“The crisis we experienced started the day abortion became law”: Jaime Mayor Oreja

The Symphony of Life is a tribute to the French doctor Jérôme Lejeune, discoverer of the genetic cause of Down syndrome.

“Doctors who continue to practice abortions would ask them if they believe that ending a life helps the mother”: The winner of the II One Of Us Prize, John Bruschalski

 

 
On May 27th, Budapest gathered around 600 representatives of life-support organizations from all over Europe at the II European Forum of One of Us, with the main goal to show the support of many Europeans for the policy developed by governments such as Hungary or Poland in favor of life, family and motherhood.  

 

Jaime Mayor Oreja, President of the Federation One of Us, affirmed that “The crisis we experienced started the day abortion became law: from there, the doors open to the imposition of gender ideology  and all those trends that attack the person and the values ​​of true humanism.  Here we are the ones that do not resign ourselves, we come to look at the roots of the crisis and to face them.”

María San Gil, former deputy in the Basque Parliament and a member of the Values ​​and Society Foundation, said: “Today we defend that life is not the heritage of any ideology and in its defense we have to be absolutely radical. The world has values ​​that deserve to be radically defended, that we do not use double meanings, double arguments, that we do not have complexes of any type and we defend them from the front, with truth and with forcefulness.” 

The One of Us Forum concluded with a presentation of its vision of the future, in which the political and social context has changed, but values ​​and convictions can not be absent from the European and national public debate.

The Symphony of Life arrives in Budapest promoted by the European Federation One of Us

The musical work, promoted by the Spanish association Symphony Orchestra and Choir JMJ, is a tribute to the French doctor Jérôme Lejeune, discoverer of the genetic cause of Down syndrome and great defender of life.

The composition has been made by the Spanish Carlos Criado and the Russian Kuzma Bodrov, and for its execution has required the presence of more than 300 musicians on stage.

In addition to the musicians of the JMJ Symphony Orchestra and their choir, the Children’s Choir of the Hungarian State Opera and the Vox Mirabilis Choir in Budapest have also taken part in the performance of the Symphony.

One of Us gives the II European Prize “A hero of the life” to the American doctor John Bruchalski

This year also gave the One of Us ‘A Hero of Life’ Prize to the American doctor John Bruschalski, a former abortionist doctor, who currently runs one of the United States’ life-support medical centers, the Tepeyac Family Center.

Dr Bruschalski spent part of his professional life promoting abortion until he felt a complete disregard for what he was doing: “I do not see happiness and joy in my clinic. More abortions means more broken relationships, more infections, more destruction, more bitterness” says the Hero of Life.

Dr. Bruchalski: “Doctors who continue to practice abortions would ask them if they believe that ending a life helps the mother. It is very hard for a mother not to worry about her son, and I would ask them if they really think that abortion is the best answer; If they do not believe there are better solutions, and if you are interested, contact me.”

 

The ONE OF US European Federation brought together more than 600 people in Budapest for the second European forum for life. It was placed under the high patronage of the Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán and the minister for Families, Katalin Novák.

The forum brought together Europe at the service of life: European and national politicians, associative personalities, health and ethics experts, all gathered around the theme “Protecting life: the heart of a new cultural debate”.

The forum has revived the debate on issues of life in Europe and on the strongness of values, being at the forefont of the debate the protection of vulnerable human life . The forum also sent a message of support to governments developping policies to defend human life.

During the opening of the Forum, Bence Rétvari, Hungarian Minister of Human Capacities: “I am pleased that ONE OF US has chosen our city to hold its forum. We, Hungarians,The are proud that Budapest is the capital of families … The Defense of life is one of the most important values ​​in Europe, we have added it in the Hungarian constitution by committing a fundamental declaration upholding human dignity. For the stakes of life, you can always count on Hungary.”

Jaime Mayor Oreja, President of the UN FEDERATION, reminded us that “the crisis we are experiencing began the day abortion became a right, from there the doors were opened for the gender ideology, GPA and all those ideas that go against humanism. We are the ones who refuses to accept this situation and want to fight the roots of the crisis”.

Malta was represented by Dr. Miriam Sciberras, Chairperson of Life Network Foundation Malta.

https://www.oneofus.eu/

A survey was sent to each and every candidate asking them about their position on life issues.

Here are the results:

Court of Justice to Hear One of Us Application

 

• One of Us requests that the European Court of Justice rules whether the European Commission erred on the decision to refuse the submission of the proposal of the European Citizens’ Initiative One of us to the European Parliament for its debate

• The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 9:30 am in the courtroom of the Blue Court before an extended composition of judges.

• The European Commission’s refusal to act on the initiative One of Us, one of the most supported in history since the creation of this instrument in 2012, has called into question the legitimacy of the European Citizens’ Initiatives

 

Brussels, 12 may 2017. – The One of Us European Federation is pleased to announce that the Court of Justice of the European Union will be hearing the One of Us application on Tuesday, 16 May 2017 at 9:30 in its Blue Court room with an extended composition of judges. The case surrounds the question of whether the European Commission erred in refusing to submit the One of Us proposal to the European Parliament for debate.

The One of Us European Citizenship Initiative [ECI] has been 1 of only 3 successful initiatives undertaken since the instrument was launched in 2012. With more than 1.7 million certified statements of support, One of Us has been the most successful Citizenship Initiative in history. The Initiative sought the legal protection of the dignity, the right to life and the integrity of every human being from the moment of conception in areas of EU competence.

The European Citizenship Initiative was introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon in recognition of the perceived democratic deficit in the European Union. It allowed for the possibility of direct democratic participation of European citizens in the development of EU policies.

The Commission’s refusal to take action on the successful One of Us ECI, despite it being the most supported ECI in history, has brought into question the legitimacy of the ECI all together. President of the One of Us Citizen’s Committee, Dr. Gregor Puppinck, commenting on the case before the Luxembourg court stated: “This case is about protecting the ECI from bureaucratic discrimination where the voices and tireless effort of European citizens to introduce legislation that matters to them is not thwarted because the Commission find the subject matter of the proposal politically inconvenient”. The highly anticipated ruling in this case will determine whether the ECI is indeed an instrument of democratic participation or whether it is in fact dead letter

 Contact 
+34 645734423
www.oneofus.eu

Can you imagine a world in which only scientists considered climate change; where only women cared about women’s issues; where just children held opinions about other children; where only farmers cared about animal welfare; a world in which only Catholics had an opinion on the value of human life?

The way some opine about abortion within the pro-choice (pro-abortion) and pro-euthanasia movements, you would think such a strange world actually existed. Such people describe a universe in which people blindly support causes, from which they may never deviate and for which they must somehow “take the blame” since such issues are important to them, topics about which they might have a broad knowledge.

That is the kind of world that some wish us to think that Catholics, for instance, inhabit. As a vociferous commenter on many subjects, Martin Scicluna, an inhabitant of this curious universe, recently launched a salvo against pro-lifers, including Ivan Padovani and myself. For some reason, he felt it necessary to name and lamely try to shame people who respect life, to make some kind of “examples” of us.

Unlike Scicluna, none of us might disingenuously claim never to ignore comments made regarding their articles. It was obvious from his approach that he did read our comments and that he was clearly bothered by them on behalf of womankind. The sort of article he wrote is a common occurrence these days.

The label “religious fundamentalist” is often bandied about, now the standard liberal way to describe anybody with whom they disagree. And what about those with no religious faith who respect human life? What kind of “fundamentalists” are they? Since Scicluna raised the issue of religion, clearly, his own brand of Catholicism never prevents him from taking the opposite view.

Those making such accusations fail to check themselves in their determination to sully the reputations of those who fully support life. It is blatantly obvious that, in their often nasty verbal attacks upon pro-lifers, they are themselves attempting to ensure that their own opinions are taken seriously and, indeed, to be imposed upon society through the making of statutes. Yet, they have the gall to accuse pro-lifers expressing their own opinions as “imposing” on others.

Whatever happened to basic respect for humanity? Humanists claim to respect human rights. Yet, the most basic right – the right to life – is carefully presented as non-existent, though only for the unborn segment of humanity. Only the “actual born” may have rights – any rights they like. For unborn life, the lack of laws which provide protection is cited as their sole reason why no such laws should be enacted.

This right to life is further eroded by deliberately dehumanising life before birth. Many humanists deny the most basic science surrounding human reproduction, always pointing the finger at religious fundamentalists as the authors of such truths solidly backed up by science. They cover their ears and eyes to avoid truthful facts, the inconvenient and most basic facts of life.

Cheap, sarcastic, unscientific remarks about sperm and eggs being on a par with human embryos are commonplace among those in denial about human biology. In a post-truth era (that is, where truth is no longer the most important objective of discourse), even the widely-known medical complications which result directly from the effects abortion has on a woman’s body, such as the vastly-increased risk of breast cancer, are dismissed as fiction by pro-abortionists. This has less to do with the fact that they know it is true and more to do with their claim that such facts are “scare tactics” invented by Catholics, so somehow unworthy of belief.

Similar overreactions occur concerning pictures or videos exposing truths about abortion. Though clear evidence, and despite their factual bases, these too are described as “scare tactics”. This comes from people who insist that all facts be known by women considering the life-changing decision to abort their unborn human children. They are very careful which facts get presented and which do not – facts required to make decisions, remember; life-changing also for the unborn child.

Pro-abortionists push abortion for their own reasons, the debate flooded with scare stories, erroneously suggesting women die through not having abortions. So why do so many die during abortions? Why do many abortions go wrong? Strange that they never mention these things.

Pro-lifers are not women-haters. Pro-life women, including mothers, are called misogynists for opposing the culture of death.  And not all who are pro-lifers are religious. They never seek to “impose” themselves on others, yet, are obliged to allow the culture of death to be imposed upon them.

Note this particularly demeaning humanist description of unborn human life, directly attacking humanity: “meaningless clumps of cells, worth no more respect than drops of blood”.

When challenged to ask their mothers exactly what they were carrying in the womb, humanists refuse or else invent a response. Neither would they challenge pregnant women by telling them what “meaningless parasites” they bear.

Rest assured that such descriptions, reducing the unborn to virtually nothing, come from those claiming to represent humanity while simultaneously denying that humanity, including their own.

Spin and sarcasm remain the stock in trade of the average pro-abortionist. Facts and basic truths are irrelevant to them; they distort what is said by pro-lifers in their attempts to discredit them.

How can one have a fair debate on the value of human life if we cannot even agree that life in the womb is human? Show me, with unequivocal evidence, that the “material of a pregnancy” or “contents of a uterus” are alien and I shall listen up!

Gerry Cowie is a teacher of English

A 1 day Pro-Life seminar was recently organised by Life Network Foundation Malta at Dar tal-Providenza, Siggiewi where local Pro-Life groups networked together in order to discuss the road ahead relating to important Life issues. Strategies for cultural change were also discussed. Dr. Miriam Sciberras invites all supporters and friends to join Life Network in order to build a force for defending life!

The One of Us Federation claims in the European Parliament the urgent need of our society to defend and protect human life, women and maternity

• Throughout these days it has become clear that the defence and protection of human life and women in their motherhood are matters of concern to the citizens of the different countries of the European Union
• In the absence of solutions by public authorities, member organizations of the One Of Us Federation take up the baton to support, and protect women until the institutions decide to take concrete and effective measures to protect motherhood.
• The public authorities must understand that the development of our society must be based on the protection of fundamental human rights, whose maximum expression is the defence of human life.

Brussels, March 23rd 2017. The One of Us Federation has participated in the 7th edition of the Week for Life at the European Parliament in Brussels. As in previous years, the One of Us Federation has had a special presence and participation in the European Parliament raising the voice, through the delegates of the organizations of the different countries that meet each year in the seat of the Parliament and whose main mission is the defence and protection of life.

Throughout this session the One of Us Federation, through a wide participation of the delegations of the different countries, has made it clear in the seat of the European Parliament – and therefore in the seat of the European citizens – through its representatives, that the defence and protection of human life and women in their motherhood are matters of concern to the citizens of the different countries of the European Union. Likewise, the report of commercial practices which seek to take up positions in the EU countries, through surrogacy, has been clearly described as practices involving the commercialization of women, their maternity, and their child.

In different panels shown, the lack of protection of life is seen as evident, a life that, today more than ever, is attacked in its different stages: the embryonic stage and the final stage of it. The need for protection of women in their maternity, as the great neglected by public authorities, shows how essential the involvement of social organizations that every day provide assistance, in different areas, to women in their maternity is.

Thus, in the absence of solutions by public authorities, the mediation by member organizations of the One Of Us Federation to support, and protect women in the various EU countries has become absolutely necessary and urgent, at least until the institutions decide to take concrete and effective measures to protect motherhood.

The One of Us Federation publicly states its concern about the practices that leave human life unprotected, and asks the public authorities for their urgent intervention so that the development of our societies should be based on their progress through the protection of Fundamental human rights, whose maximum expression is the defence of human life.

Octogenarian and pro-abortion Martin Scicluna (March 8) rowed again into his usual rhetoric on abortion and women’s rights in Malta. In a perfectly identical fashion as other pro-abortion activists, Scicluna wrote about women’s rights but said nothing about the deliberate killing of unborn children by women through abortion.

He euphemistically called abortion a “choice”. A “choice” to kill an unborn child. He also mentioned the “freedom of conscience” of women to kill a little human being.  As if he were writing about the right of women to a facial or to cosmetic plastic surgery.

He showed no compunction at all about the deliberate killing of innocent and vulnerable unborn children in their mothers’ wombs. It’s not ignorance of scientific facts. It’s arrogance without bounds.

Scicluna seems to be happy and confident that “women who do not want to give birth will invariably find some way of making sure they do not”. He was referring to the availability of doing abortions overseas, in Britain and Italy. He called it “abortion tourism” no less.

Apparently he has not noticed or read what a good number of anti-abortionists from the pro-life movement and the three main political parties said about the beauty of life and the horrors of abortion during the last Pro-Life Day manifestation in favour of life by MUCM at the Oratory of St John’s Cathedral in Valletta. All of them were below 60 years of age, many of them young, or relatively young.

Unlike Scicluna who seems to be happy there is sufficient and adequate provision of abortion services for the “70 to 100 women” from Malta, each year, who want to do an abortion overseas, many members of parliament on both sides of the House  speak repeatedly on the need to provide more counselling and material services for pregnant women in difficulties.

Godfrey Farrugia, former minister of health, now the government’s whip and not “an elderly male” said: “Life is beautiful. Life is a fundamental right. I started my life as an embryo. To be pro-life means that you are also in favour of the dignity of the human person throughout his whole life, from conception to natural death.

“Embryo freezing can kill and can lead to other social problems. Emergency contraception before implantation of an embryo can kill a human person. To be pro-choice does not give any woman the right to determine the fate of another weak and vulnerable human being  in the womb. In my view this holds good also in the case of rape and disability.”

On the same day Clyde Puli, shadow minister and not “an elderly male” during the same event said: “It is my pleasure to be with you for the celebration in favour of life from conception to its natural death.

“Our law reflects the high value we give to human life. The Act on the Protection of the Embryo, passed unanimously in Parliament in 2012, is the law about the right to life of the unborn child. The leader of my party Simon Busuttil has instructed me to assure everybody that the protection of life from conception until its natural death was, and will remain, on the agenda of the Nationalist Party.”

Life is beautiful. Life is a fundamental right. I started my life as an embryo 

Simon Galea from Alternattiva Demokratika, also not “an elderly male”, said:  “AD has been in favour of life and against abortion since it was set up.  While recognising the difficulties which pregnant women normally find themselves in, the right to life of the unborn child comes first.”

Deborah Schembri, a junior minister and not “a post-menopausal female”, in her speech on Pro-Life Day in Valletta said: “The child in the womb, a human life from conception, has the right to life. There are those who argue that a woman should have the right to do what she likes with her body and that the right to choose whether to keep the baby or not is a decision she only has to make. Those who argue this way conveniently forget that there are two human lives, with equal rights, in every pregnancy, wanted or not.”

On Pro-Life Day in 2015 Paula Mifsud Bonnici, shadow minister, and not “a post-menopausal female”, said: “I believe in the dignity of the human person. It is my privilege to declare that I and the Opposition are in favour of life in all its stages even when it is most fragile and cannot defend itself. I feel proud that our country still values human  life from conception, a value which many other countries have lost.”

Justyne Caruana, junior minister, and not “a post-menopausal female” on Pro-Life Day in 2009 said: “My presence here is to testify that the Labour Party is in favour of life from conception until its natural death. When we hear the pro-choice people say there is nothing wrong in women having the right to choose, actually they are saying they are in favour of abortion. I believe the right to life from conception is a fundamental right. Not only, but pregnant mothers  have the duty, and the obligation, to do what it takes to protect the life of the child in their womb, until birth.”

Government backbencher Deo Debattisita (not “an elderly male”) has urged the government to set up a “pro-life” clinic to help expectant mothers thinking of aborting their unborn children.

In 2013, Carmelo Abela, now Minister of the Interior, and not “an elderly male”, said: “Abortion is illegal and that is how it should remain – it is nothing less than murder.” And he added: “Parents were obliged to do their utmost and protect their offspring from the moment of conception… Society and the State were in duty bound to support mothers during their pregnancies and help them provide a good quality of life to their newborns”.

The Pro-Life Movement has been offering the service HOPE to pregnant women in difficulties for many years and there are plans to enhance these services even further in the coming months.

So much for Scicluna’s obscure perception of “moral paranoia, tilting with windmills and obsessional compulsive disorder of Maltese anti-abortionists”.

Scicluna’s article contrasts sharply with the 2015 report by the Today Public Policy Institute, of which he was director general, on “the environmental dimension of Malta’s ill-health and action to prevent obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dementia”.

It is claimed the report is focused on “environmental factors that encourage incorporating healthy lifestyles into everyday life”. Yet Scicluna utterly disregards the right to all the good conditions for a healthy life in the womb, the first environment to man, for the 4,000 and more unborn children every year in Malta.

Unlike many articles which Scicluna writes in this newspaper, and which I read and admire, every time he writes on abortion and women’s rights he discredits himself.

In her article ‘Be bold(er) for change’ (March 8) Equalities Minister Helena Dalli writing on the occasion of Women’s Day draws a broad outline of what she intends to do to advance further the cause of women in Malta. Yet she makes no reference to sexual and reproductive health, in international circles synonymous with abortion, as other pro-abortion women are doing in Malta. Has there been a ‘change’ here also?  A change of heart after the controversy on the morning-after pill?

Paragraph 25 of the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review on Malta at the UN in Geneva (December 2013) says that Dalli led a Maltese delegation of 11 persons which “reiterated the (Malta) government’s belief in the need to protect the right to life, including that of the unborn child. It expressed the view that, as human life begins at conception, the termination of pregnancy through procedures of induced abortion at any stage of gestation, was an infringement of this right. Malta, therefore, could not recognise abortion or any other form of termination of pregnancy as a legitimate measure of family planning”.

Tony Mifsud, coordinator, Malta Unborn Child Movement.