On the Bill O'Reilly show on Fox News last week, Patricia Ireland, past president of NOW (National Organization of [liberal] Women) said, Jesus Christ said nothing about abortions. The word abortion is not in the Bible.”
This was her defense of the “Choice on earth” Christmas Cards that Planned Parenthood ( the leading killers of human life the world has ever know), is hawking.
They think that a women's choice to have her unborn child killed, trumps Peace on earth. Now, wouldn't Peace on earth be grand and the ultimate goal of mankind? This is what all civilized people strive to attain, but only through total acceptance of Jesus Christ as our Lord, Savior and King.
But not Planned Parenthood and NOW. The killing of human beings, while still in their mother's womb and at times 3/4 out of the womb, is more important to them than the Creator Who made them, Who has given them breath to voice such blasphemy of the Commandments.
O'Reilly cited a poll that stated that 64% of Americans say that the card is inappropriate. 23% said appropriate and 13% not sure. He did this to try to convince Ireland that the Christmas Card was in bad taste. I will.
O'Reilly also took issue with her, that Jesus Christ would have no objection to the card. Oh, yes He would!
Yet, O'Reilly said, “based on my knowledge of theology and Christian upbringing as an Irish Catholic, I believe that Jesus Christ would not be a big fan of abortion. Now, I can't speak for Jesus, but his philosophy is all life is sacred. That's what I base it on, ALL life is sacred."
Good, I said to myself, O'Reilly is finally showing a religious nature and not afraid to stand up to anyone, who mocks his Savior, Jesus Christ.
But he should have said to Ireland:
'Are you kidding me, not in the Bible, have you never heard the Commandment, “Thou Shalt Not Kill?" Why would the killing of unborn children not be included in that commandment? Are you trying to say that God is not all powerful and that He could not look in the future and thus put an asterisk after the Commandment, that says and this includes unborn children?
Do you see an asterisk, I don't. It would seem to me that you are showing disrespect to God and it may even come under the heading of blasphemy.
However, the very next day O'Reilly, probably through ignorance, left me mumbling.
He had a Reverend Mark Bigelow of the United Church of Christ, who believe it or not, has been involved with Planned Parenthood for the past fifteen years, as an advisory board member.
Now, one would think as a preacher of the Gospel, he would demand that they stop killing God's precious children. But no, he is part of the American holocaust.
I have a feeling that he gets paid big bucks, just to sit around and be an ornament. After all, killing unborn children can't be so bad if the killers have the backing of the clergy.
He said that he was proud of his association with Planned Parenthood, that they do a lot of good for thousands of women and families around the country. Yes, he really said this. Next he'll have us believe there really is a Santa Claus and all he carries in his sack of goodies are condoms and abortificients.
Now, here's what left me mumbling to myself:
O'Reilly said, "I don't think there is any question that they have done some good for some people. I don't think there is any question about that.”
To Mr. O'Reilly, if somehow this article comes into your field of vision, read carefully:
In 1997, a medical science finding was published in the top Scandinavian medical journal in the field of obstetrics and gynecology. However, as usual, this news was suppressed for public consumption by the liberal media in the United States, as well as the top medical journals.
The secular Commandment: “Thou Shalt Not Harm The Abortion Industry,” penned by the NAF(National Abortion Federation), the NARAL,(National Abortion Rights Action League), NOW (National Organization of Women) and Planned Parenthood and fueled by moral depravity and the Democratic party, appears to have replaced God's Commandment, “Thou Shalt Not Kill."
Finnish women, who had an induced abortion had 3.5 times the TOTAL risk of dying as women who delivered in the 12 months after the end of pregnancy. (Acta Obstet Gyn Scand 1997;76:651-657)
This ALL-CAUSE maternal mortality -- comparing the relative mortality risks (in the 12 months after the end of pregnancy) for women who delivered versus those who had induced abortions was easily computed from the data.
Not only has a doctor taken an oath to, “first do no harm," but he/she also has a legal duty to withhold any treatment that the doctor knows, or should know, is not in the patient's best interest. This TRIPLING of a woman's one year risk of death can hardly be considered in a patient's best interest and invites a malpractice suit.
I do believe it was a good thing this study was done in Europe, since the Abortion Industry has great faith in European abortion studies, as evidenced by their embracing of the Melybe/Danish study that proclaimed that abortions do not increase the risk of breast cancer.
This Danish study was plastered on the National Cancer Institute webpage and on Planned Parenthood's. It seems they don't trust American scientists, as 13 of 15 studies done in the USA found that abortions DO increase the risk of breast cancer. Also, 29 of 38 done worldwide found the increased risk.
Even when the Danish study was exposed for its many obvious flaws and when corrected, DID SHOW that abortions increased the risk of breast cancer.
The NCI (National Cancer Institute) finally had to take this study off their website.
Isn't it amazing that the NCI had to travel the world to find a study that met their political persuasion. What was wrong with the studies done in the USA, especially one of the studies they actually funded, the Dr. Janet Daling study, which showed that abortions increased the risk of breast cancer on an average of 50%? Why didn’t they put this one on their website? It wasn't what they wanted to hear.
But, the Daling study contained even more frightening results. If a woman had obtained her first abortion after age 30, her risk jumped by 110 percent. If she had her first abortion before she turned 18, the likelihood of having breast cancer increased by 150 percent. Worse yet, if she has a family history (mother, sister, aunt) of breast cancer and had a first abortion after age 30, her risk went up by 270 percent.
Most ominous of all, were the results for women who had had an abortion before age 18 and who also had a family history of breast cancer. (mother, sister, aunt etc.) EVERY ONE in this group got breast cancer before age 45. Not 50% of them, but ALL of them.
Even these extremely high risk teenagers, did not bother the NCI -- still no warning, even for these teenagers. Better for them to die, than to harm the billion dollar abortion industry. True to their Commandment.
Nor does Planned Parenthood, or any of the other abortion mills warn these teenagers of this serious risk prior to an abortion. They even fight all parental notification laws and who else would know if their is a history of breast cancer in the family, but the parents, especially the mother. And yet, EVERY ONE of these teenagers got breast cancer. There's a word for this -- well actually two -- GREED and MALPRACTICE.
The National Cancer Institute, which is funded by public taxes chose to run a flawed study on their webpage instead of the Daling Study which they actually funded. WHY?
The NCI must be investigated for their brazenness and cover-up and the guilty removed and punished. After all, how many deaths have they caused by their willful denial of an abortion/breast cancer risk, in the face of overwhelming evidence.
By the way, Dr. Janet Daling is “pro-choice” and stands by her findings and is miffed by those who downplay them. She said the work of her group was painstakingly done. To read more about this, see www.hometown.aol.com/dfjoseph/abortioncancer.html.
Abortion mills are also, not concerned about subsequent pregnancies, but women are, so they should know that due to damage done to the cervix and endometrium during an abortion, premature deliveries in subsequent pregnancies have skyrocketed since abortions were made legal in 1973.
This means low birth weights and thus the risks of physical and mental problems in the child are greatly increased, including cerebral palsy. That is, if the women was not made sterile by the abortion.
The All-CAUSE mortality in the twelve (12) months following abortions was 252% higher than in the 12 months following a term delivery. The Scandinavian study, not only included deaths from cancer, but also suicides, homicides and accidents.
Since the NAF and the NCI, distrust American studies and refuse to believe in the solid evidence concerning the abortion/breast cancer risk, which results in thousands of women, dying every year solely from the fact that they had an induced abortion, I am wondering what excuses they will come up with to denounce the ALL-CAUSE MORTALITY RATE. There are ZERO 12-month ALL-CAUSE mortality studies finding that women with induced abortions have a lower TOTAL death risk than childbearing women.
The U.S. Supreme Court justices deciding the Roe Vs Wade case, were convinced that elective abortion was considerably safer than childbearing. Now, we know better -- beyond any shadow of doubt.
There is a misunderstanding, even among many medical professionals, that 'maternal mortality' and 'all-cause mortality' are the same. Maternal mortality, as currently defined, excludes the following causes of death: (which are included in all-cause mortality): accidents, suicides, homicides and cancers.
In the United States automobile and truck accidents are the number one cause of youth death between the ages of 15 years and 24 years. When you add cancers, of which breast cancer heads the list, to all of the above, it is plain to see that maternal mortality is a very POOR substitute for ALL-CAUSE mortality and any researcher comparing the death rates of women who selected induced abortion versus women who selected term births MUST use ALL-CAUSE mortality, if they want to be truthful and thus, aid in the prevention of unnecessary deaths.
In the 1997 study of Finnish women, those with induced abortions had a 324% higher risk of dying in an accident. 546% higher risk of dying via suicide (versus women who delivered); the homicide risk was 1299% higher for women who had abortions.
The 252% higher death risk means that elective abortions are CONTRAINDICATED and thus, they should NOT be a LEGAL procedure and doctors who insist on doing them for monetary gain can be sued. IT IS BAD MEDICINE.
In view of these findings, NAF, NARAL and Planned Parenthood, being as concerned as they are about the safety of abortions and women's health as they purport, will undoubtedly recommend abortions ONLY if the women's life depends on it. They have no choice. Unless of course -- they don't mean what they say, concerning SAFE and legal and are only interested in monetary gain.
Not only does Planned Parenthood kill the largest share of the 1.4 million unborn children every year, but due to their efforts, by not warning women of the risks and complications of abortions, they are directly responsible for the death of thousands of post-abortive women every year -- including the immediate complications of an abortion, the main ones being -- infection, perforated uterus, hemorrhage and death. Not to mention post abortion stress and drug and alcohol abuse and suicides.
So, Mr. O'Reilly, would you like to take back, that Planned Parenthood does good work?
Now, for the rest of the interview with the so called Reverend (Bigelow):
O'Reilly: “Since 1973 there have been 40 million abortions done in this country. Do you think that Jesus, a man of peace, who respected life in all forms is pleased with that?"
Bigelow: “He spoke of the integrity of the individual, of free will, and the opportunity for people to express their faith and live their lives according to their own values.
Pro-choice means to allow people to live their lives, make the most personal decisions about their lives according to their own values. So yes, I do think Jesus would support people to make personal decisions based on their own values.”
In regards to this statement by Bigelow, I wrote the following letter to Mr. O'Reilly:
Mr.O’Reilly, regarding the killing of unborn children, a.k.a. as abortions, the Rev. Bigelow said that Jesus Christ would support people to make personal decisions based on their own values.
And if their values are in the cesspool, then what? I guess he also believes that adults should be able to sexually molest children since they made a personal decision based on their OWN values.
And how about if someone's values are further in the cesspool. Can you imagine our country where everyone acted according to their OWN personal values.
It was because of Hitler’s personal values that 6,000,000 Jews were killed. It was also, the terorrists personal values that 3,000 Americans were killed on 9-11 and the list is endless. I have never heard such garbage, and you let him get away with it.
O'Reilly to Bigelow: "You are confident if you die tonight and you have to face your maker, that He is going to be comfortable that 40 million potential humans beings have been killed since 1973. Do you think He is going to be happy with that?"
STOP The Press! Potential human beings? This statement by O'Reilly is absolutely wrong, so I wrote the following in a separate letter to him:
Unborn children are NOT potential, they ARE human beings. We now have DNA that proves beyond any doubt that human life begins at conception, which was not available in 1973 and in the majority opinion, (Roe Vs Wade) they even admitted that no one knows when human life begins.
Now, we do, it is a scientific fact and cannot be refuted by any embryologist in the entire world -- that human life begins at conception.
If not a human being, then what -- an animal being? Come on O'Reilly, you're smarter than that. Please, get your facts straight.
Because O’Reilly gets thousands of E-mails every day and he and his staff, probably pick them at random. Your help is needed. So if you're fed up with the spin that skates over God's undeniable, unchangeable laws, then let him have it. Write him at email@example.com
I think sometimes, and the preceding were ony a few examples, that Bill O'Reilly gets a little dizzy in his own spin of what his Catholic Faith teaches and means. If "the Spin stops here" as he says at the beginning and end of every show, than the buck stops there, too. Get your faith and facts right, Bill.