Posted by: littletoe | April 17, 2009

It’s Starting

I found this at the Catholic News Agency this morning.  Scary.  I’ve never really thought of myself as a threat to the government, although I freely admit that I support a limited federal government  and that believing in the rights of individuals and states makes me a patriot.  The Constitution limits its own authority:   ” The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  This is the law of our land.  Am I a right wing extremist because I think it is a good law?

Attack planning?  Capitalizing on the election of our first African-American president to recruit, mobilize, etc.?  Are they nuts?

Homeland Security Report equates ‘abortion opponents’ with white supremacists

.- According to a Homeland Security Report distributed to law enforcement organizations, abortion opponents are as great a threat to national security in the immediate future as white supremacists.

The nine-page document was sent to police and sheriff’s departments across the country on April 7 under the headline, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.” The report is unclassified, but is accompanied by a warning that says it “contains information that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act.”

The report was prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch of the Department of Homeland Security and claims it was “coordinated with the FBI.”

“Rightwing extremists,” the document says, “have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.”

Nevertheless, according to the report, the combination of a prolonged economic downturn, the election of the first African American President and the return of many veterans with “combat skills” could create an environment similar to the early 90’s, which lead to the Oklahoma City bombing.

The report describes “Rightwing extremism” broadly as “those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

Under the title “Revisiting the 1990s,” the report claims that “paralleling the current national climate, rightwing extremists during the 1990s exploited a variety of social issues and political themes to increase group visibility and recruit new members.”

“Prominent among these themes were the militia movement’s opposition to gun control efforts, criticism of free trade agreements (particularly those with Mexico), and highlighting perceived government infringement on civil liberties as well as white supremacists’ longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion, inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage.”

The report “is provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States.”

This is insulting but actually, I think I should be packing my bags.  It reminds me of Nazi Germany and I’m on the wrong side.

Posted by: littletoe | December 30, 2008

Questions of Justice


* Warning * Catharsis alert!

In my last post I mentioned that my husband and I were involved in a serious accident on Christmas Eve.  If you’re into those sorts of details, I posted them to my “family” blog at  Now that the shock is wearing off, and the depression is setting in and I’ve had an opportunity to chat with the state patrol officer who responded, I have a few questions.  Moral questions.

I found out that the person who hit us had several open containers in his vehicle and in his home (where they found him passed out in his bed after he had fled the scene.)  He was so inebriated he couldn’t be left alone after the officers were done with him.  In the course of their investigation, the officers discovered that his license had been suspended in another state.

Finding this out makes me want to hunt him down and kill him.  I believe he is dangerous and I believe he is a future threat.  I believe that a person like this has no regard for his own life or anyone else’s.  He’s like a terrorist that way.  I believe he only cares about his drinking.

So….this made me wonder about the Catholic teaching about the death penalty.  My understanding is that the death penalty is allowed but only as a last resort.  The death penalty should not be used as punishment but only when it is the only way to protect innocent (or more innocent) members of society.  The least amount of force necessary to restrain the criminal from causing further harm should be used.

So here are my questions.  At what point would a perfectly Catholic society no longer be required to build and staff jails to contain drunk drivers, who I consider to be a deadly menace to innocent people?  I was told by the officer that the guy who hit us did not go to jail because they’re too crowded.  I am one of the voters who voted against expanding the county jail last time they asked.  Not that I really regret that since drunk drivers don’t stay there.  I really think they should get ONE chance to kill someone and then get locked up FOR LIFE.   In other words, you’re out on the second strike.  I believe they should have the luxury of one “wake up call”, even if it kills someone.  Trust me, right now that’s a painful amount of mercy to come up with.   The problem is that there are too many of them.

So then I started thinking we ought to take them out and shoot them, like mad dogs, because their behavior is sociopathic.   We would never think of casually turning a murderer loose, yet that is what we do all the time with drunk drivers.   My guess is that a good Catholic would not support the take-’em-out-back-and-shoot-’em solution, so what to do?  Why do we allow these people to offend over and over again?  Why would their offense be less than criminal neglect?

Could someone help me out here?  I doubt any moral theologians peruse my blog, but I’m curious if as a society Catholic morality compels us to expose ourselves over and over to these people who have no regard for their own lives or ours.

Posted by: littletoe | December 27, 2008

Some Christmas Miracles

Guardian angels

Guardian angels

My husband and I were in a very serious accident in which we should have died or been severely injured on our way to the Midnight Mass on Christmas Eve.  I blogged about it on my “family” blog at  If you’re in the mood to read about some miracles, stop by.

Posted by: littletoe | December 9, 2008

Is it Really A Choice?

I came across this article at the Elliott Institute, an online resource for post-abortive men and women.  I was struck by how modern feminism has truly betrayed women. When a woman is denied the information necessary to make an informed decision about what to do with “her body” and feminists participate in cover-ups such as this one, where is the freedom? Where is the empowerment?  Why is there a deafening silence where there should be outrage at the treatment of women, especially minorities?

The Cover-Up
Why U.S. Abortion Mortality Statistics Are Meaningless
David C. Reardon, Ph.D.On March 1, 1989, Erica Richardson, a 16-year-old Maryland resident, bled to death from a punctured uterus only hours after undergoing an abortion. During the next five months, two adult women, Gladys Estanislao and Debra Gray, also died from abortion complications. They too were residents of Maryland.Shockingly, none of these three women was even granted that smallest of recognitions–becoming a statistic. The official statistics issued by Maryland public health officials showed that there were no deaths from abortion in 1989. Indeed, Maryland only reported a single abortion-related death for the entire decade of 1980 to 1989.(1)

There was actually a fourth maternal death related to a 1989 abortion in Maryland. In this case, Susanne Logan fell into a coma during her abortion and awoke four months later as a quadriplegic, unable to talk. She survived for three years, dying in 1992. Since Susanne’s death was not an immediate result of her abortion, it has not been counted in any of the official abortion mortality statistics.(2)

These are four deaths that occurred in one small state that reported no abortion deaths for 1989. For that same year, the Abortion Surveillance Unit of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported only 12 deaths for the entire country. But, as we will see, the CDC doesn’t look very hard.

Covering the Abortionists’ Tracks

In the late 1980’s, Kevin Sherlock, an investigative reporter who specializes in public document searches, undertook an extensive review of death certificates for women of reproductive age in Los Angeles County. Looking for indications of “therapeutic misadventure,” he pulled autopsy reports and was able to find 29 abortion-related deaths in L.A. County alone between 1970 and 1987. Four of these deaths occurred during a one-year period for which the CDC reported zero abortion-related deaths for the entire state of California and only 12 deaths for the whole country.

Using a similar technique, Sherlock eventually documented 30 to 40 percent more abortion-related deaths throughout the country than have been reported in the “official” national statistics published by the CDC. Furthermore, Sherlock accomplished this without any assistance from the CDC, which obstructed his every effort to examine their records. Sherlock admits–and even insists–that with his limited resources and the tendency of abortionists and state health authorities to minimize or obscure the paper trail surrounding abortion-related deaths, he has documented only a fraction of the deaths that are actually occurring as a direct result of abortion.(3)

The scope of the coverup is hinted at in a memo from Steven C. Joseph, M.D., the Commissioner of Health for New York City, to all of his city’s abortion providers. Dated June 5, 1987, the friendly memo simply cautioned against the overuse of general anesthesia, stating: “During the period between 1981 and 1984, there were 30 legal abortion-related deaths in New York City . . . one-third of these (10) were due to general anesthesia, whereas in the rest of the United States less than 10 percent of abortion-related deaths were due to general anesthesia (12/146).”(4)

While not intended for release to the general public, this memo is clear evidence that public health authorities know far more about abortion-related deaths than is being shared in the “official” statistics. For this same time period (1981-1984), New York’s top health official had identified 30 deaths in New York City alone, while the CDC’s official report shows only 42 abortion-related deaths during this period for the entire nation.

In addition, the memo also suggests that the Commissioner of Health had access to unpublished information identifying another 146 abortion-related deaths for that same time period outside of New York. Combined with the 30 deaths in New York City, that is 176 abortion-related deaths in all–419 percent higher than was reported in the official CDC numbers.

Similar admissions of cover-up have been made by other public health authorities.(5) For example, following the death of Barbara Lee Davis from hemorrhage after a routine first-trimester abortion, the chief of the Illinois Department of Public’s Division of Hospitals and Clinics admitted to reporters, “It’s unfortunate, but it’s happening every day in Chicago, and you’re just not hearing about it.”(6) Just one year later, during an investigation of only four Chicago-based abortion clinics, investigative reporters for the Chicago-Sun Times identified twelve abortion-related deaths that had not been reported in the state’s official statistics.(7)

How can there be such an extensive cover-up of abortion-related deaths? Prior to legalization, abortion-related deaths were carefully and accurately reported because these deaths resulted from an illegal activity.(8) But today, abortion is not only legal but is politically protected. Indeed, the CDC’s abortion surveillance unit is not only run by abortion advocates, it has regularly employed practicing abortionists! This is like putting consultants for Phillip Morris’ cigarette manufacturing division in charge of the CDC’s lung cancer surveillance unit. Clearly, the CDC’s abortion surveillance unit is more interested in protecting the health of the American abortion industry than in protecting the health of American women.(9)

Furthermore, the cover-up of abortion-related deaths has actually been furthered by the World Health Organization’s coding rule number 12 of the International Classification of Diseases. This rule requires that deaths due to medical and surgical treatment must be reported under the complication of the procedure (embolism, for example) and not under the condition for treatment (elective abortion). According to researcher Isabelle Bégin:

In effect, this makes the “abortion” category a “ghost” category under which it is simply impossible to code a death due to abortion. Medical coders have in fact relayed that any attempt to code a death due to abortion under abortion yields a “reject message” from the computer programs provided by the National Center for Health Statistics of Washington D.C., a division of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia. Only a minute number of abortion-related deaths actually qualify to be declared under abortion, i.e. those for which the medical certificate of death categorically and unequivocally gives abortion as the underlying cause of death.(10)

Racial Minorities at Risk

One final note. Both the “official” statistics on abortion-related deaths of women and the findings of private investigators have found that non-white women are two to four times more likely to die or suffer serious injury from an abortion than are white women. The best explanation for this discrepancy would appear to be that non-white patients are at greater risk of suffering from negligence, or even hostility, that is rooted in racial bias. This is because many abortion providers believe that abortion is essential for “suppressing poverty, crime, and other problems of society.”(11)

In an unguarded moment, Dr. Edward Allred, owner of the largest chain of abortion clinics in California, made his racist attitudes frighteningly clear:

Population control is too important to be stopped by some right-wing pro-life types. Take the new influx of Hispanic immigrants. Their lack of respect for democracy and social order is frightening. I hope I can do something to stem that tide; I’d set up a clinic in Mexico for free if I could . . . The survival of our society could be at stake . . . When a sullen black woman of 17 or 18 can decide to have a baby and get welfare and food stamps and become a burden to all of us it’s time to stop.(12)

Four years after Allred made these comments, Patricia Chacón, a sixteen-year-old Hispanic girl, and Mary Peña, a 43-year-old married Hispanic woman, both bled to death after having abortions performed by Allred. The autopsy reports do not disclose whether either woman was “sullen.”(13)

Other known deaths at Allred-owned clinics are those of Deanna Bell, a 13-year-old black girl; Josefina García, a 37-year-old Filipino woman; Laniece Dorsey, a 17-year-old black girl; and Joyce Orenzio, a 32-year-old Hawaiian woman.(14) Clearly, Dr. Allred has contributed more than his share to suppressing the population of minority women and their children.

Originally published in The Post-Abortion Review, 8(2), April-June 2000.  Copyright 2000, Elliot Institute.
See also:


1. Kevin Sherlock, Victims of Choice, (Akron, OH: Brennyman Books, 1996) 134-135.

2. James A. Miller, “‘Safe and Legal’–Back in New York and Maryland,” HLI Reports, 11(2):8-9, Feb, 1993.

3. Sherlock, Victims of Choice, 115-117.

4. Sherlock, Victims of Choice, 165-167.

5. For a more complete discussion with additional examples, see Reardon, Aborted Women Silent No More, 109-113, 282-293.

6. Ann Saltenberger, Every Woman Has a Right to Know the Dangers of Legal Abortion (Glassboro, NJ: Air-Plus Enterprises, 1982, 27.

7. Pamela Zekman and Pamela Warrick, “The Abortion Profiteers,” Chicago Sun-Times, special reprint 3 December 1978 (original publication 12 November, 1978)

8. Reardon, 282-293.

9. For a more extensive review of CDC complicity, negligence, and conflicts of interest, see Mark Crutcher, Lime 5, (Denton, TX: Life Dynamics, 1996), 135-170.

10. Isabelle Bégin, “World-wide Abortion Statistics Scam Exposed,” Reality, Oct. 1999.

11. See also the interview with abortionist Edward Allred in the film A Matter of Choice (New Liberty Pictures)

12. “Doctor’s Abortion Business Is Lucrative”, San Diego Union, Oct. 12,, 1980 B1:1.

13. Sherlock, 13-14.

14. Sherlock, 172.

Please join me in saying a prayer for the mothers and fathers who have been deceived into having this procedure done, for the families that have lost mothers and daughters from “safe, legal abortion” and for the thousands of innocents we allow to be killed each day in our country.

Posted by: littletoe | December 2, 2008

A Different Kind of Imperialism

I just finished listening to a CD I got in the mail from HLI (Human Life International).  It was called “The Infertile Soul:  Contraception’s Influence on Faith and Society.”  It was about a half hour long, but I HIGHLY recommend it to anyone who would be willing to take the time and spend the $8.00.

One of the recent discoveries I’ve made about our society’s contraceptive mentality is how brutallyPresident of Human Life International imperialistic it is.  You’ll rarely hear me say the words “social justice”, “diversity”, or “community” in the context of my faith because the words have become so charged and seem to have begun a semantic shift.  “Social justice” means we care about the poor people who have no voice unless they happen not to be born yet.”  Diversity” means I need to accept sinful behavior as morally equal to holy behavior.  “Community” is a group of people more important than God.  Until we stop the genocide taking place each day in our own neighborhoods or acknowledge that it is the worst social injustice currently perpetrated by our society by degrees of magnitude, I find it difficult to talk about improving education and creating jobs for the poor.

The exportation of contraceptives to third world countries is the “new way” we exert our dominance.  I guess going somewhere with an army, subjecting a people and establishing our own government in their country is passe.  Now we tell them that because they are poor they should not breed.  We lie to them and tell them that if they have smaller families they’ll prosper and be happy like we are.  We fund contraception and abortion and voila!  Problem solved.

In fact what we export is the degradation of women and the destruction of families.  We export more AIDS because we tell people they can have sex and still be “safe”.  We teach people that they can’t control themselves and they have no hope of a happy, fulfilling life without the freedom to limit their fertility.

It is painful to see how the contraception mentality has wrought havoc in my own life and the life of my friends when I was younger but it truly pains me now that I and every other taxpayer in the U.S. is exporting this pain to the third world countries that we purportedly care so much about.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »