Haiti and Planned Parenthood - Hillary is Against Catholics

Our Catholic brethren in Haiti were betrayed by the Clintons who used the Haitians suffering to enrich themselves with the generous donations of Americans, and to carve up Haiti for members of their cartel.

It's as if Hillary's full scale support of Planned Parenthood was not enough to prove to Catholics, and men of goodwill, just what a corrupt, criminal sleazebag she is.

When is a life not a life?

This week on Radio Two there was a fascinating discussion. 

It revolved around the case of a mum who had consumed alcohol whilst pregnant resulting in her child having a condition akin to mild brain damage. 

During the show we were informed that apparently this happens more often than you think, primarily with alcoholics and drug addicts. 

During the debate the unborn child was referred to as the unborn child, the baby etc. not once did we get the euphemisms of "foetus" or the frankly offensive "clump of cells."

Of course the idea of a mum harming her unborn child with repercussions for the life if that child has huge consequences and these weren't lost on the bbc. On Radio 5 Live a solicitor was asked if the mum had a "right to choose" as it was "her body" - a logical extension of the abortionists' myth, and rightly swiped aside by the solicitor. He asserted that the child has a future and the mother has no right to impose her short term gratification on the long-term health of the baby/child/person. 

How much moreso the mum who destroys the life of the baby, taking away the entire future of a person? Or of course the father who bullies and threatens the mother into killing the child? If a man in the street did that we'd call it "infanticide."

Being the BBC I'm sure they will move on from this, ignore it and move back to their cultural Marxism and purposefully whitewashing the mass murder of generations. 

Yet for a moment we had a glimpse of a society that actually cares for the rights of children and in the belief of the hopeful future of every child. And it was refreshingly optimistic. 

Of Beating Hearts & Accents

There's a programme on Radio 4 called The Unbelievable Truth which is very funny. The basic premise is that each comedian on the panel has to give a talk full of whopping fibs, wherein he has to hide 5 strange/unknown truths. 

In the latest episode one of the panellists gets caught out stating that babies cry in accents. The chairman of the show, David Mitchell then cut in to say a study in a German university in 2007 found that babies started imitating the accent of their mum, in the womb!

So we have a child crying with an accent to copy & bond with his mum, yet still liberals would have us think this isn't a life, and can be burnt or ripped apart in what they euphemistically call a "termination" in an effort to whitewash a disgusting and murderous deed. 

Abortion really is murder. 

BPAS' Fave Inspiration Addresses KKK Rally

Yes. The darling of the "pro-choice" movement, the advocate of abortion and sterilisation, Margaret Sanger, was an out and out racist who not only wanted non-Whites curtailed, but the poor too.  

Strange character for the advocates of mass murder to get into bed with. 

Or maybe not. Ann Furedi, boss of abortion provider BPAS used to co-publish Living Marxism (her hubby was publisher/editor), a mag shut down for denying concentration camps and mass murder by Marxists in the Balkans. 

Nice!

Choice Lobby Publicly Back Infanticide

Anyone with half an ounce of dignity should listen to last week's Moral Maze programme which went out on BBC radio 4. 

You can still get it on the BBC iplayer & you can download the podcast. 

The programme dealt with abortion, with two speakers in favour of mass murder and two against. All are professionals and experts. 

What will poleaxe anyone with a grain of humanity is that one of the pro-"choice" lobby not only supported death up until birth in all cases (as did her compadre) but she openly supported infanticide. 

Yep. You read that right. 

This callous, uncaring, pro mass murder lowlife supported the killing of babies AFTER they are born, if that's what the "mother" wants (or no doubt if she's coerced to do so as with so many abortions, by a bullying control freak "father" of the child).

Listen to it. Tell your pro-life friends. 

This exposes the "choice" lobby for the murderous cowards that they are. They would rather see a baby die than support, care & help (& even adoption) be offered to mums in distress. 

That's the simple truth. 

Life is found on Mars! Scientists rejoice!

Got your attention? Good. 

Kelvin Gosnell: Murder Inc

Americans died at the Boston Marathon. Terror attacks in America are rare. This was headlines news all over the world. 

Americans died in an abortion clinic. Babies and at least one mum were murdered. Abortion is very common and very profitable big business. 

We have to ask why the mass murderer Kelvin Gosnell was not headline news for weeks across the media. 

Who are protecting the murderer? Why?

BBC's Jeremy Vine is Pro-Life

"The baby is a different person" - Jeremy Vine on his show, BBC2 13th May 2013.

Well done Jeremy. Your argument against smoking in pregnancy is THE argument against abortion.

It is a developing human being, NOT a "cluster of cells."

Let us hope this common sense will now diffuse among his mostly liberal BBC colleagues.

Habemus Papem: & The Secularists Unroll Their Agenda

Hooray!

We have a new Pope. Pope Francis.

He will have a heavy burden. We should keep him always in our prayers.

The media portrayed the appearance of Pope Francis with all its pageant, but already the secularists, within and c/o the media, are circling.

This morning I have heard a great number of them busy in the media suggesting what the new Pope must do. So far (and still counting) I've heard:

• The sanctity of marriage must be undone by allowing divorcees to re-marry. This would mean marriage is no longer for life, an Oath to God is meaningless, and Catholics could swan in and out of marriage as their whims take them with the blessing of the Church.
• An homosexual militant saying the Church must stick to caring for the poor (as if it ever stopped!) and leave moral matters to... well... the homosexual lobby, I guess. Of course, the very thought that the Church should step aside and leave the wolves to move a midst the sheep is unthinkable.
• The Church should sell all its artwork to feed the poor. The - let me be charitable - numbskull who suggested this clearly didn't know the pharisees already tried this one on Our Lord Himself, and He gave them short thrift.
• Of course the homosexual priests/paedophile scandal was uttered in every other sentence; yet it seems the very thing that needs to be done (defrocking homosexual priests) is the exact opposite of what the secularists want. Hmmm. The secularists forget that it was Catholic children assaulted by these monsters, it is the Church and its most innocent members that has suffered.
• Contraception and wymmins rights were high on the agenda of one (feminist) lady. Of course most ladies such as this care not for Our Lady nor the message of the Magnificat. Their agenda is widespread use of contraception which would see the world die (as in European countries where there are not enough children being born) not to mention increased spread of sexual diseases (which are not curtailed by contraceptives) not to mention increased abortion - because when contraceptives fail, abortion rises - hence the RISE in abortion figures where contraceptives are widely distributed, especially to children.

It seems the secularists won't be happy until we get a Pope that isn't Catholic. God forbid. Literally.

But let's join their mad hatter's tea party for a moment. Imagine we got that very abomination. Imagine the Catholic Church were no longer catholic or a church. They would skip away happily knowing they had destroyed the institution left on earth by Christ to ensure we could all (if we desire it) receive his Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity via the Blessed Sacrament.

They would leave behind just another floppy, wet, happy clappy, let's hug each other, social working, pressure group. If we all want that we can join Oxfam, Amnesty or any other secularist group whose impact pales in significance to Holy Church that raises up the poor and cares for the weak by way of its schools, hospitals, infirmaries, retirement homes, throughout the world.

Once upon a time in the UK Catholic adoption agencies were the most successful. They helped home the most difficult cases wiuth loving families. The secularists then changed the law. Bodies could not adopt out children if they were unwilling to do so to homosexuals. At the stroke of a pen the best adoption agencies were closed.

This is what the secularists would love to do to Holy Church. They don't care if the poor suffer. They don't care if the very best schools are closed (ask Nick Clegg!). They don't care if the homeless, hungry, ill and dying are left without the best care.

They want the Church disemboweled.

Expect the attacks on our new Pope to increase...

Who is the ABORTION BOSS in the UK? A Concentration Camp Denier and Political Extremist!

BPAS Boss, Marxist and convicted criminal Ann Furedi

I would ask all Catholics and pro-lifers to buy the latest Private Eye magazine (just out). In its letters page there's a rebuttal of a previous letter by a Marxist who used to edit the REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNIST PARTY's magazine Living Marxism (later LM Magazine). The Marxist in question was not alone in editing the mag. There were two others, a married couple.

This mag (LM) was eventually shut down after denying the photographic evidence of skeletal figures and suffering in Yugoslav (Communist) concentration camps. They said the pics were doctored and one prisoner did not really exist. The ex-prisoner turned up at court, the Marxian triumvirate were found guilty and LM was no more.

Yes. Sad isn't it?

But why, aside from the fact that these Marxists lied and were found out for denying facts and whitewashing  death and misery (inc of Catholics) is this of interest to Catholics and pro-lifers?

Because one of the married couple, one of these "concentration camp deniers" exposed in open court, one of these mad Marxist Extremists out to disguise the terror of the gulags was none other than ANN FUREDI, the Chief Executive (that's BOSS to you and me) of BPAS - the British Pregnancy Advisory Service: the pro abortionists' apologists, the profiteers from misery and death, the media wafflers who excuse away the abortion death mills.

Perhaps lying about deaths in Marxist gulags was good practice for lying about deaths in abortion mills?

I wonder why it is a Communist like ANN FUREDI sees abortion - the murder of a baby - as an answer to poverty? Surely helping the poor and elevating their condition is preferable to killing their children? And when so many women are bullied into killing their babies, is this feminism? Remember too that most aborted children are baby girls. Feminism?

So please remember who is the leading advocate of abortion in the UK: a discredited Marxist extremist who denied the existence of Communist concentration camps, who was exposed as a liar in a UK court and whose LIVING MARXISM mag was shut down as a consequence.

Nice.

Glib Lies & Terror Tactics: It Must be the "Gay Marriage" Campaign

Big Business celebrates "gay marriage" in Vermont, USA.

There is something in the air. And it's not just the foul smell of David Cameron's messing about with marriage to try and 'do a Blair' (cement his place in history, blah blah).

It is the smell of repression, bullying and scare tactics.

Last night's Newsnight had all the balance of a Transvestite's new wardrobe party. The BBC has from time to time interviewed opponents of Cameron's unwanted, unneeded and mandate-less bill, but virtually everyone within the BBC has taken the stance of showing their colours in favour of the ultimate oxymoron.

The Twittersphere has been awash of course, with all manner of comedians and minor-celebs tweeting their extreme joy at "equality." This has left me wondering - are there no similar celeb-style people who are against "gay marriage?"

If we are to believe the stats and polls, roughly half of people are for it, half against (the number against rises significantly if they are told it gives homosexuals no new rights they don't already have). So where are the 50% of people opposed in the BBC? Amongst the comedians and celebs?

Either they are too afraid to speak out, for fear of losing their job/work, or the BBC (etc.) is truly unrepresentative of the people of these islands. Neither possibility is particularly welcoming.

We know the MPs do not represent the population. As often as they waffle on about "equality" still too many of them went to posh fee-paying schools, and so many of them are (ex) lawyers or went straight from university into politics; certainly far too many of them have no experience of struggling to pay for the basics or of manual labour. I am reminded of when GK Chesterton said that those in favour of population control never want to start with themselves. Similarly the public-schoolboys and well-off MPs try and tell us, with our two-up two-down houses, struggling to pay bills and run-of-the-mill jobs, about equality!

Today a number of people have said how Sarah Teather MP, the Lib Dem who is a Catholic and voted against the bill, has come under attack from the "tolerance" brigade who like to pour bile and hatred on anyone who proffers a different worldview to theirs. Their tolerance seems somewhat stunted and their talk of "love" somewhat empty as they come down on this MP like a ton of bricks.

Of course I was somewhat tempted by the arguments of the likes of David Cameron who says, quite simply, that if two people love each other and want to show a lifelong commitment to each other, who are we (if not "bigots!") to stand in their way? That was until I snapped out of my miasma and realised that by those empty and meaningless words, a mother and son, brother and sister, or similar could get married.

Let's not even go down the road of how "gays" cannot legally consummate a marriage, because marriage is of course based entirely on the willingness and openness to procreation. Those of us who know the story of Abraham know that the many liberals who whine about those who "cannot conceive" need a little more... erm... Faith. As for those who say they "do not want kids" - well we all know they can still conceive, and even those who say they would abort a child, there is still the chance of a changed mind, a softened heart and the love of a life given, kicking in.

Still, David Cameron knows best and now the minuscule number of Civil Partnerships will mean an even tinier number of "gay weddings" and all the nightmares resulting (the homosexual lifestyle being well known for its multiple "partners," violence, short-term relationships etc.) After all if mankind can make as much of a mess of marriage as it has, we daren't even imagine what horrors are in stall for the future with this monstrosity in the offing.

Perhaps open and honest blogs like this will be removed -- Facebook already took down a Spanish language Catholic page for "hatred," while extreme anti-Catholic, pornographic and/or homosexual pages remain safely in situ?

Perhaps Catholic bodies will find themselves in court, mirroring the way Catholic adoption agencies were already closed down (leaving more children in council run homes - those places so well known for creating dysfunctional teens)?

Perhaps Catholic teachers in state schools who refuse to teach that homosexuals can marry will face the sack? Perhaps Catholics who write in fora, on blogs, on Twitter or Facebook against "gay marriage" will face the sack or get that 5am knock at the door?

Certainly one friend of mine has already told me he dare not write anything against it for fear of work reprisal by bosses -- and he works for the Post Office!

And that brings us back to the silent comedians and celebs, who dare not speak their minds amidst a storm of celebratory messages from the empty vessels busy making the most noise. We are told we have freedom, democracy, etc... yet in a country where people are already fearful to speak out in defence of marriage: there is clearly something very, very wrong.

• In 2004 the politicians pushing for Civil Partnership PROMISED there would be no push for "gay marriage." They lied.
• In 2013 the politicians are promising churches wont be forced to carry out "gay marriages" and that teachers and others will not suffer for speaking their minds. They are lying again.

Homosexuality = anti-culture

The militant homosexual lobby (who do not even speak out for all homosexuals*) are already pushing for the age of consent to be lowered. The next stage in their campaign will work towards a quasi-acceptance of paedophilia. Peter Tatchell has already publicly written in defence of sex with 9-year-old children** And we Catholics should know better. The entryism of homosexuals into the seminaries (the pre-60s hidden trickle has become a post-Vatican 2 flood***) had a direct role in the explosion of child abuse that has dragged the Catholic Church through the mud: the Church a victim of the very forces that now screech at it for defending the family. It is ironic that the secularists who hold up the clerical abuse scandals as a means to bash all Catholics, will never say that the role of homosexuals was paramount in this dreadful episode. If the Church had kept its strict rules re. Seminarians and kept its internal policy the same as its public pronouncements then the scandals would never have happened.

If one thing is as sure as eggs is eggs it's that random and kooky CofE vicars and vicaresses will eventually start doing "gay marriages" (God is luv) and pressure will mount - and that's the danger of heresies: they lead to error and the next thing the dull, the ignorant and the just plain evil will say "the Jesus I know would have celebrated homosexuality" and then they'll point at the bizarre churchlets already carrying out these monstrous affronts to God, and the handful of CofE vicars (called Jeff n Tracey) who are doing rebellious "gay weddings" (and the CofE Bishops who will, by then, already be saying "maybe this isn't so bad...") and bingo: Guy n Wayne will be walking up the aisle at some Minster or other.

And it all began with some glib politician's lies, and the campaign of intimidation and fear by the uber-politically correct. I wonder if the war in heaven started in the same way...

St David - pray for us
St George - pray for us
St Andrew - pray for us
St Patrick - pray for us.
Our Lady, Help of Christians - pray for us.





*On yesterdays Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2, they invited on two elderly homosexuals to "celebrate" the changes in the law, from the days (pre-1967) when homosexuality was outlawed. When asked at the end of the interviews how they felt about this wonderful bill (Jeremy Vine could barely conceal his joy, seems a BBC rule!) one said he did not favour it and that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. The other said he saw no need for it and was perfectly content with a Civil Partnership. Ooops. The BBC slipped up, and Mr Vine quickly moved on...

**In a letter he had published in The Guardian in 1997.

***Christian Order magazine has documented this very well, including the role of Cardinals in shielding known homosexuals, and attacking/demoting any priest who dares to speak out.

Abortion Debate: Women's Bodies and Who Should Comment

No womb - no view. Sorry bucko!

Recently I saw a debate on the internet between Martin "Money Saving Expert" Lewis and an extreme feminist.

Lewis wondered why people were going for the throat of the health secretary when this was a matter of law, and so it should be debated in parliament by MPs like him.

The feminist said that no man should speak on these issues, let alone formulate public policy, because it did not concern men, it was about women's bodies, she foamed.

Of course she is right and wrong.

• It is about women's bodies and the damage done to them. And their psychological health. Their ability to have further children. Their ability to fight various cancers. And their immortal soul.
• It is also about bullying. Many women are bullied into abortions (not least by overpowering "fathers") so it is strange that wymmins-rights folk don't find this offensive.
• It is also about women dying. Female babies constitute at least 50% of those murdered. Some suggest more, as some communities seek to murder unborn girls. Who speaks for the "wymmins-rights" of those girls?
• It is also about a public debate. men take a role in procreation, so they should also be able to defend the rights of the unborn.
• To limit the debate to women is akin to saying that only MPs aged 16 and 17 can discuss lowering the voting age. It is a nonsense.

But then, when defending the mass murder of innocents - including those murdered for the crime of being female, poor or disabled - when have the abortionists ever made sense?

SPUC's Life Chains: Take a Stand for the Unborn

I was chuffed to be reminded c/o John Smeaton's excellent blog that SPUC's Life Chains are coming back to the streets, mostly on the 28th of April. More details here.

There's one near us and I am hoping that there'll be no last minute family drama (car dying, child breaking bone etc.) that stops at least a few of us attending!

Have a look and see if there's one near you. If there is ask your Parish Priest to publicise it. Let's make this a year when more and more Catholics (and men of good will) make a stand for the butchered innocents.

And look! Someone's taken a folding chair... so there's no excuse, not even for those of us who like pork pies a little too much (you can even take one or two in a pocket!)

BBC Thinks Murder is the Answer to Poverty

From Love Undefiled Blog

I just watched a BBC News 24 Programme. It was actually a propaganda piece. It was about the Philippines and was an attack on that country's Faith and its policy of not promoting contraception.

We were treated to all the clichés about women's rights, poverty, the "dark ages" etc.

It always strikes me as weird that liberals (such as the BBC) think that all the poor children we see playing, working etc. should have been killed. Is it a solution to kill children, rather than stop poverty?

That is like taking a machine gun into a council estate because you think the people there are unfairly treated by a system in which a minority have too many riches.

• We call a man who puts puppies in a sack with a brick and throws them into the canal a monster.
• We call a man who wants the mass murder of innocent babies on the grounds of poverty a "progressive."

As the Americans would say: 'go figure.'

It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish. ~ Blessed Mother Teresa

Abortion: A Crime Against Humanity

Abortion is never an answer.

"Pro Choice" advocates (who ignore the choice of the baby, sometimes the father and even sometimes the mother) often say that abortion is just another operation.

I always thought if this was so, why don't they show abortions on TV as they do heart by-passes or hip replacements? They treat the murder of a baby as if it were a mole removal. We are told a "group of cells" is removed... Yet even the brain dead surely know that a mole, wart or cyst that's removed does not have a future as a living, walking, smiling, crying, struggling, tax-paying individual (I would say a soul bound for heaven - but we are dealing with non-Christians for the most part so let's stick to their remit).

So let's survey the "ProChoice" (dis-)info so far. It's just another operation, and it's just a group of cells... hmmm.

There are other lines spun when the abortion-defenders spread their lies. One is that this is a serious matter in all cases (they would never have you believe that babies are aborted so couples can buy a new car, or continue with regular holidays, or be seen to be "loyal" to the firm and so progress in their career)..

Another big lie is that groups like BPAS are "not for profit" (profits are made, and people are made rich via abortions); and perhaps the biggest lie of all is that the abortionists provide unbiased advice to pregnant women, when they have a vested interest to get their tills ringing, and a vested ideological interest to make abortion look like a "no victim procedure" - which sadly many women discover is not true, with Post Abortion Syndrome being an established fact.

Abortion is an outrage. Abortion has one and often two victims. Abortion is a crime against the child, motherhood, the family and society.

It really is that simple, and until we as a society stop the slaughter of the innocents we should not be surprised at the maltreatment of the elderly, the bullying of the disabled, and the lack of care, duty and compassion in society.



---

P.S. Do a Google search on abortion and the adverts at the top are for Marie Stopes, BPAS and Calthorpe. I don't know who the latter are, but the former are pro-abortion advocates and abortion providers.

P.P.S. I always wonder why socialist groups back abortion. Wouldn't improving peoples' lives and the lot of working families be a better option than killing babies in an answer to 'poverty?'

First They Came for the B&B Owners...

In an age when a Christian (albeit Anglican/Presbyterian) Monarch passes "laws" on abortion, homosexuality and marriage which run contrary to the law (and undermine her coronation oath), something the Pope has condemned as moral relativism,we should remember this (from St Augustine) and wear it as our badge for the new Pilgrimage of Grace.

As Catholics I believe we need a huge debate on what we can do to rectify the situation wherein the law-of-the-land, in crucial areas is contrary to objective Truth, especially when councils are being banned from having official prayers and B&B owners are being fined for stopping sodomites from having a double bedroom.

The words of the German Lutheran pastor Niemoller spring to mind.

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Interestingly, according to his page on Wikipedia, he was initially a supporter of Hitler and on meeting him, as a protestant representative, in 1932 as he said after WW2: "Hitler promised me on his word of honor, to protect the Church, and not to issue any anti-Church laws." 


It makes me wonder how much longer the laws meant to "protect" abortionists, homosexuals etc. are turned against the Church. In my humble view this has already started, with active/practising Catholics now stopped from adopting children out (via Catholic adoption agencies) and from running any business which may make them complicit in promoting/allowing homosexual activity.


One thing is sure, we need strong, powerful and unapologetic Catholic leaders such as the wonderful Scottish Cardinal, Thomas Winning who led from the front, was a strong voice for the rights of the family, the poor and the unborn, and would not be silenced by the pc lobby.






Image from: St Peter's List

Hungarian Government Protect the Unborn

On reading some Catholic writers' praise of a Hungarian government that was praising Hungary's Catholicism including the historic role of the Faith in the establishing of a Hungarian State, I posted a piece celebrating this fact.

One person leaving comments on the post chided me, stating that Hungary was becoming "fascist" (whilst leaving little proof beyond sound bytes).

It now appears that Hungary has asserted the absolute right of the unborn child to life.

If this is "fascism" (and that's a huge if) then (I can see people lining up to have a pop) I would rather see more such "dubious" governments than the liberal democracies that have resulted in millions of dead innocents!

A regime that kills the innocent has no moral obligations in regards to the treatment of the young, the elderly, the disabled, the poor and so on.

The Hungarian regime may not be perfect (I am not a politician nor a seer, so I don't pretend to know how things will end up), and one should add what can be perfect this side of Heaven, but so far it all seems outstandingly Catholic.

The Hermeneutic of Continuity on the Hungarian Pro-Life Law

Are Catholic Priests Defying the Pope and Magesterium?

Soho outrage: queeringthechurch.com' calls this a 'pride mass'

A leading homosexual activist claims that homosexual "civil partnerships" are being blessed by one or more priests. See John Smeaton's superb blog for full details

Enough really is enough. We need guidance, we need leadership, we need help! The wolves are amongst the sheep and the shepherds need to act. Promptly.

Bravo to SPUC for the leadership it is showing, and for all pro-lifers for showing the link between fighting the evil that is abortion, and the struggle to defend the family from other assaults on its dignity, and the sanctity of marriage.

John Smeaton is tackling real evil, and that is what is behind the Soho Masses, with its guile, twisted words and suchlike. This type of absolute evil will seem obsequious to those who matter into whose ears it will drip honeyed words of praise, whilst having a spirit of outright rebellion. It will speak of love, compassion, community, commitment, and even a disturbingly twisted Biblical love of neighbour, whilst spreading a worldview steeped in hatred, loneliness, violence, drugs and outright sin.

It will take no prisoners and paint its enemies, the defenders of truth, humanity, marriage and Holy Mother Church, as bigots, haters, extremists, and so on. So we must not only admire John Smeaton and SPUC, we must support them, for they are sure to face a campaign of hatred, twisted half-truths and similar underhand tactics.

Catholics must be clear that we stand, from SPUC to Pope Benedict, against moral relativism and the disordered deathstyle that is homosexuality. There can be no fudging!

Terry Pratchett's Assisted Suicide Argument is Fatally Flawed

On tonight's BBC News at Six, Terry Pratchett asked how we would possibly get from people "choosing to die" to people getting killed by the state.

I'm sorry but he is not a thick, unintelligent man. I have read and enjoyed most of his books, and he is clearly quick witted.

Can't he see the day that old people are pressurised by lazy, greedy, hard-pressed or "busy" relatives to sign a piece of paper so they can be injected with a lethal concoction? We already see "DNR" on old people's clipboards in hospital. A relative of mine was infuriated to see it on hers -- Do Not Resuscitate. The NHS is already looking out to save money and/or clear beds.

In a world where money means all, do we think the NHS would care for elderly people for years when they could "humanely" dispatch them?

Does Terry Pratchett not see the precedent of abortion? Initially this was supposed to have safeguards. It would only be when the mothers' lives were in danger. There would be safeguards with doctors' signatures required. Oh - and sex education and contraception (and even lately the morning after pill) would lower the number of abortions.

Only none of this worked, and the number of abortions has grown and grown. Now people who think they are "too poor" kill their child just as quickly as people with "careers" or even those who want to kill their child because they want a new car or have a holiday planned. We even see the same people give "advice," provide the murder machinery, and profit from the abortions. It's become a big business with media-savvy mouthpieces ready to promote their agenda and protect their profits.

Just as the "safety net" of unemployment benefit has become instead a lifestyle choice for what have been called the generation of "Shameless" families (named after a notorious TV series) and those who have no intention of working (a newspaper report today said half or dole recipients would give up their payments rather than be forced to work); so abortion has become a "lifestyle choice" for hundreds of thousands rather than the supposed 'safety net' for pregnancies that threatened a few dozen mother's lives each year. And I speak as someone whose mother was told by the "experts" to abort me for that very reason, happily we both survived.

If Terry Pratchett is indeed an intelligent man, then he must know that assisted suicide, no matter what the claimed safeguards, however it is entered in law, will undoubtedly change once enacted. Over a relative few years the dozens will become hundreds, then thousands, then tens of thousands and so on. The selfish generation who have holidays planned will pressurise the old to sign for their death, as quickly as they would seek an abortion.

The "inconvenience" of pregnancy and childbirth will be joined by the "inconvenience" of old age and caring/visiting the elderly. Plus there will be the 'added bonus' of early inheritance for the greedy, corrupt or desperate.

There are none so blind as those who will not see, and I do appreciate the onset of an irreversible disease must induce truly terrifying emotions; however we cannot change the law of the land and open the door on all sorts of awful eventualities just because a few selfish people wish to end their own lives.

That is not looking out for the Common Good. I do not wish to see a society in which the millions killed by abortion, for all manner of dubious, twisted or even 'good' intentions (and we know where they lead) are joined by millions killed by lethal injection.

I would ask Terry Pratchett to think again. He may not see the logical consequences of his actions, but we weren't told legalising abortion would end up like it has with millions dead. Opening the door to assisted suicide for a few vocal people with access to the media, would be a disaster for this society.

Hungary, Catholicism and Nationhood

On Saturday I wrote in regard to Catholicism and Nationalism from a Welsh point of view.

According to Rorate Caeli the Hungarian government seems to agree:

We are proud that our king Saint Stephen built the Hungarian State on solid ground and made our country a part of Christian Europe one thousand years ago.

...

We recognise the role of Christianity in preserving nationhood.

They go on to defend marriage as between a man and a woman (radical dude!) and the right of life from conception (liberals are a-fainting!)

Thank God for Hungary!