Right to Life New Zealand – Upholding the sanctity of Human life and Standing Up for the Vulnerable

Time 2020-11-14 09:04:17

Web Name: Right to Life New Zealand – Upholding the sanctity of Human life and Standing Up for the Vulnerable

WebSite: http://righttolife.org.nz

ID:115543

Keywords:

Upholding,Zealand,sanctity,

Description:

Right to Life New ZealandUpholding the sanctity of Human life and Standing Up for the VulnerableYou are here: Home / HomeGore Health leads way in rejecting euthanasia by lethal injection for patientsNovember 7, 2020 by Philip Leave a Comment Media Release 7 November 2020Right to Life requests that the twenty District Health Boards in New Zealand follow the commendable example of the Gore Health Community Trust to protect the vulnerable by publicly refusing to have anything to do with providing their patients with euthanasia by lethal injection or assisting in their suicide.There is no place for the euthanasia or assisted suicide of patients in our hospitals and hospices. Killing or assisting patients to die by suicide is not health care.Right to Life also requests that the government does not direct DHBs to provide lethal injections and assisted suicide to patients in accordance with the End of Life Choice Act. The Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern stated after the election that she wants to govern on behalf of all . Hopefully this includes protecting the vulnerable in our community, the aged, the disabled and the seriously ill from being killed by a doctor as normal health care and an end of life choice .Right to Life commends the Gore Health Community Trust for affirming the sanctity of life and its commitment to providing quality palliative care for its patients.Gore Health chief executive Karl Metzler, (Stuff 6 November) states the vast majority of physicians are opposed to the End of Life Choice Act. None of them got into medicine to end lives,” he said.Euthanasia is not a core health service and District Health Boards are not obliged to provide euthanasia. According to the Oregon experience, for the state to set up a national euthanasia system would be very expensive and would benefit only a small group of elite white people.All of our District Health Boards are cash-strapped and are struggling to provide the services which they are required to provide in mental health, cancer treatment and in other areas of care.It would be an intolerable burden on the community to impose this expensive and unnecessary euthanasia system for the termination of the lives of vulnerable patients.Our palliative care services are world class, but they are underfunded. Currently only 1 in 3 New Zealanders who need palliative care in one of our 33 hospices has access to a hospice.The state should concentrate on providing increased funding for palliative care and refrain from funding euthanasia. Our health funds should be used exclusively to promote a culture of life and not a culture of death.Ken Orr,Spokesperson,Right to Life N.Z. Inc.Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: 2020 Elections, Assisted Suicide, Bioethics, Decriminalisation, End of Life Choice Act, Euthanasia, Euthanasia Referendum, Jacinda Ardern, Labour, Media Releases, New Zealand, NZ General Elections, Referendum, Right to Life, RTL Activities Tagged With: assisted suicide, decriminalisation, District Health Boards, End of Life Choice Act, ethics, euthanasia, euthanasia referendum, Jacinda Ardern, Labour Party, Medical professions, suicideRepeal of Euthanasia Act –a Moral imperativeOctober 31, 2020 by Philip Leave a Comment Media Release 31 October 2020Right to Life believes that the End of Life Choice Act 2019 is an unjust law that fails to protect life, violates the common good, lacks legitimacy, should not be obeyed and must be repealed.An unjust law is a human law that is not founded on eternal law and natural law. We have a duty to obey human made laws but when they disobey God’s law they must be disobeyed and repealed.The EOLC Act violates the moral law because it violates God’s fifth Commandment, Thou shalt not kill. Parliament has no authority to violate God’s law.It violates Article three of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”The preamble of the Declaration advises that our right to life is inalienable and universal, being inalienable we may not have it taken from us nor may we give it up.It violates the New Zealand Bill of Rights 1993, Article 8, “Right not to be deprived of life.”The Euthanasia referendum also undermines the EOLC Act’s legitimacy for the following reasons:-The “yes” vote for the referendum was 65.2 per cent. It is believed that only one in five who voted yes had actually read the Act.Right to Life believes that many of those who voted yes were grossly misinformed. The government MPs, who were overwhelmingly in support of the new law, claimed to be neutral, but conducted a campaign of misinformation about the referendum.A poll conducted in New Zealand between 31 October and 6 November, 2019, by Curia Marketing on behalf of Euthanasia Free New Zealand revealed the following disturbing findings on what the End of Life Choice Bill would deal with or allow to be legalised:•         74% thought that it included turning off life support•         70% thought it included ‘do not resuscitate’ (no CPR) requests•         62% thought it included the stopping of medical tests, treatments and surgeries.Why did the government refuse to address this widespread misunderstanding of the referendum?The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about, nor does it make legal the action of turning off life support, to make a do not resuscitate request (no CPR) or to stop medical treatment. All of these end of life choices are already legal, are not euthanasia and this new law does not change these actions.The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about pain relief. It is already legal for a doctor to give a person enough medication to address their pain and make them comfortable, even if this may hasten their death as a side effect, as the doctor seeks to neither hasten or cause the death of his patient.Right to Life invites all in the community who wish to protect the right to life of the most vulnerable to join with us in working for the repeal of the EOLC Act.Ken OrrSpokesperson,Right to Life N.Z. Inc.Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: 2020 Elections, Assisted Suicide, David Seymour, Decriminalisation, End of Life Choice Act, End of Life Choice Bill, Euthanasia, Euthanasia Referendum, Labour, Media Releases, New Zealand, New Zealand, NZ General Elections, Referendum, RTL Activities Tagged With: Decriminalisation of Euthanasia, End of Life Choice Act, End of Life Choice Referendum, ethics, euthanasia, euthanasia referendum, human rights, human rights violation, NZ Bill of Rights, NZ General ElectionEuthanasia Referendum- temporary victory for Culture of DeathOctober 30, 2020 by Philip 2 Comments Media Release 30 October 2020The support of 65.2 per cent who voted yes to the euthanasia referendum marks a sad day of infamy in our nation’s history. New Zealand now has the notoriety of being the first country in the world that has approved with a national referendum to allow the killing of its most vulnerable. New Zealand now becomes not only the most dangerous place in the world to be an unborn child but the most  dangerous place if you are elderly, seriously ill or disabled.The architect of this legislation David Seymour and the Labour government who wanted an overwhelming “yes” vote  will be delighted their campaign of misinformation has produced the planned result.This is the day that New Zealand accepted the implementation of the End of Life Choice Act that empowers doctors to administer a lethal injection to their patients or assist in their suicide as some sort of health care .This Act is a threat to the lives of every person in our community. It is not the end of change in these laws,  but merely the first step in implementing the agenda of the international euthanasia movement, who ultimately desire assisted killing for anyone who is tired of life, or who believes that they may be a burden on their family or society so cannot justify their continuing existence.This is the legislation that provides cover for the perfect crime, the victim is killed and disposed of, there are no witnesses and their death certificate is falsified to conceal the truth that the patient was actually killed by their doctor. No doctor will be tried for manslaughter or homicide, because they will always be acting in good faith .This law may corrupt the medical profession and drive out some members who refuse to participate in mercy killing or assisted suicide. The trust between patients and their doctors will be eroded unless safer alternatives to euthanasia continue to be readily available and adequate funding is provided for palliative care. The safeguards which should protect the vulnerable are not specificed in this law no independent witnesses are required, and no consultation with family or whanau is required under this law.The duty of Parliament to protect the lives of every citizen, especially our weakest and most defenceless members has been changed forever. Parliament now has assumed the authority of our Creator. It now arrogantly believes that it has the decision making authority about who may live and who may be killed. It also believes that it has the authority to empower and direct doctors to ignore medical ethics to kill and not to care.This tyrannical referendum posing as democracy is not the end, but the beginning of our battle against euthanasia. The pro-life movement will not abandon the vulnerable in our community, but re-commits ourselves  to fight unceasingly for the repeal of this obnoxious End of Life Choice Act.Parliament has shamefully abdicated its responsibility to present a truthful and accurate campaign to educate voters on this critical issue, has ignored the wishes of the majority of the submissions against this dangerous law, and has failed to protect the vulnerable who may be coerced into an early death.Ken OrrSpokesperson,Right to Life N.Z Inc.Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: 2020 Elections, Assisted Suicide, David Seymour, Decriminalisation, End of Life Choice Act, End of Life Choice Bill, Euthanasia, Euthanasia Referendum, Jacinda Ardern, Labour, Media Releases, New Zealand, NZ General Elections, Referendum, Right to Life, RTL Activities, Submissions Tagged With: euthanasia bill, euthanasia referendum, Labour government, Legislation, New Zealand Parliament, Referendum, right to lifeRight to Life Applauds US Senate Confirmation of Justice Amy Coney BarrettOctober 28, 2020 by Philip Leave a Comment Media Release 28 October 2020Right to Life commends the United States Senate for confirming the appointment of Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, this is a victory for women.Justice Barrett is the fifth woman to have been appointed to the Supreme Court in its 231 year history. Her credentials are impeccable, were unquestioned and unchallenged. She taught law at the Notre Dame university as a professor and served three years as a distinguished Federal Appeal Court Judge in Chicago.Barrett is now the sixth practicing Catholic justice at the Supreme court, joining Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Brett Kavanaugh. In addition, Justice Barrett will join Sotomayor as the only two Catholic female Supreme Court Justices in US history.The appointment of Justice Barrett is a victory for women. She is an iconic model for women, providing an outstanding example of a woman fulfilling her role as a loving wife, mother of seven children and as a member of the legal profession attaining the pinnacle of her profession as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. She has achieved this because of the loving support of her husband Jesse. They have been married for 21 years and are raising seven children, two being adopted from Haiti. During the Senate hearing she humbly stated,”What greater thing can you do then raise children.”At her confirmation she swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States and stated,“A judge declares independence not only from Congress and the President, but also from the private beliefs that might otherwise move her. My fellow Americans, even though we judges don’t face elections, we still work for you. Fr. John Jenkins, CSC, president of Notre Dame university said this of her in a statement:“Recognised by experts from across the spectrum of judicial philosophies as a superb legal scholar and judge, she is an esteemed colleague and a teacher revered by her students. Justice Barrett becomes the first alumna of Notre Dame Law School and the first Notre Dame faculty member to be so honoured. In Justice Barrett the United States Supreme Court has an outstanding member who believes in the sanctity of life of every human being from conception to natural death and also believes in marriage of exclusively one man and one woman.Ken OrrSpokespersonRight to Life N.Z. Inc.Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: Conscience, Family, Marriage, Media Releases, RTL Activities, Supreme Court, Trump, United States Tagged With: Courts, Legal Profession, Supreme Court, USA, WomenRight to Life believes that the government is violating UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities.October 24, 2020 by Philip 1 Comment Media Release 24 October 2020.Is the government seeking to  exterminate unborn children with Down syndrome?The Minister of Justice, Andrew Little, in response to a letter of protest from Right to Life at the removal of the prohibition of abortions for disability including Down syndrome of the child at post 20 weeks, in the Abortion Legislation Act 2020, stated in a letter dated 11 February 2020, that this was to comply with a directive in 2017 from the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of the United Nations officially stated that abortion of children “explicitly” because of a disability violates the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, [CRPD]. (Art, 4,5,8)” The Committee is opposed to the imposition of eugenic abortion, which claims that only the perfect have a right to life.The Minister claims that not including the 20 week restriction of the killing of the unborn diagnosed with a disability in the Abortion Legislation Act 2020 is consistent with New Zealand’s obligations under the CRPD. Right to Life challenges this claim. The Act does not explicitly mention fetal abnormality or any other grounds, however, sadly fetal abnormality is widely accepted as grounds for an abortion by his government.The government is engaged in a campaign of eugenics with its search and destroy screening programme for Down syndrome and other disabilities. Women who are considered to be at risk of having a child with Down syndrome, are strongly encouraged and coerced to subject themselves to screening. Those women who are diagnosed as having an unborn child with Down syndrome, are subject to pressure to choose an abortion funded and provided by the government. This eugenics programme is promoted as “a woman’s right to choose.”With the passing of the anti-life and anti-feminist Abortion Legislation Act 2020, the Ministry of Health, at the government’s direction, is ensuring that a veil of silence descends over the killing of the disabled.The Ministry’s abortion notification form, which is to be completed by abortionists, requires no information on the reasons for abortions  including the alleged Down syndrome or other disability of the child. The government is suppressing debate on abortion by withholding this important information.The Prime Minister said in 2017 that her government was going to be the most accountable and transparent government we had ever seen.It is estimated that 90 per cent of children diagnosed with Down syndrome in New Zealand are killed before birth, Right to Life expects this number to increase, however, we may never know because the government is ensuring that the community will never know. Why is the media silent?Ken Orr,Spokesperson,Right to Life NZ Inc.Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: Abortion, Abortion Legislation Act, Andrew Little, Disability, Down Syndrome, Eugenics, fetal abnormality, Jacinda Ardern, Labour, Media Releases, RTL Activities, Spina Bifida, United Nations Tagged With: abortion, Disabilty, disabled children, Down Syndrome, eugenics, Human rights of the unborn child, human rights violation, LabourAndrew Little refuses to answer OIA Request Complaint to OmbudsmanOctober 20, 2020 by Admin Leave a Comment 16 October 2020Ombudsman,Office of the Ombudsman,Dear Sir,I wish to lay a complaint against the Minister of Justice, Hon. Andrew Little for declining to provide the following information under the Official Information Act:-What statistical evidence do you have to support your claim that there is no such thing as a full-term abortion?What evidence do you have to support your claim that abortions after 20 weeks are performed to protect the women’s life or health from serious risk?The Minister has not disclosed under the Official Information Act what provisions he is declining my request. I submit that the Minister has no grounds for declining my request as he has access to the abortion statistics recorded by Statistics NZ and by the Perinatal and Maternal Mortality Review Committee {PMMRC].Statistics available from the PMMRC reveal that the vast majority of late term abortions are performed on the grounds of alleged foetal disability including Down syndrome.I question the Minister’s claim that it is my duty to produce evidence about the performance of full term abortions, this is an absurd distraction that seeks to avoid answering my request.Yours sincerely,Ken Orr,Secretary.Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: Abortion, Abortion Legislation Act, Andrew Little, Complaints, Letters, OIA Requests, Ombudsman, RTL Activities Tagged With: Andrew Little, late term abortion, Obudsman, Official Information Act, PMMRC, Statistics NZ and AbortionRight to Life Newspaper Advertisment Christchurch Press Dominion PostOctober 20, 2020 by Admin Leave a Comment The following half page newspaper Advertisement was published in the Dominion Post and in the Christchurch Press on Friday 16th October the day before the election. Follow this link for quote referencesShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: Abortion, Abortion Legislation Act, RTL Activities Tagged With: abortion, Abortion Legislation Act, Jacinda Ardern, Right to Life Newspaper AdsRe-elected Labour government increasing threat to human rights and traditional family.October 18, 2020 by Philip 1 Comment Media Release 17 October 2020Right to Life is disappointed that the electorate has re-elected Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her Labour government for a further term of government. Right to Life believes that only those who are committed to protecting the lives of every person in the community from conception to natural death are worthy of sitting in our Parliament or of governing us. Right to Life believes that the Labour government of Jacinda Ardern has forfeited its right to govern us because of their failure to protect women and their precious unborn from the violence of abortion which is now promoted as no longer a crime but health care. They have also failed to protect the vulnerable in our community from euthanasia and assisted suicide with their overwhelming support for the End of Life Choice Act.Right to Life warns the community that Western civilisation and its values are under attack by neoliberalism and post modernism. Following the government’s violation of human rights during its first term, we need to be alert to the re-energised  agenda that will be pursued by the government this term, which will increasingly threaten the sanctity of life and the traditional family, the foundation of our nation.This government, during its first term, presided over the government funded killing of more than 30,000 innocent and defenceless unborn children.  It also passed the Abortion Legislation Act 2020 which denied the humanity of the unborn child and declared that it was no longer a crime to kill a defenceless unborn child. There were more than 25,000 written submissions to the Abortion Legislation select committee, with 90 per cent of these opposed to decriminalising abortion, the government ignored these submissions.This government caucus also gave overwhelming support to the End of Life Choice Act, which would empower doctors to administer a lethal injection or assist in the suicide of vulnerable patients, as health care .This government threatens free speech, with its promise to introduce legislation to prohibit hate speech. This could be used to prohibit churches from teaching that killing unborn children in abortion or killing the vulnerable in euthanasia is a violation of human rights and an offence to God.The government fully supports the Private Members Bill of Louisa Wall M.P., to restrict the right of free speech and assembly within 150 metres of an abortion facility.  This law would deny women seeking an abortion, their right to obtain help from those present.This election is a sad day for our parliamentary democracy, as the Labour government now has an overwhelming majority that will allow it to legislate as it wishes. Will the news media serve our community by being an effective watchdog?Ken OrrSpokesperson,Right to LifeShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: 2020 Elections, Abortion, Abortion Legislation Act, Abortion Legislation Bill Select Committee, Buffer Zones, End of Life Choice Act, End of Life Choice Bill, Euthanasia, Euthanasia Referendum, Free Speech, Freedom of Religion, Hate Speech, Jacinda Ardern, Labour, Louisa Wall, Media Releases, NZ General Elections, RTL Activities Tagged With: discrimination. religious freedom, election, End of Life Choice Act Referendum, euthanasia bill, euthanasia referendum, free speech, Freedom of Speech, Labour MPs, NZ General ElectionWhy is the Labour government opposed to the traditional family?October 13, 2020 by Philip 2 Comments Media Release 13 October 2020The government should recognise that the family does not exist for society or the state, but society and the state exist for the family.It should be of great concern to all New Zealand families that the government is seeking to suppress Family First’s outstanding advocacy for the traditional family and its opposition to abortion and euthanasia.The Attorney General, (the Hon. David Parker, pictured), acting for the government, has appealed to the Supreme Court against the recent decision of the Court of Appeal to uphold its charity status withdrawn by the Charities Commission and upheld by the High Court in August 2018. The traditional family is one of the three pillars of authority outside the state, along with the Church and civic organisations, to defend human rights and democracy.Right to Life believes that this appeal to the Supreme Court is not just about the charity status of Family First but about the government’s perception of the traditional family as being a threat to the government and to society. The government is opposed to the advocacy of Family First for the traditional family and its opposition to abortion and euthanasia.In 2018 Right to Life requested the Prime Minister under the Official Information Act,”do you have policies that recognise that the promotion of marriage as  exclusively of one man and one woman as the source of the next generation and the foundation of a healthy society?” The reply from the office of the Prime Minister was to refuse the request as there were no such policies.This case exposes and highlights the government’s rejection of the traditional family of exclusively one man and one woman as being of public benefit. The Attorney General’s submission to the Court of Appeal argued that:-“Family First’s contention that its activities benefit all forms of families cannot be sustained on the evidence. He submits that Family First has not established that its principal purpose, advocacy on behalf of the traditional family, is of public benefit or is sufficiently analogous to any purpose previously accepted as charitable.”Counsel for the Charities Board submitted that the, “Trust’s main purpose is to promote points of view about family life, the promotion of which is a political purpose because the points of view do not have a public benefit that is self-evident as a matter of law.”Key Statements from the Court of Appeal Judgement, which is now being appealed by the Charities Board :-Para 73: “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other similar instruments, affirm a right to family life. That provides considerable support for the proposition that Family First’s support of, education about, and advocacy for, the family and its related institution of marriage may, other things being equal, be charitable.”Para 92: “[As] Paul Rishworth QC has observed: “Our political systems depend upon our deliberating as a community. Our understanding of the world comes by seeking information and transmitting it to others.”Para 109: “An examination of this material, set in the context of advancement of education and research, shows Family First’s clear purpose of stimulating a public debate and participating in public discourse on important social issues relevant to families.”Para 122: “Such research is valuable in promoting public knowledge about marriage and families and the many issues that affect the family. Public discussion and debate about such important issues is desirable to encourage the development of related policies and laws.”Para 164/165: “We consider Family First’s engagement in the deliberations of the community on issues such as abortion, assisted death, anti-smacking laws, prostitution reform and censorship is properly characterised as part of its broader purpose of supporting marriage and family as being foundational to a strong and enduring society. Any attempt to label such engagement generally as cause advocacy of a political nature is not helpful.”In fact, society “has a vested interest in supporting marriage as the surest basis for family life,” the statement affirms. It says, “Politicians of all parties should recognize and support marriage as a key building block of a stable society.” For, “marriage brings considerable and measurable benefits to individuals, children, family life and society.”Ken OrrSpokesperson,Right to LifeAuthorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBratneys Road, ChristchurchShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Filed Under: Censorship, Charities, Family, Family First, Free Speech, Freedom of Religion, Labour, Marriage, Media Releases, Religious Freedom, RTL Activities Tagged With: charities act, charity status, discrimination. religious freedom, family, family first, Freedom of Speech, marriage, Traditional familyRight to Life End of Life Choice Chistchurch Billboard CampaignOctober 13, 2020 by Admin Leave a Comment The following eight 6m x 3m billboards have been displayed at various locations around Christchurch for the past couple of months urging people to Vote NO to the dangerous End of Life Choice Bill. Locations: Clarence/Blenheim; Curletts/Parkhouse; Clarence Blenheim; Lincoln/Aldwins; QE 2 Drive Westward; QE2 Drive Eastward; Cashell/Fitzgerald; SH 1 Woodend Northbound.

TAGS:Upholding Zealand sanctity 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

Upholding the sanctity of Human life and Standing Up for the Vulnerable

Hot Websites