Saturday, June 18, 2011


The UNFPA received 846 million US dollars in funding in 2008. The biggest donors was:
1) The Netherlands - 118 millions
2) Sweden - 67 millions
3) Norway - 62 millions
4) Denmark - 54 millions
5) The UK - 53 millions
6) Spain - 52 millions
And so on. USA did not fund UNFPA when Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. was Presidents. But Clinton and Obama are funding this.
And the UNFPA spend this money in "poor countries" like Africa, Latin America and Asia. During the 1990s they set up clinics in small villages in the jungles and mountains of Peru. The people here are mainly Catholic Indians and they usually had about 7 children. And they would just set up their clinics in the small village and sterilize the women, and when the job was done they would just close the clinic and go to the next village.
They would say to women "You are so poor. You can not have more children. You already have 3 children! Are you a cow?! Hahahaha."
And the main funder of this program was the UNFPA. And of course this was "amazing" for Peru because they got rid of poor Indians. If you kill the poor people in your country you can push your GDP per Capita up and brag to your President friends about your amazing economic growth.
Two of the goals of the UNFPA is "global access to reproductive health by 2015", meaning that they want abortion on demand to be legal in every country by 2015, and of course it must be free, because we can not discriminate against poor women. And another goal is "that every man and woman will get a healthy infant", meaning that they must test all unborn babies, and if the slightest risk of a handicap exist the amazing profession that helps people have to abort all of the "human weeds" like Tim Tebow.

I also have to say: If you really thought that the UNFPA only cared about "helping people" or "helping women", wouldn't big and rich countries like USA, Italy, France and so on be the biggest donors? Of course they would. But the biggest donor is The Netherlands, a small country with a small population and also the most liberal country on earth, and the 2nd most liberal country on earth (Sweden) is the 2nd largest donor even though they have a very small population, same thing with Norway and Denmark. Of course countries like Italy and France are also extremely liberal, but at the same time they are less liberal than northern Europe and therefore they doesn't fund UNFPA to the same extent as northern Europe.
/Dr. Lopez

Hitler defeated France after all

Did you know that France is aborting 96 % of children with Down's syndrome?
And did you know that north of the border, in Belgium, they euthanise people and transplant their organs to others?
/Dr. Lopez

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

The Republican debate in New Hampshire

First of all I noticed that they had put Romney at the center of the stage, as if they had already chosen him. And of course I also noticed that Michele Bachmann was there, and that she will run for President.
I think this debate was pretty boring. And I have to say that Ron Paul seemed like the clear winner to me. He totally dominated the other ones.
Tim Pawlenty seems like a very good man and I would like to be his friend.
I think it is clear that the candidates are more conservative this time around than in 2008. And this is pretty normal after a few years of Obama as President. Last time Romney was the one that conservatives endorsed and he was seen as the conservative choice along with Huckabee vs. the liberal Republican McCain. But this time Romney is the most liberal candidate.
I think Rick Santorum is a very good man. And one of his daughters was born so handicapped that he have birthday parties for her every week. And now she is 3 years old, even though the "doctors" used to say "you need to let her go" and "her handicap is imcompatible with life". But Santorum make me a bit worried when he talk about other countries and he seem to want to invade every country that does not agree with USA. And as somebody that is 100 % pro-life he should re-evaluate his antipathy towards leaders like Chavez (who have lead a country where abortion is illegal for over 12 years) and his love for "allies" like Britain (who are working against the innocent children in countries like Venezuela and Peru), a pro death machine where most of the people are drunk most of the time. But at the same time Santorum is very good on many issues and unlike cowards like Huckabee and Palin he does not say that "I don't think abortion is the best optiooooooon", but he said recently, "I would charge doctors who perform abortions". So at least he have a position on this unlike Huckabee and especially Palin, they should just shut up and understand that Planned Parenthood and 30 year olds with 13 year olds girlfriends doesn't care the least what they think is the best "optiooooon".
Michele Bachmann also seems like a very good woman. And I think that she would be a pretty good President.
/Dr. Lopez

Monday, June 13, 2011

Lethal liberal lies

Liberal whites (like Hillary Clinton) and different forces who work diligently in the "conspiracy against life" (a phrase coined by a former Pope), for example the EU, UN, "human rights groups" and pure "pro-choice groups", they always say that "women have much more abortions in countries where it is illegal than in countries where it is legal".
And when they say this they mean "even if you think abortion is wrong, banning it will not accomplish anything positive". And they also want to say that "the people of The Philippines or Guatemala or Ghana are just as immoral as people in England or Vietnam or Russia".
I think it is self evident that nobody can know how many women are having abortions in countries like The Philippines, Ghana or Guatemala, since their governments spend their resources on other things than performing and counting the nr of abortions. So nobody can know how many women are having abortions there.
But we know that "western countries" like USA and Sweden abort about 1/3 of their children. And we know that everybody in these countries that was born after about 1973 have one sister or brother that they don't know about, of course some have 5 siblings that was aborted and some have 0, but on average everybody have one sibling that they don't know.
We also know that Eastern Europe historically have aborted about 75-90 % of their children. And we know that different communist countries around the world also abort a lot of children, for example Vietnamese women abort 3,7 children on average.

(And of course we can't know for sure if these bloated pro abortion governments spin their numbers.)
And the statement "women in countries where abortion is illegal have much more abortions than women in countries where it is legal" surely was out there in 1995.

As I said before nobody can know how many women had abortions in Ghana or Guatemala in the year of 1998 for example. But personally I think that the liberal statement above is a lie.
We know that women in Ghana in 1998 had maybe 8 children on average. Does that mean that they aborted 9 times 8= 72 children? Something they must have done to keep up with the abortion rate in Eastern Europe. Or did they only abort 3 children and gave birth to 8? Something they must have done to keep up with the abortion rate in USA.
Personally I think this is the same kind of liberal lies that Alfred Kinsey reported. At a time when people got married at age 21 in USA and nobody divorced, Alfred Kinsey reported that most husbands cheated on their wife, and that they visited prostitutes and so on, and that super many women was having abortions, but later people revealed that Kinsey found sex criminals, pedophiles and prostitutes to include in his data, in order to pump up his numbers.
I think today the pro death movement are following the same playbook, by saying that women in countries where abortion is illegal have more abortions than women in for example Russia or USA. I think this is a lie to make Americans feel more justified in their sin (See? We are as good as anybody else!), and they want to make people in Guatemala question their moral culture. And they want to make them feel like hypocrites (See? You have more abortions than me! And still you oppose it you say!...Hahahaha... liberal white women like Hillary Clinton are saying).
Also it is very weird how like 94 % of women in Costa Rica can be against abortion if they really are having so many of them.
The pro death movement in the 1950s wanted to turn husband against wife, and make people believe that "everybody else is cheating, so I should also do it" or "my husband surely is cheating, so I should do it too" and "most women are having abortions, so we should make it legal and safe" and "many men have sex with their daughter, so I should do it too, and don't care about that stupid Bible" and "most people are having premarital sex, so I should do it too".

I think they are lying today in the exact same way, in order to break down the welcoming attitude towards children and the reliance and faith in your spouse in a country like Ghana.
Of course what we can know is that places where abortion is not legal, like Africa, Latin America and southern Asia have fertility rates around 2-8, while places where abortion is legal, white countries and northern Asia, have fertility rates around 0,6-2.
And of course their ultimate objective is a fertility rate around 1, and that most dads will not live with their child, so the mom must work full time or more, and the state raise the child, and the mommy can maybe cook the child dinner at night, but if she does not serve green food, of course the child will report it to his master (the state education), when he go to school the next morning to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" or put condoms on bananas.
/Dr. Lopez

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Children can not be demanded


If Catholics are pro life. Why do they then oppose things like in vitro fertilization?
Answer: Children are a gift. So they can not be discarded (abortion). And they can not be demanded.

If we can demand children, then they are not a gift. The gift of children is freely given by God and freely received by man.
I can see this in Jesus' parents. Their child was given to them by God, even though they had not hoped for one at that time, and they accepted him and they did not discard him.
/Dr. Lopez

Monday, June 6, 2011

Women's liberation


Before Aaron Russo died, he was a friend of Nick Rockefeller.
One night Rockefeller said: "Aaron, what do you think women's liberation was about?"
Russo answered: "That women have the right to work. They get equal pay with men. Just like they got the right to vote."
Rockefeller started to laugh and he said: "You are an idiot."
Russo: "Why am I an idiot?"
Rockefeller: "Let me tell you what that was about. We the Rockefellers funded women's lib. We are the ones who got all of the TV and newspapers, the Rockefeller Foundation. Do you want to know why? There are two primary reasons. One reason was: We couldn't tax half the population before women's lib. The second reason was: Now we get the kids in school at an early age. We can indoctrinate the kids how to think. Plus it breaks up their family. Kids now look at the state as the family, at the school as the officials, as their family, not at the parents teaching them."
Up to that point Russo had thought that womens lib was a noble thing, but when he saw their intentions behind it, he saw the evil behind what he had thought was a noble adventure.
/Dr. Lopez

Saturday, June 4, 2011


Sometimes our relationship can be hard
But I will always be your lifeguard
Sometimes I swear
But I spend more time in prayer
Sometimes I sin
But you are even closer to me than my twin (plus I can hit a golf ball with backspin)
Sometimes I treat you wrong
But it is with me that you belong
Sometimes you want to break up
But before you do, please talk it over with the Archbishop (Juan Luis Cipriani)
Sometimes I don't behave very Christly
But it is you that I have to marry

/Mr. Ortega