WE'VE MOVED!

This site have moved to a new location. You will be redirected to its new home in about 8 seconds. Please update your Bookmarks to reflect the new address and follow us there!
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Google blocks abortion ads

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Search engine giant Google is apparently disallowing advertisements for abortion businesses in several nations, some of which prohibit abortions and some of which don't. There appears to be little rhyme or reason for the Google decision, which abortion advocates are blasting.

Pro-abortion activist Lori Adelman corresponded with a staff member at Google who confirmed the denial of abortion advertising.

While ads for abortion are allowed in many nations, such as the United States, Google appears to have banned them in countries such as Brazil, France, Mexico, Poland, and Taiwan.

While nations like Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Poland protect women and children, others such as France and Taiwan allow abortions.

"Last September, we reviewed our abortion ads policy in order to make sure it was fair, up to date and consistent with local customs and practices," the staffer told Adelman. "We decided to disallow ads for abortion services, such as abortion clinics, in the following markets: Germany, Poland, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, France, Italy and Spain."

"However, general, factual ads on abortion continued to be allowed and we also enabled religious associations to place ads on abortion in a factual way," the Google staffer said.

The latter comment appears to be a response to concerns from pro-life advocates in England and elsewhere that their ads were facing denial from Google.

Asked for further clarification from Adelman why the specific countries were selected for disallowing ads for abortions, the Google staffer did not provide a specific answer.

"I can share that we conducted the review and made the change to ensure our policy was fair, up-to-date, consistent with local laws and codes of practice," the staffer said.

That frustrated Adelman, who wrote on the pro-abortion blog Feministing that she "Never thought I'd be taking sides in the war of the search engines."

"Google's rationale behind disallowing ads in these particular countries ... is shrouded in mystery: the spokeswoman deftly avoided answering my question about how the countries were chosen," she lamented.

"Regardless of the reason, I'm pretty disturbed by Google's ability to withhold information about reproductive health services [sic abortion] in these countries without justification or accountability," she said.

ACTION: Contact Google and thank it for not running ads for abortions in these countries. Call 650-253-0000, fax 650-253-0001, or go to http://www.google.com/intl/en/contact

Continue Reading...

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Catholics who supports abortion should know this

Like Nancy Pelosi, many Catholics do not really know their catholic faith and beliefs and needs to take more religious and spiritual teachings from their church leaders. You can't say you are a practicing Catholic but you are also an advocate for abortion. That is totally contradicting in every sense of the word because Christ is life and not death.

Read the article here.

Continue Reading...

Friday, October 31, 2008

Babies are gift from God; but to Obama, a form of punishment?

Obama said in this interview that if ever her daughters make a mistake, he doesn't want them to be punished with a baby. I couldn't believe my ears hearing this from a Christian, or is he really a Christian? I don't think so. How can you claim to be one if you are not following the teachings of Christ. Babies are gift from God, so since when did they become a form of punishment for the mistake one makes? I am totally scared of what's more in Obama's mind. I'm scared of what he will teach the children of America if ever he becomes the president. Please remember that God himself is the one who taught us to be pro-life.

Continue Reading...

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Barack Obama, William Ayers, and ACORN - this can't be ignored

The relationship the media tells you doesn’t matter, and Obama refuses to reveal the full details on. Well, here are more details for those undecideds. Think before you vote. [stoptheaclu]

Watch this video and take its message seriously. Think, America, think!

Continue Reading...

National Review: Doesn’t Fancy Obama Know That HE Could’ve Been Aborted?

Over on the spastic Corner blog at National Review Online, famous conservative Ed Whelan has brought up a very interesting point about the great hypocrite, Barack Obama: that if Roe v. Wade had come to pass but a few Earth-years earlier, the terrible fetus Barack Obama would have almost surely been aborted faster than your average prep school broken-condom demon zygote. Because his mother was a dumb feminist liberal, of course, and all she wanted to do was kill her Barry before too many of his cells duplicated into viable human features. Think about it. It means… nothing. This argument is balls.

OMFG read this, what the hell:

Nearly 48 years ago, a young woman, not yet 18, became pregnant in her freshman year of college. Living in a time and place in which abortion was generally illegal, she proceeded to marry the father of her child and gave birth to a son. Perhaps she would have done so irrespective of the abortion laws at the time, even if, say, she lived in a legal culture that celebrated abortion as a fundamental right. Very possibly not. (I haven’t found any statistics on the percentage of pregnant college freshmen who abort their pregnancies, but indirect indications suggest that it’s very high.)

Barack Obama may actually believe, as he stated yesterday, that Roe v. Wade “was rightly decided.” But it may be very lucky for him, as the son born of that woman, that it hadn’t been decided a dozen or so years earlier.

That Obama may owe his very life to a pre-Roe legal regime that banned abortion is, to be sure, not necessarily a reason that he should favor that regime (though I can’t help noting that Justice Thomas’s critics recklessly accuse him of hypocrisy for opposing racial-preference plans that they say he benefited from). But it ought to lead Obama and others to think more carefully about the valuable role that protective abortion laws play. [NRO]
Indeed, liberals, think of all the other awesome people that have probably been smushed up by some doctor with a vacuum ever since Roe v. Wade. Could there possibly have been a Jesus II that was unwittingly trashed? Or a Mitt Romney SPACE VERSION? Just think about how sad all you liberals would be now if Obama’s mother had put the kibosh on Fetus Barry before you had any idea who he was. You would cry all day. You would CRY ALL DAY like little dumb regulation fairies, which you are.[Wonkette / Brian Beutler]

Continue Reading...

Obama, the "most committed" abortion-rights candidate

Catholics who compromises their beliefs by supporting the most committed abortion-rights candidate does not have the true faith in their hearts. Obama catholics are the so-called "Buffet Catholics" or "Catholics in name" only - because they pick and choose what they want to believe - and those who support Obama, pick and choose abortion. If you read along the line, this is one of the changes he promises - but he does it in a subtle way - and once abortion is legalized, it will allow women have abortion as they wish. This is totally wrong and this is not Catholic, not God's at all.

Ab. Chaput calls Obama ‘most committed’ abortion rights candidate since 1973

Archbishop Charles ChaputDenver, Oct 17, 2008 / 07:14 pm (CNA).- In Denver this evening, Archbishop Charles Chaput spoke to a group dedicated to promoting the “genius of women” and what they contribute to society. During his talk, Chaput sharply disagreed with Doug Kmiec’s promotion of Sen. Obama, calling him the “most committed ‘abortion-rights’ presidential candidate … since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973.”

The Archbishop of Denver began his thoughts by offering what one of his friends calls his “Litany to the IRS”: “I’m not here tonight to tell you how to vote. I don’t want to do that, I won’t do that, and I don’t use code language -- so you don’t need to spend any time looking for secret political endorsements.”

Moreover, Chaput emphasized that what he had to say was “as an author and private citizen” and not on behalf of “the Holy See, or the American bishops, or any other bishop, or even officially for the Archdiocese of Denver.” He did, however, say that he believes that he believes his views are “pretty solidly grounded in Catholic teaching and the heart of the Church.”

After speaking about the role of Catholics in the public square and why he wrote his recently published book “Render Unto Caesar,” Chaput then turned to how it has been treated by Pepperdine Law School professor Douglas Kmiec.

“I began work on ‘Render Unto Caesar’ in July 2006. I made the final changes to the text in November 2007. That’s a long time before anyone was nominated for president, and it was Doubleday, not I, that set the book’s release date for August 2008,” he noted.

“So -- unlike Prof. Douglas Kmiec’s recent book, ‘Can a Catholic Support Him? Asking the Big Question about Barack Obama,’ which argues a Catholic case for Senator Obama -- I wrote ‘Render Unto Caesar’ with no interest in supporting or attacking any candidate or any political party,” Chaput explained.


While noting that “Prof. Kmiec has a strong record of service to the Church and the nation in his past,” Chaput took exception to Kmiec’s claim that “his reasoning and mine are ‘not far distant on the moral inquiry necessary in the election of 2008’.”

“Unfortunately, he either misunderstands or misuses my words, and he couldn’t be more mistaken,” Chaput stated.

Archbishop Chaput even further specified his stance saying, “I believe that Senator Obama, whatever his other talents, is the most committed ‘abortion-rights’ presidential candidate of either major party since the Roe v. Wade abortion decision in 1973.”

“Despite what Prof. Kmiec suggests,” he continued, “the party platform Senator Obama runs on this year is not only aggressively ‘pro-choice;’ it has also removed any suggestion that killing an unborn child might be a regrettable thing. On the question of homicide against the unborn child – and let’s remember that the great Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer explicitly called abortion ‘murder’ – the Democratic platform that emerged from Denver in August 2008 is clearly anti-life.”

Chaput also addressed Kmiec’s assertion that there are “defensible motives” to support Obama. “Speaking for myself,” he said, “I do not know any proportionate reason that could outweigh more than 40 million unborn children killed by abortion and the many millions of women deeply wounded by the loss and regret abortion creates.”

The archbishop also offered his analysis of Catholics who argue that “Senator Obama is this year’s ‘real’ prolife candidate.” For Catholics to believe this “requires a peculiar kind of self-hypnosis, or moral confusion, or worse,” he stated.

Such a portrayal of the “2008 Democratic Party presidential ticket as the preferred ‘prolife’ option is to subvert what the word ‘prolife’ means,” he charged, pointing his audience towards Prof. Robert George’s essay “Obama’s Abortion Extremism,” which was published earlier this week on the web site of The Public Discourse.

Groups friendly to the Democrat Party such as “Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good” were also criticized by Chaput.

In his words, they have “done a disservice to the Church, confused the natural priorities of Catholic social teaching, undermined the progress prolifers have made, and provided an excuse for some Catholics to abandon the abortion issue instead of fighting within their parties and at the ballot box to protect the unborn.”

According to Archbishop Chaput, there is irony to be found in all of the arguments being made by Catholics in favor of Sen. Barack Obama—none of them are new. “They’ve been around, in one form or another, for more than 25 years.”

“All of them seek to “get beyond” abortion, or economically reduce the number of abortions, or create a better society where abortion won’t be necessary. All of them involve a misuse of the seamless garment imagery in Catholic social teaching. And all of them, in practice, seek to contextualize, demote and then counterbalance the evil of abortion with other important but less foundational social issues.”

“This is a great sadness,” Chaput said.

“Meanwhile, the basic human rights violation at the heart of abortion – the intentional destruction of an innocent, developing human life -- is wordsmithed away as a terrible crime that just can’t be fixed by the law. I don’t believe that. I think that argument is a fraud. And I don’t think any serious believer can accept that argument without damaging his or her credibility. We still have more than a million abortions a year, and we can’t blame them all on Republican social policies. After all, it was a Democratic president, not a Republican, who vetoed the partial birth abortion ban – twice.”

Archbishop Chaput, did not flinch from calling out those Catholics who are uncomfortable with fighting against abortion. Describing the cause as “not the kind of social justice they like to talk about,” he alleged that, “It interferes with their natural political alliances.”

The novelty to Catholic Obama supporters’ approach, explained the archbishop, is “their packaging,” charging that they have mimicked the abortion lobbies’ attempt to undermine the bishops teaching authority in the 70s.

“I think it’s an intelligent strategy,” he commented, adding, “I also think it’s wrong and often dishonest.”

Chaput also disputed the charge leveled by some, including Prof. Nicholas Cafardi, who claim that the struggle over abortion is legally lost. These people “are not just wrong; they’re betraying the witness of every person who continues the work of defending the unborn child. And I hope they know how to explain that, because someday they’ll be required to,” he said.

The archbishop closed his remarks on political life by noting that the country is undergoing difficult times and that “a deep spirit of conflict and anxiety” has crept into this election in particular. Nevertheless, Chaput pointed to Christ saying, “I do believe Scripture when it tells us not to be afraid. God uses each of us to renew the world if we let him.”


Continue Reading...

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Vatican official attacks U.S. Democrats as “party of death”

Burke said pro-life Democrats were “rare” and that it saddened him that the party that helped “our immigrant parents and grandparents” prosper in America had changed so much over the years.

He said, Biden and Pelosi, “while presenting themselves as good Catholics, have presented Church doctrine on abortion in a false and tendentious way.”


Read the full story.

Continue Reading...

Related Posts with Thumbnails

  © Free Blogger template Do you like my template? Get if from Ourblogtemplates.com 2008 | Showbiznippets 2008-2010

Back to TOP