Monday, August 15, 2011

"Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad." ~Aldous Huxley

Last week's announcement that HHS is mandating birth control without charge, has brought reaction from all quarters and
in an attempt to pretend balance, a Denver based organization, Health Policy Solutions contacted Colorado Right to Life for a comment and their resulting article is most instructive in how the left
censors the input it seeks when it doesn't comport with their preconceived bias.

Of course Planned Parenthood was thrilled as their spokesperson indicates, "Covering birth control without co-pays is one of the most important steps we can take to prevent unintended pregnancy and keep women and children healthy,” Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president of Medical Affairs for Planned Parenthood, said following IOM’s recommendation."

But healthy ? Huh?

In response to the query from Heath Policy Solutions about the pros and cons of the mandate, I shared the following information:


Oral contraceptives are declared Group 1 Carcinogens to Humans by the World Health Organization.

Additionally, there is an "abortifacient action" in oral contraceptives, according the the manufacturers themselves in package inserts.

Breast surgeon, Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, has dubbed the Pill a "molotov cocktail" for breast cancer.

What could be more outrageous than forcing taxpayers to harm women and children with the fruits of our labor?"

Not surprisingly, the article gives far more ink to the three women who are delighted that oral contraceptives will be provided without charge, but when pertinent information provided by opponents isn't included, one wonders if balance was truly the intent.

The article starts with the plight of a young female college student who says, "“I feel like if a woman chooses to be safe and take responsibility for her sexual health, that that should be supported and made easy. It should not be a struggle for any woman,” Carpenter said.' Then of course, the obligatory NARAL and Planned Parenthood representatives are quoted, crowing about how necessary the coverage truly is.

Next, Myung quotes yours truly, "Leslie Hanks, vice president of Colorado Right to Life, said the new law will cause more women to use birth control, which she believes carries “grave health risks.” She and other pro-life advocates assert that the new law will cover abortion-inducing drugs, known as abortifacients – a claim that HHS denies.

Why do we care so little for the health of women and their innocent children being lost to these abortifacients?” Hanks said.

Pro-life opinion is often sought to give a sheen of "balance" but after being at this for nearly a quarter of a century, I'm growing weary of accepting the crumbs the MSM gives in order to make them look fair.

A few questions come to my mind ~


I gave you the name of a respected breast surgeon, Dr. Angela Lanfranchi who I heard speak at a Human Life International symposium on 50 Years of The Pill last December. Doesn't her claim that oral contraceptives are a, "molotov cocktail" for breast cancer even cause a blip on your radar screen? Did you call Dr. Lanfranchi to learn why she makes such a claim?

Do you care so little for women's health that you and your organization censor pertinent information from them without

Does the information about the pill being designated as a class 1 Carcinogen not merit mention? Are women unable to handle the truth?

Finally, if you quote me as being concerned the pill carries, "grave health risks" would it not be fair to mention the risks I shared with you ?

The other point I raised ~ the pill has an abortifacient action, you wrote, "a claim HHS denies." Did you do any research to
see if they are accurate in their denial? Do you know or care that the definition of pregnancy was changed, "In 1965, the medical definition for when pregnancy begins was changed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Why? Ideology."

So, in the spirt of truth and love for woman and humanity, I'm asking the Health Policy Solution folks to raise the bar a bit!

When you seek the opinions of your opponents and they give you information that has health implications for your readers, you have an obligation to investigate the claims and report on your findings, in my opinion. Failing to do so, leaves you responsible for keeping women in the dark.

"God offers to every mind its choice between truth and repose. Take which you please - you can never have both." ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Wednesday, August 03, 2011

Help Mei Stay!! Update

Woman facing prison, sterilization over 1-child policy

Robert Unruh

"A woman who originally came to the United States for a marriage arranged by her family stayed after being abandoned at the altar, because of the humiliation she would have faced on her return to China. Later, she met someone else, married and now has a family.

But over the years Xiu Mei Wei, pronounced Shoe May Way, has spent contributing to American society, she has failed to do all the immigration paperwork in the right sequence. Now she's facing what many advocates consider the threat of a forced return to China, where she would face a prison sentence and forced sterilization.

Lawyers with the New York law offices of John Chang confirmed to WND today they have submitted a petition to reopen the case to the federal Board of Immigration Appeals, the highest administrative body for interpreting and applying immigration laws in the nation.

The board itself said it has nationwide jurisdiction to hear appeals from a wide variety of decisions, rulings and situations."

More . . .

Xiu Mei needs the prayers and support of Christians who know the tyranny she faces, should she be deported. Please pray for the millions of women in China who endure forced abortions and that there will be justice for Xiu Mei.

If you would like to help in Xiu Mei's defense, please write her attorney and explain why you believe she should be allowed to stay in the United States of America.

Mrs. Wei does not speak English very well, but an interpreter can be provided. If you are interested in her story or have any information about how to help keep Xiu here, please contact Jo Scott.

Jo's cell: 303-550-8170 or Ken Scott at 303-501-4706

Mei's lawyer's contact information:

John Chang
401 Broadway Suite 2001
New York, NY 10013
Mei's case number is: 96281393

Letter talking points:

State who you are, give some contact info.

1) Mei has been trying for a almost a decade to become a citizen but because of a mistake her lawyer made she is in danger of being deported.

2) Tell them that Mei is a fine Christian woman who has violated China's one child policy and that she has been supporting the underground church.

3) If she is deported she is subject to forced sterilization, her children cannot be educated or employed until after exorbitant fines are paid but she will be imprisoned for being a Christian and supporting the underground church.

Finally, pray that the leaders in China will repent of their evil policy denying siblings and that they will learn about the God given, inalienable right to life of every baby.

Tuesday, August 02, 2011

What's Next ~ Mandatory OCs for All ?

"New health insurance requirements announced by the Obama administration on Monday will force health insurance plans to cover birth control and voluntary sterilization — with no co-pays — as preventive care for women.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Service disclosed that the new guidelines, drafted by the Institute of Medicine, will take effect on or after August 1, 2012, and they are expected to apply to both individual and employer-based insurance plans"


Oral Contraceptives (OCs) are Class 1 Carcinogens designated by the World Health Organization.

According to breast surgeon, Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, OCs are, a "molotov cocktail" for breast cancer!

The 'abortifacient action' in hormonal contraceptives is documented by pharmaceutical manufacturers themselves
in package inserts.

Is it really that much a stretch to think that a government that can force taxpayers to pay to poison American women and kill their children could take another leap and require all women to take oral contraceptives?

More . . . .