BY FR. SHENAN BOQUET

December 20, 2013 (HLI) – Tradition teaches that Saint Francis of Assisi set up the first Nativity scene in order to inspire and encourage a greater appreciation of the wonders of the first Christmas. The year was 1223, and Francis created the scene in a cave outside Greccio, Italy featuring a wax figure of the infant Jesus and a man and a woman playing the roles of Mary and Joseph, with a live donkey and ox also present. Local shepherds watched over their sheep in nearby fields, just as shepherds in Bethlehem had watched over theirs on that first Christmas Eve.

Every Christmas crib provides a simple invitation to open our hearts and minds to the mystery of Life. It is an encounter with the Eternal God, who as the second Person of the Holy Trinity entered history and mortality in the mystical scene of the first Nativity for all to see (though he had truly become human some nine months earlier!). Although few encountered Him that first Christmas in the simple and lowly dwelling of Bethlehem, it would not be long before the world knew that he came for all: rich and poor, sinner and saint, believer and non-believer.

Christmas anchors us in the profound message of the closeness of the One who created the world; the One who becomes human and dwells among us — Emmanuel. The God who made the whole universe and created man out of the dust of the earth, embraces our humanity — without sin — and takes up His first dwelling among us as every man — in the womb of Mary.

Sadly, just as with that first Christmas Eve when only a few persons recognized the wondrous gift that entered human existence, so it is with human life today. So many forget the miraculous wonder of every conception. They forget that the eternal Logos — the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us — was once an embryo, a fetus and a developing child. The Incarnation sanctifies every pregnancy, every womb and every developing child within the womb. Moreover, Jesus’ first act of redemption began from the womb of Mary, His mother.

Saint Francis wanted all on Christmas Eve to see and understand the reason for their celebration — Jesus, the Babe of Bethlehem, the Light whose appearance breaks through the gloom, dispels the darkness and enables us to understand the meaning and the value of our own lives and of all history. In the midst of an every growing secularization and de-Christianization of our culture, the wonder of Christmas anchors humanity in its origin and re-birth given to us that miraculous winter’s Eve. The Incarnation reveals in an incomparable and amazing way that every human life is dignified in and through the One who became man.

Read More: 

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-nativity-scene-opens-our-hearts-to-the-mystery-of-life

BY PETER BAKLINSKI

OAKLAND, CA, December 20, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A pioneer doctor in neonatology is championing the life of a 13-year-old girl from California who was officially declared “brain dead” by doctors after a routine tonsillectomy last week went horribly wrong.

“The first thing about ‘brain death’ is that brain death is not true death. It never was and never will be,” said Dr. Paul Byrne, a pioneer neonatologist and clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Toledo to LifeSiteNews.com.

“This girl is still very much a living person. Her life ought to be protected and preserved. No one should be hastening her death or shortening her life,” he said.

Tonsillectomy is a common surgery. Jahi McMath’s December 9 surgery was recommended by doctors to allegedly address the her sleep apnea. While the surgery at first appeared to be successful, the girl began coughing up blood before suffering cardiac arrest. Doctors declared her brain-dead December 12.

The McMath family is seeking a court injunction today through their lawyer that would prevent doctors at the Children’s Hospital in Oakland from taking their daughter Jahi off life-support, despite doctors allegedly telling the family that she is “dead, dead, dead, dead.”

But Jahi’s mother Nailah believes that her daughter is not truly dead.

“I feel her. I can feel my daughter. I just kind of feel like maybe she’s trapped inside her own body. She wants to scream out and tell me something,” she told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Jahi’s uncle Omari Sealey agrees: “She’s still warm. I can feel her presence, I can still feel her smile,” he told KGO-TV.

Byrne said that it should be “obvious to everyone,” not just the girl’s relatives, that she is still alive.

“Her heart is beating, she has circulation, she has respiration, her immune mechanisms are intact, and I’m sure she is healing from her tonsillectomy. Healing happens in only a living person.”

“These are facts of life, [indicating] that this girl is a living person and that she’s not dead,” he said.

Byrne explained that someone does not “become dead” because a doctor declares someone ‘brain dead’, “although they intend it that way”, he added.

He explained that the brain dead criteria was “invented” in 1968 by an ad hoc Committee of the Harvard Medical School openly seeking a way to harvest organs for transplanting. Since a dead organ taken from a corpse cannot be successfully transplanted into a living body, the committee settled on a definition of death that would allow the harvest of healthy living organs from a still living body that lacked signs of brain activity.

“Brain death was invented, conjured, made-up to get organ transplants,” he said.

Declaring someone ‘brain dead’ to harvest organs is always to the detriment of the patient, Byrne explained. “No one can recover once they’ve had their beating heart and other organs cut out.”

“If doctors can, they will take this young girl’s organs.”

Byrne said it’s a common misconception that a machine, such as a ventilator, gives a person life. The machine only sustains an already existing life.

In a case like Jahi’s, the ventilator “only moves the air into a living person. It does not move the air out.”

“The air comes out because the person is alive,” he said.

“The machine supports the vital activities of respiration and circulation, but it does not give life. The life comes from God and from no place else. What doctors [are supposed to] do is protect and preserve the life that’s there,” he said.

The girl’s family is waging a legal battle to keep their daughter on a ventilator and to have doctors insert a feeding tube into her.

“I want her on as long as possible, because I really believe that God will wake her up,” the mother said. The family held a prayer vigil on Wednesday night for their daughter’s recovery.

The family is keeping constant vigil at their girl’s bedside, fearing that doctors might pull the plugs without their knowledge or consent.

The doctors know that the law favors whatever decision they make. California law states that “a person who is declared brain dead is legally and physiologically dead.” According to the law, Jahi is dead.

Byrne said that only New York and New Jersey have a conscience clause that offers specific protections to a patient declared ‘brain dead’ whose primary caregiver does not hold cessation of brain activity as true death. “In the other 48 states, there is nothing in their laws to give any kind of protection to the person declared brain dead.”

“All of the laws — and I mean all of them — all revolve around getting organs,” he said.

Read More:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/shes-very-much-a-living-person-doctor-champions-13-yr-old-brain-dead-girl-o

I have been following the tragic case of Jahi McMath, who went to Oakland Children’s Hospital for a tonsillectomy and suffered a catastrophic complication, resulting in cardiac arrest. According to the media, her doctors later declared her “brain dead” and told the parents she would be removed from life support. After a lawyer’s letter, Jahi’s life support continues.

“Brain dead” is a popular term, not a medical one–and it is too loosely used. Some use it to denigrate the moral value of profoundly disabled patients such as Terri Schiavo, who we now know may be aware and able to recognize family. Slinging “brain dead” as an epithet justifies dehydrating them to death or castigating family members, like the Schindlers, who fight to keep such patients alive–which they legally and biologically are.

In Jahi’s case, brain dead actually means a declaration of “death by neurological criteria,” one of the two legal methods for declaring the bona fide death of a human being. To be declared dead by neurological criteria does not mean there are no brain cells remaining alive. Rather, it means that medical tests, observation of the patient post injury, and history of the case demonstrate that the patient’s brain and each of its constituent parts have irreversibly ceased to function as a brain. As one doctor told me, it is as if the patient was functionally decapitated.

Death by neurological criteria is controversial. Some pro lifers see it as an excuse to harvest organs from living patients, and oppose its use as a clinical method of determining death.

Many bioethicists–of the type who once assured a wary public that brain dead was truly dead–agree,but because they want access to the organs of patients with clearly working brains, such as a patient diagnosed as unconscious but who can breathe without medical assistance. In other words, they want to allow killing for organs and they believe that undermining the public’s belief in “brain death” can help them achieve that end.

Under the law, brain dead is “dead” when it connotes death by neurological criteria. In such circumstances, if accurately determined, there is no legal right to continue life support of what is, essentially, a cadaver. This isn’t true–yet–of patients thought to be permanently unconscious. But that may be coming, my pretties. That may be coming.

A huge problem in this field is that there are no uniform criteria for declaring death by neurological criteria, with testing requirements varying from state to state, and in some instances, hospital to hospital. That needs to change.

Read More:

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/12/20/fighting-for-jahi-mcmaths-life-brain-dead-term-too-loosely-used/

BY OPERATION RESCUE STAFF

HOUSTON, TX, December 20, 2013 (Operation Rescue) – A Houston grand jury has refused to indict late-term abortionist Douglas Karpen after a months-long investigation into allegations of illegal late-term abortions and the killing of babies born alive at his two abortion clinics.

Three former employees – Deborah Edge, Krystal Rodriguez, and Gigi Aguliar – came forward in a videotaped statement released in May to say that Karpen regularly murdered babies born alive outside the womb, sometimes twisting the heads off newborn babies.

Douglas Karpen is scot-free

The allegations against Karpen were based on information acquired from four former Karpen employees and on photographs of dead late-term babies taken by some of the workers on their cell phones. The grisly photos showed very large aborted babies that were nearly decapitated. (You may see the photos here. WARNING: Very graphic and disturbing images.)

The informants also told Operation Rescue that Karpen routinely did abortions beyond the legal limit of 24 weeks, which seemed to be supported by the photographs.

“The refusal to indict Karpen is a gross miscarriage of justice. The grand jury has essentially freed Karpen to continue to violate Texas laws and take the lives of late-term babies that the law was meant to protect,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “It’s upsetting to know that the kind of brutality shown in the photos taken at his clinic will be allowed continue.”

Operation Rescue alleged that Karpen was murdering babies in in a similar way as convicted Pennsylvania abortion Kermit Gosnell, who was found guilty of three counts of first degree murder for intentionally killing babies born alive during late-term abortions.

“It’s simply unbelievable that a grand jury would not find that Karpen broke the law, just based on the photographic evidence alone,” Newman said. “There’s no way any reasonable person could look at the images of those abortion victims and say that nothing was done wrong. The babies’ throats were cut from ear to ear. That isn’t something that can be done inside the womb.”

Read More: 

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/shock-houston-grand-jury-wont-indict-abortionist-for-twisting-heads-off-new

In a recent interview with the Huffington Post, May Helen Bowers shared her joy in being pregnant, and discussed how her objective is to ensure that all women embrace their feminine sizes and figures at all stages, including pregnancy. Bowers is a professional ballerina who founded the explosive women’s exercise program Ballet Beautiful. Bowers is also famous for her role in Black Swan, with Natalie Portman.  She is nine months pregnant and has continued her ballet workouts throughout her pregnancy. She described  her experience as a first time mother, saying:

I’ve found the entire process of being pregnant to be such a miraculous, beautiful time. As a first-time mom I am so excited! My instinct has been not only to capture this special time, but [also] to share it with others, too. Pregnancy is magical, I’ve never felt more connected to my body. Looking back I’m so happy that I’ve taken so many photos and really documented the different stages.

Photo by Ballet Beautiful.

 

By photo-documenting her entire pregnancy and the changes that her body has gone through, Bowers hopes to encourage other women to embrace the changes that they experience during pregnancy. However, she has encountered some criticism for embracing her pregnant figure through photo documentation. She said:

Even in 2013, the image of a pregnant woman embracing her figure and really putting it out there can be scary to some people, but I don’t let that stand in my way and I don’t think other women should either. My company, Ballet Beautiful, is built around celebrating the strength and femininity of the female body — for me pregnancy has just been an extension of that.

Read More: 

http://liveactionnews.org/ballet-beautiful-founder-says-her-pregnancy-has-been-miraculous-and-beautiful

Scott Johnston of Silent No More interviewed a nurse who participated in several abortions. She witnessed two partial-birth abortions and one first trimester abortion in the hospital where she worked in obstetrics. Partial-birth abortion is a term that refers to a procedure called dilation & extraction. In a partial-birth/dilation & extraction abortion, a late second or third trimester baby is delivered feet first and the head is held within the mother’s birth canal. Surgical scissors or a syringe is used to pierce the exposed back of the neck, and then the skull contents (i.e. the brain) are suctioned out through a tube. It is now illegal to do abortions this way. However, abortions are still done in the second and third trimester. They are now done either by dismemberment (D&E) or by injecting digoxin, a potent poison, into the amniotic sac or directly into the baby’s body.

Here is an excerpt from the interview, which can be found in its entirety here.

How many partial birth abortions did you personally witness?

“Two full-term abortions. They were done at nine months.”

What do you know of the circumstances surrounding these abortions? Why were they being done?

“One of the mothers already had three or four and she didn’t want any more.”

“The other girl was single. She didn’t have a husband and had no means of support. I asked, ‘Why don’t you put the baby up for adoption?’ She said, ‘I don’t know how it would be treated.’”

She then goes on to talk about the doctor who performed the abortions:

“The doctor was an O.B. doctor. I would say he was not of the highest caliber either. He had a bad reputation. He had a lot of deaths of babies that were born because he did not take care of them properly. He was sloppy. Normally, this doctor would be in the farthest back delivery room. When they did abortions, the doctors usually had their own nurse. This one didn’t. He was a sleezeball. [Sic]”

Johnston then asked her to describe what she saw when the doctor performed the procedure.

“He turned the baby around [in the womb] and brought it out feet first. That’s one of the worse [sic] things for the mother that you can do. I was helping the doctor hold the baby [to keep it in the birth canal]. The other nurse got the instrument [a large syringe with a large needle], handed it to the doctor, and he inserted it into the base of the skull. Then he pulled the baby out. Its little hands were grasping. When the baby quit grasping, then he delivered it. He used the syringe to suction out the brains. That’s more traumatic on the mother than if she had given a normal birth.”

“They took the [dead] baby and wrapped it up in a receiving blanket and asked her [the mother] if she wanted to hold it. She said she didn’t want to.

Neither one of them wanted to see them.”

“They were sent to the morgue.”

These were two perfectly healthy, full-term babies that were legally killed. Neither one of them had a defect that the nurse could see, and neither one of the aborting women had a medical problem.

The interview goes on:

What was your reaction?

“I was so sick. I was absolutely nauseous. I couldn’t believe all that was taking place.”

“I told the charge nurse I didn’t want to work with him anymore.”

“I think it’s such a horrible thing. I said a prayer for those babies.”

What was the reaction of the other personnel who were present with you at these abortions?

“With the doctor, he was so nonchalant. It was no big thing.”

Scott Johnston then asked the nurse about the first trimester abortion she witnessed. She describes how the abortionist used a sonogram machine during the abortion procedure:

“On the sonogram, when he started the suction, the baby’s arms spread out. It immediately threw its hands out. Its little arms spread out. So, you know it had to feel it.

[The instrument used for the abortion] it is a silver tube with stainless steel blades on it. He inserts it first, and then turns on the suction. The baby comes out all shredded. ‘Now, you watch this, and you’ll see how it doesn’t feel a thing.’ [The doctor said] I think it was kind of shocking to him. I looked at him and he looked at me, and then he wouldn’t look at me after that. I don’t think he had used a sonogram before during an abortion. It was over in a short period of time.”

She then goes on to reveal:

“That doctor is not here [at the same hospital] anymore. He had so many malpractice suits he had to leave town.”

Unsurprisingly, this nurse was so horrified by what she witnessed that she began to speak out against partial-birth abortion. She says:

“Anybody who starts talking about partial birth abortion, I say, ‘Do you know what it is?’ And I tell them what it is! They just usually look kind of wide-eyed with their mouths open. And one girl said, ‘I don’t believe you.’ I said, ‘why should I stand up here and lie to you?’ Most people are just shocked.”

The partial-birth abortion debate has faded away in the memories of many pro-lifers, but the suffering of the babies aborted that way and the horror of the procedure should not be forgotten. Ultimately, the partial-birth abortion ban, while a symbolic victory, accomplished little. Babies are still being killed, only by different means. Although the campaign against the partial-birth abortion procedure was useful in the sense that it educated the public about different methods of abortion and led to more people supporting the pro-life side, only a total ban on late-term abortion will have a chance of eliminating the killing of viable unborn babies.

Read More: http://liveactionnews.org/