Category: Pro-Life

BBC.co.uk reports: Calls for law to stop anti-abortion protests outside clinics

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) is calling for new laws to move anti-abortion protesters from the doorstep of its clinics.

BPAS, one of the UK’s main abortion providers, has told Newsbeat some patients are being confronted by graphic content.

These include large posters and leaflets with pictures showing dismembered foetuses.

But anti-abortion groups, like Abort67, say they are “educating” the public.

Department of Health figures for 2013 suggest there were 185,331 terminations in England and Wales.

“We’ve really asked protesters to think a lot harder about the kind of activity that they’re undertaking outside clinics,” says BPAS spokeswoman Clare Murphy.

“We completely respect people’s right to protest, but we simply feel that approaching women, causing them harassment and distress at what’s already quite a difficult time in their life, really isn’t right.”

BPAS is now campaigning for the Government to create “access zones” outside British abortion clinics to help women access them without be confronted by pro-life protesters.

Submission for the Gender Identity (GIGESC) Consultation by Life Network and Gift of Life Foundation Malta

A Bill entitled An Act for the recognition and registration of the gender of a person and to regulate the effects of such a change, as well as the recognition and protection of the sex characteristics of a person.

The proposed law may seem to apply to a minority group, however the way that the law is worded and the implications thereof will affect the whole population. Some of the most salient parts of the law and their application are listed (in bold) below:

(2) Without prejudice to any provision of this Act (a) a person’s rights, relationship and obligations arising out of parenthood or marriage shall in no way be affected; and

(b) the persons rights arising out of succession, including but not limited to any testamentary dispositions made in one’s favour, and any obligations and, or rights subjected to or acquired prior to the date of change of gender identity shall in no way be affected.

Transfers/liabilities:

What about transfers/liabilities acquired inter vivos prior to change of sex and name as per article 11(1)?

Penal charges:

What happens if there is a change in gender in the period between committing a crime and being charged for it? Would the charge be considered null and void, because the particulars do not correspond to the particulars listed on the charge?

Why should one be permitted to change one’s gender on the basis of one’s ‘experience of gender’, but not one’s birth date if one feels that one ‘should’ be a different age?

(1) It shall be the right of every person who is a Maltese citizen to request the Director to change the recorded gender and, or first name in order to reflect that person’s self-determined gender identity.

Security:

What happens if the gender chosen does not correspond to the person’s bodily appearance? Is this safe or even legal? The law will demand new practices in the identification of people.

Example: What happens at airport security if there is a mismatch? Will the police be allowed to investigate? What about international security?

Gender change registration in cases of gender dysphoria:

It is well known that gender dysphoria may be a symptom of schizophrenia and of other mild psychoses. There are several gender dysphoria syndromes that may result in a temporary altered gender identity and reassignment of gender in these persons, at least, is not only harmful to themselves but also to society. (Levine and Lothstein J Sex Marital Ther. 1981;7:85-113; for a summary of a more recent paper, see the end of this document). More generally, for the protection of the individual and of society, there should be more attention to the psychiatric and psychological assessment of those with gender dysphoria before any official change of gender is contemplated.

Expenses:

Will the individual have the right to have the cost of expensive gender reassignment surgery and hormonal therapy met by the government as a result of official recognition of gender change?

Gender change registration:

How many times is one allowed to register a change?

(2) The request shall be made by means of a letter which makes clear reference to the public deed published in accordance with article 5.

Legal loophole: The request is to be made by means of a letter which makes clear reference to a public deed. A true copy of the public deed must be attached to the covering letter as proof.

Also, there is room for abuse, since in Malta the Public Registry (Acts of births+ deaths) and the Public Registry (Assets and Liabilities/ transfer of immovable property) are not in any way linked or intertwined.

5 (2) The Notary shall explain to the applicant the legal implications of the change of the assigned gender and shall require the applicant to declare understanding of such implications.

Notarial duties: Since when are Notaries trained to explain that the legal implications will also have psychological, medical and social implications to mention but a few?

6 (3) The Director shall cause an index of the Gender Register to be made and kept in the Public Registry Office in Malta and in Gozo; and no-one shall be entitled to search that index.

This is not acceptable or in the public’s best interest. Birth certificates are available to any and all – they are public documents, and that is why the Registry is public.

Note: Articles 8 and 15 both refer to Protection of minors

(1) The persons exercising parental authority over the Minors. minor or the tutor of the minor may file an application in the registry of the Civil Court (Voluntary Jurisdiction Section) requesting the Court to change the recorded gender and first name of the minor in order to reflect the minor’s gender identity.

(2) Where an application under sub-article (1) is made on behalf of a minor, the Court shall:

(a) Ensure that the best interests of the child as expressed in the Convention on the Rights of the Child be the paramount consideration; and

(b) in so far as is practicable, give due weight to the views of the minor having regard to the minor’s age and maturity.

Protection of minors

The Act recognizes a “minor” as a person who has not as yet attained the age of eighteen years. Adolescence is one of the most difficult phases of the life cycle of human beings during which a child/adolescent goes through different stages in how he or she understands his or her body (including for some, a feeling, which will often have begun much earlier, that their physical characteristics do not reflect their “real” gender).

Helping children and young people to mature should be a matter of helping them understand and appreciate their body and physical sex, rather than seeing their body as something “wrong” which needs to be “corrected” or “rectified” through surgery.

The Bill refers to the “right to bodily integrity”(31 (d)) but does not uphold the right to bodily integrity in practice where a child’s physical sex is unambiguous, but the child is experiencing difficulty in coming to terms with it.

A holistic approach is required to address the diverse needs of the child during such a traumatic and vulnerable time.

While it is always a questionable response to gender dysphoria to agree with the person that his or her physical sex needs “correction” or “masking” by dress, those under 18 in particular should be protected from well-meaning attempts of parents or doctors to “correct” what does not in fact need correction (the body and the way it is presented to society), rather than addressing the young person’s emotions in themselves.

Gender reassignment of children who are physically healthy (as opposed to “intersex” children who are born with ambiguous physical sex) is difficult to defend in relation to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child including article 8 which refers to the child’s right to preserve his or her identity, article 19 referring to protection from physical injury and article 37 referring to inhuman or degrading treatment.

Penal Liabilities

Surgical intervention and any gender reassignment treatment, particularly if this treatment is irreversible, should at the very least be postponed until the minor reaches the age of majority. The law should stipulate penal liability for professionals who conduct any irreversible therapy on the child before age eighteen.

(1) Accessibility to the full act of birth shall be limited solely and exclusively to the person who has attained the age of eighteen years and to whom that act of birth relates or by a court

order.

This is highly discriminatory with respect to the rest of the population since full acts of birth of the rest of the population can be attained.

(1) A person who in the course of the discharge of official duties was involved with a matter relating to this Act may not unlawfully disclose such matter in accordance the Professional Secrecy Act and the Data Protection Act.

(2) Whosoever shall knowingly expose any person who has availed of the provisions of Act, or shall insult or revile a person, shall, upon conviction, be liable to a fine (multa) of not less than one thousand euro (€1000) and not exceeding five thousand euro (€5000).

Does this apply to marriage bans? Wouldn’t this be “discriminatory to the innocent party”? What if institutions are called on to explain why a particular person is considered male or female by them and therefore not suitable for a position reserved to one or other sex (such as the priesthood in the case of the Catholic Church)?

(1) Every norm, regulation or procedure shall respect the right to gender identity. No norm or regulation or procedure may limit, restrict, or annul the exercise of the right to gender identity, and all norms must always be interpreted and enforced in a manner that favours access to this right.

This does not respect children’s need for a mother and a father or existing social institutions that try to meet that need. This can be abusive and result in coercion of those who do not accept the normalisation of (for example) same sex/transgender marriage or use of surrogates and donors by those in same sex/transgender unions who wish to have a child.

In many countries, where similar laws were enacted, this has resulted in court cases against parties who in principle cannot support such lifestyles. Parents who were morally opposed to gender mainstreaming have been incarcerated and penalised for trying to protect their children.

There are examples citing such discrimination and attacks on the right to religious tolerance on many websites. The following is one such site:

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AGAINST THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY (IN CANADA AND the US) http://www.christianpositivespace.com/discrimination-cases.html

Reproduction requires a male and a female in nature, and, in the best interests of the offspring born of this union. The Embryo Protection law applies to heterosexual couples, and is not only oriented to achieving a pregnancy but towards embryo protection. It should also be noted that this law took a lot of discussion and finally agreement from both sides of the House to come to fruition. It cannot just be altered to accommodate anyone who now wants to change it.

14 (2) The public service has the duty to ensure that unlawful sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics’ discrimination and harassment are eliminated, whilst its services must promote equality of opportunity to all, irrespective of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics.

How will this be interpreted as regards application to public education and education in schools?

Will comprehensive sex education become mandatory?

Will parents be allowed to opt out for their children, or will they be silenced, coerced, or even imprisoned, as we have seen happening in other countries?

Two recent examples are included:

Germany : Mandato d’arresto a genitori “non allineati” Sta suscitando polemiche la vicenda dei coniugi Martens, ai quali è stato notificato un arresto perché non hanno acconsentito alla presenza della figlia a scuola durante le “lezioni di gender”

Italy:Parents united against gender, “emergency social and anthropological An initiative promoted by Italian parents to stem the ‘gender’ teaching in schools. Rome, November 24, 2014 ( Zenit.org ) Federico Cenci

Church Schools and the Right to Religious Freedom:

Can the state declare that the Right to Religious Freedom will be upheld?

Gender ideology goes against basic tenets of the faith. It fails to acknowledge God as the Supreme Creator. It does not accept Natural law i.e. that part of the moral law that can be accessed by human reason alone. It does not accept marriage as made up of the exclusive union of one man and one woman. It negates the complementary nature of male and female (which today is even scientifically backed by brain scan technologies). Motherhood and fatherhood, so essential for the optimal holistic development of the child is also denied.

Catholic Church schools and institutions, and practising Catholic individuals, cannot accept Gender mainstreaming.

(1) It shall be not be lawful for medical practitioners or other professionals to conduct any sex assignment treatment and, or surgical intervention on the sex characteristics of a minor which treatment and, or intervention can be deferred until the person to be treated can provide informed consent.
(2) In exceptional circumstances treatment may be effected once there is an agreement between the Interdisciplinary Team and the persons exercising parental authority or tutor of the minor who is still unable to provide consent: Provided that medical intervention which is driven by social factors without the consent of the individual concerned will be in violation of this Act.

Protection of minors It is not clear whether 15.2 would protect children from medical intervention which is in fact “social” rather than medical but is not admitted to be social (that is, the child is physically healthy but the child’s self-perception is seen as causing psychological problems which gender assignment is proposed to “treat”).

17(6) The members of the working group shall review the current medical treatment protocols in line with current medical best practices and human rights standards and shall, within one year from the date of their appointment, issue a report with recommendations for revision of the current medical treatment protocols.

Which protocols would need to be changed to be in line with this proposed law? Is this referring to the The Embryo Protection Law?

Objects and Reasons

The objects of this Bill are to provide for the recognition and registration of the gender of a person and to regulate the effects of such a change, and due recognition and protection of the sex characteristics of a person.

This proposed law is imbued in human rights language and presents itself as protecting minority rights.However in its legal application it violates not only the rights of, in particular, children with gender dysphoria (as explained above) but also the rights of those without gender dysphoria. According to Gabriele Kuby, embracing gender mainstreaming means a whole different world view which can encompass when translated into policy:

“An”equality” between men and women built on a false premise.

More “equality” leads allegedly to greater justice. It is never questioned whether we are in fact enforcing equality or “sameness” between that which is not the same but is different and/or complementary.

Subversion of the identity of man and woman by destroying “gender-stereotypes”, beginning in schools.

Deregulation of normative standards of sexuality: Any kind of sexual practice or self-perception – be it lesbian, gay, bi-sexual or transgender (LGBT) – has to be accepted by society as equivalent to heterosexuality. And this would have to be taught to children at school.

Early sexualisation of children through obligatory comprehensive sexual education.

The gender ideology attempts to create a new man, whose freedom would include the choice of his sex and sexual orientation. This means to arbitrarily decide whether he or she wants to be man or woman, heterosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual (GLBT). This view of freedom and sexuality, according to the will of the UN, EU and most European governments is to be imprinted onto the minds of children from the nursery onwards.” (Ref Kuby G, Gender Mainstreaming — The Secret Revolution)

Camille Paglia, a lesbian and self-described “notorious Amazon feminist” comments negatively on the gender ideology. She “sees a connection between society’s attempts to paper over the biological distinction between men and women pushing a version of feminism that says gender is nothing more than a social construct”.

State parties are duty bound to protect minors. It has been amply proven that minors from single parent families suffer from the absence of a missing parent. Mother and father figures are essential to the holistic child development.

This law will have the effect of destroying society’s recognition of the need for these role models. Children are likely, in the future, to be bombarded with presentations of all sorts of different sexual relationships from an early age, and eventually encouraged to choose. Any attempts by parents to teach their children about the traditional heterosexual marriage, based on biology and on children’s real needs, will suffer the full brunt of the law. This goes against the fundamental human right to family life, which right is supposed to be exercised and enjoyed without undue interference from the state.

According to Article8, Chapter 319 Laws of Malta

(1) Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

(2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Ref: Article8, Chapter 319 Laws of Malta .This is a constitutional source of law and is supreme to all other laws of the land, which prevails if in conflict with another law.

This Bill if enacted will be imposed on an absolute majority of heterosexual people to accommodate a minority of gay, lesbian, homosexual or transgender people, whose own genuine interests are not obviously served by the Bill.

Babies are biologically born either male or female. Their sex is anatomically visible at birth. In very rare cases, intersex babies are born. In these cases scans and karyotyping would determine which sex organs are present or most developed, and remedial surgery could be performed at an appropriate age if it is truly in the person’s interests. This law applies not to the biologically intersex person alone but to those whose biological sex is absolutely clear but who have difficulty accepting that sex and need psychological support.

A paper entitled “The Psychopathology of “Sex Reassignment Surgery”: Assessing its Medical, Psychological and Ethical Appropriateness” (NCBQ Spring 2009) whose main authors are psychologists and family therapists, reached the following conclusions about such surgery, based on a wide review of the available scientific literature:

Sexual Reassignment Surgery (SRS) violates basic medical and ethical principles because a) it mutilates a healthy, non-diseased body and therefore violates the medical principle “first do no harm”.

Demands for SRS result from a misperception of the self and SRS therefore offers a surgical solution to psychological problems (which may include failure to accept the goodness of one’s masculinity or femininity, lack of secure attachment relationships in childhood with same-sex peers or a parent etc.).

SRS does not accomplish what it claims to accomplish because it cannot, in fact, “change” a person’s sex and cannot benefit the person in the way sought.

Finally, SRS is a “permanent”, effectively unchangeable and often unsatisfying surgical attempt to change what may be only a temporary (i.e psychothepeutically changeable) psychological/psychiatric condition.

As can be seen, the enactment of this law will change the concept of society as we know it. Although the law ostensibly applies to a minority group, the way that the law is worded and the implications thereof will affect the whole population. As well as failing to protect the right of children with gender dysphoria to bodily integrity and to genuine psychological support, the Bill will limit the rights of the majority without gender dysphoria, including parents wishing to teach their children about the body, sex and marriage. As is amply demonstrated from court cases abroad, this results in a minority dictatorship which is in fact in no-one’s interests.

Dr Miriam Sciberras Mr Paul Vincenti

BChD(Hons) MABioethics President

Chairman, Life Network Gift of Life Foundation – Malta

Prime Minister Muscat On Abortion

During a visit by the Prime Minister Joseph Muscat’s at the Life Network’s stand, members of the Life Network gave exposure to the value of life and took note of his comments.

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_video title=”Muscat On Abortion” src=”“//www.youtube.com/embed/zxGCpXsdkWM“” width=”“560“” height=”“315“” frameborder=”“0“” link=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxGCpXsdkWM”][vc_column_text]Life Network is currently present at the Fresher’s Week on University Campus. During the brief encounter with Hon Muscat, the Prime Minister gave his comments with regard to the issue of abortion.

His comments gave a great indication into what he believed the Maltese people agree upon in this regard. He stated that his belief is that ‘there is a consensus’ of the Maltese people against abortion. Using the word consensus implies that there is more than a general feel against abortion but a unifying agreement against its introduction. He also noted that that he has ‘no doubt’ that the consensus will remain as is.

Hon Muscat was shown a leaflet portraying the effects of abortion on the unborn child. To the images on the leaflet Hon Muscat said nothing and likewise he did not give any indications on his personal opinion on this matter.

Life Network is an NGO devoted to educating people about the value of human life (See our mission statement). The NGO has formed a new youth wing on the University Campus (see press release) where they will be present between the 1st and 8th October 2014.

For news about the Youth Wing On Campus go to: https://www.facebook.com/events/1526524097594487/[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

“Ta’ 12-il sena ghandhom ikunu jafu dwar l-abort” – Newsbook.com.mt

Aisling Hubert tfajla Ingliza ta’ 21 sena ilha ghal dawn l-ahhar 7 snin tahdem biex tbiddel il-mod kif in-nies iharsu lejn l-abort.

Aisling bhalissa tinsab Malta ghal-laqgha organizzata mill-ghaqda Life Network bhala parti minn progett ta’ edukazzjoni pubblika dwar l-abort.

Ma’ Newsbook.com.mt, Aisling qalet li hemm bzonn li l-adoloxxenti jkunu jafu x’inhu abort.

Dwar ta’ liema età z-zghazagh ghandhom jibdew isiru jafu dwar l-abort u l-konsegwenzi li jgib mieghu, Aisling qalet li kif il-genituri jhallu t-tfal taghhom jaraw films u loghob vjolenti, bl-istess mod m’ghandhomx izommuhom lura milli jaraw ritratti grafiċi.

Kompliet tghid li fl-Ingilterra tifla ta’ 12-il sena ghandha d-dritt taghmel abort minghajr il-kunsens tal-genituri, allura, fi kliem iz-zaghzugha, ta’ dik l-età ghandhom jibdew jitghallmu dwar il-hajja li tibda fil-guf.

Qalet li “xi darba l-guf kien il-post li joffri kenn u sigurtà ghat-tarbija, izda issa dan sar l-aktar post perikoluz”.

Dwar jekk tahsibx li l-abort xi darba ghad jidhol f’Malta, it-tfajla Ingliza qalet li normalment, irid ikun hemm generazzjoni, madwar 20 sena, biex jibdew jittiehdu passi, u milli rat, dan digà qieghed isehh.

Sostniet li jekk mhemmx l-edukazzjoni xierqa, kaz wiehed ta’ abort jista’ jkun il-bieb ghal-legalizazzjoni tal-abort.

Skont l-Uffiċċju Nazzjonali ghall-Istatistika u d-Dipartiment ghas-Sahha fir-Renju Unit, mill-1990 sal-2012 kien hemm 1,275 kaz ta’ nisa Maltin li ghamlu abort fl-Ingilterra jew Wales. Dan ifisser li fuq medda ta’ 22 sena, kull sena, 58 mara Maltija ghamlu abort.

Aisling tahdem ma’ Abort67, parti minn progett tal-Bioetika fl-Ingilterra, li jqajjem kuxjenza dwar kif persuna thares lejn l-abort.

Dr Miriam Sciberras minn Life Network, qalet li l-edukazzjoni ssir billi persuna tara l-verità, anke jekk ghas-soċjetà dan huwa tabù.

Sostniet li f’Malta hafna min-nies huma favur il-hajja, izda l-lingwagg qed jinbidel biex jahbi x’inhu l-abort, u ghalhekk hemm bzonn ta’ kampanja edukattiva.

Dr Sciberras fakkret li ghal kull ghazla hemm konsegwenza.

See source article, taken from Newsbook.com Julia Callus “Ta’ 12-il sena ghandhom ikunu jafu dwar l-abort”.

President of Malta Promises Not To Legalize Abortion – Hilary White

Malta’s recently-elected president, Marie Louise Coleiro Preca, told a delegation of pro-life advocates last week that her government would never legalize abortion.[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]During a “courtesy meeting” with Malta Unborn Child Movement (MUCM) an umbrella group representing 45 local organizations, the president said she is “personally dead set against” abortion and that as president, she would never sign such a legislation, MUCM said.

After the legalization of “limited” abortion in the Republic of Ireland, Malta became the last European nation, and one of the last in the world, to totally outlaw all abortion. The tiny Mediterranean country has been the target of decades of relentless pressure to legalize abortion at the international level.

A member of the group, and the co-founder of Life Network, the country’s newest pro-life activist organization, told LifeSiteNews.com that the president “realised that over the issue of abortion, although Malta does not enjoy a universal consensus, it was imperative that we all worked together in promoting the protection of the unborn child and against abortion.”

President Feels Encouraged Of Malta’s Life Shield

Dr. Miriam Sciberras told LifeSiteNews.com, “The President of Malta said she wanted the widest possible backing to combat the pro-abortion culture.” She added that the president’s words were “an encouraging pro-life shield against the anti-life movement that is being forcefully promoted both locally and abroad.”

“It’s very encouraging to have her say these things publicly. She could have chosen not to say anything, to stay silent or not invite us. If we had more people who are not ashamed to speak about these things I’m sure the situation would be much better.”

Malta Has Always Spoken Against Abortion, And So Has Labour

The president’s promise backs up another made by Leo Brincat, the Labour Party’s representative at the Council of Europe, who said in 2008 that there is “one unifying factor among the parties represented in our country’s parliament,” that “Malta has always spoken with one voice in its stand against abortion.”

“As for my party…there are no ifs or buts on this issue. The Malta Labour Party always was, is and will remain against abortion. The issue does not feature on our agenda.”

But the abortion mentality is growing in large segments of Maltese society, as the population, with little opposition from the clergy, slides slowly away from its historic Catholic roots. Despite an officially 98 percent Catholic population, Mass attendance has fallen dramatically in the last ten years, while during the period between 2002 and 2011, records from the UK’s Department of Health showed that 591 women travelled to Britain for abortions, a significant number in a country with a total population just over 420,000. No records are available on how many travel to nearby Italy for the same reason, though it is widely known that the practice is common.

Dr. Sciberras said the Life Network was founded this summer in response to the growth of this “anti-life mentality” that includes the contraceptive mentality and wider acceptance of the homosexualist “gender” ideology.

RU-486 (Morning After Pill) Discussed

Artificial contraceptives are nearly universally accepted, including hormonal contraceptives, despite the fact that their abortifacient nature is well known. Although the country still outlaws both the abortion drug RU-486 and the so-called morning-after pill, a 2012 article in the Malta Medical Journal showed that contraceptive use, including “barrier method, hormonal manipulation, and sterilisation” is common.

The effects of this new cultural paradigm can be seen in Malta’s falling total fertility rate, which stands at 1.45 children born per woman, far below the 2.1 required for maintaining a stable population.

Dr. Sciberras said, “We look at the growth of the anti-life mentality, which is pervasive. It’s everywhere. We know that we’re up against a change in lifestyle that is promoting the Culture of Death instead of the culture of life.”

First Priority Is Educational

“Our first priority is educational, showing people the meaning of being pro-life, that it is not just a statement, it’s a way of life,” she added.

Their first educational campaign will be to reach out to schools and parishes, and the group has already identified a core of students at the University of Malta to launch a project there. UofM already has active organizations on campus making posters and pamphlets available to students promoting homosexuality and the feminist ideologies.

She said her group wanted to take up the defense of all life, at all its stages and conditions, “be it with disability, with dementia… embracing the full spectrum of life.”

The Life Network

Life Network is also not restricting itself to issues related to abortion and euthanasia, but Dr. Sciberras says their dedication to the “full spectrum” includes the moral defense of the natural family based on marriage between one man and one woman. She acknowledges also that the government has embraced a contradiction with its pro-life position in its enthusiasm for the homosexualist agenda’s push towards “gay marriage.”

“‘Life issues’ take place within the context of the family,” she said. “You cannot protect a child without protecting his family. He comes from the union of a father and a mother.”

“It is the right of every child to have a father and a mother. This is a basic principle.” She says that there is a growing element in Maltese society that has moved away from these principles, and warned that it would lead to conflicts. “When you start compromising, you always get in trouble. You go against the natural law,” she added.

Responding to the recent passage by President Preca’s Labour government of the same-sex civil unions legislation, she said, “I know that a lot of things have been passed not with the consensus of all the people. Just because a government passes a law doesn’t mean it has the backing of the whole country.”

Maltese Legislation

Since the surprise legalization of divorce through a referendum in 2011, Malta’s laws on the nature of the family have changed with astonishing rapidity. This year saw the civil unions bill pass, and the country’s first same-sex civil unions registered. Last year, Helena Dalli, the Labour government’s Minister for Social Dialogue headed the Maltese delegation to a UN meeting in which she assured delegates that Malta’s “new Government was fully committed to the protection of the rights of LGBTI persons.”

This month saw the passage of the “transgender anti-discrimination” bill, as promised by Dalli at a “transgender” congress in Hungary in May. Dalli told that meeting that while her government’s focus had up until then been mainly on homosexuals, they would shortly be turning their attention to “trans” people.
She boasted that her government “amended the Constitution in such a way as to provide protection on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. I am told that we are the first country in Europe to have included an express reference to gender identity in the Constitution.”

This rapid succession of changes resulted in Malta being named by the EU’s leading homosexualist organization, ILGA Europe, one of the two “fastest climbers” among EU nations with regards to the goals of the organization.

Paulo Côrte-Real, co-chair of ILGA-Europe’s executive board, said in a statement attached to the organization’s Annual Review, “It is very encouraging to see countries like Malta and Montenegro make such huge progress in the space of one year. It shows that so much is possible when there is political leadership, especially when it is coupled with meaningful engagement of civil society.”

See source article, taken from LifeSiteNews.com Blogger Hilary White’s ‘ Malta’s president promises not to legalize abortion’.

You can learn more about Life Site News here and join their Facebook group here.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

The Peacemakers – Pope Benedict XVI

The path to the attainment of the common good and to peace is above all that of respect for human life in all its many aspects, beginning with its conception, through its development and up to its natural end.

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

Peacemakers are those who love, defend and promote life in its fullness. True peacemakers, then, are those who love, defend and promote human life in all its dimensions, personal, communitarian and transcendent. Life in its fullness is the height of peace. Anyone who loves peace cannot tolerate attacks and crimes against life.

Those who insufficiently value human life and, in consequence, support among other things the liberalization of abortion, perhaps do not realize that in this way they are proposing the pursuit of a false peace. The flight from responsibility, which degrades human persons, and even more so the killing of a defenceless and innocent being, will never be able to produce happiness or peace. Indeed how could one claim to bring about peace, the integral development of peoples or even the protection of the environment without defending the life of those who are weakest, beginning with the unborn?

Every offence against life, especially at its beginning, inevitably causes irreparable damage to development, peace and the environment. Neither is it just to introduce surreptitiously into legislation false rights or freedoms which, on the basis of a reductive and relativistic view of human beings and the clever use of ambiguous expressions aimed at promoting a supposed right to abortion and euthanasia, pose a threat to the fundamental right to life.[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”287″ border_color=”grey” img_link_target=”_self” img_size=”850×350″][vc_column_text]There is also a need to acknowledge and promote the natural structure of marriage as the union of a man and a woman in the face of attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different types of union; such attempts actually harm and help to destabilize marriage, obscuring its specific nature and its indispensable role in society.

These principles are not truths of faith, nor are they simply a corollary of the right to religious freedom. They are inscribed in human nature itself, accessible to reason and thus common to all humanity. The Church’s efforts to promote them are not therefore confessional in character, but addressed to all people, whatever their religious affiliation. Efforts of this kind are all the more necessary the more these principles are denied or misunderstood, since this constitutes an offence against the truth of the human person, with serious harm to justice and peace.

Consequently, another important way of helping to build peace is for legal systems and the administration of justice to recognize the right to invoke the principle of conscientious objection in the face of laws or government measures that offend against human dignity, such as abortion and euthanasia.

WORLD PEACE DAY 2013 message, entitled “Blessed are the Peacemakers,” Pope Benedict XVI[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Pro-life Malta’s third Great Siege begins

As the battle continues across Europe and the World, journalist Hilary White, mentioned Malta as the last European country standing when it comes to opposing abortion.

White speaks on how when she first started working within pro-life back in 1999, Malta along with Poland and Ireland were the last three European countries standing. However, recently, after meeting with the leaderships of the Maltese pro-life movement, she was informed that Malta is currently the last country standing to outlaw abortion.

White explains how in Poland, abortion became legal in 1993 in cases of ““when pregnancy constitutes a threat to life or to the health of the pregnant woman,” in cases where the unborn child is “irreversibly damaged” or seriously ill, and where there is a “justified suspicion” of the pregnancy being the result of rape.””

Ireland “brought it in under “strictly limited circumstances” last year, and the campaigners are hard at work to get rid of those “limits” as soon as possible.” White continues explaining.

So how did pro-life Malta sand so strong?

See source article, taken from LifeSiteNews.com Blogger Hilary White’s ‘ Pro-life Malta’s third Great Siege begins: will they stand strong?

We need your support in order to be able to spread the news on the value of life. Your donation will help us to educate people of all ages, organise pro-life seminars and buy books & materials to facilitate educate. Like every life is infinitely priceless, so is every donation. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts.

Life Network

Freedom to choose life

A truly humane society is measured by how it cares for its weakest members, namely the preborn, the ill, the disabled and the elderly.

It is a society that attributes an intrinsic value to life in all its stages, be it an embryo, foetus, infant or adult. This is the present Maltese scenario, one of our strong unifying positions in a politically-divisive country.

We are a people who still value life, appreciate life and care for our disabled and elderly brethren. Unfortunately, for most countries, commodification of life has become rampant.

Prenatal diagnosis does not change the intrinsic value of life. The dignity of a child does not alter with a diagnosis of Down syndrome, cystic fibrosis, spina bifida or any other health condition. Disability-selective abortion is nothing more than a ‘search and destroy mission’ to kill innocent infants whose life is deemed ‘inferior’. This is a justified eugenics in search of the perfect child.

Malta remains the only country in the EU that fully respects human life from conception. However, the unremitting pressure to comply with women’s so called ‘reproductive rights’, including abortion, remains. It might be pertinent for members of Parliament to point out to our European counterparts that we are free to choose protection of life for our preborn infants.

Liberal laws and liberal people or countries are not really liberal when they threaten or try to coerce those who disagree with them into complying.

Rita Joseph, a Canberra-based writer, lecturer and human rights advocate, aptly describes the sequence of events taking place. “As ‘sensitivity to the gender implications’ of a woman’s putative right to abortion has grown to gross proportions it has swamped all residual sensitivity to the lethal implications of abortion for the unborn child victims. Under the guise of ‘reform’, the feminist revolution has taken the path of excess that so many revolutions before have taken: the oppressed have become the oppressors.”

Speakers from both political parties, to their credit, have consistently spoken out against abortion both locally and in political fora abroad. Recently, Environment Minister Leo Brincat defended Malta’s position against abortion in the Socialist Group meeting at the Council of Europe. It is thanks to the vigilance of such representatives that Malta is still free to choose life.

Our stand for life includes respect for the humanity and fragility of the human embryo. Embryos have a right not to be intentionally manipulated and endangered, inherent in the fact of being human beings.

The freezing of embryos constitutes an offence against the respect for human life at its most vulnerable because this procedure exposes the embryos to increased risk of harm and death. It also exposes the embryo to wilful suspension of his/her life.

Playing word games with human lives endangers all of us and justifies anything

Achieving a pregnancy should not come at the expense of demeaning embryonic life. When we speak of ‘pregnancy rates’ without taking into account the humanity of the unborn, we risk going down a dangerous road that puts the protection of the embryo at risk, to say the least.

As quoted in Times of Malta recently, Simone Attard, vice president of the Embryo Protection Authority, insisted that a 28 per cent pregnancy rate last year compared well with the 32 per cent success rate reported by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

This success rate without embryo selection and despite having no ‘freezing’ in the first year augurs well for the professionals working in this field. Professional training should increasingly be focused on improving this technique not resorting to ‘freezing’ as a back-up.

If we are to remain a country ‘free to choose life’, we cannot afford any complacency regarding protection of human life at any stage. The fundamental principle that all rights flow from the human person must remain at the heart of our society. Playing word games with human lives, in the end, endangers all of us and justifies anything.

True freedom is not to be confused with freedom from responsibility but implies a responsibility to our fellow man, including our unborn embryonic brothers and sisters.