Edward Szeto’s Registered & Protected Web Page

  
    Speaking 4 Life
    Discussions on ethics, politics, culture, and theology in the support of human life. 
    
	Blogger Bio
Contact Me
Ed’s Topics

Events
	

	

			
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 5, 2009 
				Quality Indicators for People with Dementia
			  
			  
			    
			      Here’s something new for pro-life Americans to be concerned with that showed up in the manager’s amendment to H.R. 3962 Affordable Health Care for America Act; click here to download a copy.
A new section was added that should cause everyone to question where this so-called “health care reform bill” is heading. The new section is called “Quality Indicators for Care of People with Alzheimer’s Disease” [Sec. 1446].
The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall develop quality indicators for the provision of medical services to people with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias and plan for implementing the indicators to measure the quality of care provided for people with these conditions [Sec. 1446(a)].
Although the wording is ambiguous since this will be a plan that the secretary of Health and Human Services will be creating, it would appear that the services to be provided to patients with mental illnesses will be determined on the quality indicators that are developed. Will this mean that people with a “lesser” so-called “quality of life” be denied medical services? This is but one sign of the intended health care rationing to come if H.R. 3962 were to be enacted.
Meanwhile, an amendment was introduced by Representative John Boehner (OH) (click here to read it) in order to substitute H.R. 3962. It would strike everything after the enacting clause of H.R. 3962 and insert an entirely new bill. This amendment would codify a permanent ban on tax-payer funds from being used to fund abortions and it will codify a conscience protection clause.
The Boehner amendment would explicitly prohibit tax-payer funding of elective abortions, including any monies held in a trust fund to which tax-payer funds were deposited [Sec. 602 of Boehner amendment, amending Title 1 of the United States Code]. Additionally, the amendment would provide for conscience protection by stipulating a penalty for anyone or any entity which discriminates against an individual or any health care entity (e.g. a hospital) for their refusal to “provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions” [Sec. 602 of Boehner amendment, amending Title 1 of the United States Code].
During the summer, Representative Bart Stupak (MI) and Representative Joseph Pitts (PA) submitted an amendment to H.R. 3200 that would explicitly ban usage of tax-payer funds for abortions (click here to read it). They would like to introduce the same amendment to H.R. 3962, but speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi (CA) is trying to push a “rule” so that there can be no vote on additional amendments to H.R. 3962.
Contact your representative today to tell them to support pro-life amendments and to vote NO on Speaker Pelosi’s rule that would ban a vote on pro-life amendments to H.R. 3962. You can find information on how to call your representative on the National Right to Life webpage by clicking here. This is imperative. The vote on Pelosi’s rule is expected to happen on Friday night (November 6) and the vote on the whole bill is expected to happen on Saturday night (November 7).
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: Boehner amendment, dementia, H.R. 3962, health care rationing, quality indicators
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 4, 2009 
				Biofuels and Health Care
			  
			  
			    
			      The manager’s amendment to H.R. 3962 Affordable Health Care for America Act was released last night; click here to download a copy.
After a quick review, I have not seen any changes to the parts of H.R. 3962 that deal with abortion. Therefore, tax-payer funded abortions and all the other concerns I have highlighted remain in the bill (e.g. see “Is Abortion Prohibited by H.R. 3962?“). No one knows for sure when the bill will be voted on, but now that the manager’s amendment has been introduced, the full vote can come as soon as Friday night (November 6).
But what I am really curious about is a new section added to H.R. 3962: “Second Generation Biofuel Producer Credit” [Sec. 555]. This new section will amend the Internal Revenue Code so that it covers tax credits for producers of biofuels.
Maybe it’s just me, but…shouldn’t a health care reform bill actually deal with health care reform? What in the world is a biofuel credit adjustment doing in something as important as this?
It’s not too late to contact your representative and tell them to stop the madness and work on real health insurance and tort reform. Click here to go to the National Right to Life website for more information on how to do this.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Abortion,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: biofuel producer, H.R. 3962, manager's amendment, Section 555
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 4, 2009 
				Health Plans Forced to Provide Assisted Suicide Counseling
			  
			  
			    
			      Another little gem found in H.R. 3962 Affordable Health Care for America Act involves the requirement for your health insurance plan to provide and pay for assisted suicide counseling.
Section 240 requires that all companies offering a qualified health benefits plan to “provide for the dissemination of information related to end-of-life planning to individuals seeking enrollment in Exchange-participating health benefits plans offered through the Exchange” [Sec. 240(a)(1)]. This section also explicitly states that the insurance company cannot promote suicide, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing [Sec. 240(a)(3) and Sec. 240(d)(1)].
The problem is that that this section does not “preempt or otherwise have any effect on State laws regarding advance care planning, palliative care, or end-of-life decision-making” [Sec. 240(d)(3)]. Oregon, the first state to legalize physician-assisted suicide, does not consider their legislation to have allowed “suicide, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing.” Instead, they consider their legislation to have allowed patients to make a choice to face “death with dignity.” In fact, it is called the Oregon Death with Dignity Act, as is the Washington version passed into law last year.
Thus, your health insurance plan will now be required to promote and pay for “death with dignity” consultations in those states that have passed such legislation. Why is it that this bill is interested in promoting life-ending programs rather than life-saving or life-extending programs?
For more information on Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, go to the Oregon Department of Human Services . For more information on Washington’s Death with Dignity Act, go to the Washington Department of Health.
H.R. 3962 is just plain wrong for America; it does not protect human life and our well-being at any age or any stage as it purports to do; instead it does exactly the opposite: it promotes death and the devaluation of human life.
It is imperative that you contact your senator or representative today via mail, phone calls, and emails. Go to the National Right to life for assistance with how to do this by clicking here.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: assisted dying, assisted suicide, death with dignity, euthanasia, H.R. 3962, Section 240
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 4, 2009 
				Forced to Buy Health Insurance?
			  
			  
			    
			      H.R. 3962, Affordable Health Care for America Act, includes this little gem:
Section 501 will amend Part VIII of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. If a taxpayer is not enrolled in a Health Insurance Exchange qualified health benefits plan at any time during the taxable year, then he will be charged “a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) [of the Internal Revenue Code] with respect to the taxpayer” [Sec. 501(a), amendment to Part VIII, subchapter A, chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code]. To see what 6012(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code is, click here .
Maybe it’s just me, but…it sounds dangerously “totalitarian” that my government thinks it has the right to tell me what I must buy – whether it’s a product or a service, like insurance, when it affects only me. According the US Census Bureau, 47 million Americans are uninsured; but many of those folks actually are eligible for health insurance but don’t know it through Medicaid or SCHIP and many of those folks actually choose not to have health insurance even though they can afford it. The American Spectator wrote that a Blue Cross Blue Shield study estimated that the actual number of uninsured Americans is really closer to 8.2 million; click here to see the article. More recently, the Wall Street Journal also publish an article questioning the number of uninsured Americans; click here to read the article.
Yes, we need to help those folks who truly can’t afford health insurance, but H.R. 3962 is not the answer since it includes legislation such as taxing people  (substitute the word “fine”) who don’t want to have health insurance for whatever reason; and taxing people who don’t to participate in a health plan that uses it’s conglomerate funds to pay for services that the person has moral or religious objections to.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: H.R. 3962, income tax surcharge, Internal Revenue Code, Section 501, taxes
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 3, 2009 
				HR 3962 – Tax Surcharge on High Income Earners
			  
			  
			    
			      I spent most of the past four days reading and re-reading sections of H.R. 3962 Affordable Health Care for America Act and have come across some surprising details. Click here to download a PDF version of the bill.
For example, Section 551 will amend Part VIII of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. If a taxpayer has a “modified adjusted gross income” that exceeds $1,000,000, he will be assessed a 5.4 percent surcharge on the amount over $1,000,000 [Sec. 551(a), amendment to Part VII, subchapter A, chapter 1, Internal Revenue Code]. And oh, by the way, this “shall not be treated as a change in a rate of tax” [Sec. 551(c)].
There is no stipulation in the bill that these funds would or would not be used for health insurance; that these funds would or would not be used to help pay for premiums to the public health insurance option for those who can’t afford it; or that these funds would or would not be used to help offset the start-up costs associated with the public option–set at $2 billion in H.R. 3962.
Maybe it’s just me, but…what in the world does this have to do with health care? And how does this help provide health insurance for those who are uninsured?
Contact your representatives today and tell them to stop HR 3962. Click here to go to the Susan B. Anthony List webpage to send a message to your elected officials.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: H.R. 3962, income tax surcharge, Internal Revenue Code, public health insurance option, public option, Section 551
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 2, 2009 
				Is Tax-Payer Funded Abortion Prohibited by H.R. 3962?
			  
			  
			    
			      On October 29, 2009, the House of Representatives introduced H.R. 3962, Affordable Health Care for America Act. This is the reconciled bill between the competing bills introduced in the House over the summer, including H.R. 3200. Supporters of H.R. 3962 claim that there is a provision that states tax-payer funded abortions will not be allowed according to the bill, so I thought I’d take a closer look to verify their claim. All references to sections are to H.R. 3962 unless otherwise noted.
Section 222 defines what the “Essential Benefits Package” is meant to include. All plans eligible for the Health Insurance Exchange need to meet these minimum services. Unlike H.R. 3200, there is no language H.R. 3962 regarding options for family planning.
Section 321 establishes a Public Health Insurance Option. The public health insurance option is prohibited from providing abortion coverage “for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is not permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved” [Sec. 222(e)(4)(A)]. However, the public option is allowed to provide abortion coverage “for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved” [Sec. 222(e)(4)(B)].
In an effort to defend their claim that there will be no tax-payer funded abortion provision in the bill, proponents of the bill state that the restrictions placed on abortion by the Hyde amendment would fall under this definition and thus prevent the public health insurance option from funding abortions. This defense is misleading and doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Firstly, the Hyde amendment only prevents tax-payer funded abortions specifically through Medicaid and appropriations for the Department of Health and Human Services. It does not address the other potential funding sources for the public health insurance option, such as income tax surcharges and employer penalties for not providing health insurance.
Secondly, the Hyde amendment needs to be renewed every year; so if it is not renewed, then during the next plan year, tax-payer funded abortions can be a part of the public health insurance option.
Finally, this prohibition in H.R. 3962 is placed only on the essential benefits package and does not apply to enhanced or premium benefits packages; thus the public health insurance option can, in fact, provide for tax-payer funding abortions.
For a detailed description of how the Hyde amendment may not apply in this situation, go to the Susan B. Anthony List’s special website called Stop Hyding. Please note that although their website refers to H.R. 3200, the logic and the law are applicable to H.R. 3962 as well.
Aside from the funding issues, as of the time of this writing the only abortion coverage prohibited to the Department of Health and Human Services is partial-birth abortion, which is banned by Federal law. However, if the law changes to allow partial-birth abortions, e.g. if the Freedom of Choice Act is passed as President Obama promised during his 2008 presidential campaign, then tax-payer funded abortions through the public health insurance option would include even these types of abortions.
Do you think it’s right that your tax dollars go to ending human life in the womb? And what about your health insurance provider? Will they be forced to pay for abortions if they morally object to the practice? Will you end up paying for abortions because your premium payments into the health insurance are then used to pay for an abortion that someone else chooses?
H.R. 3962 includes a subsection entitled “Abortion Coverage Prohibited as Part of Minimum Benefits Package” [Sec. 222(e)]. This section prohibits the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Health Benefits Advisory Committee, or the Health Choices Commissioner to mandate that abortion be covered in the essentials benefits package of a qualified health benefits plan [Sec. 222(e)(1)]. The caveat is that the abortion services are described in Sec. 222(e)(4)(A) and (B) which describe abortion coverage for the public health insurance option. As discussed above, the only type of abortion currently banned is partial-birth abortion and the only funding restriction is based on Medicaid payments.
Thus the Health and Human Services Secretary, the Health Benefits Advisory Committee, or the Health Choices Commissioner can, in fact, mandate that your health insurance provider cover abortions in the essential benefits package.
If you don’t want to pay for abortions your tax dollars, it is imperative you contact your representative in Congress today! It is scheduled for a vote by the full House of Representatives later this week. For information on how to contact your representative, see the National Right to Life’s webpage by clicking here.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Abortion,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: H.R. 3200, H.R. 3962, Hyde amendment, public option, Section 222, tax-payer funded abortions
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | November 1, 2009 
				The VA’s “Your Life, Your Choices” Document
			  
			  
			    
			      In all the hullabaloo regarding H.R. 3200 over the summer, one document that was regarded as an example of how the government would treat end-of-life decisions was the Veterans Affairs’ document Your Life, Your Choices: Planning for Future Medical Decisions.
I had previously written on the LCMS World Relief and Human Care website that this document uses derogatory terms such as “vegetable” when describing a patient. Another problem that I saw was that the document asks the patient to evaluate his life based on what he can or cannot do rather than the inherent value of human life as bestowed upon him by our Creator and through the sacrifice of our Savior, Jesus Christ.
In H.R. 3200, the advance care planning consultations were mandatory. Enough people made their voices heard and in the current bill in front of the House of Representatives, H.R. 3962, this section has been made voluntary and optional.
But the concerns still remain and the VA’s document is still a good example of what a government document on advance directives and end-of-life decisions would look like. The VA has removed the document from their website and you can no longer obtain it on-line from them. But you can still download it from my blog by clicking here.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: advance directives, end-of-life decisions, H.R. 3200, H.R. 3962
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | October 29, 2009 
				Pro-life Moments on Desperate Housewives
			  
			  
			    
			      Okay, it’s confession time. When I was younger, I used to watch Dynasty with my mom. Eventually, my sister and I got into watching Flamingo Road. Now, ever since I got married, I watch Desperate Housewives with my wife. As always, the man is blaming the woman (a la Adam, see Genesis 3:12).
What was amazing to me, however, was discovering two pro-life gems in the last few weeks on Desperate Housewives, a show filled with stories of lying, cheating, adultery, murder – yes, sin of every kind.
The first scene is about one of the characters contemplating abortion. Although the word “abortion” was never used, you pretty much knew what they were talking about, and the “choice” she was considering.
The second one has to do with  marriage, and what one husband sees as one of his primary roles within that relationship.
I took the liberty of reproducing the scripts from the two episodes below. Many thanks to abc.go.com where I could watch the scenes repeatedly to get the exact wording from the shows. Enjoy! And keep your eyes open for little pro-life gems in the midst of everyday life.
From Episode 602: Lynette, working mother of four children, is pregnant with twins.  Lynette has been torn between her new position at work and her pre-born babies.  She is not sure if she wants to “keep” the babies;  she cried out to her husband, “I don’t love these babies!” in a previous episode. As we follow the story this week, her friend Susan’s daughter, Julie, was attacked and is in a coma in the hospital. Lynette blurts out that Julie may be pregnant so they won’t perform any harmful x-rays on her, and Susan wants to know how Lynette knows that Julie may be pregnant:
Lynette: I hear Julie opened her eyes; that’s great!
Susan: Yes, yes it is.
L: I’m sorry you’re mad at me.
S: I’m not mad. I just can’t understand why she went to you instead of me.
L: That day that Julie found me crying…the reason she opened up to me was because I told her…and no one else can know about this…that I’m pregnant.
S: You are…that’s amazing! Wait, why were you crying?
L: Oh, let’s see, I’m in my 40’s, my husband is back in school, I’m the sole bread-winner, I don’t know how I’m going to do this whole baby thing again, and also because…
S: What?
L: Because I can’t quiet that one voice in my mind that keeps saying, “Maybe I shouldn’t.”
S: Oh, honey.
L: Yeah.
S: Lynette, uh, you can do whatever you think it is you need to do.
L: (Sadly) Yeah, I know.  Lucky me.
S: It’s weird, everybody talks about a kid being a gift. It’s the only gift where you puke for nine months before you receive it and then scream the day it arrives.
L: (Chuckles) That’s true.
S: But they are a gift, Lynette. I know that because I’ve spent the last few hours thinking that I was going to lose mine. I realized that I would trade everything I own, I would give everything that I ever will have, for just one more day as Julie’s mom…but I’m not telling you what you should do.
L: Actually you are. And I’m glad you did.
If you are facing an unplanned pregnancy and don’t know what to do, please call the Option Line at 800.395.HELP (800.395.4357) or visit their website at www.optionline.org. If you have had an abortion in the past and are experience strong negative emotions associated with that decision, please also call the Option Line or visit their website for more information. They are there for you.
From Episode 605: Lynette fires a handyman (Roy) who told her she emasculates her husband, Tom, because she is always the one making all the decisions in their family. She is upset that Roy is judgmental of the leadership role she assumes in the marriage. Tom sees Roy on the porch across the street and goes to speak with him.
Tom:  Hey Roy, can I talk to you?
Ryan: Sure thing, pally. (Tosses Tom a beer.) Here, take a load off.
R: If it’s about me getting into it with your wife, though, I have to stop you first and say, “I’m sorry.”
T: Well, thanks.
R: I mean, I know times have changed, but a man’s still a man; and you deserve to have your wife respect you.
T: She respects me plenty, Roy. (Roy looks skeptical.)
T: Here’s the thing you gotta understand about Lynette. She grew up without her dad. Her mom was a drinker. So she had to be responsible for everyone.
R: Yeah, well, that’s rough.
T: Yeah..it left her with this constant fear that everything could suddenly fall apart. And that’s why she needs to control everything. Of course she can’t…nobody can…but she can control me…if I let her…so I do…because it makes her feel safe.  And that is my job as her husband…to make her feel safe.
R: You’re a good man, Scavo.
T: I try. Now I have a hamburger to fetch.
If you’d like to read more about biblical manhood and biblical womanhood, click here to go to the Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Abortion,  Marriage,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: biblical manhood, chivalry, Desperate Housewives
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | October 16, 2009 
				Don’t Hide Behind Hyde
			  
			  
			    
			      You may have heard supporters of the current so-called health care reform bill say that your tax dollars won’t be used to pay for abortions because of the Hyde amendment. Click here to see a video by the Susan B. Anthony List (www.stophyding.com). Basically, the Hyde amendment only applies to Medicaid, and it does not cover the new options that the so-called health care reform bill will create.
The bottom line is this: if the supporters of the current so-called health care reform bill wanted to assure the American public that tax dollars wouldn’t be used to fund abortions, why didn’t they support one of the three different amendments that were offered which categorically stated that? Or maybe they should add that restriction to the current bill. The truth is, the current bill contains loopholes that will allow YOUR tax dollars to pay for the murder of innocent babies in the womb.
Click here to go to Stop the Abortion Mandate to see how you can make a difference.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Abortion 
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
					
			
			
			  
				Posted by: Ed | October 9, 2009 
				Chicago Bubble Zone Law
			  
			  
			    
			      On September 29, the Chicago city council passed a new law that severely restricts the ability to conduct sidewalk counseling and peaceful prayer vigils outside of abortion clinics.  You can read about the “bubble zone” law from WGN by clicking here.
Basically, within a 50-foot zone around the entrance of an abortion clinic, you cannot “come within 8 feet of another person to pass out fliers, display signs, vocally protest, educate or counsel without consent.”
But all is not lost. The ordinance can still be vetoed by Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley.  His office has installed an automated answering system to tally the votes from the public on the ordinance. If you live in the Chicago area (or even if you don’t–I’ve been told they are taking phone calls from everyone), you can call the mayor’s office at 312.744.3300; press “1″ to let the system know that you want to comment on the bubble zone law; and press “2″ to register your vote against it.
For more information about the bubble zone law go to the Pro-Life Action League website by clicking here.
		        
			    
			      Leave a Comment
				  Posted in Abortion,  Maybe It's Just Me, But...  | Tags: abortion clinics, bubble zone, Chicago, prayer vigil, sidewalk counseling
			    
			
			
			  
		
	
				Older Posts »
		
	
		Categories
	
	
		
	  Abortion

	Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia

	Biotechnology

	Eugenics

	Just Thinking

	Marriage

	Maybe It's Just Me, But…

	Sexual Purity

	
	  
	
  

	
       If You Need Help 
	Grace Initiatives
Men and Abortion Network
Optionline
Word of Hope

	
 Follow Me on Facebook 			NetworkedBlogsBlog:Speaking 4 LifeTopics:prolife, abortion, bioethics Follow my blog
		 Subjects Select CategoryAbortionAssisted Suicide and EuthanasiaBiotechnologyEugenicsJust ThinkingMarriageMaybe It’s Just Me, But…Sexual Purity					 What I’ve Said Recently 			Quality Indicators for People with Dementia 
						Biofuels and Health Care 
						Health Plans Forced to Provide Assisted Suicide Counseling 
						Forced to Buy Health Insurance? 
						HR 3962 – Tax Surcharge on High Income Earners 
						Is Tax-Payer Funded Abortion Prohibited by H.R. 3962? 
						The VA’s “Your Life, Your Choices” Document 
						Pro-life Moments on Desperate Housewives 
						Don’t Hide Behind Hyde 
						Chicago Bubble Zone Law 
						
					 What Others Said 			Ed on Freedom of Choice?carolyn  burns on Freedom of Choice?Amoruso on Blogger BioEd on Abortion and Health Care ReformJackie Durkee on Abortion and Health Care Reform My Favorite Blogs 
	Americans United for Life Blog
Esgetology
Fr. Frank Pavone’s Blog
Jill Stanek
Mercy Journeys
PPL Blog
ProLifeBlogs
Secondhand Smoke
The Cloakroom

	
 Pro-Life Resources 
	Abort73
Americans United for Life
Anglicans for Life
Answers in Genesis
Black Genocide
Care Net
Do No Harm
Feminists for Life
Get Real with Yourself
International Task Force
LCMS Life Ministries
Lutherans For Life
Presbyterians Pro-Life
Priests for Life
Silent No More
Titus 2 for Life

	
 Sites of Interest 
	Alliance Defense Fund
Biblical Manhood & Womanhood
Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity
Christian Medical & Dental Assocs.
Concerned Women for America
Family Research Council
LCMS World Relief and Human Care
Stand to Reason
WORLD Magazine

	
 When You're Bored 
	Airways Magazine
Combat Aircraft
InfoWorld
National Hot Rod Assoc.
Online Conversion
The Hockey News
Winding Road Magazine

	
 Thoughts of Old 		Select Month November 2009  October 2009  September 2009  August 2009  July 2009  June 2009  May 2009  April 2009  March 2009  About Me 			Ed Szeto is the Special Projects Coordinator for LCMS Life Ministries, a part of The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod. He has been actively involved in the life issues since 1997.  Find more information about the author on the "Blogger Bio" page.
		 Disclaimer 			Comments and other material posted to this site reflect the personal opinions of individuals and may not necessarily reflect the beliefs and practices of The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod. Material posted from sources other than The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod may appear on this site. Such appearances do not imply an endorsement of the theological, moral, or ethical position of the source. 

		 More Information 		Blogger Bio
Contact Me
Ed’s Topics

Events
					Follow this blog
		


  
    
	Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Ocean Mist by Ed Merritt