Confronting the Abortion of Children with Down Syndrome

Eileen Haupt is speaking on "Confronting the Abortion of Children with Down Syndrome" at the 2010 National Right to Life Convention.

Chances of conceiving a DS baby increases with maternal age. All chromosomes are normal.  DS was named after John Langdon Down who in 1866 gave a name to the characteristics associated with DS people. 1930s, researches suspected DS might be caused by a chormosomal abnormality. 1959, the "extra chromosome" discovered by Dr. Jerome Lejeune, a French geneticist. This opened up a whole new field known as cytogenics. Modern treatment of DS: institutions, involuntary sterilisations, disabled were rounded up, experimented on and killed during Nazi Germany. In 60s and 70s in America, DS began to be raised at home. Routine use of amniocentesis for the purpose of aborting them. We have a schizophrenic treatment of people who are DS. Lejeune's discovery was meant for good, but now it is used to seek and destroy pre-born DS babies. He was ostrasised from the medical community for his pro-life views.

Mothers are put under incredible pressure to abort their preborn babies with DS.

Prenatal testing: Screening tests (show the "risk" of baby having DS) and Diagnostic tests (can tell you definitively if baby has DS).

Ramifications of "Improved" Testing: this will result in more mothers choosing abortion. Accurate and non-invasive tests; it's much easier now to discover DS much earlier in the pregnancy... "before they've even felt their baby kick".

"A simple blood test that could save the lives of hundreds of unborn babies each year." - a comment on the new DS testing. They're happy because with the old kind of testing there was a risk of the pre-born baby dying from amniocentesis - no consideration is given to the pre-born babies who are diagnosed as DS and subsequently killed by abortion.

Where do the DS Advocates stand? Sadly, the National Down Syndrome Society and National Down Syndrome Congress take a neutral stand on the abortiong of DS babies. They also partner with American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and others. However parents with DS children, shocked at the figure that approx. 90% of DS diagnosed babies are aborted, start blogs and are active in their communities. The International Down Syndrome (IDS for Life) and Keep Infants with Down Syndrome (KIDS) were established.

Methods used to abort DS babies. Because DS cannot be definitively diagnosed til 2nd Trimester, they are aborted in 2nd trimester, usually between 16 - 20wks.

In Italy a mother had a selective abortion to abort the twin that was diagnosed with DS. However the babies switched positions and the non DS baby was aborted - the mother then went back to have her DS baby aborted as well. A U.S. case, a doctor lost his license for accidently aborting the wrong twin baby - the non DS baby.

The missing factor in this prenatal testing is love. "The one thing that prenatal testing can't tell you, is how much joy your special child will bring" - Eileen Haupt

Why the heck are Down Syndrome babies being aborted? There is a waiting list to adopt children with DS.

The Future of Planned Parenthood: Building the Abortion Empire

Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D. is speaking on "The Future of Planned Parenthood: Building the Abortion Empire Through Mega-Clinics and Chemical Abortion".

How Planned Parenthood and the Family Planning Association Make More Money on Chemical Abortions
Mifepristone pills cost $90 each. Initially, abortion mills committing chemical abortions would give the woman three misoprostol pills and then give them one Misoprostol pill (prostaglandin @ $1 each) afterwards to expel the dead child. This made the cost approximately $270. However to raise their profit margin, Planned Parenthood gave women just one Mifepristone pill, and two Misoprostol pills afterwards which achieved essentially the same result - it would kill the child and cause it to be expelled from its mothers uterus - but making Planned Parenthood a higher profit margin.

Planned Parenthood says "It's not about abortion"
Cecile Richards has stated that 97% of PP's activities are focused on reducing pregnancies.
In 1990: 129,155 out of 1608,600 (8%)
In 2007: 305,310 out of 1206200 (25.3%)

Planned Parenthood has many profits connected to abortion - add-on expenses.

Abortion sales contributes over a third of Planned Parenthood's income.

Standard prices:
pregnancy test: $10 - $20
packet of pills: $15 - $25
abortion: $413

Break-down of PP's patients:
abortions: 305,310
prenatal patients: 10,914
infertility clients: 318
adoption referrals: 4,912

Planned Parenthood is very politically active...
There's two Planned Parenthoods: Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. Cecile Richards heads up both of these organisations. She has no medical background. In 2006 she said,

"Planned Parenthood has 860 health centers around the country in 50 states. We have more members, more employees and staff, than the 50 state Democratic parties combined. We have the potential to swing the vote in 2006, 2008 and 2010, and that’s a lot of power. So the question is what are we going to do with it? The answer is: We’re gonna use it. We’re gonna marry our current reality as the largest reproductive health-care provider in this country with our opportunity to be the largest kickass advocacy organization in this country.

We’re gonna channel our strength, our outreach, our power; work with our pro-choice allies to help progressive voices win in America. We’re revving up online; we’re putting volunteers on the phone and on the doors. We’re taking on the opponents of choice in the states and the districts where they live. Planned Parenthood has gotta become more political so that health care can become less politicized."

Questions & Comments from the Audience...
"Birth control pills are Planned Parenthood's bread and butter. Even on the days they don't do abortions, they're still selling the pills."

"How is it that Planned Parenthood that receives 330 million from the Govt. each year, then allowed to lobby?"... "Truth is, it's because they're Planned Parenthood." They're just playing the books carefully.

This was another darned good session. Very useful information for us Kiwis as the Family Planning Association is an affiliate of Planned Parenthood.

Gearing Up for the Mid-Terms

Karen Cross, political director for NRLC, David N. O'Steen Ph.D., executive director of NRLC and Daria St. Martin, assistant executive director of NRLC are speaking in a session on "Preparing for the Next Round - 2010", the midterm elections in the U.S.

4.5% voted for McCain and 0.5% voted for Obama on the issue of abortion in the 2008 election. 10% voted Republican on economy compared with 24% who voted Democrat for economy.

In 2006, 22% said Iraq was the most important consideration in voting, compared with 3% for abortion.

2008 Election polling:
Those who had pro-life beliefs: 53%
Those for whom abortion was the "most important" issue and they voted for candidates who oppose abortion: 4.5%

58% would like to repeal the Health Care Act as opposed to 35% who do not.

O'Steen says, If you see three children drowning, and they're in three separate directions and you can only save one, you jump in the water and swim as fast as you can to the closest one. This same principle should be applied to where we direct our efforts in fighting abortion. Do we wait until we can save all babies from abortion at one go, or do we save them as we go?

Planned Parenthood’s War Against Children

Angela Franks, Ph.D. is speaking on “Planned Parenthood’s War Against Children”.

Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger believed that children oppressed women - she called this "sex servitude" - women are oppressed by their fertility. She said, "The most far-reaching social development of modern times is the revolt of woman against sex-servitude." She believed that women have a eugenic duty: "Within her is wrapped up the future of the race - it is hers to make or mar."

Sanger had a naive belief in the promiscuous lifestyle - everyone will be more happy if they have more sex. This would result in a need to reduce population. New York City Planned Parenthood ran a fundraiser entitled "Summer, Sex and Spirits" at which free pole-dancing lessons were given out.

"For Planned Parenthood, pregnancy is the ultimate sexually transmitted disease

"Planned Parenthood thinks that by teaching young girls to use birth control pills, they will become 33-year old women who will reliably take the pills on a regular basis... We know that this is not a good job to be giving young girls - especially when their parents are not even aware this is going on."

The United States' Largest Abortion Chain: In 1991, Planned Parenthood had 99 clinics compared with 911 other clinics. By 2009, Planned Parenthood had 817 clinics, compared with 304 other clinics. This was largely due to PP's introduction of chemical abortions.

RU486 (Chemical) Abortion: Faking the Body Out

Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D. is speaking

The process of an RU486 abortion is:

• Anti-progestin or anti progesterone is taken
• Shuts down baby's life support system
• Baby shovels and dies
• Menstrual process initiated
• Prostaglandin (PG) forces baby out

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration protocol states that the woman must be no more than 49 days since her last menstrual period, as effectiveness drops at this point. However Planned Parenthood commits chemical abortions up to 63 days (9 weeks). PP's NZ affiliate, the Family Planning Association is currently seeking a license from the pro-abortion Abortion Supervisory Committee to commit these abortions. RU486 abortions are already being committed in a handful of abortion mills in New Zealand.

Still a baby, still an abortion:

• 3wks - 5wks: nervous system forming, heart beginning first beats
• 5wks - 7wks: baby's face, arms and legs are distinguishable
• 7wks - 9wks: child's ears, fingers, toes formed; nearly an inch tall

"Downsides" of RU486 abortions:

• bloodier and more painful than advertised - "you lose more blood from a RU486 abortion than from a surgical abortion". Chemical abortion wounds are larger than those of surgical abortions, and they stay open for longer.
• takes longer than a surgical abortion
• short window of time within which to kill the child

O'Bannon is reading through the specific details of the deaths of a large number of young women who underwent a RU486 abortion.

Mothers who have had RU486 abortions have reported seeing tiny fists, eyes, aborted babies lying in toilets or on the floor of the shower - this is because mothers are given the misopristol at the abortion mill, and then go home and wait for the drugs to kill their pre-born child. Once this has taken place, the prostaglandin pill is taken (this costs about $1), which brings about the expulsion.

RU486 was approved for use in the U.S. in September 2000. Guttmacher states that chemical abortions were at 6% of all abortions in 2000, 70,500 in 2001 and 161,100 in 2005. O'Bannon states that the numbers will be much higher now in 2010, however we are unsure as to a close estimate. Back in New Zealand, ALRANZ is bemoaning the lack of chemical abortions, and are strongly backing the FPA's bid to become a Chemical abortion provider.

Below is an account of an RU486 abortion written by an abortive mother on 29/4/2001:

I am 23 years old and I would say, very careless about protection. I am the mother of three children although I've been pregnant more times than that. I would be a hypocrite to deny that I've been pro-choice. I thought the "abortion pill" was a more humane way to terminate and so I used that method. I remember going over paper work that told me that because the pregnancy was very early, there wouldn't be a visible embryo and it would "seem" like a normal period. That information was then confirmed by the ultrasound technician as well as the counselor. The pregnancy was in the seventh week.
After receiving the drink of methotrexate, I left for home with a prescription for pain medication and a packet of misoprostol tablets. Five days later as instructed, I inserted the tablets and waited. A few hours later severe cramping began as well as a gush of "pregnancy tissue" . While cleaning myself up, I noticed something silvery attached to the tissue. I looked closer only to realize that I was staring at my aborted child. I could see the protrusion on it's chest where just six days ago, a heart had beat. The eyes were beginning to form already. No one told me that this might happen, in fact, I was guaranteed that it wouldn't . I'll never be the same again.

p.s. this is an actual photo, taken by me.

This was a great session on a disgusting and disturbing subject.

Pro-Life Conversion - On Love and Incrementalism

J. David Franks, Ph.D is a Catholic theologian who is speaking on "Pro-Life Conversion: Cultivating Serious and Intelligent Solidarity with the Most Powerless".

Part 1: Love and our Duty

Franks states that libertarianism cares only about "my choice" and puts it above everything else. This is patently incorrect, as libertarianism limits the choice of the individual with the freedom and choices of every other individual. He states, "Libertarianism is a pro-choice ideology," and then speaking about love, "We resent love because it means we can't remain in our libertarian cocoon." Libertarians for Life would disagree with this claim.

"The weaker the person, the greater their claim on us"

This is a very good point, and a brilliant principle to help us prioritise our campaigns for social justice. Perhaps his quote could be rephrased, "The weaker the person, and the greater the crime being committed against them, the greater their claim on us." Abortion fits this definition perfectly.

"Abortion, infanticide and euthanasia are intrinsically evil and are linked by the same objective - the killing of an innocent person. Whereas the death penalty, war and climate change are issues which it is acceptable to disagree on."


"We can't outlaw every crime. We don't outlaw a crime if it would create greater social disorder... but we can't apply this to abortion."

This is a confusing and unprincipled approach to the reasoning for legislation on abortion. Abortion should be outlawed because it takes away the life of an innocent and helpless human-being - let alone the fact that this takes place without their consent.

Franks stated that if given the choice of voting for one of two pro-abortion candidates, an individual should vote for the one which will be either best for the pro-life side, or most detrimental for the pro-abortion side. In choosing between a pro-life and a pro-abortion candidate, he stated that it is only very rarely that it would be acceptable to vote for the pro-abortion candidate - for instance if such a vote would give a more pro-life party the majority in parliament.

Franks holds that refraining to vote is not an acceptable option, stating that citizens have a duty to vote for the best of the options presented to them. He backs this up with the idea that man is a social creature, and that it is therefore his responsibility to participate in society. I disagree, because if society is unappealing to an individual, they should not be under any obligation to participate in it - let alone express their support for something they do not believe in.

Part 2: Pro-Life Incrementalism

Pro-life purists refuse to support any law or politician that seeks to reduce the number of abortions taking place, and will only support a policy that will ban 100% of abortions. Pro-life incrimentalists on the other hand are prepared to support a great number of small advances in the cause of defending the pre-born. Pro-life incrementalists are achieving results:

• Parental involvement laws correlated with a 16% decline in the minor abortion rate.
• Partial-birth abortion ban
• Legislating against abortions in which foetuses feel pain. Pro-abortion advocates may think that we want for foetueses to be anesthetised before they are aborted... In Arkansas, Kansas, a foetal pain awareness act was passed requiring that women seeking an abortion on a foetus at 20 weeks and over should be asked if they wished for their child to be injected with pain killers. In the year following the passing of this act, 600 women were offered the pain relief for the murder of their pre-born children. Upon hearing of this option, 300 of the women decided not to go ahead with their abortion.

We're putting abortion "in the course of ultimate extinction". However the American Life League for instance, claims that incrementalist groups such as National Right to Life or Prolife NZ are for regulating child-killing because we don't really want it to stop. Franks stated that ALL and the pro-life purists have rebranded themselves as the Personhood Movement, but has retained much of its revolutionary fervour - something by which young people are easily deceived.

To get the votes we need to protect the unborn will require a seismic shift in public sentiment. This can be achieved through ongoing incrementalist legislation which keeps the debate alive and grants increasing rights to pre-born people.

"I want to use as many bridges as I can"

National Right to Life Convention 2010

I am at the 2010 National Right to Life Convention from today through to Saturday. I will be live blogging and live tweeting from within the sessions. Looking forward to hearing Steven Ertelt of LifeNews.com, Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life, and House Republican Leader, John Boehner. Good also to catch up with Kelsey Hazard of Secular Prolife.

Time to Ban Sex-Selective Abortion

Steven Mosher is speaking in the general session this morning on sex-selective abortion.

India: In India as many as half a million unborn baby girls are aborted each year because of their gender. This works out as a sex ratio at birth to 130 boys to 100 girls - the normal ratio is 106 boys to 100 girls - by adulthood, this will have usually dropped down to 100:100. In some areas, 7/10 pre-born girls are killed before birth.

China: In China, there are 117 boys born for every 100 girls. "As soon as the one-child policy began, it began to have a devastating effect on little girls - reports started to come in of little girls dying mysteriously." "midwives reported that they were receiving instructions that girls born where a first child had already been born, the girl was to be killed." Sex-selective abortion goes on all throughout Asia. A recent UNFPA report says that at last 60 million girls are "missing" because of sex-selective abortion, infanticide and neglect. In China, only-sons are known as "little emperors".

The Chinese Communist Party claims that, "Sex-selective abortion is an offshoot of "feudal ideas" that modernization will soon extinguish" However the reality is that in China, sons provide support for their parents in their old age. The ultrasound technology is fueling the historical preference for sons.

Mosher shows the audience photos of a young Chinese woman taken by force and given an injection into her uterus, an abortifacient drug - once her dead child was expelled, it was returned to her in a garbage bag - she was given the job of cremating it as she had conceived it illegally.

The practice of aborting baby girls is a testimony to the low value placed on female life. Each sex selective abortion degrades women. While a narrow view of economics would say that fewer women means that women are more highly valued, in fact, sex-trafficking is on the rise in Asia. Prostitution and homosexuality are on the rise in China also. Single men are contributing to a rise in gang activity and violent crime.

Back to the United States: In the 1990s, advertisements for sex-selective abortions were found in the New York Times. "It is legal to abort a child in the United States for any and all reasons." 86% of Americans believe that an abortion should not be done for reasons of sex-selection.

A simple bill is required to "ban abortions for the purpose of sex-selection", however this is being halted by people such as Nancy Pelosi.

"The pro-abortion lobby is attempting to defend the indefensible."

Sex-selective abortions; "One of the bitterest icons of our post-feminist age."

Why Men Shouldn't Write Advice Columns

3 Million "Moses" Babies Every Year in China

"Pharaoh, king of Egypt commanded all his people, saying, “Every son who is born you shall cast into the river, and every daughter you shall save alive.” ...but when Moses' mother saw that he was a beautiful child, she hid him three months. But when she could no longer hide him, she took an ark of bulrushes for him, daubed it with asphalt and pitch, put the child in it, and laid it in the reeds by the river’s bank..." - Exodus 1:22 - 2:4

Moses was born in Egypt circa 1520 BC at a time when infanticide for male infants was mandatory, and where agents of the State would enter homes to ensure that the bloody task had been carried out. Today in China, the State is enforcing a very similar law, known as the one-child-policy, with the innocuous official title of the Family Planning Policy. The Chinese government themselves have admitted that "some 24 million Chinese men of marrying age will be unable to find a bride by the end of this decade because of the country's one-child policy". However encouraging news just in on Chinese parents who are bravely breaking the law...

As many as three million Chinese babies are hidden by their parents every year in order to get around the country's one-child policy, a researcher has discovered. Since 1978, China's government has limited each couple to one child, carrying out forced abortions and sterilizations, and monitoring women's intra uterine devices to control the population. For parents violating the policy, the penalties can be harsh. Large fines are levied, houses are often demolished and offenders are sometimes jailed. In millions of cases, families are prepared to take the risk, according to research by Liang Zhongtang, a demographer and former member of the expert committee of China's National Population and Family Planning Commission... (continue reading)

Interesting how history insists on repeating itself eh...

Planned Parenthood and ACLU Gang Up on Pro-Lifers in Nevada

When did "women's choice" become repression of the First Amendment protected freedom of speech in the United States?

"A ballot initiative by human rights group Personhood Nevada has been thwarted by Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and local Judge James Russell. On Friday, January 8, Judge Russell ruled that the fourteen word amendment did not encompass a single subject, although it is comprised of merely a handful of words and one of the most succinct ever to be filed in that State.

The proposed amendment reads, “In the great state of Nevada, the term ‘person’ applies to every human being.” The Judge’s decision declares that the people of Nevada are not entitled to vote on this matter, and that the State’s very own policies and procedures to amend the Constitution through ballot initiatives should not be applied to this specific civil rights amendment.

Judge Russell was quoted by the Associated Press as saying, "The issue to me is, are we adequately informing voters on what they're voting on. There's no way for the voter to understand the effects of the initiative."

Personhood USA legal analyst Gualberto Garcia-Jones was disturbed by the Judge’s comments. "Judge Russell is being disingenuous," he remarked. “There is a very simple way for the voter to understand the effect of the initiative, namely, read the 200 word description that immediately follows the 14 word ballot text. That 200 word description includes: ‘This amendment codifies the inalienable right to life for everyone, young or old, healthy or ill, conscious or unconscious, born or unborn.’ Judge Russell is abusing his power and jumping the gun by prejudging the effect of the law."

The good news though, is that Planned Parenthood and their Labour union ally, the American Civl Liberties Union will fail, because in 2008...

"Planned Parenthood sued to prevent the Colorado ballot initiative from moving forward, claiming that it was not a single subject issue, and lost the lawsuit. The initiative, although longer than the Nevada initiative, was found to be a single subject and allowed to proceed."

Olaf Vancura, President of Personhood Nevada commented, "We are determined that no matter how long it takes, we will not be silenced. The personhood petition will be approved, and we will protect all human life in the state of Nevada.”

And back in New Zealand...
I am now getting used to the underhanded tactics of pro-abortion advocates. Instead of debating the issue of abortion, they so often either attack pro-lifers (with the ad hominem fallacy), or attack pro-lifer's freedom to speak. An example of the latter is currently unfolding on the campus at the University of Auckland, where the feminists and pro-abortion advocates on campus are joining forces to shut down the pro-life group that has recently been founded there. A Facebook group entitled
Anti-choice groups are NOT welcome at University of Auckland has been set up. The group includes members such as ALRANZ spokesperson Alison McCulloch and AUSA Women's Rights Officer, Soraiya Daud. This group has made the following defamatory and untrue statement about Prolife Auckland:

"They are a hate group who accuse people who have obtained abortions or have helped people obtain abortions as murderers. University should be a safe place. It will not be if they affiliate."

Pro-life leader Brendan Malone has covered this at his blog here and here. While Prolife Auckland has now successfully affiliated with the Students' Association, the pro-abortion activists on and off campus continue to fight - not their message, but their right to exist on Campus.

Small-Minded Glenn Beck Disses Soccer

I like a lot of what Glenn Beck has to say about the left in the U.S., and the economy... but he should keep his mouth shut about sports because he doesn't know what he's talking about. Listen to his arrogance below... if you can bear it.

Fisking ALRANZ

Fisking: A point-by-point refutation of a blog entry or (especially) news story.

On 3 May 2010, the Abortion Law Reform Association of New Zealand (ALRANZ) published their monthly newsletter, with their leading article being entitled "ALRANZ wins website sabotage case". The article was presumably written as a collaboration by former baby-killer and president of the organisation, Margaret Sparrow with Communication Officer, Alison McCulloch. It was designed to bring the dwindling membership of the pro-abortion lobby group up to date with the news about the website that I set up recently, exposing the group. I have already discussed the issue here - read the article if you haven't already, for background to the incident. Below I will go through the article featured in ALRANZ's May Newsletter, point by point.

On 5 November 2009 Andy Moore, National Director of ProLife NZ, a youth oriented anti-abortion group also involved in the stopfamilyplanning consortium, gained rights to the domain name alranz.org.nz. and set up a website there using the US based Web hosting company GoDaddy. The terms of service which clients agree to when setting up a website include: no activities designed to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander of harass third parties; no activities that are obscene or otherwise objectionable; no activities designed to impersonate the identity of a third party. But as it turns out this means absolutely nothing unless you are a powerful corporation with a team of lawyers. Even when there is obvious violation and a complaint is laid GoDaddy accepts no responsibility and refers the complainant to local enforcement agencies.

I understand that these requirements are standard of web-hosting companies, and are designed to protect them from legal action against themselves. I hadn't read these terms of service, but it is fairly clear that I am breaking them. GoDaddy doesn't care what activities are carried out on their servers so long as they are not breaking any laws; the terms of service are laid out to provide them with immunity from prosecution.

When purchasing the domain name Andy was less than honest. He did not use his own name but hid behind the appellation “mybook.” He did not use his own address but hid behind PO Box 8979 Christchurch which turns out to be the address for the Grace Baptist Church of Christchurch of which he is a member. A letter of complaint to the church elders was not even acknowledged.

When I set up my domain hosting account with Discount Domains, I used the name of a company that I was looking at starting named MyBook. It is acceptable practice to list a domain under its company's name. Long before I purchased the domain name alranz.org.nz, I purchased another domain name which was for a holiday club which my Church was running. Therefore I used the Church's PO Box number, not wanting to put my own home address online for anyone in the World to ascertain. It was an oversight on my part to register the controversial alranz.org.nz in the same account to which the holiday program's URL was registered.

ALRANZ found out about the rogue website in February when a supporter wishing to look up something on our website typed in by mistake alranz.org.nz instead of alranz.org. The viewer was appalled when her screen filled with an offensive picture of what appeared to be a bloodied late-term dead fetus. This is an image that Andy had previously used on his blog starstuddedsuperstep in an article on “What is abortion?” with the caption “abortion at 24 weeks.” He used the same image on his Facebook page boasting about how it may have deterred a young woman from having an abortion. Unlike GoDaddy, Facebook took exception to the image and disabled his account citing an offence against section 3.7 which states: you will not post content that is hateful, threatening, pornographic or that contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence.

I am surprised at ALRANZ's description of the photo of the dead child. (view an archived version of the website here) It is a photo of a 24wk old American baby girl who has been brutally murdered in an abortion. The photo is declared to be offensive and appalling. On 8 February, Sparrow stated that the photo was "pornographic". In 2007, the Abortion Supervisory Committee reported that 105 babies aged 20wks and over were killed by abortion. That is foetuses of a similar age and viability to the foetus pictured in the photo. 19wks is the age of the most premature foetus which has been born and survived. Furthermore, ALRANZ supports total decriminalisation of abortion - no matter what the age of the pre-born child. Therefore I am confounded at their apparent disgust at the photo. Surely it's nothing more than a photo of a terminated pregnancy, or the products of conception?

The account of the Facebook incident is correct, and you can read about that here.

Apart from the overwhelming image the page was set out as if it was the real website with the three female symbols with the words KEEP ABORTION SAFE and the text “Welcome to ALRANZ (Abortion Law Reform Association of New Zealand). We are a pro-choice organisation founded in February 1971 to support reforms which allow a woman to choose whether or not to continue an unplanned pregnancy or to seek an abortion.” Then right at the bottom was the message to CLICK HERE to visit the real ALRANZ website. In February he added text “We support late-term abortions for disabled babies” which clearly misrepresents our standpoint.

A cursory glance at the website will be enough to see that it is clearly not operated by ALRANZ, but has instead been set up by someone who opposes their objectives. I designed the website, drawing on elements from the real ALRANZ site, to create a stronger link - and sarcastically placed the three images, "keep abortion safe" in the bottom-right of the page. I think the point made is pretty clear; how can abortion ever be safe? The CLICK HERE text at the bottom of the page was clearly visible and designed to allow visitors to click through to the real ALRANZ website.

Once again ALRANZ lies about me, stating that I have misrepresented their standpoint on late-term abortions for disabled babies. The text from their February 2007 newsletter reads:

"ALRANZ has for many years protested at the anomaly of our legislation that the grounds for abortions after 20 weeks do not include fetal abnormality. This significant anomaly could be easily rectified by Parliament but politicians seem unaware of the distress caused to parents. It is difficult enough deciding whether or not to abort without worrying whether or not it is a crime."

From this and other documents it is clear that ALRANZ does in fact support decriminalising abortion in the case of foetal anomaly. Anomaly is a nice cute word for disability, and is just another example of the pro-child killing lobby distorting language to try and make their case seem a little more reasonable.

When ALRANZ requested that the site be closed down Andy replied “As an active member of the pro-life movement in New Zealand, I currently have no intention of taking the website down.” GoDaddy and the Grace Baptist Church both failed to intervene. Lawyers we consulted advised making a complaint to the Domain Name Commission (DNC) which handles complaints relating to websites with the suffix .nz via a dispute resolution service.

You can read the entire complaint here. While my original website was arguably unlawful, subsequent to ALRANZ's complaint, I altered the content of the website so that it was no longer a spoof site, but instead an expose site. Among these alterations, I changed the name of the site from "Abortion Law Reform Association of New Zealand" to "Exposing the Abortion Law Reform Association of New Zealand".

On 24 February ALRANZ lodged a formal complaint with the DNC (1) that we had rights to the acronym ALRANZ and (2) that the offending website was an unfair registration. The remedy that we sought was to have the domain name transferred to ALRANZ. To establish the first claim we provided a compendium of articles, pamphlets, and other printed matter demonstrating the widespread acceptance and use of the acronym ALRANZ. Establishing the second claim was more complex. While free speech and vigorous advocacy must be allowed we had to demonstrate that this was not only part of a wider campaign against ALRANZ, but was designed to mislead and deceive internet users and would have been particularly confusing to any young woman seeking information about abortion.

It is categorically untrue that my intention for the website was for it to mislead and deceive internet users. My sole purpose in setting up the website was to expose the organisation for what it clearly is: a proponent of legalised child killing.

Andy received a copy of our complaint and the 42 supporting documents. Ordinarily the respondent will contest the claim and must reply within 15 working days. Then the matter is referred for mediation provided free by the DNC. Andy failed to respond so this course of action was not possible. The next option was for ALRANZ to have the complaint sent to an independent expert at a cost of $1800 + GST. ALRANZ chose to do this and on 29 March an expert lawyer was appointed by the DNC.

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. As far as I'm concerned, that's 2 grand less for them to be able to spend to promote killing kids.

On 19 April ALRANZ received the 13 page expert opinion with the good news that the complaint was resolved in our favour and that the website would be transferred to ALRANZ on 3 May unless Andy chose to appeal which was unlikely at a cost of $6,000. Even though strictly speaking we do not have a legal right to the acronym ALRANZ (in the sense of a business having a trademark) we had cited an Animal Welfare case similar to ours where a lobby organisation had been deemed to have the right to use a name. Our claim that this was an unfair registration was accepted and Andy’s failure to respond did not help his case. His only communication with the DNC was an email: “Dear John, Have a great week. Andy.”

It is incorrect that this was my only communication with the DNC. In fact I wrote, "Thanks for your email John - have a great week. Regards, Andy".

ALRANZ has purchased six other common suffixes to make it more difficult for imposters to sabotage our website. It is a price we are prepared to pay to discourage malicious or unethical behaviour.

This cost them at least $136.35. 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 domain names 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'm now involved with a new project,

At the Exposing ALRANZ website, we're shining the spotlight on the activities and agenda of this organisation and the entire pro-abortion lobby in New Zealand, as well as profiling the people within it. ALRANZ is a pro-abortion extremist group which promotes a strongly anti-life vision for New Zealand. The blood of 400,000 babies killed by abortion before they were born, is crying out and it's time for all those in New Zealand who value life to stand up against ALRANZ and the other pro-abortion groups in New Zealand which are a very vocal minority, pushing for an awful pro-death culture in New Zealand, "our free land"...

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.

I Lol'd

An elderly British gentleman of 83 arrived in Paris by plane.
At the French customs desk, the man took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry-on bag. 
You have been to France before, Monsieur?' the customs officer asked, sarcastically. 
The elderly gentleman admitted he had been to France previously. 'Then you should know enough to have your passport ready.' The elderly gentleman said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it.' 
'Impossible' said the customs officer, 'The British always have to show their passports on arrival in France!' 
The Man gave the Frenchman a long hard look. 
Then he quietly explained;
'Well, when I came ashore on the Beach on D-Day in 1944, I couldn't find any flippin' Frenchmen to show it to!!!

Four Years

Star Studded Super Step has been online for four years. My first post on 16 March, 2006 was on a blog named "TBC" which stood for "To Be Confirmed". A month or two later I decided on a title, choosing the name of Poor Old Lu's 1995 album, Star Studded Super Step. It had been a toss up between that and a couple of their other songs, A Snowfallen Desert and For the Love of My Country. I guess I chose the name for its originality - the line is only used once, in the song Sometimes Cry:

...sometimes we need to hide, sometimes cry
run away, far away - to Yahweh, He's my hideaway
star-studded-super-step, yeah, you've turned around again...

And I'm not really sure what it means, but it sounds good. Over the years I've written about the mysterious Mr. Raxworthy and an unfinished, four-part story entitled Coffee - Lydie and Jono also helped with this. I've explored some slightly bizarre, analogous, exaggerated autobiographical raves which I still look back on with bemusement - John's stories were my inspiration to try this style. I've done a series of posts on Timeless Cinematic Moments, which have been fun. I've written three (no, there's no other way to say it), three romantic poems, and another nice one too, entitled "Most Tranquil". I'm still working on the third you know poem, it's not quite right yet.

There's a very serious side to my blog too. I have been writing a lot recently about abortion and the arguments for and against it. I've written in the past in particular about social engineering particularly as it relates to public education. I'm also increasingly focusing on the state of the fight for freedom; at the front of the line, in the United States - with the vast majority of my readers being from that fair country. Philosophical discourse has been, and will continue to be a feature of the blog. I've discussed some theological concepts and explained the Gospel of Jesus Christ in my own words a couple of times too. I'm not going to shut up about what I believe: There's nothing you can do to shut me up when I'm speaking the truth.

Right, so what's with the picture of the guy with the t-shirt on his head? It's a scene from the movie Gerry, directed by Gus van Sant, about two friends - both named Gerry, starring Matt Damon and Casey Affleck. And cheers to Siminy for the sweet-as background photo, I think it's here to stay. I'm hoping to pick up the slack and post more frequently on issues that you and I care about.

To the days.