Category: Pro-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.

Dr Miriam Sciberras, Chairman of Life Network Foundation Malta, will be in Brussels March 21 and 22, 2017 attending the 7th Week for Life event and the One of Us general assembly. Life Network Foundation Malta is an affiliate member of the One of Us federation.

Ask yourself: what “special needs” does a person with Down syndrome really have? Check out http://www.notspecialneeds.com to discover a new perspective.

 

[youtube]kNMJaXuFuWQ[/youtube]

As was to be expected, Malta is about to legalise same-sex marriage. Within only a few years, traditional marriage has been hollowed out of any meaning whatsoever. It all started with divorce legislation, which the LGBT lobby canvassed for so eagerly. At least they knew what they were after. Those of us who warned that this would lead to gay marriage, abortion and euthanasia were ridiculed and shouted down.

Monogamous marriage between one man and one woman is the bedrock on which a civic society is built. Marriage and the traditional family will be undermined if homosexual partnerships are given the same legal ranking. What is the purpose of further weakening an institution that is already in a state of crisis?

This government, which came to power on a platform of transparency and democratic participation, has imposed one law after another without the least consideration of grass roots’ concerns. Unfortunately, certain politicians say one thing when they are in Opposition and do the contrary once in power.

The recipe is easy. If there is no popular demand for your agenda, do things incrementally. Thanks to their parliamentary majority and the reluctance of the Opposition to defend core values, the government has introduced gay adoption, changed laws outlawing vilification of religion, allowed the introduction of abortifacients under the guise of emergency contraceptives and now is further promoting the gender ideology agenda.

The root cause of this cultural change runs deep and is reflected in the fall of our country’s birth rate, the increase of broken marriages, coha­bitation, children born out of wedlock and a rise in the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases.

Sadly, heterosexuals have themselves to blame for this sad state of affairs. The consequences of widespread contraception has now come to fruition. The breaking of the link between the unitive and life-giving aspects of sex has led to the miserable state we are in.

Sound families are the only bastion against a totalitarian State 

Until 1930, every Christian denomination was unanimous in its condemnation of contraception. One only needs to the mention the following stark warnings from non-Catholic sources:

US President Theodore Roosevelt had said: “Contraception is the one sin for which the penalty is national death, race death; a sin for which there is no atonement.”

Sigmund Freud had commented: “The abandonment of the reproductive function is the common feature of all perversions.”

Ghandi had also cautioned: “Moral results can only be produced by moral restraints… if contraceptive methods become the order of the day, nothing but moral degradation can be the result.”

However, one of the strongest condemnations for contraception came from the editorial of the March 22, 1931, edition of the Washington Post, entitled ‘Forgetting Religion’: “Contraception would sound the death knell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would en­courage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalised contraceptives would be ‘careful and restrained’ is preposterous.”

As predicted, contraception has led to sexual immorality, broken relationships and abortion.

Locally, the dismal statistics say it all. Now, 30 per cent of children are born out of wedlock, with two-thirds having unknown fathers. Meanwhile, sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise while the birth rate plummets.

Yet it never fails to amaze me how the strident feminists who are so vociferous in condemning rape and domestic violence seem so indifferent to a culture that has reduced women to a being treated as men’s toys, where pornography is promoted and so-called gentlemen’s clubs sprout like mushrooms.

Amazingly, we have politicians who proudly announce that “contraception should be made widely available”. They fit the definition of being fanatics, namely, when in the wrong they redouble their efforts.

Will we take a stand to defend the lives of infants before birth, to support traditional or natural families, to welcome procreation within marriage, to oppose the latest demands of feminists and the LGBT lobby and to defend orthodox Christian sexual values and behaviour?

Sound families are the only bastion against a totalitarian State. Time will tell whether we will have the courage to put a stop to these corrosive, State-imposed policies.

Dr. Klaus Vella Bardon is deputy chairman of Life Network Foundation Malta.

 

The Dutch ‘Safe Abortion Initiative’ aims to donate €600 million worth of abortion services to people in Africa and other parts of the developing world.

Has anyone bothered to ask the Africans?

Part of a famous quote states “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” Unfortunately, in Malta, this is the case in the discussion of the Morning After Pill (MAP).

Yesterday, at a press conference, French endocrinology professor Philippe Bouchard stressed that there is no scientific evidence that the MAP has any impact on implantation. He did not make any distinction between different pills available let alone their different modes of action but just spouted out words without backing up what he was saying.

Prof. Bouchard, or those promoting him, forgot to include a disclosure in his introduction, i.e. that Prof. Bouchard has a conflict of Interest in this discussion.

Prof. Bouchard is a scientist who works for, or is engaged by, pharmaceutical companies including HRA Pharma. The relationship between HRA Pharma and Bouchard goes back to 1980. He gets consulting and research fees from HRA Pharma and others. Isn’t it a strange coincidence that HRA Pharma is the producer of MAP and that he is in fact lobbying in favour of their products overseas?

Prof. Bouchard has also been a ‘Senior Consultant to The Population Council, New York since 1986. The Population Council offers policymakers and healthcare providers the evidence they need to help communities implement safer abortion and post abortion care practices. The Population Council is pro-abortion. How can anyone in favour of aborting a child be trusted to speak in favour of protection of embryonic human beings?

The introduction of the Morning After Pill in Malta came about as a result of a campaign of misinformation. How can MAP be about self-care when it can kill an embryo? As a prolife foundation with no pecuniary interests other than to be a voice for the pre born child, Life Network Foundation invites Prof. Bouchard and Prof. Serracino Inglott to be truthful to the scientific action of the MAP. Women taking these pills deserve to be fully informed about their possible abortifacient effects.

The Chamber of Pharmacists has a right to insist on conscientious objection and also to refrain from referring to another pharmacy stocking the MAP.

Life Network Foundation Malta notes that the recommendations presented by Parliament through the Joint Health, Social Affairs and Family Affairs committee regarding the licensing of the Morning After Pill in Malta, have acknowledged not only that different types of MAP have different modes of action, but also that there are those that operate by the prevention of implantation of the embryo, thus achieving their goal by an abortifacient process.

Dr Miriam Sciberras

Chairman Life Network Foundation Malta

23.02.2017

Ref: http://www.popcouncil.org/research/safe-abortion-and-postabortion-care

Ref: http://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(11)02466-6/abstract

The French Members of Parliament have passed a law banning websites that offer information on abortion to pregnant women.

The Law extends to some websites that promote what they call “false information.” Based on a 1993 legislation that penalizes third-party “interference” in the face of “interruption of pregnancy”, originally, this law intended to prevent pro-life activists from physically blocking access to abortion clinics.

The new “digital reality”, according to Rossignol, demands an update of its content, and has stated that “Thirty years ago militants were chained to abortion clinics … today their successors continue this fight on the web.”

The law punishes this practice with up to two years in prison and a fine of €30,000.
The One of Us Federation regrets and rejects this regulation that not only supposes a direct attack on the freedom of expression, but also blocks the access to information for pregnant women.

The French legislator gives himself the full capacity to decide what kind of information women can or cannot receive. It raises itself as a kind of guide to “protect” women, who cannot discern between the information they can and cannot have, that they care about or do not care about, that they need or do not need.

The Freedom of expression is clearly curtailed in France, being the legislator who defines what content is “true” and what content is not.

The French Constitution of 1975, which legalized abortion in France, foresees that women must know the alternatives to abortion. Therefore, the new legislation approved, responds to a manipulation of the reality and the possibility of choosing maternity. A society that does not protect motherhood as the very essence of the existence of that society is bound to chaos.

One of Us wants to clearly and emphatically state that motherhood is a social benefit that must be protected, while abortion is a social problem that society and legislators must solve with a prevention policy, not with censorship or jail.

European Federation ‘One of Us’
Press Contact press@oneofus.eu +34 645734423

www.oneofus.eu
Twitter: @oneofuseu
Facebook: /oneofuseurope

Lara Dimitrijevic should keep doing the good work she said she and the Women’s Rights Foundation (WRF) are doing regarding women’s equality and against domestic violence.

Although we are one of the few nations that still abhor the murder of innocent, voiceless unborn children through abortion, we are proud of our Maltese values and laws that protect the unborn from conception.

This has been the formal position of the three main political parties so far. The latter have taken part and made pro-life speeches in the celebrations of life on pro-life days organised by the Malta Unborn Child Movement during the past 11 years.

Bruno Mozzanega the Italian gynaecologist of world fame who was in Malta last month giving talks on the morning-after pill (MAP) said the “information provided by the World Health Organisation and the European Medical Agency on the morning-after pill is not correct”.

Mozzanega, who has written over 180 scientific papers on reproductive biology, insisted that the scientific data available on the contraceptive MAP proved it is abortifacient and women were being misinformed.

“If Maltese laws protect embryos and politicians decided to introduce the contraceptive without medical prescription they have been deceived by misinformation.”

Mozzanega called on women to stop believing blindly what was being posited by the World Health Organisation and the European Medicines Authority, insisting that if any scientist considered an expert insists that the morning-after pill is not abortifacient, then “the expert is deceiving”.

The authorities should have acted cautiously on MAP. Even the chairman of the local Medicines Authority said in a power point presentation in front of the parliamentary joint committee last July that MAP “may” not be abortifacient.

In this case the precautionary principle should have been applied. Unfortunately, the hasty introduction of MAP in Malta was a great, premeditated mistaken action camouflaged by the supposed consultation, especially in parliament, by the powers that be.

On May 24, 2016, this newspaper reported Minister for the Environment José Herrera saying that “Malta is to vote against the renewal of licences for a controversial herbicide glyphosate with potential links to cancer… In the absence of scientific consensus regarding glyphosate, Malta’s original position was to abstain and recommended the possibility of implementing more stringent conditions in the licensing regimes at a national level… The government has decided to further apply the precautionary principle and, therefore, Malta should vote against the renewal of such licences.”  Those were the words of a wise government minister.

So who bears the responsibility: the dispensing chemist? If MAP has abortive consequences, where will the buck stop? 

A woman has a right over her body but she also has a duty to be careful, wise and prudent in her sexual life. She has no right to dispose of her offspring murderously through abortion or through possible abortifacient pills like MAP.

Dimitrijevic, again, said nothing at all about the rights of the unborn child from conception as protected by Maltese laws.

Dimitrijevic should reflect on the article by Josie Muscat (January 16). To my knowledge Muscat is a colleague of Mark Brincat, mentioned by Dimitrijevic. He wrote that: “The simple stark reality remains that should the MAP alter the endometrial milieu and, therefore, prohibiting nidation, then we are actually introducing abortion by the backdoor.”

He further laments that “we have become a shattered society composed of individuals who do not relate to anyone or anything except their own perceived ‘needs’”. And he warns: “The stark reality is that no one has assumed responsibility for educating and informing those interested as to what are the consequences of taking MAP or who to hold responsible.”

By implication that means WRF has failed, so far, to offer these services. It also means the authorities concerned were not reminded by WRF, as WRF “had reminded them to introduce MAP”, of their grave responsibilities to provide much-needed counselling services to MAP users.

The Pro-Life Movement in Malta has been offering free counselling and material services to pregnant women in difficulties through the service HOPE for many years. And there are plans to enhance this service even further.

Muscat laments further: “The medical profession called for MAP by prescription. The Medicines Authority ignored this advice and ordered that MAP could be sold over the counter at the request of the public. No age limitation, no advice and, certainly, no information.”

So who bears the responsibility: the dispensing chemist?  If MAP has abortive consequences, where will the buck stop? Does Dimitrijevic feel the buck stops also somewhere near her and WRF? She has already claimed merit for the introduction of MAP in Malta.

In spite of saying that the “WRF has no position on abortion now”, we have just to wait until the debate on abortion really takes off to see what the position of the WRF will be. Indications are the debate will not take very long to begin.

When it starts we will have to see if, again, there are those neat coincidences that occur when a leading figure in the government who is leading the MAP and similar campaigns sticks to the word given lately, and the promised “more to come” measures start rolling in.

In fact the Times of Malta already reported (January 26) that “the Women’s Rights Group behind the morning-after pill campaign lately demanded a mature debate on reproductive rights and abortion in schools… The call was made after a lesson on abortion delivered by the pro-life lobby Life Network Foundation to fifth form students at the National Sports School some days before.”

When I read Dimitrijevic’s reply (January 31) to my article ‘Women’s Rights and Fetal Rights’ (January 28), I wondered whether time will tell and it would establish if I really knew and understood her thoughts, her plans and her intentions.

Let’s hope I was mistaken.

Tony Mifsud is coordinator, Malta Unborn Child Movement.

Jaime Mayor Oreja, President of the Federation One of Us: “After the resounding voice expressed by 2 million EU citizens demanding to the European Institutions to ban the fund of the activities that suppose the destruction of human life, the new declarations and requests for funding actions that directly threaten human life are not a right, but a clear violation of our democratic principles and of the defence and protection of life we owe to our society”.

Carlo Casini, honorary president of the Federation One of Us, former chairman of the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the European Parliament: “Offer money to organizations that propagandize and implement abortion in the world, violates the principle of equal human dignity that Article. 2 of the EU Treaty sets as the foundation of the Union”.

Thierry de La Villejégu, Vice-President of the Federation One of Us: “The funding by the EU of programs promoting and providing abortion in developing countries is an act of pure violence, a violation of the conscience of women and a violation of national sovereignty”.

Jakub Baltroszewicz, Secretary General of the Federation One of Us: “We are firmly standing against financing abortion from the common budget of the EU”.

Alex van Vuuren, Board member of the Federation One of Us: “It is very troubling that our government is exporting abortion “services” to other nations. As if these nations cannot decide themselves about family policy and the protection of life and health of its citizens”

 

Brussels, February 10^th 2017.- On 23 January, the new president of the United States, Donald Trump, reinstated the so-called “Mexico City Policy” – a policy first introduced and sustained by Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr., and abolished by Presidents Clinton and Obama. The Mexico City Policy states that no US taxpayer funding should go to international or foreign organizations which perform or promote abortion.

But, now, in response to this US decision, the Dutch Minister of Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, Lilianne Ploumen, has launched an initiative to fund international abortion organizations under the name “She Decides”. The Dutch government is actually launching an international abortion fund to “counter” President Donald Trump’s ban of most U.S. government funding of foreign pro-abortion groups.

Dutch Trade and Development Minister Lilianne Ploumen announced on Tuesday that the fund would bankroll projects to increase access to contraception and abortion as well as “women’s education” in developing countries, according to the Independent.

The Netherlands has approached other European Union members to donate to the fund, and intends to ask non-EU governments, corporations and social institutions as well, the CBC reported on Wednesday.

The Dutch government has held preliminary discussions on the initiative with other European Union members who have responded positively, a foreign ministry spokesman said on Wednesday.

Governments outside the EU, companies and social institutions will also be approached to participate.

One of Us demands that women should be helped, not the help of abortion. Women in developing countries need essential obstetrical care, not abortion.

The 2012 World Health Organization data shows that 91 percent of maternal deaths “are preventable”. Women are experiencing suffering due to the scandalous lack of effective care during pregnancy and childbirth, resulting in 333.000 of them dying annually, 99 percent of which occur in developing countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, the risk of dying is one in 31 pregnancies. These deaths are due to direct obstetrical causes during the last trimester of pregnancy, during labour and delivery, and one week later

Jaime Mayor Oreja, President of the Federation One of Us, declares that: “The European Citizens Initiative One of Us, has been the most successful ECI by now, with almost 2 Million citizens supporting with their signatures the demand to the European Institutions to ban the fund of the activities that suppose the destruction of human life. After this resounding voice expressed by the European citizens, we have to denounce that, once again, these new actions clearly go against the demands of the citizens. These declarations and requests for funding actions that directly threaten human life, are not a right, but a clear violation of our democratic principles and of the defence and life protection”.

Carlo Casini, honorary president of the Federation One of Us: “The European Court of Human Rights has never recognized a right to abortion and it has imposed on Europe the neutrality on this subject. The Court of Justice in Luxembourg declared the human dignity of the embryo from the conception. Offer money to organizations that propagandize and implement abortion in the world, means getting out from this neutrality, encourages abortion and violence the principle of equal human dignity that Article. 2 of the EU Treaty sets as the foundation of the Union”.

Thierry de La Villejégu, Vice-President of the Federation One of Us: “The first duty of the EU toward women is to allow them to deliver a baby in conditions of dignity. I urge the European countries to quickly develop high quality medical care for each and every pregnant woman. The funding by the EU of programs promoting and providing abortion in developing countries is an act of pure violence, a violation of the conscience of women and a violation of national sovereignty. These programs must be condemned.”

Jakub Baltroszewicz, Secretary General of One of Us Federation: “The action of the Dutch Minister stand vividly against the most successful European Citizens Initiative ONE OF US. We are firmly standing against financing abortion from the common budget of the EU. This matter is not competence of the European Union and it should remain strictly the competence of the national governments.”

Alex van Vuuren, Board member of Federation One of Us and director of general affairs of the Dutch organisation Cry for Life: “It is very troubling that our government is exporting abortion “services” to other nations. As if these nations cannot decide themselves about family policy and the protection of life and health of its citizens. The argument is made that part of the funding goes to other services than abortion. That is not a product one country should export to another country under the pretext of development help. This policy of the Dutch government goes against the deep convictions of hundreds of thousands of Dutch citizens”.

European Federation ‘One of Us’

Press Contact
press@oneofus.eu

+34 645734423
www.oneofus.eu