Sunday, April 27, 2014

"Contraception" is Murder, March 1, 11-21, 2014


formerly, Abortion is Murder, and, before that, skyp

(stop killing young  people)


March,  2014,  Vol. 11   No. 21

PO Box 7424, Reading, PA 19603

Phone, 484-706-4375


Circulation, 207

Editor, John Dunkle


  “Contraception” is Murder, a weak, pathetic response to baby murder, is sent out at least once a month.  If the gestapo hasn’t jailed you yet for defending the innocent realistically, you either have to tell me you want it or go to the website.  Emails are free but snail-mail is free only for PFCs, two grand for others.


  Because I believe we should examine every legitimate means, including force, in our attempt to protect children from being tortured to death,  I want to hear from people who’ve been forceful and from those who defend them. I’d also like to hear from those who oppose the prolife use of force and call it violence.



Prisoners  For  Christ: 


1.         Evans, Paul Ross 83230-180,  FCI, PO Box 1500, El Reno, OK 73036

2.         Griffin, Michael 310249, BRCF, 5914 Jeff Atles Rd., Milton, FL 32583-00000

3.         Grady, Francis 11656-089, USP Allenwood, P.O. Box 3000, White Deer, PA  17887

4.         Holt, Gregory 129616   Varner Supermax, PO Box 600, Grady, AR 71644-0600    

5.         Kopp, James 11761-055,  USP Canaan, P.O. Box 300, Waymart, PA 18472 

6.         Roeder, Scott 65192  PO Box 2, Lansing, Kansas 66043

7.         Rogers, Bobby Joe 21292-017, USP Beaumont,  PO Box 26030, Beaumont, TX 77720

8.         Rudolph, Eric 18282-058  US Pen. Max,  Box 8500, Florence  CO 81226-8500

9.         Shannon, Rachelle 59755-065, FCI Waseca, Unit A,  P.O. Box 1731, Waseca, MN 56093   

10.       Waagner, Clayton Lee 17258-039, USP, P.O. Box 1000, Lewisburg  PA 17837 


This song is dedicated to those incarcerated for doing Right.


I looked over the prison walls and what did I see

Beautiful long haired ladies and young strong men coming after me

I looked out the prison bars and what did I see

An army coming after me

I looked at the prison guards and what did I see

Something undescribable coming after yee


  Someone please explain this to me.  I love tobra’s stuff even though sometimes I don’t understand it.




  Bob Lokey Saw It Coming:


  I told it coming in on this whole baby butchery mess way back when Roe vs. Wade was made law (and painted a life-like, realistic picture of it because words were not large enough), that it would only be a matter of time until Roe vs. Wade began snatching everybody of every age into its maw and murdering them, too, as the ruling was a euthanasia/depopulation measure that would one day stop discriminating by age and circumstance.  When I told it, every hearer responded, "Impossible.  Never. There are laws protecting adults."

   But was I correct, or what?  And the whole thing is only just now beginning to get wound up even though billions worldwide have been slaughtered already.  Thus, it doesn't matter whether anybody fights baby butchery or supports it, everybody's time is here.  (Wherefore, lament not just for the babies, o' humankind, but for thy self as well.)  

  When I see the "woman" walking up to the baby-butcher shop, all rigid and deathly cold about her murder plot, I know that she is committing suicide, which is the right of every human being of legal age.  Unfortunately, she is also taking her child and the remainder of humankind with her. 




  I just read Otis Pike’s obit in the N Y Times (1/23/14). No mention of how important he was to making and keeping baby-killing legal.

  Pike was a popular congressman  on Long Island before and well after Roe v Wade. He lived on the east end, the most beautiful place on earth, and felt attacked by the growing numbers attracted there by its beauty.  So he became obsessed with getting rid of other people; i.e., obsessed with the contraception/abortion issue.

  In 1969 those who agreed with Otis narrowly defeated those who disagreed with him, and New York State became leader in the push towards Roe.




  Robert Weiler was supposed to visit Reading again on January 21.  I emailed him:


me,  Missed you today. When I saw the snow coming down I was happy you weren’t there. I meant to call you yesterday but forgot.  Hope to see you soon.   


Robert,  Unfortunately, I was attacked and robbed while doing a demonstration last week, and could not afford to come up. I meant to call you and I apologize for not doing so. I will try for another Tuesday off very soon.


me,  How’d it happen?  What did they get?


Robert,  I was demonstrating on US Rt.1 in College Park, MD, near a bar called the Cornerstone Grill & Loft. I was approached by two staff members of the bar who began following me around, trying to force me to leave, physically.  I began recording on my cellphone camera.  A brawl ensued when one of them tried to rip to phone out of my hands.  In the brawl, the cell phone and my prescription eyeglasses were lost. I had to buy a new cellphone and glasses. Police arrested the two men but did not recover these items.


  Then I emailed the Cornerstone Grill and Loft:


Hello CGL, I send out a newsletter to a relatively large group. I just got a report that two of your employees had a confrontation recently with someone who was demonstrating out front.
  I plan to post the information I've received so far but realize I know only one side of the story. Please email me your side. Thanks, John Dunkle


  Nothing.  Almost impossible to get killers and their helpers to talk. 

  So I’ll go to step 2: Please send the following message to any you know in the College Park, MD, area – Two thugs employed by the Cornerstone Grill & Loft attacked a prolifer demonstrating near the bar. They destroyed his phone and glasses. The least you can do to oppose those thugs and their employer is never to go there, and spread the news. Course there’s more you can do, too.




Dear John, I was listening to President Obama's state of the union speech and I was thinking about the President's "death panel," which is completely anonymous and authorizes the extrajudicial killing of American citizens. I came to the conclusion that if anyone asks if you support Scott Roeder, just say, "Wasn't he on the President's death panel?" If someone says, no, just ask, "How would you prove it, since the panel's membership is completely anonymous?" If someone complains Roeder acted outside the normal course of law, just say, "That's how the President's panel operates, outside our system of checks and balances. That's what the extrajudicial killing of Americans means." If someone says the President's panel only kills Americans on foreign soil, say, "Apparently not. And as the coroner can tell you, you are just as dead on one side of the U.S. border as on any other, so the difference is legally insubstantial." If someone asks you why you think the President's panel would authorize the extrajudicial killing of American physician Dr. George Tiller, just say, "As always, the panel authorizes the extrajudicial killing of American citizens to protect American lives from 'an imminent threat of violent attack' when 'capture is infeasible,' as was the case of Dr. Tiller who as a ranking Al-Choice figure was able to repeatedly evade being brought to justice."
  Note that the internal quotes are taken from a U.S. Justice Department memo titled "Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen Who Is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Choice [oops, Al-Qa'ida] or An Associated Force." So, word for word, Mr. Roeder could have simply taken his defense, including the meaning of 'imminent,' from the Justice Department's own memo on President Obama's death panel.

  But maybe it's more than a coincidence, because it almost sounds as if the Justice Department got the President's defense from the Army of God website. So maybe that's why the Justice Department monitors your newsletter. They're copying it for legal policy!
  Of course, there is a notable difference in legal policy here. In the 1979 installment of Belloti v. Baird, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a special exception to normal rules occurs in view of "the peculiar vulnerability of children" inasmuch as such an exception is necessary to protect their lives. See 443 U.S. 622, 622-623. That means Mr. Roeder's defense is actually on a stronger legal footing than the President's, since in Dr. Tiller's case it was American children who were singled out as the target of 'an imminent threat of violent attack.'
  So that gives a rough idea of the analogy. But there is no real point in trying to go over the details with court rulings, since the very concept of "extrajudicial" means the killings are being done in a manner independent of the traditional standards of the judiciary anyway. Moreover, the courts have yet to rule on the death panel or comment on the rationale behind its operation.
  At any rate, when it comes to the extrajudicial killing of American citizens to protect American lives, ironically it appears Mr. Roeder and President Obama have drawn upon similar ideas to legitimize their actions. And should the Obama Administration ever be taken to court over the death panel, the President's arguments could provide a powerful legal strategy for the likes of Mr. Roeder.           Sincerely, Cal



  Scott’s Appeal, From Their Viewpoint:


  Justices on Kansas' highest court expressed skepticism Wednesday that a man convicted of first-degree murder in the shooting of a Wichita abortion provider should get a new trial because he sincerely believed he was saving the lives of unborn children.

  All seven Supreme Court justices had pointed questions for the attorney representing Scott Roeder, who is serving at least 50 years in prison for killing Dr. George Tiller in May 2009. Roeder gunned down Tiller in the foyer of the doctor's church where he was serving as an usher just as a Sunday service was starting.

  Rachel Pickering, an appellate defender, argued that Roeder should get a new trial because jurors weren't allowed to consider whether they could convict him of voluntary manslaughter, rather than first-degree murder. The lesser crime covers killings that occur when people have a sincere but unreasonable belief that harm to themselves or others is imminent and justifies deadly force.

  Tiller was among a few U.S. physicians known to perform late-term abortions. Roeder had strong anti-abortion beliefs, equating Tiller's procedures with murder. Pickering noted Roeder also believed the doctor was violating Kansas law, though Tiller had been acquitted of misdemeanor state charges of violating late-term abortion restrictions weeks earlier.

  "We're talking about his view that this doctor is performing illegal abortions resulting in the deaths of others," Pickering told the court.

  During Roeder's trial, Sedgwick County District Judge Warren Wilbert allowed the confessed killer to testify to his beliefs but ultimately refused to let the jury consider the lesser charge after hearing all the trial evidence. The defense's tactic outraged Tiller's colleagues and abortion-rights advocates nationwide, who feared it gave a more-than-tacit approval to further acts of violence.

  Roeder raised multiple issues in his appeal, but the Supreme Court's hearing focused mainly on whether jurors should have been allowed to consider the lesser charge. The justices did not say when they would rule.

  The justices questioned Pickering for more than an hour, twice the amount of time set aside for her arguments. In contrast, Assistant Sedgwick County District Attorney Boyd Isherwood didn't use his full half-hour in defending Roeder's first-degree murder conviction and "Hard 50" sentence.

  Justice Dan Biles asked Pickering whether, in line with her legal arguments, someone who morally opposed ending life support for an otherwise dying patient would face the lesser charge if he or she shot a doctor who shut off a ventilator at a family's request. Pickering acknowledged her position could lead to such a result.

  Justice Eric Rosen asked about someone with a strong belief that, because smoking leads to deadly illnesses, selling tobacco products places others in imminent danger.

  "That gives someone the right to go out and kill the CEO of Philip Morris?" Rosen said, referring to the tobacco company. "It's the same principle."

  Pickering said the health harm would not be immediate enough to warrant the lesser charge in such a situation, and she emphasized that she was arguing only that the jury should have been allowed to consider the lesser charge in Roeder's case.

  "You're saying this statute, this jury question, will be applicable any time anyone wants to shoot a doctor," Biles responded.

  The justices also struggled with Pickering's argument that Roeder believed unborn children were at imminent risk from Tiller, noting that the doctor's clinic was closed at the time and he wasn't scheduled to perform abortions for another 22 hours.

  "There weren't going to be any abortions performed at the church," Justice Lee Johnson said.

  Pickering said Roeder believed the harm was imminent because he was certain Tiller would perform more abortions when his clinic re-opened for business.



  Every once in a while it’s good to read a summary of what’s going on:


  In recent months we have heard the liberal rant that conservatives are somehow anti-women promoters of a “war on women.”  The mainstream media has swallowed and fostered this wholeheartedly.  Is this truly the case, however? 

  Liberals argue that abortion rights make them pro-women.   Besides the fact that approximately half of all aborted children are female, the abortion of a child is a cause of trauma for women. 

  Women who have had an abortion often develop post-traumatic stress or what is often termed post abortion trauma.  This trauma is marked by overwhelming feelings of guilt, isolation, grief, anger, depression and shame.  It is marked by damaging women in their ability to bond with their children and their spouses. 

  Women who have had an abortion often develop obsessive compulsive disorders and various forms of addictive behaviors such as eating disorders and alcohol and drug abuse.  Women who have had an abortion often turn to the coping mechanism of suppression, repression, rationalization and compensation.  If this post abortion trauma is not addressed through healing programs, the outcome is disastrous for the woman and to the future of our culture.  It should not surprise us that divorce has reached epidemic proportions and kids are shooting up schools and killing their parents! 

  Another little dirty secret about abortion is that it is related to breast cancer.  During the past forty-three years, over seventy studies by the most prestigious universities and reported in the most prestigious journals of medicine and science have shown a correlation between breast cancer and abortion.  One study comes out regarding a correlation of two factors and cancer, and it is all over the evening news.  Forty-three years of studies is stifled by the liberal agenda of abortion on demand.  Now, who is being pro-woman?

  What about contraceptives?  Conservatives are viewed as being anti-woman because they do not want their tax dollars to go towards paying for contraceptives.  Is being anti-contraceptive being anti-woman?  If we were to ask most couples about the negative side effects associated with the use of the pill, most couples would have a general idea regarding these effects, either through information obtained from their doctors or from pharmacists.

  They may not be aware of the fifty-two side effects associated with the use of the pill, but they more than likely would be aware of the most talked about side effects such as strokes, heart attacks, and blood clots.  This alone, makes one wonder who is being pro-woman.

  If, however, we were to ask most couples about the method in which the pill works in preventing the birth of children, there would be a tremendous amount of ignorance.  Why?

  There are two major types of pills that are being used in preventing the birth of children: those that contain a combination of estrogen and progestogen and those that contain only progestogen.  Both of these types of pills prevent the birth of children either through preventing ovulation or preventing the effective migration of sperm in the uterus, or by preventing implantation.

  The pill (whether the combination pill or the progestogen-only pill) has the potential for being an abortifacient—an abortion-causing agent.  When conception takes place, a human being is present.  The pill at this point, because it weakens the lining of the uterus, prevents this human being from being implanted in the womb of the mother.

This is a silent abortion of a human being.  It certainly is not a silent abortion of a chimpanzee! 

What is said of the pill can be said, with slight variations, of all the other hormonal methods of contraception including Norplant, Depo-Provera, RU-486 and Ovral. 

  Similar abortifacient effects are also apparent in the use of intrauterine devices such as Lippes Loop and the Copper-T 380A.

  Contraception has led to a contraceptive, use-up and throw-away mentality in our society.  Divorce is almost the norm; promiscuity is safeguarded from unwed pregnancies; sex is hedonistic; people are sex tools, sex objects, or masturbatory tools of selfishness, self-centeredness, and self-interest. 

  Love is lost in contraception.  The person, at best, can only say, “I love you, but only so much—not enough to spend my life with you or to have children with you.”  People with this contraceptive mentality use people until their usefulness is no longer needed.  Then they move on to the next empty experience.

  Is it any marvel that the divorce rate of those who use contraceptives is fifty percent while the divorce rate of those who respect the natural order of their bodies in the unitive bond of committed monogamy, of marriage, is less than four percent?  

  In the use of contraceptives, the relationship between womanhood, motherhood, sexuality and procreation is lost.  What flows is a culture of divorce, promiscuity, and hatred for and the objectification of women and their procreative gifts.  The contraceptive mentality destroys the bond between husband and wife, which in turn destroys the bond between children and parents. 

  It is estimated that every year some 60,000 to 100,000 young women are made sterile by HIV, gonorrhea or chlamydia.  As many as a third of sexually active teenagers have genital warts.  Sexually transmitted diseases infect approximately twelve million Americans each year.  Two-thirds of sexually transmitted diseases occur in persons younger than twenty-five and every year more than three million teenagers are infected.  This epidemic has caused many women to have problems with infertility—STD’s being the fastest growing cause of infertility. It is estimated that as much as one out of four adults has an STD.  Now, who is being pro-woman?

  The media—in all its forms—has made women into objects, not persons.  This is particularly so in the liberal promotion of sexually explicit programing. 

  Sex in this secular-liberal perspective is seen in terms of self-pleasuring and usefulness.  It is devoid of all spiritual purpose and is completely alien to the very nature of conjugal love and the nature of the person.  A person’s sexuality in this worldview of things has been distorted by the secular-liberal philosophies of pragmatism, egoism, hedonism, positivism, and relativism.

  Liberal Hollywood has distorted the meaning of sex and thus the nature of womanhood. It eliminates from the essence of sex the mutual vulnerability that makes human intimacy possible.  Hollywood’s image of sex replaces vulnerability for control, power, and the objectification of the person.   It makes a mockery of the rights of spouses, of the institution of marriage, and compromises the welfare of children who need a healthy two parent home for stability. 

  Is it any wonder that adultery and marital infidelity are at epidemic levels?  Is it any wonder that promiscuity has reached levels unheard of since the time of paganism? Is it any surprise that ten-year-olds are sexually active and that twelve-year-olds are getting pregnant and having abortions?  Is it any wonder that once the spice of sex is lost in a marriage, the marriage ends?  Is it any wonder that rape, sexual assaults and child abuse have reached epidemic proportions? 

  Now, who is being anti-woman?  Who is really waging a war on women?

  Finally, in the name of woman’s rights, liberals worship at the foot of Planned Parenthood, the leading proponents of abortion, contraceptives, and the view that no act between consenting adults is immoral.  Unwittingly, they worship at the feet of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood.  Hilary Clinton is the proud recipient of the Sanger Award, and President Obama is the proud supporter of all that Planned Parenthood stands for.  I wonder if Hilary is aware of Sanger’s words:   “[Our objective is] unlimited sexual gratification….  The marriage bed is the most degenerate influence in the social order…. The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it”

  And what about you, Mr. President? Are you aware of these words:  “We should hire three or four colored ministers [or perhaps a President]….  We don’t want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister [or perhaps Obama] is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” Abortion is the number one killer of African Americans.

  There is a war on women, but it is not from the right.  It is from the left.  Make no mistake about it. The left are no friend to women!

                   Fr. John J. Pasquini

  Quote of the Day: We cannot be sure it’s wrong to kill an abortionist because we don‘t know when life begins.     Robert



  For back issues of this newsletter go to


  To send money to the federal Prisoners, those with eight digits after their names, make out a postal money order to the Prisoner’s name and number. Then send it to Federal Bureau of Prisons,  PO Box 474701,  Des Moines, IA 50947-0001.

  Ask the non-feds how they may receive money – check, money order, etc. It varies by state.



  Receipt of this excellent missive notwithstanding, if you wish to be excluded from such blessings in the future, simply advise me.









No comments: