But did you know that as a result of this policy, there were up to 130,000 forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations of women in Linyi City in Shandong Province in one year alone? (2005)

Section 46 – your legal right to object

Fifty entries from around N.Z. – even one from Australia – reduced to 12 for the Finals Night on December 3^rd at Auckland’s Greenlane Christian Centre assured the audience of

approximately 250 of high quality performances in both categories. Judges Susan Elliott, Louise Lumsden and Robert Loretz admitted to great difficulty in choosing the winners and place-getters.

Second in the “Open” category was Philip van der Wel (Hamilton) and third, Ivonga Green (Auckland) In the “College/Tertiary” category, Naomi Ludlow (Tauranga) was second and Eliza Benge (Lower Hutt) was third.

Contest Organiser and Chairman of Voice for Life Bay of Plenty Charitable Trust, Don Brebner, was pleased at the number and quality of the Entrants. “Considering that a condition of entry is that song themes must in some way reflect respect for life – can be at any age or stage from conception to natural death – this contest is neither a straight singing competition nor a talent quest. The judges must look for that unique combination of meaningful message and original melody that can inspire an audience.”

Mr. Brebner also noted that the collaboration between the Tauranga-based Trust, and the National body, Voice for Life Inc., had led to an excellent first performance in Auckland.

Keen to write a song themed to ‘respect for life’, which conveys your hopes and values to others? Then the annual Voice for Life song-writing challenge could be for you.

Details for the 2012 Contest will be added soon. Until then, please visit voiceforlife.bravehost.com for entry criteria and Terms & Conditions.

President Brian Whitaker said the group plans to gather annually at Kapiti Police Station after staging a publicity event coinciding with White Ribbon week.

Mr Whitaker said the event, which included a balloon launch and hand-held model foetuses, aimed to challenge society on its selective concern about violence.

“It seems to focus on the newborn and up. We would suggest the unborn need to be included in the event.”

The imagery of the baby in a hand was commonly used by anti-abortion groups, he said.

Read more at: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/kapiti-observer/6050269/Anti-abortion-stunt-not-OK

The Waikato District Health Board has contracted a long-established abortion clinic, the Auckland Medical Aid Centre, to provide surgical abortions at three Waikato hospitals.”

Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10769527

The case against Sean Davison has provoked debate about whether euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide should be legalised.

Few would argue that Mr Davison was not motivated by a sense of love and duty for his mother in doing what he did – he thought he was doing the best thing for her. But, as far as the bigger picture is concerned, Mr Davison’s motivation is beside the point. It is drawing a very long bow to argue that this one “hard” case merits the legalisation of euthanasia.

The case in favour of euthanasia is not without its own logic. Euthanasia advocates most commonly present the issue as being about freedom of choice.

Legalising euthanasia will not adversely affect the choices of those who do not want to die in this way, it is argued. They remain free to act without interference. On the other hand, the prohibition of euthanasia unfairly prevents some (albeit a small minority) from exercising their personal choice; the values of one group are effectively forced on to others.

However, the reality is that we don’t make our choices in isolation; our so-called “free” choices are constrained by factors beyond our control.

We all find ourselves subject to pressures generated by the impact and intersection of familial, cultural, societal and economic influences.

Consider the society we live in. Sadly, the experience of those who are sick, dying, disabled and elderly is that they are becoming increasingly isolated and feel less valued. Families are more fragmented with grown-up children often living far apart from parents and unable to provide practical and emotional support.

Meanwhile, the average age of death is climbing, the number of elderly people in care is increasing and the costs of caring for the ill and the old loom larger while the tax base shrinks.

If euthanasia were legalised there would be an increased temptation for families and society as a whole to see those who are disabled and sick as a burden to be shed rather than as persons to be cared for. In other words, legalising euthanasia will place at greater risk those whom others might be tempted to think would be better off dead.

Furthermore, there is the very real danger that people who feel neglected and undervalued will see themselves as a burden and will want to do the “right” thing, especially when there are growing economic pressures on providing health and other forms of care for the aged. The “right to die” will quickly become a “duty” to die.

The vulnerability of the elderly is already reflected in the rising rates of suicide among the elderly and the growing numbers of elderly reporting that they are victims of abuse. Is making suicide easier and more acceptable really the best we can do as a society? The choice argument put forward by those in favour of euthanasia would only work in a perfect world where there were no limits on health resources, where families weren’t fragmented, where there were no arguments about inheritances and where the elderly and sick did not feel isolated or marginalised.

No euthanasia legislation can effectively guard against the abuse that would arise. This issue is about the protection of those most vulnerable at a time in their life when they most deserve to feel safe, valued and cared for.

Mr Davison has said that people should not judge him until they have been in his position. I don’t judge him. I understand that supporting a person who is dying is incredibly challenging – physically, emotionally and spiritually. I have been there with my own mother. The dying and their families need support at such times – the sort of holistic support provided by hospice services which includes effective pain relief – rather than a licence to be killed and the fear of being coerced into dying that would come with it.

What bearing does the Davison case have on the debate about legalising euthanasia? Condoning the killing of the elderly, terminally ill or sick would create far more suffering than it would ever resolve. As the saying goes, “hard cases make bad law”.

Many people, including those ideologically in favour of euthanasia, recognise this. That is why, in the past two years, at least nine different parliaments around the world have voted down attempts to legalise euthanasia while no jurisdiction has voted in favour. That alone should tell us something about the dangers euthanasia presents for society. The laws stopping assisted suicide and euthanasia are there for good reason.

We cannot even contemplate creating a legal “right to die” for some when it means many more will lose their right or will to live.

* John Kleinsman is the director of the Nathaniel Centre, the New Zealand Catholic Bioethics Centre

Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/australasia/news/article.cfm?l_id=4&objectid=10769164

This is a particularly important Conference because, in 2012, it is anticipated that a coalition of pro-abortion activists will push for the decriminalisation of abortion in New Zealand.

For the past two years, Victorian pro-abortion forces have been networking with their Kiwi counterparts, who include sympathetic and influential members of the NZ “medical establishment”. Their model is the Abortion Law Reform Act, passed by the Victorian State Parliament in October 2008, which effectively decriminalised abortions and has resulted in a 600% increase in late-term abortions at the Royal Women’s Hospital in Melbourne.

Therefore, the theme of the VFL conference is “Be prepared: learn from Victoria”. The keynote speaker will be Babette Francis from Melbourne, who played a leading role in the campaign against decriminalisation. Also speaking at the conference are Mike Sullivan (from Savingdowns), Roger Gilbride (Young and Pro-life) and Alisdair Morgan (ProLifeNZ), Catherine Bronnimann (SANDS) and Diane Belcher – a “mum on a mission”.

All pro-life New Zealanders who wish to prevent the legalisation of abortion in this country are invited to attend the conference. For more information, email: info@voiceforlife.org.nz

Reflection and Healing Day
Friday 28 October 2011

You are invited to come and hear -

Marina Young (Buttons project)
share her story
“What happened matters.”

“Through my own abortion experience I have come to realise
that many women feel the same – that it can be difficult to
gain any sense of closure.”
www.buttonsproject.org

Dr Norman MacLean
Former Southland Hospital Obstetrician and
Gynecologist will share from his years of experience.

At present Dr Maclean is Senior Lecturer,
Dept of Obstretrics and Gynecology,
Otago Medical School, Otago University

Morning tea and registration at 9:30am
Finishing time 2:30pm followed by afternoon tea

Please bring your own lunch

Venue: Winton Presbyterian Hall, Meldrum St.

Contact Liz – 03 248 5084
– 027 818 7984

[EXPAND expand/collapse]

The organization has been issuing the award since 1966. Past recipients have included Martin Luther King, Jr., President Lyndon Johnson, John D. Rockefeller III, Katharine Hepburn, Ann Landers, Jane Fonda, Ted Turner, and Hillary Clinton.

The SBA announced this week that it had sent a letter to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards challenging her to “officially bring to an end any further glorification of Margaret Sanger.”

Sanger’s background as a prominent member of the eugenics movement has been in the national spotlight since presidential contender Herman Cain charged that her population control efforts deliberately targeted the black community. Cain unleashed a firestorm of controversy by referring to the national abortion giant as “Planned Genocide.”

Veronica Byrd, director of African American media at Planned Parenthood, denounced Cain’s comments in a statement, saying: “For all her positive work, Margaret Sanger made statements some 80 years ago that were wrong then and are wrong now. Those statements have no bearing on the high quality health care Planned Parenthood provides today.”
In its letter to Richards, the SBA said that Bryd’s comments were “hardly consistent with the praise and veneration Planned Parenthood has afforded this well-known eugenicist.”

“Each year Planned Parenthood Federation of America awards its “highest honor,” the Margaret Sanger award, as recognition of “leadership, excellence, and outstanding contributions to the reproductive health and rights movement,” the letter read.

“Planned Parenthood’s annual tribute to Sanger, despite her appalling and deplorable statements, as well as your organization’s mission of population control, as explained in your Mission Statement found on IRS tax returns, can only lead one to logically conclude that Planned Parenthood was in fact founded and designed in part for the purpose of preventing specifically targeted groups of people from having children.”

The letter challenged Richards to not only cancel or rename the award but to also remove all “affirmative mention” of Sanger from Planned Parenthood’s website and publications.

[/EXPAND]