1997  Life Jewels Volume 2
1 minute pro-life audio messages for the right choice
Created 1997
Life Jewels are produced by  Life Issues Institute, Inc.
 hosted by Dr. John C. Willke.

1  2  3  4  5  6  7
Table of ContentsVolume 2 Life Jewels 1997
Click on # for text
 1] Potential Human?
 31] Abortion is to Kill?
 2] Incomparable Single Cell
 32] Abortion & Breast Cancer
 3] Plant the Seed
 33] Misscarriage & Breast Cancer
 4] Fertilize How Fast?
 34] Only a Religious Issue?
 5] Change in Charm
 35] Your Doctor, An Abortionist?
 6] Fetus v. Pre-Born
 36] Help Get Abortion?
 7] Amniocentesis
 37] UN Children's Treaty
 8] Cleanse Gene Pool?
 38] Ugly Americans
 9] Permit Experiment?
 39] Demographic Disaster
10] Fetal Defect
 40] Abortion vs. War
11] Equal Quality of Life
 41] Pater & Materfamilias
12] "Normal" and Down's
 42] Abortion/Euthanasia I
13] Enjoy Handicapped Life
 43] Abortion/Euthanasia II
14] Hadicapped adoption
 44] Abortion/Euthanasia III
15] AMA and Abortion
 45] Fear of Dying
16] AMA, AIDS & Abortion
 46] Care or Assisted Suicide
17] AMA & Partial Birth Abortion
 47] Biologically Tenacious
18] Partial Birth Abortion I
 48] German Euthanasia
19] Partial Birth Abortion II
 49] False Safeguards
20] Partial Birth Abortion III
 50] Euthanasia Society
21] Abortion % With RU 486
 51] Vulgar Language
22] Margaret Sanger
 52] Premarital Chastity
23] Creating Superman
 53] Going Steady
24] Men and Abortion
 54] Kisses
25] Men Hurt Too
 55] Child's Social Ladder
26] Message For Men
 56] Honeymoon
27] Women Not Punished
 57] Love
28] Slavery/Abortion History Repeats
 58] Night Mirrors Day
29] Abortion Clinic?
 58] Example Teaches
30] Pro-Life/Anti-Abortion
 60] What is Sex-Ed.?

Volume 2 Life Jewels 1997


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.Is a human fertilized egg only a potential human? Not so.    This is not a potential human but a human with vast potential.

We might say that the sperm swimming alone and/or the ovum waiting for the sperm constitute a potential human, but once they unite, this is a human. This being is already male or female. We know this from X and Y chromosomes. He or she is alive and growing, not dead.

Human? Yes. Each cell has the 46 characteristic chromosomes that identify it as a member of the human family. This is not a carrot and certainly not a dog. This single cell contains more information than all of the computers at the Space Center in Houston.

Is this single cell only a potential human? No, rather this is a human with vast potential. This is Dr. John Willke. TOC


The human fertilized egg is only a single cell, but it is an incredibly remarkable and unique one. It is already male or female.

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Never before in the history of the world has this exact individual human existed nor ever will again. It is complete.

No bits or pieces will be added from this time until the old man or woman dies. Nothing will be added but nutrition and oxygen. This being is programmed from within, moving forward in a self-controlled, ongoing process of growth, development and replacement of his or her own dying cells.

At this point, he or she is dependent upon the mother for shelter and food, but in all other respects is a totally new, different, unique and independent human being. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.
Throughout most of history, it was always assumed that the man planted the entire new being in the body of the woman.

They knew that when a farmer planted a wheat grain in the soil, the soil gave it nourishment and the wheat plant grew. The entire wheat plant was originally contained in that kernel, that seed.

And so it was logical to assume the same in human reproduction. From this we get the term of "the man planting the seed". We also speak of the woman being "fertile" or "barren".

It wasn't until the early 19th century, when conception was discovered, that it was shown that the woman contributed half of the new being, the man half, and that the result was a new living human. Thought you'd like to know. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


Do you know how long it takes for human fertilization to occur? Actually, it happens rather quickly.

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. First of all, sperm enter the woman's body. They swim through the cavity of her womb and out through her fallopian tubes. It can take as short a time as five minutes to get through the uterus to reach the tubes, and as little as 15 more minutes to go through the tubes to reach her ovaries.

If at that time the egg is breaking out of the shell of her ovary, it can be penetrated by one of the sperm very quickly. When penetration happens, the ovum instantly creates a chemical or electrical charge or fence preventing other sperm from entering. Most people refer to this as the "moment of conception". This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. After a baby leaves his mother to now live separately, what is the change medically?

The only real change is in the external life support systems. At birth he changes his method of feeding and of getting oxygen.

Previously these were obtained from the mother through the baby's umbilical cord - now the baby gets oxygen through his own lungs and nutrition through his own stomach. Except for this, it's the same baby whose bodily organs and muscles are functioning exactly the same after birth as they did before.

There is one other change that we don't always speak of -- a change in charm, for now you can see the baby, hold and cuddle him. It's a lot more difficult to kill a baby after birth, than before. This is Dr. John Willke with today's Life Issue. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Words are important. What should pro-lifers call the being growing within the mother?

Always speak of the unborn baby, pre-born baby or child. And "Developing baby" is also professionally accurate.

Sometimes more human terms should be used, such as "the little guy".  Do avoid referring to the unborn child as "it". Rather use "he" or "she".

Remember that terms like "the fetus" and "the embryo", which fall on the listening ear, often mean non-human glob. So never use those terms if you can avoid it.

But, if you must, then speak of the living human fetus. Remember, the stage "fertilized egg" lasts only one day. What implants a week later is not a fertilized egg but rather a living embryonic baby. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.  You're pregnant. Your doctor wants to test the fluid around the baby - do an amniocentesis. You have absolutely no intention of aborting, even if the baby is not normal. You also know that this test results in the death of 1% of the babies tested.

So you say "no". Your doctor insists and insists. What should you do? Tell him to write down in his records that he has urged you to have the test. Read his records. Write down that you refuse. Sign with a witness.

Guess what? He'll quit insisting. Why? The reason he wanted the test was to prevent a possible lawsuit from you in the event the baby was not normal. Now you can't sue, and he'll quit bugging you, because probably the main reason he wanted the test done was to protect himself. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Would it ever be possible to cleanse the gene pool? Well, no. Any talk about breeding out genetic diseases is a lot of nonsense. Seriously affected people are unlikely to marry and unlikely to have children.

Rather, bad genes, if you call them that, are passed along by carriers. For instance, there are 40 carriers for every one person with sickle cell disease. If every such affected victim were killed before birth, it would require 750 years just to cut the incident in half.

And to stamp it out altogether would require 200,000 abortions for every 500,000 couples. You see, each normal person is the carrier of three or four bad genes, and the only way to eliminate genetic diseases would be to sterilize everybody or abort everyone. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


Can parents give permission for medical experimentation on their child?

Yes, but...it is assumed that they have concern for their child's welfare, and the hope must be that such experimentation will be of greater benefit to the child than any possible harm from the experimentation.

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. But parents who give consent to abortion, to have their child in the womb killed, obviously have no such loving interest. Legal tradition in our country has always forbidden parents to injure, or allow others to injure, their child.

That's what child abuse laws are all about. So, if some kind of proposed fetal experimentation is not done to preserve the life or health of the pre-born baby, then the parents have no moral right at all to grant permission. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Do you use the word "fetal deformity" or "fetal defect"?

I hope not. Why should we use such turn-off adjectives before birth, when we don't use them after the child is born?

Think a moment. The word "deformity" makes us turn away almost in revulsion. "Defective"?

Our culture throws defective things away. Rather, use handicapped. It's a word that calls for a helping hand. To use "fetal deformity" or "fetal defect" is to make the killing easier.

To use "fetal handicap" is to open someone's heart and invite them to help. Remember, killing a handicapped pre-born is killing the patient to cure the disease. Before birth and after birth, it's the same patient with the same handicap. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


Is it worth the expense to save the lives of tiny premature babies? Can those children enjoy life as others do, particularly if they are left with certain neurologic handicaps?

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. A recent study compared two groups of teenagers. One group had weighed less than a 1000 grams (2 lbs.), the others were born with normal weights.

One-fourth of the preemies, but only 2% of the others, had some degree of disability. Each was asked to evaluate him or herself on how they perceived their own health-related quality of life.

Both "normals" @ 73% and those born prematurely @ 71% valued life highly and almost the same. Are their lives worth saving? Just ask them, they'll tell you. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. One day, many years ago, two babies were delivered in Braunau, Austria. One was a fine healthy boy. He had a strong cry. His parents were extremely happy and proud of their son.

The other was a little girl. Her parents were very sad, for she was a Down's Syndrome baby. A physician friend followed them both for almost 50 years.

The girl grew up living at home and was finally destined to be the one who nursed her mother through a very long and lingering illness after she had a stroke. My friend does not remember her name. He does, however, remember the boy's name. He died in a bunker in Berlin. His name was Adolf Hitler. This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. (Listen Now)

The assumption that handicapped people enjoy life less than "normal" people has been shown to be completely false.

A number of well documented investigations have shown that there's no difference between handicapped people and those without handicaps in their degree of life satisfaction or of outlook of what lies immediately ahead, and their vulnerability to frustration.

In one series of 150 unselected spina bifida patients who were questioned when they were older children, all were asked whether their handicaps made life not worth living - and should they have been allowed to die after birth.

The unanimous response was forceful. Of course they wanted to live. In fact, they thought the question was ridiculous. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Recently a concerned mother called me regarding her daughter's pregnancy.

Two couples were interested in adopting her baby. However, when born, the baby had Down's Syndrome, and neither couple then wanted the child.

We called the Down's Syndrome Association of that city and were told that there were 30 couples in that area waiting to adopt a baby with Down's Syndrome. The baby was placed in a pair of loving arms. Did you know that there are couples waiting throughout the nation for handicapped babies, no matter how severe their problem? (TOC)

Recently a baby who was born deaf, blind and without arms or legs was placed for adoption. Truly there are no unwanted babies. This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. In the nineteenth century, the American Medical Association called physician abortionists "men who cling to a noble profession only to dishonor it - false brethren - educated assassins - modern Herods - the executioners.
These men should be marked as Cain. They should be made the outcasts of society."

That was back then, but in recent years the AMA has defined such abortionists as "conscientious physicians who should be permitted to perform abortions."

Back then the AMA called abortion "the slaughter of countless children - unwarrantable destruction of human life." But now the AMA calls it "the induced termination of pregnancy - a medical procedure." It's something to think about! This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. The cover of a recent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association was blank because the issue was focused on AIDS.

Readers were asked to consider the "incalculable loss" from the disease -- "the loss to all those whose lives would have been touched, even changed, but were not; by books not read because they were never written; by paintings not seen because they were never painted; by performances never heard because the song was not sung."

The same issue contains a laudatory review of a book about abortionists (hmmm). Perhaps we should consider "the incalculable loss to all of those whose lives would have been touched, even changed, but were not, by books not read because they were never written, by paintings etc., because they were killed before they were born." (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. The American Medical Association's policy on abortion, since the Supreme Court decision, has been that what is legal is medically acceptable. In other words, they have had a pro-abortion policy.

However, a welcome exception to this occurred during the Senate debate on partial-birth abortion. In an unexpected reversal of its previous policy, the AMA announced that the partial-birth abortion procedure is one that; quote "is never the only appropriate procedure and has no history in peer-reviewed medical literature or in accepted medical practice."

Translated that means that this is the one method of abortion that the AMA opposes. Let's hope my medical colleagues also re-think their approval of the other methods of killing the unborn. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


Partial-birth abortion. In over 80%, these babies are entirely normal, and the mother has no obstetric problem.

These babies are past the half-way mark and, with few exceptions, can survive outside of the womb, if allowed to be born. This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. The abortionist risks the mother's future ability to have children by spending three days stretching open the mouth of her womb.

Then he risks perforating her uterus by reaching into the womb from below and bringing the baby down feet first in a breech delivery.

He delivers the body, then, still keeping the head in the birth canal, jams a scissors into the base of this living child's skull, threads a tube between the blades and kills the child by sucking out his brains. Then he delivers the head of the now dead baby. Abortion? Not really -- this is infanticide. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.  80% of partial birth abortions kill a normal, viable baby during delivery. In one Senate debate, a pro-abortion senator was asked,

"What if, just as the abortionist is about to jam a scissors into the skull of this live baby, the mother coughs and the baby pops out?

Can you now kill the baby?"

The senator changed the subject. Let us answer it. She wanted to get unpregnant, and now she is. So why not just cut the cord and send the infant to the nursery?

Yes, and into the loving arms of adoptive parents. You know even if you believe that the mother must terminate her pregnancy, there is absolutely no reason to kill the child -- except that the mother wants the baby dead. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.  Partial birth abortion. Four-fifths of these babies and mothers are normal, and almost all are old enough to survive if allowed to be delivered.

But what if the baby's head is too large?

The abortionist must reach up inside the womb, a dangerous thing, turn the baby and deliver it feet first, then jam a scissors up into his or her skull and suck out the brains before delivery.

But why expose the mother to the risks of permanent damage to her cervix, perforation and laceration of her womb, bloods clots and more?

Why not a simple, safe Cesarian Section, if the head is too large? Because they want her baby dead. A C-Section would give her a live baby and they want the baby killed. Stop and think -- this is really what partial-birth abortion is all about. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


The French abortion pill, RU 486 -- Yes, it is coming to the United States. Tightly restricted at the beginning, but then the gates open.

What percent of induced abortions may ultimately be done using the pill? This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.

Well, let's look at France. We've been told repeatedly that 25% of abortions in France are done with the pill. That's not correct.

Official data from the French health department tells us that there have never been more than 14% of French women who have used RU 486.

The numbers in Sweden are way below that, and in Britain it is only about 2%. These figures may give us a clue as to what percent will be done with the pill here in America. The main method will still remain surgical abortion. I just wanted to let you know. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. In her 1922 book, Pivot of Civilization, the author unabashedly called for drastically limiting the number of people in certain racial groups.

She called them "weeds" overrunning the human garbage.

She was a eugenist who called for the segregation of those whom she called morons, misfits and maladjusted. She wanted to sterilize "genetically inferior races", singling out Chinese, Jews, Southern Europeans and Blacks.

And who was this? She was Margaret Sanger.

Her American Birth Control League's goals in the '40s paralleled too closely what happened in Nazi Germany, so she changed its name to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. I thought you should know. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Do you remember a famous person in 1934 who decreed that no woman should have the legal right to bear a child without a permit, and that no permit should be valid for more than one child?

This person called for the elimination of those she called "the unfit, the disgenic". She coined the word "birth control" and spoke of it as the process of weeding out the unfit, aimed at the creation of a "superman".

Famous quotes were:

"The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it"..and.."All our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class." And who said, wrote and published these little gems? Margaret Sanger - - founder of Planned Parenthood. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


Do men suffer the after-effects of abortion? You're probably aware that abortion often severely affects women psychologically. But did you know that many men also suffer from the loss of their child?

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Men are instinctively programmed to provide for and protect their offspring. Sadly, because of U.S. Supreme Court rulings, the woman can shut the father out of this, one of life's most crucial decisions. The father has no legal right to stop the killing of his unborn child. In the wake of abortion, men often suffer considerable grief and shame because they were unable to provide for and protect their unborn baby.

This can result in corrosive anger, suppressed guilt and a variety of other symptoms. So, remember men suffer too. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. What are the symptoms of men who suffer psychologically from the loss of their baby by abortion?

Anger is common and often is expressed in a destructive way. He may turn to alcohol or drugs to dull the pain of his grief and shame. He may become a workaholic. He may become unemployable due to an inability to handle decision-making. He may be an excessive risk-taker, setting himself up for failure, and then seeing this self-inflicted failure as punishment for failing to protect his unborn baby.

Future relationships with women may be difficult or impossible. Additional symptoms include: sexual dysfunction, sleeplessness, panic attacks, poor coping skills, flashbacks, nightmares, self-imposed isolation or even suicidal tendencies. Yes, men hurt too, and we shouldn't forget this. This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.
Are you a man with an abortion in your past?

If you're having difficulty dealing with the loss of your unborn child, I have encouraging news for you. You are not alone. Your feelings are shared by millions of other men. There are compassionate men and women, many who have also experienced abortion, willing to assist you in dealing with this loss.

What to do? Locate your local right to life group or crisis pregnancy center. There you will find loving, caring people who can help you.

You need to share your story with someone you can trust. You need to grieve over this shame and loss. You need to mourn for the baby you will never hold in your arms. There is help for you so don't wait. Make that call today. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. In years past, when abortions were illegal, were women punished if convicted of getting an abortion?

The answer is no.

But abortionists were punished. If convicted they were sent to jail--never executed, but they were sentenced to serve time in the penitentiary.

In sharp contrast, women were never punished. In all of the history of the U.S., there isn't a single case where a woman was even indicted for getting an abortion. The law always recognized the woman as being a victim. Let's remember that laws in the United States rely heavily on precedent. If abortion is ever again forbidden, let me predict that abortionists will again be punished, but not the woman. Thought you'd like to know. This is Dr. John Willke.


We cannot say too often that the basis of slavery was the deep-seated conviction of so many people that black people were biologically inferior. Is abortion an analogy?

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.  Listen to what I said in my book, Abortion & Slavery-History Repeats:

"For decades our nation tolerated, indeed stoutly defended an institution which embodied the theory that a whole race of people were biologically inferior to others. They formulated ingenious rationalizations for their conduct, devised legal barriers to its correction, heaped indignities upon those who spoke out in protest, challenged the right of free inquiry and discussion, and finally, tragically, sent their own men out to kill each other in the Civil War."

Except for the war, we're repeating the same story with abortion. This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Please understand that the term "abortion clinic" is a clear and strong pro-abortion propaganda term. Sadly, pro-lifers use it only too often, but it's an inherent contradiction. A clinic is where you go to be healed, so these aren't clinics.

What to use? Abortion mill? Abortorium, Killing center? Call it an abortion facility, if you must be neutral. But, best of all, call it an abortion chamber. That reminds us of gas chambers, extermination centers.

Properly so. Every second human being who enters an abortion chamber is exterminated. And we do mean that tiny human inside the womb of his or her mother. Perhaps we should remember how important words are. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. We call ourselves "pro-life". They call us "anti-abortion". By all means, let's phrase this positively. We are for protection of the unborn, the handicapped, the aged, and for help for the mother. Do not accept the negative label - "anti-abortion". (TOC)

There is nothing negative about being for life. In any case, we are not only against abortion, but were also against infanticide and euthanasia.

And what should you call them? Please, never call them "pro-choice". When you do, you help change the question to one of women's rights. When that happens, more babies die, and your use of the words "pro-choice" can help to kill babies. Call them pro-abortion, call them anti-life. Anything - but not pro-choice. If at times you must use those two words, always add "pro-choice to kill". This is Dr. John Willke


This is Dr. John Willke with A Life Issue:
 For abortion, the proper word to use is "kill", as in "kill babies".  Use it repeatedly, consistently, directly, often.  It is a non-judgmental, accurate, biologic description of what happens.  We use it when we step on a roach.  We use it when we spray crabgrass.  Use it here also.  What of the word "murder"? 

Well, a much stronger word.  But you cannot murder a dog or an insect, only a human being.  So to call him a murderer, clearly implies that he knows that this is a living human being and kills anyway.  Therefore, use "murderer" with caution.  It has its place, but sometimes it can be counter-productive.  The word "kill", however, as in "kill babies", is always in order.  This is Dr. John Willke.



You continue to hear about the link between women having abortions and later breast cancer. Well, you'll be hearing more.

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. (Listen Now)

To date, there are 11 major studies that have been done in the U.S., and ten of them confirm the abortion/breast cancer link.

Worldwide there have been 30 major valid studies, and 24 show a direct association between abortion and breast cancer. On an average, these studies are showing that if she has an abortion, particularly if before her first full-term pregnancy, she increases her chance in later life for breast cancer by upwards of 50%.

This looks more and more like a definite cause-and-effect relationship. I, for one, am now convinced it's real. Best you think about this. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.

You've heard that induced abortion is closely associated with, and may be a cause of breast cancer in later life.

The question then arises - what of a miscarriage?

Does it also bring such a threat? Happily, the answer is no.

The reason apparently lies in the degree of stimulation of her breast cells by the female hormone, estrogen, which has been implicated as being a major causative factor of breast cancer.

Early in a normal pregnancy, estrogen is present in her body in very high levels and is needed to maintain the pregnancy.

When a miscarriage occurs, however, almost without exception she had considerably lower levels of this hormone in her body. Therefore, there was less stimulation, and this produced less of a threat of cancer. This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Is abortion only a religious issue? The bottom line is that our religious faith motivates us. Belief in God, in our creation by Him, in his authorship of life, of his commandments and His justice, and in our brotherhood and sisterhood with the unborn, is a powerful motivation which leads believers to work for the protection of the unborn.

But it can never be the sole legal justification for seeking laws to protect the unborn. The legal and secular reason for such laws is that this is a human rights issue, a civil rights issue.

Should an entire class of living humans be deprived of their unalienable right to life on the basis of age (too young) and place of residence - living in the womb? This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Is your doctor an abortionist?

Most abortionists ply their grisly trade full time. But some also maintain a private practice.

All women have a right to know if their doctor does abortions. Do you really think that doctor is going to have the dedication and put forth the needed effort to save the life of your child at delivery - if that same day he's being paid to kill some other woman's baby?

I'd suggest you find out who the abortion doctors are in your area. Then widely publicize who they are through public pronouncements, in your newsletters -- yes, and picketing them, if necessary. Most doctors who are part-time abortionists will quit the killing business if this ugly practice of theirs is publicized. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. You have a friend who's going to get an abortion? You tried to talk her out of it and failed?

She's definitely going anyway, and now she asks you to drive her there and support her? Should you?

My advice is - absolutely not!

If she said she was going to commit suicide, would you drive her to the bridge?

If you do drive her, babysit her other children, loan her money or help in any way, your actions loudly and clearly tell her that abortion is all right, no matter what else you say.

What should you do beyond explaining fetal development and offering any and all alternatives? Pray for her and with her. Tell her she can call you if she needs help afterwards, but do not aid her in any way. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. The treaty, the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, sounds good but it does not recognize any specific right of parents to make decisions for their children. The only authority is the State.

It potentially could outlaw spanking, outlaw home schooling, give children rights independent of their parents, give them the right to contraceptives and abortions irrespective of parental wishes, prohibit parents from teaching religion to an unreceptive child or from taking them to church, put parents under active scrutiny by the State, register and track all children, lead to universal child care - and the ugly list goes on.

Do you think our Senate should ratify that United Nations treaty? This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. You've heard the phrase, "Ugly American"? We're called this by many in the Third World because of what our foreign aid is doing to their countries.

Foreign aid sounds good, but what does it translate into in those poor countries?

I travel extensively overseas and see it again and again. Walk into a health clinic subsidized by funds from the USAID.

The shelves will be loaded with condoms and contraceptive pills. but no penicillin.

It's quite clear to them that our government has a single-minded purpose - to prevent them from having children, to abort those who are conceived, and then, only too often, not to help keep them alive after they are born. They call us "Ugly Americans"? You know what? They're right. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Do you know which nation in the world has the lowest birth rate? It's Italy.

The average woman there is now bearing only 1.2 babies in her lifetime. In order to only replace those who die, the average woman in a nation must have, not 1.2 but 2.1 babies.

Italy is a rapidly aging nation. Unless the birth rate rises dramatically, that nation as we know it will largely disappear by the end of the next century. But all of Western Europe is in similar trouble.

The average in Western Europe is 1.5 babies. Remember, they need 2.1 just to stay at Zero Population Growth. Population observers are now beginning to speak of Western Europe as a demographic disaster area. Incidentally, except for our heavy immigration, the U.S. would be following not too far behind. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. You've heard that pro-life people are inconsistent. They say that we want to stop the killing of the unborn, but that we're all in favor of killing in war.

Not so, of course, but let's look at the differences.

If there is ever a clear-cut justification for war, it would be a war of self-defense. In contrast, abortion is brutal aggression.   This kind of war would not be wanted - it would be unplanned.

Abortion is wanted and planned. War is waged by the state.

Abortion is committed by a private citizen. Again, war is one nation against another nation, whereas abortion is one individual who sees to the killing, or does the killing, of another private individual. There is a difference. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Reverend Charles Carroll, an Episcopal priest, chaplin at University of California at Berkley, expert in international law and U.S. officer at the Nuremburg trials,

has stated, "As I would reject the law of pater- familias of ancient Rome, so I would also reject the law of mater- familias in present day America. As I would not sympathize with the Roman state giving the power of life and death over his offspring to the Roman father, so I cannot sympathize with the Supreme Court decision granting the power of life and death over her offspring to the American mother. Surely, I would hope our lawmakers would be as humane as the Emperor Hadrian who abolished that article of Roman law." This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Abortion and euthanasia both directly kill living humans, and they're both done for the same reasons:

• Usefulness - We kill a baby in the womb because we assume he will be a burden, but, since his stroke, Dad has been a burden.

• Wantedness - The unborn baby is unwanted, and so she aborts. Do you know any old folks who are unwanted?

• Degree of Perfection - The baby is not perfect; she will be handicapped, and so the pre-born baby is killed, but what of your Aunt Susie now in the nursing home and quite handicapped?

• Age - The baby is too young. He has not yet reached a certain age, therefore he can be aborted. But what of Uncle Joe? He is long past a certain age.

If we kill because one human is too young, will we someday kill another because he is too old? This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Abortion and euthanasia both directly kill living humans, and they're both done for the same reasons:

• Cost - Children are aborted because their parents are too poor, but someday will their parents be killed because their children are too poor?

• Numbers - They have too many children already, and so they abort this one. Soon we will have far too many old folks, and so will we rid ourselves of them?

• Intelligence - We rationalize abortion because the baby is not yet conscious. But what of the lady with Alzheimer's who is no longer really conscious or aware any more.

If you can kill one, why not the other?
Abortion and euthanasia both kill and both are done for the same reasons. Think about it. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Abortion and euthanasia both directly kill living humans, and they're both done for the same reasons:

• Place of Residence - Abortion is allowed because the baby is still living in his first little house, the womb. You can't kill him after he moves out. But if a criteria for killing the unborn is place of residence, what about all these old folks living in nursing homes?

• Marital Status - The mother is unmarried, therefore abortion is okay. But Aunt Mary is widowed, therefore euthanasia is?

• Meaningful Life - The Supreme Court justified abortion because the fetus "does not yet have meaningful life."

Euthanasia bills now speak of those who "no longer have meaningful life."

Abortion and euthanasia both kill, and for the same reasons. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


Many people really fear dying. They fear the pain that may be involved; they fear being a burden; they fear rejection, loss of control. But dying does not have to be a horrible experience.

This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.

Physical pain can always be alleviated. But that's not the ultimate goal. We who love this person should try to make their dying an honorable and rewarding experience.

You can sit with that person quietly or in conversation. You can pray with him or her. You can sing to them. You can rub their back, oil their skin, hold their hand, bring flowers.

Hospices are examples of the best of this tender, loving care by those closest to the patient. When this care is given, the question of assisted suicide doesn't even arise. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue.Assisted suicide or compassionate care?

The question is being argued.

Over the last two decades we've learned a great deal from hospice care. We found that if we can keep a patient comfortable and, more importantly, help them feel confident that they will not be alone and abandoned, then dying can be a meaningful time, a rich time of life.

Given those conditions, families then are able to say things to each other -- "I love you", "Thank you", "I forgive you", "Forgive me", and then "Goodbye".

It's a time when that person can retell stories, can share with children, spouse and loved ones what they have learned and the meaning of the life they leave behind. It can provide rich, rewarding and meaningful memories to their posterity. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. uthanasia people constantly paint a frightening picture.

It's of an old man tied down in bed, in great pain and obviously dying. He has tubes in every body orifice.

Why don't these cruel doctors let him die?

You know what?    That's not the person they're interested in. That poor gentleman will die.

Proponents of euthanasia are much more concerned about those who somebody thinks ought to die but who won't -- the biologically tenacious.

These are people not in pain, not on life support, but, by somebody's judgment, are burdens.

It is the normals around them who judge their quality of life to be unacceptable and who want them dead. But if we begin by allowing this old man to be killed, they will move to the next and the next, and where will it stop? This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Was the German Euthanasia Program the same as the Nazi Holocaust? No, it was not.

The German Euthanasia Program began several years before the first Jew was killed. It was begun by doctors who decided that some lives were not worth living. First they killed hopelessly insane adults and idiot children.

The price tag was then progressively lowered until those institutions were empty. The first gas chamber was erected in a psychiatric hospital by doctors.

Three years later, after these doctors established that defective humans could or should be killed, Hitler turned to a "defective" race, and the Holocaust began.

But the entering wedge of the Holocaust was when doctors decided that some lives were not worth living and began to kill them. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Those who favor assisted suicide or euthanasia tell us that it's happening anyway. They say that if we make a law permitting it, and with sufficient restrictions, this would regulate it, stop back-alley euthanasia and would be the humane thing to do.

But, if those doctors are not obeying the law now, what makes us think that they would obey the new law then?

If they're willing to risk their careers by committing a felony now, what makes us think that they would hesitate to commit a misdemeanor then?

Experience in Holland has shown conclusively that, even though legalization included a dozen restrictions to prevent abuse, after a short time many doctors ignored all restrictions. And today thousands are killed by doctors without their knowledge or consent. This is Dr. John Willke.


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Is there a euthanasia society in America? Yes, there is, and that was its original name.

But it didn't attract many members, and so they changed their name to the Society for the Right to Die. That still didn't do the trick, so they changed again to The Society for Concern for Dying.

This one clicked and has attracted more members.

Dear Abby was a prominent founding member of their advisory council, as was Dr. Allan Guttmacher, former head of Planned Parenthood.

Another more recent group is the Hemlock Society. Its equivalent in England is the Exit Society. They are all from the same "culture of death" people. They're all after the same thing. They want to make it legal for doctors to kill patients. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Vulgar language has always existed. Expressions referring to Divine Persons, excrement or genital sex have debased language since the dawn of history.

Until recently, vulgar language was largely a preserve of men, but now vulgar and obscene language have become fairly common among young women. Is this a necessary equalization of the sexes -a gain for women - liberation, progress? Or is it cultural degeneration? Have they lost by debasing themselves?

In the past, has vulgar language increased a man's power and stature before women? Does its use today by a girl make her more feminine, add to her attractiveness to men?

Stop and think -- what do those words, that you're using, really mean? Is that what you really mean to say? Think about it. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Is premarital chastity only a religious value, or is it one oriented toward the preservation of intact family life, and hence a value that helps maintain a stable society?

Was chastity imposed in times past for reasons no longer valid, or was it also learned by man and woman through trial and error over the centuries and then incorporated into both civil and religious value systems?

Well I think it's obvious that certain ethical religious norms have gone beyond the realm of sectarian religious teaching, and now, as core values, have become firmly embedded in Western civilization. Thou shalt not kill is certainly one. I believe premarital chastity is another one of these values. Do you? This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Bernice entered the dress shop contemplating a purchase. The clerk showed her only one dress and said there was no other choice. Did she buy?

No. In fact, she walked out quite upset. She wasn't content with such a narrow choice. She wanted to see a wide selection of dresses of varying styles, materials and prices before finally committing herself. Only then could she be sure she had the right one.

But this same Bernice has been going steady with one boy for over a year now and intends to continue in that commitment. She had never really dated much before meeting him. But she's sure this is "it", and she dreams of marrying this boy when they finish high school. Strange world! This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Stop and think. There are many kinds of kisses.

There are hello kisses, thank-you kisses, I-like-you kisses, I-love-you kisses, I'll-use-you kisses, let's-go-further kisses.

You see, a kiss is more than a handshake.

It says something more than words. It says something to your partner. It also says something about you.

The Statue of Liberty says something. A red stoplight says something. A girl's diamond ring says something. But the lofty message of the Lady in the Harbor has at times been abused. People do run stoplights. Some girls aren't faithful. A sign means something, or it should. A kiss is a sign, and kisses can say many things. What do your kisses say? This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Each child climbs a ladder, beginning with the first dancing, then dating -- and that leads rung by rung to eventual marriage.

For most, this seems to take just so long. The younger they begin, the younger they top out. If the climb up this social ladder is begun in high school, they reach the top, are ready for and can marry in their early 20's when their chances for a successful marriage are good.

But if the climb up this ladder is begun in primary grades, and they're dating by junior high, then many will reach the top, become intimate too soon, too often get pregnant, face abortion and perhaps a too early marriage.

Their chances for happy lifetime marriages are clearly less if they climb this ladder too soon. What rung are your children on? This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Is a honeymoon important? Yes! For most couples, it was an unforgettable time.

But from a social standpoint, it is also important. It marks the boundary between one social status and another. The engagement, wedding and honeymoon are called "rights of passage".

The more formal and the longer the engagement, the more ritualized the ceremony and the longer the honeymoon, the more this contributes to the full celebration of the entrance into marriage, strengthening the bond, helping to ensure it will endure.

Did you know that only half of sexually experienced couples take a honeymoon, compared to 90% of virgins?

Did you know that those who've tried it out ahead of time divorce more often, while virginal marriages are much more stable? This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Being able to love is really what makes us human.

Sexual activity, to be human, must be governed by love. To the extent that it becomes mere instinct, desire and satisfaction, it becomes sub-human and destructive to a stable human society.

Being able to love is at the core of being a human person. It is the center of human existence. It can be expressed sexually, and powerfully so, but sex alone is not love, anymore than love needs to be expressed sexually.

Love is an action. Love is giving something of myself freely, hoping for a return of your love, but not making this a condition of my gift. Love is giving something that will make you happier, healthier, holier, wiser, more mature, more content, more secure. True love is never selfish. It means doing what is best for you, who I love. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. A married couple's night reflects like a mirror the day that precedes it. Was it a good or a bad day between them?

Did they talk to each other about what each was doing; did they share what each hoped to accomplish that day?

Were they tender and considerate of each other? Or did they ignore each other? Was there apartness, a distancing, arguing, bitterness, upset?

Nighttime compatibility reflects the all-day-longness of their life. Young people must be told this. It is of crucial importance and true of every marriage.

You should marry a person with whom you're compatible all day long. If you do, the nights will take care of themselves and grow in richness. Take it from a guy who has had 49 wonderful years with the same woman. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. A philandering husband cheating on his wife may be a very accomplished sexual athlete indeed.

He may know all about it and know how to do it very well, but he flunks sex education. He's using his power of sex in a way that's damaging to himself and to all of those close to him.

Another couple, however, may have never heard of fallopian tubes but may have used sex within their marriage in a way that has brought them peace, fulfillment and happiness.

If their children also reflect the security and love of the home that these parents have created, they get an "A" in sex education. You see, most values and attitudes are taught by the day-to-day witnessing of parents' lives and have very little to do with teaching facts of biology. This is Dr. John Willke. (TOC)


This is Dr. John Willke with a Life Issue. Sex education is largely accomplished at home before the child enters school and in fact is largely learning attitudes about masculine and feminine sexuality. (TOC)

This way of living and acting, taught by their parents' example, largely determines whether their children will adopt as their own a set of values that will help bring them happiness and peace and will help stabilize the society in which they will live as adults.

This, at its core, is what sex education is all about. It's an education to a value system, and parents' actions speak so loud that their children can't hear the words they say. For better or for worse, in so many ways, your children will end up doing as you did, not as you told them to do. Think about it. This is Dr. John Willke.(TOC)



Top of Page

W3C  Validated HTML 4.01 & Link checker

Christian Top 1000