The Suzy B Blog

Feb 3, 2010
Ireland Attacked for Pro-Life Laws
babysavingintern

LifeNews reported this week on a shocking turn of events. Ireland was attacked today by the group Human Rights Watch for what they perceived as an affront to basic human rights. What could be this assault you ask, what basic human rights are being denied in Ireland? According to the HRW, Ireland is depriving its’ citizens of the “fundamental human” right to have an abortion.

Of course, they fail to take into account the right to life of the unborn child.

What’s even more disturbing is the fact that Ireland’s laws protecting the unborn were not set up just a few years ago, but have been a major force in their legal system since 1861. The Irish Constitution explicitly recognizes the humanity of the unborn child and states that all life must be protected, from conception until natural death.

Rebecca Roughneen, a pro-life advocate in Ireland, argued that, “Neither I, nor the majority of Irish women, need abortion to ‘enjoy’ our human rights.”

So why doesn’t Human Rights Watch look out for those that are really suffering from a lack of human rights? Those lacking the fundamental right to life? The unborn.

For more info on this story please click here

Read More

Tags:
Feb 2, 2010
Feminists Still Furious Over Tebow Ad
nomatterhowsmall

superbowl comic

This morning in the Washington Post, sports columnist Sally Jenkins had a great piece that truly sums up what has been the radical feminist response to Tim and Pam Tebow's Superbowl ad.

Refering to NOW as the "National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time," and "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us," Jenkins simplifies the problem with all of their complaints.

"They aren't actually 'pro-choice' so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell...

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn't be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. . I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn't."

Jenkins considers herself to be pro-choice, and expresses that "surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the 'need' for abortions wasn't so great. Which is precisely why NOW is so wrong to take aim at Tebow's ad."

Jenkins goes on to laud Tim Tebow for his selflessness and humility, exclaiming that more Tim Tebows are exactly what this world needs, and that the likes of NOW should agree. We need more men like Tim Tebow who are unashamed to say that they respect themselves, women, and the institution of marriage, to the point that they'll "practice sexual restraint" so that women might have less need for abortion.

Jenkins believes that the women of NOW should appreciate this because even as pro-choicers, "surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the 'need' for abortions wasn't so great."

This is where Jenkins misunderstands NOW and the radical feminist movement. Terry O'Neill and the "National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time" believe that women need abortion to be happy--that abortion completes womanhood. That is why NOW is so furious about Pam Tebow and her choice. They believe she choose wrong.

Read More

Tags: Feminists Still Furious over Tebow Ad
Feb 2, 2010
South Korea’s Family Drama
babysavingintern

Korean Family

Here’s a bit of interesting news.

While we here in the United States fight to keep the government from promoting abortion through our taxpayer dollars the opposite seems to be happening on the other side of the world in South Korea.

Recently John Sudworth, of BBC News, reported that the South Korean Ministry of Health shut down its operations earlier than usual in an attempt to encourage its employees to go home and spend time with their families, hopefully making bigger ones.  Why, ? because South Korea happens to have an extremely low birth rate and an aging population.  According to the article even Japan’s birth rates are higher than that of South Korea’s which is astonishing.

This is seen as a serious issue by the government due to “falling levels of manpower and spiralling health care costs” as quoted in the BBC article. To counter-act decline in birth rate, this experimental, early, end-of-the-day is hoped to be repeated every month. It certainly seems that the Ministry of Health believes its staff should set the tone for the rest of South Korea in encouraging “family life.”

Another interesting little tidbit found in the article on the BBC website is that at the Ministry of Health, “Generous gift vouchers are on offer for officials who have more than one child, and the department organises social gatherings in the hope of fostering love amongst its bureaucrats.” Even money is being given to people for having children. What a turn-a-round!

Many criticize the new “Family Day”, however, stating that the government is encouraging larger families without taking into account the drawbacks to having numerous children. For instance, the cost of education and childcare is very expensive, and thus they are a major road-block, especially to the young people of South Korea interested in starting families.

But, hey, they are at least heading in the right direction. If the South Koreans want bigger families they are going to have to make it an attainable goal, the motto being, ”the bigger the better”.  Yet here, while bigger families are more attainable, government seems to be promoting the opposite mantra. Instead of something along the lines of “the more the merrier,” we get, “the more, the drearier.”

Fascinating, no?

Read More

Tags:
Syndicate content