Stand Up and Speak Out:

Choose a Topic:

Sun
18
Feb '07

Time Magazine Covers Crisis Pregnancy Centers

One argument that I hear time and time again against pro-lifers is “Why don’t they quit this and actually do something to help women? Hypocrites.” These people seem to think that they are making an original, thoughtful point. However, their suggestions have already been in action for many years. In fact, pregnancy centers now outnumber abortion clinics (Times.)

So why have so many people not heard of these centers? One reason may be that the general public finds it difficult to justify the idea of a caring pro-lifer with the idea of pro-lifers as “anti-choice fanatics” which they receive from the news. (Interestingly, news of pro-abortion violence is rarely heard, although there have been a greater number of crimes. See here for more information).

However, for the first time, a major news source has decided to cover this “new” side of the pro-life movement. Time magazine wrote a cover article entitled “The Grassroots Abortion War”. The article explains the services that crisis pregnancy centers offer and gives an in-depth interview with Deborah Wood, the CEO of a North Carolina center, portraying her as compassionate and competent. While the article surprisingly describes the movement as “kind, calm, nonjudgmental”, it also gives voice to critics who state that the centers are not giving correct information. These claims should have been investigated by the Time, not simply quoted and unsubstantiated. Despite these shortcomings, this article is certainly a revolutionary look for the American public.

Sun
29
Oct '06

Proposition 85

Please read the following letter, written by a local woman, and then take a look at my comments on Proposition 85, the Parental Notification Initiative here in California.

Hello, I am a Sacramento area parishioner, both myself and my children attended local Catholic schools. I would like to share my story to help encourage more people to speak out about abortion, especially in the church, our schools, community, and our family.

At 14 years old, in the 8th grade I met and started dating a 19 year old guy who was already out of school. I lost my virginity to him and by summer I had become pregnant. My boyfriend pressured me hard into getting an abortion without telling my parents for fear he would get in trouble or go to jail etc. When the day came he dropped me off in front of the Planned Parenthood in downtown Sacramento and went on his way to a concert with a friend. I aborted our baby alone and afraid. He left me there not knowing how I was going to get home. I left the clinic bleeding and crying my eyes out. I walked alone downtown about 12 blocks to the old Greyhound depot to catch the bus that took me back to our side of town. I had never been downtown on foot and alone and I remember how scared I was of everyone. I could not go home though because I was crying too hard and bleeding too much that my parents would have known something was terribly wrong. I rode the bus and walked around all day, alone and afraid until I could compose myself enough to go home. Once the abortion was done my boyfriend broke off what was left of our relationship. I was left alone to suffer depression, had thoughts of suicide, experienced eating disorders, had parenting insecurity, no self confidence, no self forgiveness and all the negative effects nobody warned me about or offered counsel for throughout most of my life.

When I was about 32 years old, I started listening to Catholic Radio and for the first time heard advertisement for post-abortive counseling and healing. I finally got help 18 years later.

I am telling you this because I think it would be better if the truth about abortion was talked about more openly. The evils of abortion should be learned about to counteract the lies told to young girls about how abortion is just a simple procedure to eliminate the ‘cluster of cells’, make all your troubles go away, and your life go back to normal in no time. To this day, I never hear the real truth about abortion being discussed in church or Catholic school. The scared fathers or molesters only want the ‘problem’ to go away. Planned Parenthood is not warning these girls, in fact they shelter them from the truth, even lie about it, and leave them to suffer the consequences alone. Nobody ever told me how bad it would be to live with the truth of what you have done. It was never talked about by anyone but the people who wanted me to abort the most.

I think that young girls would be more likely to seek help through their parish if they at least saw and heard the truth from there. If the church speaks about abortion it might cross a girl’s mind that she may be able to turn and find help there. It never crossed my mind. I think it could prevent some girls from having abortions and open the door for post abortive women to get help or reconciliation. After all, if I had not started listening to Catholic radio, I would have never known or even thought of turning to the church even though I had confessed it several times. When done in a compassionate way, openly talking about abortion helps women who have had one to know that they are not alone or crazy for the suffering they feel.

Had there been a law about parental notification I may not have gone through with it. Even if I had, someone would have known to get me help and counseling. When I helped collect signatures for Prop 85 at the church I was shocked at how many people not only refused to sign, but were hostile and rude about it. I wanted to share my story with them and say; ‘Look, I went through this at 14 years old and my parents had no idea what was wrong with me or how to help. All they knew and chalked it up to was that my boyfriend broke up with me. I remember hearing them say, “She’ll get over it, she’s just heartbroken.” I didn’t. And there are worse stories then mine. Is that what we want for our daughters? ’

In the end, my baby was killed at my request. I knew that from the moment it happened. No one ever had to say that to me, or even knew what I had done. The guilt I felt was so strong nobody could have made me feel worse then my own thoughts did. The truth could have lead me to help sooner. Sometimes I feel that abortion does not get talked about for fear of offending or making people feel bad. I am just wanting to express that people who have had abortions already feel bad and do not know where to turn for healing and understanding if it is not talked about openly and honestly in parishes. Please do what you can to help bring the whole truth about abortion to your family, community, church, and everyone you know. The truth could really help someone like me.

Thank you for your help and support.

Sacramento-area post-abortive woman

As a 14-year-old girl, this woman had parents who cared for her. Under Proposition 85, the abortion facility would have been required to notify her parents before the abortion. As she admits, she may have still gotten an abortion even if her parents had known. However, her parents would have been able to give her the support she desperately needed. Without Prop 85, we are crippling the guidance and help that parents can give their daughters.

Opponents of Prop 85 are not above hiding the truth in order to win. On the No on 85 website’s “The Facts” page, it states, “Prop 85 forces even teens from violent or abusive homes to involve their parents.” This is simply a lie. Proposition 85 allows a young woman to obtain a judicial bypass if she does not want to involve her parents. Furthermore, Prop 85 would stop these abusive parents by shedding light on the situation. This shows that opponents don’t care about what is best for the teen involved, but only about the abortion itself.
It is entirely illogical to make the argument that parents should not be told because some may get abusive. For instance, some parents may become abusive if their child gets bad grades. Does this mean that parents should not be told about their student’s progress in school? No, of course not. Parents should be told so that they can help their child, and any parents who are abusive should be stopped. The same is true in the case of abortions concerning minors.

Opponents of Prop 85 also state, “While the proposed law would include a bypass provision for teens to seek help from a judge, a girl afraid to tell her parents isn’t going to march up to a judge in a strange courthouse to talk about her pregnancy.” If you know Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics, then you know they will do just about anything to keep their customers. Undoubtedly, Planned Parenthood employees will “help” the young women obtain the judicial bypass, just as they already do.

Please read the above letter and the text of Prop 85 for yourself, and do what is best for my classmates. Vote Yes on Proposition 85.

*Update- The Sacramento Bee calls the No on Prop 85 ad “incorrect”.

Sun
11
Jun '06

“Can I Live”

I recently came across the song “Can I live” by Nick Cannon, who is a relatively well-known rapper, comedian, music producer, and actor.

His song, “Can I live”, tells the story of how his mother was going to abort him, but changed her mind.

Click here to view the music video in a pop-up screen.

I have to admit, I actually started crying when I saw this, both times too. ;)

Here are some of the lyrics near the end of the song:

I am a child of the king
Ain’t no need to go fear me
And I see the flowing tears so know that you hear me
When I move in your womb that’s me being scary
Cause who knows what my future holds
Yo the truth be told you ain’t told a soul
Yo you ain’t even showing I’m just 2 months old
Through your clothes try to hide me deny me
Went up 3 sizes
Your pride got you lying saying ain’t nothing but a migraine
It ain’t surprising you not trying to be in Wic food lines
Your friends will look at you funny but look at you mommy
That’s a life inside you look at your tummy
What is becoming ma I am Oprah bound
You can tell he’s a star from the Ultrasound
Our Spirits Connected Doors Open Now
Nothing But Love And Respect Thanks For Holding Me Down She Let Me Live…

[Chorus]
I’ll Always Be a part of you
Trust Your Soul Know it’s always true
If I Could Talk I’d Say To You
CAN I LIVE
CAN I LIVE
I’ll Always Be apart of you
Trust Your Soul Know it’s always true
If I Could Talk I’d Say To You
CAN I LIVE
CAN I LIVE
[Repeat 2]

[Nick Talking]

It’s uplifting foreal yall
I ain’t passing no judgement
Ain’t making no decisions
I am just telling ya’ll my story
I love life
I love my mother for giving me life
We all need to appreciate life
A strong woman that had to make a sacrifice
Thanks for listening
Thanks for listening
Mama thanks for listening

You can click here for all the lyrics.

Sat
22
Apr '06

Tolerance and Choice? I think not.

In two incidents, college pro-life displays were vandalized this month. The first occurred at Northern Kentucky University, when “British literature professor Sally Jacobsen and several of her students destroyed a display of hundreds of crosses pro-life students have put up in the grass outside the student center to talk about the 47 million unborn babies who have been killed via abortion…. Jacobson has admitted encouraging students in her class to engage in the vandalism but would not comment to the media about whether she was involved. However, a reporter from the student newspaper caught the professor on camera ripping up a sign set up next to the crosses… ‘I did, outside of class during the break, invite students to express their freedom of speech rights to destroy the display if they wished to,’ Jacobsen said last week after the incident.” (Photo: Dr. Sally Jacobson tears down main “Cemetery of Innocents” sign displayed by the campus pro-life group)

This is ridiculous. Destroying displays is most definitely not inviting freedom of expression. That is suppressing expression, by using criminal actions!

But this was not the sole incident. Another occurred when pro-life students at Princeton set up a “flag display in front of Frist Campus Center to remember the 347 students that the group estimates are not attending Princeton this year because of abortion… The pink and blue flags the group used to represent the men and women who are not a part of this year’s freshman class were destroyed and abortion advocates replaced them with coat hangers, a pro-abortion symbol used to claim women will die form illegal abortions if it is prohibited. The sign in front of the display explaining its significance had been trampled and abortion advocates taped computer printouts over it with the message ‘support smaller class sizes: support abortion’ and ‘347 rusty coat hangers were saved from mangling and mutilation.’”

It should be obvious that destroying displays is not showing tolerance. It should also be obvious that when opposing views are suppressed, there is little choice in what views are heard or can be expressed. So why would groups that supposedly promote tolerance and choice deny both to anyone who disagrees?

Sat
11
Mar '06

South Dakota and Roe vs. Wade

South Dakota recently passed a bill outlawing abortion, except when the life of the mother is at stake. Many people may not think that this is the right time for such a law, including some pro-lifers. (Case in point: Going With Your Brain Over Heart by Andy Nevis) However, I disagree. I will examine the possible outcomes and the advantages and disadvantages of such a law, in terms of overturning Roe vs. Wade, the number of abortions, and the average opinion of abortion.

The first outcome is that the issue will be taken to the Supreme Court. As Andy (see above) wrote, “At the present time, there are just not the votes on the court to overturn Roe vs. Wade. At best, it is probably 5 to 4 in affirmation.” But if Roe vs. Wade is not overturned then, the issue may come to the Supreme Court again. All that is needed is 4 votes from the justices saying that the issue needs to be addressed.

The second outcome, and the most likely, is having a referendum. “A referendum would require 16,728 signatures. Those petitions would have to be filed within 90 days of the end of the Legislature, which is scheduled for a final veto day on March 20. If sufficient signatures were filed within the time allowed, the law wouldn’t take effect until after the November vote.”

So what would these two outcomes mean? First, no matter what the outcome, having a such a law against abortion undermines the legality of the act. I’ve found that a common response when faced with the truths of abortion is to say, “Well, it’s legal, isn’t it?” When it is debatable as to whether abortion should be legal, people can no longer allow law to do their thinking for them. And, when people are forced think about abortion, many people become pro-life. When they know when the heart starts beating (21 days after conception), the percentage of abortions done for birth control purposes (about 95%), the number of abortions done in our country every day (4,000), the vast number of un-planned pregnancy resources, and the option of adoption (about 40 couples are still waiting to adopt per every baby put up for adoption), they have no choice but to change their position. When more people become pro-life, there are less abortions.

So as you can see, there really are many advantages to such a law. Therefore, we need to keep pushing the envelope, and keep abortion in the public view. Sooner or later, they will come to their senses.

Wed
25
Jan '06

Abortion and Women’s Equality

A couple of weeks ago, I entered a pro-life essay contest in the Diocese of Sacramento hosted by Catholics for Life. I was informed last week that I had won first place. Yesterday (Tuesday), I was recognized at the pro-life mass at the Cathedral and was asked to read my essay at the pro- life rally on the capitol steps. Here is the essay I submitted:

How Abortion Hurts Women’s Equality and Degrades Individual Women
By Katelyn Sills

Today, abortion has been championed as “a woman’s right” and described as a “liberty” by the United States Supreme Court. On January 22, 1973, in the Roe vs. Wade decision, the Supreme Court struck down individual state abortion laws and made abortion legal up until the time of birth in all fifty states. The Supreme Court says that “Roe is an integral part of a correct understanding of both the concept of liberty and the basic equality of men and women.” Yet, our country is slowly realizing that this may not be true. Abortion hurts women’s equality and degrades all women. In this essay, I will explain how women, as a result of on-demand abortion, are seen as inferior to men and how in actuality, it is the pro-abortion attitude that impairs women both born and unborn. This impairment does not only affect women who have abortions, but all women, those in the past, present and future.

First, let us examine women from our past. In the last hundred years, women have seen enormous progress in gaining equal rights with men, only to have abortion destroy many of those rights and liberties. Women suffragists led the campaign for women’s rights, and the vast majority of these women were very strongly anti-abortion. Susan B. Anthony, one of the most widely recognized feminists, said, “I deplore the horrible crime of child murder
 No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed
 but oh! Thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime.” Susan B. Anthony’s newspaper, The Revolution, stated that, “When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged.” Elizabeth Cady Stanton said that “When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we wish.” Mary Wollstonecraft condemned those who would “either destroy the embryo in the womb, or cast it off when born.” Victoria Woodhull, the first female presidential candidate, said “The rights of children as individuals begin while yet they remain the foetus.” and “Every woman knows that if she were free, she would never bear an unwished-for child, nor think of murdering one before its birth.” Thus, early feminists in the past understood that abortion is a symptom of inequality and exploitation, and certainly not a solution for women. Continue>>>>

Sun
22
Jan '06

Walk for Life West Coast 2006

This Saturday, my dad, my brother, and my sister attended the Walk for Life. According to several sources, there were about 15,000 people there. The San Francisco Chronicle chose to describe it this way: “Subdued Walk For Life meets boisterous pro-choice demonstrators.” According to my family, it was more like “Regular pro-lifers meet wacko pro-aborts.” But anyway, here are some of the pictures.

According to the Chronicle, this is a group of tourists watching the Walk. Notice the guy with the black handkerchief and drum. According to my family there was a group of these people all yelling obscenities.

A pro-abortion protester gets arrested.

I believe that this is the pro-abortion group described in the Chronicle article:

“One group wore sheets and gowns dipped in red paint to symbolize their image of back-alley abortions.”

Interesting. Very interesting.

More love and tolerance from the pro-aborts.

Another interesting individual.


According to my family, there was an amazing amount of police officers keeping the peace.

(Picture is my own)

Up close and personal with some of the pro-lifers.

All in all, it was a good event, with very good turnout. It seems that a lot of the opposition had anti-Bush signs, which I thought was interesting. I mean, why would they have that there? Do they think that abortion is all Bush’s fault too? But anyway, according to my family, they did not see even one “wacko” pro-lifer, but saw many questionable pro-aborts, including some of the above. Even the San Francisco Chronicle could hardly twist this one!

Mon
16
Jan '06

Graphic Abortion Pictures

I have been to pro-life rallies. (I have also seen a pro-abortion rally, since they were counter-protesting on the same day.) I have seen the reactions range from giving a thumbs-up sign to flipping people off and yelling obscenities. (These last two are almost always from those usually labeled “tolerant.”) However, I cannot understand some of the negative reactions to graphic pictures of abortion themselves, no matter what the views of the viewer are.

For those that believe the unborn to be just “tissue,” there should be no problem. Undoubtedly, some of them must watch popular shows such as the ER, House, etc. Yet, seeing “tissue” never seems to disturb them there. Often, the “pro-choice” liberals that condemn the pictures are the very ones that were showing pictures of the vile Abu Ghraib abuses to anyone and everyone.

On the other side, those that are pro-life and believe that abortion is the killing of human beings cannot be outraged at the pictures either. Who gets outraged at the history books that have pictures of the Holocaust? No, people are usually outraged that the Holocaust even happened. If that same event were happening now, we would not scorn those who show the evidence, and then continue on our way to work. Instead, hopefully, we would be called to end such evil.

We know that people won’t believe something until they see it themselves. Ad campaigns recognize this. Anti-smoking campaigns show pictures of cancerous lungs. Anti-drinking campaigns show scans of alcohol-affected brains that look like swiss cheese.

Even pro-abortion “feminist” author Naomi Wolf realizes that pictures force the truth to be faced. She says,

So, what will it be: Wanted fetuses are charming, complex REM-dreaming little beings whose profile on the sonogram looks just like Daddy, but unwanted ones are mere “uterine material”? How can we charge that it is vile and repulsive for pro-lifers to brandish vile and repulsive images if the images are real? To insist that the truth is in poor taste is the very height of hypocrisy. Besides, if these images are often the facts of the matter, and if we then claim that it is offensive for pro-choice women to be confronted by them, then we are making the judgment that women are too inherently weak to face a truth about which they have to make a grave decision. This view of women is unworthy of feminism. Free women must be strong women, too: and strong women, presumably do not seek to cloak their most important decisions in euphemism.

There is no good reason to be “outraged” at the pictures themselves. If you think abortion is a procedure that removes tissue, there’s nothing worth arguing over. If you think abortion kills a human being, you should feel called to help, if you have any moral character at all. The pictures themselves are only an “outrage” to those who have been hoping to avoid the issue, only to be faced with it head-on.

Fri
13
Jan '06

Catholics for a Free Choice?

I found this on the Catholics for a Free Choice website.

Liturgy for Seeking Wisdom

Background: This liturgy will help a woman decide to bring her pregnancy to term or to have an abortion.

Centering: Play soothing instrumental music quietly in the background.

Candle Lighting: Light candle, absorb its power, pray.

Prayer: Gracious and loving Holy Wisdom, fill ______ (name of woman) with wisdom that she may see clearly the choice that she needs to make. Bless her and comfort her with your Spirit.

Visualization: Guide the woman through this visualization.

See yourself walking on a path through the woods. You are walking into the future. At the end of this path see yourself in ten years if you decide to bring this pregnancy to term. (Pause for three minutes and listen to yourself.)

Now begin again. (Pause fifteen seconds.) See another path through the woods. Walk along this path. At the end of this path see yourself in ten years if you do not bring this pregnancy to term. (Pause for three minutes and experience what this is like.)

After you have visualized these two pathways, find a cozy room with a comfortable chair. Sit in this chair and think about what you have seen. (Pause for as long as you like.)

Reflection: Sit and watch the candle burn, write down your thoughts in a journal and/or share your insights.

Closing: Wisdom comes when we reflect on our life and make choices based on honesty and truth. Wisdom lives within us. Listen to her. Trust her. Talk to her whenever you need to. She is your friend.

Song: “i found god in myself” from Colored Girls

i found god in myself, i found god in myself

and I loved her fiercely, i loved her fiercely,

i found god in myself.

Blow out the candle when you are finished. Invite the woman to do something comforting, for example, drink a cup of tea or take a warm shower.

What they don’t seem to realize is that there is no choice between having a baby and not having a baby. The baby is already there. (A heartbeat can be detected by five weeks after the last menstrual period, which is when a woman usually notices that she is pregnant.) So what is this choice?

If they are truly for an informed choice, then why do they not suggest that women see ultrasounds or look at baby development?

Thu
12
Jan '06

Roe vs. Wade Remembrance

To remember Roe vs. Wade and the effect it has had (33 years of legalized abortion, resulting in over 43 million deaths, and an estimate that 43 percent of American women will have at least one abortion by the age of 45), there are several events those in the California or Sacramento region can attend:

  • St. Joseph Parish, Lincoln - Everyone is encouraged to pray and sacrifice during the week of January 16-22.
    • At St. Joseph Church, we will pray the pro-life Rosary before the 8:30 am weekday Masses on January 16, 17, 19 and 20, before the Saturday 5:00 pm Mass on January 21 and the 8:00 am Mass on January 22.
    • At St. Daniel Church, the pro-life Rosary will be prayed at 8:00 am on Friday, January 20.
    • The 8:30 am Mass on Monday, January 23, at St. Joseph Church, will be celebrated for the Day of Prayer and Penance for Life as requested by the United States Bishops.
  • ““Show the Truth”” Project- Join other Christian churches in the Roseville area for this life-saving ministry which involves standing at busy intersections showing the truth about abortion. See www.prolifeaction.org/truth/ and www.project33.org Events include:
    • January 17th, Tues. 3:30-5:00 pm, Kaiser Hospital, Douglas & Rocky Ridge.
    • January 18th, Wed. 7:00-8:30 am at Sunrise and Cirby Way.
    • January 19th, Thurs. 7:00-9:00 am at Roseville Planned Parenthood, 729 Sunrise Blvd.
      3:30-5:00 pm at Douglas and Sunrise Blvd.
    • January 21st, Sat. 9:30-11:00 am at The Galleria Mall.
  • Abortion Memorial, Hope and Healing Services- January 20th, Friday, 7:00 pm, at Foothill Community Church, 200 Cirby Way, Roseville.
  • Project 33 Youth Assembly- January 21st, Saturday, 1:30-3:30 pm at Foothill Community Church, 200 Cirby Way, Roseville. See more information at www.project33.org
  • West Coast Walk for Life in San Francisco, January 21st, Saturday. For more information visit www.WalkforLifeWC.com
  • Auburn Life Chain - Sunday, January 22
  • Pro-Life Mass at the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament- January 24th, Tuesday, at 10:30, followed by noon rally at the State Capitol’s west steps.
  • ““Abortion Hurts Us All” prayerful ministry to women at Roseville Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic, 729 Sunrise Blvd. January 26th, Thursday, 8:30-10:00 am and Sacramento Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic, 29th and B Streets, Friday, January 27th, 8:30-10:00 am. Everyone hurt by abortion, especially post-abortive women, are invited to participate.

For more information you can email me.

Tue
29
Nov '05

“Aborted” Babies Born Alive

According to this article, in England, “up to 50 babies a year are born alive after botched National Health Service abortions.” Babies aborted “after more than 21 weeks and six days of gestation should have their hearts stopped by an injection of potassium chloride before being delivered.”

However, sometimes that is not the case. According to Stuart Campbell, former professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at St George’s hospital, “They can be born breathing and crying at 19 weeks’ gestation. I am not anti-abortion, but as far as I am concerned this is sub-standard medicine.”

“‘If a baby is born alive following a failed abortion and then dies (because of lack of care), you could potentially be charged with murder,’ said Shantala Vadeyar, a consultant obstetrician at South Manchester University Hospitals NHS Trust, who led the study. ”

And here is another story on this topic from earlier this year, in which a mother is suing because her now 3-year-old child survived abortion.

To me, the most disturbing thing is that we have now gotten to a point in our world in which a “botched procedure” results in a life saved.

Tue
15
Nov '05

The Truth About My Immediate Dismissal

We and our attorney, Eric Grant, have repeatedly tried to reconcile with Loretto’s administration, beginning with our request for a retraction and apology on November 4th. After waiting ten days, Loretto finally responded with an unfortunate refusal along with a copy of their press release. My family continues to hope for reconciliation (see our press statement), but any reconciliation must necessarily address the falsehoods discussed below. Thus, we have decided to release all of the communications between my family and Loretto so that people can see the truth for themselves.

On Saturday, October 29th, I received an express mail envelope from Loretto administration, which ordered “immediate dismissal” of my family from Loretto High School. Please read it here.

First of all, the letter states that Loretto was “ready to move on with our educational mission” and that “the focus of the administration, faculty and students continues to be disrupted by the actions of your family.” How does one “move on” while one’s mom is restricted from campus permanently? It would seem that my family would be the ones not allowed to “move on.”
As you can see in the letter, there were three pieces of “evidence” for my expulsion. I would like to discuss all of them below.

  1. The first “piece of evidence” as reason for expulsion was that there was an “email from Wynette Sills threatening Sister Helen with the disruption of Open House.” Here are the emails between my mom and Sister Helen about Ms. Bain teaching at Loretto and the events in between. Because Sister Helen has refused to meet with us or return our phone calls, these emails are our only communication with Sister Helen. These are all of the emails. Nothing in these emails has been edited, except taking off our home phone number (for obvious reasons), omitting personal identities when noted and the pictures included in the first email.The October 4th email is where the “threat” supposedly happened. I invite you to read it again. If this email was so “threatening” that it was grounds for expulsion, then why was my family allowed to attend Open House after the “threat” was made? It just doesn’t make sense.
  2. The next bit of “evidence” is that my dad “trespassed into a private area and attempted to intimidate an Assistant Principal” at Loretto’s Open House on October 16th. My dad talks about it here.Obviously, it is my dad’s word against the assistant principal’s. However, Loretto’s actions afterward further support my dad’s statement. That day, there were police officers already on campus. If my dad truly was threatening and trespassed, it would have been common procedure to interview the alleged “intimidator.” My dad was never interviewed. Also, my dad has volunteered on Thursday mornings before school for Loretto’s TEAMS club (preparation for Stanford’s Engineering, Math and Science contest) all of my freshman year and all of this past year up to two weeks after Open House. If my dad was intimidating, why was he allowed on campus with Loretto students? The only reasonable conclusion is that Loretto’s administration knows that my dad did not threaten or intimidate anyone. Thus, this second reason for dismissal is also false.
  3. The third piece of “evidence” was an email from my mom asking our family and friends for prayer. It is quoted fully in the letter, but you can also directly read the email of October 27th here.

Apparently, asking for prayer and capitalizing Catholic is “malicious,” “slanders the reputation and integrity of Loretto High School” and is grounds for expulsion. If this sounds unbelievable, I suggest reading the dismissal letter again.

Also in the envelope were my grades from this year and last year. As you can see, I have been a straight-A student during my time at Loretto. I have never, in my life, been sent to the principal’s office or have received a detention. (And here I am getting expelled.) Obviously, this expulsion is not about my grades or my behavior at school.

This “immediate dismissal” came completely unexpectedly and without warning. In fact, the very week before my expulsion, I was thrilled that I was chosen to be one of the defense attorneys on Loretto’s Mock Trial team. I was hoping to try out for a solo in the choir. I was looking forward to Homecoming week with my friends. Yet, Loretto’s administration sent me this notice on a Saturday morning and indicated that the contents of my locker would be shipped to my home. I was unable to say goodbye to my friends and teachers, or even ask for reconsideration. Furthermore, these same classmates and their parents received a letter from Loretto’s administration which accused my family of the items that I discussed above. You can read the letter here.

Some people have speculated that I got expelled because of my blog, but Loretto’s administration never asked me to restrict anything on my blog. This forum has allowed post-abortive women to share their stories, some for the very first time. These true experiences can change hearts and minds, and most importantly, can save a life.

My expulsion was the only remaining power that Loretto’s administration had over my family. They chose to use that power, stating the three pieces of “evidence” above as “proof.” This expulsion was greatly unreasonable, undeserved, and vindictive. Furthermore, the falsified “evidence” is defamation of my family’s character. For the last ten days, we have given Loretto’s administration an opportunity to retract their false statements and apologize, but they have refused. My family and I will not stand for this. I hope that you will not either.

Sun
13
Nov '05

Condoleezza Rice’s Views on Abortion

Because there have been many predictions about Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice running for President in 2008, (although Dr. Rice herself has said it is unlikely) I thought that it would be good to see how she stands on the issues.

Although I am not just concerned with one issue, abortion is important to me, as it is a life-or-death issue. In the past, there has been little light shed on Dr. Rice’s views on abortion. However, in a March interview with the Washington Times (see transcript), she spells it out more clearly.

“I believe if you go back to 2000, when I helped the president in the campaign, I said that I was, in effect, kind of Libertarian on this issue, and meaning by that that I have been concerned about a government role in this issue. I’m a strong proponent of parental choice, of parental notification. I’m a strong proponent of a ban on late-term abortion. These are all things that I think unite people and I think that that’s where we should be. I’ve called myself at times mildly pro-choice.

I’m very comfortable with the president’s view that we have to respect and need to have a culture that respects life. This should be an issue pretty infrequently because we ought to have a culture that says that, “Who wants to have an abortion? Who wants to see a daughter or a friend or, you know, a sibling go through something like that?” And so I believe the president has been in exactly the right place about this, which is, we have to respect the culture of life and we have to try and bring people to have respect for it and make this as rare a circumstance as possible. “

While I am not exactly ecstatic about this, I think it is a better position than most politicians have. Condoleezza Rice rightly notes that having a culture of life should not be an issue, and that abortion is not a thing that women should at any time desire to have. However, I think that Dr. Rice misses what abortion truly is. If abortion was just a poor choice for women, then I would totally agree. But besides harming women, abortion ends a human life. This is something that any reasonable person should be able to recognize through simple logic. The unborn have 46 chromosomes, a trait distinctly unique to humans, so the unborn are human. The unborn are growing and developing, so they are alive. The unborn are also unique individuals whose eye and hair color is already determined and who may even have a different blood type than the mother. In conclusion, the unborn are alive, unique humans and therefore are human beings, just as anyone of us are, and worthy of our protection. (For more, you can read my post Protect Life.)

Fri
4
Nov '05

“Fired Loretto teacher files complaints”

This was in the Sacramento Bee today:

Fired Loretto teacher files complaints
She says her ouster was discrimination, violating her free-speech rights.

By Todd Milbourn — Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PST
Friday, November 4, 2005
Story appeared in Metro section, Page B1

A former Loretto High School drama teacher alleged Thursday that her firing last month for having volunteered at a Planned Parenthood clinic was a case of sexual and religious discrimination and violated her free-speech rights.

Marie Bain, 50, of Sacramento, filed two separate employment complaints Thursday with the state against Loretto, the religious order that sponsors the school, the Catholic Diocese of Sacramento and Bishop William K. Weigand.
One complaint - with the state Department of Labor - calls for an investigation of the employment practices of the diocese. The other - with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing - is a first step toward a lawsuit.

“Loretto rightly prides itself as an academic institution committed to vigorous debate of ideas and beliefs,” said Bain’s attorney, John M. Poswall of Sacramento. “Unfortunately, the action of the bishop, cowering to noisy fundamentalists, threatens to turn Loretto into a Taliban-style institution of thought control and repression.”

James Sweeney, an attorney for the diocese, who had not yet seen the complaints, said he’s confident the diocese handled the case appropriately.

“It’s purely an internal matter of church discipline and is protected by the First Amendment,” he said.

Weigand called for Bain’s firing in early October in response to demands from an anti-abortion activist and mother of a Loretto student.

Weigand argued that Bain’s previous volunteer work presented an irreconcilable conflict with church teachings and set a poor example for students at the all-girls school.

Poswall stated in the complaint that Bain’s firing constituted sexual discrimination because it targeted “her beliefs and actions related to women’s reproductive rights” and sought to make “an example of her as a woman, to other young women.”

School officials knew Bain was not a Catholic and had her “own personal beliefs” when they hired her in August, Poswall stated.

Punishing her for having supported opposing values in the past is tantamount to religious discrimination, Poswall said.

Regarding the free speech claim, Poswall argued that Bain’s volunteering was akin to a “political activity,” which is a protected class of speech and a “fundamental right of all California employees.”

Tue
1
Nov '05

Press Release

The Sacramento Bee is doing an article on my expulsion. They asked for a statement. This is what I gave them:

Saturday morning, October 29th, via overnight mail, we were informed by the administration of Loretto High School of the “immediate dismissal” of our family from the school. Coming in the middle of fall term, this dismissal is most unfair and undeserved.

What is worse, however, is the administration’s outrageous charges that our family has engaged in “threats,” “abuse,” and other “malicious” behavior toward members of the Loretto community. These charges are categorically false and defamatory. In actual fact, our family has at all times acted respectfully in attempting to resolve a difficult situation for the good of all members of the Loretto community, continuously seeking reconciliation. This is an institution that we desired our daughters to attend since they were very young. Katelyn enthusiastically dedicated her extra-curricular time towards numerous school activities, including the Recruitment team, which visits elementary schools in the area to encourage 8th graders to join the Loretto community. Anyone who knows our family will recognize these allegations as blatantly false. It is very unfortunate that the administration has chosen to respond with falsehoods and vindictive spite.

Also, you may have noticed that my blog is experiencing technical difficulties. This is due to an unusually high viewing rate. I hope to post soon, but I am waiting for this technical issue to be resolved, among other things.

Mon
31
Oct '05

Expulsion from Loretto

As of Saturday, October 29th, I was given official notice by express mail that I am expelled from Loretto High School. This was given completely without forewarning, without a meeting, and without a chance to say goodbye. My family is now seeking legal advice, and more details will follow.

Wed
26
Oct '05

Loretto Update

First, I would like to thank those who commented on my blog, especially the women who courageously spoke about their abortion experiences. There is no better or truer voice for the pro-life movement than those who have had abortions. Thank you for sharing your stories.

After the initial uproar and confusion over Ms. Bain’s dismisal, things are now pretty much the same as always at Loretto, from my point of view. My friends are still my friends and, for the most part, people treat me as they did before.

One thing that I had not mentioned was that Loretto’s administration has banned my mother from campus since October 16th. Obviously, we hope this can be resolved soon, especially since there are school events (such as the school play) that our family would like to attend.

Sat
22
Oct '05

Loretto Teacher Fired: Part 2

In case some of you have not figured it out yet, Wynette Sills is my mother. I was unable to reveal this earlier because at the time of my last post, my family felt that it might make my time at Loretto awkward. After all, our family appreciates the school and hopes that my younger sister will also be able to go there. Now that the Bee has revealed our identity publicly, I would like to share the article and my thoughts as a sophomore at the school.

Anti-abortion mother got teacher ousted

By Todd Milbourn — Bee Staff Writer Published 2:15 am PDT Saturday, October 22, 2005
Story appeared on Page A1 of The Bee

The mother of a Loretto High School student obtained photographs that exposed a drama teacher as a former Planned Parenthood volunteer, a revelation that led to the teacher’s firing last week. It wasn’t the first time Wynette Sills raised her anti-abortion views on the all-female, private Catholic campus.

Sills, who leads anti-abortion rallies outside Sacramento-area Planned Parenthood offices three times a week, complained to school administrators last year about a classroom presentation on domestic violence, said Gail Erlandson, a theology teacher for 11 years at Loretto.

Sills objected to brochures listing agencies that offer help for women because they included Planned Parenthood, which supports abortion rights. The brochure was later revised.
Bishop William K. Weigand’s call to fire drama teacher Marie Bain in response to Sills’ latest protest has raised concerns in some circles that anti-abortion activists at Loretto have too much pull with the Sacramento Diocese’s top cleric.

“There are a handful of extremists in the affluent Catholic community that can make keeping the integrity of academic freedom very difficult,” said Erlandson, who retired last year in part over the brochure flap. “There is a lot of fear among teachers: How far is this going to go?”
Sills did not return repeated messages left on her telephone or at her home.
Sills provided photos of Bain escorting women into the clinic in a Sept. 19 e-mail with a letter stating: “If the identification is verified, clearly this individual cannot be a part of the Loretto staff.”

Bain “will have extensive unsupervised access to our young women at Loretto, and I must speak up or they are put at risk due to her abortion-promoting presence,” Sills wrote. “My conscience will not let me ignore this information.”

Loretto, a college preparatory school on El Camino Avenue, is one of three Catholic high schools in the Sacramento area that operate independently of the diocese. But the school still falls under the bishop’s purview on issues of morality.

Weigand, who declined to comment for this story, exercised that authority in an Oct. 5 letter to Loretto’s president, Sister Helen Timothy.

Weigand’s spokesman, the Rev. Charles McDermott, said the diocese “treads carefully not to intrude on internal affairs.”

But the message in Weigand’s letter is clear: “I am directing you, under the provisions of Code of Canon Law … to dismiss Ms. Bain with all deliberate speed.” The letter also states that the termination should be handled with “dignity, sensitivity and appropriate decorum.”
Dom Puglisi, superintendent of Catholic schools for the Diocese of Sacramento, said parents have a right to expect their students will be taught in accordance with Catholic principles. And allowing teachers to publicly display contrary beliefs sends the wrong message, he said.
“It sounds like we play hardball, but they know up front, whether they are Catholic or non-Catholic, that these are Catholic schools and we go by the teachings of the church and Rome,” said Puglisi.

Loretto has long employed Catholic and non-Catholic faculty alike. Bain, who was hired in August, is not Catholic. That fact could play a role in a potential discrimination lawsuit, wrote Bain’s attorney, John M. Poswall, in a statement.

“Loretto knew that she was not a Catholic and did not insist that she either hold or follow Catholic doctrine when they hired her,” wrote Poswall.

Vocal parents demanding action from administrators are not unique to Loretto, said the Rev. Martin Connell, an education professor at Loyola Marymount University, a Jesuit college in Los Angeles.

Increasingly, he said, “teaching and schooling is treated as a service industry - we tell people how we want our lawn cut, how we want our hair cut and how we want our children educated.”

While it’s positive to have parents more involved in their child’s education, sometimes parents step on the toes of teachers and administrators, he said.

One of the Sacramento Diocese’s seven Catholic high schools, Loretto offers a rigorous academic program with an emphasis on social justice.

Traditionally, the school’s mission has been to instill Catholic values while pushing students to become independent thinkers. School officials have said they take pride in presenting all sides of an issue.

“The idea is to come to the right decisions based on faith,” said Rebecca Williams, a University of California, San Diego, freshman who graduated from Loretto in the spring. “That doesn’t mean you always have to agree with the church, but you have to always consider both sides.”

Williams said she understands the bishop has certain moral obligations, but is disappointed he would “align himself with someone who takes pictures of people walking into a clinic.”

“What does that say about our church as a compassionate organization?” Williams asked.

At least three mornings a week, demonstrators gather in front of Sacramento-area Planned Parenthood clinics, many hoisting anti-abortion signs and shouting anti-abortion messages to clients and workers, said Katharyn McLearan, spokeswoman for the local chapter.

As a volunteer, it was Bain’s job to be a “friendly face” and help steer clients through the protesters, McLearan said.

Sills first saw Bain during one of those morning rallies, according to the e-mail Sills wrote to administrators. Sills decided to alert the school after seeing Bain at a Loretto function in September.

Many at the school have kept quiet about Bain’s firing - at least publicly. Calls to six Loretto teachers and the school principal were not returned. Timothy, who initially voiced support for Bain, has since referred all questions to Weigand’s office.

But debate is lively in cyberspace. Web sites ranging from “Bush vs. Choice” to “California High School Conservative” have weighed in.

Loretto sophomore Katelyn Sills, Wynette Sills’ daughter, started a political blog in March and has written in support of the bishop’s decision to fire Bain.

A person “who volunteers at abortion clinics on days when the killing occurs is probably not the best candidate for a position at an all-girls Catholic high school,” wrote Katelyn Sills, who did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment.

An classmate who wished to remain anonymous retorted on Sill’s blog: “Many people at our school are pro-choice but do not think that abortion is the right answer. Should we with our beliefs be expelled from the school?”

On a recent afternoon, Loretto students gabbed and listened to iPods in front of the school as they waited for rides home.

Kathryn Wahlberg, taking a break from after-school play practice, said she was in Bain’s drama classes. She drafted a four-page letter that she plans to send to the bishop. Wahlberg said Bain was a “disciplined but fun” teacher who was “really good for students who are serious about acting.”

Regarding her termination, Wahlberg said, “It makes people think we don’t tolerate people of opposite opinions. I don’t think we’re like that.”

Let me tell you the whole story. My family was not originally as pro-life as we are now. Actually, it all started at Loretto. In my freshman year in our Sexuality and Spirituality class, we had to research abortion, develop an opinion, and give a presentation to the class. That night I went home and was reading some websites. It was then that I realized that there really was no argument. You can see what I have to say on it here. I realized that if abortion is the ending of a human life, I would need to do whatever I could to protect that life. When I shared all of this with my family, they agreed. We had always made small donations to the Life Center, but after this touched our hearts, we knew we had to do more. Since then, we have gone to abortion clinics, passed out literature on fetal development and the facts of abortion, and have offered to help women in any way we can.

I have gone to the Planned Parenthood mentioned in this article and have seen this individual as an escort there. I know that many people do not know what exactly an escort does, but a blogger named”Naaman the Ex-leper” was formerly an abortion clinic escort and explains it here. When I started school and saw Ms. Bain, I just thought that they looked very similar. I mentioned this to my mom and she could not believe it. Others who go to abortion clinics with us document their time there with pictures, not of the “clients” but of the long term employees and escort activity in general just so any falsehood that the abortion clinic decides to tell can be easily disproved.

The article mentions the “brochures” that were handed out last year in our Sexuality and Spiritualty class. These “brochures” were actually business cards that were labeled “Just in Case” and listed emergency numbers and “helpful” websites. One of these websites was teenwire.com, which is Planned Parenthood’s teen outreach. If you visit this website, I’m sure you can understand why my family would be opposed to such a website being distributed at this Catholic high school.

Interestingly, the Sacramento Bee chose to interview Kathryn Wahlberg. Kathryn and I are both sophomores and we consider each other friends. We know what each other’s views are, but we don’t let that interfere with our friendship.

At a Catholic school, people can reasonably expect that the staff will support Catholic teaching. This does not mean that the teachers have to be Catholic. I have had many teachers that I admire and are not Catholic. However, Ms. Bain did not just disagree with the Church. Her moral identity is in direct conflict. John Paul II states that abortion “is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being,” and that “it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church.” This was not some small issue. When a teacher at a Catholic school has actively demonstrated that her beliefs are contrary to the Church on an issue that the Church believes is “deliberate killing”, something is very wrong.

Wed
12
Oct '05

Abort73

I have just come across an excellent pro-life website. It is At first, I thought that “Abort73″ meant no on Proposition 73, but since the website is very anti-abortion and there is no mention of Prop 73, I think that it means Abort 1973, which is the year of Roe vs. Wade.

Anyways, this is the perfect website for everyone: those who are looking for background information to support their pro-life argument, those who just don’t know much about abortion, and those that support abortion. (The last two are often times the same person.)

So please, visit http://abort73.com/.

Sun
9
Oct '05

Hilarious Parody

Conservative Schooler has written this on his blog. It’s definitely a must-read and really shows what would happen if we as a society adopted the thinking of those that oppose Prop 73.
Here’s an excerpt:

“Right now, California Public Schools require that parents see their student’s report cards. In addition, teachers may call parents at home to talk about the students.This terrorizes students. Some parents may severely punish children who receive bad grades. In addition, no child should have to endure the embarrassment of having their teacher call their parent at home.So therefore, I am proposing the Keep Kids Smart Act. This act will require that teachers get permission from students before sending home a report card or calling a parent.”