Saturday, 9 July 2011

Watch this very professional video about black US abortions

Our colleagues at Life Issues Institute, through their outreach Protecting Black Life, have launched a very professional new video highlighting how abortion is decimating the black community in the United States. Do watch below, on the Protecting Black Life website or on YouTube. UK readers should note that the abortion rate among UK blacks is higher than for the rest of the community. We must defend the equal right to life and intrinsic dignity of all human beings against the racism which abortion has always facilitated.



Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Friday, 8 July 2011

This afternoon's must-read pro-life news-stories, Friday 8 July

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi
Abortion
Embryology
Population
Sexual ethics
General
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Thursday, 7 July 2011

Parents furious as schools minister gives green light to explicit sex ed in science lessons

Parents of primary-school children from across the country are furious that Nick Gibb, the schools minister, has told Parliament that schools can teach children, including in primary school, about sex in science lessons (see  below).

Science is a national curriculum subject and therefore parents are not allowed to withdraw their children from science lessons. By contrast, when sex education lessons are given in personal, health, social and economic (PHSE), parents have a legal right to withdraw their children if such lessons are unacceptable to them. PHSE is not part currently of the national curriculum.

Ruth Pond, a mother of two from Worksop, Notts., has been campaigning locally to expose the sexually-explicit classroom teaching programme “Living and Growing”. The most widely-used primary-school sex education resource, it contains graphic material, aimed at children aged seven, which illustrates exactly how to perform sexual intercourse.

Mrs Pond told the media earlier today:
“I am very concerned that sex education can now be taught in science lessons.  Does this mean that the law regarding the national curriculum will be changed to allow parents to withdraw their children from sex education that is too graphic? Otherwise it makes it impossible for parents to protect their children."
Tower Hamlets local authority has already issued a statement saying that parents can withdraw their children from national curriculum science, although there’s no evidence that the Department for Education has approved this. Local parents are still not happy.

Eneque Charles, a mother of three children at Clara Grant primary school in Tower Hamlets, said:
“I have been battling with my children’s school for months because of the 'Living and Growing' DVD. My son was shown a cartoon of a couple having sexual intercourse in his science lesson and I was powerless to shield him from this. The school has now said it will change the materials it is using. But I’m still not confident that I will be able to spare my daughter from seeing explicit sex scenes, despite what Tower Hamlets local authority has said.” 
Mrs Charles and Antonia Tully of SPUC's Safe at School campaign were interviewed yesterday regarding 'Living and Growing' on BBC London radio . Antonia was also interviewed on BBC London TV .

House of Commons written answers, 6 July 2011

Health education: sex

Mr Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will take steps to ensure that maintained schools are prevented from teaching aspects of sex and relationships education in science lessons that are not covered by the national curriculum for science as part of his Department's review of personal, social, health and economic education. [63908]

Mr Gibb [holding answer 5 July 2011]:We trust teachers to use their professional judgement when following the national curriculum programmes of study for science. We do not therefore consider it necessary to impose preventative measures on maintained schools to stop them teaching sex and relationship education (SRE) within national curriculum science lessons. SRE is covered in personal, social, health and economic (PSHE) education which will be subject to an internal review.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

This morning's must-read pro-life news-stories, Thursday 7 July

HIRH Otto von Habsburg RIP
Abortion
Embryology
Euthanasia
Population
Sexual ethics
General
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Wednesday, 6 July 2011

SPUC's new education manager reviews Channel 4's "The Joy of Teen Sex"

Anthony McCarthy, SPUC's new Education and Publications Manager, has kindly sent me his review of Channel Four's programme "The Joy of Teen Sex". An abridged version of Anthony's review is below, but do read his review in full on the SPUC website.
Review of Channel Four's "The Joy of Teen Sex" by Anthony McCarthy

The title of this series of programmes put out by Channel 4 is instructive. It refers back to Alex Comfort’s multi-million selling book of 1972, "The Joy of Sex: A Gourmet Guide to Lovemaking". The series under discussion follows a number of other ‘sex education’ vehicles put out by Channel 4. More importantly, Channel 4 also produces the widely-used "Living and Growing" schools programme which is shown to primary school children across England (Antonia Tully of SPUC's Safe at School campaign can provide more information about this). This fact should be borne in mind in reading what follows.

Almost the very first thing the programme tells us (episode 1) is that the average teenager has had three sexual partners by the time they reach 16. That message is repeated in the intro of each subsequent programme in the series, together with a blasé clip of a teenager telling viewers he has slept with between 110-120 girls. A letter signed by a number of health professionals and sex educators – many of whom favour early and explicit sex education - draws attention to the inaccuracy of the former claim and cites research indicating that most teens have not had any intercourse before 16. The same professionals also found that the programme “frequently used unreliable statistics to back up points made.” Why has this programme broadcast highly dubious information without citing any research, let alone reputable, research to back it up?

One obvious answer to this question is that misinformation serves ideological purposes: to undermine many people’s belief in traditional sexual morality. Why? Well, the implicit argument is that actual sexual behaviour bears little relation to sexual restrictions and that, therefore, traditional restrictions are unreasonable.

This combination of fraudulent statistics and the idea that if something is prevalent in a society it must therefore be morally right in some sense (right and wrong are somehow ‘empirically determined’ by ‘scientists’) is present throughout "The Joy of Teen Sex". Thus we are told that 80% of people have had sex before their 18th birthday and a boy is shown plaintively asking why it’s never happened to him – a ‘problem’ that therapists, whose qualifications are not mentioned, proceed to ‘treat’. Similar ‘advice’ to teenagers includes jocular talk about doing the ‘fresher’ thing ‘full-on’ (i.e. engaging in promiscuous sex). There are many many more examples that might be given that would further reveal the moral and intellectual standards of the programme.

In short, this programme was unapologetic propaganda for sexual liberation and aimed at a particularly vulnerable group, many of whom would be below the legal age of consent. The letter below indicates that even fervent promoters of sexual liberation are embarrassed by it, not least because it appears to ignore even the health issues that at least some sex educators feel the need to tell teenagers about.

What both groups share is [a lack of] any sensitivity to the nature of sex and the special role sexual ethics needs to play in the life of the young if they are to have fulfilling and virtuous lives. That sex is something that can ‘take life over’ is well-attested to in literature through the ages and its ability to control and to pervade our life means that it must be treated delicately and with proper respect for its dignity. To treat it as something akin to sport is to distort a central element of our lives – the one which allows for intimate conjugal union in self-giving love. "The Joy of Teen Sex" shows no interest in such notions, implicitly mocking them. In doing so Channel 4 betrays young people, again.
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

This morning's must-read pro-life news-stories, Wednesday 6 July

Abby Ryan with son Riley
Abortion
Embryology
Sexual ethics
General
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Tuesday, 5 July 2011

SPUC's disability rights division speaks out about latest abortion statistics

Janet Thomas of No Less Human, a group within SPUC which represents disabled people, has kindly sent me her reaction to yesterday's publication by the Department of Health of detailed statistics of abortions performed on the ground of disability:
"No Less Human (SPUC’s disability rights division) sometimes hears from mothers who, after a diagnosis of disability for their unborn children, are put under great psychological pressure to have an abortion. These mothers are not treated with compassion by the medical profession, because they have not made the ‘politically correct’ choice; they suffer greatly for the remainder of their pregnancies. It is not surprising if many women succumb to the pressure to have an abortion. One mother, who spoke to our coordinator Alison Davis, who has spina bifida, told her: 'They told me that my baby has spina bifida, but no-one will tell me what spina bifida is!' Real knowledge of disability and contact with disabled people is not part of the decision-making process once a pregnant woman is given the news of her baby’s disability. In fact, a very black view of the child’s future is usually painted. One of our members was told that her baby would have a head like a banana and would not survive birth. He has now grown up, moved into his own flat and is training for a job."
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

This morning's must-read pro-life news-stories, Tuesday 5 July

Abortion
Embryology
Euthanasia
Sexual ethics
General
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Monday, 4 July 2011

New abortion figures reveal shocking discrimination against disabled people

Newly-released figures of abortions of disabled babies reveal a shocking level of discrimination against disabled people. The Department of Health, following a legal application by the Pro-Life Alliance, revealed the precise numbers, gestational ages and types of disability of babies aborted between 2002 and 2010. The figures, among other things, revealed that 482 babies reportedly with Down's Syndrome were aborted in 2010 alone. Also released today were figures regarding abortions on teenagers under the age of consent (16), showing that in 2010 alone there were 3,718 abortions among 12- to 15-year-olds.

Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager, told the media earlier today:
"Between 2001 and 2010, the number of abortions on the ground of disability rose by one-third, 10 times that of abortions generally. It is clear that legal abortion is a system which discriminates, fatally, against the disabled.

Ann Furedi, the leader of the UK pro-abortion lobby, has today praised medics who abort disabled people, and described such abortions as couples 'los[ing]' a pregnancy http://bit.ly/jA3FnX . It is grossly misleading of Ms Furedi to imply that aborted babies are merely 'lost', as one might describe a miscarriage. Abortion is the intentional killing of a unborn child. It is medically unnecessary and ethically unacceptable. SPUC recognizes the profound challenge to couples who receive a diagnosis of disability in their unborn child, but Ann Furedi's comment is extremist.

The figures on teenage abortions reveal the failure of the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy inherited from the Labour government. The government must cut its ties and deny funding to those groups which share responsibility for that failure, most notably Brook and the Family Planning Association."
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Biggest-ever All-Ireland Rally for Life holds Irish government to account over abortion law

Pat Buckley, SPUC's man in Ireland, has blogged about the great success of Saturday's All-Ireland Rally for Life in Dublin (see YouTube video below). Official police figures numbered the rally at 8,000 participants, the largest number yet since the rally began 5 years ago. A pro-abortion counter-demonstration only attract a desultory 200 to 300 people. As is so often case regarding other pro-life marches in America and elsewhere, the media both grossly underestimated the pro-life numbers and downplayed the event's significance.

The rally's theme was "Enda, keep your pro-life promise", referring to prime minister Enda Kenny's pre-election promise not to legislate for abortion. Dana Rosemary Scallon, the veteran pro-life politician and friend of SPUC, was one of the keynote speakers, with shouts of "Dana for president" coming from the crowd.

Another of SPUC's Irish friends has alerted me to a radio interview last week (RTE Radio 1, 28 June) with Dr Michael Turner, professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at University College Dublin. The interviewer asked: "So you would say that Ireland is one of the safest places on the planet to have a baby?" Dr Turner replied: "It is, I’m pleased to report", describing it as "a tribute to the excellent care" provided in Irish hospitals. This is proof-positive that abortion is totally unnecessary for good maternal healthcare.



Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Sunday, 3 July 2011

Abortion ads plans show devious and sleazy agenda

From "Mad Men"
Proposals to allow explicit abortion adverts expose the devious and sleazy agenda of the advertising industry.

SPUC was responding to a report in The Telegraph that the Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP) proposes to allow commercial abortion providers to advertise on TV and radio.

Paul Tully, SPUC's general secretary, told the media this morning:
“These new proposals to allow abortion commercials will cause many people bewilderment. Less than two years ago, the code of practice was reviewed, and a wide public consultation was held. A huge majority of people objected to changing the code to allow abortion adverts. So the code was not changed.

“Then last year, with the revised code in force, the first TV advert for abortion was allowed anyway. The advert cleverly avoided mention of abortion. It was all done by implication. It depicted a young woman worried about her period being late. The advert asked: "Who can help her?" and the answer was a so-called pregnancy advice ‘charity’ that runs a lucrative chain of abortion clinics.

“People complained that advertising abortion in this way was illegal, indecent, dishonest and untruthful, but the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) approved the adverts anyway. The ASA has a long pro-abortion track record.

“The advertising industry is displaying a bias to support the devious and sleazy agenda of abortion providers, who have ideological and commercial interests in promoting abortion.

“There is a simple answer to this situation. Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, has specific powers under the Communications Act to tell Ofcom, the official regulator, to ban these adverts. He should do so".
Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy