“Our once great western Christian civilization is dying. If this matters to followers of Jesus Christ, then we must set aside our denominational differences and work together to strengthen the things that remain and reclaim what has been lost. Evangelicals and Catholics must stand together to re-establish that former Christian culture and moral consensus. We have the numbers and the organization but the question is this: Do we have the will to win this present spiritual battle for Jesus Christ against secularism? Will we prayerfully and cooperatively work toward a new Christian spiritual revival ― or will we choose to hunker down in our churches and denominationalisms and watch everything sink into the spiritual and moral abyss of a New Dark Age?” - Mark Davis Pickup

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

A CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE ON EUTHANASIA

For people in the Edmonton area: See below for my next presentation. If you would like to arrange for me to speak at your parish Life issues event, Catholic conference or pro-life event in Canada or the United States, contact me at HumanLifeMatters@shaw.ca 
Mark 
(Venues must be wheelchair accessible.)


Monday, October 16, 2017

WHO IS THE MOST PRO-LIFE PRESIDENT?

By Brad Mattes
President
Life Issues Institute
Cincinnati, OH




Ronald Reagan is often touted as America’s pro-life president. The man and his legacy are revered by many in the nation. Pro-life candidates have often compared their political philosophy to that of the “Great Communicator.”
Ronald Reagan
As beloved as President Reagan is, his legacy regarding unborn babies has been In spite of the great enthusiasm many of us have for the “Gipper,” another president has exceeded Reagan’s presidential accomplishments for America’s unborn babies.Those who know me well are aware of my passion for all things Reagan. I have over 50 books on him, his family and his administration. My wife and I have made several “pilgrimages” to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA. I even have a bust of Ronald Reagan in my office, having gotten the idea from then-Congressman Mike Pence who I interviewed for our TV program, Facing Life Head-On called Pro-Life Superstars. He had one in his office that was strategically placed between us during the interview.
.
President Donald Trump has already done more to protect preborn children during his approximate eight months in office than President Reagan did in eight years.
Ronald Reagan is credited with elevating the credibility and legitimacy of the pro-life movement during the 1980s, which was instrumental to our successes today.
He was the first sitting president to write a book while in office, and the title was Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation. He was also the first president to address, by phone, the annual March for Life in Washington, DC.
Sadly, it was President Reagan who nominated Sandra Day O’Connor to the U.S. Supreme Court in the face of evidence that she was pro-abortion. Justice O’Connor proved true to her reputation while serving on the Court.
Just three days after taking office, the President didn’t merely reinstate the Mexico City Policy, he widely expanded it. This new policy ensures that our tax dollars are protected from funding the abortion industry overseas across all global health spending, not just family planning. The Bush-era Mexico City Policy protected roughly $500 million in spending. The new Trump policy prevents over $8.8 billion overseas aide from funding abortion.In the relatively short time that Mr. Trump has been in office, he has not only honored his commitments to America’s unborn babies — he has exceeded them!
The President fulfilled another campaign pledge by defunding the United Nations Population Fund, which has long been complicit in China’s brutal population control activities, including limiting births and forced abortions. President Trump’s State Department prevented about $33 million per year from going to the UNFPA.
The President signed a law permitting states to defund Planned Parenthood of Title X funding. It reverses an Obama-era rule that disbarred states from doing so. Because this was passed using the Congressional Review Act, future administrations cannot enact a similar rule to Obama’s.
The departments of HHS, Treasury and Labor issued two interim final rules, which means they took effect immediately, that provide permanent, enforceable relief from the previous HHS mandate for both religious objectors, such as Little Sisters of the Poor, and moral objectors, such as Life Issues Institute. The new rule also exempts private employers and educational institutions that have sincerely held religious beliefs or moral objections against providing abortifacient drugs.President Trump has honored his campaign pledge to appoint pro-life, constitutional judges. 
While US Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has yet to prove his muster, all indications are that he is a younger version of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. In addition, four Trump judicial nominees have been confirmed to the US Court of Appeals and two have been confirmed to the district court. There are 50 more nominees (13 for Appeals, 37 for District) that are moving through the Senate.
Candidate Donald Trump may not have been your first choice in the presidential primary, and as president, his bombastic approach at times may be an affront to your sensibilities, but he has done an outstanding job advocating for our most vulnerable citizens — unborn babies.
A few short years ago, few among us imagined that Donald Trump would be the avenue for such positive and dramatic change for our nation. But regardless of our personal feelings about the man, he has stepped up to the plate and hit these balls out of the park.

Thursday, October 12, 2017

BRINGING HOPE THROUGH MUSIC

"I'm a firm believer of the impact of beauty on culture. You give a culture beauty and people look at life through the eyes of hope and goodness." -- Eric Genuis

The last post featured Eric Genuis. Here's more about his vital music ministry.


ERIC GENUIS: SERVANT OF GOD AND PEOPLE, THROUGH MUSIC

I would like to introduce you to my friend Eric Genuis: musician, pianist, composer and inspirational speaker. He combines his music and heart to serve God and humanity. He knows pain and joy. Through the universal language of music and the magic of his words, Eric touches audiences and bears witness to power of love and the redemptive qualities of hope, grace and forgiveness -- for others and ourselves. I highly recommend the genius of Eric Genuis for any forum. His wisdom and music are bound to bless. Click the video below to see Eric's TED Talk at a prison. 

[Contact Eric Genuis for your next community, church or concert event https://www.ericgenuis.com/contact]

"I was in prison and you came to visited me." -- Jesus 
(Matthew 25.36)




Wednesday, October 11, 2017

CANADA'S EUTHANASIA SAVES MILLIONS (DOLLARS NOT PEOPLE)

Kevin Dunn, documentary film maker
 on location
Prolific Canadian documentary film maker Keven Dunn has embarked upon his latest production FATAL FLAWS.  In conjunction with the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, Mr. Dunn explores, amongst other things, the short step from physician assisted suicide to euthanasia.[1] This is exactly what is happening in Canada in the 14 months since physician assisted suicide became legal. 

Jocelyn Downie
professor of law and
medicine, Dalhousie
University
What is the difference between physician assisted suicide and euthanasia? A vociferous advocate for legalizing physician assisted suicide was Jocelyn Downie, professor of law and medicine at Canada's Dalhousie University.  I will use the explanation of the difference between assisted suicide and euthanasia given by the Dalhousie's Health Law Institute, of which Downie is a member:

"Assisted suicide and euthanasia are different.  Assisted suicide is providing another with the knowledge or means to intentionally end his or her own life; euthanasia is deliberate action undertaken by one person with the intention of ending the life of another person to relieve that person’s suffering where that act is the cause of death.  An example of assisted suicide is a physician who prescribes barbiturates to a patient with advanced ALS who uses the drugs to kill herself.  An example of euthanasia is a physician who administers a combination of a sedative, a barbiturate, and a neuromuscular block to a man suffering from advanced spinal muscular atrophy with the intention of ending his life in order to relieve the pain and suffering caused by his condition where the barbiturates cause death."[2]

More than 2,000 Canadians have died with medical assistance since 2015 (including Quebec).[3] Cancer represented 64% of assisted suicides, followed by circulatory/respiratory and neurodegenerative diseases of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and multiple sclerosis (MS).[4]

How did the numbers break down? From June 17 - December 31, 2016, 507 people received medical assisted death, of which 503 were administered by doctors or nurse practitioners. Only 4 were self-administered suicides.  From January 1st - June 30th 2017 there were 875 medically assisted deaths of which 874 were administered by a physician or nurse. One was self administered suicideOf the 1,482 assisted death for the year, only 5 were self-administered suicides (0.0033%). In practice (according to the Dalhousie university's definition), what Canada legalized in 2016 was not assisted suicide, it legalized euthanasia by another name. 

What makes things worse is that pressures are starting to mount on sick and disabled people -- or their families -- to sign DNR orders or agree to euthanasia, and ideally organ donation.[5] Why might that be? There a number of reasons:
  • There is a shortage of organs for transplantation.
  • Up-to-date palliative care is an area of specialty in which many family doctors are not particularly skilled. 
  • The last six months of life can be very expensive whereas euthanasia is cheap. 
  •  Some people with disabilities can be difficult, peevish and bothersome patients. They may require frequent and expensive hospitalization. Many do not get better.
  • Hospitals and nursing homes are overcrowded and care for the sick is so expensive.
Could it be mere coincidence that 6 months after medical assisted
Drs Manns & Trachtenburg
death was legalized in Canada a study came out of the University of Calgary and published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal heralding the cost savings of killing dying patients? Drs Aaron Trachtenburg and Braden Manns proclaimed it could save up to $139-million annually! Of course, they took pains to state they were not suggesting people be euthanized to save money. The illustrious doctors noted that "as death approaches, health care costs increase dramatically in the final months. Patients who choose medical assistance in dying may forego this resource-intensive period."
[6] (How considerate of patients.) 

American journalist, cynic and cultural critic H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) once said, "When somebody says it's not about the money, it's about the money." Why would anybody conduct, write and publish such a study if it was not about the money? 

The medical killing net is sure to be cast ever wider to be more "inclusive" (as progressives will be sure to champion). Anybody with an incurable, degenerative disease or disability has every right to fear hospitals or nursing homes -- and even their own future (or lack of one). It's hard to get any rest with a parking meter ticking so loudly at the end of the bed. 

My point is this: People like me cost too much and benevolence can quickly turn to malevolence. We need care and do not contribute to the nation's GDP. I fear that eventually we will be considered what was once referred to as useless eaters or lebensunwertes leben (Life unworthy of life). Eventually some doctor, health care budget administrator
or government policy will surely decide we've over-stayed our welcome and our organs will be worth more than we are worth.

MDP

___________________________
Notes
[1]  https://fatalflawsfilm.com/
[2] End-of-Life Law and Policy in Canada, Health Law Institute, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. http://eol.law.dal.ca/?page_id=238
[3] Kathleen Harris, "More than 2,000 Canadians with medical assistance since legalization: Cancer neurodegenerative disorders and circulatory or respiratory failures drive most requests." CBC News online http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/medical-assistance-death-figures-1.4344267
[4] 2nd Interim Report on MEDICAL ASSISTANCE IN DYING IN CANADA, Department of Health, Government of Canada, https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/health-system-services/medical-assistance-dying-interim-report-sep-2017.html
[5] Sharon Kirkey, "Doctors harvesting organs from Canadian patients who underwent medical assisted death, National Post, 20 March 2017. (http://nationalpost.com/health/doctors-harvesting-organs-from-canadian-patients-who-underwent-medically-assisted-death)
[6]Sharon Kirkey, "Doctor-assisted suicide could save Canada up to $139 million each year, Alberta study suggests", National Post, 23 January 2017. http://nationalpost.com/news/0124-na-assisted-dying

Monday, October 9, 2017

CRUELTIES AND DISABILITY

For most of my adult life I've been scaring friendship away with incurable sickness and disability of aggressive multiple sclerosis (MS). In my early days with MS, old friends stayed away in droves. 
Charlie Chaplin

I was a young man being forced to use a cane and it was hard. It seemed out of place to me and to others. Canes were for old people with
bad hips or a silly little man with a moustache and black bowler hat in the era of silent movies. He may have been funny but the reality was that people laughed, from comfortable seats in theatres, at the comedic misfit. The difference between Charlie Chaplin and me was that he twirled his cane and I hobbled on mine.

As my disease progressed, I had to resort to two canes. My body contorted with spasticity and it frightened people. The sight of a young man on two canes seemed to remind them that they too were mortals. Children stared from behind clothes racks at shopping malls. Their parents scolded them not stare at "that man" -- then discreetly stared themselves from the end of the aisle.

Later, with metal crutches, the sight of me took on a sideshow quality. People stared out of pity. They were friendly enough but passed by quickly.

During remissions when physical function returned, I was invited into new friendships until the next attack. My social calendar became blank again. Don't get me wrong, new friends were not unkind, just hard to find.

When I started using a mobility scooter, people began taking liberties with jokes about my disability to ease their own discomfort. 

"Got a licence to drive that thing?"  
"Don't get any speeding tickets."
"Hey look! Here comes speedy Gonzales"

Oh, if I had a dollar for every time I heard those rib-ticklers! The jokes may have eased other peoples' unease with my disability but they made my heart ache. The problem was that it was my legs that did not work right. It was a source of pain and grief to me. Strangers and acquaintances should not have thought they could make jokes at something that was breaking my heart. I did not find jokes amusing about my disability or the tools I was forced to use. I still don't. It was as inappropriate as if they were to joke about somebody's poor vision by saying, "Hey, have you tried to start any fires with those coke-bottle glasses?"

There are people who can take liberties with my disability but they are not strangers on the street or acquaintances in cafes, stores or church foyers. People who could take such liberties are a few loved-ones who have been with me throughout my suffering; if anyone has earned the right to make smart-cracks about my disability, it is them. Yet, they do not. They witnessed the anguish and the tears throughout the years that took me through each loss of function.

Now, in advanced disability, the jokes have diminished along with meaningful human contact. I have learnt to turn isolation into solitude. There is one constant that has remained with me throughout every phase of disease and disability and the smarting of ill-placed jokes and sparks of loneliness: God has been with me. 

After the last page of each book closes and the music dies away and the snickers all cease, it is Christ who comforts and consoles me. He will do the same for you if you allow Him when your heart is breaking. So let me end this post with words and music that start Charlie Chaplin's song:  Smile, though your heart is aching.

[click below]





Thursday, October 5, 2017

CHOOSE LOVE


I came across an entry in a diary I wrote many years ago when I was threatened with quadriplegia from multiple sclerosis. It was a time of I radical and risky therapy at the University of Alberta Hospital (Canada), to try and stem where the disease seemed to be going. I spent much time in my room contemplating my situation and what really matters. It was a frightening time but Christ was with me.  That entry is below. 
_________________

I knew a woman who was afraid to leave her house. Her name was Valerie.
She was consumed by all sorts of anxieties about what might happen if she stepped outside her door. A truck or bus might run her down if she tried to cross a street.  She might be accosted by a stranger. Yes, Valerie was so paralyzed with a fear of dying that she stopped living -- choosing to be a prisoner in her own home.  


I know a man who is afraid to fall in love for fear of what it might require of him. His name is John. He grew up in a home bereft of affection and coldly predictable. In a heartless sort of way, John was safe.  Now in adulthood, John keeps up a facade of superficial but aloof cordiality to scare away all possibilities of romance or commitments of love. John has sexual desires but lust is not love.  Lust consumes while love embraces. John's fears what love might be required of him and so he keeps his heart in check. He is emotionally paralyzed. 

Paralysis takes many forms. Mine is physical. It creeps slowly,
taking away physical function, bit by bit. Despite a life of slowly advancing physical disability, an electric wheelchair, and the deteriorating physical health, I consider my paralysis much less of a handicap than the emotional and spiritual paralysis Valerie and John suffer from. They are more handicapped than me.  One is afraid to live while the other is afraid to love. I am afraid of neither: Life and love both involve an element of risk but also holds a promise of great rewards. Being engaged with the living experience and being committed to love (human and divine) are indispensable to human growth. They are at the center of human growth! Love makes our time on earth worth while. Neither life nor love require legs that work.

There is so little in my world I can control. I can, however, decide to live my life in whatever state I find myself following a road of love.  I choose to love. The option is to live a compromised life or an existence without love. No! I choose to live and to live my life to the fullest; that is only possible immersed in love. I choose to go outside my house and enjoy the fresh air and the warm sun. I choose to love. Whether love is returned, in any human context, is beyond my control. I am loved by God and He is the author of life and love.

In his Messianic prophecy Isaiah wrote:

"The spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because the Lord has anointed me;
He send me to bring glad tidings to the lowly,
to heal the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives
and release to the prisoners,
To announce a year of favour from the Lord 
and a day of vindication by our God,
to comfort all who mourn." (Isaiah 61.1-2)

Christ read this passage and claimed it to himself (Luke 4.17-21). He came to set captives free. Christ is Truth (John 14.6) and the Truth sets humanity free (John 8.32). Valerie did not need to live in fear and nor does John. Abundant life is available to all in Christ.

MDP