Friday, October 27, 2006

Former Abortionist Backs S.D. Ban

Dr Patti Giebenk tells of a former patient of hers that wrote and told her that even though she'd delivered the woman's twins...she could no longer have her for her OB/GYN since she'd begun to work at Planned Parenthood. Dr now hopes that her former patiens sees her ads...and is pleased that she now believes that life begins at conception and is speaking for Life.

There are two ultrasound videos to watch, one titled VOICE FOR THE VOICELESS, and the other I can't speak for myself... is a 4D ultrasound. There are stories of women affected by abortion, either after having had one, or choosing life instead of one (even in the case of a rape.)

The site has a LOT to see, to learn about the issue in South Dakota. Vote 'Yes on 6'.

God bless!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Nancy Valko
Date: Oct 27, 2006 3:53 PM
Subject: Former Abortionist Backs S.D. Ban

October 26, 2006
                     Former Abortionist Backs S.D. Ban
                     Supporters of South Dakota's abortion ban have unveiled a
                     blockbuster TV commercial in their campaign to convince
                     voters to affirm the legislatively enacted prohibition against
                     ending preborn life.
                     The spot, which premiered Wednesday, features Dr. Patti
                     Giebenk, an M.D. who once performed abortions for Planned
                     Parenthood in Sioux Falls.
                     "I would do abortions where I would be ending the life of the
                     baby," she says in the ad. "And I think this is the time to ban
                     abortion on demand in our state."
                     Giebenk goes on to urge viewers to vote "yes" on Referred
                     Law 6, a measure on the Nov. 7 ballot that would uphold the
                     Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act – passed by
                     the Legislature earlier this year. The law bans abortion in most
                     The legislation is necessary, Giebenk says, to protect South
                     Dakota's women and children.
                     "I don't think (unfettered access to abortion) is necessary," she
                     says in the commercial. "I think its time has passed."
                     FOR MORE INFORMATION:
                     To view the ad, visit the Vote Yes for Life Web site.
                     (Paid for and authorized by Focus on the Family Action, 8605
                     Explorer Dr., Colorado Springs, CO 80920)
                     You can receive family news stories by email.  Sign up
                     now for this complimentary service.

                     Copyright © 2006 Focus on the Family.
                     All rights reserved. Inte

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Actor Jesse Martin is victim of thieves

Actor Jesse Martin is victim of thieves
News Staff Reporter

Jesse L. Martin was shooting a local film.

Jesse L. Martin, the television actor from Buffalo, was the victim of a theft Monday morning when he returned here to shoot a local film.

Martin, who plays Detective Ed Green on NBC's classic television series "Law & Order," was eating breakfast in an Allen Street restaurant when thieves broke into a sport utility vehicle and stole his belongings and luggage.

The 37-year-old New York City actor took a flight out of town hours later - with only the clothes on his back and his wallet.

"I'm ashamed of my city," said director Peter McGennis, who flew Martin here to shoot his independent feature film, "Buffalo Bushido."

"I feel like our community let him down. . . . The purpose of the film is to make people feel good about Buffalo, and that's why Jesse came here. I had to drop him at the airport with nothing but his wallet."

Martin, a graduate of the Buffalo Academy for Visual and Performing Arts, spent 21/2 days in Buffalo after he arrived here for filming Saturday morning. Martin was disheartened by the daylight theft in the city where he was raised.

"He wasn't furious," McGennis said. "We're just disappointed and crushed. . . . He's such a positive person. I've never seen a celebrity with so much grace."

The thieves stole items from the SUV that belonged to three people - Martin, McGennis and Brette Goldstein, a New York City-based casting director. The total estimated value of the heist was about $8,450.

Police said about $3,000 worth of Martin's belongings were stolen - luggage valued at $2,000, about $500 worth of clothing, a $450 video iPod and dozens of autographed photographs of the actor.

"It's a shame," said Central District Police Chief Donna M. Berry. "I can't believe how brazen they would be at 11:15 in the morning. . . . I hope these criminals read this and realize how they're destroying this city." Martin, McGennis and Goldstein went to eat breakfast Monday morning in the Towne Restaurant, 186 Allen St. During breakfast, Martin spoke about his love for Buffalo, offered advice to help the restaurant's cook pursue his dream of being a stand-up comedian and signed several autographs. He also talked about his goal of starting an independent film festival here.

After breakfast, they walked back to the SUV and discovered the theft. During his stay, Martin dined with his relatives and friends and filmed at Franklin Middle School and the Lenox Hotel.

The independent film, "Buffalo Bushido," is being shot entirely in this city on a shoestring budget but also features Hollywood actors John Savage and Leila Arcieri.

"He's lived in New York City for 20 years and has never been robbed or a victim of theft. He comes back here, and in two days he gets fleeced," McGennis said.


Monday, October 23, 2006

Catholic Exchange Article

WI Catholic thought you would be interested in this article from

This article is by a friend of mine, and it took her a long time to be able to find the courage to share it. But we need to hear it, and we need to understand that that there is a second person in every abortion situation. And that person needs to know love and forgiveness...

God bless!

Article Title: How Could She Do That?

However, in their zeal to protect the unborn baby, pro-life people tend to overlook
the plight of the woman who is often confused, terribly scared and desperately concerned
with her own survival. By doing this, pro-lifers inadvertently play into the hands
of the pro-choice movement, which focuses totally on the woman. The pro-choice movement
represents themselves as empathetic advocates of women and their right to control
their own bodies. It calls anyone who disagrees with them anti-woman, and because
of this seemingly sympathetic position they win a lot of women to their side.

I'd like to explain what I mean by telling you a true story. It's not an easy story
to tell, but I feel comp ... (to finish this article, please click the link below)

Authored By: Amanda Russell

Read this article on the web:

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Just a little sarcasm here....

The other day, I was accused of saying that I owned something on my blog (in spite of full acknowledgement of the authors and internet url) with this statement:

Editorial content of this blog is the property of the Blog Owner.
Feel free to quote from the editorial content, while giving proper credit and link.

I would like to point out the definition of Editorial Content with this definition from here:

  1. An article in a publication expressing the opinion of its editors or publishers.
  2. A commentary on television or radio expressing the opinion of the station or network.
  1. Of or relating to an editor or editing: an editorial position with a publishing company; an editorial policy prohibiting the use of unnamed sources.
  2. Of or resembling an editorial, especially in expressing an opinion: an editorial comment.

And again, from here:

1. An article in a publication expressing the opinion of its editors or publishers.
2. A commentary on television or radio expressing the opinion of the station or network.
1. Of or relating to an editor or editing: an editorial position with a publishing company; an editorial policy prohibiting the use of unnamed sources.
2. Of or resembling an editorial, especially in expressing an opinion: an editorial comment.

The above disclaimer did not mention anything about claiming anyone else's writing as my own, nor of owning the copyright to it. It said MY material, expressing MY opinion. In all articles or partial articles used in this blog, there is ALWAYS corresponding links/hyperlinks to the source, and authors' names given, and my EDITORIAL words are separated either by font, color or both.

This person, Anita by name, also ignored another aspect of my disclaimer in the process of her contacting me by stating that her email was private, not meant for publication.


Any email sent concerning this blog
or related to it in anyway,
at this address, are subject
to possible publication in my blog.

No, sorry, Anita. I chose to not publish your email NOT because you told me that I couldn't in your email, but because I chose not to do so.

And because of the tone of your last email to me, beginning with 'let's start over, etc.', I chose to no longer leave what I had considered to be a fantastic article about your topic from my blog. Again, not because you 'asked' me to change it, but because of the tone of your email to me.

But I am going to express an EDITORIAL COMMENT here. When I post anything here, if at all possible, I document where the information came from. There are times when the article is so well written that I don't want anyone to miss one word of it, and put the article here, but I have NEVER taken credit for the writing or authorship or ownership. Occasionally with photos, I do not know who to credit, when they are found online or come to me in an email from someone.

When someone ACCUSES, right off the bat, however, it leaves one with a bad taste in one's mouth for not only the person, but also for the organization that person represents. And I have had a bad taste in my mouth for that organization for a long time, in spite of being on the same side of issues.

For years, I wrote to this particular organization about the petitions that I would not/could not sign due to the wording about the "American Catholic Church" being against some things, for others, etc. Told them repeatedly that I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church that is in America, but that there is no such thing as American Catholic, etc. Then, lo and behold.... I learned that there IS such an animal, and let this organization know once again that I am NOT a member of it, and cannot/will not sign petitions that refer to something (in error) that we are not.

Though I have not been 'listened to', and wrote many times, in response to each of their petitions/fundraising letters ..... note... fundraising letters/petitions.... I was not heard, nor was I ever given the courtesy of any kind of response. Not once. Not even a sorry, not going to change. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

So, Anita... remember that when you quote my disclaimer to me, you also quote the first part. It is solely MY discretion about using any email sent to me about this blog, regardless of the reason it is sent. If not put here in the comment section, and emailed to me to 'get around' the comment section... it is still subject to publication at MY discretion.

And now you know why I did not publish the email, and why I removed your article, as good as it was, from my website. Write me again... I 'd love to publish our correspondence.

And... remember the definition of Editorial Content, ok?

Forgive my sarcasm, regular readers.