Tuesday, May 9, 2006
i've been working so hard on the website. You know, there's a big part of me that wonders if i like creating busy work for myself... or if there is any way that actions that we take... actually have an impact. i *know* that the biggest impact that i will probably ever have is the way i raise my little ones ~ and there is comfort in the knowledge that my life spent nurturing is valuable. i love being a mom.
Monday, May 8, 2006
Thursday, April 20, 2006
This is interesting. My sister Steph found it and forwarded it to me.
http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~whatsup/RoeWade.html
Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal Contest
Press Release from RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Cltn.) 7 March 2006
Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal Contest (with a $10,000 prize)
There is a large 'loophole' in the 22 Jan. 1973 'Roe v Wade'
U.S. Supreme Court decision making elective abortion 'legal';
This same loophole applies to the Canadian 'Morgentaler' ruling.
Elective 'terminations' that are not in a patient's best inter-
est are still not legal! 'So what', since abortions are 'safe'?
In 1997 the top Scandinavian journal in the field of women's
health reported that in the 12 months after an induced abortion,
such women had 252% higher relative TOTAL risk of dying compared
to women who delivered. (Acta Obstet Gyn Scand 1997;76:651-657)
This study must be countered with a study showing significantly
lower total one year death risk to women who have abortions com-
pared to women who delivered. If we knew of such a study, we
would not be holding this contest.
The $10,000 contest ("Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal") in brief:
Prize
Amount: $10,000 (U.S.) or 10 one ounce gold coins (Canadian
Maple Leafs); the winner chooses all cash or all coins
Who Wins: The FIRST (there can only be ONE (1) winner) person
to mail RPRC a copy of a significant study showing
lower 12 month TOTAL death risk for U.S. women with
elective abortions compared to women who carried to
term; (the study must be in the English language)
EMAIL entries will NOT be accepted.
Offered by: RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Cltn.)
3456 Dunbar St. (146)
Vancouver, Canada V6S 2C2
Deadline for
entries: 22 January 2007 (34th anniversary of 'Roe v Wade')
Contest
details: See the Appendix to this press release for details
(Contest rules at: www.vcn.bc.ca/~whatsup/RoeWade.html )
.....
If, indeed, elective 'terminations' of pregnancy protect women's
health, let's help keep this procedure safe and legal. This contest
is 'for real' and a winner, if a copy of a valid study meeting the
criteria set out in the Appendix is received by RPRC before 22 January
2007, will receive his/her $10,000 (U.S.) first (and only) prize.
...................................................................
Appendix: Contest Rules for the "Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal Contest"
7 March 2006
1. Prize amount: $10,000 (U.S.) to the FIRST person to provide
RPRC with a copy of the required study; there can only be
one winner.
2. Eligibility: Any citizen of any country over the age of
18 years.
3. All decisions by RPRC judges are FINAL.
4. The study must adhere to the following criteria:
a. Achieved statistical significance in finding lower ALL-CAUSE
(i.e. TOTAL) death risk for United States women with legal
elective abortions compared to women who delivered newborn
in the TWELVE months after 'the end of pregnancy'.
b. Was published in a peer-reviewed ENGLISH language medical
journal after Jan. 22, 1980 and before Jan. 22, 2002.
c. Must not have later had its finding of significantly lower
death risk retracted by one or more of the study's authors or
by the journal in which the study was first published.
d. Must not exclude any death category. E.G. 'maternal mortality'
studies that exclude deaths via accidents, homicide, suicide,
or cancer are NOT ALL-CAUSE death studies and are not eligible.
e. Design of study: must have used a registry of induced abortions
to ascertain whether women had elective abortions; (New York
state has such a registry and thus, such a study could have
been done there). Also, must have at least 250,000 subjects
in the study; (the 1997 study of Finnish women had well over
500,000 women subjects in it).
5. Tie entries
If more than one entry satisfies the criteria for the winning
entry (see points 2-4 above) and the postmarks have the same
date, a random draw of those entries will determine the ONE
winner. Assuming that there is no such 'tie', the earliest
postmarked entry meeting all the criteria wins. There is only
one prize and the maximum number of winners is ONE (!).
6. All letters sent to RPRC become the property of RPRC and will
not be returned.
................................................................
RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Cltn.)
3456 Dunbar St. (146)
Vancouver, Canada
V6S 2C2
Feedback
http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~whatsup/RoeWade.html
Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal Contest
Press Release from RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Cltn.) 7 March 2006
Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal Contest (with a $10,000 prize)
There is a large 'loophole' in the 22 Jan. 1973 'Roe v Wade'
U.S. Supreme Court decision making elective abortion 'legal';
This same loophole applies to the Canadian 'Morgentaler' ruling.
Elective 'terminations' that are not in a patient's best inter-
est are still not legal! 'So what', since abortions are 'safe'?
In 1997 the top Scandinavian journal in the field of women's
health reported that in the 12 months after an induced abortion,
such women had 252% higher relative TOTAL risk of dying compared
to women who delivered. (Acta Obstet Gyn Scand 1997;76:651-657)
This study must be countered with a study showing significantly
lower total one year death risk to women who have abortions com-
pared to women who delivered. If we knew of such a study, we
would not be holding this contest.
The $10,000 contest ("Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal") in brief:
Prize
Amount: $10,000 (U.S.) or 10 one ounce gold coins (Canadian
Maple Leafs); the winner chooses all cash or all coins
Who Wins: The FIRST (there can only be ONE (1) winner) person
to mail RPRC a copy of a significant study showing
lower 12 month TOTAL death risk for U.S. women with
elective abortions compared to women who carried to
term; (the study must be in the English language)
EMAIL entries will NOT be accepted.
Offered by: RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Cltn.)
3456 Dunbar St. (146)
Vancouver, Canada V6S 2C2
Deadline for
entries: 22 January 2007 (34th anniversary of 'Roe v Wade')
Contest
details: See the Appendix to this press release for details
(Contest rules at: www.vcn.bc.ca/~whatsup/RoeWade.html )
.....
If, indeed, elective 'terminations' of pregnancy protect women's
health, let's help keep this procedure safe and legal. This contest
is 'for real' and a winner, if a copy of a valid study meeting the
criteria set out in the Appendix is received by RPRC before 22 January
2007, will receive his/her $10,000 (U.S.) first (and only) prize.
...................................................................
Appendix: Contest Rules for the "Keep 'Roe v Wade' legal Contest"
7 March 2006
1. Prize amount: $10,000 (U.S.) to the FIRST person to provide
RPRC with a copy of the required study; there can only be
one winner.
2. Eligibility: Any citizen of any country over the age of
18 years.
3. All decisions by RPRC judges are FINAL.
4. The study must adhere to the following criteria:
a. Achieved statistical significance in finding lower ALL-CAUSE
(i.e. TOTAL) death risk for United States women with legal
elective abortions compared to women who delivered newborn
in the TWELVE months after 'the end of pregnancy'.
b. Was published in a peer-reviewed ENGLISH language medical
journal after Jan. 22, 1980 and before Jan. 22, 2002.
c. Must not have later had its finding of significantly lower
death risk retracted by one or more of the study's authors or
by the journal in which the study was first published.
d. Must not exclude any death category. E.G. 'maternal mortality'
studies that exclude deaths via accidents, homicide, suicide,
or cancer are NOT ALL-CAUSE death studies and are not eligible.
e. Design of study: must have used a registry of induced abortions
to ascertain whether women had elective abortions; (New York
state has such a registry and thus, such a study could have
been done there). Also, must have at least 250,000 subjects
in the study; (the 1997 study of Finnish women had well over
500,000 women subjects in it).
5. Tie entries
If more than one entry satisfies the criteria for the winning
entry (see points 2-4 above) and the postmarks have the same
date, a random draw of those entries will determine the ONE
winner. Assuming that there is no such 'tie', the earliest
postmarked entry meeting all the criteria wins. There is only
one prize and the maximum number of winners is ONE (!).
6. All letters sent to RPRC become the property of RPRC and will
not be returned.
................................................................
RPRC (Reduce Preterm Risk Cltn.)
3456 Dunbar St. (146)
Vancouver, Canada
V6S 2C2
Feedback
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
The following link could help many make better (more ethical) decisions about immunizations. i know many people are unaware that some immunizations are derived from fetal cell lines from aborted babies. Neil and i made a decision long ago based mainly on this knowledge to stay away from immunizations. i know this can be a volatile subject, but it's worth exploring. Many of the ethical alternatives to these vaccines are not available in Canada.
http://www.cogforlife.org/canadianvaccines.htm
http://www.cogforlife.org/canadianvaccines.htm
Monday, April 17, 2006
"borrowing" letters to save time ... i just added on a greeting (this) and sent my 'letter to Ralph Klein' to my MP.
Hi, Chris!
i've been meaning to write you a note since you got elected, but haven't had a chance. Congratulations on your victory. i am a stay at home mom in Sexsmith and i wanted to write you a note to let you know that our family as well as many other families in your constituency support the Choice in Childcare proposal.
i am attaching a letter i recently wrote to Premier Ralph Klein on the subject of publicly funded day care ~ or daycare subsidies. I'm not a big believer in daycare, and when i heard that Stephen Harper was introducing a proposal to allow parents to choose how to spend their childcare money and that parents could use it to stay home, i was greatly heartened. Already over the years, we have been penalized by a tax system that does not recognize the value of the stay at home parent, and when the government was going to take another chunk of our tax dollars to fund yet another program that is offensive to us, it was depressing. This is one way that you could use taxpayers money to make it easier for moms to choose to stay home.
Thank you for considering my letter.
paige beselt
beselt@cablerocket.com
Hi, Chris!
i've been meaning to write you a note since you got elected, but haven't had a chance. Congratulations on your victory. i am a stay at home mom in Sexsmith and i wanted to write you a note to let you know that our family as well as many other families in your constituency support the Choice in Childcare proposal.
i am attaching a letter i recently wrote to Premier Ralph Klein on the subject of publicly funded day care ~ or daycare subsidies. I'm not a big believer in daycare, and when i heard that Stephen Harper was introducing a proposal to allow parents to choose how to spend their childcare money and that parents could use it to stay home, i was greatly heartened. Already over the years, we have been penalized by a tax system that does not recognize the value of the stay at home parent, and when the government was going to take another chunk of our tax dollars to fund yet another program that is offensive to us, it was depressing. This is one way that you could use taxpayers money to make it easier for moms to choose to stay home.
Thank you for considering my letter.
paige beselt
beselt@cablerocket.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
playlist
