One of the things that distresses me, immensely, apart from the legalized
killing of unborn children, is the utter disregard that the pro-choice [to
kill unborn children] people have for the health and lives of women and teen-
This particular column I will address the plight of pregnant teen age girls,
literally, have been thrown to the wolves, purely for political and
If the pro-aborts have no compassion for these teenagers, you would
think that the medical profession, politicians and the media would be a
Oh sure, we will kill their child for them, usually for a price, and their
be over, so we think. But NOT true, their problems would just begin.
13 of 15 studies done in the United and 28 of 37 world wide have shown
that abortions increase the risk of breast cancer. The ACS (American
Cancer Society) whose sole existence is to warn the public of cancer risks,
says the evidence is inconclusive. In lock step with the ACS are breast
cancer organizations, such as the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer
To say that the risk is inconclusive is pure “garbage.” How can they say
with a straight face in view of the fact that 17 of the studies are
What does SS mean? It means, you had better sit up and take notice. You
better warn women, who are about to have their unborn child killed. Even
if only ONE is SS -- let alone, 17!
They also ignore an experiment done in Michigan in 1980, which was reported
in the American Journal of Pathology, August 1980, pp 497-511. Cancer
researchers injected a number of pregnant rats with DMBA, a cancer-causing
substance. They then aborted half the rats; the other half were allowed to
carry their pregnancies to term.
Among the aborted rats, 77% developed breast cancer. Among the term
rats, only 5.5% developed breast cancer.
As if that wasn't bad enough, here is the worst part -- young girls who have
NEVER had a full term delivery, are at even a GREATER risk, when they
have an abortion. Even the ACS admits to this risk
Dr. Clark Heath, head of Epidemiology and Surveillance Research of the
American Cancer Society, on February 20, 1998, conceded to this one
aspect of the ABC link -- that an abortion delayed first birth INCREASES
breast cancer risk. The longer the time to her first term delivery, the
greater the risk.
It's the interruption of subsequent pregnancies that the ACS will not
admit to -- even though, as I stated before, 17 of the studies were SS.
Only the FIRST child killed, the American Cancer Society says, increases
the risk of breast cancer. Tell me the difference between that and Herod striking the young male 'first child' of every family in the killing of the innocents?
Even though the evidence is overwhelming that ALL ABORTIONS increase
the risk of breast cancer, let's go along with them and say that just
the first child increases the risk of breast cancer.
THEN WHY AREN''T THESE YOUNG GIRLS WARNED OF
THIS, BEFORE THEY HAVE THEIR FIRST CHILD KILLED?
That is the question, since everyone is in agreement, including the ACS,
as to the imminent danger of breast cancer in teen-age girls, who abort
their first child.
Then what's the problem? Why is the ACS and breast cancer
organizations suppressing this live saving news?
Why is the media silent? Why do they insist on keeping this “America's best
I know for a fact that the media, which is predominately liberal, is aware of
the ABC link. However they did warn us that cell phones MIGHT increase
the risk of brain cancer. This on only 6 studies, in which the pros and cons
were about equal.
Have teen age pregnant girls now been relegated to the same status as
unborn children -- their lives are expendable if it means harming the
The studies mentioned above, of which 13 of 15 done in the USA, agree
that ALL abortions increases the risk of breast cancer by about 50%.
In the grade school that I attended, I learned that a ratio of 13 to 2 was
NOT even being close to being equal. Was I taught wrong?
The exhaustive work of Dr. Janet Daling and her colleagues at Seattle's
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center examined the possible linkage
between abortion and breast cancer. Funded by the National Cancer
Institute and directed by a woman who describes herself as "Pro-choice,"
the study can hardly stand accused of coming at the issue with a pro-life
The size of the study (1,806 women -- 845 women who had breast cancer
were compared with a "control" group of 961 women who did not);
The Daling study showed that on the average, the chance of a woman having
breast cancer before she turns 45 increases by 50 percent if she has had an
However, if a girl had her first abortion before she turned 18, the
of having breast cancer increased by 150 percent.
Most ominous of all, were the results for women who had an abortion
before age 18 and who also had a family history of breast cancer. Twelve
women in the Daling study fit that description. EVERY ONE OF THEM
HAD BREAST CANCER.
A staggering and sobering statistic. It's one thing for the abortion clinics
not to warn these teenagers -- their reason is greed. But, the American
Cancer Society and breast cancer organizations -- what's their excuse?
And let's not forget the media -- sure they're predominately liberal, but
here we are talking about life and death.
A tragedy, you say -- I will take it one step further, it is downright
In a court of law, what reputable person of science would testify on behalf
the abortion mills?
What reputable professional would even testify on behalf of the ACS, for
withholding this life saving information, especially when they have already
admitted to it?
Now, here is the “kicker,” [un]Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW and
their condoners and enablers -- the pro-choice [to kill unborn children]
are fighting tooth and nail to knock down any parental notification laws.
Why is this law of vital importance, other than most parents would like to
know, if their child is having an elective surgery, even though it's not just
having their ears pierced?
The reason parents MUST be notified, is that if there is a history of breast
cancer in the family, children usually don't know it -- ONLY THE PARENTS
know it, especially the mother.
Frankly I don't know if this argument has ever been discussed in a state or
national legislative setting. I doubt it.
What I do know is that these young girls are being treated like animals
by the abortion industry and by the party, whose platform accepts the
proposition that a woman should have the right to have her unborn child
killed, if she so chooses -- the Democratic party.
PETA would be all over this party, the abortion industry and the ACS if
these young girls were animals.
The Democratic party, as well as the abortion industry have signed the death
warrants for thousands of teen-age girls every year. No one, not even the
ACS denies that teen-age girls, who have their first child killed, increase
their risk of breast cancer. They even acknowledge that if there is a
of breast cancer in the family, the risk increases dramatically.
Yes, it does boggle the mind, why these young girls are not warned and why
parental notification laws are being knocked down.
I probably shouldn't say boggles the mind, because I do know why. If even
a hint gets out that abortions increase the risk of breast cancer for just
girls, who abort their first child, it would be the death knoll for Planned
Parenthood and all of the other abortion mills, as well as making the
Democratic party and all the other pro-aborts eat crow.
What IS mind boggling, is the cold-heartedness of these groups and all others
who condone these killings, of which the Democratic party has to take the
lion's share of the blame. Remember, this is the party that revels in its
that they champion the sick, the voiceless and less fortunate.
Yeah, right -- only if it does NOT interfere with the constant flow of
money from Planned Parenthood, NARAL (National Abortion Rights
Action League), NOW (National Organization of [Liberal] Women)
and the Hollywood Filth Industry.
Even though in this case, we are just talking about young girls, common sense
would dictate that the mechanism that causes breast cancer in young girls is
the same as in older women, who have abortions.
When pregnancy occurs, there is a SURGE of the hormone, estrogen
causing the breast cells to proliferate dramatically in the first trimester,
order to lay the foundation for the production of milk. These young growing
cells are more prone to develop cancer.
In the second half of pregnancy, the estrogen levels RECEDE under the
influence of such hormones as human placental lactogen. The immature
cells, then grow and differentiate rapidly into mature, specialized milk
producing tissue. Once specialization has occurred, the cells are less
likely to turn cancerous.
When the pregnancy is terminated by an induced abortion, these young
growing cells (known as undifferentiated cells), and having undergone
drastic changes are now in LIMBO. They are no longer normal breast
cells, nor are they capable of producing milk.
In plain English, these insulted cells (traumatized) have been hung
out to dry. They are between a rock and a hard place.
Scientists have known for years that any cell in the human body that
has been traumatized, whether by chemicals, radiation, micro-trauma,
or any other reason would be especially vulnerable to cancer
One must then surmise that what has been instilled in physicians
heads from time immemorial, regarding the vulnerability of abnormal
cells, is no longer valid. To suit their political agenda, they would have
you believe that an abnormal cell is NO more prone to becoming
cancerous than a normal cell. This defies all scientific knowledge, as
well as common sense and shows the depths they will go, to keep
the abortion industry flourishing. Human life means nothing to them.
It has also been long known that a pregnancy carried to term protects
against breast cancer.
However, if a woman has an induced abortion, this protection is terminated.
The reason is because the proliferation of the undifferentiated, cancer
vulnerable cells, by the estrogen secreted early in the pregnancy, no
longer has the protection that comes from hormones released later
in pregnancy, since the pregnancy has been aborted.
The estrogen/breast cancer risk has been known by doctors for many
years, thus their reluctance to prescribe estrogen for menopausal
women, especially those with any family history of breast cancer.
Manufacturers of oral contraceptives alert the public as to the possible
link between their product and breast cancer. The induced abortion risk
is greater than the relative risk associated with oral contraceptives.
When the above mechanism is explained to a pro-abort, or a liberal doctor,
all they can say is -- "well, ah, ah, well, ah, dah dah ugh, ugh."
I am not exaggerating, I know -- I have been there.
As you may know, abortions also increase the risk of drug and alcohol
abuse and suicides. The reason is simple -- THEY KILLED THEIR CHILD.
Remorse, strong remorse, unforgiving remorse on their own psyches haunts them. It is inevitable.
Abortions also increase the risk of premature children in subsequent
pregnancies. These children of low birth weight are more prone to develop
physical and mental disorders, including cerebral palsy. For details, see http://hometown.aol.com/dfjoseph/abortionvschildbirth.html.
Such an awesome price to pay to keep the abortion industry flourishing.
Not only do we kill 1.4 million unborn children every year, (98% for
convenience sake) but we don't even care about the suffering and deaths
of post abortive teens and women. Tell me the difference between the savage Aztecs
who forfeited their own in human sacrifice in the 14th and 15th centuries and today's killing industry.
The difference is the men of Nahuatlan were not politically motivated, not motivated by greed and they
killed far less than the abortion industry does today.
Finally, as you know, the Church today is in grave crisis. The Boston scandals stretch to every diocese and there have been reports over the last several decades of a severe priest shortage. Today, unfairly or fairly, every priest seems to be under the microscope as suspicion flares with each headline about this pedophile or that gay priest abusing someone. Has anyone ever considered there would not be a priest shortage were it not for abortion? Have they thought about the fact had the Church remained strong in its uncompromising resistance to modernism and sinful situations, that these pedophile and homosexual-oriented men would have been rooted out long before they reached the stage of ordination? Instead many were called, not chosen. Because of the shortage of good men, the rascals were allowed in, infesting the ranks with their liberalism and worldliness, and lack of true virtue. Without a true sense of following God's Laws and seeking holiness, sin only follows more sin.
Who can estimate how many young women, out of mere selfishness, discarded a precious fetus whom God might have destined for greatness, destined to bring more souls to Heaven? Instead those innocents never had the opportunity to follow that calling, never had the privilege of becoming moral leaders, or donning a religious habit or wearing a Roman collar. It's time to collar the culprits who try to justify the killing of the innocents and the cancer risks - as well as other complications - to their mothers - many of whom were never told.
The Church must share a large portion of the blame for this. By relaxing her disciplines, by downplaying sin, countless Catholics succumbed to a more casual, tolerant and uninhibited lifestyle where conscience, once so carefully guarded by the reminders of Church teaching on virtue and the perils of hell, was dulled and the evil doers of abortion were allowed to peddle their poison of 'pro-choice' on a dumbed-down population. A population who once valued morals and ethics. We no longer do and, because of that, we are receiving our just rewards. Whether it is in outright killing innocent babies in the womb, or deliberately hiding valuable statistically significant facts from young girls and women, or fostering the kind of licentiousness and avarice that produces warped minds who cause scandal within the Church, or condoning all of this by silence - it is all savagery that will result in the end of our own civilization. One thing is certain today: We are NOT a civilized society!