Weekend question
Veronica at the Planned Parenthood Aurora blog blames pro-lifers for the lack of participation by pro-aborts in the civil discourse, or perhaps it’s noncivil discourse, because she says we scare them away:
I have heard from friends, read your comments & blogs. Why weren’t there more pro-choice voices at recent City Council meetings? Why did supporters leave meetings early? It is my belief that the history of clinic violence keeps some silent. The fact that the anti-choice leaders picket clinic workers homes keeps us silent.
Do you agree with Veronica it is our fault pro-aborts are less likely to actively engage in the abortion debate?
Sep.29, 2007 10:35 am |
Weekend question |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
ooooooh please, Veronica. What isn’t our fault?
If you have to resort to silly stuff like “pro-aborts,” then you’re hardly interested in debate anyway.
Doug
Eh.
My guess is that PCers just don’t care. They’re apathetic and most likely think that PLers are making too big of a deal out of the Aurora PP. That’s more than likely why they are not making a big deal out of it. I don’t think they’re “afraid” or “intimidated” by the PLers, they just don’t care enough to do anything about it.
Ah, complacency.
Veronica,
My thoughts are this…
I don’t think that the pro-aborts are intimidated by the pro-lifers “violent behavior” that I have YET to hear about or see for myself at the prayer vigils at the mill. It is the pro-aborts yelling at us and being confrontational.
I think that the pro-aborts are intimidated by the TRUTH. It is hard to debate against the TRUTH. I sat in front of PP supporters at the last town council mtg and I could tell they were so misinformed. When Margaret Sanger quotes were brought up, they were behind me denying the quotes. They were also agreeing with misinformation that the PP supporters were saying in their talks.
It is sad to see these non-supporters of life that are so misinformed. I think when they realize they don’t know what they are talking about, that’s when they get up and leave…or maybe they have just donned a pink shirt to jump on the PP badwagon for their 15 minutes of fame in the media spotlight.
Yes, I am cynical, but TRUTH IS TRUTH.
Actually, I think the reason is even simpler. Pro-choicers aren’t counter-protesting because right now, abortion is legal. The people who have to actually fight to get their changes through are going to be the ones fighting. Over-turn Roe v Wade, you’re going to see the exact opposite.
“I think that the pro-aborts are intimidated by the TRUTH. It is hard to debate against the TRUTH.”
Yes Colleen, I agree.
I don’t think they are intimidated by us. I think we prolifers are more passionate because we feel we are fighting legalized murder. They feel they are fighting for a woman’s “right to choose.” I also think prochoicers would rather not face the realities of abortion. That’s why they prefer to be called prochoice instead of proaborts. It is hard to reconcile the prochoice position once one is really confronted with reality- it is easier to just avoid it all together. Deep in their hearts the prochoicers, maybe even subconsciously, don’t want to be associated with murder. I am speaking as a former prochoicer(or proabort if you will).
One reason they don’t come out more often is because, when forced to actually discuss the issue, they can end up looking silly:
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=752cb9b41da3fc43fbe7
Bethany, she was really confused, wasn’t she?
Bethany, thanks for posting that. I needed a good laugh. Actually, I shouldn’t laugh. I am being mean. It’s more sad than funny. It looks like she was just reciting her talking points. The more she was challenged, the more confused she got.
That’s what happens when you’re a blatant liar. I’ve known a few. They can’t ever keep their stories straight. They really think that the whole world is “STUCK ON STUPID.”
That is exactly what I thought, Carrie.
Oh and I have to credit MK for finding that video about a month ago! :)
“They really think that the whole world is “STUCK ON STUPID.””
I’m “hooked on phonics” myself. Alex Trebek has made me a phonics junkie. :-p
And also, I’ve seen some clips of Lifers looking pretty darn silly themselves.
One reason they don’t come out more often is because, when forced to actually discuss the issue, they can end up looking silly:
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=752cb9b41da3fc43fbe7
————————————————-
Wow, Bethany. Thanks for posting this highly intellectual interview {{{heavy sarcasm here}}}. This is the type of responses Ive gotten at times over the years from the pro-abort supporters (as recently as last Tues. Aurora town council mtg).
Stupid is as Stupid does…
Pro-aborts are never interested in debate. They are always interested in changing the subject. Why would a pro-abort attend any formal discussion of abortion, when all they know how to do is call us fascists, call us the Taliban, say we’re forcing theocracy on them, or else take the conversation way out in left field and start talking about the Bible, clergy, semantics, George W. Bush, and other stuff which has little to do with the issue of the intentional killing of unborn children.
Her first statement is “If you think abortion is such a bad thing, don’t have one.” Lady, you’re talking to a man!
Sandy, there is at least one very good reason to oppose the so-called “Women’s Right-to-Know Act”. The act would require doctors to tell patients that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer, which is not true.
The act is a mandate for doctors to lie to their patients about this.
I just googled “Women’s Right to Know”, and I find that the act would also require doctors to tell patients that abortion increases the risk of complications in future pregnancies. This is another lie. It doesn’t.
http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2007/Introduced/HB0144.pdf
Then why are there studies that say that abortions CAN increase a woman’s risk for breast CA? I know of 2 women who died from breast CA. Both of them had abortions. HHHHMMMMMMM.
John,
Pro-aborts are never interested in debate. They are always interested in changing the subject. Why would a pro-abort attend any formal discussion of abortion, when all they know how to do is call us fascists, call us the Taliban, say we’re forcing theocracy on them, or else take the conversation way out in left field and start talking about the Bible, clergy, semantics, George W. Bush, and other stuff which has little to do with the issue of the intentional killing of unborn children.
Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 29, 2007 12:39 PM
For example, let`s change the subject from
“Are they intimidated?” to “We prefer a different label”
Doug wrote,
“If you have to resort to silly stuff like “pro-aborts,” then you’re hardly interested in debate anyway.
Doug
Posted by: Doug at September 29, 2007 10:41 AM
“Actually, I think the reason is even simpler. Pro-choicers aren’t counter-protesting because right now, abortion is legal. The people who have to actually fight to get their changes through are going to be the ones fighting. Over-turn Roe v Wade, you’re going to see the exact opposite.”
I agree completely.
Oh and I noticed heather that you asked me how I was in another thread. I am doing okay. It has been a long week but next week at this time i’ll be visiting Minnesota and I will have some time off of work. Students were tough, as usual this week. Some days i think its getting better and others I don’t.
Sand, Somg,
Having a full term pregnancy reduces cancer risk. The younger you are the more protective the effect.
Having an abortion cancels the benefit.
Some studies show abortion as an independent risk. Others don`t. Some of those that don`t included participants whose abortions were too recent to make an impact because cancers can take years to develop.
All studies are designed by people, and therefore limited and imperfect.
More inquiry with better controls and parameters would aid our understanding.
Heather, the studies to which you refer are so small that their conclusions are susceptible to statistical noise.
(If you don’t understand what I mean by “statistical noise”, take an intro statistics or intro epidemiology course at your local med school.)
If you bothered to look, you could find small studies that show a small PROTECTIVE effect–that abortion PREVENTS breast cancer. Again, this is statistical noise, meaningless.
The big study–the one with millions of patients, followed for several decades–showed, unequivocally, that abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer.
Your personal anecdote, with a population of two, is not very convincing.
No, hippie, the medical community regards this question as settled.
The counter-protestation argument would make sense, except for the fact that we’re specifically talking about Aurora. In Aurora, PP has been shut down. The pro-aborts should be on the move, not sitting down. The pro-lifers are winning on the issue of whether or not there can be an abortion mill in Aurora, so the ball is in the pro-abort’s court.
Also, Erin and JM, you do realize that overturning Roe v. Wade is not the same thing as outlawing abortion, right? Roe v. Wade prevents the people from making abortion laws through their representatives. If Roe is undone, then the people will once again have a say in how abortion is regulated. Thus, if you truly think that your “pro-choice” arguments trump ours, you should not be afraid. You need only convince the people to support laws in favor of “choice”, and then it won’t matter if Roe is overturned.
Also, hippie, the protective effect of carrying a pregnency to term is very small.
I love it when a prochoicer thinks they are insulting me by calling me anti-abortion. Am I against aboriton? Yes and I have no problem admitting it. Or how about ant-choice? No problem there. I am against giving women the right to choose abortion. Those labels do not bother me in the least.
SoMG, I am impressed to see that you are capable of speaking on behalf of every physician, nurse, or other medical professional on the entire planet. Can you speak on behalf of other entire groups of professionals as well?
500 years ago, the scientific community regarded the question as settled that the Sun revolves around the Earth. This scientific knowledge was held by no less a genius than Aristotle himself. It is interesting to see how our modern day Galileos are treated.
Somg, you have made these claims before. The studies are still conflicting. 2 women dead in their 40’s. Both had abortions in their 20’s. I’m still going to have to go on that. JM, hope you are well. I thought you quit. I figured you had already moved back to MN. Glad you will be going home for a visit though! See the family and the B/F.
Somg, I had some questions for you under the Clarence T. post.
Nope, still hanging in there heather, I can’t quit on these kids. As bad as they are sometimes I couldnt do it to them. (they already lost one 7th grade teacher) As bad as they are sometimes, it isn’t all of them. I need to remember its just a small handful that are really rude.
According to the National institutes of Health
Having zero full term pregnancies before age 30 increases breast cancer risk 200% – 300% over the woman whose first full term pregnacy is before age 20.
Here is the quote and url
“It is well recognized that certain reproductive events, and the age at which they occur, are strong determinants of subsequent breast cancer risk. The most consistent determinant of risk in various populations is the woman’s age at first full-term pregnancy. Women with a first full-term pregnancy after age 30, and women who have never borne a child have about a two- to three-fold increased risk of breast cancer compared to women having a full-term pregnancy before age 20.
From National institutes of health
http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/risks120.html
JM, *chuckles* I can’t help it. Sometimes there are a handful of adults on any given job who can make life seem miserable. My hat goes off to you for hanging in there. I told Rae that you quit. Sorry. I figured that you had been packing and were on your way back to MN.
Are you getting used to Arizona?
So basically if a woman has an abortion at age 16 and doesn`t have a baby till she is 30, she increased her breast cancer risk at least 200%-300% over carrying to term.
Since she is already pregnant the lowest cancer risk is with carrying to term.
Heather,
Now that the weather is getting better, I am adjusting nicely. Low 90’s today and the rest of the week. Much better than 110-115!
JM, great to hear that. I hope you enjoy your visit home. Have a safe one!
Hippie, a 200% – 300% increase isn’t necessarily very big. Remember: if a number changes from very very very very rare to just very very very rare, that change can be reported as a many-fold increase, but it’s still very very very rare.
I know of 2 women who died from breast CA. Both of them had abortions. HHHHMMMMMMM.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I know two women who died of breast cancer. They were both Christians.
Jesus makes you die.
Having zero full term pregnancies before age 30 increases breast cancer risk 200% – 300% over the woman whose first full term pregnacy is before age 20.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe- But if you have a baby before the age of 20, your life and those children’s lives are pretty much ruined:
Babies of teen mothers have 21% higher probability of low birth weight, increasing possibilities for infant death, blindness, deafness, chronic respiratory problems, mental retardation, mental illness, and cerebral palsy. It doubles chances for dyslexia, hyperactivity, and other disabilities.1
Teen mothers are often victims of abuse. As Kathleen Sylvester, vice president for domestic policy of the Progressive Policy Institute, wrote:
Uhhhhhhh…
How about that Congressional report that found 87% of CPCs gave misleading information?
You know – they LIED:
Policy Updates – July 2006
Federally Funded Crisis Pregnancy Centers Provide False and Misleading Information about Abortion; Money Funneled through Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Funding Streams
A new study, False and Misleading Health Information Provided by Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers, was released on July 17, 2006 by Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA). The study found that 87% of federally funded
On a random note…look! A BRAIN EATING AMOEBA!!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070928/ap_on_re_us/killer_amoeba
@Erin: I saw that this morning in the newspaper and I burst out laughing…”Brain-eating Amoeba”. *snort*
They had Naeglaria fowlri on “House, MD” during the second season, it was what made Foreman so sick in those two episodes. :)
Laura, thank you for providing that report from Rep. Waxman, one of the most liberal, most pro-abortion, and most dishonest men in the entire US Congress. Taking anything released by Waxman seriously is the equivalent of going to David Duke to learn about racial tolerance.
I know two women who died of breast cancer. They were both Christians.
Jesus makes you die.
Posted by: Laura at September 29, 2007 2:18 PM**********************we die physically, and some of us believe in an afterlife. Some don’t. The choice is yours. I accept the fact that we do have agnostics here. My brother is one.
Hello Rae and Erin.*waves* gotta go to work. See ya later.
And hello John.
Erin, I agree. Part of the reason that abortion rights advocates do not turn out in numbers comparable to the anti-abortion rights advocates is because abortion is still legal. Additionally, I think it is because many who identify as “pro-choice” do not have strong feelings on the issue. That is compounded by the fact that there are some who believe that abortion is immoral but feel that the government has no right to get involved.
I feel part of the reluctance on the part of abortion rights advocates is also due to how they are often treated by the “anti-choice” crowd. A typical response is “you’re a murderer” or some critical judgment that never fails to imply that there is some moral defect in the person. There is simply no reason to subject oneself to that kind of treatment. It says far more about the person who is judging than the person being judged.
SoMG,
Hippie, a 200% – 300% increase isn’t necessarily very big. Remember: if a number changes from very very very very rare to just very very very rare, that change can be reported as a many-fold increase, but it’s still very very very rare.
And yet you and Doug still persist in saying that a woman is 10 times more likely to suffer serious complications from carrying a child to full term, than from having an abortion…
Which is it? Very, very, very, very rare to just very, very, very rare is insignificant or isn’t it?
Enigma,
I feel part of the reluctance on the part of abortion rights advocates is also due to how they are often treated by the “anti-choice” crowd. A typical response is “you’re a murderer” or some critical judgment that never fails to imply that there is some moral defect in the person. There is simply no reason to subject oneself to that kind of treatment. It says far more about the person who is judging than the person being judged.
As someone that has been standing outside of clinics for years, and has been to three Aurora events, I can tell you that being called a murderer would be a cake walk compared what has been yelled at me…
The things that the pro choice crowd says and does to us is so commonplace that we have actually written a bill of rights for you. Just to make it easier to insult us.
I have had food and drinks thrown at me, been verbally assaulted with words a sailor would blush at, almost been run over by a number of cars, gotten a cop fired for assault, and had a gun pulled on me.
If you absolutely do not believe that abortion is murder, that those taunts would affect you in the least.
I’m pretty sure is someone called me a cyclops, dog hating, bird watcher…I wouldn’t bat an eye.
1. ENUNCIATE: If you feel you absolutely must share your opinion, please do so clearly and distinctly; allow every pearl of wisdom to form in your mouth and roll off your tongue before you scream the next. Recall how Professor
MK,
“I have had food and drinks thrown at me, been verbally assaulted with words a sailor would blush at, almost been run over by a number of cars, gotten a cop fired for assault, and had a gun pulled on me.”
You’ve had an interesting life to say the least.
“If you absolutely do not believe that abortion is murder, that those taunts would [not] affect you in the least.”
In truth, they don’t. What I dislike is being judge and having the opposing party judge me as wanting. What makes them feel that they’re so above me that they can cast judgments with impunity?
I’m always amused that the quote “Judge not, lest ye be judged,” is out of all the quotes in the bible, the one that people choose to ignore.
In truth, they don’t. What I dislike is being judge and having the opposing party judge me as wanting. What makes them feel that they’re so above me that they can cast judgments with impunity?
The question I’m asking is why? Why does it bother you to be judged and hove an opposing party see you as “wanting”?
It wouldn’t bother me in the least. It doesn’t bother me in the least. We often laugh (see above post).
“The criticism that hurts the most is that which echos our own self condemnation.”
Why does it bother me? Because I dislike self-righteous people. They’re arrogant. They think that they know everything and feel entitled to drag anyone kicking and screaming against their will into their vision of salvation.
“The criticism that hurts the most is that which echos our own self condemnation.”
Sorry, but nothing I’ve said here comes even close to what I condemn myself for.
Enigma,
“I have had food and drinks thrown at me, been verbally assaulted with words a sailor would blush at, almost been run over by a number of cars, gotten a cop fired for assault, and had a gun pulled on me.”
The reason these things have happened is because I have put myself “out there” for a cause. I am willing to be verbally assaulted on a weekly basis, because I am doing something I believe in.
It’s called passion.
Would I rather be somewhere else? Sure. Personally, I’m always up for a Saturday Matinee.
You on the other hand, have excused your side from speaking out, because you don’t like “being judged” and made to feel “wanting”.
To me, that says “lack of conviction and/or passion”
MK,
See whatever you wish. I will not deny that my passion lies elsewhere.
The argument that PC people are apathetic because they have the law on their side and have no reason to react doesn’t wash.
If anyone remembers the civil rights movement you will recall the violent backlash to preserve segregation in the south. Why weren’t southern segregationists apathetic? They had the law on their side. They had the police and courts on their side. They had decades of support for segregation on their side. Who cares about a bunch of “uppity” black demonstrators?
They reacted because they firmly believed in the rightness of segregation, the inferiority of black people, they feared the destruction of the status quo, and would stop at nothing to preserve it. Summed up, they reacted because of their conviction to the rightness of what they believed in and would fight for it. That we would disagree with their cause was irrelevant.
So how do you explain PC apathy? Why aren’t PC people so ready to take a stand and be heard? Why didn’t they overrun the town meetings in Aurora? Why aren’t they marching in the streets? Because people might say things that are not very nice to you? Puh-leeze. If you’re afraid of that, don’t get out of bed in the morning.
Mary,
“So how do you explain PC apathy? Why aren’t PC people so ready to take a stand and be heard? Why didn’t they overrun the town meetings in Aurora? Why aren’t they marching in the streets?”
Actually, I would link this to a general decline of civic involvement. Its a trend that has been growing for decades. People are less likely to be civicly or politically involved. Even if one is involved, generally it is through some sort of tertiary organization or one simply throws money at an issue. There is less active engagement with other people and more connecting through impersonal networks. None of this creates a good atmosphere for engagement. (This is a really broad summery, read Bowling Alone for more details.)
“If you’re afraid of that, don’t get out of bed in the morning.”
I was wondering why I got of bed this morning. The alarm went off way too early and my bed was so nice and comfortable. Wouldn’t it be nice to simply roll back over and just let the world go by?
Enigma,
A valid point, but I remain convinced that dedicated people will make themselves heard, whether or not we agree with or like what they are dedicated to. People are certainly making themselves heard on the issue of the Jena 6, and we certainly hear from and see plenty of action from the PETA people. Agree with them or not, they are dedicated to their causes. I remember in the early years of the abortion movement there was no shortage of dedicated souls making themselves heard whether it was verbally, in writing, or in the streets marching.
I can only conclude that the PC side may not have the support its always assumed it had.
Enigma 9/29 4:20pm
In a word, yes!
Laura,
I said a teen would have a lower lifetime cancer risk by carrying her baby to term.
She can give the child for adoption if there is no one around her with enough love or care to help her access childcare or educational opportunities.
One of my friends had a baby when she was 15 that she gave for adoption. Later she married and had three daughters with her husband and eventually reunited with the daughter she gave up years before. Her first daughter had a great life with her adoptive family and a cordial and loving relationship with her birth mother and three half sisters. It is a beautiful story.
Life is what you make it. Love finds a way.
“I have had food and drinks thrown at me, been verbally assaulted with words a sailor would blush at, almost been run over by a number of cars, gotten a cop fired for assault, and had a gun pulled on me.”
The reason these things have happened is because I have put myself “out there” for a cause. I am willing to be verbally assaulted on a weekly basis, because I am doing something I believe in.
It’s called passion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe called masochism.
Do you enjoy spankings?
Do you REALLY enjoy spankings?
She can give the child for adoption if there is no one around her with enough love or care to help her access childcare or educational opportunities.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Teens don’t give up their babies.
They don’t finish school.
They don’t work.
There isn’t any one of us who hasn’t witnessed this scenario about 10,000 times.
Teens don’t give up their babies.
They don’t finish school.
They don’t work.
There isn’t any one of us who hasn’t witnessed this scenario about 10,000 times.
Posted by: Laura at September 29, 2007 4:50 PM
“““““““““““““
It may not be what you want but maybe it is what they want.
It is their life.
I would be happier to see my tax dollars go to help them or for their healthcare or whatever than I am to see it spent on wars.
Another of my friends had her baby at 18 spent 6 months on welfare and in a training program and worked at Dairy Queen and single handedly supported herself and her son and her mother for 10 years. She has now remarried and just bought a house. She has always been one of the happiest and kindest people I know. She is optimistic and wonderful. She always tells me, “kids don`t need stuff, they need love.”
Laura,
Masochism? Would you call the civil rights demonstrators who endured attacks by fire hoses and police dogs, as well as physical and verbal abuse, mashochists? Would you ask them how they like being spanked? Or would you consider them people of courage, passion, and conviction?
Hippie,
“Life is what you make it.”
I completely agree. Actually, I think that might be one of my mottos. I’d have to check though. I tend to forget my mottos.
“Love finds a way.”
This one I don’t buy. Love is not all that. Love cannot do everything. It has limits.
I know. She is optimistic and wonderful. She always tells me, “kids don`t need stuff, they need love.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yeah!
Just save that love in a big ‘ol jar, ’cause I hear that Ivy League universities are accepting it as tuition!
Erin: Actually, I think the reason is even simpler. Pro-choicers aren’t counter-protesting because right now, abortion is legal. The people who have to actually fight to get their changes through are going to be the ones fighting. Over-turn Roe v Wade, you’re going to see the exact opposite.
Right on, Erin.
Doug
John L: Pro-aborts are never interested in debate. They are always interested in changing the subject. Why would a pro-abort attend any formal discussion of abortion, when all they know how to do is call us fascists, call us the Taliban, say we’re forcing theocracy on them, or else take the conversation way out in left field and start talking about the Bible, clergy, semantics, George W. Bush, and other stuff which has little to do with the issue of the intentional killing of unborn children.
Heh heh. Yeah, right.
There is an element of wanting power that might be called “facism,” but I don’t see it as a big deal.
Some pro-lifers, you included, John, have an element of religious extremism in them, like the Taliban, now that you mention it. Is that really at issue, though? I don’t think so.
This really boils down to more wanting the life of the unborn or more wanting women to keep the freedom they have. That’s the debate in a nutshell.
Doug
For example, let`s change the subject from “Are they intimidated?” to “We prefer a different label”
Hippie, if it’s different labels you want, then instead of “pro-lifers” we could say “women-slavers.” The point is that the silly name-calling stuff is not real debate.
Doug
Masochism? Would you call the civil rights demonstrators who endured attacks by fire hoses and police dogs, as well as physical and verbal abuse, mashochists?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No, they were working to liberate themselves, and you are working to oppress others.
Oppressors aren’t entitled to martyr status.
MK: And yet you and Doug still persist in saying that a woman is 10 times more likely to suffer serious complications from carrying a child to full term, than from having an abortion…
Which is it? Very, very, very, very rare to just very, very, very rare is insignificant or isn’t it?
Well, MK, when somebody says “abortion is dangerous,” I guess it’s up to them to say just how dangerous it is. Same for “you can’t tell me abortions is safe.” What is “not safe”? The fact of abortion being much safer remains.
Doug
Laura,
That’s all in the point of view. Segregationists would have looked on civil rights activists as stepping on their rights! They had the law on their side and were fully within their legal rights keeping blacks “in their places”. “Who did these uppity coloreds think they were”? “Those Northern white do-gooders can also stay home and out of our business”. “Why, our colored folk were perfectly happy until these troublemakers came along”. All statements frequently heard in that era.
Like I said Laura, its all in the point of view.
(I originally posted this in a different thread, but since that thread is now in archives, here it is again.(
JTM,
“Wrong. The new life created at the moment of fertilization has distinctly, identifiably human DNA from that point on.”
Human DNA does not a human life create. It is possible for one to have human DNA and yet not have human life.
“Legitimate surgery does not deliberately slaughter an innocent human life.”
Well, considering that abortion doesn’t destroy human life, neither does abortion.
“It isn
“Abortion is to surgery what 9-11 was to aviation.”
Wow, excellent analogy. Perfect.
Teens don’t give up their babies.
They don’t finish school.
They don’t work.
There isn’t any one of us who hasn’t witnessed this scenario about 10,000 times.
Posted by: Laura at September 29, 2007 4:50 PM
Who had the post “Stupid is as stupid does..?” well they were right! Laura is the perfect example. My sister, at 17 had a baby and gave it up for adoption. She is now married and has a beautiful 4 month old daughter. Not only finished high school but a bachelor degree and master’s. Works at a local hospital in the PR department. She has a WONDERFUL life, and no regrets.
Hippie is right, life is what you make of it. Laura apparently doesn’t make much out of hers.
Kristen,
“Hippie is right, life is what you make of it. Laura apparently doesn’t make much out of hers.”
Simply because she has a different definition of what constitutes a wonderful life does not mean that she is wrong or that her life is not wonderful.
I think it’s the sneaky and underhanded stunt PP pulled. People don’t want to be associated with supporting lies and decietfulness, even if they would otherwise think that the PP was a good thing.
I found some interesting things on the website Hippie posted.
http://rex.nci.nih.gov/NCI_Pub_Interface/raterisk/risks120.html
“From 1973 to 1991, invasive breast cancer incidence in the United States increased 25.8 percent in whites and 30.3 percent in blacks, or roughly 2 percent per year (Ries et al., 1994). ” … here they make explanations that it could be increase use, and better Mammeograms… “However, the increased rates cannot be completely explained by increased use of mammography, suggesting that changes in other breast cancer risk factors may also be occurring.”
“However, only between 5 and 10 percent of all breast cancers seem to be attributable to an inherited genetic mutation. A second breast cancer gene (BRCA-2) has been located but not yet identified. Studies of migrants who immigrate from low-incidence areas to high-incidence areas have found that the rates of breast cancer increase to that of the new country, reflecting changes in lifestyle and environmental factors, showing that international differences in rates are not due to genetic factors.”
“The greater number of women who are delaying childbirth or remaining childless may explain some of the recent increased incidence of breast cancer. ”
“Several recent studies suggest that subsequent births are associated with a further reduction in the risk of breast cancer, even after considering correlated effects of the age at first pregnancy.”
“Because of the relationship between endogenous hormones and breast cancer risk, much concern has been raised about the use of exogenous hormones. Most studies suggest no effect from oral contraceptive use on breast cancer incidence. However, some recent studies suggest a possible increase in breast cancer at an early age (before age 45) among long-term oral contraceptive users, and those who started taking oral contraceptives at a young age.”
“In addition, only a small proportion of the cases are accounted for by known risk factors (Kelsey and Gammon, 1990), indicating the need for further research.”
There is nothing concrete in there. Nothing other than speculation. But it is interesting that the 2% a year increase of breast cancer started the same year as Roe v Wade. (Around 1969 is when some states began to relax their abortions law, which is what sparked the 2 cases that were decided in 1973 – Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton)
Also, the need for more study is something that I see on all studies about breast cancer. Even the ones that say abortion has nothing to do with it. I think it is safe to say that with increased technology there is increased knowledge in this. I think it would be unwise to say abortion does or does not cause a higher risk of breast cancer until more studies can be done. It seems when it comes to cancer, the studies change every day as to what causes or doesn’t cause it. To me, this means they really have no idea.
(if anyone responds to this and wants me to respond back – please email me. I may not have time to get back on and read all the posts on here and could miss it.)
I saw this and thought you might be interested, it talks about peaceful protesters being brutalized by police in Europe. I’m sure many of you have heard about protesters especially lifers being harassed and even tortured by police. It’s a scary time when protesting and the right to organize is being suppressed by those who want to exploit and maintain power over the rest of us. We must join together and resist these haters of freedom!
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/sep/07091202.html
I happened to be in Aurora for most of the day today and drove all over the East side. I saw a “Planned Parenthood BAD for Aurora” sign in every other yard. Oddly enough I didn’t see ONE PP sign. Apparently PP isn’t pro-choice when it comes to what the people of Aurora want, just what THEY want.
Simply because she has a different definition of what constitutes a wonderful life does not mean that she is wrong or that her life is not wonderful.
Posted by: Enigma at September 29, 2007 8:16 PM
Enigma –
Laura is the one that said 1. Teens don’t give up their children 2. Teens don’t finish school, etc… and I have clear evidence to the contrary. Like I said in previous posts, Laura makes a lot of grandiose statements that are EASILY shot down. She really doesn’t prepare well for arguments and until she either 1. Prepares better or 2. Gets a little wiser she really should stop talking.
@Doug,
you keep aligning freedom with choice. So lets think about what makes humans free. Choice is one. Exiting prison another. Flight yet another … wings of eagles, gliders, kites, … fast cars and spreading arms … etc. Now what elements are there is each because it would be a real stretch aligning the freedom of flight as a freedom-of-choice?
I think the freedom of escaping from prison is closer in alignment to ‘procuring an abortion’ than freedom-of-choice. These are not the same … even if you wish they were.
“Judge not lest ye be judged” means that we’re supposed to admit our own failings before we point to someone else’s. OK, then, I can be obnoxious and unfeeling and angry with my brother. Now that I’ve admitted my failings, stop killing babies.
I’d like to answer the question of this post: (Do you agree with Veronica it is our fault pro-aborts are less likely to actively engage in the abortion debate?)
Our fault?! It’s so easy for the PP supporters to blame us. They just can’t come to terms with the fact that the people of Aurora don’t want an abortion mill in town.
And deep down most of these PP supporters know that abortion is wrong. The safest place for a baby should be in his or her mother’s womb. A mother’s instinct is to protect her baby… not to let someone rip it out of her womb, piece by living piece. All women know that. They can’t dispute that without looking heartless.
My observation about the pro-PP people leaving early from the city council meeting is that they are mostly young teeny-boppers who jumped on the bandwagon to get free t-shirts and have something fun to do. They are being told what to say if they get a chance to talk. Once they found out they weren’t going to be talking they left to go outside where it was more fun because they found the meeting to be boring & they wanted to be with their friends. This is all the more reason that the parental consent law should be passed – these are just young girls who want to have fun and aren’t mature enough to make such decisions for themselves.
Bethany, thanks for posting that video.
I have said that in order to argue your point, you must use Logic – the rules of arguments.
This should be taught to everyone in school. I had a course in Logic as part of a philosophy minor recently. It was very helpful and practical.
You have to use the rules, use correct and true premises, in order to arrive at a TRUE conclusion.
That is the main reason why virtually all pro-aborts can’t argue against us and then get angry at us and yell and scream or walk away.
Diane,
It’s funny… now that you mention that the PP rally-goers were mostly teeny boppers, it made me think of the slide show that PP posted of the rally. It made me giggle to see teens upon teens holding up the “This Family Supports Planned Parenthood” signs. I kept thinking to myself, “What family?! Where are your parents and siblings?!” I guess PP was expecting more families to show up. (But, of course, our families will always outnumber their families!)
This is all the more reason that the parental consent law should be passed – these are just young girls who want to have fun and aren’t mature enough to make such decisions for themselves.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great.
So if I’m a parent and decide that my daughter is too immature to have a child, I can do what I deem to be best and force her to have an abortion?
Certainly if you can decide that your daughter MUST carry a pregnancy, I should be able to decide when my daughter MUST have an abortion?
John: you keep aligning freedom with choice. So lets think about what makes humans free. Choice is one. Exiting prison another. Flight yet another … wings of eagles, gliders, kites, … fast cars and spreading arms … etc. Now what elements are there is each because it would be a real stretch aligning the freedom of flight as a freedom-of-choice?
I think the freedom of escaping from prison is closer in alignment to ‘procuring an abortion’ than freedom-of-choice. These are not the same … even if you wish they were.
It’s all the same thing. It’s not being under external control; it’s being at liberty to determine one’s own action without being restrained.
The actions could be movement (not being in prison), flying a glider or a kite, having an abortion, driving a fast car, etc.
Doug
Paul: You have to use the rules, use correct and true premises, in order to arrive at a TRUE conclusion.
Agreed, Paul, and that’s why arguments based on unprovable faith aren’t all that much. If everybody agreed with your beliefs, it’d be one thing, but of course it’s not that way.
Doug
John L: “Judge not lest ye be judged” means that we’re supposed to admit our own failings before we point to someone else’s. OK, then, I can be obnoxious and unfeeling and angry with my brother. Now that I’ve admitted my failings, stop killing babies.
Ha! Hey, not bad, John.
Doug
Posted by: Doug at September 29, 2007 11:17 PM
Agreed, Paul, and that’s why arguments based on unprovable faith aren’t all that much. If everybody agreed with your beliefs, it’d be one thing, but of course it’s not that way.
Did I mention anything about faith?????
I’m talking about plain facts, scientific facts.
(Science is your religion after all.)
So if we agree to stick with scientific facts, then we can at least argue those facts.
Sigh.
I met this great guy, successful, really nice, and he looked VERY similar to Stephen Colbert. Very attractive.
I slyly ask him where his girlfriend is. He said he doesn’t have one. Great!!
Then he drops the bomb. “…however, god willing, I hope to become a priest.’ I was like NO WAY and he really went into it, he’s really seriously wanting this.
Life is so not fair.
I’m so bummed about this. He is such a smart guy. He graduated last year but majored in classical humanities, greek and latin. He is a bank manager. Very levelheaded, honest, and good sense of humor.
Exactly the kind of guy who is super attractive to me. As said previously, the nerd/handsome mix just drives me crazy!
Everyone, see what the Catholic church has done to my love life!
Laura, your biggest problem is that you put too much emphesis on your education and degree. What’s the problem? You seem to be one of the most miserable and hate filled people on the blog. I know people both rich and poor. Life is what you make it. A degree doesn’t buy your happiness. My reaction to someone who brags about their level of education………..so what?
Jill, Bethany, et.al.,
Sorry my comment above was posted so many times. I don’t know what the problem was. When I clicked “Post” it was just sitting there not going through. So I pressed “esc” and tried again. It did not seem to go through. Finally it went through at 4:11 am and Voila – many duplicates!? Hope someone can delete the extras.
I am not sure why Pro-Aborts don’t like to engage in debate.
All I know when I used to go to Pro-Abort websites they had to debate using vulgar language instead of debating in charity.
Many times when debating on Pro-Abort websites, they would delete my posts especially if I added links with my posts. Sometimes I was banned from their websites just because I was swaying others to the Pro-Life position.
I got sick of getting my posts deleted on the Pro-Abort websites. I feel I am just wasting my time. So now I just hang around the Pro-Life sites and wait for the Pro-Aborts to visit and engage in a charitable debate.
Heather, you wrote: “2 women dead in their 40’s. Both had abortions in their 20’s. I’m still going to have to go on that. ”
You don’t have the slightest idea how stupid you are, do you?
Mk, serious complications during childbirth are not rare!
“Judge not lest ye be judged” means that we’re supposed to admit our own failings before we point to someone else’s.”
Where in that line does it say anything about recognizing your own failings before pointing to someone else’s. Unless I’m missing something, all that it says is not to judge people.
“OK, then, I can be obnoxious and unfeeling and angry with my brother. Now that I’ve admitted my failings, stop killing babies.”
Abortion doesn’t kill babies. And supporting abortion is not a failing.