No More Free Milk at School - Now it's Free Abortions

Back in the post-war years, up until my parents were at school, children were given a glass, or bottle of milk at school in an effort to increase the healthiness of Kiwi kids. That stopped in 1967. And in 1977 New Zealand got it's "Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act" - a relatively pro-life act which declared that abortions would only be legal if the mother's life or health were in serious, life-threatening danger. Since then, the law has become farcaical, and New Zealand now has child-killing on demand. Below is an account I was sent, of an abortion committed against a sixteen-year-old Kiwi girl, and her pre-born baby that took place in Wellington, New Zealand just recently.

"I have been extremely saddened and quite shocked this week to learn that a friend of my daughter had an abortion last year when she had just turned 16. I know the parents fairly well and they are fabulous parents who have given the world to their kids and they have been very involved in their lives, supporting them at sports and after school activities over the years. The most shocking part of this story for me is that unfortunately this girl has gotten pregnant, gone to the school councilor instead of her parents and, without consulting the parents, the school councilor has taken her to Wellington for an abortion (after taking her to the KYS first).

That was last year and the girl has still not told her parents. I am sure you are all with me on this in terms of feeling horrified that this has been allowed to happen but I really want to know what legislation is in force that allows a school councilor to take this responsibility? I don’t believe there is any! I know those parents and they have had their rights taken away from them and the girl was definitely not mature enough to realize that the love and support she could have received from her parents was what she needed then – whatever outcome they chose together. She just knew she had been “naughty” and didn’t want to get into trouble."

Unfortunately, this legislation is in force, in the form of an amendment to the Care of Children Act. The Care of Children Act establishes that children under the age of 16 are not permitted to undergo medical procedures without their parent's consent. However it makes one exception...

Section 38 of the Care of Children Act 2004: Consent to abortion
1. If given by a female child (of whatever age), the following have the same effect as if she were of full age:
(a) a consent to the carrying out on her of any medical or surgical procedure for the purpose of terminating her pregnancy by a person professionally qualified to carry it out; and
(b) a refusal to consent to the carrying out on her of any procedure of that kind.

2. This section overrides section 36.

Section 36 had declared that children under 16 could not undergo any medical procedures without parental consent, however Section 38 comes along and removes this. Abortion is one of the most dangerous and life-changing experiences that any young girl could go through, and this aspect of our abortion law is therefore unprincipled on an unprecedented level. Gianna Jessen's mother was 17 when she chose to have an abortion. The abortionist used the saline-abortion method which both poisons and burns the child in-utero, until it dies - almost always a long and painful death. The saline solution (salt-water) is injected into the womb via a very large syringe. Gianna was burned alive for approximately 18 hours in the womb, in the saline solution. However she was delivered alive, and is today a beautiful and corageous voice for life, speaking internationally about her experience, and about the awful reality of abortion which is hidden behind the glossy brochures and deceptive platitudes from the pro-child killing lobby. As Gianna says - "if abortion is about women's rights, then where were mine?" Abortion is not a choice, it is painful, disgusting, and degrades women. It is shameful that our Government not only funds killing approximately 18,000 pre-born babies every year, but that it also funds the public-schools which promote abortion as an acceptable option - more desirable than adoption, - and further, arrange for young school-girls to have the foetus growing inside them, to be murdered.

Objection from a Former Sailor

To the Editor:
I object and take exception to everyone saying that Obama and Congress are spending money like a drunken sailor. As a former drunken sailor, I quite when I ran out of money.
Bruce L. Hargraves
USN Retired
Worland

Exposing the Abortion Law Reform Association of NZ

On 5 November 2009, I purchased the domain name, www.alranz.org.nz, and made a simple spoof website which you can view here (note, graphic image). On 8 February 2010, President of the organization, Dame Margaret Sparrow emailed me, claiming that the website was unethical and unacceptable, and requesting that the site be taken down, stating:

"I object to the pornographic photo posted on the website alranz.org.nz making a link to our website alranz.org It is clear that someone has maliciously purchased the website alranz.org.nz as an attack on our website alranz.org."

Dame Margaret Sparrow

Sparrow claimed that the photo I had used as the background for the website was "pornographic". However the definition of pornography is that it is the depiction of explicit sexual subject matter for the sole purpose of sexual excitement. Does Sparrow find the photo of this murdered baby sexually exciting? Because I sure as hell don't.

In my response, I stated, "As an active member of the pro-life movement in New Zealand, I currently have no intention of taking the website down, as it serves to expose ALRANZ for its awful agenda of decriminalising abortion in New Zealand." ALRANZ and its lawyer subsequently drafted up a nine-page document and a dossier of archived documents relating to ALRANZ and pages printed from the web, presenting a case against me, claiming that my registration of alranz.org.nz was an unfair registration.Speaking of my "history of opposition" to ALRANZ, the document stated the following:

"Mr. Moore is well-known as an active opponent of our Association through various groups including, but not limited to, ProLife NZ (www.prolife.org.nz) and Stop Family Planning (www.stopfamilyplanning.org.nz) and via a blog at http://www.starstuddedsuperstep.com. He frequently attacks the Association, in particular its president, Dame Margaret Sparrow. For example:

[1] Labelling Dame Margaret "an anti-life extremist"
[2] Highlighting the following comment on his blog: "Margaret Sparrow should be hung, drawn and quartered"

[1] I absolutely stand by my statement that Sparrow is an anti-life extremist. She has murdered countless innocent pre-born babies with her own hands during her time as an abortionist, and now, in her retirement years, works tirelessly to further liberalise NZ's abortion laws, to allow for greater access to abortions, for a wider range of reasons, and later into the pregnancy. [2] However the claim that I highlighted the quoted comment is a gross misrepresentation, taking the quote out of context. I did not highlight that comment; rather I highlighted an account from a woman who had had an abortion, from which the above sentence was taken; the strong implication being that I personally endorse this comment. Pro-life stalwart, Brendan Malone has written an article on another instance of this statement on my blog being contorted and made to seem like something that it never was, by this pro-abortion group, ALRANZ. Brendan summed up the article, stating,

"This is simply another classic example of the pro-abortion tactic of using misinformation to slur those who refuse to support the notion that killing unborn human beings is morally, socially and medically acceptable."

I chose not to contest my right to the domain name, due partly to having been very busy with many other pro-life activities such as the successful 2010 South Island March for Life, and also being quite happy with allowing ALRANZ to foot the fairly substantial legal fees. ALRANZ spent $2025, the fee for having an independent expert hired by the Domain Name Commission to decide on the case. They also spent at least $136.35 purchasing similar domain names on 25 February 2010 (3 NZ domain names at $31.45 each and 3 international domain names at $14 each). With a total of 6 extra domain names that they previously did not need, this is going to cost ALRANZ an extra $136 per year, as domains incur an annual fee. I spent a mere $31.45 purchasing the domain name alranz.org.nz, however it has cost ALRANZ at least $2161 in initial outlay, not including their lawyer's fees. This is two grand less per year that the pro-child killing lobby in New Zealand has at their disposal, for the purpose of promoting their lowly, despicable cause. And I really couldn't care less about ALRANZ getting the alranz.org.nz domain name, because I've just set up...

www.ExposingALRANZ.org.nz

At the Exposing ALRANZ website, the spotlight will be shone upon the activities and agenda of this organisation, as well as profiling the people within it, and the radically pro-abortion, anti-woman policies which they are lobbying for. I am not opposed to abortion law reform, in fact I believe that NZ's abortion law (and application of the law) needs to be reformed to reflect the majority opinion that killing pre-born children is not a core health-service, and to protect the right to life of our Country's pre-born children. As long as ALRANZ pursuses pro-child killing abortion law reform, I will oppose ALRANZ. I will not go away, and I will not shut up about this, because as a former foetus, I have a duty to speak up for them, because they sure as heck cannot speak for themselves, and ALRANZ is taking advantage of this; their platform is built on the knowledge that the people they are advocating to be killed cannot yell out "don't kill me, I'm alive!".

Are Tea Partiers Principled?

The former Govenor of New Mexico, and Honorary Chairman of the OUR America Initiative writes, warning of misplaced enthusiasm in supporting politicians who claim to stand with the Tea Party movement on issues such as small government and lower tax. Below is an excerpt from his article...

A lot has been said of “principle over party” by the tea party movement in the last year. They stuck to their guns so strongly as to support a third party candidate over the Republican candidate in New York’s special District 23 election, because they felt the Republican candidate didn’t align closely enough with the principles they held so dear.

Videos on YouTube abound of tea party protesters shouting down and booing Republican speakers who dared come to their events to speak after voting for 2008’s financial bailout package. Over and over again, tea party leaders stress that this is about principles, not partisan politics- they could care less who has what letter next to their name. They only want people who stand for the right principles: limited government, individual liberty, Constitutional rule of law.

But there’s an important aspect of “principle over party” that cannot be overlooked. If the tea party neglects this one important thing, it will be doomed to fail in its attempt to limit and reverse the relentless expansion of government into our lives. That one crucial factor in its success is for the tea party to remember policy over personality.

While someone may have a good personality, a personality that seems conservative, down-to-earth, and middle-American; while a politician on stage might say everything you agree with and believe deep down in your heart; while that person may strongly affirm all of your principles… he or she might not really believe in them.

Is it so hard to think that a politician might capitalize on the tea party movement by telling us what we want to hear?... (Continue Reading)

Here's a video introducing Our America...

Blog Update

I haven't blogged for ages... just about one month since my last post. I've got a project on the go which is taking up a lot of my time, but more on that later. Shortly I'll publish a post about an incident involving the pro-abortion lobby group, the Abortion Law Reform Association of New Zealand. Those working for ALRANZ read my blog... hello Alison McCulloch and Margaret Sparrow - I trust you're looking forward to the post I'll be publishing about your pro-baby killing organisation shortly. ALRANZ recently misrepresented me in a column they had published in the Gisborne Herald, to which Family Life International spokesperson Brendan Malone responded, "This is simply another classic example of the pro-abortion tactic of using misinformation to slur those who refuse to support the notion that killing unborn human beings is morally, socially and medically acceptable."

I also hope to (finally) publish a poem which I started writing back in December 2009, and have just about finished... we'll see.