Saturday, December 31, 2011

More on the abortion murder charges in Maryland

Abortionists Steven Chase Brigham and Nicola Irene Riley have been charged with murder in connection with the deaths of viable babies at an illegal secret abortion clinic that the two abortionists operated in Elkton, Maryland.
Brigham is currently being held in the custody at the Camden County Jail in New Jersey and Riley was arrested and Riley is currently in the custody of the Salt Lake County Jail in Utah. Both are awaiting extradition to Maryland.
Brigham was charged with five counts of first-degree murder and five counts of second-degree murder. Riley was charged with one count of first-degree murder and one count of second-degree murder. The charges are the result of a Grand Jury investigation. In addition, Brigham and Riley were each charged with one count of conspiracy to commit murder. According to the story posted on

Brigham was never licensed in Maryland, but he routinely performed abortions in Elkton, as he admitted to New Jersey regulators at his October 2010 hearing. His claim that Maryland law allowed him to serve as an unlicensed "consultant" to the clinic "medical director" - an 88-year-old disabled doctor hired by Brigham - was rejected by regulators in both states.
During the Elkton raid, on Aug. 17, 2010, police found 35 late-term fetuses in a freezer, several just a few weeks shy of full term.
The search was prompted by the complaint of an 18-year-old New Jersey woman who had been critically injured four days earlier during an abortion performed by Riley. The patient had to be airlifted to a Baltimore hospital for emergency surgery.
Brigham is charged with five counts each of first- and second-degree murder, and conspiracy to commit murder.
Riley faces one first-degree count, one second-degree count, and a conspiracy charge.
However, it is very interesting that the story which comes on the heels of so many stories of shoddy abortion mills being closed down is not making it big in the mainstream media. the internet wire services are reporting the story but Google did not list it in the top news and one had to search the name to find the story. Yahoo, to its credit listed the story under U.S. News, picking up the Reuters News service feed. But you won't find any mention of the story in the New York Times. CNN listed the story. Even the Washington Post listed the story under "Top Headlines."

The point is that there is still a serious bias against giving any credence to the long held position by pro-lifers that the abortion industry is a gruesome disgusting business that any decent person or business should avoid.

Perhaps with more stories of their horrific activity, there will be a change in perspective that will help usher in a real change throughout the nation.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Abortionists Charged with Murder

One does not read that headline every day but in Maryland two notorious abortionists have been charged with murder after a 16 month investigation lead to grand jury indictments of Steven Brigham and Nicola Riley. President Obama and the pro-abortion Democrat party are responsible for the parade of horrors that continue to plague the nation and especially the northeast corridor.

Brigham and Riley have been on the radar of pro-life activists just as Operation Rescue for years.

The Philadelphia Inquirer also did a major story on Brigham back in 2010 identifying his abortion history and his  problems that go back to 1989. He lost his license in several states and according to the Inquirer
Brigham graduated from Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in 1986. By 1990, when abortion became the focus of his practice, he was licensed in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, California, Florida, and Georgia, public records show.
Pennsylvania was the first setback. In a confidential 1992 settlement, Brigham agreed to permanently give up his license amid an investigation of his practice in Wyomissing.
Despite this restriction, Brigham continued to own and expand his abortion business in the state.
In 1994, New York took his license, finding him guilty of "gross negligence" and "inexcusably bad judgment" involving two late-pregnancy abortions. The patients suffered life-threatening bleeding and required emergency hospital operations, public records show.
Brigham maintained offices in New York through 1995 but failed to file state business taxes, a misdemeanor for which he was sentenced to 120 days in jail and $8,188 in restitution, public records show.
In Florida, Brigham lost his license for not disclosing New York's action. California put him on probation and ordered extra training; instead, he let his license lapse, as he did in Georgia.
New Jersey suspended Brigham's license in 1993, citing the same botched abortions as New York, plus other charges.After three years of defending himself against an action by the state Attorney General's Office, Brigham won full reinstatement of his medical privileges.
Pennsylvania's latest disciplinary action came July 7 when Deputy Secretary of Health Robert Torres permanently banned Brigham and any corporation in which he has a controlling interest from providing abortions in the state. Torres' order cites repeated violations of the state's medical licensing rules.

Brigham and Riley are representative of the abortion industry and remind the nation once again why there must be laws against abortion. Just as Kermit Gosnell these two abortionists represent the dark side of the medical profession, a side that panders to the weakness and desperation of the human condition.

As a society we need to offer real hope and help to women with unintended pregnancies and not the false notion that abortion will solve their problems. As a society we nee to value every human person, the mother, the father the child. As a society we need to teach our children to respect the power of human sexuality and not consider that it is merely recreational entertainment. And as a society we need to put laws in place that recognize such principles or all that we say will have no protective meaning.

Friday, December 23, 2011

Merry Christmas

This will be short and sweet. Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night. Thanks for all your support of our pro-life efforts. May God bless you and yours abundantly.

Obama: "The thing actually that I most dislike is cruelty. I can't stand cruel people."

In an interview to be aired tonight on 20/20 President Obama made this amazing statement.
"The thing actually that I most dislike is cruelty. I can't stand cruel people."
For 36 years I have listened to the pro-choice advocates claim to have compassion for women while ignoring the unborn. I have heard the broken shattered voices of women who regret their abortions and cried with families who lost their daughters, sacrificed to the gods of the abortion industry. I have met the heroes of the pro-life movement who have saved mothers and children, people whose humility is only matched by their own sense of wonder how God has used them to do such good.

And now during this time of the year when the world stops for a moment to reflect on one solitary life, our president claims to dislike cruel people.

Abortion is the ultimate in cruelty to people. Abortionists and those in the abortion industry are by their actions cruel. If the president really wants to do something decent this Christmas, it would be to stop his administration's all out assault on the pro-life movement, to reconsider his own calloused attitude toward life and children, and to appreciate that choosing life - as his mother did - is the most heroic thing a person can do.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Republican Presidential Field and the Pro-life Issue

The jockeying among the presidential candidates to claim the pro-life mantle has begun. Up until now the candidates have all focused on the economy and for all the obvious reasons. Over the last week, however, we have seen a "ramping" up of the issue and different candidates challenging each other on their credentials and bone fides.

Major national right to life organizations have blessed all of the serious Republican contenders as preferable to the current occupant of the White House. National Right to Life, for example, has a sheet highlighting the candidates and the positions on funding, ObamaCare and Roe v. Wade. Other groups such as SBA List have called for candidates to sign a pledge to appoint judges and oppose certain legislation.

Now with the Iowa Caucus less than a month away, both the candidates and their surrogates are launching to attacks on each other. An example was found yesterday in an opinion piece in the Washington Post by Marc Thiessen, who recounts Newt Gingrich's stated and historical positions concerning abortion and related matters. he lists all those who questions Gingrich and his pro-life stand, asking about his actions in Congress. the article also asks why Romney is not playing up this abortion issue more.

Then there is the National Review and its decision to back Romney, joining with the so called "Establishment" folks in D.C. who thinks its Romney's turn. so NRO links to those sites who chip at Newt, who, having had the momentum, now is the guy to be pulled off the hill.

So where does it leave pro-lifers, whether they be in Iowa or New Hampshire or Arizona?

Each of the candidates' supporters point to their candidate's pro-life talking points. In conversations with Romney Supporters, one will hear how Romney vetoed a state law that would have changed the definition of when life began. (I am always amused by the conceit of legislators who believe that by legislating something, they can make it so.) The Bachmann folks beat up on Newt for his implantation confusion. There are constant reminders of Romney's flip flops on being pro-life or pro-choice and whether he even understands - or much less cares.

Perry got roasted in the beginning when he announced over the vaccine issue. People did not life what he did and he agreed that he was wrong.

Dr. Paul, has delivered thousands of babies but unfortunately thinks that abortion is strictly a state's rights issue, a position embraced by some politicians who wish we pro-lifers would just go away.

For records and for being champions, Bachmann and Santorum have a leg up on the other candidates, although Huntsman can point with pride at legislation he signed in Utah while governor.

One can get a good read on the candidates from a little research. There are enough sources to consider as long as one can insure there is not an ulterior motive in the article.Of course, one of the concerns of many voters is that candidates will say one thing and do another. For many in the pro-life movement, there is a jaded attitude toward the political approach, having seen too many missed opportunities. One cannot wait upon political solutions entirely, although eventually a political solution must be reached if we are to ever protect all children.

Those who have checkered pasts need to recognize that the pro-life movement has been burned too many times before so simply accept the "trust me" line. We don't need politicians to treat us as interest groups one trudges out every couple of years to vote and then escort to the back of the bus. And we don't need people to "remind" us that economic issues are "more" important than the life issues or that there should a "truce" in talking about family issues. the reason economic issues are important is because they affect the family - in other words - people. And ultimately "people" are what it is all about.

So where are we on this 20th day of December 2011, a few days before Christmas, with the prospects of the 2012 election year before us? Many, I believe, are keeping their powder dry. Many are watching the flavor of the month and keeping their ideas to themselves. As the candidates and their surrogates attempt to force
decisions, the pro-life voting public is waiting; waiting to see who will be their champion. They know that the lives of millions depend on a real champion who understands what is at stake for the nation and the world.

During this holy season, we all need to pray for that champion of life.

Friday, December 16, 2011

"Batman" Christian Bale's visit to Chinese Human Rights Activist spotlights Chinese forced abortion policy

Christian Bale, the actor who played Batman was roughed up on Thursday in China after attempting to visit the blind Chinese Human Rights activist Chen Guangcheng, who has been under house arrest for exposing the latest in Chinese atrocities concerning its forced abortion policy in 200. The self taught lawyer has been a strong voice defending the rights of women and children in China. His actions have been a source of tension between the government and human rights activists. Chen Guangcheng exposed the fact that there were 130,000 forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations in Linyi County in 2005. The Chinese Communist Party imprisoned Chen for four years and three months and has kept him and his family under strict house arrest since September, 2010. On February 9, 2011 Chen released a video describing the deplorable conditions of his house arrest. The next morning, Chen and his wife, Yuan Weijing, were “beaten senseless.”

Bale, in China making a movie called The Flowers of War, heard about Chen and decided that he should make the eight hour journey to tell him how his actions inspired so many.

Chinese authorities are in a bit of a quandary since the movie Bale stars in, was made with Chinese government support.

This latest story out of China reminds us that abortion is an internationally destructive phenomenon, causing death and destruction to all involved and everywhere it is practiced. Late term forced abortions are common in China. The violations of human rights and the Chinese one-child policy initially exposed by Steven Mosher in the early 1980s have largely been ignored by the West as it continues to curry favor with the growing Chinese influence in the world. But the tensions that a massive population imbalance can bring are only too real to those who study such matters. Many of the current problems in Europe can be traced to the declining populations in Western European nations. We in the United States need to remember that the greatest natural resource a nation has is its people.

Yet how are we to take a moral stand against such atrocities and human rights abuses when we in the United States kill over 3000 children a day?

How can we complain about what the Chinese government does when our own administration promotes abortion on demand and supports abortion profiteers such as Planned Parenthood?

Action item: Does your congressman or senator know of China's human rights abuses and its one-child policy that includes forced abortions? Perhaps you should make your representative aware of this ongoing atrocity.

Thursday, December 08, 2011

HHS backs off on FDA approval of morning after pill

Perhaps the Obama Administration is aware that some things actually cross the line - and can have very serious consequences come November. That is how some observers are explaining the White House's decision through HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius to leave in place a requirement that women younger than 17 get a prescription for the Plan B contraceptive. You will recall the previous fight last year over the drug, which proponents call safe and opponents question. The politically charged decision by the FDA, which has previously allowed RU-486 on the open market, despite the rising death toll from that drug, was vetoed by Sebelius yesterday.

Pro-abortion forces were "left speechless" by the decision.

So now many are asking why?

After reading Jill's column, here is another thought. There is probably a clear money trail between the companies who would most benefit from the drug being out in the open market and the Obama re-election campaign. If that information was revealed, it would further damage the administration whose ties to the rich and powerful have been contained thus far by the very friendly media. But with the hearings on Planned Parenthood on the horizon, the nation still in the throes of the "Great Recession," and the so called "Occupy" movement turning its attention on Obama and those money connections, smart people close to Sebelius said that this little social experiment can wait. Lefty Catholics will try to claim some influence in order to try to sell the most pro-abortion president in history, but my guess is that there is a money connection. All of the other theories probably made it an easy sell to Sebelius who never saw an abortion plan she did not like..

Monday, December 05, 2011

Gingrich clarifies, reiterates, and cleans up.

Thankfully it did not take long for Newt Gingrich to address the major faux pas he made the other day and to do so without letting a whole lot of time pass. His statement, put on his website, states that he believes life begins at conception.

Thanks to Joshua Mercer for reporting on this at

So of course there will be some who will ask why the comments on implantation in the first place. I cannot speak for Gingrich but it is possible that his professorial mode took over and he got caught up in discussing details on a subject that was more complicated than he understood. Or maybe he was being cute? Or maybe he wanted to avoid talking about the Personhood of the human zygote. Who knows?

What is important is that he as well as every candidate recognize the importance of the pro-life vote. All of the candidates need to realize that unless they understand and embrace a philosophy that respects the dignity of the human person, we will never get our country out of the mess it is in. Fixing our country's economic problems begins with respecting the nation's greatest natural resource - her people. Appreciating the value of the worker, the importance of culture not consumerism, and the purpose for which man was created, all of these ideas are part of our founding principles as a nation. They are a reflection of the greatness that was Western Civilization. Passing this gift to our children is critical to the nation's well being and to the stability of the world economy.

Considering that the current occupant of the white House has no respect for the dignity of the human person when one as ks to include the unborn child, it is imperative that we citizens vote to remove him as president by electing someone who will honor the sanctity of all human life by supporting any an all legislation that will protect all persons born and unborn..

Saturday, December 03, 2011

Culture of Life pianist Eric Genius comes to Phoenix December 8

Culture of Life pianist Eric Genius comes to Phoenix December 8, 2011

Eric Genuis, the amazing composer, pianist and story teller, is coming to Scottsdale and will be performing at Our Lady of Perpetual Help Catholic Church - Miller Road south of Indian School Road on DECEMBER 8, 2011 @ 6:30 pm. this FREE Culture of Life concert is a gift to the community and a call to celebrate the good, the true, and the beautiful. A free will offering will be taken to support the pro-life cause.

Eric is an incredible talent and this can be just the event to help you get into the spirit of the holiday season.

Eric will be joined by a violinist, vocalist and trumpeter.

Don't miss an evening of uplifting inspirational entertainment for the whole family.

check out his web site. Eric Genuis.

See you Thursday.

Friday, December 02, 2011

This Time Gingrich Steps in It - Handling the Life issue

The latest buzz circulating in the news and on the Internet is Newt Gingrich's interview with Jake Tapper and Gingrich's comments on when human life begins. Apparently Newt has forgotten his high school biology class lessons and the scientific definition of when and human life has his or her beginning. People will use the word "conception" to describe the formation of a zygote by the union of a make sperm and female ovum or the "beginning" of a human life. There is nothing ideological in such a description and it is very odd for Newt to so contend. In science the so-called "fertilized egg" term in reality is the human zygote or new human being.

So Newt really stepped in it this time. He fudges on the time line and implies that addressing the reality would make it difficult to consider other matters. Those in the now discredited area of embryonic stem cell research had long since tried to manipulate language to "create" terms to describe the human being at those first moments of life as "pre-human." It was a farce and everyone knew it. Now we have a throw back to such terms from someone who should know better.

In addition to his errors on fertilization and implantation, Newt also gets it wrong regarding stem cell research. One does not obtain embryonic stem cells from the placenta. One obtains adult stem cells from the placenta, cord and blood. One only obtains embryonic stem cells from embryos and in order to obtain them, one must destroy the embryo.

In addition, as Ramesh Ponnuru points out, “Gingrich may have forgotten where he stood, but he did in fact back embryo-destructive stem-cell research in 2001.”

Jill Stanek makes a good point.
Of all the Republican presidential candidates, Rick Santorum has the best record on the Life issue and is the most articulate.

All of this reminds us that the pro-life issue is still a very critical issue in the Republican primary, that pro-life voters should demand clarity in explaining their positions, that simply saying one is "pro-life" is not enough, that explaining why one is pro-life is important. As for the flip-floppers like Romney, simply stating that he was always personally pro-life while espousing a very hard pro-choice line, demands that he condemn his past confusion and duplicity, ask forgiveness for his past transgressions and actively prove his conversion.

We in the pro-life movement have always welcomed converts. But sincerity is required. We in the pro-life movement have been misled by too many over the years. Promises have been made by politicians who had no intention of following through. The powers in Washington think very little of the movement as a whole and the mainstream media even less. Those who hold the pro-life view as a threshold issue must be firm in holding those politicians who seek their vote to the test. For someone as wealthy as Mitt Romney, what percentage of his wealth has been used to make amends of the years of his "pro-choice" heresy? What has he done as a man to tell people how terrible abortion is and how it harms women, children and families? Where were these people now running for office when we needed their voices to stand up for life?

And Newt, when you were Speaker of the House, why did you not advance the pro-life agenda? Why did we have to beg for scraps? Why did the Caucus not cut out Planned Parenthood funding then - when the Republicans controlled both houses?

Now is the time for clarity. The current occupant of the White House is the most pro-abortion president in our nation's history. His actions have damaged the family and the country. Whoever succeeds him must have the welfare of the human person and respect for human life as his or her first priority. Such a philosophy will affect all policies foreign and domestic. It is the least we can ask from someone seeking to be president. Defend all innocent human life.