Here at the end of the year we remember the birth of Jesus. We often forget, however, how unexpected and unusual was Mary's pregnancy. It is good to remember the circumstances of this pregnancy. Mary was a faithful Jewish girl; and such girls did not fall pregnant before marriage. What did this betrothed-not yet married-young woman do, who now found herself mysteriously with child? Imagine the unkind looks and comments she (and Joseph) must have endured as Mary's pregnancy became more and more obvious. Yet out of love for God she carried that unexpected baby to birth, and delivered into the world our Saviour. Billions of peoples' lives have been improved both on earth and eternally by Jesus Christ. We thank God the Father for sending us the Saviour, and we can be glad that Mary was willing to do God's will for her by giving birth to Christ.

The life of Mary teaches us something more today. Note that God chose Mary for this unexpected task, to carry this unexpected (at least for Mary!) child. We thus see that no child is ever a "mistake", whatever the intentions of the man and woman who conceived that child. God has a unique and valuable plan for the earthly life of every child who comes into existence. Let us honor God by honoring His good intentions for each human life conceived. Like Mary, may women unexpectedly pregnant protect and carry to birth their children. Like Joseph, may the rest of us stand in solidarity with these mothers by supporting them through pregnancy, delivery and beyond (recall the difficulties Joseph had finding a room for the family on the night of Jesus' birth, and the family's flight from King Herod's attempt to kill the boy). As in the case of Jesus, God the author of life wants to do special things with each human person. Let us cooperate with Him in protecting and nurturing each human life. No to abortion, yes to life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Abortion and Memory

At this time of year, we remember and celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. For the one billion Christians alive today, this is an anniversary of joy for the coming of their Saviour.

For many post-abortive women, however, the anniversary of their abortion or the anniversary of what would have been their child's birthday is a date of grief, regret, and loss. These two dates haunt these women, sometimes for the rest of their lives. A survey published in 1994 found that 36% of the 252 post-abortive women surveyed strongly agreed that they were "preoccupied with thoughts of the child I could have had". That same survey found that 21% of 238 women surveyed strongly agreed that "negative feelings about my abortion became worse on the due date of pregnancy"; one out of four of 235 women reported stronger negative feelings about their abortions on the anniversary of the abortion itself.

A woman should be happy when she learns she is pregnant; this happiness should reach fulfillment when she gives birth to her son or daughter. Let us make sure no woman suffers anniversary grief over a child she destroyed through abortion. May we protect women and children from the death and despair of abortion; may we support them in our roles as husbands, fathers, siblings, parents, and friends. No to abortion; yes to life.

More information on abortion's effects on women is found at www.afterabortion.org

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Abortion and Slavery

Abortion advocacy consistently claims a woman's "right" to choose an abortion, even as medical science makes it abundantly clear that a pregnant woman carries a living human person. A disturbing and illuminating parallel between abortion and slavery comes to mind. From its inception until the end of its civil war in 1865, the United States allowed white people to keep black people as slaves. The United States Supreme Court called slavery-the possession of human beings as property-a constitutional right in its 1857 "Dred Scott" decision. Abolitionists at the time argued that it is wrong for some people to keep other people as property. These abolitionists were told "You may not like slavery, you may think it is morally wrong, and you need not choose to keep slaves. But do not force your morality on slave owners. They have a legal right to keep slaves." Today, this argument sounds as absurd as it is morally repulsive.

Today's pro-life advocates assert that abortion is wrong, because no one has the right to kill an innocent person. In an eerily similar fashion, these pro-lifers are often told "You may not like abortion, you may think it's morally wrong, and you certainly do not have to choose an abortion. But do not force your morality on women who want to abort. They do (or should) have a legal right to abort their baby".

In 1858, Stephen Douglas ran against Abraham Lincoln for the presidency of the United States. The two of them engaged in a series of lively debates during the campaign. Douglas advocated letting each state choose to keep slavery legal or not. Lincoln answered Douglas this way: "No one has the right to choose to do what is wrong".

Abortion kills a human being. It often injures or kills the mother too. May the citizens of the Kingdom of Swaziland protect the right to life of all people, from conception to natural death.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Peace on Earth

We are approaching Christmas, the time of "Peace on earth, good will to men". In 1994 Mother Theresa, the nun famous for working among the very poor in India, addressed a breakfast meeting in Washington D.C. The crowd included then-President Bill Clinton and other Washington luminaries. During her address, Mother Theresa said "The greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child...and if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"

As we prepare to remember the birth of baby Jesus-the One who made peace between God and man-may Mother Theresa's words ring in our ears. For the sake of peace on earth and good will toward men (and women), may Swaziland say no to abortion and yes to life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

The Morning After Pill

When discussing life issues like contraception and abortion, truth is very important. Friday's (12 Nov) Times carried a full-page article discussing so-called "emergency contraception" pills. Readers were told that these pills can be used "to prevent an unwanted pregnancy".

We must note first that human life begins at fertilization (also called conception), which is the moment when the sperm and the egg join. The Letters page of the Times lacks the space to contain all the quotes from medical experts testifying to this fact, so one example will have to do. Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni from the University of Pennsylvania (USA) told the US Congress in 1981: "I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception...I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life". Medical research and understanding has grown exponentially since that time, and all the gathered information confirms that human life begins when the egg and the sperm join. After conception (which usually takes place in the tubes leading from a woman's ovaries to her uterus), the new person travels to the uterus and attaches to the wall of her mother's womb. Nine months later, if all goes well, the baby is born.

I visited a prominent chemist in Mbabane on Saturday, and they graciously gave me an information page which comes in the box with the morning after pills. The information page says that the active ingredient (Levonorgestrel) in this pill (Norlevo) "acts as a contraceptive by inhibiting ovulation and preventing the nidation of a fertilized ovum in the uterine mucosa".

The information sheet is half right. "Inhibiting ovulation" means to stop an egg from leaving a woman's ovary. This is a contraceptive action, because if no egg is present then the sperm has nothing to join with, and conception is impossible. "Preventing the nidation of a fertilized ovum", however, is not a contraceptive action; it is an act of abortion. A "fertilized ovum" is nothing less than a new human being, as Dr. Bongioanni explained above. "Preventing nidation" means to make it impossible for the newly-conceived human person from securing herself to the wall of the uterus. In this way, the morning-after pill causes abortion. Senior Nursing Officer Gibson Sibanda was quoted in the Times as saying "After 72 hours conception may have taken place, and once fertilization takes place the ECP (morning after pill) is useless". The paper that comes with the pills indicates that the pill can still have an effect after fertilization--at that time it may prevent implantation. Sexually active women should have accurate information as to what effect this pill might have on a child she may conceive. The Times, FLAS, and the pharmaceutical companies would do well to provide accurate information in a form that does not require a university biology degree to understand.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

One Child Policy?

According to the Swazi News on 6 November, MP Johannes Ndlangamandla has floated the idea that limiting by law the number of children people can have will help Swaziland develop. The News did mention that "globally" some countries, like China, limit the number of children a couple can have. Policymakers and policy influencers (like the News) would do well to tread carefully in this area.
First off, note that no one lives "globally"; we all live in some particular place. The question is, do we want some policy from another part of the globe to become policy in our own country?

China does indeed have a one-child policy, but it has led to a numerous and serious problems. Population Research Institute says that victims and witnesses report the following government activities in China related to its one-child policy: "age requirements for pregnancy; birth permits; mandatory use of IUDs (the loop); mandatory sterilization; huge fines for breaking one's child limit (in one instance, a couple was fined approximately 500,000 Emalangeni for having twins after they already had one child); jail sentences; destruction of homes and property; forced abortion and forced sterilization." Such dreadful actions would not improve Swaziland's position on the Mo Ibrahim log for democratic governance. Additionally, killing daughters via abortion is common, since sons are highly valued in China and couples want to make sure they get a boy. Being killed precisely because one is a girl is the epitome of gender-based violence, and Swaziland (rightly) hears continuous calls for an end to gbv.

China's experience shows that bringing the force of law to bear in order to reduce the number of births is a bad idea. Swaziland has development problems, but limiting the number of children by law is not the way to solve them.


Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Choose the Option that Gives You the Most Options

The book "The Art of the Long View" says "Choose the option that gives you the most options". This rule applies to the abortion debate. A mother carrying an unplanned baby faces the question, "Should I abort the baby or not?" Which option gives her the most options? Carrying her baby to birth means she can rear the baby herself, ask her parents to help with rearing the child, join the Swaziland's newly-created support group for single mothers, or marry the dad and have a complete family. The "birth option" allows the mom to view and influence her growing child, to enjoy the fruits of seeing that daughter or son mature, and to receive the support of her child in her own old age. The birth option also opens up all the small and large life choices to that child. The "abortion option" offers a brief and bloody end to the baby, often accompanied by long and short term physical and emotional harm to the mother. It offers the mother a lifetime of "what if" questions she will not be able to answer. In short, the choice of life gives mother and child the most options. Let us help moms and the babies they carry enjoy the maximum range of choices in their lives: let us help moms choose life.


Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Modernism and abortion

I worry sometimes what effect modernism will have on Swaziland. By modernism I do not mean antibiotics, near-instantaneous electronic communication, rapid transportation, or any of the other many life-enhancing benefits of contemporary technology. I mean a mindset that centres solely on the benefit of the individual, and that makes life an activity concerned solely with the maximization of pleasure and the minimization of pain. Such a mindset locks people into a highly self-centred mode of existence, one which is ultimately unsatisfying. We are made not to live only for ourselves, but for others, too. When we generously look out for the interests of others, we find our own lives enhanced.
Sadly, abortion represents the selfishness of modernism at its worst. Abortion pits a mother against her own son or daughter; when the abortion is carried out (many times due to pressure from the father or parents and against the wishes of the mom), this selfishness reaches its murderous conclusion.
Let Swaziland keep the benefits of modern conveniences while protecting the rights of all her citizens, born and unborn. By doing the latter as well as enjoying the former, we will build a community where we all prosper.
Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Men and abortion

It takes a man and a woman together to make a child. The best situation for rearing a child is also a man and a woman committed to each other for lifelong marriage. When it comes to abortion, however, women often find themselves alone or pressured by men to abort.

64% of women in one study felt pressured by others to have an abortion. That same study found 52% felt rushed and 54% were not sure about the decision at the time, while 79% of survey participants said they received no information about alternatives to abortion. One survey of women at abortion clinics found that in 95% of cases, men in these women's lives played a major role in the abortion decision.

All the while, as many as 83% of abortions are unwanted. If someone would just step forward and support these women, they would carry these children-whom, according to the statistics, they want to keep-to term. Unfortunately, post-aborted women make comments like this one: "No one would support me ... The worst day of my life got closer and closer. I think in more cases than not, it isn’t the woman’s choice. It should be called 'Your Parents’ and the Guy’s Choice'...I needed someone to tell me that it was possible to keep my baby, but no one did."

Men are meant to be protectors and providers. The first way for them to protect women is to not have sex with them until marriage. Sex brings deep and abiding changes to a person's life, not least of which is parenthood. Those deep changes are best experienced within the secure bonds of faithful and lifelong marriage. Second, men should take care of the children they father by supporting the mother before and after birth. By doing so they will benefit three people: the mother, the child, and themselves. A man who is making the effort to support and love his wife and children will not only help them prosper-he will, as he receives the gratitude from wife and children, be energized by the love he receives from his family.

Abortion just kills and destroys; love protects, provides, and makes people prosper. May men stand up and fulfill their masculine role of provider and protector. All of society will prosper. No to abortion; yes to love and life.

For more information about abortion's effects on women, visit www.afterabortion.org

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

People-A Nation's Greatest Resource

A nation's greatest resource is its people. Without people, a nation ceases to exist. Some observers speculate that within 100 years it will be impossible to find a German person in Germany, because Germans are having so few children. Conversely, even though a nation may disappear politically from a map-as Poland did during a portion of its history, due to rapacious neighbors-if the people retain their population and identity, the nation lives on.

Abortion kills a nation's future, because it kills its future citizens. Of course, children should come only after a man and woman are married, and they must be ready to take good care of all their children. But never should an innocent citizen-the greatest resource of any nation-be purposefully killed. Yet this is precisely what abortion does. Bear in mind, also, that many women suffer due to the abortions they undergo. These citizens should also be protected.

For the sake of the nation-no to abortion, yes to life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Pass Along the Good Favour

Most of the time, people debate abortion as they would debate other issues, like international politics or national policies or the motivations behind historical events. But abortion is something very different than these other issues because at one point, each of us was at the very centre of the debate. During the 9 months each of us spent in our mother's womb, only the goodwill of our mother and the force of law (depending on where we were living) protected us. Some countries have completely demolished that legal protection. In those places, it is up to the mother to make sure her child sees the light of day.

Bear in mind that YOUR mother made sure that your life was protected. Now that you are "on the outside", pass along the good favour your mother showed you: speak up for the little people by defending the unborn child's right to life. One good turn deserves another. No to abortion; yes to life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

The Bible and Contraception

Friday's Times carried a fair piece about the Bible and contraception. A few clarifications are in order.

Both the IUD and the "morning after" pill are not contraceptives. Contraception means "against the beginning"; that is, contraceptives work to prevent the egg and sperm meeting and starting a new life. Once the egg and sperm join, a new human life has begun. To prevent the implantation of this new life is an abortion. Thus, the IUD and the "morning after" pills are abortifacients, not contraceptives.

The Times is to be commended for saying that one of the ways the birth control pill works is by preventing implantation. Sadly, couples using the birth control pill may be aborting their children without intending it. Using the birth control pill is like standing atop the Dlanubeka building with a rifle and firing a shot in the general direction of the bus rank. One does not know if the bullet will strike and kill anyone, but one cannot be sure.

Concerning the Onan incident, listen to a portion of the booklet Birth Control and Christian Discipleship by John F. Kippley: "Biblical scholar Manuel Miguens has pointed out that a close examination [of Genesis 38] shows that God condemned Onan for the specific action he performed, not his anti-Levirate intentions. The translation 'he spilled his seed on the ground' fails to do full justice to the Hebrew expression. The Hebrew verb shichet never means to spill or waste. Rather, it means to act perversely. The text also makes it clear that his perverse action was related towards the ground, not against his brother." Kippley quotes Miguens: "...His perversion or corruption consists in his action itself, not precisely in the result and goal of his act...In a strict interpretation the text says that what was evil in the sight of the Lord was what Onan actually did (asher asah); the emphasis in this sentence of verse 10 does not fall on what he intended to achieve, but on what he did."

Every Christian church, from 33 A.D. to 1930 A.D., condemned artificial birth control in any form as gravely sinful. In 1930 the Anglican church said artificial contraception for married couples with serious reasons was acceptable. The day after the Anglican church in America made this decision, the Washington Post newspaper wrote: "Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee's report, if carried into effect, would sound the death-knoll of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be 'careful and restrained' is preposterous." The fact that it is easier to get free condoms in Mbabane than it is to find a free toilet gives credibility to the Post's prediction. Is anyone under the delusion that those condoms, or the other contraceptives promoted in various quarters, are intended only for married couples with serious cause to avoid pregnancy?

Happily, for those couples who do need to delay the birth of another child, there is a method called Natural Family Planning (NFP). NFP uses some easy-to-record physical signs of the wife to know when she is fertile and when she is not. As a husband and wife become knowledgeable about her fertility, and as they consider their readiness for another child, they can decide when marital relations are appropriate and when they are not. Natural Family Planning is not the unreliable "rhythm method"; NFP works as well as any modern contraceptive technology. This is documented in the British Medical Journal by an author who studied the use of Natural Family Planning among Hindu and Muslim couples in Calcutta, India. These couples were instructed in Natural Family Planning by Mother Teresa, the famous Albanian nun who spent decades among the poorest of the poor.

Natural Family Planning, in addition to being effective, encourages couples to grow in communication, understanding, and cooperation-and surely every marriage can use more communication, understanding, and cooperation. It is acceptable to every Christian denomination, and it builds the kind of love God wants for married couples.


Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Abortion and the Golden Rule

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" says the Golden Rule. This applies well to abortion. Were any of us unexpectedly pregnant, we would want others to help calm us down and find a life-affirming way forward. Given the documented damage abortion does to the women who undergo them, that way would include bringing the child to birth-and supporting the mom all along the way, and beyond. Putting ourselves in the position of an unborn child-which each of us was, once-we would certainly want others to respect us enough to protect our lives. The Golden Rule directs us to support the lives of women and their children in crisis pregnancies. No to abortion; yes to life.


Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Where There is Life There is Hope

An old proverb says, "Where there is life there is hope". A football team may trail by a goal late in a match; but if time remains on the clock and determination lives in the heart of the players, there is hope for a victory. Someone may suffer life-threatening injuries in a car collision; but as long as their heart beats and they possess the will to live, there is hope for recovery. Firefighters enter burning buildings to rescue the trapped and injured. Why do they do this? Because they are convinced that life is valuable, and as long as there is hope that someone's life can be saved, they will run into those burning buildings.

Conceiving, bearing, and raising children is a profound act of hope: hope that their future will be better than our own, and hope that they themselves will craft a better world. Abortion extinguishes the hope that is a child, and frequently ravages the mothers who undergo the procedure. Abortion crushes hope.

Litsemba alibulali runs the venerable SiSwati saying. May Swaziland keep hope alive by protecting and nurturing mothers and children. No to abortion; yes to life and hope.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Pain is Temporary, Pride is Forever

A mother with an unplanned pregnancy may face tremendous challenges: Will my husband/boyfriend support this child? What might her friends or parents think? If she has a career, she might worry that being pregnant and then having a child will disrupt her work life. If she has no job and the father is not helping, how will she pay the baby expenses?

These and other obstacles can bring strong pressure to choose abortion. It would seem that the abortion will solve all those problems, and that life for that mother will return to normal. The statistics on physical, emotional, and mental health on post-aborted women indicate otherwise.

Women who have an unplanned baby may indeed face a difficult road. Yet the pain of carrying and birthing an unexpected baby can be overwhelmed by the pride of protecting and nurturing that new human person. Some women who have conceived children under the worst circumstance-being raped-have reported that carrying the child to birth helped them rebuild their self respect after that horrible experience.

It is always best to wait until marriage for having sex, so that children enjoy the stability and support of both parents. But should a woman get pregnant without having a husband, let us support her and her child through the hardships. In the end she-and the rest of us-will enjoy the lasting pride of helping others through temporary difficulties. No to abortion; yes to love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Abortion Threatens All of Us

Though abortion takes life at its earliest stages, it inevitably threatens human life at all stages. If a society permits the taking of innocent human life before birth, there is no logical reason for not taking human life at any time after birth. This dynamic is already at work in places like the Netherlands, where (for instance) a doctor visited an elderly patient's home and found the patient had a cough. The doctor then gave the patient an injection, which killed him in an hour. The wife of the man called their regular doctor and told him through her tears “Doctor, Doctor, why did he kill John? John didn’t want to die.” Such activity is not prosecuted in the Netherlands; incredibly, what this doctor did was legal, and he suffered no legal consequences.

In another case in the Netherlands, a doctor escorted his patient, who had cancer, to the hospital on a Friday. He told his patient that on Monday, they would talk about what treatment plan to pursue. When he returned on Monday, he did not find his patient in her bed. “Where did you move Mrs. VanderHoff?” asked the doctor. “Oh, we euthanised [killed] her yesterday”, replied the doctor on duty over the weekend. “You what?” said the astonished doctor. “Well," explained the weekend MD, "we euthanised her yesterday. Look, Doctor, she wasn’t going to make it anyway, she had metastatic cancer.” “Well, yes I know, but she wasn’t in pain. She hadn’t even been treated yet”, said the regular doctor. “Well, that may be, but in any case, we needed the bed” was the final word from the guy on duty on the weekend.

Drawing on the work of Dr. Karl Gunning, founder and president of the World Federation of Doctors Who Respect Life, Dr. John Willke reports that "A little more than 130,000 people die in the Netherlands every year. Twenty-five thousand is the number that he [Gunning] says are killed by doctors. Worse yet, half of these are killed without the patient’s knowledge or consent." Willke explains that "If you are admitted to a hospital in Holland and you happen to have gray hair, it will not be long before a person will call on you and for a modest fee, they will watch your case to insure that your doctor does not kill you. Many senior citizens in Holland carry a card in their wallet, protesting that they do not want to be killed and that they do want care."

Pro-life speaker Alan Keyes once explained that "You cannot destroy respect for life in principle, and expect to sustain that respect in fact." Abortion spells death for the unborn; once it is socially accepted, it threatens untimely death for the rest of us. May this nation respect life in the womb; for if it does not, human life outside the womb will fall under attack too. No to abortion; yes to life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Pro-Woman, Pro-Life

To be pro-life is to be pro-woman. Frank Pavone, director of Priests for Life, puts it this way: "We do not say, 'Love the baby and forget about the mother.' Rather, we say 'Why can't we love them both?' We can and we must. To harm one is to harm the other; to love and serve one is to love and serve the other." Priests for Life takes this approach based on the leadership of a remarkable Christian leader who died about 5 years ago, Pope John Paul II. In his book Crossing the Threshold of Hope, the Pope said "in firmly rejecting 'pro-choice', it is necessary to become courageously 'pro woman,' promoting a choice that is truly in favor of women...The only honest stance...is that of radical solidarity with the woman."

Let all people of good will work for the genuine welfare of both women and children. No to abortion; yes to life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Just A Medical Procedure?

Some abortion advocates would have us believe that abortion is simply a routine medical procedure, a procedure no more consequential than removing a "clump of cells" or a "blob of tissue". It's a mighty strange "routine procedure" wherein 64% of women undergoing it feel pressured to do so; 65% of women who undergo it experience higher risks of clinical depression than those who carry their children to term; suicide rates for post-aborted women are 6 times higher compared to women who carry their children to birth; and deaths due to all causes are over three times higher among women who have had abortions than for those women who give birth. According to the statistics, abortion inflicts dreadful injury and even death on women; some routine medical procedure.

Women and children deserve better than abortion. May the Kingdom unite for the well-being of women by giving them real love and support through pregnancy, birth and beyond. No to abortion; yes to love and life.

Get more information on abortion's effects on womens' health at www.theunchoice.com

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

What Is In a Name?

On 19 July Mr. AB Suleiman offered an understanding of Allah in Islam (see article below). In closing his letter, Mr. Suleiman mentions different words for the Supreme Being from different languages. It is my understanding that some Christians in the Middle East do refer to the Christian God as Allah. Perhaps the lesson we can learn is that although the name we ascribe to the ultimate Deity is important, the characteristics of that Deity are what really tell us about Him.

Mr. Suleiman says that Allah listens to peoples' prayers and meets all their needs, dealing with them in mercy and compassion. Again, Jews, Christians and Muslims all agree on this. We can all be glad for His love for us.

But a little reflection leads us to some questions: What is God's life like, in Himself? He keeps the universe in operation, and we can be glad for that; but even though the whole universe is a vast thing to us, it is not a vast thing to the Infinite, Ultimate Being. So what else can infinite God do since running the universe is not an adequate activity to occupy Him?

God Almighty loves human beings, and we can be mighty glad for that too. Still, we finite beings are hardly an adequate object for infinite love. We can neither fully appreciate nor return infinite love. As writer Frank Sheed says in his book Theology for Beginners, "Is infinite love [God] never to find an object worthy of it?"

In the middle section of his letter, Mr. Suleiman said "The one most highly emphasized aspect of God in Islam is His Unity. God is One. He has no associates. He is neither born of anyone nor gives birth to anyone. He shares His supremacy in the universe with no one. To associate anyone else with God is shirk (ascribing partners with Him) and it is a grave sin in Islam."

Jews, Muslims and Christians all agree that God is One. Is there nothing and no one adequate to receive and return God's love? Is God ever to be frustrated in loving, because the fullness of His love is never fully appreciated and returned? Christianity says 'No'. The Christian Bible says that God is love. That is his nature. Before anything else was created God loved and was loved perfectly. But love must have an object.

Again from Mr. Sheed: "It was left to Christ Our Lord to reveal to us that there is companionship within the one divine nature-not a number of Gods, but three persons within the one God. It is in the knowledge and love of the three persons that the divine life is lived." Through all eternity, the three persons who are the One God know and love one another. This eternal and dynamic exchange of love remains totally sufficient within the divine life.

From the Christian perspective, there is no "ascribing of partners" to God in this truth, for each person within the One God-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-is fully God. And since there are three persons in the one God, His infinite love can be fully received and reciprocated.

The interior life of God is difficult to understand; still, just because something is hard to understand does not make it untrue. Interested readers are encouraged to see Sheed's book.

The wonder of love is that it always produces life. God knows eternally the joy of divine love, and he made human life that we might experience a portion of that love. Even when our first parents, Adam and Eve, sinned and turned away from Him, He had a plan-born of love-to bring us back to Himself. God the Son-Jesus Christ-came to earth and without losing His divinity became a fully human man, to offer his life to God the Father to forgive us of our sins.

True love involves sacrifice. We can ask, "How much does God love me?". Our answer comes when we look at a picture of Jesus on the Cross. He is telling us, with arms outstretched on the Cross, "This much".

God is One, and God is love. Within the divine life moves an eternal circle of love. This love overflowed in our creation, and in Christ's sacrifice to bring us back into relationship with God. Let us give thanks for God's perfect unity in love, and His love for us.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

KFC and Halaal

In Friday's Times, "Swazi Citizen" decries a rude letter ("The Wrath of Satan") from a Christian. I missed that letter; it's sad if it was a hurtful letter. All interreligous dialogue should be respectful. It's also true that lots of food items in Swaziland are already marked "Halaal" (including macaroni noodles and jam). These two items also carry the "Parev" (Jewish) marking, indicating it is acceptable for Jews to eat them on some occasions. And although I cannot find an item right now, I seem to remember seeing some sort of seal indicating some food items are acceptable for Hindus. So we have reached interreligious common ground on a number of food items already.

"Swazi Citizen" is also right to suggest getting facts straight. He asks, "What would Jesus do?". I think Jesus would want Christians to clearly propose the truths Christ taught in respectful interreligious dialogue. If we are clear in the use of our terms; it will make it much easier to know where both parties stand. Then, understanding-if not perfect agreement, right away-can grow.

We know what Jesus said about Himself, because we have His words in the Bible: "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me". Also, "I and the Father are one". Also, "Before Abraham was born, I am!" Also,"My son, your sins are forgiven"-a statement the religious people nearby understood to be Jesus' claim to be on equal standing with God. "Swazi Citizen" says his Quran respects Jesus; but I think we can all agree that there is a big difference between 1) showing someone respect and 2) believing they are God incarnate (which Christians hold is true) and deserving of worship as such. Jesus also says "I told you that you would die in your sins, for you will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he." In this case, Jesus means "unless you believe I am the Messiah". The issue of Jesus' identity is a major dividing issue, perhaps the biggest one, between Muslims and Christians. Muslims believe Jesus was a prophet, but not on equal standing with God; Christians believe He is God the Son, who lived and died on the cross and rose again to save humans from sin and to bring them into restored relationship with God the Father.

It is good to learn each others beliefs accurately so that we can communicate well about the things that we hold most dear.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Be The Good Samaritan

Most of us are familiar with the parable of the Good Samaritan, the story Jesus told to remind us that the person we find in need is our neighbor. Pastor Frank Pavone (USA) gives some illumination to Jesus' parable. He explains that in Jesus' time, the road from Jerusalem to Jericho was very dangerous; robbers would frequently waylay travelers and do to them just what the robbers in Jesus' story did to the poor traveler. As for why the Levite and the priest passed by the wounded man, Pastor Pavone writes: "Perhaps the priest and the Levite who passed by that man asked themselves, 'If I stop to help this man, what might happen to me? Maybe the robbers who attacked him are sill here. Maybe they're hiding just around the bend. This is a dangerous road. I better keep going.'"

Pastor Pavone continues: "And then the Good Samaritan came along, and he reversed the question. He didn't ask, 'If I help this man, what will happen to me?' The Good Samaritan asked, 'If I do not help this man, what will happen to him?'"

Pastor Pavone's illumination of this parable bears on our lives. The modern western mindset-a mindset more and more prevalent in the world as time goes by-considers the lives of unborn children disposable. The contemporary world is that dangerous road from Jericho to Jerusalem. If we do not defend unborn children and their moms from a "choice" which kills one and wounds the other, who will? If we do not defend mothers from the pressure to "get rid of the problem" if they find themselves unexpectedly pregnant, who will? The priest and the Levite took the easy way for themselves, but history holds them in low regard. The Good Samaritan did the more difficult thing, but the assault victim and history hold him in high regard. May we be the Good Samaritan by promoting the life and dignity of moms and their unborn children. May Swaziland build a culture of life.


Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Slippery Slope II

On the 21st the Times reported on UK doctor Howard Martin's killing of patients whom he deemed "had such dreadful suffering". Significantly, the good (?) doctor said he did them in "not because they wanted to die" but because he decided their suffering was too great.

Though the connection may not be immediately clear, this is one of the bitter and inevitable fruits of abortion. Once a society accepts the killing of innocent human beings near the beginning of life, there is no logical reason not to kill them at any other time. Once the principle that innocent life is inviolate is violated, it takes only some "difficult" cases and clever words to open the hunting season on everyone else. Note also that at least some of Dr. Martin's victims did not wish to die; he simply arrogated the power of life and death to himself. One shudders at the partially-realized spectre of those in authority simply deciding others need to die, whether they want to or not. Shudder a second time that the British courts acquitted Dr. Martin of his crimes. It is bad enough when someone commits murder; it is even worse when government, whose first and most important job is to protect its citizens, sets their murderer scot-free.

Martin's appeal to "Christian compassion" in murdering his patients is complete hogwash. Christian ethics never allow the deliberate taking of innocent life. Pain, both physical and mental, can be managed. Dr. Martin appears to have forgotten that his calling includes killing pain, not patients.

Swaziland, beware of the creeping (and largely western-imported) culture of death. Respect life for the gift that it is, from conception to natural death.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Abortion Reality Check

This space has discussed abortion from many different angles. Sometimes it is important to revisit the basics of an issue. Let us remember that abortion always kills a child, and that it very frequently injures, in numerous ways, the mother of that child. Folks with access to the internet are encouraged to visit www.abortiontruth.com for photographs of the results of an abortion. Here's what Karen Sullivan Ables experienced during and after her abortion:

"I could feel the baby being torn from my insides. It was really painful...Three quarters of the way through the operation I sat up...In the cylinder I saw bits and pieces of my little child floating in a pool of blood. I screamed and jumped off the table. They took me into another room and I started vomiting...I just couldn't stop throwing up...I had nightmares and recurring dreams about my baby. I couldn't work my job. I just laid in bed and cried. Once, I wept so hard I sprained my ribs. Another time while crying, I was unable to breathe and passed out. I was unable to walk on the beach because the playing children would make me cry. Even Pampers [a brand of nappies] commercials would set me into fits of uncontrollable crying."

Ms. Ables' experience is not uncommon. Vastly increased rates of alcohol abuse, drug abuse, depression, suicide attempts, and miscarriages of later pregnancies beset many post-aborted women. Visit www.afterabortion.org for more information about abortion's effects on women.

For the sake of women and their children, may the Kingdom never show respect to abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

To Empower Women

UNFPA's poster competition "When You Empower a Woman, You Empower A Family" submissions are due by June 30; winners will be announced later. One suggestion says "Draw how a woman can empower a family". We all know that Swazi women carry a heavy load when it comes to supporting a family. Maybe a good way to empower women and families would be for husbands and dads to assume a bigger role at home. If dads will bring home the financial support regularly, help children with homework and know how they are doing in school, and listen to their children so that they could offer fatherly support through childhood problems, I think mothers will feel very empowered. These mothers will no longer have to do the jobs of two parents. Additionally, the dad's sacrificial and thoughtful actions will cultivate love among family members. I hope that present and future husbands/dads will endeavour to give their wives and children the time and effort they need to thrive. May Swaziland prosper as husbands and dads lead the way in caring for their families.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

HIV+ Moms and Abortion

Friday's Times (May 21, 2010) carried a full-page article entitled "The Right for HIV Positive Mothers to Access Abortion Care". Though the article jumped around a lot (touching everything from abortion on demand to breast feeding to Prevention of Mother to Child Transmission), hopefully we can all share the common ground of supporting women. If supporting women included not asking or pressuring any woman for sex (and not accepting any invitations from women for sex) before marriage, the number of women carrying the virus would fall dramatically. So, how about making abstinence before marriage the primary focus and tool for ending the spread of HIV? In addition to slashing the HIV rate, this would build more self-disciplined men and women and create stronger, more loving families.

When it comes to allowing HIV+ women to abort because they are HIV+, one must ask if one tragedy deserves another. An HIV+ mom will likely die before she ever expected to; is this a good reason for killing her child? UNICEF ran its "Unite For Children, Unite Against AIDS" program a couple of years ago. It would be tragic if that slogan were changed to say "Unite Against AIDS and Children".

The saddest part of Friday's article was the part that said some HIV+ moms choose abortion "because of the discrimination that mother and child are likely to face." The solution to this problem lies in ending the discrimination, not humiliating the mother and killing the child. Killing the child, it would seem, is a very severe form of discrimination. Ending the discrimination would signal an increase of love and respect among all citizens-and that is something we can all support.

As this space has documented, abortion is not a simple medical procedure like pulling a tooth. Many women experience extraordinary anguish leading up to an abortion, and many women suffer deep medical and emotional injury (including sterility and years of crippling regret) afterward. Making abortion just another topic alongside "microbicides" and "baby feeding options" downplays, to all mothers' detriment, the tremendous seriousness of abortion.

Let's show love and respect to women by keeping sex where it belongs: in marriage. Let's respect the lives of HIV+ mothers and their unborn children by providing them life-affirming help. Let us cast off the false notion that offering a mother in need the opportunity to kill her child through abortion is ever a loving thing to do. Let us build a culture of love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

A Person's a Person No Matter How Small

Human life begins at conception. This truth has grown more certain as medical science has peered deeper into the dynamics of human development from its earliest stages. Many who wish to spread legal abortion far and wide know this, and so they have changed from saying "We don't know when human life begins" to "The unborn are not really 'people', and so it is okay to kill them."

How have they made this jump of logic? They have made it by drawing up lists of characteristics which they say define personhood. Peter Singer, a professor at Princeton University (USA), says having human rights requires "characteristics like rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness...Infants lack these characteristics. Killing them, therefore, cannot be equated with killing normal human beings, or any other self-conscious beings." Note that Singer is talking about killing already-born children; his argument applies with equal lethal force to the unborn.

Happily, this argument is as weak as it is horrifying. If one has to be "rational" and "self-conscious" in order to have a right to life, then anyone who is asleep may, in Singer's mind, be killed. This is ridiculous. Falling asleep does not magically turn a person into a non-person.

Singer's argument, and others like it, are growing in visibility around the world. Forewarned is forearmed. The next time you hear this or other such silly arguments put forth, ask the person next to you if taking a midday nap removes you from the human community and puts you on the same moral standing as a chicken which could be killed and cooked. Then have a good laugh, and appreciate anew the joy and wonder which is human life, at every stage of life. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

Love and Life Beat Abortion

This space has detailed the pain and destruction abortion visits upon women and children. How can we eliminate abortion at its root? One excellent way is saving sex for marriage, and keeping sex only between a man and a woman married to each other. Keeping sex within its proper boundary keeps it in the place where it best serves its two functions: 1) Bringing children into the world between two adults committed to each other for life, and 2) Increasing the love between the husband and the wife. This simple, time-honoured practice will go a long distance towards eliminating even the thought of killing the unborn and damaging their mothers because it will replace selfishness with love: a love between spouses which overflows to their children. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

Abortion's Hazards to Women's Health

Many advocates for women believe that fewer women will be physically damaged by abortion if abortions are legal. They assume that complication rates for legal abortions will match the rates in studies published in scientific journals. This is not likely to be true. Consider this quotation from John and Barbara Willke's book "Why Can't We Love Them Both":

Published reports [on women's health after abortion] from scientific studies all come from university medical centers. Surgery in them is done by highly qualified surgeons. Further, they have immediate access to topnotch care if a mishap occurs. But less than 10% of USA abortions are done in such elite institutions. Consequently their reports of safety or hazards do not in any way reflect the actual situation "out there" where over 90% of abortions are done in free-standing, for-profit abortion facilities or in doctors' offices.

A much better estimate of complication rates comes from former abortion clinic director Carol Everett. She says that in the last 18 months of her directorship, her clinics were doing 500 abortions a month and killing or maiming one of those 500 women every month.

Legalised and widespread abortion in Swaziland would likely injure a lot of women; the government hospitals are already overtaxed, and if unscrupulous individuals knew they could make large sums of money out of a meagrely-equipped room, why wouldn't they? Women going to these individuals would be at risk of horrendous injury without topnotch emergency medicine to care for them when complications occured.

Dr. David Reardon has said that while legalizing abortion reduces the danger rate of each abortion a small amount, the increase in the number of abortions resulting from legalization causes the overall number of injuries to increase. So instead of reducing the number of women physically harmed by abortion, legalization usually INCREASES the total number of women physically harmed by abortion.

The book "Lime 5" documents hundreds of cases of women damaged by legal abortion in the United States. Here is just one sample, names are changed: "Stacy" had an abortion in April 1992 by John Roe 689 at an Alabama abortion clinic. During the procedure he perforated her uterus, suctioned her right ureter completely out of her body, and damaged one of her kidneys. She had to be transported to an emergency room where the fetus and damaged kidney were removed. The facility where Stacy had her abortion was a National Abortion Federation member [NAF members are supposed to meet higher standards than average abortion clinics]. These kinds of things happen in a country with the best medical care in the world. Are we to believe that it wouldn't happen in Swaziland?

Women and children deserve better than abortion. Let us build a culture where sex is saved for marriage and every new life is welcome. No to abortion; yes to love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

Incest Dad Arrested

The story in the 20 April issue of the Times about the incest dad who was apprehended shows why allowing abortion in the case of incest is counterproductive. Had the girls given in to abortion, the primary evidence against the father-namely, the children who were conceived-would have been destroyed. The girls might have been right back in the same abusive situation at home, and the children who were conceived-who were completely innocent of any wrongdoing-would have been killed. Thankfully, the girls were spared the trauma of abortion and the potential for further abuse. Praise for these girls and the others who helped them stand up for their own dignity and the lives of their children. Now, hopefully, justice can be done. Yes to life; no to abortion.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

Err on the Side of Life

Whatever position one takes on abortion, everyone agrees that the abortion decision is a serious one. For some time in my own life, I did not know what position to take on the issue. I was a new Christian and I knew many Christians opposed abortion, but I had always assumed a woman's body was her own and no one should tell her what she can and can't do with it. I was truly in the undecided middle on the issue.

At this time I spoke to the mother of a friend of mine. In the course of our conversation I mentioned my ambivalence on this issue, that I really did not know what to think. She appreciated my uncertainty, but she also said that she had known women who had undergone abortions and she saw that abortion had wounded these women, leaving them with serious emotional damage. Because of this wise woman's words, my conviction moved subtly but firmly to the pro-life side. If abortion is supposed to help women but in fact damages them, I reasoned, then the best option-for both mother and child-is to err on the side of life.

My uncertainty about abortion was intellectual. How common is such uncertainty about abortion among women who go for the procedure, and what effect does this uncertainty have on these women later in their lives?

A 2004 study found 54% of post-aborted women had doubts about the decision; sadly, this study found 67% of these women received no counseling whatsoever before the procedure. Pro-choice sociologist Mary Zimmerman's book "Passage Through Abortion" studied a group of 40 post-abortion women. David Reardon summarizes Zimmerman's results this way: "Fully 70% of women studied expressed disapproval of abortion, seeing it as deviant or immoral. But seeing themselves as forced by others, by their circumstances, or by society at large, they frequently attempted to deny responsibility for what they believed was an immoral act. In other words, 70% of these aborted women felt forced to compromise their own values and ideals." In 1986 Uta Landy, then executive director of the National Abortion Federation, wrote "Some women's feelings about their pregnancy are not simply ambivalent but deeply confused." Sylvia Stengle, a later director of the National Abortion Federation, said in 1994 that 20% of women undergo abortions even though they believe the procedure is morally wrong. She identified these women as a "very worrisome subset of our patients" and that "Sometimes, ethically, an [abortion] provider has to say 'If you think you are doing something wrong, I don't want to help you do that.'"

Australian journalist and women's rights advocate Melinda Tankard Reist compiled "Giving Sorrow Words", a book of personal accounts of women describing their post-abortion experiences. Reist received 150 submissions after placing notices in newspapers, magazines and other locations. The submissions varied from a single page to book-length. Some of the accounts are chilling and heartbreaking.

The last entry in Reist's book, written by a woman named Lee, covers 24 pages. Her journal of both pre- and post-abortion is grueling reading. Portions are related below.
****************
"I said I didn't want a baby and hated my partner [for not having a vasectomy earlier]. I also said I was scared of feeling a great sense of loss after the abortion, that I was very ambivalent about the situation and while I didn't think it sensible to have a baby, I was really shocked that part of me wanted to keep it and couldn't bear to lose it. The counselor told me that ambivalence was normal. She said that she had seen women who were 80/20, 70/30, 60/40, even 51/49 about whether to have an abortion, and they were okay afterwards...I wanted to drop to the floor and sob, "But you don't understand, I want this baby." But I didn't. Such ambivalence was 'normal' and no one should have a baby just because they couldn't face an abortion.

I write to the abortion clinic:
Dear Counselor,

It's been just over two months since my abortion...I found it an extremely difficult decision to make and was very ambivalent right up to the time of the abortion. I believed it would be an easy thing to do and I would primarily feel relieved. I certainly didn't expect to feel completely devastated, cry for weeks on end and find myself swamped by full blown grief."

The counselor at the clinic responds by phone to my letter. She says, "But you were sure about not wanting another baby."

I say: "Yes I was sure about not wanting another baby, but I didn't know how it would feel to lose it."

I have thought since to say:
"Yes, I was sure about not wanting another baby, but I had one. To make the decision about another baby when you're not pregnant is one thing. To make the decision about another baby when you are pregnant can be a completely different thing. Yes I was sure about not wanting another baby but I was not sure about terminating the one I had."

Never did [the counselor] point out, and never did I anticipate, that you also have to be clear about wanting an abortion, to live with one."
*******************
Later, Lee decided to try for another child, hoping that it would help her to heal. She did get pregnant, and give birth to a baby boy. Soon after the delivery she said "I feel the most incredible and profound sense of relief. We [she and father] both spent the first two weeks crying at how we nearly didn't have the baby and how we'd finally made the right decision...it seems absolutely like the only thing I could have done-to heal, to soften, to make a new start, to begin to forgive...From great grief, pain, rage, regret, has come new life, new hope, a second chance, and a beautiful baby."

Ambivalence about abortion is widespread; the aftermath of abortion is potentially devastating. Let us support and protect women and children. No to abortion; yes to love and life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com
more letters at http://letterstotheTOS.blogspot.com

NGO Funding

On 20 March the Swazi News carried a story about a German named Mr. Albrecht, who was in the country visiting NGOs. Apparently Mr. Albrecht has a great deal of cash, and he was considering whether to give some of that money to Swaziland NGOs.

Mr. Musa Hlophe made some interesting comments. The Times paraphased Hlophe to the effect that the government's current budget proposal has no money allocated for NGOs. Let us remember what "NGO" stands for: "Non Governmental Organization". Mr. Hlophe is concerned that the government isn't giving a non-governmental organization money.

It is no secret that many NGOs make less-than-encouraging remarks about government policy and practices, and there is definitely room in any civil society for healthy and constructive debate. But it does seem odd that government would, and in some opinions should, give money to NON governmental groups which turn around and criticise the government that funds them. The Swazi proverb "hamba sandla, buya sandla" might be modified to hamba sandla, shaya sandla, with the addendum kepha ungadzinwa kusasa.

Secondly, Mr. Hlophe was quoted as saying "Bread for the World is found wherever there is human suffering something contrary to what the corporate world was doing. The world over the corporate world funds glamorous projects that do not involve ordinary people."

Now there's no denying that lots of aid and self-help schemes are big and expensive and useless, and don't help the people they are intended to. But not every scheme is a failure. Gone Rural, based in Malkerns, has a good reputation for employing bomake with traditional skills and then helping those mothers with their childrens' school fees, etc. Gone Rural harnesses market forces to give Swazi women income and other benefits. The genius of the corporate world is not that it "funds glamorous projects that do not involve ordinary people," but that it hires ordinary people so they can meet the needs of their family and even have money to share with others.

I don't know how Mr. Albrecht made his fortune, but is hard to imagine he made his billions of Emalangeni by only travelling around the world and giving it away. Despite its faults, free market capitalism (which does include some degree of corporatism) has generated lots of income and lifted lots of people to higher living standards. Why, it has even made it possible for some individuals to travel the world funding NGOs which seek to alleviate human suffering.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

Jesus' Resurrection

Tuesday's Times (April 6, 2010) carried a wire story about Pope Benedict's Easter sermon. The story said that Easter is the time "when Christ is believed to be resurrected." Happily, that belief is an historically solid one. A casual reading of the four gospels will show that Jesus earned some powerful enemies near the end of his life, enemies who wanted (and managed to get) him killed. After Jesus' death, he was put in a solid rock tomb with a huge rock closing the entrance. A guard of soldiers was posted outside the tomb, to make sure no one tried to get the body out.

This past Sunday Christians worldwide celebrated the fact that on the first Easter Sunday, Jesus' body was not in that tomb. What are the possible explanations? Is it possible that a disheartened band of 11 former fishermen and tax collectors could overcome soldiers and move a huge rock to drag Jesus' dead body out of the tomb? Unlikely; but even if they had, how long could they run around Jerusalem proclaiming that he was alive? Eventually someone would ask to see him; if the apostles could not produce a real, breathing, alive Jesus, the game would be up. If Jesus were not resurrected, those who helped get him killed could end the apostles' preaching by simply taking Jesus' dead body out of the grave and trotting it around the city center for all to see.

The best explanation is that a really dead Jesus was really raised back to life. Jesus said he would die for the forgiveness of sins and be raised on the third day. He completed the death and resurrection part; it is safe to trust him about the forgiveness of sins. Try a prayer to Jesus this Easter season; he lives, and he wants to start a relationship with you, and give you his eternal life.

For more information on the truthfulness of the New Testament and the claims of Jesus, read Josh McDowell's book More Than A Carpenter.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

Living Witnesses

Every one of us is a living testament to the pro-life position. How so? Because for each of us, our mom chose to give us life. Each of us can be thankful that our moms loved us enough to let us live. Let us pass the favour to future generations. Let us build a culture of life and love.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

A Response to Colleen Matsebula and David Vost

Thank you, Mr. Editor, for allowing me to respond to Thursday's letters from Colleen Matsebula and David Vost. It is excellent that the Times is open to all opinions on issues.

In 2007, then-Senator Barack Obama said "I am absolutely convinced that culture wars are so nineties; their days are growing dark, it is time to turn the page." The tone of Matsebula's and Vost's letters indicate that such a time has not yet come.

Ms. Matsebula suggests that I insult the intelligence of Swazis. Far from it. My purpose in writing letters about abortion is so that Swazis would be informed on the issue and not make the same tragic mistakes that Americans have made since 1973.

America kills about 1 million of its own children each year through abortion; that's as many people as live in all of Swaziland. Intimately involved in each of those abortions is a mother, and these mothers are at risk of horrendous injury-physical, emotional, and relational-from those abortions. The people of Swaziland have been incalculably generous and kind to me: from my colleagues at work to students past and present to fellow church members to regular acquaintances in the old market to aspiring football stars at local pitches on the weekends. The wonderful people of Swaziland is one reason I stay here. And the reason I write these letters is that I do not want these or any other Swazi to suffer the devastating consequences abortion brings.

For the record, I have no problem with Mr. Obama's skin colour. If I did, spending 9 years of my adult life in rural Swaziland under Swazi leadership would be a strange place for me to do. It is great that less than 50 years after the end of institutional apartheid in America, a black man can be elected president of the most powerful country on earth. Also for the record, it is immature and underhanded for Ms. Matsebula to suggest I have a problem with Obama's skin colour; let us discuss content and not descend to unbecoming, if subtle, accusations of racism.

When it comes to content, there is no question that the content of Mr. Obama's health care reform bill contains substantial support for abortion. It is true that he signed an Executive Order (EO) that purports to restrict federal tax money for paying for abortions. But all but one pro-life group (the one most closely associated with Mr. Obama's party) in America has stated that the EO is inadequate to address certain aspects of the reform bill with respect to abortion. Most
significantly, the head of Planned Parenthood has called it "a symbolic gesture" and has said that "while we regret that this proposed Executive Order has given the imprimatur of the president to Senator Nelson’s language, it is critically important to note that it does not include the Stupak abortion ban." Note that Planned Parenthood commits more abortions than any other
organization in America; they are not worried about the EO.

Briefly for Mr. Vost: I think it would be great if every US citizen could get health care; I just don't think it should come with an abortion mandate. Abortion is manifestly not health care; it always kills a child, and it frequently injures her mother. As for Mr. Vost unsubtly suggesting I belong to the Ku Klux Klan; note my comment above concerning Ms. Matsebula's comment on that issue.

One more for the record: Hillary Clinton, Mr. Obama's Secretary of State, announced in January that the Obama Administration will push for “reproductive health care and family planning” on a massive scale around the world. In April of 2009 Mrs. Clinton told the US Congress "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health and reproductive
health includes access to abortion that I believe should be safe, legal and rare."

When I write to the Times explaining how Mr. Obama moves on the abortion issue, it is not because I personally dislike him; I don't personally know him, so I can't personally dislike him. Rather, I write to let Swazis know what developments may soon affect them. This great nation deserves better than the death and heartbreak of abortion.

Obama's Health Care Woes

Wednesday's Times told us that US President Barack Obama delivered an "emotional closing argument" for his health care reform proposal. Friday's paper quoted Obama saying "You've got a good package, in terms of substance", "if they vote against it [the bill], they're voting against health care reform" and "This notion that this has not been transparent, that people don't know what's in the bill, everybody knows what's in the bill...the final provisions are going to be posted for many days before this thing passes". Sadly, the articles failed to tell us why the bill has encountered such difficulties in getting passed. That difficulty is that Obama's plan will provide public funding for elective abortions on an enormous scale.

The version of the bill Obama would like to pass into law would require anyone enrolling in the federal health insurance plan to make a monthly payment into a fund that will pay for other people's abortions. This is outrageously unjust, as people who would like to have the federal insurance but are opposed to abortion will have to choose between going without the federal health care program and helping pay for abortions.

Obama's favourite version would also allow the head of the Health and Human Services Department (Ministry) to declare abortion "preventative medicine" and insist that health insurance plans pay for abortion. Obama put pro-abortion Kathleen Sebelius in that position. It takes little imagination to think what she would do if this bill became law.

Obama's preferred version does not protect medical personnel from penalties if they choose not to participate in abortion. This means that if a doctor or nurse does not want to be involved in abortion, their career may suffer or be ended.

Obama's desired version includes $7 billion ($7,000,000,000) for Community Health Centers. The bill puts no restrictions on this money's use; this means the money could be used for performing and/or promoting abortion. Not surprisingly, the Reproductive Health Access Project and the Abortion Access Project, two pro-abortion organizations, are pushing for Community Health Centers to carry out abortions.

Obama would like people to believe that he has been transparent in this health-care reform debate. In his debates with Hillary Clinton for becoming the Democrat candidate for the presidency, Obama said concerning health care reform that "all of this will be done on C-SPAN in front of the public." In January of this year, it came to light that he, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi held private meetings on how to get Obama's health care bill passed. Secret does not equal transparent. And to call "transparent" the posting of 2,400 pages of complex legislation on the internet "many" days before a vote and expect people to read and thoroughly understand it does test the limits of credulity.

Still, Obama is partly right in saying "everybody knows what's in the bill". The American public has slowly realized how strongly Obama's preferred health care reform scheme promotes abortion, and they are liking it less and less. A recent poll by newspaper The Wall Street Journal found 48% of people think Obama's health care reform idea is a bad one, while 36% think it is a good one. This is the greatest disapproval percentage since the newspaper starting polling in April 2009. A poll by Rasmussen Reports found 53% of respondents opposed to Obama's plan and 43% in favour. This same Rasmussen poll found 46% of respondents strongly oppose Obama's plan, while 23% strongly favour it. Specifically addressing the use of public money for elective abortions, a poll last December found 73% of respondents opposed. Obama's plan will, in fact, divert tremendous amounts of money into publicly-funded abortion. Contrary to Obama's statement "You have a good package", polls consistently show more people disagree with him than agree with him.

Chillingly, a poll by the New England Journal of Medicine found 46% of medical doctors would consider leaving their medical practice if Obama's bill becomes law. The magazine observed that "While a sudden loss of half of the nation's physicians seems unlikely, a very dramatic decrease in the physician workforce could become a reality as an unexpected side effect of health care reform." Kevin Perputua, managing editor of the company which completed the poll for the Journal, said "Health care reform and increased government control of medicine may be the final straw that causes the physician work force to break down."

Obama says he's not "worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate". Maybe that's because those rules are so complex that an air traffic controller at London-Heathrow would struggle to keep them all straight. The point is that Obama is considering ways to bypass an open, transparent debate and vote on this reform and ram it through over growing disapproval. Whatever happened to all the promise of hope, bipartisanship, unity, and "one United States" he rode into office?

62% of the doctors in the New England Journal of Medicine poll thought health care reform is needed, but Obama's way is too much too soon. Millions of Americans want to see health care costs brought under control and health insurance available for people without it. Millions of Americans would join hands with Obama over health care without abortion coverage; but for some reason, Obama insists that abortion be part of the deal.

Obama has put himself in a no-win situation: if the health care plan fails, no reform will take place and the estimated 50 million Americans without health insurance will still lack it. If the plan goes through, Obama will have needlessly kicked the hornet's nest that is the abortion debate and further divided the people of the United States on this critical issue.

Passage of the bill will not mean the end of the health care reform debate. The state of Virginia has threatened lawsuits should Obama's preferred plan go through, and the decades-long struggle to protect women and children from the abortion machine will continue with added impetus.

It boggles the mind as to why Obama has placed himself, and the United States, in such a position when a large number of people will be disappointed with either passage or defeat of the bill. Women and children deserve better than abortion. If only Mr. Obama understood and acted on that truth.

Youth Maternity Rights

Friday's Times devoted a full page to the challenges of single motherhood and the rights these mothers have. Single motherhood is indeed a hard road; single moms and their children run a much higher risk of poverty than moms who are married.

We should help those mothers who find themselves with a child but without a husband. We can reduce the frequency of such difficult circumstances by teaching our youth to save sex for marriage and to keep sex only inside marriage. This avoids both unmarried motherhood and STDs. It also develops character during the single life, as well as the opportunity to develop work and/or educational skills to support a family. Two often overlooked advantages of saving sex for marriage are much lower divorce rates for those men and women who were married as virgins, and greater sexual satisfaction within marriage for those women who saved their sexual debut for their wedding night.

A proverb says "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". We should aid those young women who find themselves with child but not a father to provide. At the same time, we should teach our children by our actions and our words to save sex for marriage. This will drastically reduce unwed motherhood, and will lead to stronger couples, families, and a stronger Swazi nation.

Dads and Abortion

This space has spent much ink detailing abortion's terrible effects on women. But why do women have abortions in the first place? The reasons are innumerable; the Alan Guttmacher institute reports that an average woman gives 4 reasons for having an abortion. One recent study discovered an unexpected influence: the dad's involvement in raising a previous child.

Drawing on statistics from Princeton University's Fragile Families and Well-Being Study, Priscilla Coleman and her co-workers surveyed hospitals in sixteen American cities. The survey focused on families which already had one child and were identified as "fragile": along with poor financial and educational factors, 87% of the couples were not married. Interestingly, over 75% of the women indicated that the father of the first child was also the father of the second one.

The survey found that women were more likely to abort a second child if the father was poor in taking care of the first one. If the mom could not trust the dad to "watch the child for a week," "take good care of the child," "watch the child when the mothers needs to do things," or "does not support the mother's way of raising the child," the second child was in danger of being aborted.

The study found that factors usually expected to result in abortion-including a child with frequent sicknesses, a hard-to-manage child, or a low level of income-did not push moms toward abortion. Though material factors are of course important, these moms said a man who would help her with child-rearing was more important.

What do we learn from these results? Men can protect their unborn children-and benefit the whole family-by taking good care of their born children. Common sense dictates that everyone in the family prospers from an active, involved, loving dad. It also appears that future generations are more likely to enter life if fathers fulfill their protecting, providing, and supporting role.

May all fathers reading this column step forward and take care of their wives and children, for the sake of current and future generations. May Swaziland build a culture of life.

Rudy Poglitsh
rpoglitsh@live.com

Contraceptive Talk

The 19 February issue of the Times of Swaziland carried a full-page story about the advent of male hormone contraceptives, perhaps within the next 5 years. We were told that "safe, effective and reversable" contraception has been available for women since the 1960s and that male contraceptives will "empower" men. It is expected that male hormonal contraceptives will widen the gender equality avenue in Swaziland and will allow men to "take full responsibility on reproductive health matters".

Actually, there has been a "safe, effective, and reversible" method available for years that allows men to take full responsibility on reproductive health matters. It is cheap. It doesn't require hormones that alter body chemistry, and it has been shown to help couples build better marriages. It is called Natural Family Planning.

When my wife and I want to avoid pregnancy, I take her temperature every morning. I record this on a chart and with a simple analysis of the temerature day by day, we can tell when she is fertile and when she isn't. We adjust our behavior accordingly. This requires us to talk about important issues such as family size, workloads and child spacing. This communication helps us build a stronger marriage. We develop many ways to show love to each other. This strengthens our respect for each other and for ourselves. We do not view the normal functioning of our healthy bodies as an enemy to be overcome by whatever modern weapons (creams, caps, condoms, injections, synthetic hormones, surgery) are available.

Our sexuality needs to move beyond "Using others and being used by them." As the newspaper reports daily show, this leads only to self-centered misery. Natural Family Planning helps us mature so that we can learn to genuinely love our spouse with our whole body and with our whole self. This approach will empower not just men, and not just women, but couples and, by extension, families.

For a free cd explaining the pitfalls of contraception and a very brief introduction to the advantages of Natural Family Planning, visit http://www.omsoul.com/catalog/index.php?target=products&product_id=531

We Can Love Them Both

In October of last year Sharon Camp, president of the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, said "in much of the developing world, abortion remains highly restricted, and unsafe abortion is common and continues to damage women's health and threaten their survival." At the United Nations-sponsored "Women Deliver" conference in London in 2007, Dr. Francisco Songare, Director of the UN’s Partnership for Maternal and Newborn Health, said that the first priority in reducing maternal mortality “must be sexual and reproductive health – abortion – and without taboos!” In January of this year, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States will soon give lots of money to encourage “reproductive health care and family planning” as a “basic right” worldwide. In April of 2009, Secretary Clinton told the US House Foreign Affairs Committee that "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women's health and reproductive health includes access to abortion that I believe should be safe, legal and rare."

But do abortion and protecting maternal health actually go together?

UNICEF's 2009 "State of the World's Children" report says that "Most of these direct causes of
maternal mortality [the report names bleeding, infection, extended labour, and some other
complications from birth] can be readily addressed if skilled health personnel are on hand and key drugs, equipment and referral facilities are available".

Dr. Robert Walley, head of MaterCare International, said “It is ridiculous to address abortion and contraception at a conference [Women Deliver] about maternal mortality. By definition, a maternal mortality involves a pregnant woman, not a pregnancy that has been avoided or aborted. We have known for many years how to help prevent a woman’s death by emergency obstetrics and skilled birth attendants. It is a shame that these leaders want to divert attention from the real needs of women -- giving her the best of obstetrical care based on life, hope, and the dignity of motherhood.”

In January, Dr. Elard Koch, a researcher at the University of Chile, reported that the South American country of Chile has reduced its maternal death rate from 275 per 100,000 women in 1960 down to 18.7 in 2000. Dr. Koch said "From 1960 onwards, there has been a breakthrough in the public health system and primary care" in Chile. This included developing "highly trained personnel, the construction of many primary health centers and the increase of schooling of the population.”

An article in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2000 said "sudden and dramatic decline in maternal mortality rates, which occurred after 1937, took place in all developed countries and eliminated the previously wide country-level differences in national mortality rates. The main factors that led to this decline seem to have been successive improvements in maternal care." It is worth noting that these improvements took place before abortion became legal and widespread in the developed nations being studied. Put another way, providing improved health care to pregnant moms-and not abortion-improved their health.

Interestingly, there are anecdotal correlations between maternal health and laws protecting unborn children. Ireland has strong laws protecting unborn children; they have only 1 maternal death for every 100,000 live births. Poland has strengthened its laws against abortion over the past few years; that nation suffers only 8 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. The United States, where abortion is legal for any reason at almost any stage of pregnancy, suffers 17 deaths per 100,000 live births.

In 1995, the South American country of Guyana legalized abortion hoping for "attainment of safe motherhood". Guyana's maternal mortality rate is 30 times higher than Chile's. Chile has laws
protecting unborn children, and has (as seen above) made great strides in improving medical treatment to mothers.

Closer to home, South Africa suffers 400 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births; South Africa has the loosest restrictions on abortion in all of Africa.

Though the correlation of strong anti-abortion laws is anecdotal, it does make common sense: a
culture that wants to protect the lives of unborn children will certainly want to protect the lives
of their moms too. In this mindset, the health of women and children are both promoted.
We see signs of hope here in the Kingdom, too. On February 19th the Times reported the conversion of a clinic in Maguhdeleni into a full hospital. The hospital will include a maternity ward. According to Sister Grace Mavuso, the great expense of travelling to Mankayane Government Hospital meant many women were giving birth at home. The upgrading of the clinic promises a great step forward for the health of Swazi moms and their children.

The health of a mother and her unborn child need not be in conflict; rather, we can respect the lives of mothers and the lives of their unborn children. We can love them both.

May Swaziland build a culture of life.

Abortion and War

From its founding to the year 2000, the United States engaged in seven major wars: the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the first and second World Wars, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the first Gulf War. The total number of deaths from those wars add up to nearly 1.5 million. The Alan Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, reports that the number of abortions from 1981 to 2005 varied between 1.6 million and 1.2 million per year. This means that in two years, abortion kills nearly a million more people than those who died in all of America's conflicts for the first 200 years of that nation's existence. This comparison only considers the babies who died; millions of mothers also suffer physical, emotional, spiritual, and relational damage due to abortion.

Abortion is civil war on an unprecedented scale. May Swaziland never allow the destruction of its own women and children through abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of life.

The Real Meaning of Sex

This space has repeatedly demonstrated the bad effects of abortion on women. It has also shown that life begins at conception and that abortion always kills a child. If abortion devastates women and kills children, why does it perist throughout the world?

The reason abortion remains with us is because we do not understand the real purpose of sex. The true purpose of sex is to demonstrate and strengthen the communion between one man and one woman who have pledged themselves to one another for life in marriage. The marriage act (that is, sexual intercourse) physically embodies the oneness of marriage, and the emotional bonding of the marriage act strengthens that oneness. Furthermore, the love of husband and wife in marriage is the source of new human life. This is the true meaning of sex.

The false meanings of sex include 1) It's just for fun, 2) It should be saved for that special person and only when one is ready (married or not), and 3) People will just do it anyway. Note that these "meanings" lack any trace of lifelong committment or understanding that sex brings new people into existence. With these attitudes, it naturally follows that anything standing in the way of these "meanings" must be removed. A child is one such obstacle to meaningless sex, and so children must, if they appear due to sex, be removed. And thus we have abortion, with its ruinous effects on women and its killing of the unborn.

We have the antidote to this meaningless destruction: elevate the importance of sex by saving it for marriage, and keep sex only between one man and one woman who are married to each other. In so doing, we will improve the welfare of women, safeguard children, build happier marriages, and strengthen society.

Women, children, and men deserve better than abortion. Let Swaziland recapture the true meaning of sex and so promote the well-being of the whole nation. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.

Respect for Endangered Life
Father Frank Pavone is the USA director of Priests for Life. He recounts the following story:
"One Sunday I was preaching about abortion at a church in Florida [a state in America]. I told the people that the babies in the womb have no protection throughout the pregnancy from the evil of abortion. After church I took a walk across the street to the beach, and I saw a big sign posted there by the local authorities which said 'Do not touch the sea turtles or their eggs. They are protected by local, state, and federal law.'" Father Pavone continues: "My dear friends, if we don't have the right to choose to smash the egg of a sea turtle, why should we have the right to choose to smash a baby?"

Let us indeed respect all life, mothers and children included. May Swaziland build a culture of life.

Pro-life Might Save Your Life

Consider this story from American magazine Reader's Digest in July 1991. In New York in the 1950's, a three-year-old boy named Joey and his older brother would visit a neighbor woman named Catuzza who was pregnant. As children sometimes like to do, the boys would touch the woman's big belly and feel the baby kicking inside.

When Joey was nearly 40 years old, he faced a life-threatening condition. A good doctor treated Joey, and he lived. Later, Joey's brother noticed the last name of the doctor, and said this: "Only then did the realization hit me. The unborn baby who had kicked inside Catuzza all those years before on Irving Street had grown up to be the doctor who saved my brother's life".

Respecting the lives of children in the womb might someday save the lives of those already born. For the childrens' sake, for the mothers' sake, and even for our own sake, let us reject abortion and build a culture of life and love.

Letters to the Times of Swaziland

Letters to the Times of Swaziland

In September/October 2007, 71 aborted babies were found in plastic bags floating in a pond in Matsapha. A minor uproar erupted. The Family Life Association of Swaziland (FLAS) took out a full-page advertisement in the Times of Swaziland, the major national newspaper, suggesting Swaziland rethink its prohibition against abortion. The ad was chock-full of the typical euphemistic language used to promote abortion around the world. I e-mailed a letter to the editor the same day I read the ad, and have been sending a letter a week to the paper since that time. Many, though not all, of the letters have been published. The first letter is the first one I sent in response to the FLAS advertisement. The rest are in no particular order. Feel free to use them to work up your own pro-life thinking and letters. Feel free to contact me at rpoglitsh@live.com.Two last notes. Many prolifers believe an important and overlooked tool in ending abortion is considering its effects on the women who have them. If most people don't like abortion but tolerate because they think it helps women, then demonstrating that it harms those women is a great approach. For this reason, I suggest the first three documents in the section below.RESEARCH AND KEY FACTSAbortion’s Harm to Womenavailable at http://www.theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/ResearchBooklet.pdfand
Making Abortion Rare: A Healing Strategy for a Divided Nation by David Reardon, available at http://www.afterabortion.org/FreeBook.htm
An Unnecessary Evil by Clarke D.Forsythe, available athttp://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=437
These three resources are free, and all are dynamite.
For those who prefer bound paper in hand, here's a list of books to read. I drew most of my information from these books. Thanks to internet booksellers, you can pick up used copies of these books cheap. You will be making a great investment.Aborted Women, Silent No More by David ReardonThe Cost of "Choice": Women Evaluate the Impact of Abortion, edited by Erika BachiochiForbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion, by Theresa BurkeWomen's Health After Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence by Elizabeth Ring-Cassidy and Ian GentlesBlood Money: Getting Rich off A Woman's Right to Choose by Carol Everett with Jack ShawProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments by Randy AlcornA Love for Life by Dennis DiMauroWho Broke the Baby? by Jean Staker GartonLime 5 by Mark CrutcherNow-to the letters.
Subject: FLAS advocates abortionDear Editor,The FLAS statement in Friday’s paper is, I am sorry to say, a typical Planned Parenthood smooth-talking effort to get abortion legal in Swaziland. Their arguments can be condensed to a few sentences, and are easily refuted.“Sexual and Reproductive Health”, despite its nice sound, always carries with it abortion. Many pro-life NGOs, including C-FAM (a Catholic participant at the United Nations), have documented this again and again.Contraceptives ALWAYS increase the demand for abortion, because contraceptives fail. Contraception comes before abortion. This sounds strange, but is an historical fact. If the Matsapha factories provide contraception, more dead babies can be expected to be found in bags in the water.FLAS says “desperate circumstances such as rape, incest, desertion by boyfriend/spouse, economic difficulties, as well as being very young to support a child” could lead to unsafe abortions. Ask yourself, good reader, if any of these circumstances mean a mother’s body should invaded with cutting instruments and a baby cut into pieces. The proper response to those desperate circumstances is not the murder of a baby, but genuine care for mother and child.FLAS is in fact accurate when it says unsafe abortion has many life-threatening complications to the mother. Abortion is legal in my home country of America, and lots of mothers still get wounded and killed by abortion. The goal should not be to make abortion legal; the goal should be to make it history.FLAS suggests looking at what other countries have done in these circumstances. What FLAS means is that the Kingdom should make abortion legal, like these other countries have done. Making abortion legal means putting more babies at risk of getting cut to pieces within their mother’s womb.So, what to do about these hard circumstances? It is for families to be strengthened; and specifically, it is for men to lead. Men need to be protectors of their mothers, sisters, and female friends. Men must save sex for marriage. Men must provide for their wives and children. That is what a real man does. If men do not stand up now and protect and provide for women, IPPF and its associated groups will eventually force abortion on Swaziland. And then we will see more bloodletting. Let us build a culture of life and love, where every human in being is respected and protected from conception to natural death. Let us send the culture of death packing.Subject: A Woman's ChoiceSome people support abortion because they say that a woman should have control over her own body. These people have a point: every woman should be free to choose her occupation, where she wants to live, if she wants to marry and who she marries, and the many other options every human being deserves by virtue of being human.When it comes to abortion, however, things are different. This space has offered just a small amount of the evidence that the pre-born child is a full human being. That pre-born child deserves the opportunity to make all the choices available to her in the course of life. But abortion, because it kills her, denies her every sort of choice. Abortion is anti-choice, because it eliminates a lifetime of choices for the aborted child.The time of choice when it comes to children is before the sexual act is engaged. Are the conditions right for sexual intercourse? Those conditions are 1) marriage and 2) readiness for the beginning and care of a new life. If the answer to either question is no, than the correct choice is no sex.May Swaziland keep the choices of all its citizens open; may Swaziland say NO to abortion and YES to marriages and families filled with life and love.Subject: A World of HurtThis space has considered abortion's many areas of impact: on the health of the mother, the life of the child, the relationships between a mother who has abortion and the other people in her life, the pain of the mother and child in the process of abortion, the psychological effects on abortion providers, and the effect of abortion on the future of a nation. In every respect, abortion damages individuals: everyone loses. May Swaziland reject abortion and all its destructive effects. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love, a culture built on the respect for every human life from its beginning in the womb. May Swaziland build strong marriages and families, because strong marriages and families are the institutions best able to protect and promote life and love. May all Swazi children, reared in loving marriages and families, develop their full potential and make Swaziland a strong and vibrant nation.Subject: Abortion and Abuse IIA common pro-abortion slogan is "Every child a wanted child". It is definitely good for every child to be wanted. But what abortion proponents mean by this slogan is that if a woman finds herself unexpectedly pregnant, she should be legally free to kill that child. For the sake of honesty, those pushing for legal abortion should complete that sentence: "Every child a wanted child, and unwanted children may be killed in the womb".Abortion advocates would have us believe that if we just allow mothers to kill their unborn children, these moms and their families and the rest of society will be better off. This will not be the case. Abortion is violence-a most severe form of violence-against children. Legalizing abortion tells parents that it is okay to do violence against their unborn children. If this happens, we can be sure that violence against born children will follow. Any parent will tell you that children can make you supremely happy and proud, and that they can also infuriate you beyond what you thought possible. If a society decides that in some circumstances violence against children is okay (that is, abortion), what do you think will happen in those times at home when tensions are running high and patience is running low? Imagine a tired couple returning home from a long and frustrating day at work; one child has broken some dishes, a hungry baby is crying in a back room, and an older child is more concerned about checking messages on his cellphone than helping the family at this moment. If a society has legalized the killing of children under some circumstances, it has lowered the protection of its most vulnerable members. With a depreciated sense of the inviolability of the safety of children in mind, the potential for this hypothetical mom and dad to lash out against one or more of these born children-if only out of frustration-is very high. And all couples with children will tell you that an occasional frustrating day leading into a tense evening at home is far from hypothetical. One researcher concluded, "It should be noted that one of the earliest arguments [for abortion] was that aborting unwanted children would diminish the incidence of child abuse. Statistics show precisely the opposite; that is, with more frequent abortions, all kinds of child abuse have increased".Deliberate violence against innocents is always wrong-and that's just what abortion is. Abortion also leads to violence against born innocents-and that is also wrong. May Swaziland never go down the road of violence against innocents. May Swaziland say no to abortion and yes to strong marriages and families. May Swaziland say yes to the protection of all innocent life, from conception to natural death.Subject: Abortion and AthleticsMy school is currently spending afternoons training for athletics competitions. I am glad to get to exchange my teaching clothes-suit and tie-and for some running shoes and shorts. I trot up to the sports ground and stretch my legs in anticipation of a sweaty and enjoyable workout.The best part of the afternoon, however, is the students. Vusi's intensity as he pushes to place first in the 100 meters; Ncobile's determination to win every running event she enters (which she does); Josta's quick smile and handshake; Gugu's bubbly interaction with her friends; and the laughing and exhausted piles of participants who collapse on each other as the cross the finish line. As beautiful as the mountains and rivers of Swaziland are, its people are far more beautiful.Then today I began to wonder how this afternoon would appear if Swaziland had an abortion "law" like my home country, the United States, does. The US legalized abortion in 1973. Since that time, any mother has been legally able to abort her child for any reason. As a result, 40 million children have been denied the right to life. One in four American children conceived since 1973 has been aborted.With this statistic in mind, I took a second look at the students. One in four...which ones would not be here, if abortion were legal? Mfanimpela, with his easy smile? Masiko, with his quick but gentle wit? Would thoughtful and virtuous Khetsiwe been a victim of her mother's "choice" to have an abortion?Khetsiwe, Mfanimpela, and Masiko are wonderful young people, full of life, promise, and kindness. Swaziland would be a much poorer place without them. Yet abortion promises to cut such lives short before they take their first breaths. Aborted babies will never feel the February sun on their face or a cool breeze on their back. They will never climb the mountains of the high veld or hear the chattering of the weaver birds. They will not know the camaraderie of sports and culture teams and the pageant of speech and prize-giving days. Those of us who do live will be deprived of the joy of watching them grow up. All abortion will give us is one dead child and one wounded (physically, mentally, spiritually, emotionally) mother.Citizens are any nation's greatest asset, and abortion is war on the youngest and most defenseless citizens. Swaziland, do not swallow the pill of self-destruction that is abortion. Cherish and protect the lives of your people. Build strong marriages and families. Say NO to abortion and build a culture of life and love.Subject: Abortion and Breast CancerBreast cancer is the number one cancer afflicting women worldwide. Is there a link between abortion and breast cancer? Sadly, yes.What is the link between breast cancer and abortion? When a woman becomes pregnant, the cells in her breasts multiply and undergo substantial changes in preparation for breastfeeding. If the pregnancy is suddenly ended by abortion, these changing cells are left in an "in-between" state. Cells in this "in-between" state are more likely to become cancer cells.25 out of 31 studies from around the world have demonstrated the link between breast cancer and abortion (Chris Kahlenborn, "Breast Cancer Risk from Abortion" pamphlet). Doctor Joel Brind, after surveying numerous studies of the abortion/breast cancer link, "concluded that women who have an abortion before their first full-term pregnancy have a 50% increased risk of developing breast cancer" (Kahlenborn). Another study showed that "women younger than 18 who had an abortion experienced a 150% increased risk of breast cancer. This became an 800% increased risk of they had their abortions between the 9th and 24th week of pregnancy." (Kahlenborn)Abortion kills children, and breast cancer kills mothers. We hear much talk about promoting women in Swaziland, and this is good. Since abortion kills baby girls and increases the chance of a cancer which targets women, abortion cannot advance women's well-being. May Swaziland never allow a mother and child-killing procedure to become legal. Down with abortion, up with good marriages, up with strong families, up with Swaziland.Subject: Abortion and Child AbuseWe hear more and more calls for an end to child abuse in the Kingdom-and this is excellent. SWAGGA has an advertisement almost daily in the Times for children who have been abused to come forward and tell their stories. As Swaziland debates legalizing abortion, it is a good time to ask: is there a link between abortion and child abuse?Sadly, yes. Researchers Ney and Peeters write: "people who have had an abortion are more likely to abuse their children and people who have been abused are more likely to have an abortion...with more frequent abortions, all kinds of child abuse have increased". Other studies indicate that 25 per cent-one out of four-of the 1.3 million American women who have abortions each year have abuse in their history. Researchers Crawford and Mannion continue: "Several studies now show that many aborted women were victims of sexual abuse as children. They who were the victims of violence, now become perpetrators. How? Why? Does not this knowledge of the women's history or similar insights demand even greater compassion and commitment to help heal?" (all from "Women's Health After Abortion" by Ring-Cassidy and Gentles)Indeed, such facts do call for greater compassion and commitment to heal the victims of abortion. Remember that the best way to heal an injury is to prevent it before it happens. May Swaziland protect women and children by keeping abortion illegal. May children in the womb have their right to life respected; may future generations be spared the abuse abortion spawns; may Swaziland build strong and loving marriages and families, which will build a strong and shining Swaziland.Subject: Abortion and ContraceptionThis space has repeatedly demonstrated the horror of abortion. Abortion leaves a trail of death and emotional, spiritual and mental destruction behind it. Many people work hard to help women who have had abortions to recover their well-being. But as a common saying goes, a gram of prevention is worth a kilogram of cure. Better to stop the cause of abortion than to have to do the much harder work of helping a woman recover after the fact.What leads to so many abortions? Though this might sound surprising, it is contraception.Every contraceptive, just like every other man-made device in the world, sometimes fails. If a man and woman are having contracepted sex and have no intent whatsoever of conceiving a child, imagine their surprise and shock when they learn the woman is pregnant. Since that child was in no way welcome in the sexual act, it is a short mental step to "get rid of it"-and that means abortion.Experience has shown that the first step to legalized abortion is the widespread use of contraception. The wider the acceptance and use of contraception, the stronger the push for abortion. Bear in mind that Swaziland, as reported in the Swazi News some months ago, has received 26 million condoms since 2000. That is 26 condoms for every man, woman, and child in the country.So what is the solution?First, sex belongs in marriage only-not before, and not with anyone other than one's spouse after. Second, for those couples who do need to delay the birth of another child, there is a method called Natural Family Planning, or NFP for short. Natural Family Planning uses some easy-to-record physical signs of the wife to know when she is fertile and when she is not. As a husband and wife become knowledgeable about her fertility, and as they consider their readiness for another child, they can decide when marital relations are appropriate and when they are not. Natural Family Planning is not the unreliable "rhythm method"; NFP works as well as any modern contraceptive technology. This is documented in the British Medical Journal by an author who studied the use of Natural Family Planning among Hindu and Muslim couples in Calcutta, India. These couples were instructed in Natural Family Planning by Mother Teresa, the famous Albanian nun who spent decades among the poorest of the poor. Natural Family Planning, in addition to being effective, encourages couples to grow in communication, understanding, and cooperation-and surely every marriage can use more communication, understanding, and cooperation.May Swaziland build strong marriages and strong families by saying NO to abortion and YES to love. The techniques are available; may the eagerness to build a culture of life be there too.Subject: Abortion and DevelopmentMost countries described as "developed" have legalized abortion. What part does abortion play in the development of a nation?This is an easy question to answer: abortion has no legitimate place in the development of a nation.Develop, Webster's New World Dictionary tells us, means "to make fuller, better, etc." This definition could describe the normal process of a child's growth from conception to birth and through all the phases of a full and healthy life. The same dictionary says that abortion means "premature expulsion of a foetus so that it does not live; miscarriage". For a visual definition of abortion, visit http://www.100abortions.com/ and see the result of cutting apart of a baby while still in the womb and then sucking those baby parts out with a powerful vacuum machine. Concerning chemical abortions (the kind mentioned in a letter to the Times about a month ago) know that chemical abortions via tablets kill babies of less than five weeks gestation. They work much less efficiently after the baby is 7 weeks old, and abortions done after this stage still rely on surgical methods. ("The Facts of Life" by Brian Clowes) Besides, 95% of all abortions, at least in the United States, are still surgical (that is, the baby is dismembered in the womb and the parts taken out piece by piece; First Things magazine, Nov. 2007) When it comes to the life of a human being, Webster's definition of the word "development" does not agree with Webster's definition (and the physical reality) of abortion.Another letter a few weeks ago asked the question, What is a young woman who finds herself pregnant and does not have the financial resources to raise the child supposed to do? The letter writer's solution was abortion. Pam Stenzel, a former counselor for women with unwanted pregnancies describes the situation like this: "You had good options before you had sex. Now your choices are bad, worse, and worst. There is no simple, pain free solution. I've counseled hundreds of women who thought that abortion was a simple fix. 10, 15 years after their abortion they are still suffering from that decision." Sex brings children; that is its purpose. Who wants to put herself in a position where they think killing a child is the only good solution left? It is tragically ironic that at a time when massive resources are getting mobilized to "Unite for children, unite against AIDS" and to end child abuse, the country is simultaneously considering the legal killing of unborn children. How in the world could such a bizarre combination of protecting children from the ravages of AIDS and abuse stand next to the legal killing of the utterly innocent? Such a combination would not be development; it would be a sign that a significant portion of the population-that is, the unborn-are not deemed worthy of participation in the advancement of the nation. Yet the unborn are the next generation of citizens; who else is more deserving to reap the benefits of and contribute to the development of Swaziland but the next generation?The phrase "community development" is often heard these days. The first human community is a family, and the family has its origin in the lifelong, committed marriage of husband and wife.From the community of husband and wife develops the family, through the procreation of children. When a woman conceives a child, another community is brought forth-that of mother and child. Think for a moment of the intimacy of that mother/child community. For about 9 months, mom takes care of all the needs of that utterly helpless and growing human being within her. She gives her child all that she has, so that this new life may have life. I have had the great privilege of knowing the birth of three daughters; and I know my wife went through a lot, especially in the final months of carrying tinkhabisa tetfu, to bring these children into the world. My wife and I continue to teach our daughters the requirements and rewards of living in loving community with other people. Learning about and participating in supportive community is a major part of a fulfilled human life. It teaches us about cooperation and unity. The family is the building block of society, and children who grow up in loving families can become excellent developers of any community.Abortion, on the other hand, obliterates community. In one brief and violent act, the new life developing in the womb is ended and the community of mother and child wiped out. Instead of cooperation and unity, abortion teaches opposition (mother and/or father against child) and violent death. It also teaches selfishness, because a couple can feel free to engage in the sexual act and know that any conceived child can be aborted. The couple is free to tell any possible children "You are not welcome into our community; if you show up, you will be killed". Does this sound like the way for a country to become "fuller" and "better"-for the country to develop?Development and abortion do not mix. Let us build the country by strengthening marriage and family; let us respect every human life, from conception to natural death. Subject: Abortion and EqualityWe hear much these days about gender equality. It is important that men and women be treated with equal dignity as human beings. But it is very obvious that men and women are different in many ways. One of the most obvious ways men and women are different is in childbearing. Bizarre stories from the United States aside, women can have babies and men cannot. This is an amazing ability, one which should be respected and protected by all citizens. Yet in many discussions of gender equality, we hear calls for women's "reproductive rights". Be aware that "reproductive rights", for many development organizations, includes abortion. It is a strange thing that in order for women to "develop" and "advance", they should be able to kill the new human life growing inside them. Childbearing is a unique and essential ability, one that is altogether important for the future of a nation; women should not think that denying that ability and killing their children is the way to gain equal footing with men. Instead, women's capacity to bring forth new life should be protected and honored. May Swaziland build strong marriages and families, where the unique contributions of both husband and wife are honored and respected. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.Subject: Abortion and Human RightsWe hear much talk about rights these days: women's rights, children's rights, voting rights, and so forth.There is much good in this talk about rights. Many members of the human family have suffered systematic denial of their human dignity by those more powerful than themselves. It is good to defend the inherent human rights of all people, so that all people are treated properly.One must be alive to enjoy one's rights. We are appalled at violent crime because it assaults a person's dignity and sometimes even takes their lives.Which brings us to abortion. The child in the womb is a human person. As a consequence of their humanity, each child has a RIGHT TO LIFE. The right to life is the first and most fundamental right. Without it, all the other human rights mean absolutely nothing. How can a dead person enjoy his or her human rights? Legalizing abortion means legalizing the murder of the very young and the consequent denial of their opportunity to enjoy their rights as a human being. It is obvious that abortion is a gross insult to the dignity of pre-born girls and boys. May Swaziland never legalize the abomination of abortion. May Swaziland instead build a culture of life and love which respects each and every human being from the moment of conception to natural death. It's the right thing to do.Subject: Abortion and PainAbortion hurts. Don't believe it? Read this:"As early as 8 to 10 weeks after conception, and definitely by 13 and 1/2 weeks, the unborn experiences organic pain...By 13 and 1/2 weeks, she responds to pain at all levels of her nervous system in an integrated response which cannot be termed a mere reflex. She can now experience pain." (from "Prolife Answers to Prochoice Arguments", Randy Alcorn, P. 149) A "mere reflex" is a situation like pulling your hand away from a hot stove. The doctor quoted in Mr. Alcorn's book is talking about the kind of pain I experienced when I hit my thumb full-on with a hammer while driving nails. The pain was so great I could not speak; I simply walked slowly in circles until the pain gradually subsided. I thought I would pass out or vomit. I was not having a reflexive response to pain, but rather a fully conscious experience of great pain. Such is the pain an unborn child feels as she is cut to pieces by an abortionist's knives. I survived my thumb-smashing; an aborted child does not survive an abortion.The mother also experiences pain: sometimes during the procedure, sometimes she experiences emotional pain for years after, and sometimes she experiences both. Consider the following:"I could feel the baby being torn from my insides. It was really painful...Three quarters of the way through the operation I sat up...In the cylinder I saw the bits and pieces of my little child floating in a pool of blood. I screamed and jumped off the table. They took me into another room and I started vomiting...I just couldn't stop throwing up...I had nightmares and recurring dreams about my baby. I couldn't work my job. I just laid in my bed and cried. Once, I wept so hard I sprained my ribs. Another time while crying, I was unable to breathe and passed out. I was unable to walk on the beach because the playing children would make me cry. Even advertisements for nappies would set me into uncontrollable fits of crying." (Alcorn, P. 156-157)Swaziland is becoming more aware of the hardships of women and children. We don't want to cause them more death and pain-yet legalizing abortion promises to do just that. May Swaziland stand up for the well-being of women and children by saying NO to abortion and YES to healthy marriages and families.Subject: Relationships and abortionEveryone wants to love and be loved. Almost all popular music sings about love. What is the effect of abortion on relationships?Read these quotes from chapter 15 of "Women's Health After Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence" by Elizabeth Ring-Cassidy and Ian Gentles."Abortion can have a significant impact on every relationship a woman has; not only is her relationship with her partner affected, so are her relationships with the other members of her family and her other children. After an abortion, the rate of marital breakups and relationship dissolution is anywhere from 40 to 75 per cent, often related to the breakdown of intimacy and trust. In addition, many women experience depression, guilt, and anger related to feelings of having been let down by their partner...If their partners have manipulated or coerced them into having an abortion, women tend to feel angry and betrayed, and men, typically, feel a loss of control and pride especially if they were not consulted."Put simply, abortion kills love between man and woman. How about between parents and children?"When a young girl is coerced into having an abortion by her parents, there is often a breakdown in the parent-child relationship...Or, if a girl has an abortion without her parents' knowledge, she ends up in a cycle of lies and cover-ups which emotionally strain all her relationships."So abortion devastates the love and trust between parents and children. How about between a woman who has an abortion and later carries a child to birth?"Suppression of mourning which occurs in many of these situations often has marked negative effects on relationships with future children, some women reporting emotional numbing and inability to bond maternally."Abortion can render a mother incapable of loving the children she carries to term. Does abortion affect children whose parents abort a later child?"Living children in a family where there is an abortion are also negatively affected, frequently exhibiting fear, anxiety, and sadness at the loss of their sibling".Everyone wants love. Research demonstrates that abortion kills love at every level: between men and women, between girls who abort and their parents, and between mothers and living children. It is hard to imagine a more effective method for killing love than abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life and trust; may Swaziland say NO to abortion and say YES to strong marriages and strong families.Subject: Abortion and the Status QuoIn the past few weeks we have been horrified to read of the dumping of a dead baby and the strangling of a newborn. These tragic incidents brought feelings of sadness and outrage. They also provided the occasion for noble statements by a pastor quoted in the Times and Save the Children about respecting and protecting the lives of young people.If Swaziland legalizes abortion, however, the revolting act of killing children will become a "normal" part of civic life. Should abortion become legal, younger people who do not remember the debates about the issue will treat it as just another topic of discussion. And yet, it is NOT just another issue or topic. The 73 babies floating in Matsapha last year and the recent tragedies are abominations that no society should ever accept as "commonplace" or "normal". Instead, just as that pastor and Save the Children said, may Swaziland always protect the young. They are the future of Swaziland; they deserve to live, and the nation needs them. May abortion never find a place in the Kingdom. May loving marriages and strong families be the standard in Swaziland. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.Subject: Abortion and women in developmentSome individuals and organizations argue that for women to achieve equality with men, they must have the legal option of abortion. Put another way, many feminists-those who want women to have the right to become all they can be-feel that abortion must be available. Is this true?The early American feminists strongly opposed abortion. Susan B. Anthony, who fought for the American woman's right to vote, referred to abortion as "child murder". She said: "I deplore the terrible crime of child murder...No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed...but oh! three times guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime". (Randy Alcorn, "ProLife Answers to ProChoice Aguments", p. 95)The president of a well-known abortion rights group once said "We have to remind people that abortion is the guarantor of a woman's...right to participate fully in the social and political life of society". (Alcorn, p. 96) This is absurd. Mothers bring forth the next generation of citizens; abortion threatens to kill that generation. It is an illogical and evil idea that a mother should be able to kill her child, which is one of her most important contributions to society, so that she can participate fully in society. Finally, abortion is today's leading method of getting rid of baby girls. A 1989 report on India stated that of 8,000 pre-natal tests which indicated a daughter was in the womb, all but one of those daughters was aborted. Mainland China's one-child policy, joined to the strong desire of Chinese parents for sons, means that thousands of baby girls are aborted every year. It is horrifically ironic that abortion, which is sometimes presented as essential for women to move ahead, has brought death to many thousands of girls; girls who would have become full-grown women, but who got aborted because they were female.Women and men are already equal in the most important way: their dignity. No man is more dignified because he is a male, and no woman is no less dignified because she is a female. The ridiculous and patently false notion that men are superior just because they're male and women are inferior just because they're female must be smashed.Men and women are, however, different in every other category-and that's good! It allows for a wonderful complementarity between the sexes. May Swazis respect and encourage the different and complimentary strengths of the opposite sexes. May Swaziland build strong marriages and families.Subject: Abortion as HolocaustBeginning in the 1930s and stretching into the mid-1940s, Nazi Germany sought to exterminate European Jews. Soviet and American soldiers, at the end of World War II, came across grisly concentration camps where millions of Jews had been worked to death, gassed to death, or died due to "medical experiments". What had these Jews done to deserve this fate? Nothing.Swaziland is enmeshed in a debate about legalizing abortion. Legal abortion will mean an entire class of people who have done nothing wrong will now be eligible to get killed at will. What have these unborn children done to deserve this fate? Nothing. Their only "fault" is that they are too young to speak or otherwise defend themselves.We are inspired when hearing stories about how some Europeans went to great lengths, even as far as putting themselves in danger of going to the concentration camps themselves, to save Jews from the Nazi death machine. Some people wonder today why more people didn't do more than they did to protect Jews when it became clear what Hitler was doing.Swaziland, don't join the nearly-universal holocaust of abortion. Now is the time for heroism. Now is the time to stand up for those who cannot speak up or defend themselves. Now is the time to preserve and protect the next generation of Swazis. Now is the time to say NO to abortion. Let husbands and wives love each other, and let them welcome new life into their love. Let these children grow up in a loving, supportive family. Let love and life reign.Subject: Abortion: Between a Woman and Her Doctor?Some abortion advocates argue that abortion is a personal medical decision, and as such it should be between a woman and her doctor only. Other citizens, these advocates argue, have no legitimate input into the decision to abort.In fact, at least two other people ARE involved in the decision to abort: the father of the child (who had a 50% contribution to the new baby) and the baby herself. To say that the decision to abort a child is between a mother and a doctor only is the same as saying two people may privately decide whether they will kill a third, completely innocent person, sitting in the next room. Who speaks for the innocent person?Beyond this obvious fault in the "woman and doctor only" argument, evidence after 35 years of legalized abortion demonstrates that the reality of abortion almost never matches the idyllic picture of a mother and her doctor thoughtfully pondering the pros and cons of aborting her child.From Carol Everett, former owner of a number of abortion clinics in the USA:"But when (a pregnant girl) calls that number that's paid for by abortion money, what kind of information do you think she is going to get? Remember, they sell abortions. They don't sell keeping the baby. They don't sell giving the baby up. They don't sell delivering the baby in any form. They only sell abortions.The counselor that the girl speaks to on the telephone is paid to be her friend. She is supposed to seduce her into a friendship of sorts to sell her the abortion. There are usually two questions the girls ask. The first is: Does it hurt? "Oh, no. Your uterus is a muscle. It's a cramp to open it: a cramp to close it; it's a slight cramping sensation. Everybody's had cramps - every woman in the world."Then they ask: Is it a baby? "No, it's product of conception; it's a blood clot; it's a piece of tissue."When the girl goes in for the abortion she pays up front then goes into a room for counseling. They give her a 6 to 12 page form. This form is written by an abortion attorney to confuse the girl to death. It works and she doesn't ask any questions. She goes back to the two questions: Does it hurt? Is it a baby? I cannot tell you one thing that happens in an abortion clinic that is not a lie."Doesn't sound like an open, warm, consultative relationship, does it?In the United States-home of one million legal abortions a year-the procedure is usually done in a stand-alone location, not associated with a hospital. Because "time is money" and the faster the women move through the clinic the more money is made, any relationship between the abortion doctor and the woman is very limited. From the book "Lime 5" by Mark Crutcher: "Another problem for abortionists is that there is seldom a conventional doctor-patient rapport. To move as many women through the clinic as possible, the nurses and counselors completely prep the woman for abortion and oversee her recovery; the doctor is involved only during the actual procedure. According to abortionist David Grimes, the 'communication may be limited to a brief discussion with the patient on the operating table before the surgery'. So there is little time to get to know the patient, or to allow the patient to see the doctor as anything more than someone who walks in a room, performs her abortion, and moves on to the next woman".This "let's get it over with so I can get my money" attitude reared its ugly head in the following incident, as reported in Randy Alcorn's "ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments":"One day the doctor was in a hurry to go play golf. This poor woman was crying because he was rushing the procedure to dilate her cervix. She was in a lot of pain and really afraid. He got angry and told her, 'Spread your legs! You've obviously spread them for someone else, now spread them for me'". Does this sound like a warm, caring, thoughtful relationship between woman and abortion doctor?From the Los Angeles Times newspaper (USA), February 2008:"By the time paramedics arrived, the patient was lying in a pool of her own blood, her pulse racing and her blood pressure dangerously low. The woman, identified only as Angela P. in records of the Medical Board of California, had gone to the Clinica Medica Para la Mujer de Hoy in Santa Ana in the summer of 2004 for an abortion. Dr. Phillip Rand, then in his early 80s, performed a vaginal suction procedure, despite having determined that Angela was about 20 weeks pregnant, well into her second trimester. She was given no anesthesia or painkillers. Angela P.'s experience was cited in a 2004 medical board accusation against Rand as 'barbaric' and a 'severe departure' from a reasonable standard of care."Once again, this is no example of a good relationship between doctor and patient. Further and equally disgusting examples abound.The "between a woman and her doctor only" argument for abortion fails on logical as well as empirical grounds. Abortion is shown once more to work against the health and well-being of women. May Swaziland keep abortion illegal and instead, build strong marriages and families-marriages and families where life and love go hand in hand.Subject: Abortion Horror ShowWhen abortion was legalized nationwide in the United States in 1973, many individuals got into the abortion business. Why? Because a lot of money was to be made. Lots of money is still being made through abortion. Planned Parenthood, the biggest abortion provider in the world, rakes in about 100 million dollars-700 million Emalangeni-per year doing abortions.Unfortunately for women, many abortion clinics do not pursue high health standards the way they pursue high incomes. Listen to a couple of stories.On 17 April 1998, Lou Anne Herron, a 33-year-old mother of two, lay on a gurney soaked with her blood, crying out, "Help me. What's wrong with me? My legs are numb." An abortionist at the A-Z Women's Center in Phoenix (USA) replied, "There's nothing wrong with you. The bleeding has stopped," as the blood continued to stream down Herron's legs to her toes. She bled for three hours.There was no registered nurse on hand, only $7-an-hour [just over minimum wage] untrained assistants, an abortionist who wouldn't interrupt his lunch to look at Herron, and a clinic administrator who stubbornly refused to call an ambulance from the hospital across the street until it was too late. An emergency room physician estimated Herron had been dead for 10 or 20 minutes before paramedics arrived. She had a torn uterus.National Catholic Register, March 2001On 2 June 1989, "Margaret" went to Acme Reproductive Services 21 to have an abortion performed by John Roe 295. After she was dismissed, she started experiencing pain and bleeding, and called the facility about her symptoms. The did not advise her to seek medical care. Two days later, she sought medical treatment on her own and was told that she had a perforated uterus and had retained foetal tissue. A dilation and curettage was performed to complete the abortion and, due to infection, a hysterectomy was also necessary. Unfortunately, despite all efforts to save her life, Margaret died of the complications of her abortion, leaving behind her husband and one-year-old son."Lime 5" by Mark CrutcherNote that these tragedies took place 16 and 26 years after abortion was made legal. In these and many other cases, "legal" abortion was not "safe" abortion. Will every woman who goes for abortion suffer these horrible fates? No, but many will. Doctor David Reardon in his book "Aborted Women" reports that 20 to 50% of all women who have abortions suffer long-term complications, usually of their procreative system. It is much safer, for mother and child, to allow the baby to live.May Swaziland never put money before the health of her mothers and children. May the country build strong marriages and families, where life and love go hand in hand. Yes to life; no to abortion.Subject: Abortion Hurts WomenSome people think abortion lessens the stress on a woman who finds herself unexpectedly pregnant. This would seem to make sense; after all, if pregnancy is "the problem", doesn't abortion solve it? Yet evidence gathered over many years indicates that abortion has long-lasting bad effects on some women. These bad effects include:*Much higher suicide rates (up to 9 times higher for post-abortion women than for women in the general population)*Shame*Hostility towards self and others*Sleep disorders*Relationship disruption*Flashbacks to the event*Bitterness(from Randy Alcorn, "ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments", page 152-153)This is but a partial list of negative outcomes of abortion. One can argue that it is impossible to know if a woman will have such reactions to an abortion, and that is true. In the same way, we don't know if a bullet shot from the top of a tall building towards the centre of town will strike and kill anyone. But such a bullet certainly could kill someone, and it is far better not to fire that bullet. Any particular woman's reaction to having an abortion is unpredictable; but the evidence says that many women do suffer tremendously from the procedure. Remember also that, in contrast to the bullet analogy, one person always does die in an abortion: a child.Swazi women face enough challenges without risking the physical, psychological, and spiritual burden of killing their own pre-born children. For the sake of tinkhabisa na bomake wemaSwati, may Swaziland keep the murder of abortion illegal. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.Subject: Abortion: Rhetoric versus RealityPromoters of abortion often place it under the cover of "reproductive rights". Abortion is touted as a necessary step in the advancement of women and a way for women to exert control over their bodies. The unborn child is left out of the discussion, and the procedure is characterized as simple and painless. Mention of long-term after effects is rarely made.First off, a child always dies in an abortion. Killing and innocent human being is not an acceptable method to achieve any "right", "advancement", or "control". Regardless of the professed "simplicity and painlessness" of a procedure, if the procedure kills a baby, it is wrong.Beyond the killing of a child, what are the realities of abortion? Let's hear from former abortion clinic owner and operator Carol Everett."I cannot tell you one thing that happens in an abortion clinic that is not a lie. There are usually two questions the girls ask. The first is: Does it hurt? 'Oh, no [she is told] Your uterus is a muscle. It's a cramp to open it: a cramp to close it; it's a slight cramping sensation. Everybody's had cramps - every woman in the world.'"Is abortion simple and painless? Ms. Everett explains, "...they are very painful to the baby. But, yes they are very, very painful to the woman. I've seen six people hold a woman on the table while they did the abortion.""Then they ask: Is it a baby? 'No, it's product of conception; it's a blood clot; it's a piece of tissue.'" (from www.prolifeaction.org/providers/everett.htm)Hear what Stephanie Williams of California, USA has to say: "I was deceived because I was not told the truth about what an abortion means to the life of an unborn baby. I was not told that at 10 weeks (which is [sic] when I had my abortion) my child was already fully formed." (LoveMatters.com newspaper)In fact, at 20 days after conception your eyes began to form and your brain, spinal column, and nervous system were almost complete. At 24 days, your heart began to beat. ("The Facts of Life" by Brian Clowes) When a woman is pregnant, she is pregnant not with some abstract piece of foetal tissue but with a child.What about long-term effects? Is having an abortion no more serious than having a tooth removed? Listen to Tewannan Aman of Florida, USA: "I was 18 when I got pregnant. At three months pregnant, I had an abortion. About seven years later...my heart broke. I was so overcome with grief. How could I have taken the life of my unborn child?" Listen to Carrie Camilleri of California, USA: "I was an emotional wreck. The following day I was empty, sad, numb. I knew that day I had made a huge mistake. I wish with all my heart I would have done things differently". (both from LoveMatters.com)Listen to these women from Australia: "I am tormented...I've lost self-esteem, inner peace, find it very difficult to find joy anywhere in life, am always depressed"-Julie. "I had paid the ultimate price. I have to live with myself. I have to look at myself and know it was my choice-I did it. I can't believe I did it, I wish I could change everything and go back"-declined to give her name. (Quotes from "The Cost of Choice", edited by Erika Bachiochi)Carol Everett once more: "I finally realized, 'We weren't helping women, we were destroying them-and their children'...I knew that I not only had to stop being involved with abortions, but I had to help promote the truth." (from LoveMatters.com)When a woman is pregnant, she is pregnant with a child. Should she choose to have an abortion, she will be choosing the death of her child and she risks suffering immense physical and emotional pain herself.Abortion is good for neither woman nor child. If you are unexpectedly pregnant, do not kill your baby through abortion. Give your baby the greatest gift you can-the gift of life. May Swaziland build strong marriages and families so that all members of society-even small, unborn members-are protected from conception to natural death.Subject: Abortion: Safe, if legal?Some groups suggest that if abortion were made legal in the Kingdom, mothers would be protected from unsafe abortions. In their press statement on Friday, 12 October, for example, FLAS insinuates that Swaziland's meeting their commitments to various interventions (Millennium Development Goals and International Conference on Population and Development) includes reconsidering how Swaziland treats abortion.In my home country, the United States, the courts legalized abortion in 1973. The United States has, arguably, the highest standard of medical care in the world. It follows that a nation with legalized abortion and very good health care should have very safe abortions.I include here a few anecdotes taken from a book called "Lime 5" by Mark Crutcher. Mr. Crutcher heads an organization called Life Dynamics Incorporated in the United States. Lime 5 describes the real-life effects of abortion on the women who have them and the individuals who perform them. It is a book not likely to appear on the suggested reading list of the International Planned Parenthood Federation or on the shelves of any of its affiliates. Still, anyone interested in abortion would do well to read it.Note: Lime 5 protects the identities of the mothers undergoing abortion by giving them false names. It protects the identities of the the abortionists by calling each of them "John Roe" with a number. The abortion clinics are also represented as "Acme Reproductive Services" with a number. Each anecdote is referenced in the book, and the actual names and places can be looked up. Here are a few of the hundreds of documented stories in the book.On June 14, 1977, "Barbaralee" had an abortion performed by John Roe 781. After the procedure, she was noted to be pale and complaining of lower abdominal cramping, so she was kept at the clinic for an additional two hours. When she was dismissed, her sister helped her, weak and bleeding, to her car, where she lay in the back seat during the trip home. Several hours later, she was found unconscious in her bedroom and was rushed to the hospital. She was pronounced dead on arrival. An autopsy showed a badly torn uterus, a damaged ureter, and a large amount of blood in the pelvic cavity...She was 18 years old at the time of her death.On June 2, 1989, "Margaret" went to Acme Reproductive Services 21 to have an abortion performed by John Roe 295. After she was dismissed, she started experiencing pain and bleeding, and called the facility about her symptoms. They did not advise her to seek medical care. Two days later, she sought medical treatment on her own and was told that she had a perforated uterus and retained fetal tissue. [A procedure was undertaken] to complete the abortion and, due to infection, a hysterectomy (total removal of the uterus) was also necessary. Unfortunately, despise all efforts to save her life, Margaret died of the complications of her abortion, leaving behind her husband and one-year-old son."Patricia" underwent an abortion by John Roe 13 to terminate her 24-week pregnancy on March 3, 1984. During the procedure, she suffered a deep laceration (cut) two inches long and passing through the entire cervical wall. Roe then left her alone while he performed abortions on other patients. Patricia, age 16, bled to death while at the abortion clinic.Mr. Crutcher explains that his book, which is just over 300 pages long, would have to be expanded to "a couple of thousand" pages to include all the cases he found. If abortion causes such horrible and tragic deaths of women in the most medically advanced nation on earth, what will be the results of legal abortion in nations whose medical services are not yet so advanced?FLAS mentions that its parent organization, IPPF, is involved in "maternal and child health and safe motherhood". That is excellent; everyone should be interested in the health of mothers and children, since mothers have a huge part in bringing forth the next generation and children ARE the next generation. Making abortion legal is not the way to take better care of women and children, as Lime 5 and other studies show. Swazi women and children deserve better than abortion. They deserve caring, committed husbands and fathers, who will vigilantly and lovingly look after their families. Building the family is the best way to advance maternal and child health and safe motherhood in Swaziland.Subject: Abortion: Testimonies of RegretThe following are quotes from mothers after their abortion. Even if one is not sure if what "is inside" is a child or not, wouldn't it be better to err on the side of caution and give birth? Read what these women have to say, and see what you think.These quotes come from http://www.lovematters.com/. More information is available at that website. I was an emotional wreck. The following day I was empty, sad,numb. I knew that day I had made a huge mistake. I wish with all my heart I would havedone things differently. -- CARRIE CAMILLERI, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIAI was 18 when I got pregnant. At three months pregnant, I had anabortion. About seven years later my heart broke. I was so overcome withgrief. How could I have taken the life of my unborn child? -- TEWANNAH AMAN, FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDAI was told that I would be out for eight minutes and I would feel onlya little discomfort afterwards. They lied,it ruined 10 years of my life.--MAE ABBOTT, LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIAI was deceived because I was not told the truth about what an abortionmeans to the life of an unborn baby. I was not told that at 10 weeks (whichis when I had my abortion) my child was already fully formed. I was made tobelieve that I was doing something that was as natural as going to the dentist for ateeth cleaning.-- STEPHANIE WILLIAMS, RIDGECREST, CAAfter the first abortion, I did get more depressed. I developed a veryangry character; I became very violent. After the second abortion, I reallydidn't notice a change. By the third, I had really low self-esteem, and after thefourth I became extremely promiscuous and self-destructive. Throughout the years, witheach abortion, I became more and more depressed and I gained more and more weight.-- CECILIA GOMEZ, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIAThe suction machine was turned on, causing tremendous pain. I wasfrightened, it hurt so much. I wanted to scream. I wanted it to stop. I suddenlyknew there was a baby inside. They were killing my baby!-- MICHAELENE JENKINS, SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIAHaving an abortion was the biggest, most tragic mistake of my life. Ifthere is anything I can ever say or do that would change a woman'sor man's abortion-bound course, I will do it.-- CARNA SPINELLA, SEATTLE, WASHINGTONI was told I had 'caught it' at a great time because it was just a tiny mass of tissue (4-6 weeks). Boy, was I deceiving myself! Whatignorance I was in.-- LISA AND WILL WINDHAM, TORRANCE, CALIFORNIATwo weeks after the abortion, I went into labor. I staggered into thebathroom. And there, with my husband beside me, I delivered a part of my babythe doctor had missed. It was the head of my baby. . .I wake up in the middle of thenight, thinking I hear a baby crying. And I still have nightmares inwhich I am forced to watch my baby being ripped apart in front of me. I simplymiss my baby. I constantly wake up wanting to nurse my child, wanting to hold mychild. And that's something the doctor never told me I would experience.-- LORI NERAD, former national president of Women Exploited by Abortion I know millions of women across this country feel as I do aboutabortion. We all somehow know deep down inside that we alone made a horribledecision and no coined phrase about choice and rights or the denial of biological andfetal facts can ever erase the truth. For we as mothers instinctively know duringthose still moments of aloneness, that we ended the life of a separate human beinggrowing inside of each and every one of us.-- SUSAN CARPENTER-MCMILLAN, PASADENA, CALIFORNAAbortion destroys self-worth and dignity. I bought into the idea thatabortion was simply a matter of choice. I used abortion as birth control untilafter my fourth abortion. I felt inside that this action has to be wrong. I wish I hadgiven more thought to the abortions I had. If just one person had said, Star,what you're doing is wrong, it might have changed the destiny of my life.-- STAR PARKER, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIAPlease understand that by aborting your unborn child, that doesnot make the baby go away. Your baby will be in your heart until you die. Afterabortion‚ the guilt, shame and loneliness is horrible. Once you abort, youcannot go back and change it.-- LISA BURROUGHS, BUENA PARK, CALIFORNIAIf you abort your child, this child will haunt you the rest ofyour life because no other child can replace him. Your problems will multiply, notdisappear. Talk to others who have had abortions, who have chosen not to abort, whohave found other ways to give life instead of death to their children.Abortion is wrong. Even if you don't believe that for sure, wouldn't itbe smarter to err on the side of life? Abortion is irreversible-once it'sdone, you have no more options.-- MARGARET CARSON, MEDFORD, OREGONYou can see the photos of these women who've had abortions at:http://www.lovematters.com/women.htmMs. Carson's comment should be repeated: "Even if you don't believe [abortion is wrong], wouldn't it be smarter to err on the side of life? Abortion is irreversible-once it's done, you have no more options".Swaziland deserves better than abortion. Let's build strong and loving marriages and families. Let us build a culture of life.Subject: Abortion: Widening Circle of DeathAbortion is the taking of the life of a child in the womb. Most people think that even though abortion is a difficult issue, the killing of an innocent boy or girl is absolutely not allowed once the child is born, and that such a practice will never come to pass.Sadly, once killing children before birth becomes legal, killing people after birth inevitably follows. One nurse in the United States documented how newborn babies were "set aside" after birth and left to die. This led, fortunately, to the passing of a law called the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act", which criminalized murder of babies by starvation and dehydration.Over 10 years ago a scientist named Stephen Pinker wrote that "neonaticide"-that is, the killing of newborn children-may be permissible, because they lack some traits that make them human. Among those traits are having hopes and plans for the future and a history of experiences. Mr. Pinker went on to say that "several moral philosophers have concluded that neonates are not persons, and thus neonaticide should not be classified as murder".Mr. Pinker is not a lunatic (or maybe he is, but people treat him like he is sane); he is a researcher at a very prestigious university in the United States. His comments were printed in the New York Times, one of the best-known newspapers in the world. Be aware, good reader, that once the door is open to killing children in the womb, the killing of children after birth will follow. Sure, lots of people will throw lots of big and interesting ideas around about the "upper age limit" for killing a newborn child, or under what circumstances a newborn with some sort of handicap can be killed, but the bottom line will always be that murder of the innocent is allowable in some cases. Further, you can be assured that the number of cases for which a person may be killed will always grow. Some people today argue that people late in life, who have lost some of their former capabilities, may be "euthanized"-a fancy word for killing by way of an injected drug or a poison.Legalizing abortion is like letting a poisonous snake into your house. Once the snake takes up residence-once abortion is legal-no one in your home or your country is safe. Innocent human beings should not be put to death on a whim, or on some set of fancy-sounding words deciding who is human and who is not. May Swaziland reject abortion and all its life-denying aspects. May Swaziland build families of love and life.Ms. Rogers argues (31 October TOS) that illegal/unsafe abortion puts women's lives at risk. Indeed, abortion (illegal or legal) is very dangerous; it is a very good thing to avoid. Women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant deserve support for themselves and their unborn children. Many individuals in the United States, concerned with the death, loss and pain that abortion has brought to children and mothers, have developed homes and programs for unwed mothers and mothers-to-be. Developing this response to unplanned pregnancies is much more humane and supportive than pushing abortion. Programs for unwed and unsupported mothers give these young women a chance to develop their potential. Fathers are identified and are legally required to financially support their children. Over 1 million families in the US are waiting to adopt a child. These options encourage women to give their unborn children the great gift of life. Let us not apply a quick and deadly approach to unplanned pregnancies, an approach that can leave a lifetime of regret; let us instead tfutfuka live through encouraging responsible behavior and supporting unwed mothers and their children. Ms. Rogers contends that I am ignorant about abortion procedures because no scraping of the womb is performed after an abortion. Ms. Rogers fails to differentiate between a chemical abortion (the kind she described) and a surgical abortion. I assume she is describing an abortion caused by the pill called RU-486. According to "The Facts of Life", "The abortion pills are used to kill babies of less than five weeks gestation, and their efficiency decreases dramatically past seven weeks' gestation". Abortions done after this developmental stage still rely on surgical methods. Readers are invited to visit http://www.prolife.com/ or http://www.cbrinfo.org/ to view some real-life photographs of children who died through cutting and scraping. Beware that these are graphic images; surgical abortion is ugly.As disturbing as Ms. Rogers' blurring of chemical and surgical abortion is her unwritten assumption that abortion is okay because it can be done without surgery. But whether you hit someone with a lorrie and leave a lot of blood and body parts on the pavement or you slip poison into someone's tea mid-morning and they die tidily at their desk 2 hours later, they are still dead. Killing the innocent is always wrong, and abortion (whether performed with knives or performed with pills) is killing the innocent-so abortion is always wrong. Ms. Rogers says the abortion pill causes the uterus to "expel its contents". What women aren't told is that those "contents" include a human being whose heart began beating 3 weeks after conception--right about the time that most women begin to suspect that they might be pregnant.Ms. Rogers would like to know where I sourced my information. I have included references in my letters to the editor; I saw none in hers. I cordially invite Ms. Rogers to meet sometime; she can contact me at rpoglitsh@yahoo.com. I will bring some references with me, and we can chat.I do trust that Ms. Rogers would be pleased if young men and women (and full-grown men and women) would build strong marriages and families. Strong and loving families would uproot all possible causes for abortion; strong and loving families would leave a legacy of commitment, trust and love for generations.Subject: Barack Obama and AbortionAs an American, Swazi friends and acquaintances ask me about politics in the USA. Politics this election year are especially interesting, as Barack Obama hopes to become the first black American president. Obama is a great speaker, and his continual talk of "hope, change, choice, opportunity" certainly is appealing. Further, the presence of a black man in the highest elected office of the United States would indicate that America has come a long way from its dark era of slavery (ending in 1865) and apartheid (ending with the passage of laws in the middle 1960s).Slavery and apartheid were equally (and brutally) hypocritical contradictions of America's lofty ideals, and we can be glad Mr. Obama's skin colour is no longer a barrier to his political aspirations. Famous American civil rights leader Martin Luther King said he looked forward to the day when we judged people not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character. When considering someone for public office, we want to know what they believe in and what direction they would take the country were they to get elected. And here is where my problem with Barack Obama arises.The first right of any human being is the right to life, and the first job of civil government is the protection of its citizens. As this column has demonstrated ad nauseum, abortion denies the humanity of unborn children and opens the way for killing them. Approximately 3500 to 4000 babies are killed each day in the United States by abortion. In a country whose Declaration of Independence proclaims "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", abortion is a gross violation of our stated beliefs. Mr. Obama is a very strong abortion proponent, the strongest pro-abortion politician in USA's political realm in decades and perhaps in all its history. A few examples:*In 2007 the US Supreme Court upheld a law outlawing a partial birth abortion. In such an abortion, a baby ready to be born is turned round feet-first inside the womb and all of the body except the head is delivered from the mother. With the head still in the mother, the abortionist opens the back of the head with a scissors, inserts a vacuum nozzle, and sucks out the baby's brains. Even other proponents of abortion said this was too close to killing a born infant to be legal. Mr. Obama strongly criticized the Supreme Court for upholding the ban this procedure. Mr. Obama thought that vacuuming the brains out of babies just centimeters from birth should be legal.*As a state senator in Illinois, Mr. Obama opposed a law which would make sure that babies who survived an abortion should get the same medical treatment a "wanted" baby would get. Mr. Obama's suggestion? Just set that newborn aside to die of hunger and dehydration. This is the same as coming across someone who has miraculously survived a terrible car accident and refusing to offer medical aid. When it comes to abortion, Mr. Obama's ideal world has no place for a baby who survives an abortion or anyone who would help that child.*Mr. Obama opposes laws which would require the parents of a minor girl to be told the girl is going for abortion. In Mr. Obama's eyes, a teenager should be able to kill her parents grandchild without gogo's or mkhulu's knowledge.*Finally, but not surprisingly, Mr. Obama believes that legal abortion is essential to a woman's equality. "I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught Constitutional Law", he told a recent Planned Parenthood meeting. "Not simply as a case about privacy but as part of the broader struggle for women’s equality." The "Roe" mentioned here is a US Supreme Court case in 1973 which legalized abortion nationwide. Since abortion always takes a human life, it seems strange to link women's rights to the the ability to kill one's own child. But that's what he believes, and his public voting record and statements in favor of abortion flow logically from that belief. One might conclude, based on his enthusiasm for abortion, that the more abortions women have the freer they are.I offer these facts and reflections because I care about my fellow (born and unborn) Americans. But I also write because the next US president will influence, through foreign relations and aid programs, what sort of assistance America provides to the rest of the world. President Bush's multi-billion dollar assistance for AIDS worldwide emphasizes abstinence and faithfulness. Mr. Obama said to Planned Parenthood "It’s time to turn the page on a policies that provides [sic] almost 1.5 billion dollar to teach abstinence in our schools but refuses to teach basic science and basic contraception." Uganda has shown that abstinence works. Swaziland has lots of condoms and lots of talk about sex (have you seen that billboard in front of Mbabane bus rank?), and the AIDS rate here is still murderously high. I am concerned about Mr. Obama carrying what appears to be lightly-veiled scorn for an abstinence-based approach into official US aid policy. Yet what will he offer instead? MORE condoms? MORE explicit sex talk in the public arena? I am concerned also that he will bring his open enthusiasm for abortion into official US aid policy. Swaziland does not need abortion any more than any other country does, and it certainly doesn't need the US encouraging abortion for Swaziland.In that recent address given to Planned Parenthood Mr. Obama wondered aloud, "I think about my own two daughters, Sasha and Malia, and sometimes it makes me stop and makes me wonder: what kind of America will our daughters grow up in?What kind of America will our daughters grow up in?" If he is elected president, we can be confident it will not be an America safe for his, or anyone else's, unborn grandchildren. For the sake of all innocent human life, I cannot and will not vote for Mr. Obama in November.For more information on Obama visithttp://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction and http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/mar/08030412.htmlThe next letter was in response to a Kath Manson, an occasional contributor to the Times. She argued that CEDAW is the way to establish just relations between the sexes.Subject: CEDAW and Gender EqualityKath Manson wrote last week that pretty much every society on earth is patriarchal and displays all the evils associated with that term.Indeed, women should be equal partners in civil society. One's sex should not mean someone gets less money for the same work, is not allowed to vote, or must shoulder more work than a member of the opposite sex just because of their sex. Women also need the help of the law when the father of their children neglect, abuse, or refuse to support them or their children.Two problems arise, however, in Ms. Manson's solution to inequality. First, CEDAW (the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women) is bent on forcing abortion on every country on the planet. Though the document itself says nothing about abortion, CEDAW committees have pressured 37 countries, from Togo to Poland to Colombia, to liberalize their abortion laws. Some folks might think legalizing abortion is a great way to uplift women, but it sure doesn't do much for those baby girls (tomorrow's women) who get aborted. Be advised that, in fact, more pre-born girls are aborted than pre-born boys. As this space has demonstrated, abortion often wreaks havoc on the mothers who undergo abortions. Speaking of mothers, CEDAW has pushed for the banning of Mother's Day. Is knocking out a special day to celebrate our mothers' contribution any way to uplift them?Second, "gender equality" laws try to make men and women exactly equal-which anyone not wearing a pair of highly ideologically-coloured glasses will tell you, they aren't. Whether we like it or not, men and women are very different. Men and women are equal in dignity and should be treated in accordance with that dignity. Happily, men and women have different and complementary strengths; learning to accentuate those different strengths can lead to healthy dynamics.Furthermore, "gender equality" laws are very individualistic. In emphasizing personal rights and freedoms, they have the effect of working against families. Yet the basic unit of society is the family; without them, new citizens are not brought to life, and those new citizens have no place in which to learn how to love, work, and serve.So what's the answer? Let societies build strong marriages and families. This is most quickly and effectively done when men take the lead as good husbands and fathers. Let them show love in action by, as Mother Teresa put it, doing small deeds with great love. Taking over some domestic responsibilities at times (as I write this, for instance, I have an inconsolable 9 month old daughter on my back) gives moms needed breaks. A Dad who spends time with his children tells daughters and sons that they are special in the eyes of dad. These children grow up self-confident, ready to face the challenges their lives will deliver. As men become good protectors and providers, women and children will benefit. Let Swaziland look not to international bureaucracies generating interminable (and sometimes disingenuously-applied) documents to uplift her citizens; instead, let her look to her own men and women to love and support each other.Subject: Christian perspective on abortionSwaziland in embroiled in a debate about legalizing abortion. Since a very large percentage of Swaziland professes Christianity, it is wise to consider the Christian perspective on abortion.By way of introduction, I became a Christian in Swaziland in 1991. For many years prior to that time, I assumed abortion was a woman's right and could not understand why there was even a debate about it. For a few years after becoming a Christian, I really did not know what position to take; I knew most Christians opposed abortion, but I still couldn't set aside my thought that "it's the woman's body". The turning point came when I explained my indecision to a Christian female friend. She was sympathetic to my uncertainty, but she explained that she had known women who had undergone two or three abortions, and that abortion had made a shambles of these women’s' lives. When my friend explained that the women whose control over their own body I did not want to violate were in fact hurt by abortion, I knew what stance to take. More reading in the years since have confirmed that the pro-life position, which respects the life of a mother and her unborn child, is the position of the historic Christian church and the position which best protects all people.What does the Bible have to say about pre-born life? Here are some scriptures."Before I formed you in the womb I knew you..."Jeremiah 1:5For thou didst form my inward parts, thou didst knit me together in my mother's womb. Psalm 139:13Surely a baby is an innocent person. What does the Bible say about the taking of an innocent life? "Cursed is the man who accepts a bribe to kill an innocent person." Deuteronomy 27:25What did the early church have to say about abortion? Is the Bible the only place in Christianity where we hear about life in the womb and it's protection?An early manual for teaching new Christians-you could say it is the original "Sunday School" textbook-is the Didache. It was composed somewhere between 50AD and 140AD. The Didache says this about abortion:"You shall not procure abortion, or destroy a new-born child."Do Christians after the time of the Didache have anything to say about abortion? Listen to Saint Hippolytus of Rome, who died a martyr on the Italian island of Sardinia, writing somewhere after 222AD: "For this reason women who were reputed to be believers began to take drugs to render themselves sterile, and to bind themselves tightly so as to expel what was being conceived, since they would not, on account of relatives and excessive wealth, want to have a child by any insignificant person. See, then, into what great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by teaching adultery and murder at the same time!Here is Saint Basil the Great, a famous bishop, writing in 374 AD: "Those also who give drugs causing abortions are murderers themselves, as well as those who receive the poison which kills the foetus."This concern for the unborn has been the unbroken Christian teaching right to our very day. It is taught by both faithful Protestant denominations and by Catholics. Let Christians and all people of good will stand with the historic Christian church and defend the lives of the unborn. Let us build strong marriages and families in Swaziland, where love and protection abounds.Subject: Deadly Facts about AbortionA sincerely concerned MSK from Manzini said in Thursday's (18 October) Times that legalizing abortion would prevent death and injury from "back alley" abortions. In 1940, about 1,300 women died of illegal abortions in the United States, mostly due to infection. Thanks to better antibiotics and improved techniques, only 42 women in America died of abortions in 1972, the year before abortion was made legal nationwide (from the book "The Cost of 'Choice', ed. Erika Bachiochi). Meanwhile, Carol Everett, a former owner of a number of a number of abortion clinics, said that her business was performing 500 abortions monthly and killing or maiming one of those women. With about one million abortions a year in the United States, that means about 2,000 dead or wounded mothers every year AFTER the legalization of abortion. Surely we do not want such needless death, for children or mothers, in Swaziland.What about the case of rape or incest? Though making abortion legal in such cases seems to make sense, a little thought makes things clearer. Why should a child be killed for someone else's evil act? The child didn't do anything wrong; why should that defenseless baby suffer the death penalty for someone else's crime?It would again seem logical that a mother being able to abort a child conceived from rape would lessen the psychological trauma of the rape. But of 200 letters received from women who conceived children through sexual assault, 88% of those who had abortions said they regretted it, and that it made the trauma of the original assault worse. None of the mothers who decided to give birth to those babies regretted doing so. These letters went into the publication of a book called "Victims and Victors: Speaking Out About Their Pregnancies, Abortions and Children Resulting from Sexual Assault" edited by David Reardon.No matter how you approach it, abortion is bad for a nation. For the sake of women and children, Swaziland should continue to say no to abortion. For the sake of women and children, Swaziland should build strong, loving, trusting marriages, and build strong, loving families. The nation will grow strong through faithful marriage and family.Subject: Has abortion helped anyone?Abortion was illegal in the United States up until the early 1970s. As late as 1968, almost no one in that country thought any good would come from legalizing the procedure.Abortion advocates then forcefully proposed a few arguments suggesting that abortion would help large numbers of people in significant ways. Let us consider these arguments and whether they have delivered what they promised.One argument was that, in the 1970s, the world faced a population explosion. Abortion advocates argued that by the turn of the millennium, huge numbers of people would be killed by massive pollution generated by far too many people living on earth.This has not happened; instead, 40 million babies are killed by abortion worldwide each year. It is grotesquely ironic that a procedure which was meant to stave off the deaths of large numbers of people has in fact caused the deaths of large numbers of people.Another argument was that if abortion were legal, fewer women would die from illegal abortions. In the years leading up to the fateful 1973 Supreme Court decision to legalize abortion, advocates argued that five to ten thousand women died from unsafe abortions. This was completely false, as one-time abortion proponent Bernard Nathanson later admitted. Doctor Nathanson played a huge role in the legalization of abortion. After switching sides and becoming pro-life, he said "The statistics that we gave to the American public about illegal abortions annually, that we fabricated regarding the number of women dying from illegal abortions, all of these matters were pure fabrication and still persist to this very day. We spoke of 5,000 to 10,000 deaths [of women by abortion] a year. I confess that I knew the figures were totally false". In 1972, only 41 deaths due to unsafe abortion were recorded. Even if one might argue that all those illegal abortion deaths were covered up before 1973, one would expect a drop in the overall death rate of women after legalization. No such drop has been seen.Contrary to common sense, the legalization of abortion saw a dramatic increase in unsafe abortion facilities. With much money to be made and legal cover, the rush was on to provide abortions. Newspaper stories reported unsafe medical practices, "filth" and "butchery" in many new abortion clinics. Such stories persist to this day.Finally, abortion was supposed to reduce out-of-wedlock births. If a woman got pregnant unexpectedly, she could simply abort the child. This would reduce the number of fatherless children and this would be good, since single motherhood is strongly linked to poverty. Note the irony that abortion's poverty reduction plan was to kill people who would otherwise become poor. Can we help someone get out of poverty by killing them? Maybe so, but we also "help" them out of every other aspect of life by taking their life.Regardless of this lethal answer to poverty, has abortion reduced births outside of marriage? Quite the opposite. In 1970, 10.7% of births were out of wedlock. By 2004, almost 70% of black children and 33% of all children in America were born to unmarried parents.Abortion has failed to deliver on its promises. Women and children deserve better than abortion. May Swaziland build strong marriages and families: marriages and families based on love and life.NOTE: Information for this article drawn from the essay "Thirty Years of Empty Promises" by Candace C. Crandall, in the book "The Cost of Choice: Women Evaluate the Impact of Abortion" and the magazine "LoveMatters.com"Subject: Abortion: How many Women Die from Illegal Abortion?Abortion is always a tragedy. A "successful" abortion always kills a child. How many mothers also die due to abortion?Advocates of legal abortion argue that if it were legal, it would be safe, and no mothers would die during the procedure. Pro-abortion groups claim around 200,000 mothers die from illegal abortions every year worldwide.No women would have to die from abortions if the procedure were never performed. Instead of these mothers feeling they have no better option than abortion, we should, as a society, see to it that they and their unborn children get the support and protection they deserve.Putting aside for a moment the best answer to maternal death due to abortion-which is ending the practice altogether-how many mothers do die from the procedure annually?The first challenge in answering this question is that most countries do not report numbers or causes of death accurately. C-FAM reported on 1 November that "the UN Population Division issued a report 'The World's Women 2005: Progress in Statistics' that said 'more than a third of the 204 countries or areas examined did not report deaths by cause, sex and age even once.'" C-FAM, in the same newsletter, reports that the World Health Organization explains that "two-thirds of deaths go unreported in national statistics of most developing countries."To make an estimate of the number of maternal deaths due to illegal abortion, we can use statistics from the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), a group which actively supports abortion. AGI estimates that 0.6 out of 100,000 legal abortions kill the mother. Let us assume illegal abortions are 20 times more dangerous than legal ones. This would mean 12 out of 100,000 illegal abortions kill the mother. Note that another pro-abortion group, the National Abortion Rights Action League, regularly states a maternal death rate of 6 out of 100,000 for illegal abortions. We will err on the pro-abortion side in our estimate.AGI estimates that 22 million illegal abortions are performed each year worldwide. Taking 12 out of 100,000 as the number of women killed in the procedure annually, this means that 2,640 women die in illegal abortions each year. (Estimation taken from "The Facts of Life" by Brian Clowes)The next time you read that 200,000 women die annually due to illegal abortion, remember that most causes of death go unreported and that statistics from pro-abortion groups give an estimate of about 2,600 deaths a year-far below the 200,000 figure. So if abortion is legal, will that improve the health situation for women?Carol Everett, a former owner of a number of a number of abortion clinics in the US, said that her business was performing 500 abortions monthly and killing or maiming one of those women every month. With about one million abortions a year in the United States, that means about 2,000 dead or seriously wounded mothers every year AFTER the legalization of abortion in the US alone. Surely we do not want such needless death, for children or mothers, in Swaziland.Remember that one maternal death due to abortion is one death too many. The best solution to an unplanned pregnancy is compassion and support for mother and child. The best way to end unplanned pregnancies is for all people to live virtuous lives, with no sex before marriage and sex only with the spouse after marriage. A life of virtue and commitment before and after marriage will make for a strong and vibrant Swaziland.Subject: Humanity of the childIn light of the discovery of 71 aborted babies in Matsapha and in line with FLAS's suggestion on October 12, we are considering what other countries have done with regards to abortion. What about the humanity of the aborted child? How is it that a nation-any nation-can legalize the deliberate killing of unborn children?Until recently, the only way to make abortion the least bit plausible to the public was to deny the humanity of the unborn child. Thus, pro-abortion groups frequently refer to a newly-conceived child as a "product of conception" or a "blob of tissue". A more indirect way to deny the humanity of the unborn child is to try to confuse the issue of when human life begins in the womb. If we can say "Human life doesn't begin until 3 weeks gestation" or, better yet, "We have no idea when human life really begins", the door is opened for abortion, since killing non-human life is not immoral.What does science say about when life begins? Read what the Nobel Prize Committee for Physiology and Medicine said in 1991: "the Nobel Committee noted that life begins with the activation of ion channels as the sperm merges with the egg in fertilization". (book "The Facts of Life" by Brian Clowes) Consider what the textbook "Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics" says: "The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops...The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life". (ibid.) Another textbook, "Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant" says: "every time a sperm cell and ovum unite, a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition." (ibid.) Every human life-mine, yours, and the person's sitting next to you on the bus-began when a father's sperm united with a mother's egg. That is when life begins. That is the point at which human life should be protected.As medical technology has improved, so has our ability to view the unborn. An expectant mother can, right in Mbabane, go for a "scan" or "ultrasound". This painless procedure, in which a wand is pressed gently against the mother's belly, gives a moving television view of her unborn child. This procedure is used to determine the approximate size and date of delivery of the child; it can also tell the sex of the child (though our family has always enjoyed the anticipation and surprise of waiting for the birth to know if we have lijaha nome inkhabisa).Doctor Bernard Nathanson, a medical doctor in the United States, was instrumental in the legalization of abortion in the 1970s. He has since changed his position on abortion, becoming an articulate advocate for the unborn. Why did he change his mind?One major reason was viewing the unborn during a scan. Dr. Nathanson says in his book "The Hand of God": "For the first time, we could really see the human fetus, measure it, observe it, watch it, and indeed bond with it and love it. I began to do that". (Lovematters.com newspaper) Dr. Nathanson videotaped an abortion using the scan technology and showed it to another doctor who did abortions. After watching the videotape, this colleague never did another abortion. (ibid.) Dr. Nathanson references a paper in the prestigious "New England Journal of Medicine" that of 10 women entering an abortion clinic to have an abortion, nine of them will carry the baby to birth if they see the baby on a scan. (ibid.) Tragically, a friend of mine who works with unwed mothers tells me that abortion clinics, while they do scans, will not show the TV screen to the mother and will turn down the volume (which would otherwise reveal the heartbeat of the child).Hear what other former abortionists have to say about the humanity of the unborn:*Anthony Levatino, M.D.: "I want the general public to know that the doctors know that this is a person; this is a baby. That this is not some kind of blob of tissue..." (Lovematters.com)*Joseph Randall, M.D.: "The picture of the baby on the ultrasound [scan] bothered me more than anything else. The staff couldn't take it. Women who were having abortions were never allowed to see the ultrasound". (ibid.)*McArthur Hill, M.D.: "It was easy for us to do the first trimester abortion because we were using the same procedure that you use if you remove the placental tissue after a woman has a miscarriage. The vacuum machine is used, and the vacuum tubing empties all of the products of conception into a tidy little cheesecloth sack...There isn’t any way that you can say that there isn't a human body when you can look and see the little arms, feet, and faces.In my second year of residency I spent two months on a pathology rotation, which is an interesting thing, and I had to come face-to-face with the contents of those sacks. We were studying the embryology of the ovary. I personally had to search through the jumbled-up mass of tissue. The jumbled-up mass of tissue was easily identifiable as the torn and shredded body of a tiny human being." (http://www.prolifeaction.org/providers/hill.htm)*Joan Appleton, Registered Nurse: "One of the things that bothered me even during the time that I was head nurse at the clinic is that it (abortion) was such an emotional trauma for a woman and such a difficult decision for a woman to make.If it was right, why was it so difficult? I had to ask myself that all the time. I counseled these women so well, they were so sure of their decision, so why were they coming back months and years later, psychological wrecks?Another thing that bothered me as I went about my work at the clinic was the fact that I had seen an ultrasound abortion. We did first trimester abortions. This was a late first trimester, probably second trimester. I handled the ultrasound while the doctor performed the procedure and I directed him while I was watching the screen.I saw the baby pull away. I saw the baby open his mouth. I had seen Silent Scream a number of times, but it didn't effect me. To me it was just more pro-life propaganda. But I couldn't deny what I saw on the screen. After that procedure I was shaking, literally, but managed to pull it together and continue on with the day." (http://www.prolifeaction.org/providers/appleton.htm)Medical science, the scan, and the testimony of former abortionists all concur: human life begins at conception. Inside the belly of a pregnant mother is a new human being. For the sake of the mother, for the sake of the child, for the sake of medical personnel: keep abortion illegal. Let Swaziland build a culture of life and love, not a culture of death.Subject: Jesus and AbortionAnd he took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in his arms, he said to them, "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me." Mark 9, verses 36 and 37.These words of Jesus are astonishing: Jesus tells us that to welcome a child in his name is to welcome him and the one who sent him-God the Father. Christians (myself included) want more and more of Jesus in our lives and in our world. The last thing we want to do is prevent Christ from entering this world in greater and greater degrees. Yet if anything stands opposed to welcoming a child, it is abortion. Abortion kills babies; if we take Jesus at his word, abortion keeps humans from receiving him and his Father.Fellow Christians, let us stand up for the children whom Jesus loved and blessed. Let us protect the right to life of all people, including those innocent ones not yet born. Our Lord Himself tells us: "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me".Subject: Love versus abortionEveryone wants to give and receive love. Pope John Paul II, in his first official writing as pope, said "Man cannot live without love. He remains a being that is incomprehensible for himself, his life is senseless, if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it." (encyclical, "Redeemer of Man") How do love and abortion fit together?They fit together like oil and water-that is to say, not at all. Killing someone who physically depends on you for life is definitely not an act of love. On the other hand, bringing a child to birth, even if the pregnancy was unexpected or unwanted, is a supremely loving act. In allowing a child to grow to birth, a mother reveals love to her child; this new human being encounters love from the very beginning of his or her life. Shouldn't every child begin their journey in this world under the intimate care of another human being?We want love to characterize our relationships with our spouses, parents, and boyfriend/girlfriend. How does abortion impact these relationships? Does abortion increase the amount of love and trust with other people in our lives?Again, we find that love and abortion do not mix. The book "Women's Health After Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence" by Elizabeth Ring-Cassidy and Ian Gentles, which surveys numerous studies on abortion, reports that 40 to 50 percent of couples break up after an abortion. Why is this so? Researcher Teri Reisser explains: "One of the most important factors in the breakup of a committed relationship following abortion is the disillusionment experienced by the woman...Women still respond powerfully to men who wholly love them and who are entirely committed to the family. When a partner fails in these tasks, a woman often feels deserted, and eventually disengages emotionally". When we consider the effect of abortion on the relationship in light of the Pope's comments, it is clear that abortion is opposed to love. Abortion, about half the time, ends the encounter, experience, and participation in love by ending the relationship.How about situations when a minor girl gets pregnant and her parents encourage abortion? Is the parent/child relationship, one which should be full of love, affected by abortion?Abortion can devastate the parent/child relationship. Consider these quotations:"...my mom said if I was going to have the baby I couldn't stay at the house and see my brothers and sisters...his mom came to the house and tried to talk [my parents] out of the abortion, but they wouldn't listen to her...my mother kept telling me I had cost them 800 dollars (Emalangeni)""[My mother] told me, 'Trudy, I've made an appointment for you at the doctor's office, and he's going to take care of your problem'...I didn't go to work the next day. I lost my mind...I did blame myself a little bit. I blame my mom...we never talked about the abortion".Keeping secrets has negative effects on family relationships. Ring-Cassidy and Gentles write: "Shame and fear are the most frequent motivators for secrecy. These include shame of disappointing parents, fear of the effect pregnancy will have on parents, and/or fear of abandonment...Secrecy can have a profound effect on the relationship of a daughter to her parents or siblings". Another author says "When an adolescent elects abortion without parental consultation, she must inevitably return to her family context. However, she returns with a secret that shames and emotionally strains her coping abilities. She must employ increased deception to protect her secret and to protect herself from her perceived fears of being found out and condemned by her parents and siblings". Consider one post-abortive woman's testimony: "My sister came and stayed with me...Keeping the secret between us, we never spoke of it for years. My life was a mess...I continued to tell more lies, keep more secrets and deceive those around me to hide the truth within."A woman who aborts one child sometimes find it hard to have a good relationship with her other children. One mother said "I love my children so much but I didn't want them to touch me. It was like being in a trance." Two researchers write, "unresolved feelings of grief, guilt and loss may remain dormant long after an abortion until they are apparently re-awakened by another pregnancy." Abortion strains and strangles love between parents and children, exacts a huge emotional toll on the girls who undergo the abortion, and can set "emotional time-bombs" in the mother who later carries children to birth.Does abortion affect other children in the family? Yes. Ring-Cassidy and Gentles relate research wherein "even very young children react to their parents' distress and may have difficulty understanding and coping with the outcome." In almost comic understatement, the authors continue: "In the presence of prenatal life, young children do not separate the concept of 'foetus' from the concept of 'baby'. The conceptual difference between the two is a medical and social construct of adults and is not easily understood by children whose approach to the world is concrete". Another researcher found that "Abortion can produce a deep, subtle (and often permanent) fracture of the trusting relationship that once existed between a child and parent." Two other researchers say "There are terrible conflicts that arise from these situations, and these have an impact on the individual and society".A good friend once explained to me that one of his siblings had been aborted. That fact lingers with my friend, casting a fog of arbitrariness around his own survival. He wonders sometimes, "That could have been me". I assure you that this world would be a poorer place without my friend; we can only guess how much the world lost with his brother gone.Abortion kills love between spouses/partners and between parents and children. It confuses and damages the surviving children of a post-abortive mother. It sets a mother up for hardships with coming children. In short, abortion eliminates the exchange of love Pope John Paul II so eloquently described at the beginning of this letter; an exchange comprising a very important part of being a human being. For the sake of love, Swaziland should say "NO" to abortion and "YES" to the protection and love of human life, from conception to natural death. Let spouses build strong marriages and let them protect all their children, born and unborn, with the powerful mantle of love.Subject: Made in the Image and Likeness of God"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." Genesis 1:27All of us, female and male, are made in the image and likeness of God. We are all made to reflect His creativity, love, maturity, and joy. God is infinite, so not one human being, or all of us together, will ever reflect the fullness of God; but each person can add to our understanding and appreciation of Him.Abortion takes a human life. In so doing, abortion destroys a person destined to show us a little bit of the greatness of God. Abortion is like smashing a mirror which, had it been left intact, would show us a unique aspect of God the Father.Abortion definitely kills a child, often wounds a mother, and always robs the human family of the opportunity to get to know God better. For the sake of mothers, children, and the enrichment of us all, may Swaziland say no to abortion and yes to life.This letter was submitted to the Times of Swaziland in late December. The editor of the Times sent me an e-mail copy, and I responded to it. I don't know if my response was printed, but it was sent.A Woman’s ChoiceKath Manson It’s been a long time since I last wrote for this newspaper and after having taken such a relatively long break to concentrate on my studies, I found myself wondering what to write about, which topic to address. It probably would have been easier for me to look for an uncontroversial topic (although whether such a thing exists in Swaziland is questionable in the first place!) but when I was reflecting on the past few months, remembering what I had read and what had caught my attention, I found myself repeatedly drawn to a subject that inspires controversy and divisiveness the world over. Abortion.Yes, abortion is a hot topic in Swaziland at present, and it seems to me that the overwhelming response to the 71 foetuses/back-street abortion scandal was from that of the anti-abortion front. In a sense, this is not surprising. It was a tragic and gory story. For me, it was the fact that so many women felt so desperate, powerless and alone, that they put their lives in danger and put themselves through such a harrowing experience. However, what weighs on my mind is that the majority of responses, including the three or four letters a week that we are still seeing published in this paper, are from men. It troubles me, and, I think, serves as an indicator of oppression, that we have not heard more from women. We have consistent input from men resisting the suggestion, put forward by certain organisations, that abortion should be legalized in order to make it safer and in order to allow women more autonomy in their reproductive decision-making. I am certainly not suggesting that those men do not have the right to express their opinion, but it troubles me that the representation of the other side of the argument, and the representation of women who believe in the right to choose has been drastically under-represented. Here are a few considerations:First of all, the claim that abortion is immoral is usually based on crossing the line between the church and the state. According to the constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland, there is not one set of religious beliefs that we must all abide by. Basically, people are free to choose, in religious terms, what to believe and what not to believe. That means any law condemning abortion on religious grounds contravenes a provision of the constitution. If a woman has certain beliefs that prohibit her from choosing abortion, then she should be free to see the pregnancy through and should be free from coercion to do otherwise. However, those beliefs are not universal and if a woman has no such beliefs then she should have the right to choose her reproductive future. Furthermore, and as an aside, it annoys me when religious anti-abortionists make the implication that the decline in abstinence and chastity (i.e. no sex before marriage) is a cause of abortion. There are plenty of women worldwide that are sexually active for years and years, remain unmarried and who never suffer an unwanted pregnancy. These women are well educated about contraception and have good access to a variety of contraceptive methods. Whether or not a woman chooses to enter into the institution of marriage (and there are plenty who make a well-informed decision not to) should have no bearing on the ‘acceptability’ of their reproductive decision-making. It is her decision to make. Some people argue that the immorality of abortion transcends religious dictates because, irrespective of religion, abortion is the act of destroying a human life and therefore contravenes the human rights of the unborn child. But there are plenty of arguments that dispute the fact that a foetus is a person with rights – a foetus is not a sentient, rational, social being. (ASLEEP) It does not have a sense of its own identity, it does not have duties, responsibilities, goals, projects or desires. Whether or not this makes abortion acceptable is admittedly contentious, but my point is that the issue is far from black and white.A woman has the right, or should have the right, to make decisions regarding her reproductive life. She should have the right to reproductive self-determination. As such, pro-choice advocates argue that denying women access to safe abortion (i.e. a clinical procedure complete with appropriate medical care, rather than a visit to a dirty shack in a back street) is a form of gender discrimination. This is because laws that deny access to abortion, whatever their stated objectives, have the discriminating purpose both of denigrating and undermining women’s capacity to make responsible decisions about their bodies and their lives.People who are opposed to abortion usually portray abortion as a result of the immoral behaviour of women and imply that the legalization of abortion would make it easy for women to go around being promiscuous and having unprotected sex with lots of men and then think they can just pop down to their local abortion clinic without any problems when they find themselves pregnant. Cue lots of scare stories about abortions-gone-wrong and detailed descriptions of the procedure, which is made out to be uniquely unpleasant (note: all surgery is unpleasant, invasive and carries a certain amount of risk, not just abortion. That doesn’t mean you’d be better off not having it). This is insulting. I doubt any woman makes the decision to abort lightly. I imagine it must be one of the most difficult decisions to make. However, the fact that so many women do choose to abort their pregnancies, and that some women are so desperate to abort that they choose a back-street abortion indicates the dire extent of their situation.The impact of an unplanned pregnancy varies drastically according to women’s health, family relationships, economic resources and the availability of medical care. It would be wonderful if every woman who found herself unexpectedly pregnant received the best care, attention, compassion and support. But the reality for a lot of women is very different. Despite what the religious anti-abortion proponents will say, it is not a simple decision. The fact that the decision is so complex means that the only person equipped to make it is the pregnant woman herself.In conclusion, let me say that I am not saying that we should try to persuade women who would not have an abortion to have one. What I am defending is the right of women to have control over their reproductive decision-making and respect for their capabilities as decision-makers. I want to draw attention to the other side of the argument with regards to abortion in order to represent the women who believe in the right of women to choose what happens to their body. Whether or not abortion should be legalised in Swaziland is not for me to say, but I think it is imperative that when it comes down to the legislation making, Swazi women should be heavily involved in the process. This is not because I think women more likely to approve it, but because pregnancy is obviously something only women can experience. I am not denying a father’s emotional attachment to his child, and I am not denying his right to have a say in the future of that child. However, the fact of the matter remains that men do not, and will never have the physical experience of being pregnant and they will never be asked to sacrifice their right to control what happens to their body to sustain the life of another in the same way. In short, the government must make sure that Swazi women’s views on this subject are well represented before entrenching in law the extent to which Swazi women have control over their bodies. My response:Kath Manson weighs in on the side of abortionKath Manson’s “A Woman’s Choice” contains many arguments used many times by those who support the abortion license. As time has passed and country after country has legalized abortion on demand, empirical evidence has accumulated about the terrible effects of abortion. Ms. Manson’s opinion piece contained no evidence demonstrating the positive effects of the procedure. Since this space has presented much information on the bad effects of abortion, let us just examine Ms. Manson’s points. Those interested in more specific information are invited to e-mail me at rpoglitsh@live.com.It is true that most of the letters published in the Times are opposed to abortion. Instead of worrying about “underrepresentation” of the pro-choice (which always means pro-abortion) side, the reasonable conclusion is that the vast majority of Swazis are opposed to abortion. That indicates that abortion should stay illegal.Ms. Manson says that “the claim that abortion is immoral is usually based on crossing the line between the church and the state.” Ms. Manson would do well to read the works of avowed atheist and adamant pro-life writer Nat Hentoff (check http://www.firstthings.com/ and type in Hentoff in the search space for his most recent pro-life statement). Respect for human life is generally strong among those of strong religious belief, but it is also found among non-believing people.Ms. Manson sloppily lumps opposition to abortion with violating the separation of church and state. The term “separation of church and state” is found in a personal letter of American Thomas Jefferson, and in nowhere in the United States Constitution. The term is frequently trotted out by those who wish to exclude opinions which come from religious people. In the best of public discourse, arguments are advanced which propose the best way forward for a nation and respect the religious sensibilities of the nation. Whether the writer is an atheist like Mr. Hentoff or a near-saint like Mother Teresa is irrelevant; what matters is the content of the argument.It is also true that most of the letters are written by men. Well, men are Swazis too, and men have at least as much interest in the future of Swaziland as women do. Ms. Manson condescends and then insults men by tossing them a morsel of sentimentality (“I am not denying a father’s emotional attachment to his child”) but then proceeds to say “men do not, and will never have the physical experience of being pregnant and they will never be asked to sacrifice their right to control what happens to their body to sustain the life of another in the same way”-which is a fancy way of saying “too bad, I the mother get to decide if your child gets to live or die”. I have personally met a man who had such an experience. He got his girlfriend pregnant, she wanted an abortion, he wanted a live baby. It went through all the courts, the court ruled in favour of the mother, and the baby was aborted the next day. Is that really fair? Is this a good way to proceed on abortion? Any child is brought into being by both a mother and a father; should one half of the party have no say in the life of the child?Ms. Manson finally gets around to the humanity of the unborn child, only to put it into question. She says “there are plenty of arguments that dispute the fact that a foetus is a person with rights – a foetus is not a sentient, rational, social being”. Well, Ms. Manson is not a “sentient, rational, social being” about 8 hours a night-when she is asleep. Does that mean any mother should be allowed to kill her children while they are asleep?Ms. Manson closes with the oft-heard and so very tired “laws that deny access to abortion, whatever their stated objectives, have the discriminating purpose both of denigrating and undermining women’s capacity to make responsible decisions about their bodies and their lives.”The vast majority-well into the 90% range-of abortions are committed because the pregnancy is unexpected; that is, a woman was having sex for fun and didn’t expect a child. As unfortunate as that is, there was plenty of room for responsible decisions about her body-that room was before she got into that very intimate relationship with the man. Exercising control at that time would eliminate this whole abortion debate, because no child would appear.Furthermore, abortion kills a child, and a child, though intimately connected to a mother in the womb, is not a part of the woman. After all, how many women you know have 4 arms, 2 hearts, and 20 toes? That child is a separate person, and deserves the same rights as her mother. That child deserves the first and most important right-the right to life. That child also deserves a mother and a father who are together for life. Swaziland, build those strong marriages and build a strong nation.Subject: Maternal Mortality and AbortionWe should all work for safe motherhood. A woman undertakes a magnificent and tremendously important task when she carries a child. These mothers deserve our physical and emotional support throughout the gestation of her child and after the birth.How many mothers tragically lose their life in their effort to bring a new life into the world? Various United Nations and agencies and other NGOs frequently say 500,000 women a year worldwide die due to pregnancy complications. This half a million number was used as recently as last October at the Women Deliver conference in London. UN agencies and other NGOs often promote abortion as the answer to these maternal deaths.Promoting abortion in response to maternal death poses problems. It is strange that the answer to tragic deaths (mothers dying due to child birth) should be more tragic deaths (killing babies in the womb). Second, approximately half of unborn babies are girls; if they are allowed to live, they will likely become mothers themselves. Offering abortion to combat maternal death will, about 50% of the time, cause the death of future mothers.Third, and most deceitfully, the 500,000 figure is unsubstantiated. Even another United Nations agency, the Population Division, said in its recent report "The World's Women 2005: Progress in Statistics" that "more than a third of the 204 countries or areas examined did not report deaths by cause, sex and age even once." “Maternal Mortality 2005”, a report issued together by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA and the World Bank says “progress towards the fifth Millennium Development Goal has been challenging, due to the lack of reliable maternal mortality data – particularly in developing country settings.” The next time you hear that 500,000 women die a year due to pregnancy complications, remember that this number is pulled right out of thin air.So what is the answer to the genuine tragedy of maternal mortality? It is better healthcare for women. Listen to Alan Guttmacher who, as a champion for abortion in the middle of the 20th century and the head of Planned Parenthood for 12 years, can hardly be called a pro-life sympathizer: "Today it is possible for almost any patient to be brought through pregnancy alive, unless she suffers from a fatal disease such as cancer or leukemia, and if so, abortion would be unlikely to prolong, much less save the life." Listen to Bernard Nathanson, who used to operate the largest abortion mill in the United States and who is now strongly pro-life: "The situation where the mother's life is at stake were she to continue a pregnancy is no longer a clinical reality. Given the state of modern medicine, we can now manage any pregnant woman with any medical affliction successfully, to the natural conclusion of the pregnancy: The birth of a healthy child."The answer to the struggles of other human beings, in this case mothers, is not killing babies but assistance. May we answer the tragedy of maternal mortality with better health care, not the killing of babies. May Swaziland build a culture of life, a culture that upholds women, children, and all people.Subject: McCain and innocent lifeLast week I explained why I cannot vote for Barack Obama in the upcoming US presidential election. Today I'd like to explain why John McCain is a much better choice for US president.Last week's article explained that the first right of any human being is the right to life, and the first job of civil government is the protection of its citizens. Mr. McCain has stood on the side of the unborn throughout his political career. Fellow politician Chris Smith, himself a powerful voice for the unborn in the US Congress, said McCain is "proudly pro-life".McCain supported the ban on partial birth abortion. In this terrible procedure a baby is turned around in the womb, all but the head are delivered from the mother, then the abortionist cuts into the back of the skull of the baby and sucks his or her brains out. Mr. Obama, on the other hand, strongly criticized the Supreme Court for keeping this ban in place.McCain also supported the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which guarantees that babies which survive an abortion get the same treatment a "wanted" baby gets. Again, Mr. Obama opposed such a law in his home state of Illinois.Some will say that McCain supports the war in Iraq, and that Obama plans to get troops out quickly. Both statements are broadly true. Without going into too much detail, to suddenly pull troops out of Iraq at this time would most likely leave that place as bad or worse as it was when troops went there in 2003. Iraq is on the way to recovery, though it will take more than a few months for it to be a just and stable society. Bear in mind that the loss of life due to abortion and the loss of life in Iraq, though equally tragic, are not numerically comparable. In the month of June, about 14 American soldiers lost their lives in Iraq. In that same month, with at least 3500 abortions in the US each day, at least 70,000 American children were killed in the womb. As last week's column explained, Mr. Obama promises to enact laws which will strengthen abortion's gruesome regime in America and, quite possibly, expand it to other countries.McCain's most convincing pro-life credentials, however, come from his personal life. He is the biological father of 6 children and the adoptive father of a girl from Bangladesh. This daughter, Bridget, was taken in by Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh. The orphanage could not provide the medical attention needed to save her life, so Mr. and Mrs. McCain adopted her and gave her a new life. On that same trip to Bangladesh in 1991, the McCain's brought another child to the USA from that orphanage. This child was adopted by one of Mr. McCain's workers, Wes Gullett. The second child, named Nicki, also had many medical needs but, Mr. Gullett explains, he "never saw a medical bill". Mr. McCain paid for them. Both girls are now on their way to finish high school.For me, this November's election choice is clear: "I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live".Subject: OVCs and abortionSwaziland is rightly concerned with the plight of orphans and vulnerable children. A recent report says 130,000 Swazi children are orphans, and that this number may rise to 200,000 by 2010. SWAGGA is running advertisements in the Times asking survivors of abuse to share their stories. Institutions and individuals throughout the country are directing much money and effort to help less fortunate children.Yet we also hear some voices calling for the legalization of abortion. Calling for legalization of abortion while also calling for protection and care for OVCs is a very strange paradox. It is saying that children who are born deserve the full care of parents and society (which is true), but that children who are not yet born may be killed (which is wrong). What is the difference between a born child and an unborn child? The only difference is where they happen to live. Every one of us spent the first 9 months of our lives inside our moms; that's the way every child begins life. Being able to kill children based on where they live is like saying it is okay to kill people living in certain sections of town, simply because they live in those sections of town. It would be terrible to deprive a child of the protection of civil society just because they are spending a little time inside their mother, getting ready for life beyond the womb.May Swaziland and the whole world recognize the humanity of all human beings, from conception to natural death. May Swaziland and the whole world protect the rights and dignity of children, both preborn and born. May Swaziland build an exemplary culture of life.Subject: Planned Parenthood: Some FactsI cannot read the Times every day, so I don't know exactly what 'Swazi Mind' wrote on October 21. Thulani Lushaba responded on the 28th, berating 'Swazi Mind' for expressing uninformed opinions.Mr. Lushaba proceeded to offer very little information about the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), other than saying they promote 'Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights' (SRHR). Consider a few facts about the founding, goals, and activities of IPPF.MARGARET SANGERIPPF grew out of the National Birth Control League, founded by American Margaret Sanger in 1922. In her book "Pivot of Civilization" she wrote that traditional philanthropy (feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, etc.) should not be encouraged because "it encourages the perpetuation of defectives, delinquents, and dependents. These are the most dangerous elements in the world community, the most devastating curse on human progress and expression." (from "Architects of the Culture of Death" by De Marco and Wiker) She proposed birth control, forced separation of the sexes, and mandatory sterilization for those who she considered unfit to have children.Mr. Lushaba says that IPPF wants every child to be a WANTED CHILD. Who decides which children get that all-important title "wanted"? I would be very uneasy, given the intent of the founder of IPPF, to let IPPF make that decision.CLARENCE GAMBLEMargaret Sanger corresponded with American businessman Clarence Gamble. Gamble also enthusiastically supported, as he said in his own words, "curtailing the progeny of the feebleminded". Consider the following passage from a book called "Architects of the Culture of Death" by De Marco and Wiker:we have the now-famous letter from Gamble to Margaret Sanger, written in November 1939, which he entitled "Suggestions for a Negro Project". In order to get around suspicions that he was pushing birth control on the black population as another form of white supremacy, Gamble suggested to Sanger that they should put black leaders in positions so that it would appear that they were in charge: hire a black minister to preach the gospel of birth control in the mode of a religious revival, and hire a black physician and nurse to administer the birth control and do follow-up work. Sanger, in a letter written in December of the same year, agreed: "We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any one of their more rebellious members". Of course, outright extermination was not their goal; rather, they desired the significant reduction of the future 'Negro population'.Did Sanger and Gamble reach their goal? In the United States today, black women have abortions at three times the rate of the general population, according to the US Centers for Disease Control. The Reverend Johnny Hunter, National Director of LEARN (Life Education and Resources Network) said in 2002, "Abortion is the number-one killer of blacks [in the United States]. We're losing our people at the rate of 1,452 a day...The whole mindset Planned Parenthood has brought into the black community ... says it's OK to destroy your people. We bought into the lie." ("The Cost of 'Choice'", ed. Erika Bachiochi)In the United States in 1999, the Planned Parenthood affiliates aborted 182,854 babies and earned US $64 million (4.5 billion Emalangeni) doing so. This represented 29% of their income. (The Ryan Report, April 2001, STOPP International)Someone might say "That is only in America. IPPF does not push for abortion in other countries". Read the following section to learn more.MENSTRUAL EXTRACTIONMenstrual extraction (ME), sometimes called menstrual regulation, is a very early abortion done before a woman is sure that she is pregnant.How does IPPF feel about ME?From Malcolm Potts, former IPPF Medical Director, writing in 1970:"Using the name 'menstrual regulation' alters the name of the game. It is not practical to write about abortion in a Bangladesh newspaper in a straightforward way, but it has proved acceptable to hold a much-publicized conference on menstrual regulation in Dacca (a major city in Bangladesh)...It is not prudent to have even a whispered discussion of the role of abortion in family planning in the Philippines; but it generates immediate and widespread interest to discuss menstrual regulation...There will be no proof of pregnancy unless the tissue removed from the uterus is subjected to microscopic examination. This point is of crucial importance in countries where abortion is illegal." ("The Facts of Life" by Brian Clowes)From IPPF's "Family Planning Handbook for Doctors":"In some countries, menstrual regulation has proved remarkably popular, and individual practitioners sometimes perform several thousand operations a year. In certain countries menstrual regulation is legal, even when therapeutic abortion is illegal, as in many Latin American countries, where prosecution for abortion requires proof that a pregnancy was terminated". (ibid.)So, we see that IPPF is very much interested in promoting abortion, and is willing to employ deception in order to get it into countries which still respect life. The tone of these authors makes them sound like street thugs who kill their victims and then bury the bodies under a rock to hide the evidence. Not surprisingly, Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in the world today. With all due respect to Mr. Lushaba, Planned Parenthood's own writings show that they are not simply interested in "[advocating] for debates that empower the people to make informed choices". IPPF is not a neutral party when it comes to abortion; IPPF pushes for abortion.CONTRACEPTIVE IMPERIALISMNo nation should be forced or become convinced in its own mind to limit or kill off its population. Mahatma Gandhi, the great Indian leader who peacefully led his nation to independence from Britain, wrote the following to Margaret Sanger in 1924:If it is contended that birth control is necessary for the nation because of over population, I dispute the proposition. It has never been proved. In my opinion, by a proper land system, better agriculture, and a supplementary industry, this country (India) is capable of supporting twice as many people as there are in it today. I am totally opposed to artificial means of controlling the birthrate, and it is not possible for me to congratulate you (Sanger) or your co-workers on having brought into being a league whose activities, if successful, can only do great moral injury to the people. I wish I could convince you and your co-workers to disband the league and devote your energy to a better purpose. You will pardon me for giving my opinion in a decisive manner. ("The Facts of Life" by Brian Clowes)LEGITIMATE CONCERNS'Swazi Mind', though perhaps lacking facts, has legitimate concerns about IPPF. Swaziland should be very careful about taking direction from a group founded to rid the world of the "feebleminded" and which leads the modern world in providing abortions. The solution to the abortions and the hard circumstances women find themselves in is for men to take up their roles as protectors and providers and to give their sisters, mothers, wives and daughters love and support. Strong families and strong marriages will build a civilization of love and support; strong families and strong marriages will make a bright, powerful Swaziland.Subject: Mothers' health after abortionIn a press statement on 12 October, FLAS indicated its concern for maternal and child health and safe motherhood. In the same statement, FLAS suggested "[taking] stock of what has happened in other countries" with regards to abortion.What has been the effect of abortion on the health, both physical and mental, of mothers and children after abortion in other countries?A book entitled "Women's Health After Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence" by Elizabeth Ring-Cassidy and Ian Gentles addresses this question. This book surveys the results of many studies on women's health after abortion, citing recognized publications such as the British Medical Journal, the United States Centers for Disease Control, and the South African Medical Journal. Following are some significant findings:*A study in Finland found suicide rates after abortions to be six times the level of suicides after live births, and three times higher than the general population.*One study found teenagers "significantly less likely to attempt suicide before an abortion than adult women, but more than twice as likely as adult women to attempt it after abortion".*A study in America found the suicide rate among women who had undergone an abortion 160% higher than the rate for women who had delivered their babies.*Women who aborted their children had "significantly higher depression scores 10 years after their abortion than those who bore their children".*Fittingly, another researcher concluded "Motherhood seems to protect against suicide".What effect does abortion have on the health of children? First off, every "successful" abortion kills a child; surely that is not good for children. We also know that Swaziland is working hard to eliminate child abuse. Ring-Cassidy and Gentles offer the following quote:"people who have had an abortion are more likely to abuse their children and people who have been abused are more likely to have an abortion...Abortion results in more post-partum depression [after having a live baby delivered after an abortion] and therefore less bonding, less touching and less breast feeding...It should be noted that one of the earliest arguments was that aborting unwanted children would diminish the incidence of child abuse. Statistics show precisely the opposite; that is, with more frequent abortions, all kinds of child abuse have increased." This report also says that "Abortion also runs in families, with mothers and grandmothers for three to four generations having had abortions often for the same reasons".Such reports from around the world tell us that abortion is a bad idea for Swaziland. Suicide rates skyrocket among women who have abortions. Mothers who abort their children have much higher rates of depression. Abortion always kills a child, and abortion leads to child abuse. Finally, abortion is a self-perpetuating legacy, leaving the third and fourth generations of mothers committing the same violence and injury on themselves and their children. Abortion is not the way to achieve maternal and child health. The way to achieve maternal and child health is to build strong marriages-and this starts with abstinence before marriage and faithfulness within marriage. May Swaziland lead the world in building a culture of life by saying yes to love and faithfulness and no to abortion and death.Subject: Psychological effects on abortion providersThe FLAS statement on October 12 suggested Swaziland look at what other countries have done about abortion. We have considered the effect of abortion on women and children so far. What about the effect of abortion on those who do them, both the doctors and the clinic workers?Following are anecdotes from the book "Lime 5" by Mark Crutcher.*"Abortionist David Zbaraz told the Washington Post, 'It's a nasty, dirty, yucky thing and I always come home angry'. The article went on to say that 'on those days when he performs an abortion, his wife can tell as soon as he walks in the door'".*"Sallie Tisdale, a nurse in an abortion clinic, writes, 'There are weary, grim moments when I think I cannot bear another basin of bloody remains, utter another kind phrase of reassurance..."How can you stand it?" even the clients ask. The see the machine, the strange instruments, the blood, the final stroke that wipes away the promise of pregnancy. Sometimes I see that too: I watch as woman's swollen abdomen sink to softness in a few stuttering moments and my own belly flip-flops with sorrow".*"Judith Fetrow, a former clinic worker from San Francisco, revealed that in her experience, 'clinic workers have very mixed emotions about abortion...Clinic workers may say they support a woman's right to choose, but they will also say that do not want to see tiny hands and tiny feet. They do not want to be faced with the consequences of their actions...There is a great difference between the intellectual support of a woman's right to choose and the actual participation in the carnage of abortion. Because seeing body parts bothers the workers'".*"A study of 130 San Francisco abortion clinic workers conducted between January 1984 and March 1985 found that 77% of them see abortion as a destructive act against a living thing, and 18% actually talked about it as murder. The study's author stated, 'Particularly striking was the fact that discomfort with abortion clients or procedures was reported by practitioners who strongly supported abortion rights and expressed strong commitment to their work. This preliminary finding suggested that even those who support a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy may be struggling with an important tension between their formal beliefs and the situated experience of their abortion work'".*"Dr. Warren Hern [a well-known abortionist] reported an intense emotional reaction from his staff after dilation and extraction operations [wherein the doctor uses an instrument to pull the baby apart inside the womb, and pull the pieces out]. These included 'psychological symptoms sleep disturbances, effects on personal relationships, and moral anguish'. He observed that the staff's reactions to the fetus ranged from refusal to look, dismay, and amazement, to disgust, fear, and sadness. The abortionist admitted that the procedure also caused him problems, saying, 'The sensations of dismemberment flow through the forceps like an electric current.'"*"In another observation, Dr. Julius Butler, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Minnesota Medical school, expressed his concern about the mental health of abortionists, saying, 'We've had guys drinking too much, taking drugs, even a suicide or two...There have been no studies I know of the problem, but the unwritten kind of statistics we see are alarming.'"*"One research report shows they have 'obsessional thinking about abortion, depression, fatigue, anger, lowered self-esteem, and identity conflicts'".*"Another journal article states, 'Ambivalent periods were characterized by a variety of otherwise uncharacteristic feelings and behavior including withdrawal from colleagues, resistance to going to work, lack of energy, impatience with clients and an overall sense of uneasiness. Nightmares, images that could not be shaken and preoccupation were commonly reported.'"Abortion is bad for women, abortion kills babies, and abortion also takes a terrible toll on those who perform and assist in them. Swaziland would do very well to keep this very destructive practice illegal.Subject: What is the root of the abortion problem?Times readers are aware of the tragedy of Sibongile Tsabedze (not her real name). She is the minor who became pregnant by a married man. She aborted the child, was arrested and convicted, and now faces an E2000 fine or two years in prison.How did this happen? Who is to blame?The first question is, Where is the man? He is half responsible for the child. Why wasn't he convicted of the abortion along with Sibongile?Sibongile's sister suggested an abortion, so she had a hand in it. So did the one who gave Tsabedze the pills. And Sibongile did go through with the abortion, when she could have given the baby the gift of life.A debate about who is ultimately at fault for this tragedy would fill pages of newsprint. Other subjects, such as when life begins and choice and viability of the unborn, already spill thousands of liters of ink. What is the root cause of abortion in the first place? It is a confusion about the nature of sex.Human beings are made to love. Between a man and woman married to each other, that love is to be free (not forced), faithful, unconditional (noma kanjalo, the couple will stay together), and fruitful (accepting of children who come from the marriage embrace). The marriage act-that is, sex-is to be the affirmation and renewal of these commitments. That is the purpose and nature of sex. Much to our detriment, the modern world has removed sex from marriage and turned the marriage act into just another "recreational activity". The modern world thinks that as long as both partners are consenting and no one gets hurt, sex is fine in any situation. The innumerable broken hearts, sex diseases, and abortions clearly show that the modern world is wrong. Treating it as something "just for fun", or as a way to get something from someone, or as a way to gain prestige, or for any other non marriage-affirming purpose is bound to end in disaster. Swaziland, let's build strong marriages-marriages of free, faithful, unconditional, and fruitful love between spouses-and build a culture of life. May Swaziland lead the world in showing forth the power and splendor of married love, and change the face of the earth.Subject: Slippery slopeI find it intriguing that for years Swaziland has been battling HIV/AIDS. Then, with the discovery of the 71 aborted babies, we began to talk about abortion. We hear talk now about "addressing unwanted pregnancies". On 29 October the Times reported that "FLAS believes that sexual reproductive health needs to be repositioned and placed at the centre of the development for success in the global goals". Could it be that "sexual and reproductive health"-and this term always ends up referring to abortion-is the key to Swaziland's development? Is it more important than clean water? More important than primary education? More important than ending corruption? More important than anything else?Whenever contraception becomes accepted and widely practiced, adultery and infidelity become widespread. When adultery and infidelity become widespread, so does emotional devastation and terrible diseases like AIDS. Along with the diseases, sex outside marriage (just like sex inside marriage) brings children. Swaziland, most rightly so, wants to kill off AIDS. But unlike AIDS, children are not a disease and should not be killed off. How can a country survive if it kills its own children?To build a strong Swaziland, let us put integrity and hard work and LOVE at the centre of development efforts. The world will notice Swaziland, and Swaziland will become a model for world development, when the Kingdom demonstrates commitment and dedication to its own people. Abortion and contraception and the assumed "universal right to consequence-free sex" will only hold Swaziland back. Strong marriages and families, however, will put the Kingdom on the road of success.Subject: A Woman's Right to Control Her Body"A woman has a right to control her body", goes the abortion slogan, "and no one has the right to tell her what she can or can't do with it." There is of course a lot of truth to this statement: a woman, in fact any person, has the right to decide what career to pursue, what food to eat, where to live, how to spend their money, etc. But a little thinking reveals to us that we do not have absolute freedom to do whatever we want with ourselves.Consider traffic laws. No one is allowed to drive through red lights. If someone was driving down Gwamile Street ignoring red lights and got stopped by the police, the police would only laugh when the driver said "It's my body, and no one can tell me what I can't do with it." Same thing with airplane pilots. If the pilots who carry people to Joburg and back every day decided that flying at the regular elevation was too boring and instead started buzzing the tops of homesteads near Matsapha and the tops of skyscrapers in Joburg, no one would accept the excuse that "It's my body and no one has the right to tell me what I can't do with it". Same thing with doctors in surgery. If a doctor began an operation saying "I have a right to do with my body whatever I want-so today, I'm going to remove this woman's appendix with one eye shut", he would (hopefully!) be immediately restrained by the nurses and he might lose his medical license. Same thing with gravity. A man might stand on his roof crooning R. Kelly's memorable "I Believe I Can Fly", then jump off the roof with his arms flapping madly-but just a few seconds later he will learn that although he does have a lot of freedom of choice, Mother Nature does have the right to tell him, in this case at least, what he can't do with his body.And so it is with abortion. We have wide latitude in what we do with our bodies-but our freedom to choose must be limited when the welfare of others is involved. On a deeper level, the analogy between the "right to choose" and the man who thinks he can fly is a telling one. To have an abortion goes against the nurturing, caring nature of a woman who has become a mother, and to violate one's own person in this way is to set oneself up for massive problems sooner or later in life. Abortion is not pro-woman any more than it is pro-child. Women and children deserve respect and protection, not the anti-life "choice" of abortion which damages women and kills babies. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life, where a woman's physical and emotional integrity is protected, and the lives of her children respected.Subject: Abortion and Capital PunishmentSome crimes are so serious that offenders receive the death penalty. In the modern world many individuals and groups, including well-known human rights group Amnesty International, argue that capital punishment is always wrong. Such individuals and associations contend that modern methods of jailing people makes them unable to hurt anyone, that capital punishment is not shown to discourage others from committing violent crime, and that members of some ethnic groups receive the death penalty in much greater numbers than members of other ethnic groups. Most importantly, anti-capital punishment groups say, the death penalty cannot be undone. Imagine someone is convicted of a crime and given an 10 year jail sentence. Imagine further that two years into the sentence, new evidence appears that shows that the convicted person was innocent. At this time they can be let out of jail. If someone is sentenced to death, however, and the sentence is carried out, no amount of new evidence and not a mountain of apologies can bring them back to life.This is where abortion comes in. Many abortion promoters argue that, at least, abortion should be legal in the cases of rape and incest. Ignoring for the moment that these "hard cases" are always used to widen abortion laws to the point that abortion is legal for any reason, let us consider the justice of abortion for rape and incest.Rape and incest are despicable crimes. The guilty man should be arrested and punished. Does abortion bring justice to those guilty of incest and rape?No, quite the opposite. The child who was conceived from this violent crime gets the death sentence, and the criminal goes scot-free. The child in the womb is utterly innocent of any wrongdoing and is utterly unable to defend him or herself. What's worse, the most important evidence of the crime-the child-is no longer available. Modern medical technology can, with a high degree of accuracy, identify the father of the child-if the child is still alive. With such evidence, the real culprit can be apprehended and punished. After an abortion, however, one of the the two "prime witnesses" of the crime can no longer testify, and the perpetrator is off the hook. What kind of justice is this? It is no justice at all. In fact, it is the opposite of justice-it is piling one violent, criminal act upon another.Tragically, and incomprehensibly, many individuals and groups-including the aforementioned Amnesty International-who oppose the death penalty in all situations also support abortion as a "human right".May this never come to pass in Swaziland. May the innocent be protected; may babies in the womb never be killed for someone else's crime. Subject: Abortion and damage to the uterusSurveys consistently reveal that most people don't like the idea of abortion but accept it because they believe it helps women. Even Barack Obama said last year in a presidential debate that he supports a ban on late term abortion, as long as it has an exception for the health and life of the mother.Consider the effects of abortion on the health of a woman's cervix and uterus. The cervix is a ring-shaped muscle at the bottom of the uterus. It is the opening through which sperm enters the uterus, and out of which a baby passes during birth.During pregnancy, the cervix is tightly closed. Its job is to make sure the baby stays safely inside the womb during the 9 months of preparation for birth. During the birth process, the cervix relaxes and opens to allow the baby to pass.Abortion is not a natural process. To kill and extract the baby, the cervix must be forced open. According to David Reardon's book "Aborted Women, Silent No More", this forcing "virtually always causes microscopic tearing of the muscles, and occasionally results in severe ripping of the uterine wall." Reardon mentions one study where 1 in 8 abortions resulted in the need for stitches for a cervix cut during the abortion process.Reardon continues: "Cervical damage is extremely frequent in young women pregnant for the first time, because the cervix is much more rigid in women who have not previously given birth." Sadly, some 60% of abortions are done on first pregnancies. That means these young women are setting themselves up for later problems in childbearing.What kind of problems might they experience in later pregnancies? Dr. Reardon's statistics:*One study found the risk of a miscarriage between the third and sixth month of pregnancy is 10 times higher for women who had an abortion than for those who hadn't;*Risk of premature delivery (the baby should have stayed in the womb and developed longer) increases 8 to 10 times after an abortion;*Another study revealed that 48% of women who aborted their first child had complications with later pregnancies;*A study at Vanderbilt University (USA) found that after one abortion, the rate of improper placement of the placenta (the connection between mother and child in the womb) increased 7 to 15 times. This improper placement increases the chance that the baby will be malformed or die during birth, and that the mother will bleed excessively during delivery.*Uterine damage due to abortion means aborted women suffer three times as many delivery problems in later live births, as compared to non-aborting women.Most folks don't like abortion, but tolerate it "for the sake of the mother". Tragically, the real effects of abortion on women's health are catastrophic. May all people of goodwill reject the false promises of abortion and instead build a culture of love and life. Building that abortion-free culture of life will, in fact, protect the health of mothers.Subject: Abortion and Everything ElsePeople dying of so many tragic causes: AIDS, hunger, poverty, war. These are all terrible, and they all need to be addressed. But abortion is still worse than all of them. Why is that?If you don't have life at all, then these other issues are irrelevant. The reason these other problems are important is because human life is important. We want to end war, poverty, etc. because we want people to have full and satisfying lives. If abortion gets set on equal in importance to AIDS etc. the ground on which to fight these other problems is lost. Abortion says a child in the womb is a parasite and a burden and that killing the child is a solution. Set abortion on equal footing with other serious concerns, and watch the solution to AIDS, poverty, crime, and war become "shoot and kill the wounded". This has already been done in the United States, where two men recently argued that a decrease in crime is due to the fact that mothers of children likely to become criminals have a lot of abortions. Imagine-killing someone who might in the future commit a crime, but who is today innocent, and calling that an advance! Yet this is precisely what happens if the problem of abortion is considered as an equal alongside other serious problems.The right to life is the first and most important right. Protect it. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.Subject: Relationships and abortionEveryone wants to love and be loved. Almost all popular music sings about love. What is the effect of abortion on relationships?Read these quotes from chapter 15 of "Women's Health After Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence" by Elizabeth Ring-Cassidy and Ian Gentles."Abortion can have a significant impact on every relationship a woman has; not only is her relationship with her partner affected, so are her relationships with the other members of her family and her other children. After an abortion, the rate of marital breakups and relationship dissolution is anywhere from 40 to 75 per cent, often related to the breakdown of intimacy and trust. In addition, many women experience depression, guilt, and anger related to feelings of having been let down by their partner...If their partners have manipulated or coerced them into having an abortion, women tend to feel angry and betrayed, and men, typically, feel a loss of control and pride especially if they were not consulted."Put simply, abortion kills love between man and woman. How about between parents and children?"When a young girl is coerced into having an abortion by her parents, there is often a breakdown in the parent-child relationship...Or, if a girl has an abortion without her parents' knowledge, she ends up in a cycle of lies and cover-ups which emotionally strain all her relationships."So abortion devastates the love and trust between parents and children. How about between a woman who has an abortion and later carries a child to birth?"Suppression of mourning which occurs in many of these situations often has marked negative effects on relationships with future children, some women reporting emotional numbing and inability to bond maternally."Abortion can render a mother incapable of loving the children she carries to term. Does abortion affect children whose parents abort a later child?"Living children in a family where there is an abortion are also negatively affected, frequently exhibiting fear, anxiety, and sadness at the loss of their sibling".Everyone wants love. Research demonstrates that abortion kills love at every level: between men and women, between girls who abort and their parents, and between mothers and living children. It is hard to imagine a more effective method for killing love than abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life and trust; may Swaziland say NO to abortion and say YES to strong marriages and strong families.Subject: Abortion in the Long Run"Sustainable development" is a term familiar to all who wish the Swazi nation to advance. Planning for the "long run"-that is, positive change long into the future-is essential to sustainable development. So will abortion help Swaziland in the long run? Let us see.Abortion is viewed as a solution to a problem: a woman finds herself unexpectedly pregnant, and either she or the father (or both) decide that the child must go.Many (but not all) women feel a sense of relief immediately after an abortion. The unexpected pregnancy is gone, and she thinks life will go back to normal. As time goes by, however, many women regret their decision. Women 10, 20, and even 30 years after their abortion still lament their choice and wish they could change it. Abortion is not good for the mother in the long run.The effect of abortion on men, though not as frequently considered, can also be devastating. Wherever abortion is legalized, the father has no say in the choice to abort; it is left entirely to the mother. As a result, if the father of an unexpected child wants the child to live but the mother goes for abortion, the man suffers tremendous loss. Abortion is not good for the father in the long run.If the father presses for abortion and the mother agrees, his character is corrupted. It is never good to succeed in pressuring someone (in this case, a mother) to kill someone else (in this case, a child). In this case too, abortion is not good for the father in the long run.And of course for the child, abortion takes away even the chance of a long run.Clearly, abortion does nothing to help a man, woman, or child in the long run. Abortion does not promote the development of a nation, because it kills and injures the citizens of that nation. May Swaziland never allow the scourge of abortion to present itself as a positive development. NO to abortion; YES to life; yes to true human development.
Subject: Abortion and ViolenceMany proponents of abortion argue that abortion should be a woman's choice. But in fact, most mothers who go for abortion do so because they feel they have no choice-circumstances are such that they see no way out of their situation other than abortion. Perhaps they feel they don't have a job or money or home in which to raise the child; maybe she got pregnant by a sugar daddy doesn't want a child to show for his exploits, so he pressures her to abort the child. Whatever the reason, abortions come about because women suffer a lack of choices.Is abortion the right step in such a case? Absolutely not. Why? Because abortion is the violent murder of innocents. Killing innocent people cannot be a solution to hard circumstances, for two reasons. First, why should an innocent child die because of the circumstances of her conception? Second, abortion sets a terrible precedent: that killing someone, especially someone incapable of defense or escape, is a decent way to resolve problems. If it's okay to kill babies in the womb, how about people "too old" or "too sick" to enjoy life? After all, they have lived a long life and they're not "innocent" in the same way a baby is. How about my cheating husband/wife? Surely they are not innocent at all. How about the guy who just overtook me on the way down the Malangwane? He is guilty of dangerous driving and could have injured or killed me; he should have to pay for his dangerousness! If a culture allows the murder of its unborn, it's a short step to a mindset that allows the killing of other, not-so-innocent citizens.We all started our lives as unborn children. Those in the womb today, and those not yet conceived, deserve the same protection from violence that we received. Legalizing abortion means children in the womb are no longer safe; it also means no one else is really safe, because murder has been called legal. It becomes only a matter of time before the license to kill is extended, both in law and in habit of mind, to other people.May Swaziland lead the world in respect for life. May Swaziland protect human life from the moment of conception to natural death. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.Subject: Abortion and Women's HealthIt seems despite nearly a year of letters to the Times detailing the devastation of abortion on women, children, and society, other letters to the paper indicate that some still believe abortion is a grand idea. Here we go again!Abortion was sold to the American public in the early 1970's as a necessary step in the liberation of women. We are told today that the actual procedure is just the removal of a blob of tissue and no more physically traumatic than a woman's cramps.Sadly, the reality is otherwise. A study published in 2008 showed that women who had undergone abortions had a 30% higher incidence of mental health problems compared to women whose pregnancies had not ended in abortion. Another study reported in 2006 compared the mental health of teenagers who had abortions to the mental health of those who had not. This study found that 15 to 18 year old girls who did not get pregnant had a 31.2% chance of a major mental depression. Those who got pregnant and gave birth had a 35.7% chance. Those who got pregnant and had an abortion had a whopping 78.6% chance of a major depression.Abortion has also been shown to dramatically increase the likelihood of suicide in women. A study in the USA in 1986 found that girls between 13 and 19 years of age were 10 times more likely to attempt suicide within 6 months of the abortion than girls who had not had abortions.
Studies over the past five decades have shown abortion increases the chances of breast cancer 30% to 50%. One study found the risk for breast cancer increased by over 100% for women who had abortions before they were 18 years old or after 30 years of age.Swazi women deserve to live full, rich, satisfying lives. Abortion violently disrupts the lives of women. If we want women to prosper, let us make sure we do not subject them to abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.Subject: Abortion turns life upside downMy wife and I spoke last night about how abortion turns life upside down. In a normal, healthy world, a mother and father are delighted when they conceive a child. Though parenting can be difficult at times, especially in those first few months of sleep-deprived nights, children are a natural and happy result of marital love. A child is good news from the moment mom and dad know she or he exists, and the child grows up in the midst of her parents' love and care.Abortion corrupts and destroys this environment of life-giving love. In situations where abortion is contemplated, mom and dad realize mom is pregnant and begin to wonder, "Hmmm, are we ready for a child? Should we go through with this? Maybe we should get rid of it."Note that mom and dad are not thinking clearly. If a couple is not ready for a child, they should not be having sex. Note also that contemplating abortion includes dehumanizing the unborn child. No human being should be dehumanized; it has been done far too many times in this world, and it only and always ends in murder and disaster.Most importantly, consider how abortion ruins the common-sense order of life. Instead of a child receiving the welcoming love of mom and dad, her parents put her on trial: shall this child live? The very life-giving womb of a mother may turn out to be an antechamber of death.If this argument seems hard to believe, it is because we have been numbed by the abortion slogans. Put this argument to a test: explain abortion to a 6-year-old child, and watch their reaction. Make sure you use simple, accurate words (like "kill the baby" instead of "terminate the pregnancy"). When the 6-year-old begins to frown, cry, and run away from you, you will see the clear thinking of a child recognizing that abortion violates love and life.Swaziland, never let the demon of abortion gain a foothold in the Kingdom. It will kill your children and it will damage your mothers. Build a culture where all children are welcomed in life and protected in law.Subject: Clarifications on AbortionThis letter was in response to someone else's letter; sorry I don't have the original.Ms. Rogers argues (31 October TOS) that illegal/unsafe abortion puts women's lives at risk. Indeed, abortion (illegal or legal) is very dangerous; it is a very good thing to avoid. Women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant deserve support for themselves and their unborn children. Many individuals in the United States, concerned with the death, loss and pain that abortion has brought to children and mothers, have developed homes and programs for unwed mothers and mothers-to-be. Developing this response to unplanned pregnancies is much more humane and supportive than pushing abortion. Programs for unwed and unsupported mothers give these young women a chance to develop their potential. Fathers are identified and are legally required to financially support their children. Over 1 million families in the US are waiting to adopt a child. These options encourage women to give their unborn children the great gift of life. Let us not apply a quick and deadly approach to unplanned pregnancies, an approach that can leave a lifetime of regret; let us instead tfutfuka live through encouraging responsible behavior and supporting unwed mothers and their children. Ms. Rogers contends that I am ignorant about abortion procedures because no scraping of the womb is performed after an abortion. Ms. Rogers fails to differentiate between a chemical abortion (the kind she described) and a surgical abortion. I assume she is describing an abortion caused by the pill called RU-486. According to "The Facts of Life", "The abortion pills are used to kill babies of less than five weeks gestation, and their efficiency decreases dramatically past seven weeks' gestation". Abortions done after this developmental stage still rely on surgical methods. Readers are invited to visit http://www.prolife.com/ or http://www.cbrinfo.org/ to view some real-life photographs of children who died through cutting and scraping. Beware that these are graphic images; surgical abortion is ugly.As disturbing as Ms. Rogers' blurring of chemical and surgical abortion is her unwritten assumption that abortion is okay because it can be done without surgery. But whether you hit someone with a lorrie and leave a lot of blood and body parts on the pavement or you slip poison into someone's tea mid-morning and they die tidily at their desk 2 hours later, they are still dead. Killing the innocent is always wrong, and abortion (whether performed with knives or performed with pills) is killing the innocent-so abortion is always wrong. Ms. Rogers says the abortion pill causes the uterus to "expel its contents". What women aren't told is that those "contents" include a human being whose heart began beating 3 weeks after conception--right about the time that most women begin to suspect that they might be pregnant.Ms. Rogers would like to know where I sourced my information. I have included references in my letters to the editor; I saw none in hers. I cordially invite Ms. Rogers to meet sometime; she can contact me at rpoglitsh@live.com. I will bring some references with me, and we can chat.I do trust that Ms. Rogers would be pleased if young men and women (and full-grown men and women) would build strong marriages and families. Strong and loving families would uproot all possible causes for abortion; strong and loving families would leave a legacy of commitment, trust and love for generations.Subject: Alternatives to AbortionThe guiding principle of medicine is found in the phrase "do no harm". Every medical professional should strive to help, and not to hurt, every patient they treat. Every doctor should, in consultation with his or her patient, use their professional training and accumulated experience to decide what course of treatment is best for the patient.Does the abortion industry seek to "do no harm" and to prepare a treatment regime personally designed for the benefit of each pregnant women? Sadly, no. Abortionists and the groups they work for make their livelihood selling abortions; they do not take steps which might reduce their incomes.Approximately 80% of women who get abortions say they would have kept their baby if circumstances would have been different. Under the pressure of real and imagined financial problems, insensitive spouses/boyfriends/parents, and the desire to quickly escape an unexpected pregnancy, nearly a million women a year in the United States abort their children. In having an abortion, these women subject themselves to a procedure associated with over 100 physical and psychological problems."If circumstances would have been different..." This is a haunting phrase. Can circumstances for an unexpectedly pregnant woman be changed, before she has an abortion?
YES! Alternatives to abortion exist. In countries where abortion has been legalized, government and citizen groups exist to help women bring their unplanned, unborn children to life. Is a pregnant woman being pressured into abortion by an unsupportive husband? Marriage counseling is the appropriate step. Is a daughter living at home scared to tell her parents that she's pregnant? Bringing parents and child together with the help of a counselor creates an environment where this news can be shared safely and the counselor can "shepherd" the conversation in positive directions. Is the woman afraid her career advancement is threatened by an untimely pregnancy? Job relocation services exist which help such women find work with a more supportive company. We can be glad that people of good will throughout the world make personal sacrifices to help women carry their unexpected children to term. These men and women-and of course the mothers themselves-are lifesavers.Logic dictates that the institutions performing abortions would be the ones to provide these alternatives to abortion. It is beyond doubt that abortion takes a human life. Abortionist Warren Hern says, "We have reached a point in this particular technology where there is no possibility of denial of an act of destruction on the part of the operator. It is before one's eyes. The sensations of dismemberment flow through the forceps like an electric current". If this is the case, and if 80% of women undergoing abortion would have liked to have given their children birth if circumstances had been different, and if the abortion industry really cares about women, shouldn't they provide abortion alternatives?Yes they should, but no they don't. Carol Everett, who ran a chain of abortion clinics, said "It was always difficult to find and train telemarketers who could call themselves 'counselors' while selling abortions." When she took over a clinic "I immediately began to make changes at the clinic. I trained our telephone counselors to use sales techniques instead of counseling techniques." One of her employers opened a chain of non-profit "counseling centers" for the sole purpose of getting pregnant women to be told about his abortion clinic. Planned Parenthood and other abortion-performing organizations worldwide rarely offer non-abortion referrals. These groups make their money on abortions; despite their claims to be on the side of women in crisis pregnancies, abortion is their business and they are not interested in offering alternatives. The lesson is clear. If Swaziland legalizes abortion, pregnant women here will begin to feel the pressure from international pro-abortion agencies to undergo abortions. These groups will not support these women in their pregnancies-they will encourage the killing of the child.Swazi women deserve better than this. May the nation phakamisa bomake, however they became bomake. Let us build a culture of life, where women are given the life-giving options they overwhelmingly desire. Let us choose life.Note: much of this letter derives from chapter 7 of David Reardon's book "Making Abortion Rare". Get it free at http://www.afterabortion.org/FreeBook.htm. Carol Everett's experiences are recounted in her book "Blood Money: Getting Rich off of a Woman's Right to Choose."Subject: BB Knows BarackA letter by BB Nkhosi criticizing Barack Obama was attacked by other letters. I came to Nkhosi's defense.Last weeks Times-Sunday carried a barrage of attacks on BB Nkhosi's comments on US President-Elect Obama. Simply put, Babe Nkhosi understands Obama better than Nkhosi's detractors."Juluka" quotes at length from Obama's website, wherein Obama defends his stand on "reproductive rights". Readers should know that"pro-choice" and "reproductive rights" always mean abortion.All people interested in the abortion debate should visit http://www.klannedparenthood.com/ and look at the photos of aborted children. All the smooth words (and Obama sure can talk) about reproductive freedom, rights, choice, etc. do not change the fact that abortion kills a child (in a gruesome way) and often harms the mother physically, mentally and spiritually.Answers for Juluka:Obama criticized the Supreme Court for keeping partial birth abortion illegal. In Juluka's quote, Obama said this move was an attack on Roe v. Wade, and thus an attack on women's health. Actually, partial birth abortion means the sucking out of a healthy baby's brains while the baby's head is still in her mother and just centimeters from birth. Medical doctors who testified before the US Congress said a partial birth abortion is never necessary to save the life of a mother, and you can be sure a partial birth abortion is always bad for the health of an otherwise healthy baby girl. So in addition to supporting a barbaric procedure beneath the dignity of any civil society, president-elect Obama misleads everyone who reads his website.Obama claimed he stood up for the opening of a Planned Parenthood clinic in "a community where affordable health care is in short supply". Likely, that was a black neighborhood. Planned Parenthood is the biggest provider of abortions in America, and well over 50% of their clinics are in minority neighborhoods. Black American women make up about 13% of the US population, but they have 35% of all abortions in America. So basically, Mr. Obama defended a facility whose main job is the aborting of children of colour. I would not call someone who did this a hero, and I sure wouldn't (and didn't) vote for him for president.The Ku Klux Klan is a white racist group in America. At various times, the Klan has killed black Americans by hanging and other horrific means. Every three days, more African-Americans are killed by abortion than have been killed by the Ku Klux Klan in its entire history. What the Klan didn't accomplish in one hundred years of concerted effort, abortion does in half a week, 52 weeks a year. Remember that Mr. Obama receives a full marks from Planned Parenthood, the biggest abortion provider in America. Whose side is Obama on?Obama again, via Juluka: "But we know that Roe v. Wade is about more than a woman's right to choose; it's about equality".Who would argue with "a woman's right to choose" a career, where to live, if and who to marry, etc.? Remember though, when Obama and other abortion supporters say "a woman's right to choose", they mean abortion. Go back to http://www.klannedparenthood.com/ and see again that abortion kills babies. Then ask yourself, "Should a woman getting equal opportunities in life depend on her ability to get her unborn children killed?" Of course not. But Mr. Obama's plan for women to "dream without limit" (a phrase he used in a speech to Planned Parenthood in 2007) includes partial birth abortion. Sound bizarre? It sure is."We have to build a future that's filled with hope and possibility for all Americans". At last, Mr. Obama and I reach common ground, perhaps even a moment of that elusive unity he spoke so much about during his election campaign. Let's hope, against all indications to the contrary, that president-elect Obama includes unborn Americans in that hope-filled future.mshamndane@yahoo.com got only a paragraph, in which he/she says Nkhosi is shallow in his understanding of American presidential elections. It's impossible to know mshamndane's criticisms, though, in a two-sentence paragraph lacking any statements of fact.The final writer encourages Nkhosi to "Get your facts right before you start shooting off lies for facts". This writer didn't provide any facts, though they did say "Bawatfola" about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Here's an interesting fact: Georges Sada, a high-ranking officer in Saddam Hussein's air force, said huge amounts of WMDs were moved into Syria after Syria suffered the rupture of an irrigation dam in June 2002. Hussein moved the weapons in civilian vehicles (trucks, passenger airplanes), believing they would not be inspected at the border since Iraq said they were carrying humanitarian supplies. Saddam was right, and the WMDs moved effortlessly into Syria. Read more in Georges Sada's book "Saddam's Secrets".The final writer did say that Obama is no hypocrite. Obama most certainly is consistent in promoting abortion. As a senator in Illinois, Obama voted three times against providing even comfort care (a blanket, for instance) for a baby who survived an in-utero assassination attempt. Obama's alternative? Place that dying baby in a soiled clothes closet and let him or her expire there. Nurses from Chicago's Christ Hospital testified that this occurred; Obama repeatedly opposed a law that would prevent it from happening again. "We have to build a future that's filled with hope and possibility for all Americans" rings gruesomely hollow. His campaign promised to cut off funding to crisis pregnancy centers that help women who want to keep their baby-is this choice? Obama promises to sign the Freedom Of Choice Act into law, which would make tax money available to women to pay for abortions. This means citizens who oppose abortion and want to help both mother and her unborn child through life will become unwilling accomplices in the murder of the most innocent citizens. Obama also promises to end laws which prohibit US tax dollars from going to organizations which perform or promote abortions around the world. If you start to see advertisements suggesting abortion might be a grand idea for the developing world after next January, you might reasonably suspect where the money for that advert came from.Make no mistake: Barack Obama is pro-abortion. Instead of heaping baseless verbal abuse on BB Nkhosi, we owe him a word of thanks for speaking the truth about Obama. Lastly, Obama's supporters owe it to themselves and to the rest of society to do just a little digging-produce just a little "juluka"-and find out Obama's intentions concerning the world's innocent citizens still sleeping in the womb.Subject: Beware of abortion slogansPerhaps you have heard the slogan "Every child a wanted child". This phrase was used in a letter to the Times some months ago to support legalizing abortion in Swaziland, and it is often heard in other pro-abortion circles. Here's a real-life example of why this slogan threatens disaster on lives.Jean Garton became pregnant with her fourth child after her 40th birthday. She was not happy, because she expected that after 40 years of age and three children she would be able to pursue her own child-less interests.She wished to abort this child, but abortion was illegal in America at that time. Despite her anger and frustration at her situation, she kept the child.During the pregnancy, she got active in pro-abortion activity. She found the arguments of the pro-abortion movement unconvincing, and so set out to make better arguments of her own. Despite months of research, however, she found no compelling evidence to support abortion. Paraphrasing another writer, she said "'I was carried kicking and screaming' into the pro-life position 'by the sheer weight of the evidence'".She carried this child to term. When the son she initially had hoped to abort was ten years old, Mrs. Garton's first son, her "wanted" son who had just finished four years of service in the military, was murdered. Says Mrs. Garton: "Dean-our first son, our wanted son, our planned son-murdered. And bringing great comfort as we struggled through bone-crunching grief was Donn-our second son, our unwanted son, our unplanned son-whom I had wanted to murder". Mrs. Garton offers this advice: "If I could say anything to the millions of girls, women, and men who destroy their gift [of a child] because it is the wrong sex, the wrong shape, the wrong time, the wrong anything, it would be to caution them about the unplanned events that can turn their planned lives upside down."
Jean Garton learned that the life she preserved-the life of her unplanned son, her "unwanted" son-later carried her through one of the darkest periods of her own life. Let us not snuff out innocent lives and potentially cripple our own through abortion. Let us reject abortion and its hollow slogans. Let us build a culture of love and life.Note: Read Jean Garton's book "Who Broke the Baby?" for more on abortion slogans.Subject: Do women get support when considering abortion?"But what ultimately I believe is that women in consultation with their families, their doctors, their religious advisers, are in the best position to make this [abortion] decision." That was Barack Obama in a debate with John McCain during last year's presidential campaign. Whether you think abortion is good or bad, we can surely agree that it is not a decision to be made lightly. Life-changing decisions are best made with the loving concern and input of family, friends, doctors, and pastors. Does the abortion industry offer this sort of support? Unfortunately, no. According to Doctor David Reardon, who studies the effects of abortion on women, roughly 80% of women who undergo abortions in the United States report that they would have kept their baby if circumstances would have been different. Permit me to quote from Dr. David Reardon's book "Making Abortion Rare": "Most abortion counselors are trained to recognize the fact that the decision to undergo an abortion is difficult, stressful, and often a marginal one. Therefore, to avoid increasing the stress on the patient (and losing a client), counselors are trained to avoid answering questions or providing information which will aggravate the concerns or doubts of a patient. Instead, pre-abortion counselors generally concentrate on reassuring the woman that abortion is her best option. The counselor is trained to take the role of a compassionate friend to help the aborting woman face the unknown and overcome her doubts. The problems which have motivated a woman to seek an abortion may be discussed in a casual manner, so as to provide the woman an opportunity to air her feelings, but they are seldom explored. Alternative methods of problem resolution, such as marital counseling or job relocation service, are rarely discussed at all."In countries where it is legal, abortion makes a lot of money. Again from Dr. Reardon: "when a quick buck can quickly turn into an extra hundred thousand, or two, per year, just by working on Fridays and Saturdays, some physicians quickly formed the 'medical' opinion that every crisis pregnancy is treatable by abortion. In doing so, they have negligently abandoned their duty and violated the civil rights of women." The abortion industry puts money ahead of women's health; naturally, they are not going to tell their clients a whole lot about the procedure or its potentially catastrophic after-effects. To do so would threaten their profits.Dr. Reardon a third time: "Frequently, a patient's questions and concerns are sidestepped or answered in trivial ways so as to avoid arousing unresolved doubts or fears. When a patient volunteers a statement such as, 'I really wish I could have this baby,' abortion counselors will generally attempt to refocus her attention on reasons why the abortion is 'for the best.'" A fourth helping of Dr. Reardon: "Discussion of abortion related risks is generally brief with an emphasis on only a few of the immediate physical risks. Reproductive health risks are minimized and increased cancer risks are almost certainly never mentioned at all. If psychological aftereffects are discussed at all, women are generally told that they may experience only temporary feelings of mild depression. Emphasis will be placed on the fact that 'most' women are not significantly effected and are able to 'get on with their lives.' The fact that serious psychological sequelae are experienced by at least a significant minority of women (15 to 25 percent) is almost never discussed, even though these complication rates are at least equal, and probably greater, than the risks associated with most physical complications."After the counseling and after making the decision to abort, will the mother meet a friendly and supportive doctor to carry her through the procedure? No. Again from Reardon's book "Making Abortion Rare": "According to Dr. Edward Allred, owner of a chain of clinics performing 60,000 abortions per year: 'Very commonly we hear patients say they feel like they're on an assembly line. We tell them they're right. It is an assembly line... We're trying to be as cost effective as possible, and speed is important... We try to use the physician for his technical skills and reduce the one-on-one relationship with the patient. We usually see the patient for the first time on the operating table and then not again....'" We must all accept our responsibility help women through their pregnancies, whether they are planned or not. Far too often in the United States, husbands, boyfriends and family members pressure mothers to abort their babies. If we all valued every child regardless of the manner of their conception-as we should-there would be no abortions at all. This would constitute a culture of life. We must emphasize abstinence before marriage and faithfulness within marriage, because this is what makes for happy marriages and families; but if a woman gets pregnant outside marriage, neither she nor the child should suffer long-term psychological and physical torment (including death) for that bad choice.Part of building this culture of life includes publicly saying "NO!" to abortion. If a society allows the legalization of abortion, the profit-driven vulture that is the abortion industry will begin to make its money at the expense of the lives of women and their unborn children. May women with unplanned pregnancies receive the loving support of their families, their doctors, their religious advisers to CHOOSE LIFE-for the mother, for the child, and for the strength of the Kingdom of Swaziland.Note: Dr. Reardon's book is available free at http://www.afterabortion.org/FreeBook.htmSubject: EbumnandziniThe latest ad campaign to curb HIV comes in the form of three high school girls dressed like prostitutes proclaiming that fun, sex, and HIV are parts of their lives. The punchline? "Condoms-where the fun is at!"It's hard to believe the sponsors of this ad are serious about trying to curb the AIDS epidemic. It's hard to believe the sponsors even care about young people affected by the disease. Portraying Swazi girls as whores waving condoms to interested passers-by is hardly the way to raise up a generation of virtuous women. Proclaiming to high school girls that sleeping around (as long as you use a condom!) is where the fun is at prepares them for a (short) life of heartbreak and misery. Portraying young women this way won't boost men's respect for women either. To suggest that condoms will stop AIDS is delusional. According to Contraceptive Technology, a leading journal in all things contraceptive, 1 in 12 condoms fails. Condoms break, condoms fall off, and condoms, in the "heat of the moment", don't get used. Condoms also encourage a lifestyle of promiscuity; the young girls in the advert greatly increase their chances of infidelity within marriage (should they live long enough to get married) by having sex before marriage.Last off, sex outside marriage is sin. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). And death-spiritual and physical-is NOT where the fun is at.This ad campaign is a gross insult to the young people of this country, particularly to the young women of this nation. If young people put the message of this campaign into practice, it will only fuel the AIDS epidemic and we will see the faces of these girls and their age-mates in the newspaper again-in the "death notices" section of the Times, announcing the location of their vigil and funeral. Swazis deserve better than this.Subject: Ebumnandzini IIThe Ebumnandzini billboard advertisement at the Mbabane bus rank displays young men and women enjoying themselves at a party. No harm in that. Prominent in the foreground are a man and woman with smiles on their faces and their arms around each other. Not all bad. What's are the written messages of the advertisement?"In the heat of the moment, PROTECTION is my best friend."and "Condoms-where the fun is at!"So, it has come to this: sex is no longer about love and commitment; sex is only about fun; and the almighty condom, not the other person, is by best friend. The other person is just a tool for my pleasure, and as long as my good friend the condom protects me from HIV, life is good.First off, a low rate of consistent condom use (never reported to be higher than 5% between regular partners in any African country) and an 80% to 90% effective protection against HIV transmission when they are used consistently and correctly (keep in mind the 5% figure above) means condoms cannot save Swaziland from AIDS. As a 2003 report by UNAIDS itself concludes, “There is little evidence that sometimes (but not always) using condoms provides any protection as compared to not using condoms at all.” Secondly, by omitting any mention of marriage in connection to sex, this advertisement strikes at the root of Swazi society. The family is the foundation of any culture; if the family disintegrates, so does the society. Cheapening sex-which is supposed to be the highest expression of love between a husband and a wife, and is the means by which a culture propagates itself through the birth of children-to simply a pleasurable act where the condom is the "significant other" will bring individual and societal death. This is already happening; remember Swaziland has 100,000 OVCs. Have we forgotten what has made these children so?Swazi men and women must be challenged to exercise discipline and integrity: to abstain from sex until marriage, and to be faithful to their spouses within marriage. Swazi youth can meet this challenge, if it is given to them. The A and B of the ABC message can reverse the AIDS situation, if it is proclaimed and practiced. Abstinence and faithfulness will also build stronger marriages and families, and thus a stronger Swazi nation. If instead we suffer a continuing stream of Ebumnandzini-type campaigns, the number of night vigils will increase and we will bury an entire generation of Swazi young people. The call to abstinence and faithfulness must be made. Swazi youth are able to answer the call to discipline, life, and love.Subject: First Time?The January 30th issue of the Times spent all of page 15 talking about one's first sexual encounter. On a few occasions the article said good things like "don't give in to peer pressure" and "it's okay to be a virgin". We need to give young people these two messages much more often and with much more conviction. Unfortunately, the article veered off into the far-too-common catchphrases like "being ready" and "safety". It was also pretty graphic, and mentioned same-sex genital activity; do we really want young people ingesting that stuff?We can condense all the good advice and discard all the bad advice from this article with one empirical finding: a survey conducted in the United States found that those having the best sex lives are monogamous, married, faithful, Christian women. The reasons for this are simple but profound. Sex is much more than something one "does". It is, at its root, a very deep sharing of oneself with another person. It is powerful and revealing and, for better or worse, it attaches two people not just physically but also emotionally.The best context for such powerful bonding is a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman. That context is marriage. If a couple saves sex until after they have made their "until death parts us" commitment to each other, their every act of intercourse is an opportunity to renew and reinforce their marriage vows. In this way, the marriage is founded on mutual trust and support, and sex is a dynamic and ecstatic recharging of their relationship. Who would not want such a lifelong relationship as this?Outside the marital context of mutual lifelong love and support, sex can devastate one or both members of the couple. One need look no farther than popular music to see this effect. A huge majority of songs focus either on how sexy the other person is and how much the singer loves them, or how awfully the singer has been treated and how much he or she hates his/her old flame. Those who have given in to sex before marriage and have had the crushing experience of getting dumped know how awful it is. Who wants to go through life with one experience after another like this?Abstinence before marriage and faithfulness after. This practice harnesses the God-designed power of sex for the prospering of marriages and of society. Let's get back to living and preaching the truth about love, marriage and sex, so that men and women-and the children who result from their marital embrace-may thrive.Subject: How to Prevent AbortionsThe United States Center for Disease Control reports that in 2004, 80% of the 839,226 abortions committed in the US were done to unmarried women. Though each abortion is always tragic, and over 800,000 of them a holocaust, this statistic contains a ray of hope. These abortions could have been avoided with the first step in the ABC approach: Abstinence. What's more, men and women who save sex for marriage enjoy sex more than those who did not enter marriage as virgins. In fact, a survey conducted some years ago revealed that married, monogamous, Christian women had the most satisfying sex lives.So what's the lesson? To protect the lives of innocent babies and to build strong and exciting marriages, save sex for marriage. The traditional approach to sex is the most successful, and safest, one.Subject: Life: Imagine the PossibilitiesReaders of this column know that Barack Obama is strong on abortion. In his speech to Planned Parenthood in 2007, Obama explained how we would select his Supreme Court justices this way: "we need somebody who’s got the heart—the empathy—to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom." The context of this comment was keeping America's abortion license in place-meaning keeping abortion legal for any reason throughout all 9 months of pregnancy. For Mr. Obama, compassion means making sure women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant have the legal option and financial capability to abort their children.Obama's position on abortion is puzzling, given the circumstances of his own conception and birth. A YouTube video puts it this way: "The child's future is a broken home. He will be abandoned by his father. His single mother will struggle to raise him."Facing these prospects, what advice do you think a Planned Parenthood clinic (which makes its money talking women into abortions) would have given Obama's mother? Back to the YouTube video:"Despite the hardships he will endure, this child will become the first African American President."Fortunately, the mother of the current president of the United States chose true compassion, allowing Barack Obama to live and making sacrifices for his upbringing and education. And look how far he went! But how many other history-making individuals were never able to "leave their mark" on the world because they were aborted?May the Kingdom of Swaziland never accept the lie that "abortion is compassionate". No matter what the circumstances of a child's conception, life is sacred and must be respected. Besides, you never know what a child might accomplish.View the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2CaBR3z85cSubject: Love and abortionThis space has demonstrated the destructiveness of abortion for children, women, and society. What is the answer? How can we prevent this terrible scourge from ever taking the lives and well-being of women and children?Love and respect are the answers to abortion. First, let us love and respect God. Genesis 1:27 tells us "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." Abortion is, at its root, an attempt to strike God by striking his masterpiece. Abortion is like slashing a great painting with a razor or destroying a great sculpture with dynamite; it destroys a magnificent work and insults the master artist. On the other hand, when we cultivate a love and respect for the artist, we will likewise respect his handiwork. When love and respect for God grow, our love and respect for human life will grow.Second, let us cultivate respect for the procreative ability of man and woman. The power to bring a new life into the world, a life the world has never seen before and will never see again, is awe-inspiring. The capacity to launch a new human being, who has all the rights and privileges granted to him by God, is not to be taken lightly. We respect the power to bring new life into the word by keeping sex for marriage only. In marriage, a new human life-a child-enjoys the nurture and protection of mother and father. The presence of mom and dad for the upbringing of sons and daughters is indispensable, and demonstrates the rightness of respect for the procreative ability of man and woman.In an age when technological progress grows by leaps and bounds, it is easy to think that all our problems can be fixed with technology. Abortion, however, goes much deeper than technology; it goes to the heart of woman and man. It is at the heart level-the level of virtue, vice, and decision-that the abortion debate is settled in individual lives and in societies. With love and respect in our hearts, all people benefit-especially the weakest and most defenseless of us. May Swaziland say NO to the death and destruction of abortion, and say YES to love, respect, and life.Subject: Marriage, Sex and AbortionLast week our family celebrated my wife's birthday. Last month we celebrated 8 years of happy marriage. Both anniversaries were joyous occasions for her, for me, and for our three daughters.What is the secret to a happy marriage? Really, there are few secrets. Doing small favours for each other, listening closely when the other is speaking, expressing appreciation for each other, and showing mutual respect are all simple and powerful practices for building a healthy marriage.Showing respect to each other is particularly important in marriage. Respect takes the form of listening before speaking, in valuing your spouse's opinion, and in gently overlooking habits which might annoy you. Respect extends to honoring the purpose and function of the other's body. It is at this point of respecting one another's body-particularly the maleness or femaleness of the other's body-that abortion often rears its ugly head.Most couples in the world use some sort of contraception: condoms, birth control pills, the loop, female condoms, creams, sterilization, etc.These chemicals and devices do not show respect to the wife's body because they inhibit its normal, natural function. On top of that, some forms of birth control-namely the loop and the birth control pills-cause early abortions by preventing the newly-conceived child from implanting in the mother's womb.Worse still, all forms of birth control foster an abortion mentality. Why? Because when a couple engages in contracepted sex, they expect only the pleasure of the act and not a child. When the contraceptive fails-and all man-made devices occasionally fail-and a child is conceived, the couple feels they now have a "problem". And a fast way to solve that "problem" is abortion.It is a documented fact that in every country that has legalized abortion, widespread contraception came first.So what is the answer for a couple who wants to respect one another's bodies and not cause early abortions, but cannot afford another child? A method called Natural Family Planning, which has shown to work as well as any contraceptive device, is the way to go. It requires only a thermometer, a piece of paper, and a pen. By recording the woman's oral temperature every morning when she wakes up, the couple can know when she is able to conceive and when she can't. The couple then adjusts their behaviour accordingly. This method is effective, inexpensive, causes no abortions, fosters no abortion mentality, and brings the couple together in crucial but often neglected conversation about their marriage. Find more information about Natural Family Planning at http://www.ccli.org/.A society which is contracepting and/or aborting itself out of existence has no future. A society which practices mutual respect for the integrity of a woman's body is on the way to success. May Swaziland lead the world in showing respect for a woman's body and build a culture of life.Subject: MavelaThis is athletics season at the high school, and the students have been running, jumping, and throwing in preparation for today's inter-school competitions. One competitor is a student nicknamed "Mavela". This tall form 5 student springs easily over the high-jump bar and gives the other students a run for their money in the footraces. During a training session recently, I asked him what "Mavela" means. He explained that his mother and father were not married when he was conceived and born, and so his nickname means "suprise" or "unexpected".This explanation led me to wonder what consequence legal and socially acceptable abortion might have had in Mavela's case. Had his mother and/or father decided that this unexpected child had come at the wrong time, Mavela might have been aborted. Then, neither his schoolmates nor I would have had the pleasure of his wry humour and observing his athletic prowess. Thinking farther down the road, some nice young lady would have been denied a decent and handsome husband, and a handful of children would have missed out on a good father. Mavela belongs to a class which shows real academic potential; had Mavela been aborted, might the entire nation have lost a doctor, an engineer, a teacher?May Swaziland never accept the death embrace of abortion. Abortion's disregard for and destruction of life devastates women, kills children, and obliterates potential. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love, where every life-even the "unexpected" ones-are respected.
Subject: Obama and the UnderdogLast Saturday's "Swazi News" carried a story explaining that US President-elect Obama is likely to appoint many new judges. This is true. Obama himself, in the third presidential debate with John McCain, said "one of the most consequential decisions of the next president" will be the appointing of federal judges. The reason these appointments are so consequential is that courts in the USA frequently rule unconstitutional laws which the citizens of a state have approved through voting. Significantly, these laws which judges overturn often support traditional understandings of life and family. The result is a "culture war" in the US, often between supporters of traditional values on one side and detractors of those values on the other. Sadly, judges often rule on the side of the detractors of traditional values. As the article mentioned, these judges will influence government policy on "divisive social issues" like (so-called) gay marriage, the death penalty, and abortion.The article ends with a quote from a speech that Obama gave to Planned Parenthood in July 2007. "We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom". Unfortunately, the story did not include the context of Obama's comment. Mr. Obama was talking about the Supreme Court ruling which kept in force a ban against partial birth abortions. In a partial birth abortion, a baby is delivered feet first until only her head is inside her mother. The abortion doctor then uses scissors to open the back of the neck of the baby and inserts a powerful vacuum machine (hoover) to suck the baby's brains out. Obama strongly criticized making partial birth abortions illegal, and in his address he defended a Supreme Court justice (Ruth Bader Ginsburg) who supported keeping partial birth abortions legal. He promised Planned Parenthood he would appoint Supreme Court with other Ginsburg-like justices who will keep abortion-even partial birth abortion-legal.Obama told Planned Parenthood that "the courts are [sometimes] the refuge of the powerless". He also mentioned that sometimes, "the issues that come before the Court are not sport, they’re life and death". The article said Obama opposed the appointment of Supreme Court justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito. Alito and Roberts voted to uphold the ban on partial birth abortion; Obama supports partial birth abortion. Now, who in the world is more powerless than a baby in the womb? Obama promised to keep partial birth abortion legal. Who, then, is really on the side of protecting "the powerless" on a life and death issue?It is hard to know who is more guilty in this story, Obama or the news wire service. At least if you were to read the full text of Obama's talk, you would see he laid out his position clearly on abortion. The wire story doesn't tell us the whole truth, and what it does tell us would make us think Obama is a hero of the powerless while judges like Alito and Roberts are out to crush the helpless. The exact opposite is true. The truth is Obama believes that if a mother wants her baby's brains vacuumed out, she should have every legal right to that procedure. That is the kind of "heart and empathy" Mr. Obama has promised to bring to life and death issues before the courts. Let us hope and pray he has the sense not to.Subject: Obama No Cause for CelebrationSibusiso Nhlabatsi wrote in praise of Barack Obama in the Times on Thursday. Mr. Nhlabatsi invoked the fulfillment of the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr. in Mr. Obama's election.It is ironic that Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., came out strong against Obama. In August, Dr. Alveda King said “Senator Obama’s answer to the ills of society [including] continued tax dollars to Planned Parenthood, are diametrically opposed to everything African Americans truly believe and an anathema to the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr." Why did the niece of the slain civil rights leader come out so strong against Obama? Because of Obama's aggressive support of abortion. Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortions in America, backed Obama 100%. Day Garner, leader of the National Black Pro-Life Union, said “By kow-towing to the abortion industry Obama proves he is just another politician, as he purposely overlooks the fact that 63 percent of Planned Parenthood’s 860 clinics are in African-American communities." What is Dr. Alveda King's opinion of Planned Parenthood? "Planned Parenthood is a lying, racist organization," said Dr. King on another occasion.Abortion has reduced the population of black Americans by 25% since 1973. Almost half of all the black babies who are conceived in America are surgically aborted. About 13% of American women are black, but these women undergo more than 35% of all abortions. Why are there almost five times as many Planned Parenthood abortion clinics in black communities as there are in white communities in the US?Mr. Obama's election to the presidency is not cause for celebration for people of colour. President-elect Obama, through his aggressive pro-abortion mindset, stands poised to continue and increase the killing of black children before they take their first breath. These children will never have a chance to enjoy the change and opportunity Mr. Obama spoke so much about during his campaign. The Obama presidency also threatens death for many unborn children around the world, as he has promised to remove laws against USA tax dollars being used to support abortion worldwide.We can all pray and hope that Mr. Obama will have the wisdom and good taste to abandon his pro-abortion stance once he enters the White House. This is, however, a thin hope; Mr. Obama has been loud and clear in his support for legalized abortion, both in his voting record and in his public speaking.Instead of celebrating his election to President of the United States, mourn for those unborn children who never got to enjoy a full life because they were killed by abortion. Hold your own wife tightly and tell her you love her, and do the same with your children. Do your part to build a culture of love and life in your part of the world. And pray that Mr. Obama's opportunity for damage is limited to one four-year term in office.Subject: Obama's Plan for Reducing the Number of AbortionsDuring last year's presidential race, Barack Obama occasionally said he was interested in reducing the number of abortions. Given the damage abortion does to women and children, reducing the number of abortions is a great idea.In the 7 weeks Obama has been president, what has he done to achieve this important goal?*Reversed the Mexico City policy, thus allowing money to go to groups promoting abortion worldwide*Authorized federal money for embryonic stem cell research, which always kills the new children who "donate" the cells and has yet to cure a single person*Initiated the removal of laws that make sure doctors and nurses who don't want to participate in abortions are not punished for their non-participation in the killing of innocent children*Nominated a woman to lead the Department of Health and Human Services who has consistently opposed laws to 1) make sure abortion clinics are clean and healthy 2) inform women of the health risks of abortion3) inform parents if their daughter plans to go for abortion*Failed to invite a single pro-life group to a recent "health care" summit at the White House. Predictably, Planned Parenthood attendees suggested the president include abortion in a proposed universal health care program.Doesn't sound like he's made much progress, does it?Commentators say the so-called Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) may be introduced soon. A spokesman for pro-choice senator Jerrold Nadler says FOCA "is among the congressman's priorities" and "We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later". This short piece of legislation would, in the opinion of both pro-life and pro-choice advocates, wipe out every legal limit on abortion in the United States. In 2007, Obama told a Planned Parenthood meeting that "the first thing I’d do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That’s the first thing that I’d do." Obama appears ready to sign the mother of all pro-abortion proposals into law.As the associate director of the pro-life outreach of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has said, "We can find common ground across ideological lines, as long as we agree on the obvious fact that promoting abortions is no way to reduce them."One curiosity about Obama's timing: he has developed a habit of announcing his pro-abortion initiatives on Friday afternoons, so that the news is reported when people are least likely to hear it.A troublesome pattern is emerging. Far from trying to reduce the number of abortions, Obama seems to be trying to:1) Advance abortion on all fronts, including using taxpayer money to do it2) Prevent women from learning about abortion's health risks3) Not ensure abortion clinics are at least decent for the women who go to them4) Make it difficult for informed medical personnel to oppose abortion5) Start these anti-life actions without too many people knowing about them.For the sake of women and children, may Obama start taking real steps towards his noble goal of reducing the number of abortions.Subject: Obama's ResponsibilitySibusiso Nhlabatsi (2 Feb. 2009) wrote "There is reasonable suspicion that [Bush] is a criminal" and that "many people died because of his actions" and that "he caused unrest all over the world".Hawu, Emantini, let's review the facts:1) President Bush took an oath of office in January 2001-as did President Obama last month-to protect US citizens.2) 11 September 2001-nearly 3,000 non-combatants are killed by airplane highjackers.3) The intelligence agencies of every major country-including Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and France-reported that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction. 4) Saddam was willing to use such weapons, as demonstrated when he nerve-gassed Kurds in his own country in the late 1980s.
5) Read what these political luminaries had to say.President Bill Clinton in 1998: "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction program."Hillary Clinton in 2002: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members."Al Gore: "We know that [Saddam] has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."Al Gore a second time: "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."John Kerry: "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force—if necessary—to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."Consider these comments from Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee:"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. . . . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."Soon after Bush's election, Democrat Bob Graham gave Bush a letter signed by a number of Senators which said "Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."6) The United Nations passed resolution 1441 in November 2002, which, in the words of commentator George Wiegel, "declared the Security Council’s conviction that the time for such obstruction [of weapons inspection] was past, and that the Iraqi regime must demonstrate its disarmament or be forcibly disarmed". The UN was under no illusions that Saddam was the neighborhood Good Samaritan; they too believed he was dangerous, and that serious steps must be available.Should President Bush have done nothing at this time? He had promised, "so help me God", to protect US citizens. Given what transpired on 11 September 2001, and given the information universally accepted as true at the time, would it have been wise or even acceptable to try one more round of talks with Saddam? The Iraqi leader had been given 2 weeks after the end of the 1991 Gulf War to divulge everything about his weapons. Twelve years later, he had not done so. With the facts Bush had in hand, to wait and hope that somehow something bad wouldn't happen again would seem incoherent with his solemn oath.In his book "Stride Toward Freedom", USA civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. explained his program for societal change through passive nonviolent resistance. Dr. King always insisted on his supporters practicing nonviolence in their efforts to end apartheid in America. King did express one necessary condition for the effectiveness of passive nonviolent resistance: it required a conscience to appeal to. King relied on the decency of the majority of Americans to support fellow black citizens who were just trying to get their place at the table in America. Fortunately, he could rely on that conscience, and change did come. Dr. King was clear, though, that if one's adversary has no conscience to appeal to (and Saddam certainly lacked one), then war, terrible as it is, may be one's only option.We can hope that President Barack Obama, perhaps by the sheer force of his charismatic presence, can convince combatants worldwide to lay down their arms and peacefully solve their problems. This would be a most welcome development. Only time will tell if he can do it.If he cannot, we can expect wars in this world to continue. For countries which have signed the Geneva Conventions, there are rules governing how war is fought. One obvious rule is that one does not target or attack unarmed citizens. When soldiers do so, serious consequences should and do ensue. Every abortion targets and attacks a non-combatant: a child. Abortion also leaves a trail of physically, psychologically, socially, and spiritually wounded women in its wake. President Obama is the strongest abortion advocate ever to occupy the White House. During the four years prior to his election, he opposed the confirmation of a law against partial birth abortion, in which a baby is delivered until only her head remains in her mother, the baby's neck is opened with scissors, and the girl's brains sucked out. He opposed and helped defeat a proposed law which would make sure that children who survived an abortion attempt would at least get comfort care (not even life-saving medicine), in the form of something as simple as a blanket. The Friday after his Tuesday inauguration, he freed up nearly half a billion dollars which could go to groups which advocate abortion worldwide. He has stacked his administration with others who share his position on abortion. Observers suggest Obama will, among other things:1) Restore USA funding to the UNFPA, which collaborates with Mainland China's one-child policy. Mainland China's policy includes forced abortions of women who have more children than the government allows;2) Overturn the Hyde Amendment, which prevents tax dollars from paying for abortions within the United States;3) Stop federal funding of centers which help women who want to carry their unplanned babies to birth;4) Reverse laws which ensure that doctors and nurses who do not want to do abortions are not punished for their refusal to carry out the procedure.This short sample of a long list of possible actions betrays the "pro-choice" label the president takes for himself; Obama's leans towards suggesting or even insisting on support for abortion, even over the choice of mothers and medical personnel to protect unborn children.Perhaps President Obama doesn't know that *Over 100 physical and psychological complications to a mother's health have been linked to abortion. *30% of women report that they were coerced into having their abortion. *8 weeks after their abortions, 44% of the women in one study reported suffering from nervous disorders.*Having an abortion before having a pregnancy carried to term increases a woman's chance of breast cancer by 50%. *According to one study, suicide attempts for post-abortive teenagers are 10 times higher for girls who underwent an abortion in the last six months than for girls who had not. *40% to 75% of marriages and relationships break up after an abortion.*A report issued last December (admittedly, Obama's been busy lately) stated that "women who had abortions, compared with those who didn't, had a 120% risk for alcohol abuse, with or without dependence, a 145% increased risk of alcohol dependence, 79% increased risk of drug abuse with or without dependence and a 126% increase in the risk of drug dependence."*Embryologist Keith L. Moore states "The cell results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being." Dr. Moore also says "Each of us started life as a cell called a zygote". *Abortionist Warren Hern says that "The sensations of dismemberment (during an abortion) flow through the forceps like an electric current." Finally, perhaps Mr Obama has never seen a photo of an aborted baby, an image no man or woman can forget.If Obama never knew these facts, he should have. Obama has vigorously defended and stands poised to actively advance abortion in the United States and around the world. Given the seriousness of abortion and his position of influence and power, he should have in the past, or should now, understand the deleterious effects of a procedure he has consistently defended. In August 2008, Obama told Rick Warren during an internationally televised debate that it was "above my pay grade" to decide when a baby should get human rights. Now he is in a higher pay grade; it is time for him to inform himself. Unlike the difficulties of gathering intelligence about Iraq under Saddam, it takes only a few hours on the Internet to find reputable, reliable information on abortion's terrible effects. http://www.afterabortion.org/ is a good place to start.In his inaugural address, President Obama declared "Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations." May the president take his words to heart and make sure those future generations are welcomed in life and protected in law.Subject: Mothers' health after abortionIn a press statement on 12 October, FLAS indicated its concern for maternal and child health and safe motherhood. In the same statement, FLAS suggested "[taking] stock of what has happened in other countries" with regards to abortion.What has been the effect of abortion on the health, both physical and mental, of mothers and children after abortion in other countries?A book entitled "Women's Health After Abortion: The Medical and Psychological Evidence" by Elizabeth Ring-Cassidy and Ian Gentles addresses this question. This book surveys the results of many studies on women's health after abortion, citing recognized publications such as the British Medical Journal, the United States Centers for Disease Control, and the South African Medical Journal. Following are some significant findings:*A study in Finland found suicide rates after abortions to be six times the level of suicides after live births, and three times higher than the general population.*One study found teenagers "significantly less likely to attempt suicide before an abortion than adult women, but more than twice as likely as adult women to attempt it after abortion".*A study in America found the suicide rate among women who had undergone an abortion 160% higher than the rate for women who had delivered their babies.*Women who aborted their children had "significantly higher depression scores 10 years after their abortion than those who bore their children".*Fittingly, another researcher concluded "Motherhood seems to protect against suicide".What effect does abortion have on the health of children? First off, every "successful" abortion kills a child; surely that is not good for children. We also know that Swaziland is working hard to eliminate child abuse. Ring-Cassidy and Gentles offer the following quote:"people who have had an abortion are more likely to abuse their children and people who have been abused are more likely to have an abortion...Abortion results in more post-partum depression [after having a live baby delivered after an abortion] and therefore less bonding, less touching and less breast feeding...It should be noted that one of the earliest arguments was that aborting unwanted children would diminish the incidence of child abuse. Statistics show precisely the opposite; that is, with more frequent abortions, all kinds of child abuse have increased." This report also says that "Abortion also runs in families, with mothers and grandmothers for three to four generations having had abortions often for the same reasons".Such reports from around the world tell us that abortion is a bad idea for Swaziland. Suicide rates skyrocket among women who have abortions. Mothers who abort their children have much higher rates of depression. Abortion always kills a child, and abortion leads to child abuse. Finally, abortion is a self-perpetuating legacy, leaving the third and fourth generations of mothers committing the same violence and injury on themselves and their children. Abortion is not the way to achieve maternal and child health. The way to achieve maternal and child health is to build strong marriages-and this starts with abstinence before marriage and faithfulness within marriage. May Swaziland lead the world in building a culture of life by saying yes to love and faithfulness and no to abortion and death.Subject: Rape, sexual assault, and abortionMany people think that an abortion clinic is the place to go to heal the wounds of a rape or sexual assault. A huge surprise is that many rapes or sexual assaults happen inside abortion clinics in the United States.Over 80% of sexual assaults go unreported. The experience is of course traumatic, and so the victim often remains silent. In his book "Lime 5" which tells the stories of thousands of women hurt by legal abortion, Mark Crutcher explains that "Although we had often heard rumors that this sort of thing happened, we had no reason to believe it was widespread...However, as more and more data came into our office, we began to see that rape and sexual assault in abortion clinics is not uncommon at all."Reading Crutcher's chapter about sexual assault in abortion clinics is very unpleasant. The book documents abortionists making wholly inappropriate comments about their patients' bodies. Abortionists also kissed, touched, and abused their patients in utterly unwelcome and inappropriate ways.Crutcher reasons that if over 80% of sexual assaults go unreported, it is safe to assume that an even higher percentage of sexual assaults in abortion clinics go unreported. Why? Because a woman who has endured an unwelcome advance or assault from an abortionist must also admit that 1) She is sexually active, 2) She is/was pregnant, and 3) She sought an abortion. These pressures, combined with the enormous trauma of any sexual assault, make speaking out extraordinarily difficult. Consequently, her physical and mental injury go untreated, and the guilty party goes free.Sexual assault is bad enough; why should we allow circumstances which would make it extremely hard to prosecute? As Crutcher says in his book, "it would be hard to argue that there is any business establishment in America in which a woman is more likely to be raped than in an abortion clinic".May Swaziland never legalise the establishment of such a murderous and exploitative "business" on Swazi soil. May sex be reserved as the emotionally bonding, life-bringing priviledge of a husband and a wife. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.Subject: Who gets to live?When we get right down to it, abortion is about killing someone because they lack one important trait: being born. One pro-abortion politician in the USA named Jerrold Nadler, who calls himself "as pro-choice as anybody on Earth", said this: "if an abortion is performed, or a natural birth occurred, at any age, [even] three months, and the product of that was living outside the mother, and somebody came and shot him, I don't think there's any doubt that person would be prosecuted for murder."Now, watch out! If your right to live depends on your possession of certain particular traits, it won't be long before others who want you "out of the way" decide you don't have the necessary traits. We already see this in the United States and western Europe, where those whose lives are deemed of "insufficient quality" due to age or disease or accident are encouraged to end their lives through assisted suicide. Is it possible that the end of those peoples' lives will someday be forced? Of course it is, because the precedent for doing so-in the form of abortion-is already established in many so-called "developed" countries.May Swaziland have the courage to stand against the culture of death and to stand on the side of all human life, from its conception to its natural end. May Swaziland set the standard for life and love in the world.
Subject: A Woman's Right to Control Her Body"A woman has a right to control her body", goes the abortion slogan, "and no one has the right to tell her what she can or can't do with it." There is of course a lot of truth to this statement: a woman, in fact any person, has the right to decide what career to pursue, what food to eat, where to live, how to spend their money, etc. But a little thinking reveals to us that we do not have absolute freedom to do whatever we want with ourselves.Consider traffic laws. No one is allowed to drive through red lights. If someone was driving down Gwamile Street ignoring red lights and got stopped by the police, the police would only laugh when the driver said "It's my body, and no one can tell me what I can't do with it." Same thing with airplane pilots. If the pilots who carry people to Joburg and back every day decided that flying at the regular elevation was too boring and instead started buzzing the tops of homesteads near Matsapha and the tops of skyscapers in Joburg, no one would accept the excuse that "It's my body and no one has the right to tell me what I can't do with it". Same thing with doctors in surgery. If a doctor began an operation saying "I have a right to do with my body whatever I want-so today, I'm going to remove this woman's appendix with one eye shut", he would (hopefully!) be immediately restrained by the nurses and he might lose his medical license. Same thing with gravity. A man might stand on his roof crooning R. Kelly's memorable "I Believe I Can Fly", then jump off the roof with his arms flapping madly-but just a few seconds later he will learn that although he does have a lot of freedom of choice, Mother Nature does have the right to tell him, in this case at least, what he can't do with his body.And so it is with abortion. We have wide latitude in what we do with our bodies-but our freedom to choose must be limited when the welfare of others is involved. On a deeper level, the analogy between the "right to choose" and the man who thinks he can fly is a telling one. To have an abortion goes against the nurturing, caring nature of a woman who has become a mother, and to violate one's own person in this way is to set oneself up for massive problems sooner or later in life. Abortion is not pro-woman any more than it is pro-child. Women and children deserve respect and protection, not the anti-life "choice" of abortion which damages women and kills babies. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life, where a woman's physical and emotional integrity is protected, and the lives of her children respected.Subject: Marie Stopes Moves into the NeighborhoodMonday's Times informed us that Marie Stopes will set up a clinic in Swaziland. The Times also told us that Marie Stopes clinics does abortions "in several nations where this is legal". Unfortunately, they also do abortions where they are illegal. Lifesite.net demonstrated in 2004 that a Marie Stopes clinic does illegal abortions in Kenya. The nurse at the clinic said "Yes, we perform abortions here. I myself do it also. ... I am not afraid [of being arrested]. If they come here, I will only show them to the main office [at another address]; they have to go that way in order to visit the clinic here. And if they were to come here and ask questions, I would just say that I don't perform abortions." Let's hope Marie Stopes respects Swaziland's law better than they have Kenya's.The article says PSI reports 500,000 pregnancy-related deaths a year. Perhaps PSI ought to check the statistics from the United Nations. The UN Population Division reported in 2005 that "more than a third of the 204 countries or areas examined did not report deaths by cause, sex and age even once." In late 2007 the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that two out of three deaths in the developing world go unreported, and only 31 of 193 states have good data on the causes of death.Simply put, the 500,000 number is unsubstantiated. It is regularly trotted out to argue that legalizing abortion will make it safer. It is true that legalizing abortion tends to make it a little safer; but when abortion is legalized, many more women go for abortion. Though a smaller percentage of aborted women get injured, the greater number of women having abortions means the absolute number of injured women goes up. Remember also that abortion always kills a child-it's never safe for them.The article says Marie Stopes has "seen" many Swazi women in South Africa in the past. Imagine a woman finding herself pregnant and panicked in a counseling session in Marie Stopes' new Swaziland clinic. The woman notices literature on the tables, naming locations in South Africa where Marie Stopes offers abortions. At R1300 an abortion, would the clinic staff dissuade the panicked woman from making a trip to Swaziland's big neighbor to "take care of her problem"?I hope the Stopes have womens' best interests in mind. If they do, they will be sure to tell a woman who finds herself unexpectly pregnant and thinking about abortion that:*Post-abortion women risk 2.5 to 6 times higher chances of suicide than women who give birth;*65% of aborted women in one study suffered Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, which includes: difficulty staying asleep at night, outbursts of anger or rage, nightmares about the abortion or the child, powerful grief or depression on the anniversary of the abortion or the date on which the child would have been born, withdrawal from relationships, and a reduction in loving feelings towards others;*Aborted women report 5 times the amount of substance abuse (alcohol, drugs) than women who gave birth;*60% increase in the chances of miscarriages of later children after abortion;*Post-abortion women suffer increased rates of breast cancer, cervical cancer, and lung cancer;*10% of aborted women suffer immediate health problems after abortion, and one-fifth of those problems are life-threatening.In light of these terrible statistics, it's hard to imagine anyone who cared about the well-being of women would suggest abortion.We read that the pre-abortion counseling procedures at a Marie Stopes clinic includes "a stipulation that [the client] must agree to a recognized method of contraception before they leave the clinic". This is bizarre, insulting and funny all at the same time. Bizarre: Does this "stipulation" mean that the friendly staff at a Marie Stopes clinic won't let a client leave the building until they "agree to a recognized method of contraception"? What do they do, lock them in the staff lounge until they raise their right hand and solemnly pledge to use their preferred contraceptive regime? Insulting: Who is Marie Stopes International to insist that someone must agree to some sort of contraception? Who gave them the authority to make such a demand on a woman who comes for their abortion services? Funny: It seems that the "contraceptive crowd" has yet to learn of the most effective (100%) oral contraceptive on the market: One opens one mouth and says to the would-be lover, "No". I can see it now: "Yes, Mr. Counselor, I promise not to have sex until I am ready for a child. And since I will abstain until I am ready for a child, I guess I don't have to take any of your vast array of 'weapons of mass contraception' home with me. Thanks."Which brings us to our last point. We read that Marie Stopes International is looking for someone "to further [MSI's] goal of prevention of unwanted births and its mission of ensuring the individual's right to have children by choice, not by chance." Will we ever learn: sex and children go together. If you don't want a child, don't have sex. It is that simple. It may be difficult sometimes to resist the temptation to have sex outside marriage, but the rewards in self-confidence and the knowledge that one can make sacrifices for bigger, longer-range goals is well worth the struggle. Happily, we can all be the Project Manager that Marie Stopes is looking for. We can be full of "initiative, drive, persistence, energy, enthusiasm and commitment to personal development" by living the tried-and-true principles of no sex before marriage, and faithfulness within marriage. By doing so, we will encourage our friends and those younger than us to live upright, fulfilling lives. By doing so, we will build strong marriages and so provide safe starting points for future generations-our children.
Subject: Abortion: Don't Kill Your Best Friends
Norma McCorvey is an American woman who was the "Jane Roe" of the 1973 "Roe vs. Wade" Supreme Court case. "Roe", with its companion case "Doe vs. Bolton", made abortion legal for any reason and at any time in the United States.
In 1997 Ms. McCorvey, who ironically never had an abortion, wrote the book "Won by Love". Her book describes how she changed from supporting abortion to supporting life. Crucial to her pro-life conversion was a man named Flip Benham. Though Benham has worked to protect the unborn since the early 1990's, he has not always been pro-life.In fact, when his wife Faye informed him that she was pregnant, Benham pushed hard for an abortion. From McCorvey's book: "'I was surrounded north, south, east and west by me'", he explains. "I just didn't have room in my heart for anyone else'".
"Faye refused. 'You have no choice', she told him. 'We are going to have this baby.'" What was the result? Again from McCorvey's book: "Flip loves her for it. It turned out that Faye was actually pregnant with twin boys, who today are Flip's best friends."
Abortion damages women and kills babies. One cannot know how severe the woman's damage will be or how great a blessing will be missed when a child is aborted. Mother Teresa is quoted as saying "The scientist who would have come up with the cure to AIDS has alredy been aborted". Besides, who would want to kill their two best friends?
May Swaziland issue a resounding "No!" to abortion and a resounding "Yes!" to the protection and support of mothers and children.Subject: Criminalization of AbortionThe 30 March issue of the Times told of the arrest of Sonia Robinson on one count of abortion. American researcher David Reardon documents the terrible effects of abortion on women. Consider these quotes from his book "Aborted Women, Silent No More". When he talks of recriminalizing abortion, remember that he lives in a country where abortion has been legal for any reason since 1973.
"Abortion is a women's issue, but it is an issue not of women's rights but of women's oppression. The effort to stop abortion is not an attempt to deny women an option; it is a promise to provide them with better options. It is a promise to alleviate their despair, to prevent their exploitation."
"Recriminalization of abortion must not be seen as a restriction of options but as a promise to provide women with better options. If better options are not provided, recriminalization will be just another form of abandonment. Therefore, positive alternatives to abortion must be made a top priority in American social policy."
"It has been the theme throughout this book that women are victims of abortion. It is the people who profit by abortion and those who advocate it as an 'easy' solution to real problems who are the perpetrators of this crime."
"Abortion is a symbol of how we have abandoned our ideals of community, love of our neighbors, and care for the weak...Failing to help women cope with the problems of pregnancy is to push them towards the false solution of abortion. There is no neutral ground. If we do not choose life, we choose death."
"This is the hope of the tens of thousands of aborted women who have now become pro-life activists: that through the deaths of their own children, we might all learn a greater respect for life; that through their own sufferings, we might all build the foundation for increased awareness and the motivation for change. These women and their children paid a horrible price, but if we use this experience as an impetus for change, their sacrifices may ultimately be redeemed."
"As we have said time and again, this goal will not be achieved merely by banning abortions. Instead, such a ban must be only one step towards compassionately, and unjudgmentally, supporting pregnant women through inconvenient, unwanted, or otherwise difficult pregnancies. In the wombs of these women live new hopes and dreams, new friends and companions in life. To love these children, we must love their mothers; to care for these mothers, we must love their children. Mother and child are as one, and they cannot be separated without doing violence to both."
"Some people complain that such unlimited care is too costly, too inconvenient for society to bear. These critics are half right. Such care is costly, and inconvenient. But such an investment will inevitably pay us back in full; for in learning to love both mother and child, we will learn how to better love ourselves. At the same time, in learning how to rejoice more fully in our own lives, we will learn how to rejoice in the lives of others."
Subject: Unnecessary DeathsWednesday's Swazi Observer carried the horror story of a woman who died after taking a mixture intended to cause an abortion. One might easily conclude that if abortion were legal, a proper potion could have been given to the woman under safe circumstances and she would not have died.
It is true that legalizing abortion makes the process a little bit safer. Once the procedure is legal, however, more women go for abortion, and the overall number of deaths and injuries increases. In the United States, 1200 women have been damaged by taking abortion pills (RU-486) and 8 have died. Remember also that abortion always kills a child; abortion, legal or otherwise, is never safe for babies.
Real health care for a woman has nothing to do with killing her or her child. May Swaziland never let abortion sink its claws into the nation. Instead, may Swazis build marriages and families of love, where life is respected from conception to natural death.
Subject: The search for love versus abortionI came across a quote from David Reardon's book "Aborted Women, Silent No More" so good it needs no introduction."It must also be remembered that when a young woman (or man) engages in intercourse, she is seeking much more than just physical pleasure. (Indeed, young women frequently complain that such intercourse is pleasureless and is "done only for the guy.") In the broader perspective, intercourse is just a symptom of the young woman's search for love, fulfillment, and security. Abortion destroys not only the consequences of intercourse, but also disrupts this larger search for meaning. When a young woman is encouraged by her boyfriend, friends, parents, or society to abort rather than to give life to her child, she is being told that her search for love was wrong. Instead of receiving support to act with courage and compassion, she is told to 'do what is best for yourself', meaning to place selfishness ahead of love. Instead of being encouraged to accept the consequences of her choices and to mature through the responsibilities of parenthood, she is encouraged to 'mature' through infantile destruction. Thus she is made to participate in desolation rather than growth; she is exposed to the fear of death rather than the joy of life".Women and children deserve better than abortion. May we emphasize abstinence to our unmarried family and friends, and faithfulness to our married ones. May we give women and children support and love, not abortion's death and destruction. May every woman and every child be welcomed in life and protected in law.Get more information about abortion's effects on women at http://www.afterabortion.org/Subject: Abortion and Mental Health
The topic of women in development receives much attention these days. The efforts to help girls get their education, to end domestic violence, and to end sex discrimination come to mind. These efforts all seek to improve the health and well-being of Swazi women, who already play a huge role in keeping Swazi culture going.Does abortion help a woman prosper? Listen to David Reardon from his book "Aborted Women, Silent No More":"Rather than having their egos strengthened by a society which says 'You can be a good mother-you can succeed,' many women are encouraged to abort by a society which insists 'You can't afford a child. You're not mature or stable enough to raise children. It is better to abort the child than force it to live under your inadequate care.' Thus the offer of abortion becomes an implied criticism that deflates an already weakened ego. According to psychiatrist Conrad Baars, encouraging such women to abort 'constitutes psychic murder'".Reardon references a conference of psychiatrists in 1978 which came to the following conclusion:"Without question, abortion is psychologically a symbol of the despair which seems to be endemic to modern society. It is a totally negative response to environmental pressures. Without benefit of an affirming love, abortion is always an empty response-a gesture of denial". Reardon again, on the conference: "They continue by pointing out that 'carrying an unwanted child to term' is far less traumatic than abortion, and they imply that helping a disturbed woman give birth to a child is often an aid to overcoming her emotional or mental problems. They conclude by saying, 'In the final analysis...life is better than death, and that psychotherapy which affirms life is by far the best. Abortion is a defeatist answer, a psychic retreat for those who have given up looking for answers'".May Swaziland be a nation which uplifts and supports girls, women and mothers. May this nation never suggest or force pregnant moms into the death-dealing and defeatist answer of abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.***********************************Subject: A fair-minded approach to abortionOn Sunday May 17, US President Barack Obama spoke at the University of Notre Dame. On Tuesday May 19, the Times told us Obama "urged the two sides (of the abortion debate) to try to find common ground" and said "Let us work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions. Let's reduce unintended pregnancies. Let's make adoption more available. Let's provide care and support for women who do carry their child to term." These are very good goals. What has the president done these last four months to reach them?*Rescinded the Mexico City policy, which frees up over 400 million American dollars a year for the promotion and performance of abortions worldwide;*Expressed hope to restore US funding to the United Nations Population Fund. This UN agency did not receive money under the Bush administration because UNFPA worked with the Chinese government's one-child-only policy, a policy which sometimes results in physically forced abortions. Colin Powell, Secretary of State under George Bush, said in 2004, "In July 2002, I determined that UNFPA's support of, and involvement in, China's population-planning activities allowed the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion. . ." "[A]s in 2002, UNFPA continues its support and involvement in China's coercive birth limitation program in counties where China's restrictive law and penalties are enforced by government officials."*Eliminated federal funding for abstinence-only education (and if anything reduces unintended pregnancies, it's abstinence);*Issued a budget which would allow federal tax dollars to pay for abortions in Washington, D.C.;*Responded "No" during his presidential campaign to the question "Does Sen. Obama support continuing federal funding for crisis pregnancy centers?" Crisis pregnancy centers exist to help unwed or needy mothers carry their children to term.*Failed to invite a single pro-life group to a recent "health care" summit at the White House. It appears that except for the adoption option, Obama has done exactly the opposite on each of the goals he stated at Notre Dame. Do his policies and statements share any "common ground" with those who respect mothers and the children they carry in their wombs? The "firestorm" mentioned in the Times article erupted because Notre Dame is a Roman Catholic university, and the Roman Catholic church is opposed to abortion. Faithful Catholics within and without Notre Dame were rightly outraged when the university announced Obama would speak at Notre Dame's graduation ceremony and receive an honorary law degree. Given Obama's record, it's no wonder they got upset.What are the lessons for us? 1) Let us hope Mr. Obama puts his good and lofty goals into action; he has flatly failed to do so thus far.2) Let Swaziland ALWAYS support mothers and families through love and sacrifice, and NEVER legalize abortion.***************************************************************Subject: Abortion-A Liberation for Women?
Abortion is often promoted as a liberating force for women, a way for a woman to control her own body, and a necessary step on the road to women's equality. This space has documented that abortion, in fact, hurts many women. Listen to Theresa Burke, a counselor who helps women through the grief and anguish abortion has caused them."Abortion is not a panacaea. The fact that it has caused so much division and anxiety in our country's political life clearly suggests that it can also cause internal divisions and anxiety in an individual's life. How can it possibly be a perfect solution for all women in all situations?"Again from Burke's book, entitled "Forbidden Grief":"Are all women emotionally hurt by abortion? Is it only a matter of time before their abortions come back to haunt them? Many critics of abortion believe so, but that is a broad generalization that can never be proved or disproved. All I can say with certainty is that many women and men are severely hurt, emotionally and psychologically, by their experience with abortion."Bearing in mind Burke's statement above, it is a treacherous and cruel "liberator" that causes the following reactions among women who have had abortions."I am angry. I am angry at Gloria Steinem [a famous abortion advocate in America] and every woman who ever had an abortion and didn't tell me about this kind of pain. There is a conspiracy among the sisterhood not to tell each other about guilt and self-hatred and terror. Having an abortion is not like having a wart removed or your nails done or your hair cut, and anyone who tell you [otherwise] is a liar or worse.""I am trying to learn to live with this and how to put on a show for the world. Sometimes, I feel like I won't be able to keep this show going for much longer. On the outside it seems like life has gone on like normal, but on the inside I feel like I am falling apart. It is even harder to pretend that I am enjoying myself when all I want to do is be alone and cry until I can cry no more, but even then the tears never seem to stop.""Everyone assured me not to worry, that there was nothing to be afraid of. The counseling I received was like, yes, you can do this; yes, it's safe; and don't worry, you won't have any problems. I have been emotionally tortured by this experience for the past 24 years. It's made my life a pit of depression and anxiety."How many women suffer negative post-abortion affects, and how serious are those effects? Consider:• Aborted women have a 62% increased risk of death from all causes, including suicide.• Suicide rates are 6 times higher if women abort vs. giving birth.• 60% of women who had abortions said they felt that “part of me died.”These and further statistics are available at theunchoice.comAbortion sets up a false choice between a mother and her unborn child. We need not choose between them. When someone says "A woman has a right to choose", the best and accurate answer is "Why not love them both?"Let Swaziland build a culture of respect, and love, and life.**************************************************************Subject: Let us love them both
Abortion advocacy often says things like "What is removed in an abortion is just a blob of tissue" or "Abortion is a necessary step on the way to women's equality" or "Abortion has no serious side effects." Yet listen to Dr. Julius Fogel, who is himself pro-choice and has done more than 20,000 abortions:
"Every woman-whatever her age, background or sexuality-has a trauma at destroying a pregnancy. A level of humanness is touched. This is part of her own life. When she destroys a pregnancy, she is destroying herself. There is no way this can be innocuous. One is dealing with the life force. It is totally beside the point whether or not you think a life is there. You cannot deny that something is being created and that this creation is physically happening...Often the trauma may sink into the unconscious and never surface in the woman's lifetime. But it as not as harmless and casual an event as many in the pro-abortion crowd insist. A psychological price is paid. It may be alienation; it may be a pushing away from human warmth, perhaps a hardening of the maternal instinct. Something happens on the deeper levels of a woman's consciousness when she destroys a pregnancy. I know that as a psychiatrist".
David Reardon, in his book "Making Abortion Rare", says the following: "It is simply impossible to rip a child from the womb of a mother without tearing out a part of the woman herself-a part of her heart, a part of her joy, a part of her maternity."
Abortion offers a false choice to us. Abortion says "Either the mother succeeds, or the child succeeds; but both cannot succeed." This is a lie. This space has presented fact after fact that women and children both suffer from abortion. Former abortion counselor Joan Appleton says "How did I get started in the abortion business? I was very active in the National Organization for Women (NOW). As a registered nurse, I thought that I had a wonderful opportunity as a nurse and as a firm believer in choice to be able to actually practice my political beliefs. I looked at it as a gift, so I went about working hard at the clinic for four years and remained active within NOW.
One of the things that bothered me even during the time that I was head nurse at the clinic is that it (abortion) was such an emotional trauma for a woman and such a difficult decision for a woman to make. If it was right, why was it so difficult? I had to ask myself that all the time. I counseled these women so well, they were so sure of their decision, so why were they coming back months and years later, psychological wrecks?"
The truth is, we can love and support both mother and child. Again from Dr. Reardon: "In God's ordering of creation, it is only the mother who can nurture her unborn child. All that the rest of us can do, then, is to nurture the mother. To help the child, we must help the mother." When we support a woman as she carries her unborn child, even if that child is unexpected, we preserve two lives and promote many more. The woman learns that she can face a challenge and succeed in a way (motherhood) that is unique to her. The rest of us receive the satisfaction of helping someone through a hard period. And, of course, a new Swazi child is allowed to complete her development and make her contribution to the nation.
Let us say no to abortion and yes to life. Let us promote true development for women and children. Let us love them both.*************************************************************Subject: Abortion Corrupts MedicineMedicine's first and most important principle is "First, do no harm." This principle is enshrined in the Hippocratic oath, an oath which (until recently) was taken by all new doctors on the day of their graduation from medical school. Every new doctor promised that in the course of their medical practice, their primary goal would be to heal their patients and not to harm them.The practice of abortion by some doctors casts a discouraging shadow on the noble practice of medicine. In the minds of most people, doctors are viewed as compassionate and knowledgable people whom we turn to when our health fails. We see them as heroes who restore to us one of our most precious assets-our health. But what happens to our image of doctors as healers and heroes when we learn that some of them will use their skills to end an innocent life? From Jean Garton's book "Who Broke The Baby?":"Abortion has brought us a model of medicine based on contracts and services-the kind we have with plumbers or car mechanics-rather than the historic medical model based on moral obligations. What happens to a profession that engages in killing on request? Not angrily or fanatically or politically but coldly, detachedly, and very, very lucratively?" To ask these questions is to answer them: doubt and distrust taint our lofty image of the practice of medicine. The previously unquestioned trust in doctors is subtly replaced with a nagging wonder about whether they would end an innocent life. With that nagging wonder comes the question, What would they do to me if they thought I was beyond healing? If a doctor does do abortions, would their experience with killing the innocent make them more quickly conclude I was beyond healing and "put me out of my misery"?I do not speak theoretically about this. A few years ago an acquaintance of mine, the husband of an old friend, finished medical school. In conversation about his training, I learned that his instruction in family medicine included discussion of abortion. When I mentioned the bizarre irony that part of family medicine might include the killing of children through abortion, he became silent and shrugged his shoulders. His reaction told me that he was unsure if abortion and family medicine were incompatible. As a result, I will never seek this man for even informal medical advice, much less take myself or any of my family members to see him for a health problem. He's a nice guy, but if he is not sure abortion (which kills unborn children and subjects mothers to many health risks) is bad medicine, I cannot trust his judgment. What might he do to me or a member of my family if we were really sick? Would he "put us out of our misery"? Abortion corrupts medicine. This is a sad state of affairs, and it need not be so. Doctors have earned their status as heroes through their many years of restoring us to health; may they not squander that status by engaging in abortion. May Swaziland and all countries insist that medicine always "Do no harm" and seek the health, not the destruction, of patients. May medicine do its part to build a culture of life.**************************************************Subject: Abortion and Later ChildrenAbortion harms women and kills children. Tragically, abortion can also harm children born to a woman who has aborted an earlier child. Various studies in the United States found child abuse rose 500% in the ten years after the legalization of abortion. The year 1991 saw 15 times as many child abuse cases as 1973. Why did this happen? Dr. Philip Ney, a counselor and researcher who helps women overcome the trauma of their abortions, suggests that the violence of abortion and the lowered self-esteem of a woman who has suffered an abortion play a role in later physical abuse.The violence visited upon later children is not just physical. From Jean Staker Carton's book "Who Broke The Baby?":I had just finished a speech on the wonder of life in the womb, and I invited comments from the audience of adults and adolescents. The first hand up belonged to a girl of about 12 years of age."My mother had two abortions," she exclaimed, "so why was I allowed to live?" The question stunned everyone, except the woman who later identified herself as the child's stepmother. She explained that the girl had already made two suicide attempts, wanting to be with her aborted brother and sister. It seemed that when the twelve-year-old was a little girl she lived with her biological mother, and every time the child did something the mother didn't like she would say angrily, "I wish I'd aborted you, too!"Women deserve better than abortion. So do children, unborn and born. May Swaziland build loving marriages and families; may Swaziland build a culture of love and life.The statistics above come from Garton's book.********************************************************Subject: Abortion Corrupts Medicine
Medicine's first and most important principle is "First, do no harm." This principle is enshrined in the Hippocratic oath, an oath which (until recently) was taken by all new doctors on the day of their graduation from medical school. Every new doctor promised that in the course of their medical practice, their primary goal would be to heal their patients and not to harm them.
The practice of abortion by some doctors casts a discouraging shadow on the noble practice of medicine. In the minds of most people, doctors are viewed as compassionate and knowledgable people whom we turn to when our health fails. We see them as heroes who restore to us one of our most precious assets-our health. But what happens to our image of doctors as healers and heroes when we learn that some of them will use their skills to end an innocent life? From Jean Garton's book "Who Broke The Baby?":"Abortion has brought us a model of medicine based on contracts and services-the kind we have with plumbers or car mechanics-rather than the historic medical model based on moral obligations. What happens to a profession that engages in killing on request? Not angrily or fanatically or politically but coldly, detachedly, and very, very lucratively?" To ask these questions is to answer them: doubt and distrust taint our lofty image of the practice of medicine. The previously unquestioned trust in doctors is subtly replaced with a nagging wonder about whether they would end an innocent life. With that nagging wonder comes the question, What would they do to me if they thought I was beyond healing? If a doctor does do abortions, would their experience with killing the innocent make them more quickly conclude I was beyond healing and "put me out of my misery"?
I do not speak theoretically about this. A few years ago an acquaintance of mine, the husband of an old friend, finished medical school. In conversation about his training, I learned that his instruction in family medicine included discussion of abortion. When I mentioned the bizarre irony that part of family medicine might include the killing of children through abortion, he became silent and shrugged his shoulders. His reaction told me that he was unsure if abortion and family medicine were incompatible. As a result, I will never seek this man for even informal medical advice, much less take myself or any of my family members to see him for a health problem. He's a nice guy, but if he is not sure abortion (which kills unborn children and subjects mothers to many health risks) is bad medicine, I cannot trust his judgment. What might he do to me or a member of my family if we were really sick? Would he "put us out of our misery"?
Abortion corrupts medicine. This is a sad state of affairs, and it need not be so. Doctors have earned their status as heroes through their many years of restoring us to health; may they not squander that status by engaging in abortion. May Swaziland and all countries insist that medicine always "Do no harm" and seek the health, not the destruction, of patients. May medicine do its part to build a culture of life.*****************************************************Subject: Abortion-A Free Choice?
Abortion advocacy produces a ceaseless monologue proclaiming that abortion is a matter of reproductive rights, that abortion is a necessary step on the road to women's equality, that abortion should be a woman's free choice. In places where abortion is legal and widespread, do we find women making the choice to abort their children being made freely and happily? Consider these statistics, taken from "Portraits of Coercion" available at http://www.theunchoice.com/:* 64% of women undergoing abortions felt pressured by others.* Most women felt rushed and uncertain, yet 67% had no counseling before abortion.* 79% women surveyed felt they were not informed about available alternatives.* 84% of respondents said they were not given enough information to make an informed choice.One woman reports, "They said I made the right decision, but I was never given a choice."Consider these anecdotes, also from "Portraits of Coercion":My husband said he’d leave if I didn’t abort. He told me, “Either you have an abortion, or I’ll leave you.”Sandra Morean
"When I told my mom I was pregnant, she immediately made the appointment [for abortion]. I kept hanging the phone up on her and she kept redialing. Finally she got through ... The next morning, I crept downstairs, got into my car and sped away—she quickly followed and finally caught up with me."Laura O’Brien
"The baby’s father retracted his marriage proposal as soon as he found out I was pregnant. I had no money, no medical insurance, and didn’t realize that there were places to turn to for help ...My relatives made all the arrangements ... everyone was there to give advice before the abortion, but afterwards I was on my own. If I had had love, support, and above all, the true facts, I would have never even considered an abortion. The pain never goes away."Carolyn Walton
Says author Germaine Greer in the book "The Whole Woman": “... it will be her duty to undergo an invasive procedure and an emotional trauma and so sort the situation out. The crowning insult is that this ordeal is represented to her as some kind of a privilege.”During last year's presidential campaign, Barack Obama said "I don’t think women make these [abortion] decisions casually. I think they — they wrestle with these things in profound ways, in consultation with their pastors or their spouses or their doctors or their family members." The unfortunate truth is that many women who want to keep their babies have to wrestle AGAINST their "lovers", doctors, or family members. These others often oppose a woman's desire and efforts to carry her precious child to birth.The above statistics are an indictment of the anti-life mentality so prevalent in western countries today. Women deserve and should receive our full support in bringing their children to birth. May Swaziland never adopt the anti-life beliefs which crush both mothers and their unborn children. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.***********************************************************Subject: Legalised Prostitution? Tuesday's Times reported the latest proposal for reducing HIV: legalising prostitution. If the Times report was accurate, Vusi Matsebula of SASO explained that prostitutes needed to be taught on the ways of their trade, legalising prostitution would empower women so that they could operate freely and generate revenue, and putting prostitution within the bounds of the law would (somehow, we were not told how) reduce HIV prevalence.We can hope that Matsebula was misquoted, because his proposal is absurd. A 1998 survey from Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand found that 96% of women in prostitution wanted to leave it. A study from the USA found that 46% of the women in prostitution had tried to kill themselves. It would appear that the best way to help women trapped in prostitution is not to "empower" them in that degrading practice, or to offer training and accreditation in selling themselves, but to help them get out of it.Who, by the way, would teach these women "the ways of their trade"? The prospect of a school wherein young women are taught to allure complete strangers into having sex for money is so bizarre yet so revolting, one does not know whether to laugh or cry. No offense intended, but did Matsebula run this idea past anyone (particularly any women) before he presented it at the mini dialogue?Speaking of gender inequality, why is it always men who propose legalising prostitution? I think men who suggest making prostitution legal have not spoken with any women about it or thought about it deeply enough. Sex is supposed to be the most intimate expression of love between a man and a woman who have committed themselves to each other for life in marriage. You don't need to be the director of an NGO to recognize that prostitution is not about that.The real test of any man's proposal for legalized prositution is this: he should, at the end of his talk, present his mother, his wife, his daughters, his aunties, bonkhe bomshana bakhe-in fact, every last one of his female relatives-eager for a course (complete with on-the-job training) in prostitution. Think of all the money they could make! Think of how this would boost the Swazi economy!Before Mr. Matsebula gets upset at this "test", he should recognize that this is exactly what he is suggesting other men do with their female family members.Away with this preposterous idea of legalised prostitution; women deserve better than sex slavery. Let us work hard to find real ways to uplift women.*******************************************************Subject: What Will Stop AIDS?In the past two weeks, the Times has been loaded with information on ways to prevent HIV transmission. On the 17th and the 24th, we were treated to nearly full-page stories about the role of condoms in stopping AIDS. The 24th carried Martin Dlamini's account of his trip to Uganda and how they have dealt with HIV/AIDS, and numerous issues of the Times have featured a post-coital couple in facing-page adverts for Trust studded condoms.Can condoms really make the crucial difference in bringing down the AIDS rate? If not, what can? Swaziland has one of the highest, if not the highest, AIDS rates in the world. The life of the nation rests on the answers to these questions.On the 24th, HIV specialist Dr. Kevin De Cock was quoted as saying that "if used consistently and correctly [condoms] are highly effective in preventing the transmission of HIV". A few concerns arise from this comment. First, what is "highly effective"? No percentage followed his statement. Another article on the same page said that "condoms are at least 80%, and possibly more, effective in reducing the transmission of HIV for co-habitating couples". Other reliable sources support this figure. Well, okay; 80% is a great rate if you are swatting flies or repelling mosquitoes; but the issue here is HIV/AIDS, a lethal disease. Something that protects you from a getting lethal infection 4 out of 5 times-but may fail 1 time in 5-is not a good gamble.Condoms have been successful in preventing HIV transmission within very specific groups of people, the most prominent case being prostitutes in Thailand. Condoms have not, however, been successful in curbing HIV rates in situations like Swaziland's. Edward Green, senior research scientist at the Harvard University (USA) School of Public Health and the Director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at that university, writes "Promotion of condoms alone has not been shown to be an effective strategy to lower infection rates in generalized epidemics, such as those found in Africa. As a 2003 study concluded, 'There is little evidence that sometimes (but not always) using condoms provides any protection as compared to not using condoms at all.'” In the same report, Green writes "No country in Africa has ever had rates of consistent condom usage above 5% among married people or regular sexual partners, and usage rates at last intercourse with any type of partner remain relatively low". Green quotes the British medical journal The Lancet: “Massive increases in condom use world-wide have not translated into demonstrably improved HIV control in the great majority of countries where they have occurred.”In short, condoms don't get used. Even if they were consistently used, what constitutes the correct use of a condom?Dr. Patrick Dixon's book The Truth About AIDS contains a description of how a condom must be correctly used in order to be effective. The description is graphic, so I will not include it in this widely-read newspaper. Trust me when I say that correct use of condoms goes against all human instincts of a couple engaged in the sexual act; no sober mind would conclude that all the correct steps are likely to be taken to ensure the condom's effectiveness. If you would like to know the details, contact me at the email address below and I will send you the relevant portion of Dixon's book.What about other methods for curbing HIV transmission? Doctor Green again: "A great deal of resources have gone into primarily biomedical-based interventions (i.e., VCT, STI treatment, condoms) in South Africa, Botswana and other southern African countries, yet without apparent impact on national HIV infection rates".So what will work? The HIV rate among 15-19 year-old pregnant women in Uganda was cut from roughly 34% in 1991 down to 10% in 1997. How did they do it?Edward Green one more time: "While we may never fully know 'what really happened in Uganda,' the available evidence, bolstered by more recent and similarly encouraging findings from places such as Kenya, Addis Ababa Zambia, and Zimbabwe, suggests that a comprehensive, behavior change-based strategy, ideally involving high-level political commitment and a diverse spectrum of community-based participation, may be the most effective prevention approach."May I suggest, based on Uganda's stunning success story, that Swaziland's way out of the HIV/AIDS death swamp is for everyone to emphasize, practice and expect no sex before marriage and sex only with one's spouse after marriage. If this sounds simple, that is because it is simple. So much of the world seems convinced that we enjoy a universal human right to consequence-free sex. Sex is not consequence-free, and neither popular opinion nor any amount of medical intervention (surgical, pharmacological, or condomological) will ever make it so. For adults to practice and teach the youth to save sex for marriage will not only slash the number of new HIV infections, it will build a citizenry armed with self-control and discipline. Young men and women who can control themselves will be spared not only the physical harm that often comes from non-marital sex, but also from the emotional scars that sex taken out of season so often inflicts. Such men and women will also have the character traits needed to make sacrifices for their spouses and children; and as any happily-married couple will tell you, such sacrifices are critical to the success of a marriage and family. And, of course, the "save sex for marriage" approach to killing HIV is very inexpensive.May Swaziland build generations of virtue. May all of us in this beautiful Kingdom save our bodies for our spouses only, whether we are married to them now or are still waiting to meet and marry them. May Swaziland build, through keeping sex only in marriage, a culture of life and love.Ed Green's research is available at http://www.harvardaidsprp.org/***********************************************Subject: The Sexism of AbortionSwaziland is much concerned these days with the uplifting of women, and this is a good thing: Swazi women do far more than their fair share of the work to keep the country running. They deserve support and empowerment.Some folks think abortion is part of the package to empower women. If the United States' experiment with abortion is any indicator, however, we learn that abortionists treat women like children.Abortion advocates in that country regularly fight proposed laws requiring abortion clinics to tell women all the facts about the development of their preborn children and about the abortion procedure. Innumerable testimonies of post-aborted women are tales of regret, often ending with words like "If only the counselor had told me what I know now about fetal development and the abortion procedure, I would not have killed my baby." Instead of informing women that abortion is painful and potentially very dangerous, abortion clinic counselors regularly tell clients "The pain is no worse than cramps" and "It's only a blob of tissue we remove." Instead of offering women real facts about abortion and fetal development, abortion counselors usually give misleading or flatly false information. As former abortion clinic owner and now pro-life activist Carol Everett says, "I cannot tell you one thing that happens in an abortion clinic that is not a lie." By failing to give the complete range of facts about abortion to women, the abortion industry systematically robs women of the information they need to make a real choice. Why won't they give this information? Do they think women are too stupid to understand it? As Jean Garton says in her book "Who Broke the Baby?": "By law (in the United States), women now have a right to abortion and, by law, they now have a right to privacy. What they don't have is a legal right to know what they need to know in order to give informed consent to an abortion. This all adds up to something, doesn't it? If it's not sexism, what is it?"Here in Swaziland, the same pattern in being followed. Several years ago a woman's legal group was encouraging their members to ask their MP's to legalize abortion. The leaders told their members that there was NO BABY for the first three weeks. They did not show pictures of very young babies in the womb or explain fetal development. Maybe they also thought that their women members were too stupid or too foolish to deserve the truth. The truth is that just three weeks after conception, a woman's child already has a beating heart and its own separate circulatory system. One Circle has a campaign for Women proclaiming that "knowledge is power". Women deserve the truth. Swaziland is just beginning to recognize the importance and value of women. May the Kingdom keep travelling the road towards womens' empowerment and not get sidetracked down the destructive path of abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.**************************************Subject: Abortion Robs Us AllDr. Bernard Nathanson spearheaded the effort to legalize abortion in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. He oversaw an abortion clinic in New York city, and during his leadership 60,000 abortions were performed at that clinic. Nathanson also performed abortions himself, including the abortion of one of his own children.In 1979 he wrote the book "Aborting America" wherein he describes his experience in helping legalize abortion and his growing unease with abortion. Nathanson criticizes both pro-and anti-abortion arguments in his book; yet in the years after 1979 he came to recognize the humanity of the unborn, especially through the technology of "scans" (also called ultrasounds) for viewing the baby within the womb. Nathanson videotaped an abortion from within the womb and recalls that "I, though I had not done an abortion in five years, was shaken to the very roots of my soul by what I saw. The tapes were amazing." Nathanson is now a strong pro-life leader and regrets his involvement in the abortion cause.We are all robbed through abortion: women are robbed of their health, fathers are robbed of their children, children are robbed of their siblings, and society is robbed of tremendous potential. Celine Dion is the last of 14 children. When her mother learned she was pregnant, she was upset-14 is a lot of children! Mrs. Dion spoke to her priest, who advised her not to "go against nature". "I owe my life to that priest" says the superstar singer. We too owe that priest a debt of gratitude; how much poorer we would be without Celine Dion's beautiful singing voice. Similar circumstances surround the birth of Ludwig Van Beethoven, the great European composer of the 18th and 19th centuries. His father had syphillis and his mother had tuberculosis. They had four children already; one was blind, another was deaf and could not speak, a third had tuberculosis, and the fourth had a deformity. Should the mother have aborted the child she carried in her womb? If she had, we would all have been robbed of Beethoven's stunningly powerful music.Mothers, children, and ALL the rest of us deserve better than abortion. May Swaziland say no to the thief called abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.*********************************Subject: Abortion-a private decision?One pro-abortion argument says that abortion is a private decision between a woman and her doctor. Since the advent of legalized abortion in the United States since the 1970s, abortion has become an impersonal, uncaring, and assembly-line procedure. Pregnant mothers and abortionists usually meet on the operating table and never see one another again. Leaving aside this fact, is it even legitimate to say that abortion is only between a woman and her doctor? Without question, the child she carries in her womb will be affected by the abortion decision. Research also finds that later children suffer anxiety and doubt when they learn their mom aborted other children. Fathers who want their children also suffer. Why? When abortion becomes legal, the law usually dictates that the mother makes all of the decisions about whether to abort or not. This means that should the father wants to keep his child but the mother wants to abort, he will almost always lose his child to abortion. I met a young man who got his girlfriend pregnant. At first he offered to marry his girlfriend and raise their child together. When his girlfriend refused to marry, he offered to help her raise it or to take the child after birth and raise his child himself. His girlfriend refused. In desperation, trying to save the life of his child he went to court to make sure his child wasn't aborted. Nevertheless, the court decided the girlfriend had all the authority on a Thursday, and on the next day (it happened to be Good Friday) this man lost his child to abortion. As he spoke about that experience several years later, his pain was still papable.Women who don't want to have abortions are affected by abortion. In the United States, a man is legally obliged to support (with money, if nothing else) his children. If a man gets his girlfriend pregnant, this can mean spending thousands of dollars over the course of 18 years while his child grows to adulthood. But for just a few hundred dollars, he can buy her an abortion and be done with his responsibilities. It takes little imagination to see that a heartless man who was only playing boyfriend for the sex will exert immense pressure on his "partner" to abort. Parents, doctors, and social workers can also be involved in pushing women into unwanted abortions.Women who undergo these coerced abortions are more likely to experience long-lasting and traumatic psychological aftereffects. These come out in later relationships, including marriage. As a result, her husband may feel the negative effects of her abortion.Finally, abortion affects us all by killing would-be contributors to society. Children born to already-large families (like Celine Dion) or born into circumstances of poverty and disease (like Ludwig von Beethoven) have brought joy and inspiration to millions. How much poorer we would be if their moms had chosen abortion! How much poorer are we even today, because someone made the tragic "choice" of aborting her child?The choice to abort is not a private one; innumerable other people are affected. May we give moms, both before and after delivering their children, the love and support they deserve. In doing so, we will benefit these moms, their children, their spouses, and ourselves.******************Subject: Abortion-The Failed PromiseMany times, a woman aborts an unplanned pregnancy because they think a child will prevent them from reaching their goals. In her book Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of Abortion, counselor Theresa Burke puts it this way: "Only a minority of women choose abortion simply because they do not want to have a baby. Most abort out of fear that carrying their unplanned pregnancy to term will deprive them of a wanted relationship, the approval of others, their education, a career, or some other desired goal.While women often hope that having an abortion will help them to achieve these other goals, there is no research that shows that it generally does. Indeed, the evidence indicates that abortion is more likely to harm relationships. If the abortion is done to ensure a woman's social standing or sense of approval from her parents or peers, often the cost is a great self-hatred. Finally, there are no studies showing that aborting women achieve higher educational levels or better careers than women who carry unintended pregnancies to term; some women become self-destructive and are unable to finish their education or do well in their jobs.Even if abortion helps women to achieve some desired goal, many women discover that the goal they have achieved has been drained of meaning. This is how Katrina described her experience:I had my abortion because we were poor. I was raised poor and I didn't want my kids to grow up in poverty. It's awful because now we have a great income and plenty of money. I can't enjoy any of it. Money was the reason we had the abortion...Now I have money and I hate it. Nothing I buy makes me happy and I miss the child who should be with me now.Similarly, Millie's goal was simply to complete her education. Thoughts of her missing child, however, left her unable to enjoy the fruit of her accomplishments.I had my abortion because I wanted to finish college. The day of my graduation I felt absolutely no joy or accomplishment. I am always thinking about what my child would have been like. He or she would be five years old now. I wonder what my life would have been like. I wonder if I would have met someone nice and gotten married. When I see mothers with young children I feel so sad. Sometimes, I feel angry."Aborting an unplanned child does not ensure a woman will reach her relationship, educational, career, or financial goals; in fact, it often wrecks those dreams. Abortion does, however, bring deep problems and regret to many women, and it always kills her child. Abortion has no place in the promotion of women. Let us thuthukisa bomake by respecting and developing their talents and abilities; let us not insult and injure them with abortion. May we build a culture of life and love.*********************************Subject: Rape and abortion
What is the right thing to do if woman becomes pregnant through rape? Common sense quickly concludes that abortion in the case of rape is reasonable. Consider this long quotation from Theresa Burke's book Forbidden Grief: The Unspoken Pain of AbortionNina was raped one night while away on a business trip. To her horror and shame, she discovered she was pregnant. In an effort to destroy all reminders of the rape, Nina consented to an abortion. "The fact that I got pregnant because of the rape was disgusting. I felt like I had to get rid of it. Somehow, I figured that because I got pregnant I must have enjoyed it. I couldn't tolerate that concept. I was so ashamed. I got my abortion out of state so that no one would know."The rape was nothing compared to the abortion. I developed a raging pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) because I never received any antibiotic to prevent infection. My gynecologist also informed me that besides the scarring from the infection, my cervix is badly damaged from the abortion procedure. I will never have children of my own because I am sterile due to the PID."The rape was bad but I could have gotten over it. The abortion is something I will never get over. No one realizes how much that event damaged my life. I hate my rapist, but I hate the abortionist too. I can't believe I paid to be raped again. This will affect the rest of my life".Theresa Burke continues: "Like many rape victims, Nina blamed herself, believing that somewhere along the way she had invited or consented to the rape. Rather than removing her self-blame, her abortion confirmed her sense of shame and guilt. Now she knew she was culpable; she had even consented to the abortion in writing."Nina loved children and had always wanted to have a family...When it was too late, she longed for the aborted baby, even though he or she was the product of rape. She began to see herself as the guilty party and the baby as the innocent victim of her violence. The anger she felt toward the the rapist became bitterly directed against herself. After such a devastating experience, her journey to recovery was long and difficult."Is Nina's case unique? No. A survey of almost 200 women who became pregnant through rape found that 89% of those who aborted their child regretted the abortion. More than 90% said they would tell other women who were pregnant due to rape NOT to abort. Lastly, all of the women who carried their rape-conceived children to birth believed they made the right decision.Rape is horrific, but the experiences of Nina and others show that abortion doesn't heal the injuries of rape. Away with rape, and away with abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.**********************************************************Subject: Pre-Abortion CounselingEven if a woman might not be physically injured during an abortion, the trauma of the experience can cause terrible psychological and behavioural reactions, including sucidal thoughts or attempts. Consequently, abortion providers should carefully counsel a woman who wants an abortion before she undergoes the procedure. According to post-abortion counselor Theresa Burke, "Despite the overwhelming evidence linking abortion to suicide, abortion providers do not provide the type of psychosocial screening necessary to identify patients who are at higher risk of suicide. Nor do they provide women with information about suicide intervention in the event that they begin to feel suicidal after their abortion". Burke includes this account from Paulette, a woman whose sister committed suicide after an abortion:"My sister and I were both victims of incest. My sister had been sexually assaulted by my brothers for a number of years when she got her first abortion at the age of 16. Had she been questioned by anyone as to how a minor like herself had come to be pregnant in the first place, perhaps she could have been saved from any further abuse within the family. This is indeed what should have happened in any agency which clamis to be concerned about preventing child abuse. As it turned out, she was given the abortion without my parents' consent or knowledge and then returned to the same environment."Years later, after having given birth to three children, having had many years of psychotherapy and antidepressant drugs, she became pregnant in a crisis situation. She was advised by friends and self-appointed do-gooders to abort the baby to take care of herself. This caused her a great deal of distress and anxiety. The decision was very difficult and in her weakened state she succumbed to the 'sensibility' of their arguments and scheduled the abortion."She was crying when she entered the clinic, she cried throughout the procedure, and she was sobbing as she left. But no one at the clinic asked her any questions that might upset her any more. Of course, had anyone asked her they might have recognized that she was not emotionally strong enough to stand the abortion. Had they inquired about her health history, they might have seen her as the high-risk patient she was. But none of this took place."One week after the abortion she took her life with a gunshot to the chest, striking her heart. Her three children are growing up without their mom because no one wanted to ask questions."This woman's sad story doesn't cast much positive light on anyone: How could her parents be so ignorant of what was going on within their family? Why didn't the social agencies ask the appropriate questions? How could her "friends" suggest abortion to a woman already so troubled? And as the last and most important stop on the way to the abortion, how could the clinic go through with an abortion on a woman who was crying as she entered the facility? Continuous crying is a sign that something is wrong, and that a procedure as serious as an abortion should not be done that day. Once the door is opened to legal abortion, such sad accounts inevitably multiply. Women such as Paulette's sister will have their past indignities compounded by abortions, and these abortions may lead to the end of their own lives. Women deserve better counseling, and better respect, than this. May we all respect women and their God-given ability to bear children. May the gift of sex and children remain within marriage only, for the benefit of the spouses, their children, and the whole of society. May Swaziland build a culture of life and love.************************************Subject: Abortion as a Single IssueSometimes pro-lifers are criticized as being obsessed with the lives of unborn children and not caring about other important issues. "What about poverty, homelessness, hunger; if you are really pro-life, why don't you work on these other problems, too?"Listen to Jean Staker Garton, from her book Who Broke the Baby?. Remember that Garton is an American, and references to the government and medical organizations and churches refer to those institutions in America."Most pro-life people I know are involved in other issues either through church programs or community efforts. Yet no issue has the primacy or urgency of the abortion issue because only the killing of unborn children has been legalized by the government, sanctioned by the medical profession, and defended by church bodies."Hunger, homelessness, and poverty occur for many reasons, but not because there is a Supreme Court ruling that gives one group of human beings the right to inflict suffering on another. Child abuse and spousal abuse occur, but not because physicians support the right of men to do violence to women and children. Rape, drunk driving, and other crimes occur, but not because churches have said they are permitted in the name of Christian freedom. All these things happen, but not because we have made them legal or promoted them as moral-as has been done with abortion."Abortion isn't a single issue; it is a singular issue, and to put one's energy simply into keeping babies alive is a natural and noble work."May Swaziland never fall to the level of killing her future and wounding her mothers through commonplace and condoned abortion, as many other "advanced" nations have done. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.****************************Subject: Why Can't We Love Them Both?Abortion means one dead (child) and one wounded (mother). Listen to Dr. David Reardon from his book The Jericho Plan: Breaking Down the Walls which Prevent Post-Abortion Healing:"For now it is enough for me to share the insight of a crisis pregnancy center counselor who once told me: 'When I began this work, I was mostly concerned with the unborn. But after working with so many young girls who have had abortions, what saddens me most is how abortion destroys the joy of their youth, and strips away every last shred of their innocence. Nothing can make a young girl feel more worthless and despicable than having killed her own child'".Abortion is not good for women. Let us not devastate the lives of timbali teMaswati by accepting abortion as an option for an unplanned pregnancy. Let us support the flowers of the nation by encouraging them to save sex for marriage, where sex can have its emotional and child-bearing effects safely. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.Note: More information on abortion's effects on women is available at http://www.afterabortion.org/*********************************Subject: Abortion-A Private Decision?Abortion advocates frequently explain that an abortion is a private decision between a woman and her doctor, or a woman and her husband, or a woman and her family. While this is true in one sense-a woman makes the final decision to go for the abortion-it is false in others. The majority of women in the United States who chose to abort (up to 64%) felt pressure from others who wanted them to abort; their decision was not free from coercion. Nor is the decision informed. One survey found a vast majority of women (79%) said they received inadequate information about alternatives to abortion, and 67% said they received no counseling before undergoing the procedure. The abortion decision is, in a majority of cases, an uninformed one. A woman who must make a choice while under pressure from others and without a proper understanding of the procedure is indeed making a decision, but hardly a free, private, and informed one.Abortion is not a private decision, because its negative effects ripple throughout a society. First, a woman is often wounded (mentally, spiritually, emotionally, physically); a culture is less healthy and happy because one of its members is damaged. Second, post-abortive women suffer much higher rates of suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, health problems, and self-abusive behaviour. The family and friends of these women know the heartbreak of watching their loved ones self-destruct, and must make the strenuous and sometimes heroic effort of getting them out of self-destructive habits. Finally, society is robbed of a new citizen; who knows what positive contributions that person could have made to society, and who knows how many other lives are left poorer by the aborted child's absence?Abortion is not a private decision; it damages us all. Fortunately, groups exist which help post-aborted women overcome the negative effects of their choice. But isn't it better to avoid the abortion in the first place? Let us never pressure a woman, for whatever reason, into ending the life she nurtures within her. Let us help those who have undergone abortions to overcome their negative effects. Let us respect the lives of women and children by never allowing the scourge of abortion to take hold of our culture. Let us build a culture of love and life.*********************************Subject: Obama's Nobel Peace PrizeBarack Obama will receive this year's Nobel Peace Prize. I'm sure he and his family are happy, but one must wonder: what has he done to deserve it? He has only been president for 9 1/2 months, and he has spent much of that time on issues in his own country. This is not to fault him; he is the president of the US, and his first priority has to be his own country. Perhaps it was unfair of the Nobel committee to give him this award before he had enough time to foster international peace.Obama has not substantially changed his country's policy in Iraq. The Israelis and Palestinians aren't on friendly terms yet. Al-Qaeda has yet to renounce terrorism. Russian/Polish relations are tense. Iran's nuclear program is still a live threat. There is no shortage of international relations problems to solve, and we can hope Obama helps settle these and other enduring world problems. If he does, we can all rejoice in his well-earned honors. But he hasn't done so yet.Historically, the Peace Prize has recognized individuals who have made substantial contributions to world peace through effort and sacrifice. Mother Theresa, for example, carried out a selfless ministry to the desperately poor for decades. With her actions, she improved the lot of countless others. Though Obama may have vision, he has yet to produce (maybe because he hasn't had enough time) anything of substance. The result of Obama's receiving the Nobel means is the diminishment of the prize itself; apparently, one need not accomplish anything to get it. Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez put it well: "For the first time we are witnessing an award with the nominee having done nothing to deserve it; rewarding someone for a wish that is very far from becoming reality."****************************************Subject: Legalizing prostitution debate, one more timeVusi Sibisi's "Just Thinking" column broached the idea of legalizing prostitution this week. This is the second time the Times has wondered if legalizing prostitution might be a good idea, and the third time overall that the issue has received substantial coverage. Why on earth does an otherwise interesting and often thoughtful newspaper give any space to this revolting proposal?Surveys show that 89% to 96% of women in prostitution-that is, almost all of them-want to get out of it. Prostitutes also show self-destructive behaviors; surveys show 46% to 65% of prostituted women have attempted suicide. The Times itself mentioned the sky-high sexual disease incidence among prostitutes. For citizens of a country to confirm other citizens in a degrading, abusive, and potentially lethal activity is unconscionable. If overwhelming statistics aren't enough to convince legal prostitution proponents of the wrongness of the idea, perhaps common sense will. Are these proponents willing to have their female relatives-mothers, wife, daughters, sisters, even themselves-become prostitutes? If not, why not? Were the trade made "safe and legal" and the income potential great, what should hold them back? To ask the question is to answer it: prostitution is a grave insult to the dignity of a woman, and no matter how "safe, legal, and lucrative" the law might try to make it, it is still degrading to the women involved.The first and only response to prostitution is to help women get out of it. No woman should have to have sex for money with strangers. Sexual intercourse is supposed to be the highest expression of lifelong love between husband and wife-not something that uses and abuses another person. No country should, through any channel but especially through legalization, give even a hint of respectability to this debasing practice. A nation should protect the honor and dignity of its women, and this should be demonstrated in that nation's laws and practices. Once again-and may it be for the last time-away with the suggestion of legalized prostitution. Swazi women and women worldwide deserve better.*********************************************Subject: Hope for Those Who Regret Their AbortionMany women regret their abortions, wishing with all their might that they could turn back the hands of time and undo the terrible event. Many such women wonder if life will ever have meaning for them again.If you find yourself in just such a "dark night", know that there is hope for you. Read this passage from Holly Trimble's book Healing Post-Abortion Trauma: Help for Women Hurt by Abortion:"When I was so ill with depression and guilt [after my abortion] I was continually confronted with one particular scripture: 'And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose'. (Romans 8:28)I had a difficult time believing that this could apply to something as destructive and devastating as my abortion. After all, my baby had died and I was completely shattered, unable to function in a normal manner...[Eventually] God began to patiently show me how this scripture could be fulfilled in my life. First, I began to recognize that the pain I was experiencing had given me insights on suffering, sin, and forgiveness. It also gave me a great desire to live in obedience to God; in fact, my depression was the catalyst for both myself and my husband to come to know the Lord...[I also came to realize that] my struggles to overcome my emotional pain could lead me into becoming a better person than I ever would have been without the need to struggle.I do not want to be misunderstood. I am not thankful that I had an abortion. But I am extremely grateful that God has used such a tragedy to bring me to Him and to teach me. I am very grateful that He has used this to ultimately make me into a stronger person, concerned about serving Him instead of just living for myself.God has a plan for your life, too. Be patient with yourself. Spend time in prayer and studying God's word. Let God bring healing to you. Each day dedicate yourself to Him and you will see Him work in your life in truly miraculous ways. You will see how even a tragedy such as abortion can be used by God to work for good. 'For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.'" (Philippians 1:6)God bless you.*********************Subject: Abortion Counseling-What To ExpectMost people assume that when a woman enters an abortion clinic and is contemplating an abortion, the counselor will help her think through all possible options. Sadly, this is not the case. Listen to John and Barbara Willke, a husband and wife team (he is a doctor, she is a nurse) who have researched and spoken about abortion worldwide for over 30 years:"In any other type of surgery, the doctor is required to explain in detail what the procedure is, its possible complications, etc. Only then does the patient give 'informed' consent.Abortion is unique in that, while it is surgery that is potentially dangerous to the mother, it also destroys the living being within her. To be fully informed, she should be given full actual information on the surgery, its possible complications (immediate and long-term), and, also, full details about 'what she carries'.What is done? Very little factual information is given at all, and what is given is often false. The complications are ignored, glossed over, or given on a paper in fine print. Her passenger is referred to as 'pregnancy tissue', 'not alive yet', 'not a baby yet', 'just a bunch of cells', 'only a glob.' These descriptions are given at a stage of development when a baby already sucks her thumb and feels pain, and when we can listen to her tiny heartbeat on an office ultrasonic stethoscope.Such deception of the mother and planned railroading of her into an abortion is never more evident than when the so-called 'counselor' asks her, 'Do you want your menstrual period re-established? If so, just sign up for this procedure.' Abortion is not mentioned, nor anything about the baby.There is no better example of the exploitation of women than this continuing, commercialized, and almost universal deception."Lest you think that this is just criticism from the outside, consider the words of Carol Everett. Everett once ran a chain of abortion clinics in Texas and has since become a pro-life activist. When asked "What type of counseling was offered at the clinics?", Ms. Everett responded "We didn't do any real counseling. We sold abortion". Former abortion clinic counselor Debra Henry says "We were told to find the woman's weakness and work on it. The women were never given any alternatives. They were told how much trouble it was to have a baby."If abortion takes root in Swaziland, we can expect these same exploitative deceptions to fall upon Swazi mothers. Swazi women deserve better than this. May Swaziland respect women and the children they carry. May Swaziland build a culture of life.****************************************************Subject: Abortion versus Ethical MedicineMost people naturally assume that abortion is performed just like any ethical medical procedure. Sadly, this is not the case.
Dr. and Mrs. John Willke, a doctor and nurse team who have researched and spoken about abortion for over three decades, offer this table comparing abortion and ethical surgery.

Abortion versus Ethical Surgery
AbortionEthical Surgerypaymentcash at doorpay lateradvertisingcommonrarecounselingusually a farcedone if neededsecond opinionneverif neededinformed consentlegally not requiredalwaysrecord-keepingsketchyin detailpre-operation examinationoften not done until she is on tablemandatory and detailedpost-operation examinationnonemandatory and detailedcorrect diagnosis10-15% done on non-pregnant womensurgeon is disciplined if he does many wrong operationshusband's consentnot neededexpectedhusband informednot necessaryalwaysconsent of parents (for minors)not neededlegally requiredparents informed (for minors)seldomlegally requiredtissue disposalin garbagein humane and dignified mannerburialin garbageyes, if large enoughsurgical trainingnot requiredabsolutely requirednon-medical reasons99%about 1%
The Willke's conclusion? "To a greater or less extent, in every nation, abortion procedures are commonly exempt from the sanitary and ethical rules required of other surgery".
Widespread acceptance of abortion includes widespread exposure of women to unethical and dangerous medicine. Swazi women deserve better than this. No to abortion; yes to life.
****************************Subject: Every Child a Wanted ChildAbortion advocates tell us that "Every child should be a wanted child". The second half of this sentence is always left off; that second half says "and unwanted children should be aborted." This sentence seems logical; wouldn't it be best if "unwanted" children never enter a world where they won't be loved? It is, however, utterly false.
Many women who undergo abortions do not really want to. In a 2004 study, 64% of post-aborted women said they were forced into it. In another study, 83% of post-aborted women reported that they would have kept the child if they had received support from other important people in their lives. This means that a very large percentage of aborted children are wanted.
Further, one million married couples per year wish to adopt in the United States but cannot, due to the long and difficult process of adoption. It is paperwork and time and expense, not lack of love, which prevents "unwanted" children from entering the arms of a loving family. Simply put, no child is unwanted.
In a grotesquely ironic way, abortion threatens a woman's "wanted" children she will conceive later in her life. Dr. David Reardon reports that "40 to 50% of all aborted women will suffer later reproductive problems". These problems include ectopic pregnancies (a life-threatening situation wherein the baby implants in the fallopian tube), miscarriage, premature birth, and complications during labor. Reardon estimates that "for every 100,000 pregnancies undertaken by previously aborted women, over 11,000 wanted babies will die as a direct result of latent abortion morbidity" (morbidity means complications from a medical procedure).
Every child is a wanted child. May Swaziland never allow the anti-woman and anti-child abortion thinking to take hold. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.************************************Subject: Every Child a Wanted Child II
"Every child a wanted child" goes the saying. The clincher is always left off: "and unwanted children should be aborted".
Recently this space addressed this adage and found that no child is unwanted. We also found that abortion makes it physically harder for mothers to give birth to later, "wanted" children. Doctor David Reardon estimates that "for every 100,000 pregnancies undertaken by previously aborted women, over 11,000 wanted babies will die as a direct result of latent abortion morbidity" (morbidity means complications from a medical procedure).
Abortion also damages a woman's ability to connect happily with later children, sometimes even leading to the tragedy of child abuse. Dr. Philip Ney, a veteran researcher of abortion's aftereffects, said in 1983 "You used to hear, ‘There should be abortions, because we don't want unwanted children.' You don't hear that any more. I think we've pretty well nailed the lid on the coffin of that silly thing. There is absolutely no evidence that abortion provided virtually on demand has done anything to improve the rate of child abuse and neglect. The best evidence shows that it increases the rate of child abuse and neglect."
Some women who have had abortions are devoted, loving mothers. Some of these report that they are troubled by unwanted thoughts such as fears that God will make something bad happen to their children, or disturbing thoughts about hurting or killing their beloved children. Women who have had abortions have higher rates of clinical depression, drug and alcohol abuse, and suicide and psychiatric problems than similar women who have not had abortions. Naturally these problems affect the other children of these women.
Abortion advocates would have us believe that abortion helps women. In fact, abortion physically and emotionally harms women, kills children, and threatens the relationship between a woman and later children she bears. Mothers and children deserve our love and support, not the death and abuse abortion brings. May Swaziland respect life at every age and stage. May Swaziland build a culture of life.**********************************************Subject: Abortion and Ectopic PregnancyUsually, a mother's egg is fertilized in her fallopian tube and the new little person travels to and implants in the uterus. What is an ectopic pregnancy? An ectopic pregnancy occurs when a newly-conceived person lodges in the fallopian tube of his or her mother. This is a life-threatening situation, because the fallopian tube is not made to carry the small life. If the baby continues to grow in this location, the fallopian tube will burst; the child will surely die, and only emergency surgery will save the life of the mother.
Sadly, abortion can cause later ectopic pregnancies. If the abortionist scrapes too near the mother's fallopian tube during an abortion, scar tissue develops around the opening of the tube into the uterus. This scar tissue may leave enough space for a sperm to enter and fertilize an egg, but not enough space for the new human life to pass into the uterus.
A 1995 study in the United States found that the number of ectopic pregnancies was 4.8 per 1,000 live births in 1970, three years before the national legalization of abortion. In 1980 it was 14.5 per 1,000 live births. By 1992 the number was 19.7 per 1,000 live births, and 29 women died of the condition.
Women deserve protection and care; abortion delivers neither, and in fact endangers their lives. May Swaziland never let abortion sink its murderous claws into Swazi women and children. May Swaziland build a culture of love and life.*********************************Subject: Handicapped People and Abortion
Around the world, popular support for abortion is limited to three cases: if abortion is going to save the life of the mother, in the case of rape or incest, or if the child is expected to have a serious deformity. Today, let us address the issue of deformity of the child.
It seems natural that aborting a child who will have a handicap is the compassionate thing to do. After all, the reasoning goes, wouldn't be unkind to let a child live who will experience a lifetime of suffering?
The answer, according to those handicapped people, is a strong "No!" A random survey of children with an inherited spinal handicap were asked, later in life, if it would have been better if they had been left to die after their birth. They all said they were glad to be alive, stating they found the question ridiculous.
Dr. C. Everett Koop, former Surgeon General of the United States, was a child doctor for years before his appointment to the federal government. He did surgeries on children to correct inherited physical problems. Some of these children had to undergo more than two dozen surgeries to correct their problems. At a reunion with these young people, Koop asked them if they thought the surgeries were worth all the trouble and pain in order to correct the problems. All of them said they were.
Moreover, parents who abort a child whom they believe has a handicap suffer for their decision. A 1975 study found that 92% of mothers and 82% of fathers suffered depression after the abortion of a child they had been told was handicapped. 30% of marriages of parents who aborted a child with a suspected handicap ended in divorce.
The handicapped and disabled want to live. They do not fear the hardships their lives might bring. For those parents who are not ready to accept the care for a handicapped baby, groups exist in many countries to connect these parents with other couples who will gladly adopt a handicapped child.
Dr. Jerome Jejune, the man who discovered the cause of Down syndrome, relates an account his colleague told:"Many years ago, my father was a Jewish physician in Braunau, Austria. On one particular day, two babies had been delivered by one of his colleagues. One was a fine, healthy boy with a strong cry. His parents were extremely proud and happy. The other was a little girl, but her parents were extremely sad, for she was a Mongoloid [Down syndrome] baby. I followed them both for almost 50 years. The girl grew up, living at home, and was finally destined to be the one who nursed her mother through a very long and lingering illness after her stroke. I do not remember her name. I do, however, remember the boy's name. He died in a bunker in Berlin. His name was Adolf Hitler".
People want to live. Let us respect the lives of all people, from conception to natural death. Let us build a culture of love and life.********************************************
Subject: The Message of Christmas
At this time of year we remember the birth of our Saviour Jesus Christ. Sometimes we forget, however, the circumstances of Mary's pregnancy. Mary was an unwed virgin; the angel Gabriel came and told her that God wanted her to carry the Son of God. Mary agreed, and the fully-divine Jesus Christ became, by a special grace, fully human in Mary's womb.
Joseph, Mary's soon-to-be-but-not-yet husband, was no idiot. He knew full well how babies got started. He reached the obvious conclusion, and decided to quietly call off the wedding. God then gave him special information that this child had a special origin, and that he should not be afraid to take Mary as his wife.
Both Joseph and Mary risked insults and humiliation due to the circumstances of Mary's motherhood, yet both obeyed and trusted God. Thanks to their trust that this human life, regardless of its origin, was sacred and should be respected, Jesus was able to carry out His life and mission. Jesus succeeded in His mission, and the gates of Heaven are now opened to those who will trust and follow Him.
Billions of people live better and more fulfilling lives because of Jesus Christ. We can be glad that Joseph and Mary welcomed, protected, and later nurtured the baby who began in Mary's womb. We can be glad that they stood firm and let this unborn child get born. May we build the kind of love, trust, and support between married couples that we see between Mary and Joseph. May we too protect and nurture every human life. May we carry this message of Christmas throughout every year.
Merry Christmas
***************************Subject: Barack Obama and My Sleeping ChildrenOn Christmas Eve in America, the US Senate passed a health care reform bill. This bill would use federal dollars to help pay for abortions. In November, the US House of Representatives also passed a health care reform bill. The House bill, unlike the Senate version, explicitly bans tax money from being used for abortions. Because the bills do not agree on the government paying for abortions, a final version must be composed and sent to Obama for signing. An Obama spokesman recently said Obama prefers the Senate version of the bill.
The Alan Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion research body, reports that the number of abortions go up by 30% when the government helps pay for them. Former abortion clinic manager Abby Johnson recently reported that after a 2008 donation of $23 million to pay for the abortions of low-income women, the number of abortions rose so dramatically that the Guttmacher Institute concluded the abortion clinics weren't keeping good records.
Barack Obama has fought hard to keep federal funding for abortion in his health care reform plan. The obvious question is, Why? Why does he support a procedure that damages women and kills America's future? Why does he want the government to pay for abortion when doing so will increase the rate of injury and killing?
The night I learned of the imminent passage of the pro-abortion Senate bill, I stood looking at two of my sleeping daughters. And I reflected that if Barack Obama gets to sign his preferred pro-abortion bill into law, thousands of mothers will be robbed of the kind of joy I get when I gaze at my growing, lovely girls. Thousands of dads will never have their children bring them candy canes in a box they decorated themselves (as I recently did). Thousands of moms will never hear a son enthusiastically shouting "Watch me mommy!" as he runs back and forth across the living room. Instead, should Obama sign his preferred health care bill into law, these mothers will suffer scarred bodies and unerasable memories of pain and regret over killing the very children they helped conceive. Anyone wanting evidence of abortion's harm to women should e-mail me, and I'll provide lots of information.
Obama is out of the mainstream of American thought on abortion. A recent poll discovered a whopping 72% of Americans disapprove of government dollars paying for abortions. Another recent poll by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal newspaper found that only 32% of Americans support Obama's government health-insurance takeover.
Obama's promotion of a government-run, abortion-providing health care plan is as absurd as it is lethal. First, abortion is not health care; after all, what form of "medicine" deliberately kills patients? Second, the overwhelming majority of Americans do not even want such a lethal program; Obama is rapidly destroying the phenomenal popularity he enjoyed just after his election.
If Obama gets to make his preferred bill the law of the land, thousands and possibly millions of more women will be injured and the same number of babies will die.
Fortunately, many Americans recognize (as Obama clearly does not) the harm abortion does to women and children. These good-hearted Americans are working now to keep a pro-death health care bill from reaching Obama's desk. These charitable people will continue to work for the protection of women and children from abortion, in whatever guise it appears.
Barack Obama's favoured health care reform bill is no cause for rejoicing. Should he get to sign his preferred bill, the United States will move farther down a road of self-inflicted death and injury. May Swaziland learn a lesson from America and avoid this destructive road entirely. May Swaziland say yes to life and no to abortion. May Swaziland build a culture of life.
***************************Subject: Abortion and Suicide
Medical doctor Bernard Nathanson worked hard to legalize abortion in New York, USA in the late 1960s. Before 1973, the year abortion legalized for any reason, doctors had to submit serious reasons for performing the procedure on a woman. Nathanson found that saying a woman might commit suicide if she didn't have the abortion often did the trick. From Nathanson's book Aborting America:
"The Psychiatric Harlequinade of 1969 began, and the script-unvarying and, after a few months, boring-went something like this:
'Doctor, are you sure I'm pregnant?''No question about it.''I simply can't have this baby. I (a) am not married, (b) don't have the money, (c) can't disgrace my parents, (d) can't have my husband find out, (e) am not ready to be a mother.''Well, if you're really desperate about this, to the point of suicide or something, then if you were to see a couple of psychiatrists who would attest to that, we could terminate this pregnancy for you.''Oh yes,-anything. Whom shall I see and how soon can I see them?'"
Nathanson reports that it became very easy to get abortions approved on the "suicidal" ground, and that this technique was used until the state of New York legalized abortion more generally.
Ironically, however, abortion drastically increases the chance of a woman committing suicide. A 1996 study in the British Medical Journal reported that "the [suicide] rate for women following a live birth was 5.9 per 100,000; following miscarriage, 18.1; following abortion, 34.7". Another study [1985] found that suicide attempts among teenagers went up 6 to 10 times among girls who had undergone abortions. In contrast to this, the authors of a study covering 10 years (1987 to 1997) and 600,000 women concluded that "childbearing prevents suicide". After summarizing the results of five studies which showed suicide is rare among pregnant women, medical doctor John Willke concluded "The fetus in utero must be a protective mechanism."
Abortion frequently injures women, sometimes to the point of death. Abortion always kills a child. Women and children deserve better than abortion. May Swaziland build a culture where women and children are protected and valued. May Swaziland build a culture of life.