Another Abortion Partner with Development and Peace

In what seems to be an ever deepening tide of evidence, the National Catholic Register is now reporting that Development and Peace has partnered with a pro-abortion group in Bolivia. Read the story here.

The group, CEPROSI, is called a "feminist woman's health NGO" and acording to sources cited in the article has been one of the most "militant and radical" groups attempting to lobby the Bolivian government to pass pro-abortions laws.

My thoughts on D&P are clear in the earlier posts on the subject, so I'm not going to repeat them or editorialize in this post. I'm just passing along this story.

Development and Peace Update

As promised, here is another update on the D&P Story. Archbishop Thomas Collins of the diocese of Toronto has reportedly (in a letter to the priests of his diocese) called for an investigation into D&P. Read the story here. He has stated that if money is going to pro-abortion groups, funding will be denied to D&P from the archdiocese of Toronto.

In case anyone is wondering, Archbishop Collins has strongly and vocally suported D&P in the past when he was Bishop of Edmonton. (See here) There is no way he can be (in my opinion) accused of having an agenda against D&P.

I had the privilege of hearing Archbishop Collins speak last September and he is an amazing speaker. From what I've seen, he's also a great shepherd of his flock. I want to thank him for speaking out about this- as far as I'm aware, he's the first Bishop to address the allegations.

He hasn't forbidden funding- he's simply asking that an investigation be conducted to ensure that abortion is not being supported. I think that's a very prudent decision and I hope other diocese look into this further.

Making issues like this public is important- so very important because that's how change is made. I certainly don't think D&P purposely chose to partner with pro-choice organizations, but it seems to be clear that they are. A public investigation, and open and frank discussion by the D&P leadership is what we need so everyone can be confident that their donations do not support abortion. And D&P may need to find new Mexican partners, but if that's what it takes to save lives, then that's what needs to be done.

More updates as I find them.

Further Development and Peace Developments

Shortly after sending out the e-mail and posting a story on the blog last week alleging that Development and Peace (D&P) are funding/partnering with groups who support abortion, I received a response from a friend whom I'd sent the e-mail to. She had passed it along to other friends, who were involved with D&P and they'd asked D&P for their response. D&P's executive director, Michael Casey posted a response to the article at here and asked D&P members to forward all inquiries to him. In his response, he states that D&P follow the teachings of the Church, and stated that some journalists deliberately misinterpret D&P's work. In my opinion, this response did not go far enough to address the issue, because serious allegations were made, so I wrote to Mr. Casey asking him 5 specific questions (after explaining my interest in the issue). My questions were:

1) What is Development and Peace's position on abortion?
2) Do you carefully examine all groups you give funds to/partner with to ensure they do not in any way support abortion or pro-choice activities in general? How thorough are your background checks on these organizations?
3) Did you give or partner with:
a) Augustin Pro Juarez Center for Human Rights
b) Mexican Network for Action Regarding Free Trade
c) Center for Economic and Political Research for Community Action"
d) National Center for Social Communication
e) Network for All Rights for Everyone
4) If you did partner or grant funds to any of the above groups, are you certain they do not in any way support abortion? If so, why are you certain of that?
5) A local Development and Peace member told a friend of mine that "Lifesite has been trying to discredit D&P for some time"; Is this the position of Development and Peace, and if so what proof can you offer of that?

I have heard no response to my questions. Other people I've spoken to who also contacted D&P after the response were posted have also heard nothing.

I was asked to pass the Mr. Casey's posted response along to everyone I'd sent the first e-mail to so that they could have both sides of the story. I think that is a fair request, and that's what I'm doing now. The reason I didn't post it when first requested is I wanted to get more facts straight, because I realized in my zeal to protect life I may have jumped the gun. I should have contacted D&P before making the first post, so I do apologize to all of you

Further developments have occurred.

Yesterday, Lifesite responded to the controversy around their first article (Read it here). In my blog post, I asked you not to donate to D&P because of the abortion connections. I want to make it clear that was my request, not something Lifesite was advocating. They were just trying to pass the information along. Despite Mr. Casey's response, I am still asking you to not donate to D&P. Another friend was curious about the allegations, so she did a little bit of investigation to see what was really going on. Below are her findings. (I have not changed them in any way except for some formatting because the copy and paste didn't work so well):

Life Site News on Development and Peace

Well, here it goes! This is a crazy problem.

I have spent the last 2 ½ hours reading about all of this. I'll try to lay this out systematically.

Firstly: here is the link to the LifeSiteNews.com article, where they accuse Development and Peace of funding pro-abortion groups in Mexico. Read it!:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/mar/09031210.html

Secondly: here is the response of D & P to the article. Read it!:

http://www.devp.org/devpme/eng/pressroom/2009/comm2009_03_13eng.html

Thirdly: Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says about abortion, just to refresh ourselves: (See CCC paragraphs 2270-2275)
"Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception."
"Formal co-operation in an abortion constitutes a grave offence. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life […] The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society."

I would like to say that I have not approved of some of Life Site News' tactics, and find them to be at times reactionary and emotional. Take for example their recent push for donations, wherein the donor's name is sent to Henry Morgentaler…. saying that the donor gave to the site in Morgentaler's name. Yes: ask for donations. Yes: send the list of names to Morgentaler and the government of Canada. No: to mud-slinging, almost ad hominem tactics, getting more money out of people through the incentive of making Morgentaler squirm. The focus becomes weighted on the people in both camps, and not as weighted on our unborn brothers and sisters (http://lsn1securesites.net/lifesitenews/donate/informationmcc.html).

I say all this because I have to admit I was going to the reading prejudiced against Life Site News. Not that I believed they were lying, I just wanted to make absolutely sure of everything that was said in the article.

Breakdown of claims in the article:
• I was unable to find some of the numbers on the internet: such as the statement of how only $50,000 of the $438,000 went to Caritas, the organization that actually helps the poor with food and medical help (I'm not saying it will never be found anywhere)

• The recipients of money are confirmed here, on D & P's plan for Latin America, 2006-2011 (see p. 128, especially 131-132): http://www.devp.org/devpme/documents/eng/pdf/ProgramLatinAmerica2011_Eng.pdf.

• The number $438,000 is confirmed on the mini report: http://www.devp.org/devpme/eng/publications/documents/Mini_RapportAnnuel_2008.pdf.

• I went to all the sites of the partners to D & P in Mexico. I either used Google to translate the site from Spanish, or put portions of pdf's through an online translator.

• I couldn't find all the quotes, but now I don't doubt they were there. I couldn't find all of them only because I could not copy and paste entire legal documents into the translator, for time's sake. BUT I FOUND ENOUGH TO CONVINCE ME THAT MATTHEW CULLINAN HOFFMAN IS TELLING THE TRUTH IN THIS CASE. This conclusion is a bit startling, considering I was slightly prejudiced against Life Site.

o Whenever he states that a group's name was on such-and-such a bill / document, I was able to confirm it every time

o See Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Mexico, etc., clauses 34-40, the link is in the Life Site article. These clauses do indeed make the claims Hoffman is speaking of, namely, advocating abortion on demand, standardizing Mexican abortion laws, and a woman's right to "emergency" contraceptives, in other words, abortificients (ie: "the morning after pill")

o "The National Center for Social Communication also acts as a mouthpiece for pro-abortion groups such as 'Catholics for the Right to Decide'…." I also found connections to a group called "Catholics For a Free Choice," I don't know if they are the same group or not. In one part of their site, they complain about the lack of legal attention to abortion in a recent document, "specifically the legal interruption of pregnancy was the missing item."

o So conclusion 1: D & P IS giving money to the groups mentioned in the article, called by them "partners" in Mexico. The groups ARE advocating pro-choice or pro-abortion stands.

• So then I came back to point Life Site makes about funds being "fungible." Even if D & P makes it clear to these organizations that they do not wish their funds to go towards "pro-abortion activities," the fact remains that money is fluid and not concrete; D & P's donations could help those organizations free up other assets so those assets can go towards pro-abortion activities

My "in-between" thoughts
• D & P and the organizations they partner with in Mexico are doing many other activities that any Catholic should support (hence the reason why Michael Casey of D & P accuses Hoffman of misconstruing the intentions of these organizations. You see, the pro-abortion mandate is not the only mandate, and many of their mandates are good)

• A lot of the main issues were admirable: gender equality, free trade, sustainable development, teaching people how to take care of themselves, tougher sentencing in rape and domestic abuse cases

• It occurred to me that D & P has seen that help will come to Mexicans sooner if they work through established organizations. HOWEVER, if this admirable desire requires compromise on life and death matters, it needs to be reoriented towards the Gospel of Love, even if it means starting smaller in 3rd world countries


So then I came back to Michael Casey's reply to the Life Site article:
• "We do not, in any way, support projects that would contravene these fundamental principles, most certainly not projects related to abortion."

o True, they don't support these projects, but

o They ARE supporting the organizations, which is all the Life Site article is claiming

o I sense a distinct lack of citation, especially after reading Hoffman's cited article

• "It is dangerously irresponsible and slanderous on the part of some journalists, through ill-conceived conjecture and hypothesis, to deliberately misinterpret the social justice initiatives of our southern partners in this light."

o I see now that it is not "conjecture" and "hypothesis," because the organizations are open and honest on the internet

o Moreover, Hoffman has cited EVERY claim (except the $50, 000 one) so that anyone can verify what he's saying. If it's merely a reactionary article, he would not have done this

o (Also see above: I think what Casey is saying here is that the organizations do a whole lot more than advocate for abortion. He's right, but they STILL are advocates for abortion)

• He then spends a long paragraph telling us all what we already know: about D & P's admirable work in various areas of social justice around the world

And so my thought right now (I'm willing to be shown other information, etc) is that as a Catholic Christian it is my responsibility to work for social justice, both domestically and internationally. I most likely will not be funding D & P, unless other information turns up, but will continue to fund organizations that I have checked out. There are countless numbers of small Catholic organizations who are working for sustainable living and long-term solutions.

Respectfully submitted ☺,

Robin

First, I want to thank Robin for her amazing investigative work. It is something I should have done but I didn't. She has done an amazing job.

Second, I am disheartened by her findings. I think it is a tragedy that a Catholic group supported by the CCCB would partner with groups who support abortion. I understand that abortion is only one part of their mandate, but that doesn't make it better. Even if D&P asks them not to use their funds for abortion related purposes, their funds free up other funds that can be used for abortion. In my mind, that makes any donation I might make to D&P complicit in abortion, and that makes me complicit in abortion. For that reason, I cannot and will not support D&P until they withdraw from their partnerships with these groups.

I am more than willing to consider other information in this area, but I am very disappointed with D&P's response. They have failed to address some serious allegations, and have instead resorted to impugning the journalistic integrity of Lifesite. If you hear more on this from D&P, especially where they respond to specific allegations please comment in the comment box.

For the person who asked me to pass along both sides of the story I am trying to pass along both sides, and I would love to talk to you about D&P so I can learn more. You are right that both sides should have been heard from the start, and I apologize to you specifically for not doing that. My goal is not to upset anyone, and I know this is a deeply distressing subject, and I thank-you for reminding me of the duty to share both sides.

As I find out about further developments, I will post them. And I ask you all to add the executive and membership of D&P to your prayers.

Development and Peace and Abortion

As you are all undoubtedly aware, abortion is an issue that lies close to my heart. When I read this article, I was mad, and so I am posting this because I want the information to get out to as many people as possible. I am also asking that you read the following post with the charity in which it was intended, because I am not trying to upset or anger anyone. I am simply, as always, concerned about the lives of the least of us; that is, the unborn who are completely voiceless.

As you may be aware, Development and Peace holds a Share Lent campaign to raise funds every Lent. They have a campaign underway again this year. Development and Peace is a Canadian Catholic organization that raises money and awareness of third world issues. For example, one year they focused on the problems of clean drinking water. Another year they focused on exploitative mining practices in the Global South.

While Development and Peace does a lot of good work, they also support groups that support and promote abortion. For more information on how and where this is happening, please see this link.

It concerns me greatly that a Catholic organization gives money to groups that promote abortion. It concerns me even further that when asked, they state "The criterion is not pro-life or pro-abortion...If the piece of work they propose to us is something we want to support it is something that is within our parameters, if yes we support them, if not we don't. "We don't have a policy for or against abortion." As a Catholic organization, they must, to be in line with the Church, be against abortion.

The leadership of Development and Peace does not appear to be willing to investigate where they spend their funds. Since those funds come from Catholics like you and me, we need to be concerned. Even $1 donated to an aid organization that promotes abortion is too much because it makes us all complicit in the abortion. The Catholic Church is against abortion in all circumstances, and I think it is reprehensible that an organization that won't take steps to ensure the money it raises doesn't go to abortion groups gets to speak and raise funds inside the Church, often at the end of or during mass.

I certainly don't think that the individual members of Development and Peace are anti-life, but I am afraid that they don't know enough about what their group does. I am asking all of you to not donate to Development and Peace until they put an end to this practice (which has been ongoing since at least 2000). There are many other worthwhile aid organizations that follow Catholic teachings that would love to receive your donations. Please choose one of them instead, and please inform you local Development and Peace committee about why you are not supporting them, so they can pass your comments onto their leadership.

If you want to contact the leadership directly, the information is below:

Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace
Gilio Brunelli, Director of International Programs
Phone: 514-257-8711
Email: info@devp.org
Development and Peace Website

Address in Toronto:
10 St. Mary Street, Suite#420
Toronto, Ontario
Canada, M4Y 1P9
Phone: (416) 922-1592
Fax: (416) 922-0957
Toll Free: 1-800-494-1401

Address in Montreal:
1425, René-Lévesque bld. West, 3rd Floor
Montréal, Québec
Canada, H3G 1T7
Phone: (514) 257-8711
Fax: (514) 257-8497
Toll Free: 1-888-234-8533

Please also pass this information onto your priests and other Catholics you know. All the good work Development and Peace does is undone by their complicity in abortion. They need to know that Catholics will not support that.

God Bless,
Sarah

Fighting for the Church

I don’t often take the time to actually write letters to the editor or reply to columnists, but an article I read in yesterday’s Edmonton Sun annoyed me so much I felt compelled to respond. (Read the article here)The article was titled “Vatican Lives in a Vacuum” and essentially went after the Church because of its response to the excommunication of the parents and doctor of a 9 year old girl in Brazil. The girl was pregnant with twins (the stepfather is accused of rape) and the doctor and mother decided that abortion was the only option. For their part in the abortion, the mother and doctors were excommunicated. (Read that story here)

Here was my response to the article:

I would just like illuminate a few teachings of Catholic doctrine that Ms. Jacob's column "Vatican lives in a Vacuum" misunderstood. The archbishop speaking out did not excommunicate the mother and the doctors; they were automatically excommunicated as soon as they made the decision to force the child to have an abortion because such action is considered a mortal sin by the Church. Anyone involved in procuring an abortion is immediately excommunicated, whether they are informed so by their bishop or not. While the statement didn't specifically mention the step-father, you can be assured that if he is guilty of rape, he has also been excommunicated for the same reasons.

The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is always wrong. They do that because they believe that the unborn fetus is a human being, and to abort the child is murder. Church law does not change on a case by case basis; it is law because it applies in every case. While this is an incredibly tragic case, the abortion simply compounds the crime of rape. If you read the doctor's reports further, they conclude that a vaginal birth could have killed the girl, not the pregnancy itself. That means the children could have been safely brought to term, and a C section performed. This choice would have saved all 3 lives, instead of killing 2. Not only that, there are potential long term complications from the abortion itself, which could include infertility later in life if the girl wants to have a family.

And finally, the tongue in cheek statement "you naughty Catholics shouldn't have sex unless you are planning to procreate" is actually true. Pregnancy is the natural end result of sex; why else do you think people spend thousands every year to try to avoid it with birth control that is never 100% effective. If you have sex, there is a possibility that you will get pregnant. The condom, even if used properly, is only 99% effective. That means 1 in 100 couples who have sex and use the condom correctly will end up pregnant. If you are not prepared to have a child, you should not be having sex; it's not that difficult to understand.

When writing a column on a statement made by the Catholic Church, please do a little bit of research first so you understand where the church is coming from rather than demonizing it because you disagree. The teachings of the church come from a large body of research spanning 2000 years and are based in theology, philosophy and science, and the church articulates reasons for every doctrine it has. If you'd like to know more, please don't hesitate to ask.

Yours,
Sarah

If the article upsets you as well, please send a letter to the editor to mailbag@edmsun.com or reply directly to the columnist at mindy.jacobs@sunmedia.ca. Please keep in mind that they only publish letters that are 100 words or less.

I really wish people would stop condemning the Church based on what they believe her to be saying, not what she actually teaches. It’s frustrating. And, when dealing with abortion, we need to keep in mind that the real issue is what are the unborn. This columnist (and many others) don’t believe the unborn children to be human. They are very concerned about the health and welfare of the child who was raped, and I commend them for it, but what about the health and welfare of the children she was carrying? If they are all human, how can the unborn be any less worthy of life?

Apologies

Many apologies for not posting in the last few weeks. My only excuse (and I truly hate this excuse, but it is true in this case) is I've been busy.

My schooling will come to an end in less than a month (finals included!) so I've been busy trying to get everything done.

I've also been making preparations for my life post law school, and while incredibly exciting it also eats up a lot of time.

Finally, I've realized that I will be leaving this city and the many friends I've made over the last 6 years in just over a month, and I've been trying to spend all the free time I have with them.

Add all this together and it equals neglect of this blog, and for that I apologize.

There have been a ton of things going on in the world that I'd love to blog about, but rather than writing a post on all of them, I thought I'd list and link to them.

• London's St Joseph's Hospital- A few months ago I blogged about the practice of early induction abortion at St. Joseph's Catholic hospital in London, ON. The National Post has written a story, basically denying everything the Lifesitenews article alleged. Despite that, the Bishop of the Diocese has asked the Vatican to weigh in on the practice and indicated he will do a thorough investigation and many not wait for the Vatican's response to make corrections if he finds something wrong. (We can only pray he does)
  
  
• In the Baby Shanice story (the child born alive after a late term abortion and thrown out as medical waste) the abortion worker involved has been charged with "unlicensed practice of a health care profession resulting in serious bodily injury, a second degree felony, and with tampering with or fabricating physical evidence, a third degree felony." (I pray she is found guilty)
  
  
• I have no link to give you, but after speaking with a contact in the campus pro-life world, it appears that the 6 University of Calgary students charged with trespass because of their GAP display had their first appearance in court last week, and will plead next week. (Again, please keep them in your prayers)
  
  
• In the euthanasia arena, a new (or at least new to me group) called the Final Exit Network has emerged. Their sole purpose is to aid people in committing suicide. I haven't kept up with the stories in this area, but the Secondhand Smoke and Disability Matters blog have extensive coverage on this emerging and incredibly dangerous threat to human life.
  
  
• Since the birth of the octopulets to a single mom on welfare with 6 other children, there has been a lot of talk about regulating IVF. Unfortunately, not one seems to have made this absolutely simple (in my opinion) suggestion that rather than regulating, we should STOP the practice altogether so we can a) stop denying the dignity of human life and b) stop killing children.
  

  
   

• And a new story out of Connecticut this week. Someone in the government there has decided that the state should impose changes on the structure of the Roman Catholic Church to take power away from the bishops. (This would in no way be related to the recent outspokenness of bishops on life issues would it? The government reps involved wouldn't be trying to muzzle the bishops would they? No, they wouldn't do that). See the proposed legislation here. All I can say is that the bishops are doing something right to have this much hatred spewed against them. Pray hard people.
  

  
   

There is a lot more going on, but there is a short list of things I would have blogged on if I had time. I think it's a reasonably balanced list of positive and negatives going on in the world. I will try to post more regularly than I have been (it would be hard to post less regularly) but I can't guarantee it will be daily like before. As life calms down, blogging will increase. Until then, God Bless and continue to pray and fast through the season of Lent.

Self Denial

The Ash Wednesday homily I heard today focused on self denial (appropriate given that today marks the beginning of Lent, but that's besides the point). It got me thinking, and it ties in nicely with yesterday's post about entitlement.

I believe that Western society is very much an entitlement based society. We are also a society that very rarely denies ourselves anything (as the current state of the economy demonstrates all too well.) And I think those two things go hand in hand; I don't think we would feel entitled if we practiced some self denial. We are so used to getting everything we want, as soon as we want, and we rarely wait for anything, and I think that attitude is hurting us all.

So many problems would be avoided if we just practiced a little self denial: the credit "crisis", the obesity epidemic, the genocide of the unborn etc. All of these problems have arisen in our society because we are never told no. If we lived within our means, people wouldn't be having their homes foreclosed upon and our major corporations wouldn't be collapsing. If we said no to that piece of chocolate cake (or my own personal craving, iced tea) we wouldn't be endangering our health by overindulging. If we practiced self denial and saved sex for a committed married relationship, we wouldn't be murdering our children. There are many other examples, but I don't want to belabor the point.

Self denial is a good thing. It's not an easy thing, and I know it's something I can never accomplish without God's grace, but it is important. If we learn to practice self-denial with the little things, we will have the ability to say no to the big things, but it does take practice.

The season of Lent is a penitential one, preparing ourselves for Easter and seeking to deepen our relationship with God. My earnest prayer for us all is that we will practice self-denial in some way this Lenten season, and use that self denial to allow God to move deeper into our lives, because that's the only way the major problems of our world will be solved.

Welcome to Lent, and God Bless.

Personhood Amendments

Good news today. 7 American States have introduced personhood amendments. (See story here) A personhood amendment would establish conception as the point where life begins and when human beings become persons under the law. If passed these amendments would make the abortion of the unborn a murder under the law. North Dakota, Alabama, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Oregon and South Carolina all have the amendment drives under way. A similar initiative failed on the Colorado ballot this year.

I think it's awesome that the pro-life movements in those states have managed to keep life issues on the political radar, and I hope and pray that these amendments will pass. Its issues like this that remind me why I went into law in the first place. I went into law because I think law has power. If these amendments pass, it wipes out the effect of pro-abortion decisions like Roe v. Wade and R v. Morgentaler in an instant. Abortion, instead of being legal, becomes illegal; it becomes murder. That would change everything; and that's power, real power. To protect the unborn we need the law.

Though I know these amendments face an uphill battle and have very little likelihood of passing, the fact that they are even up is a huge step forward for the rights of the unborn. The more that we keep life issues in the news and in our legislatures, the better our chances to protect the unborn. While the law doesn't currently protect the unborn, it is the most powerful tool we have to protect them, if we can only get our legislatures and judges to use it.

Personhood amendments go a long way in this area because they identify the unborn, not as a clump of cells, but as a person, equal in rights to any born human being. As we enter Lent tomorrow, let's keep the unborn and our politicians, lawmakers and judges in our prayers, and maybe some of these amendments will pass.

Entitlement

Another sad story demonstrating the culture of death that permeates our world can be found here. A Japanese woman was successfully implanted with a fertilized egg following IVF. However, the clinic made a mistake and implanted her with the egg of another woman. When she found out, she aborted the pregnancy and sued the clinic. By all accounts, she was delighted with the pregnancy, but finding out it was another woman's egg was too much. There is some suggestion that there is a cultural taboo against having another person's child, but that is beside the point.

The woman wanted to become pregnant.

She did.

She was happy about it.

She found out it was another women's and was upset.

She aborted.

That's the bottom line. There is a problem with society when a woman who is desperate to have a child aborts it because the child is not genetically hers. It points to an entitlement mentality and it points out that people view children not as a responsibility, but a right. It also points out that children are simply objects to be created and disposed of at a whim.

Let's change the scenario slightly. If the woman had purchased a dog, and later found out it wasn't the purebred she expected and put it down, people would be outraged at her action. Because it was just a child, no one bats an eye.

Even without going to that comparison, this incident points out some of the dangers of IVF. People lose respect for life when it is created and destroyed on a whim in a petrie dish. In this case, only on child was aborted. Often, women are implanted with 4 or 5 embryos. If they all implant, "seletive reductions" (aka abortions) are performed and the woman has one or two children. How does she explain that to her children later on in life- you had 3 other brothers and sisters, but I aborted them. By sheer luck you weren't the child that the abortionist dismembered and sucked out. But don't worry, I lvoe you very much.

There have been many stories about IVF in the news lately- the 8 children born to a single mom and the twins born to a 60 year old woman and people are talking about needing legal restrictions on IVF. They are partially correct. We need legal restrictions against IVF- it shouldn't be permitted in any case, ever. IVF kills children every day. The sooner we all realize that, the better for everyone, especially the children.

Happy Reading!

I want to thank all my readers for reading this blog. I hope you find it informative, helpful and thought provoking. My Reading Week begins tonight, and as a result, I am heading to my parents for the next week.

This unfortunately puts me back in the land of dial-up internet, so no new posts until Monday, February 23. I hope you all enjoy this break as much as I am going to. And, in case you are wondering, I will be doing reading; some school and some for fun. I hope you have a chance to do some reading too.

Until later, God bless you all.