Our Conference OCT 16th - Y-LIFE and Holy Apostles Life League

Email ylifeprovita@gmail.com for more details ...

Happy, Glorious, Blessed Easter, Everyone!

We have the next installment to Tim's article on the injustice and wrongness of Roe versus Wade, which we will post this week, but we want to wish everyone a most glorious Eastertide!  (Is it us, or did Lent seem kind of long this year ...)  Oh well, Happy Easter and don't forget, Sunday is Divine Mercy Sunday.  If anyone from St. Therese parish in Granby is reading this, don't forget to return your baby bottles from the baby bottle fundraiser for St. Gerard's Center this weekend.

The Annunciation - Major Feast Day, Especially for the Newly-Conceived

Today is the Feast of the Annunciation of the Lord, and we have posted this beautiful painting by the artist John Collier.  This day is the Feast Day for all pregnant mothers, newly conceived babies AND babies in the womb at any stage of development.  Remember, after the Annunciation, Mary went to see her older cousin, Elizabeth, who was about six months pregnant, and St. John the Baptist "leapt" in Elizabeth's womb at the arrival of Mary, carrying the Savior of the World in-utero as the tiniest of pre-born babies.

Pray especially hard this day for abortion-minded women and their babies, who are at terrible risk  And celebrate, too, because this is also the Feast of the Incarnation, when the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us ... as a child in the womb.

PRO-LIFE YOUTH CONFERENCE THIS WEEKEND!!!

Some of us are going to this:

Youth 4 Life Conference

March 27, 2010

St. Michael Center, Baltic, CT

4-8 p.m.

The Academy of the Holy Family’s Teens of Pro-Life Club (TOP-Life Club) and the Connecticut Right to Life Corporation are sponsoring the new and improved 2nd annual Youth 4 Life pro-life conference on Saturday, March 27, 2010, from 4-8 pm at the Academy of the Holy Family's St. Michael Center on School Hill Road in Baltic. In a new format, there will be live testimonies, breakout sessions, live band, film presentation, Mass and confession, music and pizza & …!

Meal is included. Requested donation is $10. Register by mailed form or by calling 860-822-8241.  Questions? Ask for Sr. Marie-André or e-mail:

prolifespanish@ahfbaltic.org

Bring your friends and come enjoy one of the biggest pro-life youth events in Eastern Connecticut!

Picketing and Breakfast Meeting

This morning we picketed in front of Hartford Gyn from 7 a.m. until 8:20 or so.  It's always really sad, especially when the mother does not want to go while her boyfriend or mother or aunt or gym teacher or whatever has her by the elbow.  Today we had what appeared the opposite ... the boyfriend wanted to stay and talk with the sidewalk counselor.  We prayed (because that's the best way to witness while the sidewalk counselor does his or her thing.)


After, we went to Ashley's for breakfast and had a meeting, because a lot of members showed up to picket today.  We'll be posting about upcoming events and projects when we get the notes sorted out ... more on the tag sale, the Conference and a possible celebration for St. Gerard's to celebrate the arrival of the ultrasound! And bake sales.  Actually, the only baked stuff we have ever sold has been at tag sales and bazaars.  The humble bake sale can make a lot of money for the effort.



It's really gorgeous here in Connecticut today ... really sad to think that some of those mothers will remember an early spring day as the day their baby died. Or maybe they'll be like some of the speakers we've had ... not really remembering at all, but sort of having this overwhelming sadness that no one ever talks about. And maybe some of them won't have an abortion today.  Please God.

You Can Now Follow Us on Twitter AND Conference is October 16th!

We stuck a Twitter button on the blog, so while we're waiting for Tim to continue his Roe v. Wade series, we want to let you know the Conference is a go Saturday, October 16th at Holy Apostles in Cromwell, CT and we have Fr. Tad!  Mark your calendars.  Nunc.

INSTALLMENT 3: Why the Supreme Court Decision in Roe Versus Wade was Legally Incorrect and Unconstitutional

If you haven't read Installment No. 1, please click here

If you haven't read Installment No. 2, please click here

Please find below the third part of an article written by Timothy J.  Once again, the stars stand for footnotes, which will be put into the series as Tim gets them sent to us.  Read on:

As the Supreme Court was inaccurate and biased with its interpretation of English common law, it also did not obtain the correct view of early American law.  According to the official case document, most restrictive abortion legislation began appearing after the Civil War and was only for the purpose of protecting the interests and health of the mother.  For evidence of the first claim, the Court mentioned Eugene Quay, who had written an appendix of all the abortion legislation passed before 1960.  Interestingly enough, the very proof that the Courts recommended for their position was the thing that disproved their assertion, as Quay had on record that thirty-one of the states had laws punishing abortive practices before the Civil War even started.*  This was not the scarce minority of laws that the Court had claimed existed prior to 1860.  With regard to the second claim, that the laws enacted were solely for the protection of the woman, this too is easily refuted by the fact that the evidence the Court cited works against such claims.   For example, one of the cases the Court used was an 1858 New Jersey case, State v. Murphy, which has a passage that reads “the procuring of an abortion, or an attempt to procure an abortion, with the assent of the woman, was not an indictable offense, as it affected her, but only as it affected the life of the fetus”.* This passage clearly demonstrates that the protection of the mother was not the only legitimate interest at stake, but, yet, this was the case the Court cited as evidence that American law of the 18th century did not protect the interests of the unborn child.   One must therefore conclude that the Court purposely flipped critical information on early American law and relied on a mass of legal language to keep the real truth from emerging.

By now, one should see how the Court knowingly went against the evidence of established historical and legal precedent, but it can also be ascertained that the Court went against the intentions of the United States Constitution as well.  In its examination of the Constitution as a whole, the Court did not once touch upon the critical area of the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, thus making its judgment legally incorrect.  If the Supreme Court had been looking to resolve Roe versus Wade in the most accurate manner possible, then it most definitely would have looked into the framers’ intent, for there is no better way of discerning how the Constitution should be interpreted.  Accordingly, there were several indications about what abortion mentalities were accepted around the time of the drafting of the Constitution.  First of all, two previously cited sources have held that Blackstone and his pro-life principles were well known and accepted by the American people, including the framers of the Constitution.*  Also, by looking in a popular dictionary of the times, a fetus was described as a child, who was in turn described as a living person.*   Finally, Thomas Jefferson, who was one of the leading politicians of his day, wrote a letter praising the man who had drafted a model penal code for Louisiana that included a prohibition of abortion.  There was no record of Jefferson abstaining from expressing his approval of any part of the code and the fact that this statute became so popular was evidence that the majority of the informed public agreed with it.*  Thus, at the time of the framing of the Constitution, it can be ascertained, with a high degree of certainty, that many Americans, including the original drafters, would not have had an abortion mentality.