Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

Charlie was posed with his British passport

The parents of Charlie Gard are begging British Prime Minister Theresa May to make good on her statement to Parliament that she was confident the hospital which is determined to remove Charlie’s life support “always will consider any offers or new information that has come forward with consideration of the well-being of a desperately ill child.”

UPDATE: in a great turn of events,  British High Court to hear “fresh evidence” in Charlie Gard case

In the UK Mail, Connie Yates and Chris Gard assert that five world specialists have recommended their baby receive the experimental treatment they have long sought.

This is in stark contrast to the official opinion of London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) that Charlie cannot be helped and attempts to do so could harm him.

UK Prime Minister May

Connie told reporters she has sent a letter to Prime Minister May pointing out evidence in favor of the experimental treatment that is not part of the court record. She is hoping that the Prime Minister will use it in her private meeting with President Donald Trump scheduled today during the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany.

Also early Friday comes news of two developments– born of urgency and desperation– designed to help block the imminent death of Charlie.

In February Connie and Chris originally sought a court order to compel GOSH to release their son, who suffers from Mitochondrial Depletion Syndrome (MDS), a debilitating chromosomal condition. They intended to travel with him to the U.S. for “nucleoside bypass” treatment, but were rejected in every court.

As Charlie’s plight became more desperate and more public, Pope Francis and President Donald Trump have offered to help in any way possible. Today’s developments, which began earlier, involve (1) two American hospitals and (2) the Vatican.

The first development People magazine reported, came from New York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center. They offered to admit Charlie for treatment onsite or, alternatively, to ship the experimental bypass medication with instructions to GOSH where Charlie has been a patient since October.

Speaking Friday to Good Morning Britain TV, Charlie’s mom Connie said a meeting with GOSH was set for 11 a.m. Friday to discuss possibly administering the experimental oral medication. She told the media that five doctors in Europe and the U.S. who specialize in MDS support that route, with about a 10% chance of it working for Charlie. She explained that 18 people have already benefited from it, with some experiencing “amazing responses, very quickly.”

Pope Francis

The second hopeful development for Charlie is possible Vatican issuance of a passport for him. The thought is that if Charlie is a citizen of the independent, sovereign state he would not be subject to the “death warrant” supported by the British and European courts.

The Sun quoted a highly placed Vatican source commenting that issuing citizenship to Charlie is “unprecedented” but if it allows current legal barriers to “be overcome, then so be it.”

The Pope has expressed a “personal interest in Charlie” and Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin says, “We are doing whatever we can.”

GOSH officials continue not to release any comment on the situation, attributing the silence to their duty to guard patient privacy.

PUBLIC OUTCRY, PRIVATE ANGUISH
Frantic calls to save Charlie from an unjust death continue to flood the Internet and inspire ongoing public events.

Yesterday, 40 Members of the European Parliament signed onto an open letter expressing their “full support” for Charlie and his parents. “We deem ourselves obliged to voice our deepest concerns about the outrageous outcome of Charlie’s case, which infringes Europe’s most fundamental values, particularly the right to life, the right to human dignity and personal integrity.”(See the full letter.)

Connie disclosed to the BBC that the Pope’s intervention earlier this week came after she wrote a letter to him.

Charlie’s parents find solace in hospital chapel

She said, “It does give us a hope definitely, because there was no hope left. Charlie was going to die on Friday and, you saw the video we did, we were absolutely devastated. We had no control over it, the way it was done. And then it was going to be on the Monday instead but I think the White House got involved over the weekend and then that changed things.”

Connie described to the ITV audience the “absolute living hell” of recent days, having expected their son to die last week. “You can’t even put it into words, how horrible it is that he’s our own flesh and blood and we don’t have a say in his life,” she said.

Thursday night, the couple released a photo of them in the hospital’s St Christopher’s Chapel — where they retreat when things “simply get too much to bear.”

On Good Morning Britain on Friday, Connie assured the public, “we are completely devoted to [Charlie] and he’s not in pain and suffering, and I promise everyone I would not sit there and watch my son in pain and suffering, I couldn’t do it.”

She then added: “Euthanasia is illegal. Suicide is illegal. How is this legal?”

Read Full Post »

Charlie & dad in hospital

After months of competing British headlines over the now international  battle to save baby Charlie Gard’s life, today’s UK Express  may clinch the title: “Donald Trump to roast Theresa May on the heartbreaking Charlie Gard situation’ at G20.”

The Express reports that President Trump has scheduled an hour long appointment with Prime Minister Theresa May on Friday, during the time that world leaders assemble for the G2- world summit in Hamburg, Germany.

Thomas Hunt reported, “Although the reasons for the meeting have not officially been disclosed, the insider suggested the hour–long meeting, which will occur during the G20 summit in Hamburg, will center on the desperately ill 11–month–old boy. The source added the US President is said to have ‘a very good understanding of the whole case’.”
 
The same White House source told the Daily Mail last night
“The President is deeply moved by the heartbreaking situation facing Charlie Gard and his parents. Although the President himself has not spoken to the family, members of the administration, assisted by British officials, have done so. As a father and grandfather, President Trump understands the limitless love one has for a child and he wishes to be helpful to Charlie Gard and his family, as does Pope Francis and millions of families worldwide….he is willing to provide assistance should they need any.”

Prime Minister May faces seemingly ironclad rulings from three UK Courts  (The High Court, Appeal Court, and Supreme Court) and the European Court of Human Rights,  all sanctioning the removal of Charlie’s life support. It would appear they have not given her any wriggle-room when they insist Charlie’s “best interests” dictate he must die at the hospital.  Now.

His parents vehemently disagree and refuse to give up. Chris Gard and Connie Yates have waged a relentless battle against institutional power. Eleven-month-old Charlie has a rare and debilitating chromosomal condition in which his cells cannot replenish essential energy. A natural compound, orally administered, has shown some success as a treatment in the United States.
Going viral: I am Charlie Gard

Going viral: I am Charlie Gard

GLOBAL SOLIDARITY FOR CHARLIE
Last week, after all courts opposed life for Charlie, his death seemed imminent.  A weak promise not to rush the process from the Great Ormond Street Hospital in London met with a tidal wave of global solidarity for Charlie’s parents, including viral posts of multi-language “I am Charlie Gard” arm bracelets.

Various public protests and peaceful demonstrations  are increasing. Tonight Liverpool city landmarks are decked out in blue lights for Charlie.

Responding to Charlie’s plight, Pope Francis and President Trump tweeted encouragement to the Gard family.  Connie Yates responded in return, “The support from the Pope and the President has given us hope. They are traditional men who believe in the family.”

Other nations are said to be lobbying on Charlie’s behalf. The Daily Mail’s Martin Robinson reported “Yesterday it emerged the White House has been phoning the family and also the office of Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt. And the international tug-of-love over Charlie intensified as Italy also urged Britain to help save him. The Italian Foreign Minister personally lobbied his counterpart Boris Johnson in a phone call between Rome and London.”

But Johnson rebuffed an offer from the Rome children’s hospital to have Charlie transferred there. Many Twitter users are urging President Trump to send his private plane to rescue Charlie. Get that baby on a jet and give him asylum!” said one.

And we know that the President reads tweets.

Read Full Post »

Charlie Gard’s parents, bedside, July 3”

In a Greek tragedy or Shakespearean play, a “Deus ex machina” ending is the resolution of a seemingly unresolvable situation with an unanticipated “intervention by the gods.”

In the tragic real life-and-death drama of baby Charlie Gard, facing court-supported withdrawal of hospital-administered life-support, surprising recent interventions via Twitter have been very welcome.

We can only hope that support from Pope Francis and President Trump can save Chris Gard’s and Connie Yates’s little boy from a hospital that insists he should “die with dignity.”

Eleven-month-old Charlie has a rare and debilitating chromosomal condition in which his cells cannot replenish essential energy. A natural compound, orally administered, has shown some success as a treatment in the United States. Chris and Connie have been working feverishly since January to get their son to the U.S. for that alternative treatment. Over their strenuous objections, however, they had faced the court-ordered death of their son this past weekend.

Pope Francis

But Pope Francis said on Twitter that “to defend human life, above all when it is wounded by illness, is a duty of love that God entrusts to all.” The Pontiff also tweeted that he prays for them [Charlie’s family], “hoping that their desire to accompany and care for their own child to the end is not ignored.”

President Donald Trump tweeted, “if we can help little #CharlieGard, as per our friends in the U.K. and the Pope, we would be delighted to do so.” The Washington Examiner reported this Monday from White House media affairs director, Helen Ferre:

“Although the president himself has not spoken to the family, he does not want to pressure them in any way, members of the administration have spoken to the family in calls facilitated by the British government.”

President Trump

Following the news of Vatican and American offers of support, a spokesman for the family said: “Chris and Connie are overwhelmed with emotion that President Trump and the Pope have spoken publicly of their support. Their kind words have given them so much comfort. They remain at Charlie’s bedside and his condition remains stable.”

BACKGROUND
Between April and June, rulings from the European Court of Human Rights, and three UK courts, supported the “futile care” assertion of the Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) that Charlie’s very “existence” there was “inhuman” and it was in his “best interests” that life-support be discontinued.

Orders to unplug his respirator and give only palliative care were actionable last Friday, but at press time Charlie is presumably still alive and the status of life-support unknown.

Months of public protests, petitions to UK officials and nearly $1.8 million in financial pledges have seemed ineffectual and unable to engage the concern of mainstream media to the bullying of Charlie’s parents.

That all changed when support for their plight came this weekend from the two of the most influential voices in the world.

In addition, on Tuesday, the UK Metro news revealed that both an unnamed hospital in the US and the Vatican’s Pediatric Hospital, Bambino Gesu, have offered to treat Charlie Gard for free in order to prevent Great Ormond Street Hospital from ending his life.

WHO DECIDES?
These high-profile developments have initiated more and more media attention to Charlie and the fundamental question of the inviolability of parental rights.

Arturo Estopinan with son treated for similar condition that Charlie Gard has

The Daily Mail reported on the debate over Charlie Gard held on Tuesdays’ Good Morning Britain TV show, featuring Arturo Estopinan, a Congressional aide from Baltimore.

Estopinan said his son would be dead now if they had lived in the UK. Arturino, Jr. was given two months to live in 2011 when he was immobile, except for movement of his eyes. Now six years later, after the U.S. oral treatment, he is “a happy boy” who “can move his hands, fingers, feet and arms.”

Estopinan and his wife Olga have become close friends of Chris and Connie since their son has a condition similar to Charlie’s and was aided by the same innovative oral medication sought for Charlie.

On the show, Estopinan was opposed by a British physician who asserted that “to extend Charlie’s life will create more suffering…sometimes real parental love is letting go.

Mr. Estopinan strongly objected, saying,

“What right do you have to play God?… sir, your position is 100% wrong…my son is a happy boy…on a ventilator five years…and much improved from his [immobile] condition.”

Also in solidarity with the Gard family is Terri Schiavo’s brother, Bobby Schindler, whose Life & Hope Foundation works to support the medically fragile. He said, “At issue is whether [Great Britain’s system of] universal healthcare means that bureaucrats and judges will determine appropriate treatment, or whether parents like Charlie’s with the energy, finances, and physicians to care for their child will be allowed to do so.”

Bioethics author Wesley J. Smith also strongly criticized the UK’s position against Charlie as “an act of bioethical aggression that will extend futile-care controversies, creating a duty to die at the time and place of doctors’ choosing. And that raises a crucial liberty question: Whose baby is Charlie Gard? His parents’? Or are sick babies— and others facing futile-care impositions— ultimately owned by the hospital and the state?”

Estopinan believes that President Trump’s offer has “saved” Charlie. It is yet to be seen, however, whether modern “deus ex machina” interventions can rescue Charlie from the UK government’s death grip.

Read Full Post »

Justice Stegall

“Kansas’ highest court appeared receptive Thursday to declaring for the first time that the state constitution recognizes abortion rights,”  wrote the Associated Press’s John Hanna Thursday.

Indeed, the questions from the majority of Kansas Supreme Court Justices hearing oral arguments in the most important pro-life case in Kansas history, seemed focused on how—not whether– an abortion right will be framed to support a lower court injunction on dismemberment abortions.

Only one Justice, Caleb Stegall, repeatedly probed the problems of the Court “discovering” new abortion protection that, in effect, gives constitutional rights to some groups and not others (the unborn).

SB 95, which Kansas enacted in 2015, is titled the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act. The measure prohibits abortions in which the fully-formed unborn child is torn apart with sharp metal tools, bit by bit, while still alive, inside her mother.

Unfortunately, the justices, the media, and those of us in the audience, never heard any description of an actual dismemberment abortion yesterday.

Instead, according to Janet Crepps, an abortion attorney for the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), women are the victims under SB 95. She told the justices that second-trimester non-dismemberment abortion methods were “experimental” and “painful” for women and an affront to their “privacy, autonomy, dignity and bodily integrity.”

Abortion atty,
Janet Crepps

And she said that with a straight face.

Solicitor General Stephen McAllister argued that abortion supporters want the Kansas Supreme Court to engage in a brand of judicial activism that ignored the text of the state’s constitution and the history of pro-life laws enacted in Kansas.

“If the people of Kansas want to create a constitutional right to abortion, they have a ready mechanism for doing so — the constitutional amendment process. Kansans have not been shy about utilizing it,” he explained.

CRR’s Crepps urged the justices to declare a “fundamental” right to abortion even broader than that created by Roe v. Wade, based on a “liberty” interest which has “evolved” during the nation’s “march to progress.”

She clearly aimed to undermine the “compelling” state interests that justify abortion restrictions and that are currently honored by the U.S. Supreme Court. These interests, cited in the 2007 Gonzales ruling upholding a ban on partial-birth abortions, include:

  1. That the State may use its regulatory power to bar certain procedures and substitute others, all in furtherance of its legitimate interests in regulating the medical profession.
  2. That the government may use its voice and its regulatory authority to show its profound respect for the life within the woman.

When questioned when the unborn merited constitutional rights, Crepps replied that those rights “attached” at birth.

At birth. That did not make its way into the Associated Press story, nor any other story in the Kansas media.

Abortion up until birth is an extreme position that very, very few Americans agree with.

A long line of discussion ensued on how that position can be reconciled with Kansas laws, including the fetal homicide statute [Alexa’s Law] allowing for prosecution of crimes resulting in the murder of unborn babies. Justice Stegall asked Crepps:

“How can we convict somebody of murder of an entity that has no inalienable rights, has no right to life? How can that be consistent? How can the state do that?”

Two of the justices seemed more concerned that without a state abortion “right,” women “would be forced to give birth” and pregnant women could “lose their lives.”

Lost in the discussion is the fact that abortion regulations in Kansas have always allowed “life of the mother” exceptions.

rally dismemberment sign

2015 Rally for Life urges ban on dismemberment abortions

The painful and barbaric nature of dismemberment abortion –violence that, under Kansas law, is not tolerated for pets and livestock in Kansas—was ignored.

Mc Allister warned the justices that the case before them does not require the drastic judicial activism that Crepps promotes, and that was exhibited in Roe v Wade, causing “more than four decades of havoc.

He closed his remarks with a quote from Justice Bryon White’s dissent in Roe: “As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today, but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.”

Read Full Post »

Planned Parenthood in Overland Park

Yeomans is on staff of Planned Parenthood in Overland Park

Last week, the online New York Magazine posted a lengthy piece painting a rosy picture of abortion and a “heroic provider” in Kansas.

The focus of the 2,435-word-long profile, written by Caitlin Moscatello, is 75-year-old abortionist, Ronald Yeomans, now employed by Planned Parenthood Great Plains (PPGP) in the Kansas City suburb of Overland Park, Kansas.

The writer portrays Yeomans as a Baptist-raised, devoted husband and anti-war pacifist who enjoys conversing with seminarians; a man who this particular Saturday morning “could be playing golf right now.” Instead he spends much of his work day brutally dismembering fully-formed unborn children, one by one, and mindfully reassembling each set of body parts onto trays.

Over and over.

With a price tag of up to $2,000 for each “procedure.”

What is the larger point Moscatello is using Yeomans to illustrate? That 100 years after its beginnings, Planned Parenthood operates two of the four abortion clinics in Kansas.

What Moscatello doesn’t tell you is that Yeomans returned to Planned Parenthood employment after he closed the sordid Aid for Women “cash only” abortion clinic in July 2014 due to “falling profits.”

For decades Aid for Women (AFW) was located in one of the poorest inner-city neighborhoods in Kansas City, Kansas. It used a series of abortionists with a documented history of malpractice and disciplinary actions from the state medical board. Those disgraced practitioners include original co-owner abortionists Malcolm Knarr and Sherman Zaremski, as well as later staff abortionists, Kris Neuhaus and Krishna Rajanna.

Under Yeomans’ control, the AFW website expanded its churlish critique of the “Woman’s Right to Know” state health department-provided information. This information is required by law to be accessed by clients 24 hours prior to obtaining any Kansas abortion. It is available both as a handout and online.

Aid for Women clinic

Aid for Women clinic

Yeomans’ AFW website discredited the state health information as authorized by “Republican misogynist (women-hating) bullies.” Yeoman’s website included rants and bizarre statements, for example, that cancer was a living human organism like the unborn child. (Read more here)

YEOMAN’S CLINIC FAILED STATE INSPECTION
You also won’t read in New York Magazine that in June 2011, with Yeomans at the helm, AFW was unable to pass state inspection for a Kansas abortion clinic license. However, because the new licensure law was soon enjoined in state court, AFW’s deficient facilities stayed open for business.

Yeomans challenged the 2011 licensure law in federal court, then dropped his suit and had the gall to have his attorneys file for state reimbursement for their legal fees! (Reimbursement was denied.)

One of Yeomans’ AFW attorneys is married to the radically pro-abortion judge on the Kansas Court of Appeals, G. Gordon Atcheson. The appellate court’s split decision issued in January (read more here) included Atcheson’s 38-page long concurring opinion defending the discovery of a“state right to abortion.” Due in large part to Atcheson, the Kansas 2015 ban on dismemberment abortions is under injunction and not in effect. 

As a result, Yeomans and Planned Parenthood Great Plains’ other abortionist, 74-year-old Orrin Moore, can continue to profit from performing those barbaric dismemberment abortions.  On the PPGP website, the dismemberment abortion method is described as, ” Medical instruments and a suction machine gently empty your uterus.” That’s one whale of an understatement.

Wichita Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood in Wichita

CIRCUIT-RIDING AT AGE 75
Another “service” Yeomans does for profit is to drive six hours roundtrip to Wichita to dispense abortion pills at a hole-in-the-wall PPGP clinic. He shares this new circuit task with Moore, and they alternate weeks.

Yeomans tells New York Magazine that although this circuit is taxing, it shows how he is “needed.” I’d argue he’s needed only in the sense that Planned Parenthood decided in March that they needed their guys to get a cut of the profits that the other Wichita abortion clinic was reaping in abortion pills.

Which leaves as unanswered, the question, “what about the ‘needs’ of women experiencing problems with the powerful abortion drugs they ingested– when Yeomans /Moore are three hours away in Overland Park?”

So, Ron Yeomans, who could (as Moscatello tells readers in the first paragraph) be playing golf like retirees of his age, is still plying the grisly trade of abortion.

The audience that this piece is written for is supposed to be in awe of his dedication.

And to cap it off, the author reveals Yeomans hopes his 16-year-old granddaughter will follow in his footsteps because, “she started her school’s first feminist club, wants to be a doctor [and visits him] at the clinic.”

Well, the rest of us can only pray that Yeoman’s granddaughter will take a different path– perhaps with the influence of America’s pro-life millennial majority.

Read Full Post »

Auditioners read ECHO scripts

Auditioners read ECHO radio scripts

Movie animators take great care to find just the right voices to “match” their painstakingly-drawn characters. Kansans for Life similarly took great care to cast just the right voice for our new radio spots in which an unborn child “talks” about life in the womb.

This summer, numerous delightful girls and boys, age 6-10, came to our Wichita office to audition to be the voice of “ECHO, an unborn child.” The kids had a good time, although reading and rereading a “script” with emphasis, clarity, and the right lilt in the voice was probably a bit harder than they anticipated.

Our new one-minute radio segments featuring “ECHO, the unborn child” began appearing yesterday across the state on many secular and Christian stations. We are getting many compliments on the approach and pray that thousands of listeners will think about the marvels of an unborn child in a fresh way. Here’s an excerpt:

“Hello, it’s me, “Echo”… your favorite little friend coming to you from inside my mother’s womb. She calls it a “womb,” but it’s more like my room, complete with my very own hot tub. Most of the time in here, I’m just kicking back… literally. I’m trying to outmaneuver the sonogram paparazzi. That’s why I call myself ECHO– Sonograms! Imagine… a bunch of giants trying to get a look at your private parts, just so they’ll know whether to buy pink baby clothes or blue ones…”

The concept of hearing an endearing “voice from the womb” in the middle of your regular radio broadcast is the brainchild of David Gittrich, Kansans for Life State Development Director.

david-gittrich

David Gittrich

David became involved in the pro-life movement 36 years ago after his friend dragged him to see the film, “Assignment: Life.” At that time, sonograms were just beginning to be available, and the images were pretty grainy. In the film, the late Dr. Jack Willke describes the baby developing in the womb, shows beautiful pictures of the unborn child and then challenges the audience, “Who would want to kill a baby you can see?”

That line made a lasting impression on David. He has a deep commitment to reminding Kansans that the most precious natural resource that we need to protect is our unborn children. One of his aims in this project is to personalize the child in the womb to the casual radio listener, without any reference to abortion.

Although 4-D ultrasounds are now ubiquitous, the ECHO project allows the radio audience to “see” in a new way—by listening to the baby’s voice– the marvelous developments and abilities of the child in the womb.

This is one more way we can build a society in which abortion is unthinkable.

Read details about the ECHO project here.

Read Full Post »

mother-teresa-babyAs the world watches Hillary Clinton clawing for the title of president, urging limitless abortion with full tax-funding, they will also see Mother Teresa being canonized Sunday. The comparison could not be more striking.

Hillary has spent her entire life chasing political power at the expense of the unborn; Mother Teresa gave her entire life in selfless service of the poor and vulnerable. Breitbart news reports:

“As Pope Francis canonizes Mother Teresa, we will also be reminded that the most vulnerable among us are the voiceless unborn children who can be legally eliminated at any moment, whom Mother Teresa fought valiantly to defend and whom Hillary is committed to forgetting.”

22 years ago, Mother Teresa spoke passionately against abortion in her address to 3,000 guests at the Feb. National Prayer Breakfast. Afterwards, the applause and a standing ovation lasted  nearly six minutes, with one conspicuous exception:  at the head table, a few feet away from Mother Teresa, President Bill and Hillary Clinton and Vice-President Al and Tipper Gore, sat in stony silence, neither clapping, nor standing.

Mother Teresa had not pressed for the politically correct call for more government involvement in fighting poverty. She spoke pointedly about the unborn child as truly the poorest of the poor, and deserving of our protection from abortion.

In contrast,

  • One year earlier, Hillary had urged her husband Bill on the very first day of his presidency to sign five executive orders authorizing federal funding for abortion, galvanizing the U.S. government’s sordid partnership with Planned Parenthood.
  • Seven months after the Prayer Breakfast, Hillary sent a virulent pro-abortion delegation to work against Mother Teresa at the Cairo Conference on Population and Development, attempting to coerce the world into accepting abortion as a basic human right.
  • This past January, America’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, endorsed Hillary for President with an unprecedented $20 million donation.

Mother Teresa’s entire 1994 speech  (transcript here) is inspiring, but here are the most pertinent abortion sentiments:

“I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?

By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems. And, by abortion, the father is told that he does not have to take any responsibility at all for the child he has brought into the world. That father is likely to put other women into the same trouble. So abortion just leads to more abortion.

Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.

But what does God say to us? He says: “Even if a mother could forget her child, I will not forget you. I have carved you in the palm of my hand.” We are carved in the palm of His hand; that unborn child has been carved in the hand of God from conception and is called by God to love and to be loved, not only now in this life, but forever. God can never forget us.”

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »