your account remains in arrears of $233.95. Please contact us within the next 7 days to confirm payment has been applied to your account and is no longer outstanding.
Yours sincerely, Jane Gilles
From: David Thorne Date: Thursday 9 Oct 2008 10.32am To: Jane Gilles Subject: Re: Overdue account
Dear Jane, Can I have my drawing of a spider back then please.
Regards, David.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Thursday 9 Oct 2008 11.42am To: David Thorne Subject: Re: Re: Overdue account
Dear David, You emailed the drawing to me. Do you want me to email it back to you?
Yours sincerely, Jane Gilles
From: David Thorne Date: Thursday 9 Oct 2008 11.56am To: Jane Gilles Subject: Re: Re: Re: Overdue account
Dear Jane,
Yes please.
Regards, David.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Thursday 9 Oct 2008 12.14pm To: David Thorne Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overdue account
Attached
From: David Thorne Date: Friday 10 Oct 2008 09.22am To: Jane Gilles Subject: Whose spider is that?
Dear Jane, Are you sure this drawing of a spider is the one I sent you? This spider only has seven legs and I do not feel I would have made such an elementary mistake when I drew it.
Regards, David.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Friday 10 Oct 2008 11.03am To: David Thorne Subject: Re: Whose spider is that?
Dear David, Yes it is the same drawing. I copied and pasted it from the email you sent me on the 8th. David your account is still overdue by the amount of $233.95. Please make this payment as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely, Jane Gilles
From: David Thorne Date: Friday 10 Oct 2008 11.05am To: Jane Gilles Subject: Automated Out of Office Response
Thank you for contacting me. I am currently away on leave, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Regards, David.
From: David Thorne Date: Friday 10 Oct 2008 11.08am To: Jane Gilles Subject: Re: Re: Whose spider is that?
Hello, I am back and have read through your emails and accept that despite missing a leg, that drawing of a spider may indeed be the one I sent you. I realise with hindsight that it is possible you rejected the drawing of a spider due to this obvious limb ommission but did not point it out in an effort to avoid hurting my feelings. As such, I am sending you a revised drawing with the correct number of legs as full payment for any amount outstanding. I trust this will bring the matter to a conclusion.
Regards, David.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Monday 13 Oct 2008 2.51pm To: David Thorne Subject: Re: Re: Re: Whose spider is that?
Dear David, As I have stated, we do not accept drawings in lei of money for accounts outstanding. We accept cheque, bank cheque, money order or cash. Please make a payment this week to avoid incurring any additional fees.
Yours sincerely, Jane Gilles
From: David Thorne Date: Monday 13 Oct 2008 3.17pm To: Jane Gilles Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Whose spider is that?
I understand and will definately make a payment this week if I remember. As you have not accepted my second drawing as payment, please return the drawing to me as soon as possible. It was silly of me to assume I could provide you with something of completely no value whatsoever, waste your time and then attach such a large amount to it.
Regards, David.
From: Jane Gilles Date: Tuesday 14 Oct 2008 11.18am To: David Thorne Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Whose spider is that?
Posted on: 17 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Here are some entertaining pieces of comics I've stumbled upon. The first one indirectly makes fun of the President-Elect (drawn by Joel Pett), the second one is purely ironic.
Posted on: 16 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Viwawa is going to have their second Meet-the-Gamers session on 21st November (7PM). See the banner below for details.
Wait - you notice something amiss about that poster. Read the first line again. It says 'We are having our second inaugural Meet-the-Gamers session which will allow us to understand....' How do you even have a SECOND INAUGURAL?
Posted on: 15 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Nothing beats beating yourself :P
This booklet was supposed to show how *bilingual* our school is (it was done by the CL Department if I'm not wrong). Whether you're bilingual or not, surely you can sense that something is wrong with the English below? xD
For those who can't see the words on the booklet, they read: The way of the Catholic High School is a way made of two rails Chinese and English, free from any entanglement, straight to the end. Happy are those who follow, they shall obtain a scope of a sound education.
Posted on: 14 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
This one is not bad at all - at least it has a storyline :P
For those of you interested in more of his *vocals*, check his website out!
Computer Tips
Posted on: 13 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Whilst sitting beside people at times, I always wonder why people have to go ONE BIG ROUND when they have a useful shortcut at hand. Perhaps I should share some of these with you - if you have more, feel free to comment :)
1. Tap the Space Bar once to scroll down a web page (by 1 screen). Hold Shift whilst pressing Space scrolls a web page up (by 1 screen).
2. If you have a iPhone or a iPod Touch, hitting the Space Bar twice at the end of a sentence will give you a "Full-Stop" and a capital letter at the start of your next sentence.
3. Typing jsquaredtm.blogspot in the address bar and then pressing Ctrl+enter puts the http://www. in front of it and the .com behind it and proceeds to go to the address. Subsequently, Shift+enter gives you a ".net" and Ctrl+Shift+Enter gives you a ".org"
4. Use Ctrl+Left or Ctrl+Right while editing text. This jumps directly to the previous word (Left) or to the next word (Right).
Posted on: 11 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
Some people have been asking me how they can follow my blog, other than the usage of RSS Feeds.
For those of you using Blogger, I've compiled a small video for you (without Audio) which documents how you can follow my blog (or other blogs). Enjoy!
YOG Meeting
Posted on: 10 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
A few posts back, I posted some stuff about the YOG Meeting. Here are some pictures, taken by their team :)
Yesterday, I happened to visit Marina Barrage with my family. The Marina Barrage is a dam in Singapore built across the Marina Channel between the reclaimed lands of Marina East and Marina South. Went there, took a few pictures, before moving off... Not exhilarating, but enough to keep me engaged.
Posted on: 07 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
I have made my distaste for the new president of the United States pretty obvious in my last few posts - I hope that somehow, one way or another, he'll win my support by 2012.
Meanwhile, I decided that I should start campaigning for President of the United States 2012. Yesterday's rally at Chicago went on smoothly. Please support me :P
The American people have now made it abundantly clear who they want to lead them, and the policies and practices that this president-elect has represented for some time, they can now claim as their own.
Actions have consequences, and I am sure God has duly noted what our priorities are in the US of A. Economic matters would seem to take precedence over moral matters; money more important than life itself to most people (I guess they don’t consider almost 50,000,000 innocent children murdered by abortion part of life). Now we shall see what the fruit of such a tree will be. I predict that we won’t have to wait long. In recent months we have seen “corrections” in the stock market, housing market, and banking industries.
Now we’ll see if God orchestrates a “correction” in a country and a world that has demonstrated quite clearly that it prefers convenience and wealth to life itself. Regardless of whatever happens next, remember there is still a God in Heaven and He loves you. He is infinitely merciful—and He is infinitely just as well.
Posted on: 06 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
With Obama taking the US Presidential Post, every Christian in America should reflect on their vote - on whether the abortion is really a morally acceptable thing.
A quote from Frank Pavone: Americans have made a grave mistake in electing Barack Obama to the presidency. Yet America herself remains great and is not a mistake, which is why so many of her citizens will continue, with even greater energy and determination, to defend her founding principles....
Adapted from the Contender Ministries Newsletter dated Nov 3
By Ben Rast
“Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress.”So begins an essay by Professor Robert George, a senior fellow with The Witherspoon Institute and member of the Presidents Council on Bioethics. It’s a rather strong assertion, but also an accurate one. It seems a lot of people are ignorant – many by choice – of what abortion truly is and why it matters as a topic of public policy, as well as personal faith. In this article, I hope to answer these often unasked questions.
Abortion has probably been the single most divisive topic in American politics since before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Taxes, unemployment, national defense, and even gay marriage are tame subjects in comparison to abortion. This topic is both religious and a matter of public policy. On the eve of the 2008 Presidential Election, abortion has again come to the forefront. On one side, Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden are strongly pro-choice and have received high marks from pro-abortion groups Planned Parenthood and NARAL. On the other side, Senator John McCain has a strong pro-life voting record and is endorsed by National Right to Life Coalition. His running mate, Governor Sarah Palin, not only has strong pro-life views, but she is a living example of the pro-life worldview. In a nation where 90% of babies are aborted after being identified in utero as having Downs Syndrome, Governor Palin and her husband Todd knew their youngest baby, Trig, deserved to live, even after finding out (while he was still in the womb) that Trig had Downs. It’s important to our nation, both politically and socially, that people understand what abortion is and what the Bible has to say about the unborn.
In a 2004 Barna Group survey, 33% of born-again Christians found abortion to be morally acceptable, only slightly lower than the 45% of the general population that believes abortion is a moral choice! This is disturbing to me, but I take small consolation in the fact that only 4% of Evangelical Christians agreed. A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in September 2008 found 49% of respondents believed abortion should be legal all, or most of the time, and 47% believe it should be illegal with few or no exceptions. I firmly believe that the key to reducing this acceptance of abortion is to spread awareness of what abortion really is and how it’s accomplished.
In the broader sense of the term, abortion refers to the end of a pregnancy with the death of the child. Some abortions occur spontaneously, and are commonly referred to as “miscarriages”. Other abortions, and the ones to which we refer in this article are “induced abortions”, where a physician knowingly and intentionally causes the death of the child and his or her expulsion from the uterus. Any time we use the term “abortion” in this article, we’ll be referring to induced abortions. Abortion supporters avoid using the terms baby, child, human, or person. Instead, they prefer the word “fetus”. While that word correctly identifies the stage of human development, it is a stage of human development, just as infant, toddler, and adolescent also describe stages of development. Let us not strip the child of his or her humanity by forgetting that. Let’s be accurate as we look at abortion. “Abortion ends a pregnancy by destroying and removing the developing child. That baby’s heart has already begun to beat by the time the mother misses her period and begins to wonder if she might be pregnant (about 31 days after the mother’s last menstrual period or LMP). Surgical abortions are usually not performed before seven weeks, or 49 days LMP. By that time, the baby has identifiable arms and legs (day 45) and displays measurable brain waves (about 40 days). During the seventh through the tenth weeks, when the majority of abortions are performed, fingers and genitals appear and the child’s face is recognizably human.”
How do abortionists do their dirty work? There are a number of methods, all designed to kill a vulnerable human child. Some are surgical in nature, and others are chemical. Some work best in the first trimester of pregnancy, and others work better later on. In order for the reader to understand the horrors that occur behind the deceptively clean doors of an abortion clinic, allow me to briefly detail each method.
1. Suction aspiration, also known as vacuum curettage: This is the most common technique used to kill babies in their first trimester of life. A curette is a surgical tool with a sharp cutting edge like a scoop or ring at one end. This curette is attached to a suction tube and inserted into the uterus through the dilated cervix. The suction and the cutting edge kill and dismember the tiny baby and suck it through the tube, along with blood, amniotic fluid, and the placenta. This is the first example of what some describe as a “woman’s right”.
2. Dilation and Curettage (D&C): We’ve already defined a curette as a surgical instrument with a sharp-edged ring or scoop. This procedure is very similar to vacuum curettage, except there is no suction tube involved in a D&C. Instead of using the assistance of suction, the doctor uses a more physical scraping action to kill, cut up, and remove the baby and placenta. It should be noted that D&C’s are not only used as a means of induced abortion. They are used for other medical reasons as well, such as to treat abnormal uterine bleeding and to remove a baby who died naturally in utero.
3. RU 486: Also known as the “French abortion pill”, this first trimester chemical murder may sound cleaner and less maudlin than surgical methods of murdering a baby, but this isn’t necessarily so, and it definitely leaves the baby just as dead. This abortion method isn’t as simple as taking a pill and going on about life. It actually involves three trips to the abortion clinic. The first visit includes a physical exam to try to ensure the woman is healthy enough to not suffer potentially deadly complications from RU 486 (other than the deadly intended effect on her child). If this goes well, she is given the pills. These block the action of progesterone, which causes the nutrient-rich lining of the uterus to disintegrate, thus starving the baby. A couple of days later, the woman returns for a dose of artificial prostaglandins to induce labor and cause the now-dead baby to be expelled from the uterus. For most women, this will occur during her wait at the abortion clinic, but for nearly a third of women, this will occur up to five days later when she’s at home (or at work, shopping, etc.). She’ll then return to the clinic a couple of weeks later to confirm that her choice to kill her baby has been successful. If not, options 1 or 2 above will come into play. Some women have apparently died from complications relating to their choice of taking RU 486.
4. Dilation and Evacuation (D&E): Methods 1 through 3 are typically used during the first three months of a baby’s life after conception – the first trimester. D&E is typically a method of killing babies during the second trimester – up to 6 months. This is similar in many ways to the D&C. However, since the baby is bigger at this stage in life, the doctor will use forceps with sharp metal jaws to grip parts of the baby in order to twist and tear them away. This continues until the slaughtered baby’s entire dismembered body has been removed. This is not only the method for removing the baby’s body, but also the manner of causing his death. Due to the fact that the baby’s skull has often hardened into bone at this stage, “the skull must sometimes be compressed or crushed to facilitate removal”. Sharp edges of skull bone may lacerate the cervix during removal causing the woman to bleed profusely.10 To see an artist’s realistic illustration of this procedure, click here (WARNING: GRAPHIC).
5. Saline Amniocentesis, (Salt Poisoning): This chemical abortion procedure is used after 16 weeks of pregnancy when enough amniotic fluid has accumulated around the baby to accommodate it. In this abortion procedure, the doctor inserts a needle through the mother’s abdomen into the uterus and withdraws as much as a cup of amniotic fluid, replacing it with concentrated saline (salt solution). The baby is poisoned by breathing in and swallowing the saline. He is also subjected to painful burning of his skin until he dies, usually about an hour later. At some point within the next couple of days, the woman will go into labor and deliver her dead, burned, shriveled baby. In an alternative method that is considered safer (for the mother), urea is used instead of saline.
6. Prostaglandins: You may remember this term from the RU 486 section. Prostaglandins are a chemical produced naturally by the body to assist in the birthing process. However, in this abortion method, artificial prostaglandins are injected into the amniotic sac to induce premature labor. Usually salt or another chemical is used first to try to ensure the baby is dead when he is delivered, but many are born alive (which begs the questions as to who kills these survivors and how).
7. Partial Birth Abortion: As if the preceding methods of abortion weren’t horrendous and barbaric enough, we come to the one so heinous as to have been the subject of several legal bans – a few of which were even declared constitutional! Abortion providers prefer medical terms such as “Dilation and Extraction (D&X) or “intact D&E” to describe this method. The actual procedure is more barbaric than those terms convey. This is used to abort babies that are 20 to 32 weeks into life post-conception, or even later. Babies born at 23 weeks often survive unless aborted first. In this procedure, the abortionist uses ultrasound to guide him as he slips his forceps into the uterus and grabs the live baby’s leg and pulls his body into birth canal, leaving only his head still in the uterus. At this point, the helpful doctor jams scissors into the back of the live baby’s skull and spreads the tips of the scissor apart to make the wound as large as possible. Then he sticks a suction tube into the baby’s skull and suctions the brains out. This is the cause of death, and also allows the now-collapsed head to be removed from the uterus.11 To see an illustration of a Partial Birth Abortion, click here (WARNING: GRAPHIC).
There are a few other variations and procedures, some used in order to complete what a chemical abortion did not. But the aforementioned procedures are the majority of ways that women kill their own babies in the name of “choice” or “reproductive freedom”. Did you find this information disturbing? I hope so. I fear the person who isn’t disturbed by this discussion on how babies are killed. The kind of person who cavalierly disregards the barbarism involved by defending a woman’s “right to choose” is either ignorant of the realities, or devoid of a conscience. These acts aren’t perpetrated on lifeless clumps of tissue – they’re deadly assaults on human children. Let’s take a glimpse inside the womb at the victims of this legalized murder.
As you can see, people who characterize abortion as simply the removal of a mass of unidentifiable tissue are either dishonest or woefully uninformed. Abortion is the murder of a human child. The baby’s dependency on his mother for survival for the first several months does not deprive him of his humanity. To me, hardly anything brings this point home better than hearing from those who have survived abortions.
Between September 1975 and January 1976, Amy Charlton’s mother underwent three saline abortion procedures in an attempt to kill her. They didn’t work. On April 21, 1976, Amy was born alive, two months premature. She was a healthy baby weighing four pound, five ounces. Amy writes, “My mother had no right to try and abort me, no matter what the circumstances were, no matter how inconvenient her pregnancy was.”
Gianna Jessen is another abortion survivor with a compelling story. On April 22, 1996, Jessen told her story to the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee. Her story began as follows:
My name is Gianna Jessen. I am 19 years of age. I am originally from California, but now reside in Franklin, Tennessee. I am adopted. I have cerebral palsy. My biological mother was 17 years old and seven and one-half months pregnant when she made the decision to have a saline abortion. I am the person she aborted. I lived instead of died.
Fortunately for me the abortionist was not in the clinic when I arrived alive, instead of dead, at 6:00 a.m. on the morning of April 6, 1977. I was early; my death was not expected to be seen until about 9 a.m., when he would probably be arriving for his office hours. I am sure I would not be here today if the abortionist would have been in the clinic as his job is to take life, not sustain it. Some have said I am a "botched abortion", a result of a job not well done.
There were many witnesses to my entry into this world. My biological mother and other young girls in the clinic, who also awaited the death of their babies, were the first to greet me. I am told this was a hysterical moment. Next was a staff nurse who apparently called emergency medical services and had me transferred to a hospital.
I remained in the hospital for almost three months. There was not much hope for me in the beginning. I weighed only two pounds. Today, babies smaller than I was have survived.
A doctor once said I had a great will to live and that I fought for my life. I eventually was able to leave the hospital and be placed in foster care. I was diagnosed with cerebral palsy as a result of the abortion.
Ms. Jessen has an incredible faith in God and an amazing outlook on life. She sees her cerebral palsy as a gift. She has recently appeared in national news interviews and an advertisement highlighting Senator Obama’s opposition to Illinois’ Born Alive Infants Protection Act which will be covered later in this article. Gianna and Amy are living examples that abortion targets human babies, not mere masses of tissue. If their mothers’ plans had been fulfilled, Gianna and Amy would have been murdered in the womb. The world would never have heard of them, because their mothers simply exercised their “right” to abortion.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 48 million innocent babies have been poisoned, burned, dismembered, decapitated, scooped out, and discarded in the name of “reproductive freedom”. The lives of 48 million people were violently ended before their voices could be heard. This is the equivalent of killing every man, woman, and child in California, Nevada, and Arizona. If a group of people committed such an atrocity, they would be regarded as terrorists and the perpetrators of the worst assault on mankind in history. However, when the victims are unborn children, it is considered a “right” and a “choice” rather than an atrocity. And the abortionists, the mothers who contract the murder of their children, and the political parties and organizations that support abortion are regarded – not as terrorists – but as the defenders of some grotesque “freedom”.
Up until 1973, many states had laws restricting abortion. In January 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court released its infamous Roe v. Wade decision which effectively repealed most abortion restrictions in the U.S. and sentenced nearly 50 million babies to death in the time between then and now. 16 Many in the pro-life camp view Roe as a bad judicial decision that warrants reversal. Just as the Supreme Court’s decision that freed slaves don’t count as a complete person, this decision was bad, and its effects are atrocious. Many in the pro-abortion camp are under the misconception that if Roe were to be reversed, abortion would be illegal nationwide. That’s not so. Let’s briefly examine what the Roe decision stated and what would happen if a future court were to reverse it.
In 1969, Norma McCorvey was 22-years-old, divorced, and pregnant for the third time. She wanted to be rid of the burden of another baby, but Texas law at the time prohibited abortion except to save the life of the mother. McCorvey’s life wasn’t in danger. She just didn’t want to have her baby. So she sued to overturn the law. She went by the pseudonym “Jane Roe”. In January 1973, the Supreme Court handed her a victory (though she had miscarried the child that she had wanted to abort long before). The Court found that the Constitutional guarantees of right to privacy allow a woman to make the decision to kill her unborn child with a minimal amount of government interference. The court stated that in the first trimester of pregnancy, the government can’t infringe at all on a woman’s right to kill her child. In the second trimester, “the State may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.” And in the final trimester, “the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe abortion, except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.” This is what has allowed laws against partial birth abortion that have an exception for the “life or health” of the mother. If Roe were to be overturned, it would not automatically ban abortion. It would simply allow states to regulate or ban it as they see fit. Obviously, in today’s political environment, there would be states that would not be likely to regulate it at all, even if they were able.
For the Supreme Court to decide that the murder of unborn children by their mothers is a constitutional “right” is disgusting to me. It is ironic that murder is a crime in this country, unless it is perpetrated on the most vulnerable children in our society. The mantra of pro-abortionists is “My body, my choice!” Indeed, this is what the Supreme Court decided in 1973. But this defies logic to me. Former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. once said, “The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins.” It is that same philosophy that renders the pro-choice mantra – and the Roe decision – illogical. I do not support telling any woman what she may do to her own body. But when she chooses an abortion, she is choosing to destroy the body of a unique, defenseless, human being who is dependent upon her for survival. She has swung her fist and struck down another person. That is not a “choice”, that is murder. Should we then allow family members to kill their sick, disabled, elderly, or otherwise burdensome relatives for the sake of convenience?
Several attempts to legislate an end to partial birth abortions have been overruled under Roe because they do not contain an exception for the health of the mother. But this health clause is broadly defined and frequently abused. In a U.S. Supreme Court decision released on the same day as Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court defined "health" to mean "all factors" that affect the woman, including "physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age." With this broad definition, almost anything can be determined by an abortion doctor to impact the mother’s health, and justify abortion. If she’s likely to suffer anxiety, postpartum depression, stress, or stretch marks, then her health will be affected and she should be entitled to an abortion. This is what makes the health clause such a joke. The overwhelming percentage of abortions are performed for convenience. If a woman chooses to have sex (this was her real choice) and gets pregnant, then we mustn’t stress her or, as Senator Obama said, “punish her with a baby”, so let’s let her murder the life she created.
It amazes me that so many people can support this kind of slaughter. It is, to me, inhuman to be indifferent to the murder of unborn life. It goes beyond amazing to me when Christians are indifferent to this, or even support the so-called “choice” that takes the life of innocent babies. To some extent, I think this can be explained by people avoiding the realities this article has described. I also think that many people agree with Senator Obama, who said it is “above his paygrade” to know when life begins. His running-mate, Senator Biden, has joined other Catholic Democrats in hemming and hawing about what the Catholic Church has said on the issue throughout history. Even though they’re wrong, I am not concerned with what the Roman Catholic Church has taught. I believe the Bible is the final authority, and that is where I look for answers. Some will say that abortion is not mentioned in the Bible. It’s true that the word “abortion” is not mentioned in the Bible. That’s because in the Ten Commandments, all murder is forbidden (Exodus 20:13) and God didn’t see fit to create special exemptions and subcategories. In Psalm 139:13, 16, David writes, “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb…your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.” Think about this. God “knitted” us within the womb. God ordained our days and they were written in His book before we even existed. This passage, inspired by God as is all Scripture, tells us that we were made specially by God, and that our unformed bodies are under His purview and ordination.
There is more Scriptural support for the humanity of the unborn child. Some states have a version of an “Unborn Victims of Violence Act”. Under these laws, if a pregnant woman is the victim of violence and her unborn baby dies, the perpetrator of the violence is held liable for the death of her child – usually charged with murder or manslaughter (interesting that the government recognize an unborn child as a human with rights so long as the mother wants to keep him). The first such law was drafted by God and recorded in Exodus 21:22-25, “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” This passage assigns human value to the unborn child. God Himself assigns this value. Shouldn’t we?
The prophet Jeremiah heard from God about his own value while still unborn, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5). And in a very powerful passage of Scripture, the unborn John the Baptist recognized the unborn Jesus while both were still in the womb, and Jesus was in the first trimester of his physical development (Luke 1:35-44)!
Clearly, God’s view is that a life in the womb is still a life – a human life which He created. As a Christian, do you want to face God someday and answer to Him for why you did not stand up for “the least of these”?
With the 2008 election imminently upon us, the differences between the presidential candidates cannot be starker. We previously discussed the strong pro-life records of Senator McCain and his running-mate, Governor Palin. Both view Roe v Wade as a bad decision, and both have the support of pro-life advocacy groups. Senator McCain’s voting record is strongly pro-life, and he did not equivocate when he told Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church that he believes life begins at conception.
On the other hand, Senators Obama and Biden are stridently pro-abortion. In fact, as observed by many people, Senator Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion nominee for president from a major party in recent history. Senator Obama has sponsored the “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA) and has said it would be a first priority for him as President to enact it. FOCA would effectively do away with any abortion restrictions, including existing partial birth abortion bans, parental consent laws, and laws prohibiting minors from crossing state lines to get abortions. In a speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund in 2007, Obama said, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing that I’d do.” On the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Senator Obama boasted “Throughout my career, I've been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America…. And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president.”
Senator Obama refused to support various versions of a “Born Alive Infants Protection Act”. This Act would require that abortion survivors who are born alive be provided with life-saving medical assistance. While this measure, with wording to make sure that it wouldn’t infringe on abortion, has overwhelming bipartisan support it, Senator Obama passed up four opportunities to pass it into law in Illinois. He has said that it was because it lacked the language that the federal version contained which would not infringe on abortions, but the record clearly shows that Senator Obama lied about this. He did not support a measure that was, in fact, identical to the federal bill. Senator Obama has also stated in speeches and debates that he supports measures designed to reduce abortions. Yet in response to a pro-abortion questionnaire, Obama said he opposes federal funding of Crisis Pregnancy Centers! CPC’s exist with the mission of reducing abortions by providing counseling, support, and adoption assistance to mothers who do not want to bring up a child they find themselves carrying. Yet, Senator Obama does not want to give them support. How does this meld with his claim of wanting to reduce abortions? It doesn’t. This is why we will be voting for Senator McCain and Governor Palin. They will stand up for the most innocent and defenseless among us.
Some object to “legislating morality”. I submit that everyone tries to legislate their morality, or lack thereof. Most of our laws are based on a moral viewpoint. We have legislated that murder is a crime, as well as a sin. It shouldn’t be a big reach to protect all people, born and unborn, from murder. Only a Supreme Court decision can overturn Roe v. Wade. Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President, and approved by the Senate. The Democrat party platform supports abortion, so a President Obama and Democrat Senate will appoint justices to the Supreme Court that view abortion as a right. Only by electing Senator McCain, and placing conservatives in the Senate, can we ever hope to save unborn children from being wantonly murdered.
In Norma McCorvey’s (Jane Roe) autobiography, she talks about standing on an empty playground on a summer day, and hearing a voice deep within her say, “It’s all your fault, Norma. You’re the reason this playground – and playgrounds all across this country – are empty.” Norma decided to change that. She now stands up for unborn life. Will you? Will you stand up with your voice and your vote? I hope and pray you will.
5. Phillip G. Stubblefield, "First and Second Trimester Abortion," in Gynecologic and Obstetric Surgery, ed. David H. Nichols (Baltimore: Mosby, 1993) p. 1016.
6. A. Jefferson Penfield, M.D., Gynecologic Surgery Under Local Anesthesia, (Baltimore: Urban & Schwarzenburg, 1986), p. 79.
7. Ibid, pp. 50-51.
8. Étienne-Émile Baulieu, M.D., Ph. D., "1993: RU 486 -- A Decade on Today and Tomorrow," in Clinical Applications of Mifepristone (RU 486) and Other Antiprogestins, Institute of Medicine, eds. Molla .S. Donaldson et al (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1993), p. 92-96.
10. Warren M. Hern, M.D., Abortion Practice (Philadelphia: J.B. Lipincott Company, 1984), pp. 153-154.
11. Dr. Martin Haskell described the partial-birth abortion procedure, which he called "dilation and extraction,"at a Sept. 1992 meeting of the National Abortion Federation, a trade association of abortion providers. He said he had done 700 of these "procedures." See Martin Haskell, M.D., "Dilation and Extraction for Late Second Trimester Abortion," in "Second Trimester Abortion: From Every Angle," Fall Risk Management Seminar, September 13-14, 1992, Dallas, Texas, National Abortion Federation.
17. Interestingly, the “Jane Roe” plaintiff, Norma Leah McCorvey, has since accepted Christ and become an outspoken opponent of abortion. She tried, unsuccessfully, to petition the Supreme Court to overturn the case she won in 1973. http://www.afajournal.org/2008/january/0108norma_mccorvey.asp
Posted on: 04 November 2008 comment(s) - Drop us a message?
I'll be going for the choir camp from 4th - 7th November. Will blog about it when I return.
Those involved in "Blackout!", please check the Power Federation board for important details to take note of. Please do not miss the deadline!
It's a big day today for the US - the presidential elections are coming up. I was talking to my friend, Samantha, from the US the other day. She was telling me how the election system was weird in the US. After the election day, they will only know who the new president is on the next day. However, this is the unofficial result. If one candidate decides to argue it, it will remain unofficial. If no candidate questions the results, they become official in January. In the meantime, Bush gets to serve America till January.
Having explained, very briefly, the US Elections system, I hope that McCain will win the upcoming elections. America used to be a "In God we trust" nation. What happened to them? Obama claims to be a Christian. However, unlike McCain, he believes strongly in Pro-Abortion. This is strongly against the Christian values that I've been taught.
My plea to all Americans who have the choice to vote - your vote matters even to us (in Singapore). Should Obama decide to implement his "Anti- free-trade policies", it won't do us any good. Take some time to read through the "Why you should vote McCain website".
