To love another ....

 Having lived in a few (Western) nations, I will be so bold as to claim that I have identified two things that are universal (among many others I'm sure.) One is the love of human life. Unfortunately, alongside of that love is the hatred of human life.

When you tell people that you have four children and their first response is "you should've used a condom" or (in the case of the mother) "So, you've had your tubes tied now, haven't you?" they're basically telling you that the world, or at least your family, would be better off without your most recent children.

In the past 2 weeks, these exact ideas have been told to me and my wife more often than I would like to say.

That is hatred of human life.

While there are far too many of such hateful people, fortunately there are still many more who love human beings.  They see baby twins and play with them; they bubble over in joy about how cute they are.

Or, on the other hand, they might talk about which one might be a better boss, and which one might be a better boss and which one might be a better salesman.  Others may notice which one likes to get dirty and which one likes to stay clean. Some may kiss them, others may give them a blessing.

Not once does it occur to these people how the existence of these beautiful twins could've been prevented. Why? Because they love people, and human life gives them joy.

In the same past few weeks - especially in the past two days - these and many other such wonderful things have happened when people see our twins, thankfully far more than the kind of comment mentioned above.


The joy of seeing an infant is the joy of seeing new life brought into this world and at its very root the deepest love for humans.

The next time you see a baby, let it bring joy to your heart, and not a Godless, inhuman wish that the baby's life would've been prevented.

Henry Morgentaler - Should We Be Glad He's Gone?

Henry Morgentaler died today, at the age of 90.  Let's look at what this man did:

• he repeatedly, illegally opened abortion clinics and appealed jail sentences until the Supreme Court of Canada  decided that he was right after all
• he personally performed over 100,000 abortions (http://goo.gl/bmepp)
• his clinics performed "many hundreds of thousands more"
• his actions are largely responsible for the over 3.2 million abortions that have taken place in Canada since 1970 and the fact that these cannot be punished by law (http://cambridgerighttolife.ca/testepage/abortion/)

Thanks to him, legally in Canada:

• over 300 abortions are performed ever day 
• over 100,000 are performed every year
• more than 3 babies are aborted for every
• a live-born baby is killed after a "botched" abortion, once a week on average

All of this continues full tilt ahead as you're reading.

Dr. Morgentaler personally has the blood of over 3,200,000 babies on his hands, and the numbers rise.

So, shouldn't we be glad this monster is gone?

And about the Holocaust ... 

It makes me wonder about Dr. Morgentaler - why is it that having experienced the deadliest atrocity in history up to that time first hand, having miraculously survived it, that he would choose to be the leader of the only atrocity, the only large-scale, sanitized, clinicized mass-murder that overshadows that one?

Perhaps no answer will be discovered to that question.

A Lost Soul is a Catastrophe

As tempting as it is to say "good riddance," as good as it would feel for the moment, it is wrong.

One lost soul is a catastrophe, not a victory.  He gave his life to the Enemy, and that is sad. Yes, the 3 million lives he has cost Canada is a catastrophe.  But so is the fact that he died without (as far as I know or has been publicly stated) repentance.

I think of Dr. Bernard Nathanson who's life - despite having performed proportionally more abortions than Morgentaler - was a great victory.

God's Mercy

No, we cannot be happy that this man has died with the blood of so many innocent lives on it.  We cannot rejoice or claim any victory in this sad death.

God have mercy on the soul of Henry Morgentaler.

Why Are "Catholic lawmakers hostile to abortion even when more moderate on other social issues?"

Before I say anything, I want you to click on the link below.  I want you to look at the green number that appears at the top of the page.  First see how many millions are listed there, then notice how quickly that number is going up?

http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/

When I opened the page it at 13,336,610.  It goes up by about 3 every second.

A law recently passed in Kansas limiting abortions

These are statistics for clinical murder.

The counter shows how many human beings are being murdered around the world every second - not total of murders, but only those murdered clinically, in a nice, safe, clean sterile setting that makes these murders seem like a "medical procedure."  This clean, clinical murder is called "abortion."

The total is the number of abortions that have taken place this year - since January. That's less than 4 months.  In less than 4 months, well over 13 million babies have been intentionally murdered in clinics.

That means that in less than 2 months, there were over 6 million clinically murdered babies.

According to the same webpage, the WHO reports that there are between 40 and 50 million abortions per year. That means that in less than 2 years, there are more than 75 million clinically murdered humans.

a precursor to abortionists

Why 75 Million Murders?

Why do I highlight the numbers 6 million and 75 million?  Well, about 80 years ago, a man took over the parliament of a prominent and very advanced European country.  He proceeded to start a program that led to and arranged for the clinical and systematic cold-blooded murder of over 6 million innocent people.  This program also lead to the deaths of 75 million people in the war which most people would consider the worst catastrophe in human history.

This man is an icon of evil; his actions and the way of thinking that led to those actions are unquestionably condemned by all reasonable humans.

Yet, the same number of cold, systematic, clinical murders that he committed in about 6 years was committed in the first two months of this year in the name of "choice" and "rights."

Of course, we're comparing planned, clinical murders in a handful of nations to those in the whole world .  So to make the comparison more fair, let's compare only to the U.S.  According to the WHO, there are about 3000 abortions a day in that country. That means there are 6 million every 5.5 years.  That means in the U.S. alone, abortion is outdoing the holocaust in a lesser period of time.

The same total number of people that died in horrendous 6-year war that evil man started have been murdered in abortions in only the past 2 years.  Both these numbers are world-wide.

A monster, because he made abortion look as dirty as it really is

The Holocaust of Our Progressive World

World War II and especially Hitler's Holocaust were horrible atrocities which should have never happened.  The numbers above show that abortion is an even greater atrocity - at least by 3x.

Abortion is the Holocaust of our modern, progressive, middle-class world.

Like the Holocaust, comfort, ease and - most importantly - the fear of shame or public humiliation for speaking out against it, make us quite us quite content to allow it to carry on quietly out of sight in safe, sterile clinics where it won't make us feel bad or guilty.

Unlike Hitler's atrocities, which eventually brought almost every other super-power nation against it, there is only one single nation in the world that has taken a decisive stand against abortion (Chile).  All other either endorse it as a "fundamental right" (increasingly more common) or turn a blind eye to it.

Many people are upset by what happened with Dr. Gosnell.  A few people are upset because he was murdering babies.  Most people are upset only because he wasn't as clean and clinically sterile as he should've been and - worst of all - that he let his filthiness spill out into the public eye to make us uncomfortable.

Like the brainwashed middle-class of central Europe in WWII, we are willing to turn a blind eye for the sake of comfort - we just want to be sure that it's kept comfortably clean and out of our sight.

Alberto Giubilini, advocate of "after-birth abortions"

The Final Solution

Post-birth abortion is not only a monster looming in the future used as a scare tactic by pro-lifers.  It is a common and accepted practice - even if it has not yet been given official legal approval.

It is already common practice for babies born live after botched abortions to be (a) left to die or (b) killed by the same techniques used in abortions.  This not a freak abuse limited to monsters like Gosnell.  In Canada, the government has reports of this happening to almost 500 babies in 10 years.  These are only the reported cases.  (In Canada, there is no legal requirement to report an abortion.)

Planned Parenthood practices both techniques (a and b) mentioned above.

The academic groundwork to justify "post-birth abortions" legally has already been laid by "credible" academics in influential places.  The justification is that a baby can be killed by the same techniques used in abortions “when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion."  They use the term "after-birth abortion" rather than "infanticide" "to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus … rather than to that of a child."

(see http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-08/opinions/38362423_1_viable-babies-abortion-survivor-planned-parenthood)

Marc Thiessen - a critic of "post-birth abortion"

Basically, killing a baby just after birth can be justified by the exact same arguments used in favour of abortion. And these academics are right; there's no reasonable way you can justify that a baby is a conscious human being 1 minute after the leaving the mother completely if you did not recognize that status 2 minutes earlier when part of her was still inside her mother.

Currently, there are scientists studying the question whether a 2-month-old baby is a conscious human or not - and even a 5-month-old.  People should be paying much more attention to these studies, because if the "scientific consensus" answers the above question with "no" then we will soon be having academics, and then doctors and judges, talking about something like "pre-consciousness abortion" to describe a process for clinically murdering babies that are several months old.

Unlike the case with pre-birth abortions, for "post-birth abortions" we don't even need renegade doctors who want to be heroes. Planned Parenthood is already doing that quietly, behind the scenes, on public money and with public approval (given through silence.)  All it will take to implement this "final solution" is a couple of Supreme Court judges who want their names to be recorded in history as the fearless leaders of justice who overturned their nation's laws for the sake of "progress."


Saving a Mother's Live?

And the big question - how many abortions are procured to save a mother's life? This is after all, the end-all wildcard pro-choice argument that makes all pro-lifers shut up and be entirely ashamed of ever even thinking that abortion should be banned.

Reasons for abortions

In a U.K.study, 0.006% were in direct response to save a mother's life (i.e. she was dying and the abortion saved her), and another 0.37% were due to risk of the mother's life (i.e. it was unsure if she would've died or not, but the risk was high.)

That means, of the 13 million babies clinically murdered since January, probably only 78,000 - worldwide - were in direct response to the immediate threat of death for the mother.

Abortion is not right in any situation, but the point here is legal abortion has nothing to do with saving mothers' lives. 99.994% of abortions are carried purely for a matter of personal preference or convenience, justified on the assumption that the baby is not in fact a human.  This lends itself very nicely to post-birth abortion arguments.

(*U.S. stats will list 2.8% as "maternal health concerns." This does NOT indicate danger or even risk of death, but "health" in a far broader context. "Danger of death" does not show up on stats - I'm assuming because the cases are so rare.)

Me, holding my babies minutes after they were  born.
They were humans then, just as they were 8.5 months
before, at the moment of conception.

Some More Stats

• Worldwide, there are 125,000 abortions per day - that's the entire population of Waterloo, ON, or Playa del Carmen, MX, murdered every day
• In the US there are over 3000 abortions every day - that's the population of the township I live in
• That's a total of about 20% of all babies in the U.S.
• In Canada, there is one abortion for every 3 live births; that's 25% of all babies

So ...

I couldn't name a worst atrocity than this one. Go back to that counter again - http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/. Every time that number turns over, imagine a person in nice clean clinic, having surgical scissor being jammed up through her neck into her brain, or having her spinal cord severed, or being burned in chemicals or cut to pieces alive - of course, in each case this person is nicely sedated and muffled to ensure that other people in the room don't feel uncomfortable about the process - they might see her squirm a little, but doctors and scientists can reassure us that that's just an non-conscious reflex. Pleasant thought, isn't it?

Back to the Main Question

Why, then, is that "Catholic lawmakers in particular are often hostile to abortion rights even when they are more moderate on other social issues"?  Tara Culp-Ressler at ThinkProgress.org points out this fact as though it's absurd, some sort of silly contradiction.

I hope the numbers and comparison I shared above answer this questions satisfactorily. Abortion is not simply another "social issue."

Baptism of Our Twins

This Sunday, our baby twins, who will be 2 months old in 2 days, were baptized!  Here are some pictures:

Grandma getting the babies dressed

The blessing of the water.

The annointing with oil.

The sermon

The baptism itself

Closer view of the baptism

Welcoming of babies into the Church



 After the baptism, the priest gave my wife the blessing for mothers of newborns, known as "churching":

Here's picture of the church's beautiful high altar.  It's a beautiful little church building in the countryside:

Finally, our celebration afterwards. Fortunately, the weather was beautiful, so we enjoyed lunch outside, at our house:

A Different (and Wonderful) Kind of Gift for Families with Newborns!

For parents of newborns a meal they don't have to cook is a great help!

3 weeks ago, my twins were born!  Since then, we've had many visits from family, friends and neighbours.  Besides the pleasure of seeing people and the joy on their faces when they held our babies, almost everyone also brought gifts. We are very thankful for all the gifts and - most importantly - the love and support so many people have shown us!

Yet, there's something different that happened this time.  Anglo Canadians, like Mexicans, bring gifts of clothes, toys, bottles, diapers, soothers, etc.  All very helpful and useful items, and all received with gratitude! However, something new for both me and my wife was the kind of gift that the our Old-Colony Mennonite (also known as Mexican Mennonites or Low-German Mennonites) friends, neighbours and relatives have been bringing us; they bring meals! (Sometimes in addition to the other kind of gifts.)

The first (Mennonite) family that visited us - some new friends who we've been getting to know this summer - called us one day shortly after the twins were born and asked if they could bring supper over around 5 pm.  All of us being over tired and not in the mood for cooking, we were delighted with the idea.  My mother-in-law (who has flown in from Mexico City, just to help out) and I hurried around to see if we could find enough dishes for the guests.  When they arrived, they passed dinner to us, and we asked them to come in.

"No, it's OK," they answered, "we just wanted to bring supper.  We'll be on our way and come to see the babies in a couple of days when you aren't so tired."

(They did come back in a couple of days, and we weren't so tired.)

At first we thought it was just a one-time idea that a friend had thought of; but as the weeks went on and neighbours we hardly know started bringing us dinner, we realized that this must be some sort of custom; we have no idea if all Old Colony Mennonites follow this custom or if it's just a local thing.  In any case, it really is a great idea.

(As a complete side note, I noticed that the meals all included [delicious] home-made chicken noodle soup; in Mexico, people believe that eating chicken soup is good for the mother of newborns.  Perhaps these people - most of whom spent most of their lives in Mexico - believe the same thing?  It was delicious - I hadn't had this kind of soup in a long time. The rest of the meal varied greatly, from Mexican-style stuffed peppers to fried chicken.  All very tasty!)

Over the next few weeks (in fact, right up to today) we've had neighbours bring us supper about 3 or 4 times a week.  It's incredible how much this has helped us.


Next time someone who lives nearby has a baby, we're going offer to cook a meal or two for them ... and "Thank You" to all of our friends, family and neighbours who cooked for us!