CAN WE RELY ON THE ELECTIVE ABORTION INFORMATION COMING FROM THE GENER

[Nic Samojluk]

The recent revelations made by Patricia Moleski, an Adventist whistleblower, regarding the criminal doctoring of hospital records at our Adventist Health System [AHS] forces us to wonder whether we can rely on the accuracy and reliability of the information coming out of the General Conference regarding what is taking place in our hospitals [GC].

If the president of the GC relies on the record kept by the AHS, and if such record is routinely altered by the deletion of adverse events taking place in our Adventist hospitals, then how can we trust on what the GC president says about anything connected with our medical institutions? He can be honest and truthful, but if he is fed false information, then his credibility is damaged.

If an honest man draws water from a well which has been contaminated by someone, his honesty will not miraculously make the water safe for drinking.

In the event you have not heard about Patricia Moleski’s claim, let me suggest that you take the time to watch the video she recorded for our benefit in which she relates her experience while working for the AHS until she was fired for refusing to follow orders to delete the true cause of deaths of several patients. Here is the link for the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F91hN9nR1KA

Can we rely on what Ted Wilson said regarding elective abortions?

On February 21, 2011, Ted Wilson, the president of the Adventist Church, publicly declared in the City of Redlands, California, that the church does not condone elective abortions, and that if any such non-therapeutic procedures are done, they are against church policy; and he added that this kind of abortions are so insignificant that they are “almost down to zero.”

I was greatly surprised when I heard this assertion. The reason is very simple: I was on the verge of publishing the result of my investigation into the liberal attitude of the Adventist Church towards abortion, and if what Ted Wilson stated was correct, then I needed to verify the accuracy of said information. The statistics I had accumulated up to that point diametrically contradicted what Wilson had affirmed.

A request for help ignored by the General Conference

I was willing to postpone the publication of my book if needed so that I could incorporate the latest statistics provided by the church. When the Redlands meeting was over, I asked Wilson for assistance. I requested help with the securing of statistics verifying the fact that elective abortions were in fact “almost down to zero.” He suggested that I write to Dr. Handysides at the GC. I did, but got no response. I followed this up with another letter plus a letter to Ted Wilson. Over a year has gone by and I am still waiting for a response.

Given my urgency to publish my book, I searched for other sources for abortion statistics in Adventist hospitals and located a public entity with the help of a pro-life friend. Said data seemed to tell a different story. Looking back, I am glad the people at the GC ignored my request for statistics. Had I received such data from them, I would have ended with false information I could not rely on. Knowing how records at our AHS are allegedly doctored and falsified on a routine basis, I can only thank the GC for stonewalling me.

DOCUMENTED FACTS RELATED TO ELECTIVE ABORTIONS IN OUR ADVENTIST HOSPITALS

There are certain facts which are undeniable since they have been documented by our own experts and which have been published in our periodicals such as our official “Ministry” magazine, “Spectrum,” “Adventist Today,” and Adventist books in print. In addition, some of said facts have been also published in well known media outlets like the “Washington Post.”

Fact Number One: We Adventists have led in the legalization of abortion in the United States of America. We started offering elective abortion services to our hospital patients back in 1970—three years before the practice of abortion was legalized in our mainland. If you have any doubt, you can verify this by accessing the sources listed below.

References:

George Gainer, Letters Ministry (May 1988): 27.

George Gainer, ““The Wisdom of Solomon”?” Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989): 38-46.

George Gainer, “Abortion: History of Adventist Guidelines” Ministry (Aug. 1991): 11-17.

Fact Number Two: The following Adventist hospitals did participate in the offering of abortions services to their patients:

“Castle Medical Center, Hadley Memorial Hospital, Hanford Community Hospital, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Porter Memorial Hospital, Port land Adventist Medical Center, Shady Grove Adventist Hospital, Shawnee Mission Medical Center, Sierra Vista Hospital, Walla Walla General Hospital, Washington Adventist Hospital, and White Memorial Medical Center.”

Reference: http://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1991/August/abortion-history-of-adventist-guidelines

Fact Number Three:

At least five Adventist hospitals reported that they were offering elective abortions on demand.

Reference: Gerald R. Winslow, “Abortion Policies in Adventist Hospitals” Spectrum 19/4 (May 1989): 47-50.

Fact Number Four: The Adventist Church does not condone abortions on demand, but has granted our Adventist hospitals the freedom to do so with impunity. My view is that this is similar to the behavior of Pilate who declared that Jesus was innocent of any crime but granted immunity to those who were determined to have him executed.

ABORTION STATISTICS FROM INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ENTITIES

What follows is a summary of statistics showing the number of reported abortions performed in our Washington Adventist Hospital located in the State of Maryland, and let’s keep in mind the fact that Adventist operates over fifty hospitals in the U.S. mainland. These statistics were supplied by the following non-Adventist, independent organization: The Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission.

1992: 547

1993: 287 from January through June [half a year] which gives us an estimated 574/year

2006: 47

2007: 48

2008:36

2009: 27

2010: 29

2011: 30

The mysterious sudden drop in the number of reported abortion

How can we explain the enigmatic drop in the number of abortions for the 2006 through 2011 years? What I discovered was that starting with the 2006 year the number of impatient abortion cases were no longer included. Why? I purchased the 2011 copy of the American Hospital Association Guide which used to list the names of hospital performing abortions and found out that this information was no longer included either.

Can we conclude that this sudden drop in the number of abortions in our

Adventist hospitals has been drastically reduced? Given Patricia Moleski claim regarding the routine deletion of adverse events from their patient’s and employees’ records, I conclude that we cannot trust the information contained therein. Their information seemed to have been compromised on a grand scale, which means that we can no longer rely on what we hear being asserted about elective abortions coming from the General Conference.

If you disagree, share with me your reasons for your opinion.

[Nic Samojluk]

Adventist Today has posted four separate blogs dealing with Patricia Moleski's video in which she accused the Adventist Health Sysem of wrongful termination following her refusal to delete adverse events which resulted in the deaths of a couple of patients who received an overdose of powerful medications.

Am I the only one who sees serious implications to the credibility of Adventist claims that elective abortions are almost down to zero now? If those deletions are real, then can we rely on the records of abortions as well? Why are we Adventists so apathetic about the issue of abortions? Is Billy Graham wrong on the way he sees this moral detour? Notice what he wrote:

“CHARLOTTE, North Carolina, July 27, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In a public letter, famed evangelist Billy Graham wonders whether America could be facing a punishment comparable to Sodom and Gomorrah if the nation fails to repent of its moral degradation, including the 50 million legal abortions committed since Roe v. Wade.”

Is Billy Graham off the mark on his moral assessment regarding the seriousness of what is taking place in our country?

[Nic Samojluk]

Were you aware that there is a move in the U.S. Congrees to undo the damage done by the U.S. Supreme Court 1973 Roe v. Wade decision by a simple act of Congres which requires a simple majority of the votes? If approved, abortion would become illegal in every State of the country. Should not Adventist support this bill? Here is a description of said effort:

Life at Conception Act Petition Proposed, By John Hull

"COMMENTARY | U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Wis., and the National Pro-Life Alliance are circulating a petition in an effort to put an end to the atrocities legalized by Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that allows for abortion on demand.

The petition urges your local senators and representatives to vote in favor of a Life at Conception Act that would put a stop to convenience abortions, saving almost 4,000 babies every day. The act would affirm the life of the unborn child and bring to him or her the rights and protections of the U.S. Constitution.

According to the introduction by Dr. Paul, "The Supreme Court itself admitted in Roe that once Congress establishes the personhood of unborn children, they must be protected by the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which explicitly says: 'nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property.'"

In his opinion on Roe, former Justice Harry Blackmun wrote, "In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment. The appellant conceded as much on reargument."

The left claims women have the right to abortion on demand, for any reason, as shown in a newsletter of left-wing organization, SocialistWorker.org. The Supreme Court, however, did not support this claim.

Blackmun's colleague, Justice Warren Burger, in his concurrence wrote, "Plainly, the Court today rejects any claim that the Constitution requires abortions on demand."

This abhorrent decision, allowing for abortion in the first trimester, led directly to the undeniable infanticide permitted by partial birth abortion.

In one method of early term abortion, as described by Lifesite.com a procedure called Dilation & Curettage (D&C), a baby is barbarically torn limb from limb. This method is used up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

Another procedure involves inserting forceps into the womb and crushing and tearing body parts away from the child. This procedure is used up to 18 weeks of pregnancy.

By 9 weeks the baby can feel light touch and commonly curls his/her toes (all 10 are formed by now) or otherwise reacts to the light touch, as shown by the Endowment for Human Development. If they can feel a light touch and react, it stands to reason they can also feel themselves being torn apart at 9 weeks.

Abortions are performed as late as the last 3 months of pregnancy by methods such as ramming scissors into the viable child's skull while partially exposed and sucking out the brain with a vacuum tube.

It is time to put an end to killing babies as a form of birth control simply because the parents were irresponsible. We have devolved into a culture where personal responsibility is a foreign concept. Because of this, millions of innocent lives are brutally and agonizingly terminated as a matter of convenience.

I signed the petition and hope you will, too."

http://news.yahoo.com/life-conception-act-petition-proposed-161500570.html

[Gordon1]

Nic, it seems fairly obvious that Patricia Moleski has been hung out to dry by the FBI and other agencies. She tripped over a story of national corruption involving corporate America, and by extension, many in public office.

The police have been told to back off or find another job.

On abortion, one should be cautious when aligning with political parties and lending them influence. Soon these men and women will impose the mark of the beast.

Abortion is not a national crime, because the government does not impose abortion upon the citizenry. Private individuals make the choice to abort, aided by medical personnel. All parties may receive public support, from food stamps to hospital privileges, but they are not forced by law to abort foetuses. Here Billy Graham does not address the cause of unwanted pregnancies, such as moral irresponsibility, lust, rape, incest, etc. (Perhaps some abortions are legislated for those deemed unfit by the government?)

If there were no unwanted pregnancies, all abortion clinics would close in a week.

If you fail to address the cause, legislation will only push abortion underground.

Will that save lives? No. Will it increase holiness? No. Will we be more prepared for heaven? No.

[Gordon1]

A national crime would occur in a federal imposition of an illegal action upon one person or group.

Such as invading a sovereign country unprovoked, forced sterilization of its own people, etc.

[Nic Samojluk]

Gordon1 wrote:

“Nic, it seems fairly obvious that Patricia Moleski has been hung out to dry by the FBI and other agencies. She tripped over a story of national corruption involving corporate America, and by extension, many in public office. The police have been told to back off or find another job.”

I fully agree with your comments. If our interpretations of the facts is correct, then what do we do with Ted Wilson’s claim that the number of elective abortions in our Adventist hospital has been reduced to almost zero? We know that they used to be in the hundreds in the not too distant past.

If Moleski is right in her claim that the hospital records are being sanitized, then can we trust what the same hospitals report about the number of abortions? Is it possible that Wilson is being fed information which has been doctored by hospital managers?

“On abortion, one should be cautious when aligning with political parties and lending them influence. Soon these men and women will impose the mark of the beast.”

Do you think that our fear of a future persecution, when police protection will be removed from Sabbath keepers, should lead us to ignore the current removal of governmental protection from the unborn which has so far resulted in the deaths of over 50 million innocent human beings? Have we learned anything from the German genocide or from our not so distant slavery institution?

“Abortion is not a national crime, because the government does not impose abortion upon the citizenry. Private individuals make the choice to abort, aided by medical personnel. All parties may receive public support, from food stamps to hospital privileges, but they are not forced by law to abort fetuses.”

How is this different from the predicted future persecution of Sabbath keepers? Ellen White wrote that government protection will be removed from them and those who hate those who worship God according to their conscience will have to flee for their life. The contrast with the unborn is that they have nowhere to flee from a sure death. The duty of the government is to offer protection for all human beings under their jurisdiction.

“Here Billy Graham does not address the cause of unwanted pregnancies, such as moral irresponsibility, lust, rape, incest, etc.”

He doesn’t? Have you listened to his preaching? His preaching seems to provide ample evidence that he does address the root cause of abortion.

“If there were no unwanted pregnancies, all abortion clinics would close in a week.”

Yes, and if there were no unwanted thefts, rapes, and sexual abuse of children, then criminal activity would decrease. This is a given! Does this mean that police should discontinue the protection of innocent victims?

“If you fail to address the cause, legislation will only push abortion underground.”

Should we then legalize prostitution, drugs, rape, burglary, grand theft, and child predatory activities because otherwise these type of crimes are pushed underground?

[Nic Samojluk]

Gordon1 wrote:

“A national crime would occur in a federal imposition of an illegal action upon one person or group.”

Are you saying that when the protection is removed from Sabbath keepers, as predicted by Ellen White, this action will not represent a federal crime?

[Gordon1]

I don't debate.

[doug yowell]

Am I the only one who sees serious implications to the credibility of Adventist claims that elective abortions are almost down to zero now? If those deletions are real, then can we rely on the records of abortions as well?

[Nic Samojluk]

Billy Graham is very old now. Others may be able to exert much more influence on the future pro-life efforts in our country. I am thinking about Paul Ryan. He is rather young, he a Catholic, and he has so far voted pro-life 100 percent of the time.

If Mitt Romney is elected for the presidency, Ryan may solidify Romney’s decision to support pro-life legislation in the future. The Lord may use this Catholic man to save our country from the abortion moral stain—something Adventists should have done. What do you think?