It's great to see some of the press picking up on the dreadful irony of our society's stance on abortion. Some would promote conservation of frogs, but oppose conservation of humans. They support free choice for born women, but not for unborn women. How sad.

Kudos to Festival of Light for their excellent survey in determining the values of candidates for the 2007 Federal Election. Please encourage the candidates in your local electorate to fill out the survey.

Even Jimmy Carter, the Democrats' idea of an Evangelical Christian, has allowed that "I don't believe that Christ would approve of abortions." (Though Carter added that Christ would approve of abortion if "the mother's life or health was seriously endangered or the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest" — or if Jesus really, really needed the feminists to vote for him.)

WARNING! This site may offend some viewers.  This side-by-side comparison of premature-born babies and aborted babies serves to illustrate rather graphically that the difference between 'babies' and 'fetuses' is whether they are wanted or not.  It is claimed the 9/11 terrorists are viscious and inhuman when they killed 3000+ people, yet Americans kill more of their own children every day.  Which is more terrifying?

I'm not usually one for a conspiracy theory, but consider this article by biochemist Joel Brind. Check out the different opinions, and ask yourself, "Who stands to gain by suppressing this information from the general public, and who stands to gain by spreading it?" I think you'll agree that there is far more to lose (in monetary and political terms) for those who are pro-death rather than pro-life. (Apologies in advance to those of you who are offended by my politically-incorrect tag for those who promote abortion, but it's indisputably correct: all abortions promote the death of a baby.)