What is meant by ‘organic farming’? L.W., Toronto
This is a development which some scientists see as a part of the ‘Brave New World.’
It is suggested that human beings could be developed for their ‘spare parts’. Women would be paid to have babies which would be aborted in order that they be cannibalized when doctors ‘harvested’ their organs—heart, liver, pancreas, etc. for their patients.
At the present time, in some places, abortions are being closely timed and performed so that the baby’s living brain cells can be implanted in patients suffering from Parkinson’s Disease. This happened in 1990 in Canada. (But see “USA Update” in The Interim, January 1990, and “Fetal cells transfer proves disappointing” in this issue)
Does it do any good to boycott companies that fund abortions? A.L., Sarnia, Ontario.
If the boycott is well organized, and pro-lifers write or phone the company, it can be very effective. Some years ago Campaign Life Coalition stopped the pro-abortion bias in Homemaker’s magazine by a boycott of its advertisers. This boycott worked.
In March 1990, the giant telecommunications company AT&T withdrew support from Planned Parenthood because of pro-life pressure. The 3-M Foundation in Minnesota refuses to fund pro-abortion. Otherwise, “we’re going to be in trouble with 50 per cent of the people who are important to us,” said a company spokesman.
A recent article in the business section of the Globe and Mail said that is a “treacherous economy” companies are “less willing to risk controversy.” The downturn in the economy has its uses; companies will be afraid to lose their share of the market.
Pro-lifers should watch The Interim, Vitality and their own regional pro-life newsletters for information on companies that subsidize the abortion industry (with the customer’s money), then write or phone to protest. If the company does not respond, take your business elsewhere.
I was told that a handicapped child has a shorter life expectancy today than a generation ago. Can this be true? C.W., Newmarket, Ontario.
Dr. Jerome Lejeune said recently that 30 years ago an unborn child with Down’s Syndrome had a better chance of reaching 10 years that it would have today, and this despite all modern achievements in cardiac surgery and means of fighting infection. The same holds true for children with other disabilities such as spina bifida.
Today, in order to have a chance of being ten years old, a ‘less-than-perfect’ baby has to survive many hazards: pre-natal screening, followed by abortion; denial of life-saving surgery; denial of food and water; and infanticide.
The bitter irony is that there are many other doctors with a philosophy of ‘fight the disease and love the disabled’, who have developed a whole range of therapies whih enable most disabled children to become happy and useful human beings and citizens.
A handicapped child who actually reaches the age of ten years has a longer life-expectancy than a generation ago.
Why do Campaign Life Coalition and other Right to Life groups object to being called ‘anti-abortion’. They are anti-abortion, M.D., Toronto, Ontario.
It is true that they are anti-abortion. But abortion is not the only issue. Human life is also under attack in euthanasia, infanticide, refusal to perform surgery on the handicapped, and in embryo experimentation. If abortion were completely outlawed tomorrow, the pro-life struggle would not be over. For pro-life groups across the world the aim is to protect all innocent human life, however, fragile or damaged, before and after birth.
Anti-abortion is, therefore, a limited concept of the pro-life work. Abortion alerted us to the threats of life, and it has led us inevitably to oppose infanticide and euthanasia. To be pro-life is to see life as a gift from God, to be protected and cherished—not be discarded as of no value.
