Have you seen our Protect Our Children Campaign?

 

New teaching materials created by the NHS, Scottish Government and Education Authorities advise that kids aged between five and nine-years-old should be taught about the ‘gender issue’!

It’s time to take a stand to defend our precious children from corruption.  A pro-life victory would also send a clear message to the would-be abusers of our children and mockers of our faith that their time is coming to an end.

We will not tolerate this kind of thing anymore! All this is possible if we can raise the campaign costs, are YOU with me?

Please use the donation form below!

Protect Our Children Campaign

Select an amount

News

New Zealand Sees 50% Surge in Euthanasia Deaths

In New Zealand, cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide have increased by almost 50% (48.17%) for the year April 2025 to March 2026 compared with the same period in 2022-2023, just three years ago, according to data released by the New Zealand Ministry of Health.

According to ‘Registrar (assisted dying) Annual Report to the Minister of Health – June 2026′, there were a total of 486 cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide in New Zealand from 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026, a 48.17% increase from the same period in 2022-2023, the first full year in which euthanasia and assisted suicide were available, when there were 328 cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide in the country.

In the year 2025/26, the 486 cases of euthanasia and assisted suicides accounted for 1.29% of all deaths in New Zealand. 

7% of applicants reported having a disability, and one in five applicants were not receiving palliative care at the time of application.

Only 16 applicants had a psychiatric assessment to check for competence to make an informed decision about assisted suicide.

Fewer than 1 in 10 applicants (8.33%) had a neurological condition, a relatively small proportion, despite the need for people with neurological conditions to access assisted suicide or euthanasia regularly being referred to by campaigners as a key reason for introducing assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Since euthanasia and assisted suicide were made legal in New Zealand in November 2021, 1,696 have ended their lives through these means.

The report also reveals a decline in the number of doctors willing to be involved in assisted suicide and euthanasia. The number of practitioners on the Support and Consultation for End of Life Choice (SCENZ) Group list, which connects patients with doctors willing to assess or carry out assisted deaths, fell from 148 in March 2023 to 121 in March 2025.

While doctors can provide assisted suicide or euthanasia to their own patients, those treating individuals outside their care must be on this list. The shrinking numbers have led to reports of doctors travelling long distances to assess patients, raising concerns about discomfort with helping a patient end their own life among healthcare professionals.  

The data also reveals a clear ethnic disparity in those accessing assisted suicide and euthanasia. New Zealand European/Pākehā applicants accounted for 81.1% of applications, while they represent 67.8% of the population. In contrast, Māori applicants made up only 4.9% of applications, despite representing 17.8% of the population; Asian applicants made up 2.49% of applications, despite representing 17.30% of the population; and applications from Pacific peoples made up 0.77% of applications, despite representing 8.90% of the population.

Of the 486 people who died, 94.65% (460) died by euthanasia, where a doctor or nurse ended a patient’s life either through ingestion (1) or through injection (459). 26 people (5.35%) ended their lives through assisted suicide. The key legal distinction between the two is who carries out the act: in euthanasia, it is a third party who ends the person’s life, while in assisted suicide, the person ends their own life.

Under the current law in New Zealand, a person can end their life by assisted suicide or euthanasia if they are thought to have six months left to live.

However, there have been attempts to expand the law beyond the current six-month prognosis limit. Last year, ACT Party MP Todd Stephenson tabled a Members Bill to remove this.

ACT Party leader David Seymour MP also called for the six-month requirement to be scrapped in 2022, only a year after the law came into effect in 2021. Astonishingly, this is from the same David Seymour who, before the Bill to introduce assisted suicide and euthanasia became law in New Zealand, told the NZ Parliament that opponents’ claims that the law would be expanded in the future were a “slippery slope fallacy”.

Pro-Lifers Can’t be Forced to Hire Pro-abortion Employees -Ruling

A legal victory for Pro-Life campaigners in Michigan could echo even to the UK.  A federal judge has just blocked a Michigan law that could require pro-life groups to hire pro-abortion employees. The law could also require pro-life groups to cover the killing of preborn babies through its health insurance plans.

Federal District Judge Robert Jonker ruled on July 10 in favor of Right to Life of Michigan and its challenge to the “Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act.” Due to a regulatory change in 2023, Michigan now requires employers to respect an employee’s so-called “right to the termination of a pregnancy.”

The requirement sets up logically absurd conclusions, as highlighted in Jonker’s decision.

He wrote:

What if Weight Watchers—an organization devoted to helping people lose weight by changing their habits—were forced to provide weight loss drugs like Ozempic? Would that benefit not compromise the organization’s mission?

What if Christian Scientists—a group that believes in spiritual healing over medical treatment—were forced to provide health insurance? Would that also not comprise the group’s anti-healthcare mission? Or what if Not Dead Yet—an advocacy group that opposes assisted suicide and euthanasia—were eventually forced to provide euthanasia or assisted suicide services as part of its health care packages? Would that also not compromise the group’s anti-euthanasia mission?

The decision sides with the pro-life groups, which also include an organization called Pregnancy Resource Center, and establishes a temporary injunction. The Michigan Supreme Court must first address certain questions before the case can return to the federal judiciary.

Both Right to Life of Michigan and its attorneys at Alliance Defending Freedom praised the ruling.

“The court’s decision is a welcome reprieve and reaffirms our fundamental right to hire employees who agree with our life-affirming mission. Any attempt by state officials to force organizations like Right to Life of Michigan to employ staff who do not agree with our fundamental mission is a wild misuse of power and defies common sense,” Amber Roseboom, Right to Life of Michigan’s president, stated in comments shared with LifeSiteNews.

She criticized “the radical abortion-only response to unplanned pregnancy that Democrats in our state continue to push.”

“Seeking to undermine organizations that offer life-saving choices is counterintuitive,” Roseboom said. “For choice to truly exist, every woman must have the opportunity to make a choice for life if she would like to do so.”

US judicial rulings do not automatically enter English common law, but they are classified as 'obiter dicta', so they can be quoted in legal arguments and carry weight which pushes an English court towards the same conclusion.