Hillary: “Deep-seated … religious beliefs” have to be changed for abortion

Who is John Galt on April 24, 2015 at 5:23 PM

Take out the statement about a midwife, and the rest is true. 100 years ago midwives would have washed their hands. Doctors were another story.

Ignaz Semmelweis was a great Hungarian doctor of the early to mid 1800’s to whom many mothers owe their lives because he made doctors wash their hands. He worked in two maternity clinics in Vienna; doctors worked in one clinic, and midwives worked in the other one. The first had a higher maternal mortality rate due to puerperal fever (childbed fever). The second clinic in which the midwives worked was crowded, yet far more mothers survived.

In a post mortem exam of a male friend Semmelweis observed a similar pathology with victims of puerperal fever, and concluded that “cadaver particles” were being transferred to mothers because doctors and medical students went straight from doing autopsies to delivering babies without washing their hands.

He preceded Pasteur and Lister, and had no germ and bacteria theory to explain and prove why hands should be washed, but for the fact that once doctors did so, maternal mortality dropped drastically.

He was met with derision and indifference, and was only fully vindicated by his death.

The so-called Semmelweis reflex — a metaphor for a certain type of human behaviour characterized by reflex-like rejection of new knowledge because it contradicts entrenched norms, beliefs or paradigms — is named after Semmelweis, whose perfectly reasonable hand washing suggestions were ridiculed and rejected by his contemporaries.

Let me also add that it is my personal opinion as a woman and a mother that midwives of the time, because they, themselves, were women and in all probability mothers, would have learned and done everything they could to save the lives of other women. They would have sacrificed their egos to save lives.

INC on April 24, 2015 at 5:51 PM

A Warning from Canada: Same-Sex Marriage Erodes Fundamental Rights
by Dawn Stefanowicz

…In Canada, freedoms of speech, press, religion, and association have suffered greatly due to government pressure. The debate over same-sex marriage that is taking place in the United States could not legally exist in Canada today. Because of legal restrictions on speech, if you say or write anything considered “homophobic” (including, by definition, anything questioning same-sex marriage), you could face discipline, termination of employment, or prosecution by the government….

Over and over, we are told that “permitting same-sex couples access to the designation of marriage will not deprive anyone of any rights.” That is a lie.

When same-sex marriage was legalized in Canada in 2005, parenting was immediately redefined. Canada’s gay marriage law, Bill C-38, included a provision to erase the term “natural parent” and replace it across the board with gender-neutral “legal parent” in federal law. Now all children only have “legal parents,” as defined by the state. By legally erasing biological parenthood in this way, the state ignores children’s foremost right: their immutable, intrinsic yearning to know and be raised by their own biological parents….

In Canada, it is considered discriminatory to say that marriage is between a man and a woman or that every child should know and be raised by his or her biological married parents. It is not just politically incorrect in Canada to say so; you can be saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, fined, and forced to take sensitivity training.

Anyone who is offended by something you have said or written can make a complaint to the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals. In Canada, these organizations police speech, penalizing citizens for any expression deemed in opposition to particular sexual behaviors or protected groups identified under “sexual orientation.” It takes only one complaint against a person to be brought before the tribunal, costing the defendant tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. The commissions have the power to enter private residences and remove all items pertinent to their investigations, checking for hate speech.

If your beliefs, values, and political opinions are different from the state’s, you risk losing your professional license, job, or business, and even your children….

Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian citizens were supposed to have been guaranteed: (1) freedom of conscience and religion; (2) freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (3) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (4) freedom of association. In reality, all of these freedoms have been curtailed with the legalization of same-sex marriage.…

Americans need to prepare for the same sort of surveillance-society in America if the Supreme Court rules to ban marriage as a male-female institution. It means that no matter what you believe, the government will be free to regulate your speech, your writing, your associations, and whether or not you may express your conscience. Americans also need to understand that the endgame for some in the LGBT rights movement involves centralized state power—and the end of First Amendment freedoms.

INC on April 24, 2015 at 6:10 PM