Less sex, less abortions
It’s ridiculous that the most supposedly credible source of abortion statistics is the abortion industry, and Planned Parenthood to boot.
Proven over and over to be full of liars, crooks, and creeps, PP is as trustworthy as Hugo Chavez providing statistics of Venezuelan supporters. The numbers will certainly be skewed for their purposes.
But here we have The Alan Guttmacher Institute, “research” arm of PP, releasing the latest abortion stats it garnered from other abortionist low lifes who we also know underreport due to cash and favor abortions, and we are to believe it.
So I view with skepticism, as does not one MSM outlet, Guttmacher’s January 17 press release stating abortion declined in 2005 to its lowest level since 1974, 1.2 million, 25% below the all-time high in 1990 of 1.6 million.
I will say the CDC, which admits its own unreliable numbers due to a few antagonistic state governments, also reports a downward trend.
If those numbers are true, a decline is great, particularly since the U.S. population has risen from about 200k then to 300k now….
But why? Abortion proponents and MSM agree it’s due to comprehensive sex ed and frenetic distribution of contraceptives.
But they incredibly forget what they just reported last week, other recent stats the U.S. is experiencing a “baby boomlet,” indicating, for one, parents are rejecting abortion.
They also disparage abstinence ed, while ignoring credible success stats.
In July 2007 the Federal Interagency on Child and Family Statistics reported (page 147, Table BEH4.A) adolescent sexual activity decreased signficantly between 1991 and 2005:
34.3% of 9th graders, down from 39.0 in 1991
42.8% of 10th graders, down from 48.2 in 1991
51.4% of 11th graders, down from 62.4 in 1991
63.1% of 12th graders, down from 66.7 in 1991
And even the pro-abort report critiquing abstinence programs in November 2007, Emerging Answers 2007, admitted they work:
The overall decline in teen pregnancy in the 1990s reflects both a decrease in sexual activity among teens and an improvement in contraceptive use among sexually experienced teens. However… [c]areful analyses generally suggest that about 15% to 50% of the decrease is due to fewer girls having sex, and 50% to 85% is due to better contraceptive use.
In criticizing it, Guttmacher also admitted another other reason for the abortion decline, abortion restrictions:
[D]uring the last several years, a number of states have implemented restrictions that may have made it more difficult for women to access abortion services and for physicians to perform abortions….
I do wonder why pro-abortion organizations and MSM appear happy that the number of abortions going down. Abortion is supposedly a wonderful constitutional right, the only one apparently unheralded. Why?
[HT for abstinence stats: Ruben at Noroomforcontraception.com]
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.
In a couple months we are going to hear how great and wonderful the Morning After Pill is and that is going to be the reason for the decline in abortion. This will increase sales in this pill and many people will make more money.
According to Guttmatcher the average cost of an abortion is appx $375. The morning after pill average cost is $20. Only 2 – 4% of women a year have an abortion (according to CDC and Guttmatcher). The estimate of women buying the morning after pill is approx 20 – 30% and some women by more than just one dose a year. If you go to any informational website to get info on Plan B they will all refer you to your local planned parenthood “for more information”. Example is on About.com Do the math. Plan B is more lucrative n the long run.
It is not a coincidence that the number of abortions start to go down after the FDA approves the morning after pill and the media provided free advertising for it.
(Just an FYI – I cannot find any source which tells me that levonorgestrel – the steriod synthetic progesterone in Plan B – had ever been taken orally at such high doses before Plan B. As a matter of fact the FDA would not approve BC pills that had high levels of levonorgestrel in it until they were pressured into approving Plan B.)
Also, the Guttmatcher Institute doesn’t get active numbers every year. They do Sampling to get their numbers. About every 4th year they actually go out and get numbers – all voluntarly given. Their numbers are about as inaccurate as the CDC’s. At least the CDC is honest and states up front in their reports that their research in this area is flawed.
Also remember that with the abortion numbers going down the political heat the abortionists and planned parenthood get go down as well.
It also isn’t surprising that the number of births has been steadily increasing since 9-11 and Katrina.
“I do wonder why pro-abortion organizations and MSM appear happy that the number of abortions going down. Abortion is supposedly a wonderful constitutional right, the only one apparently unheralded. Why?”
I have been keeping my mouth shut for some time now. I apologize that I won’t be able to respond back if anyone comments on my comment because I have to go to work. But here it goes. I am tired of pro-lifers assuming that all people who are pro-choice would rather have pregnant women get an abortion rather than keep the child or place it up for adoption. I have heard countless times on here that is what a lot of people think. “don’t you see an abortion as a “win” for “your” side?” Are there pro-choice people out there that have this view? Yeah there probably are. Just like their are pro-life people out there that would blow up abortion clinics or shoot down a abortion doctor. But you and I both know that is an extreme case and NO pro-life person here would ever do that. Its the same way with people that are pro-choice. Most pro-choice people do not jump up and down for joy for a women has an abortion. Most don’t see an abortion as a “win for our side” Why can’t pro-choice people be happy that abortion statistics are going down? I’m pro-choice and it makes me happy. Just because i’m pro-choice doesn’t mean I am “sadden by the fact of less abortions” Its also a constitutional right to bare arms. Does every “pro-gun” person out there own a gun? I highly doubt it.
Sorry about the rant. I have to go to work now. I’ll be back on later this evening.
JM,
I agree. The comment was ridiculous and cruel, and I’m PL! Sometimes people tend to make ridiculous comments to stir up contraversy to increase # of comments. Kindof reminds me of Ann Coulter.
Sterotyping is immature, to say the least!
Am I the only one who think that Abstinence demotivator is hilarious? Seems more like its meant to be a joke, i mean, you have two people with seemingly really serious religious or personal reasons, and then simply “I dont want warts”
Hmm, no hat tip? :-(
http://www.prolifeblogs.com/articles/archives/2008/01/report_on_abort.php
Of course if there is less sex, there are less abortions. Duh!
PIP:
Or more sex with people of the same gender. ;P
Ooer Lyssie! Ooer!
*gigglefit*
Abstinence – check the pictures below.
Grow up, Peach Pit… people act like virginity is a disease. It’s not. If you want to remain abstinent, more power to you. I know pro-choice people who are virgins, and some that are choosing not to have sex because, well, they like not having warts. Abstinence can be and is a good thing for some people. And it’s not a disease, either…
That’s right Lyssie!
I do wonder why pro-abortion organizations and MSM appear happy that the number of abortions going down. Abortion is supposedly a wonderful constitutional right, the only one apparently unheralded. Why?
Jill, because being Pro-Choice is not “liking” abortion on its own. Personally, I’d rather have a pregnancy prevented than for an abortion to take place, so if the number goes down it’s fine with me.
“Wonderful” is your word. In reality a woman may feel conflicts about it, even if she chooses it. I would think that almost all if not all women would rather have prevented the pregnancy than have an abortion.
Doug
“Abstinence is my CHOICE?”
…Not for the three in THAT picture.
A new group, composed of women who regret their abortions and now wholeheartedly support Mike Huckabee is forming. To find out more, or to join, write Jeanette here.
Domers for Huckabee
There are a couple of reasons the MSM sees this as good news.
1. Lower abortion rate makes it a less contentious issue and they hope pro-lifers will just tone down and go away.
2. They can say see safe sex and contraceptives work.
But I find the use of a study by the The Alan Guttmacher Institute to be highly problematic with its obvious conflict of interest. It is not in their interest to ever have abortion on the rise. Planned Parenthood want to always fly under societies radar and the fact that they are the number one abortion provider in the U.S.
The media would laugh at any study a research arm of for example the American Life League yet they will take Guttmacher with no questions whatsoever.
I think your point about a possible abortion reduction rate and the baby boomlet to be quite interesting and it is so obvious that it is easily overlooked.
The reality is that we really don’t have a good handle on the abortion rate do to chemical abortions such as the use of the pill or Plan B. This is the silent abortion rate.
“Because I don’t want warts”
Not every person who has sex is rife with horrific diseases. If you’re just honest with the person you have sex with you can avoid those problems.
In case anyone wanted to see these:
http://www.ironhymen.com/
http://www.sexisforfags.com/
If you’re just honest with the person you have sex with you can avoid those problems.
This is true for you Jess..but what about if the person you’re sleeping with is not honest with you? Or they cheat on you..you don’t know it and get the STD then? You can’t really go off of someone’s word alone…but you could go and get an STD test with them.
On a side note…is there anybody that really WANTS warts? I mean I get the point of the poster..but they maybe should have used different wording..cause I don’t know anyone who actually makes it a goal in life to get warts.
In case anyone wanted to see these:
http://www.ironhymen.com/
http://www.sexisforfags.com/
Jess,
Seriously, WHERE do you find this stuff? LOL.
Jill, you should know that most women who have abortions are not teenagers. 81% of women who have abortions are in their twenties and thirties.
So unless you have some evidence that women over 19 are abstaining in huge numbers, you’re going to have to accept the fact that contraception is responsible for most of the decline.
I do wonder why pro-abortion organizations and MSM appear happy that the number of abortions going down. Abortion is supposedly a wonderful constitutional right, the only one apparently unheralded. Why?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Americans have the right to receive root canals, but everyone is happy when prople practice better oral hygiene and are able to skip the expensive, invasive procedue.
FF 2:46PM
Really? I honestly couldn’t care less.
LOL Jess that’s hilarious!
The reality is that we really don’t have a good handle on the abortion rate do to chemical abortions such as the use of the pill or Plan B. This is the silent abortion rate.
Jeff Miller:
That’s an interesting thought. But please explain to me how one has a “chemical abortion” if they are not pregnant? The last time I checked, a fertilized egg must implant in the uterus before it is considered a pregnancy…. So if there is no implantation, how does Plan B or The Pill cause a chemical abortion??
Also, FYI, the bill is not a form of abortion. It keeps an egg from being released from the ovary. Now biology tells us, if there is no egg, there is no implantation, and therefore, NO pregnancy…
oops bill=pill in second paragraph, I am having typing problems today, lol.
Crap, both of the above “anonymous” posts are from me. The computer/blog wont remember me :-(
Gosh, I am having issues today!!
It’s highly unlikely that the pill (and other kinds of bc) are going to be outlawed for plenty of obvious reasons. Why don’t we focus on more important aspects of the abortion debate.
I agree PIP,
But Jeff Miller apparently thinks that the Pill or Plan B is “the silent abortion epidemic” and is wrong.
I am just curious to how BC pills = abortions when they (when used properly) dont alow an egg to be released? If there is no egg for the little swimmers to reach, there is no pregnancy…
@Elizabeth
I know the guys well before I sleep with them. I make sure I know their families and friends, hang out with them at their favorite places and stop by when they’re working (usually I’ll drop off lunch or something). So if they do lie to me everyone will know and their lives will be ruined.
@Mary
That was kind of rude. I care what you say.
I am just curious to how BC pills = abortions when they (when used properly) dont alow an egg to be released? If there is no egg for the little swimmers to reach, there is no pregnancy…
Because the third function of the pill (if there is a “breakthrough ovulation”) is to make the womb inhospitable to the human zygote, so that it cannot implant into the uterus. Despite even perfect use, birth control pills are not 100 percent perfect, and many times do fail at what they are supposed to do. That is why there are the three functions of the pill.
“if you end up with a fertilized egg, it won’t implant and grow because of the less hospitable endometrium.” -this is a quote from Richard Hill, a pharmacist who works for Ortho-McNeil’s product information department. (Ortho-McNeil is one of the largest Pill manufacturers.)
You can find dozens and dozens more quotes like this, straight from the manufacturers themselves, at this link here…along with mucho more evidence about the pill’s function :
http://www.epm.org/articles/bcpill1.html
Yes Bethany, I understand that. But it wont implant. So unless biology taught me wrong, there is no pregnancy. Some fertilized eggs wont plant in a woman’s womb who is not on BC and wants to be pregnant.
BC pills are not abortions. They are 99% effective when used correctly (taken at the same time everyday), so why is it a problem if women are taking a step in the direction of not having an unwanted pregnancy?
How can you tell the difference between an embryo that has been expelled due to natural causes and those because the endometrium is unhospitable due to BC pills?
Jess 3:48PM,
Please tell me where I was rude to you.
So unless biology taught me wrong, there is no pregnancy. Some fertilized eggs wont plant in a woman’s womb who is not on BC and wants to be pregnant.
” “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion … it is plain experimental evidence.” The “Father of Modern Genetics” Dr. Jerome Lejeune, Univ. of Descarte, Paris”
”
“By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.” Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic ”
“”Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote.”
[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]
”
“”Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
“Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.”
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]”
“”Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus.”
[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]”
“”Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus.”
[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]
”
“”Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term ’embryo’ is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy.”
[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]
”
“”The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.”
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]”
“”Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism…. At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun…. The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life.”
[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]”
“”I would say that among most scientists, the word ’embryo’ includes the time from after fertilization…”
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel — Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]
”
“”The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.”
[Sadler, T.W. Langman’s Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]”
“”The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum…. But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down.”
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel — Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]”
“”Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression ‘fertilized ovum’ refers to the zygote.”
[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]”
“”The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are…respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development.”
[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]”
“”Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed…. The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity.”
[O’Rahilly, Ronan and M
How can you tell the difference between an embryo that has been expelled due to natural causes and those because the endometrium is unhospitable due to BC pills?
If you’ll read from the link I posted above, it explains much of that. There is no way to know the exact number, but there are very simple ways to estimate around how many this happens to.
:)
Some fertilized eggs wont plant in a woman’s womb who is not on BC and wants to be pregnant.
Some fertilized eggs who make it to the 35 week mark of pregnancy, many times die unexpectedly too…does this mean that it wasn’t really a baby? Of course not :-)
Elizabeth:
This is true for you Jess..but what about if the person you’re sleeping with is not honest with you? Or they cheat on you..you don’t know it and get the STD then? You can’t really go off of someone’s word alone…but you could go and get an STD test with them.
All of this goes for women having sex with their husbands, as well. Or should they not “go off someone’s word alone” either? Marriage does not prevent people from lying. All you can do is make good choices. I really don’t understand the “but he could be lying to you!” argument, because ANYBODY could be lying to you. You can’t control whether someone tells the truth, but you can control who you choose to believe and rely on.
Mary,
You were not rude to me but I felt you brushed FF off when you said, “Really? I honestly couldn’t care less.”
I know you’re entitled to your opinion but we’re all women here (referring to you, me and FF) and we are all equal and our opinions as voters effect the lives of all of us.
Bethany:
I am not saying it is not a real baby. I promise…
Also Bethany, Ann Coulter said a perfected Jew was a Christian. She also said that we should take over the Middle East and convert everyone to Christianity. Those were her ignorant opinions. Yeah I think sometimes Laura likes to ruffle some feathers just like Hisman. And you don’t yell at him. But it’s ok because we know this is the internet and we shouldn’t take what is said here to heart. For all you know Laura is a seventy year old pro-lifer who just likes to rile people up because his doctor gave him a weird combination of pills after he had his gall bladder surgery. I could be a forty year old man whose in prison for identity theft.
I’m not though. You’ll just have to take my word for it.
I am not saying it is not a real baby. I promise…
i’m totally confused.
Jess,
FF suggested that we would all prefer people get good dental care and avoid root canals. I only meant to say that whether or not people take good care of their teeth or have root canals is not something I concern myself with, quite honestly, I couldn’t care less. I would also prefer some people style their hair differently but for the most part I couldn’t care less what people do with their hair.
I wasn’t brushing off FF and she’s entirely welcome to express any opinion she likes, I was just saying that a person’s dental care is not something I think about one way or the other.
The same holds true with my kids now that they’re adults. If they don’t want to see the dentist, tough. They can pay the consequences. I have no intention of concerning myself one way or the other.
Also Bethany, Ann Coulter said a perfected Jew was a Christian. She also said that we should take over the Middle East and convert everyone to Christianity. Those were her ignorant opinions.
And Laura has said that the unborn baby is “crotch goo”. That is her ignorant opinion. What’s your point exactly?
Yeah I think sometimes Laura likes to ruffle some feathers just like Hisman. And you don’t yell at him.
Sometimes? When does she ever turn off?
Some fertilized eggs who make it to the 35 week mark of pregnancy, many times die unexpectedly too…does this mean that it wasn’t really a baby? Of course not :-)
Posted by: Bethany at January 21, 2008 4:45 PM
*
*
Bethany:
I am not saying it is not a real baby. I promise…
Posted by: midnite678 at January 21, 2008 4:58 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bethany:
I am just making sure there is no miscommunication b/t us the way there was before last year. I am not saying it is not a baby per se. I promise :-)
Ok Bethany,
So does this mean you treat all of the expelled effects of the uterus as deceased human life -unless you are not sexulaly active, of course- to be respectfully buried or cremated? Do you urge all fertile, sexually active females to do so?
Or, do you just flush or toss that tampon or pad?
“Sometimes? When does she ever turn off?”
Lol Bethany. I didn’t know that she actually refereed to a baby as “crotch goo” I’m sorry you were upset by that and I hope that she will try to be more respectful of everyone’s feelings.
Mary,
I think we want to know why the dental hygiene of others doesn’t concern you but an individuals reproductive organs do. I know you believe it’s a baby, we both agree that it’s a human being and alive. I think, and I’m sure FF agrees, it’s a personal decision. In a way like you see dental hygiene.
@phylosopher
So what, you don’t consider an egg a human being? It has the potential to become Einstein. It’s so unfair when females don’t procreate every time they ovulate.
Jess:
With that logic; an egg has the potential to become Charles Manson as well…
I am just making sure there is no miscommunication b/t us the way there was before last year. I am not saying it is not a baby per se. I promise :-)
oh! I understand now. I appreciate the gesture, Midnite. :)
So does this mean you treat all of the expelled effects of the uterus as deceased human life -unless you are not sexulaly active, of course- to be respectfully buried or cremated? Do you urge all fertile, sexually active females to do so?
Or, do you just flush or toss that tampon or pad?
I had a memorial service and trees planted for my miscarried baby, if that matters, Phylosopher.
@Elizabeth
I know the guys well before I sleep with them. I make sure I know their families and friends, hang out with them at their favorite places and stop by when they’re working (usually I’ll drop off lunch or something). So if they do lie to me everyone will know and their lives will be ruined.
So you’re saying that getting an STD test wouldn’t be a good idea? Plenty of people’s families I’m sure don’t know about their herpes..it’s not like something you bring up at Thanksgiving dinner.
midnite,
With that logic an egg could become me : (
an egg has the potential to become Charles Manson as well…
I know I’m beating a dead horse, but an egg doesn’t have the potential to become anything without the sperm. ;-) A zygote has the potential to become einstein or Charles manson…which, by the way, A newborn has the same potential for either.
All of this goes for women having sex with their husbands, as well. Or should they not “go off someone’s word alone” either? Marriage does not prevent people from lying. All you can do is make good choices. I really don’t understand the “but he could be lying to you!” argument, because ANYBODY could be lying to you. You can’t control whether someone tells the truth, but you can control who you choose to believe and rely on.
You can choose to do whatever you want, Alexandria..but every future sexual partner of mine, including my potential husband will have an STD test before they touch me.
Lol Bethany. I didn’t know that she actually refereed to a baby as “crotch goo” I’m sorry you were upset by that and I hope that she will try to be more respectful of everyone’s feelings.
Yeah, and there’s been worse but I would have to sift through too many posts in order to find it, that it’s just not worth it.
hehe
I’m sorry you were upset by that and I hope that she will try to be more respectful of everyone’s feelings.
GOOD LUCK with that! Let me know how that works out…lol.
Elizabeth,
Oh yes, I forgot. STD testing is a must.
“it’s not like something you bring up at Thanksgiving dinner.”
Maybe it should be?
annon was me
Maybe it should be?
ummm..I don’t know about Thanksgiving..there’s so much yummy food..maybe it shouldn’t be spoiled by STD talk. Something about the herpes conversation would make me less hungry lol.
Gotta go, my daughter thinks the freezer is where we play now.
Bethany:
No problem; I am just covering all of my bases before I my mouth goes faster than my brain :-)
Don’t let her eat any un-cooked meat!!!!!!!!
Jess,
No a person’s reproductive organs don’t concern me either. Yes I see the unborn as human and prenatal life as just a stage of human development, as is infancy and old age.
I oppose abortion for that and any number of other reasons.
If you try to protect an abused child by calling social services, does that mean you concern yourself with how people run their households? No. It means you want to protect an innocent human being.
Elizabeth:
You can choose to do whatever you want, Alexandria..but every future sexual partner of mine, including my potential husband will have an STD test before they touch me.
I’m very confused. I thought that everyone agreed that getting STD tests before being sexually active with a new partner was a good thing. The discussion was over whether sex = warts, as in, “I’m abstinent because I don’t want warts,” and Jess said that sex does not have to mean warts if you’re honest with the person you’re having sex with. You said, “What if that person is not honest with you? What if he cheats?” I pointed out that anybody — even a husband — could cheat, meaning that abstinence until marriage will not protect you from warts anymore than abstinence until committed relationship will. I was pointing out that your question to Jess — “What if he lies?” — is something that would rarely be asked of married women who made the same statement, even though the possibility of contracting an STD is an equal threat in both relationships.
And now you imply that I’m anti-STD testing? Where did that come from?
Lol Bethany. I didn’t know that she actually refereed to a baby as “crotch goo”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I’ve never referred to a baby as “crotch goo.”
(Stupid people lie poorly…)
Oh…SORRY Laura, it was actually crotch GOOP. Big difference.
“Just because i’m pro-choice doesn’t mean I am “sadden by the fact of less abortions” Its also a constitutional right to bare arms. Does every “pro-gun” person out there own a gun? I highly doubt it.”
JM, we are pro-choice, not pro-gun.
Crotch rocket would have been a better term for baby.
As in, the baby cannon launched a crotch rocket.
But no it’s a baby. I mean fetus to a baby. But it’s a little person. So it’s a person and a child.
okay, I was wrong again. Took me a while to find it, but here is what she said:
“some infinitesimal wad of crotch product.”
https://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/08/new_way_to_care.html#comments
“But Jeff Miller apparently thinks that the Pill or Plan B is “the silent abortion epidemic” and is wrong.
I am just curious to how BC pills = abortions when they (when used properly) dont alow an egg to be released? If there is no egg for the little swimmers to reach, there is no pregnancy…”
Simply because the pill is an abortafacient and when conception has indeed occurred can cause a secondary effect of the implantation of an embryo to fail.
The FDA product label for Plan B says:
“It may also prevent fertilization of a released egg (joining of sperm and egg) or attachment of a fertilized egg in the uterus (implantation).”
This is why the embryonic-stem cell researchers and Plan B supporter are trying to move conception to implantation when in fact an embryo is already crated. The fact is that when the pill and Plan B work in these situations is that they cause the embryo to starve to death and to die.
…And I’ve never used any of those expressions to refer to a baby.
“JM, we are pro-choice, not pro-gun.
Posted by: jasper at January 21, 2008 6:52 PM”
huh? completely lost…
I think some have overlooked the change in demographics in the US. All of the growth in US population since the 1970s has been from immigration. Perhaps immigrants both have more children and are less likely to abort. We know that as a group women who have ever had an abortion have fewer children than women who have never had an abortion. At that rate, the segment of society who choose abortion could continue to decrease as they choose to be fewer. That is what is happening in Europe and at the current rate Europe will only have 25% of its current native population remaining in 2100. I am not xenophobic, so I welcome the revitalization that immigration brings to our country.
“okay, I was wrong again. Took me a while to find it, but here is what she said:
Laura: “some infinitesimal wad of crotch product.”
liar, liar pants on fire.
“huh? completely lost…”
JM, you refered to people who support gun-rights as pro-gun and I was saying that they should be refered to as pro-choice since there are many people who support gun-rights but would not own one themselves. …I’m being sarcastic. Thats why pro-choice doesn’t make sense and is not descriptive enough. People who support abortion rights should be refered to as pro-abortion.
Jasper, pro-gun typically does imply that you are for the ability for EVERYONE to own a gun, without restriction.
Pro-choice doesnt mean you are for EVERYONE getting an abortion without restriction, thus the agreement upon viability restrictions, as well as others.
Well Dan, I agree with restrictions on Gun laws too. The analogy fits. See, the pro-choice label justs makes pro-aborts feel better about themselves supporting the destruction of innocents.
Dan,
There are no real viability restrictions.
Any woman get an abortion as late as she wants if she goes to a doc who will agree and there are some who for $ will write whatever she needs them to say and claim it is for her health.
..And I’ve never used any of those expressions to refer to a baby.
Jess, pop quiz for you. Can you find the underhanded insult in this comment (above) made by Laura?
jasper-
Gun control was not the point of my post. My point of the post was to state my opinion that most pro-choicers do not want all women to have an abortion. Most pro-choice people do not look at a pregnant women and think… “wow i sure hope she decides to abort” I was stating that YES there are probably people out there that would have this view point. But I think it is an extreme case. Just like people who are pro-life and blew up clinics is an extreme case. You’d like to believe that most pro-choicers are the extreme case I talked about but that is just not the case.
Jill, you should know that most women who have abortions are not teenagers. 81% of women who have abortions are in their twenties and thirties.
So unless you have some evidence that women over 19 are abstaining in huge numbers, you’re going to have to accept the fact that contraception is responsible for most of the decline.
Posted by: reality at January 21, 2008 2:27 PM
Well, first you would have to know if that 81% has been constant over the past X number of years because if the % of teens had been higher and the reduced number of abortions is from among teens then it would be reflected in a change in percetage among teens proportional to their overall percentage of the population. Knowing the percentage for one year does not allow you to compare to other years. I don’t know the percentages for other years nor do I know the percentage of teens in the overall population. Do you?
So unless you have some evidence that there is no change in the percentages then you will have to accept the fact that abstinence is responsible for most of the decline.
*wave*
Hi Bethany!!
Gun control was not the point of my post. My point of the post was to state my opinion that most pro-choicers do not want all women to have an abortion. Most pro-choice people do not look at a pregnant women and think… “wow i sure hope she decides to abort” I was stating that YES there are probably people out there that would have this view point. But I think it is an extreme case. Just like people who are pro-life and blew up clinics is an extreme case. You’d like to believe that most pro-choicers are the extreme case I talked about but that is just not the case.
JM, the analogy still fits. Just think about it for a moment. If I am pro-gun, I do not necessarily think “oh, everyone should own a gun!” I don’t look at every person who doesn’t own a gun and think, wow, they should have a gun. Yet, if I called myself “pro-choice”, would that really make sense? Obviously, the right I would support would be the right to own a gun. Like Dan said, “pro-gun” does not imply that you want everyone to own a gun without restrictions. And likewise, pro-abortion does not imply that you want every person to abort.
I hope that helps clear it up some.
Hi JM! Hope you’re having a good night :)
Ah Bethany,
I am working on my graduate school application. I have to write a paper about why I want to be in the program. Argh its tough.
That stinks, JM… I’m sure you’ll do a great job though!
But the point of my post wasn’t to state anything about being called “pro-abort” either. I was stating that based on some of the things I have seen on this blog “isn’t a women having an abortion a win for your side” “I do wonder why pro-abortion organizations and MSM appear happy that the number of abortions going down.” are saying that pro-choice people are for abortion only, or that they want women to get abortions when this just is not the case.
“okay, I was wrong again. Took me a while to find it, but here is what she said:
Laura: “some infinitesimal wad of crotch product.”
liar, liar pants on fire.
Posted by: jasper at January 21, 2008 8:10 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jasper is calling Bethany a liar?
(COOL! MODERATOR FIGHT!)
..And I’ve never used any of those expressions to refer to a baby.
Can you find the underhanded insult in this comment (above) made by Laura?
Posted by: Bethany at January 21, 2008 8:42 PM
Well, duh, he or she is only a baby AFTER 40 weeks gestation, according to Laura.
I am trying. The application isn’t due for a few more weeks. I have time. I’m trying to get a good start on the essay.
But JM, you do support someone else to end the life of an innocent unborn child, Correct? See, I think that in itself is extreme, especially where over 95% of abortions are done for convenience.
“Jasper is calling Bethany a liar?
(COOL! MODERATOR FIGHT!)”
nice try Laura.
But the point of my post wasn’t to state anything about being called “pro-abort” either. I was stating that based on some of the things I have seen on this blog “isn’t a women having an abortion a win for your side” “I do wonder why pro-abortion organizations and MSM appear happy that the number of abortions going down.” are saying that pro-choice people are for abortion only, or that they want women to get abortions when this just is not the case.
oops, I’m sorry if I didn’t read the conversation high enough to notice that wasn’t your point. ;) As for the point, there are some pro-abortion supporters who do feel that way…not you, of course, but people like Laura who feel it is “irresponsible” to have a child, and then to depend on others if you need support for a while. She thinks the “responsible” choice would be to abort. People like Laura would be called, what Jill refers to as “rabid pro-aborts”
Gotta run now…ttys!
This is why the embryonic-stem cell researchers and Plan B supporter are trying to move conception to implantation when in fact an embryo is already crated. The fact is that when the pill and Plan B work in these situations is that they cause the embryo to starve to death and to die.
Posted by: Jeff Miller at January 21, 2008 7:09 PM
………………………
Starve to death? You make embryos sound like itty bitty cannibals in need of a body to feed upon.
Jasper,
I see it more extreme when a pro-choice individual would rather a woman have an abortion than anything else. Me jasper would rather a woman either keep the child or place the child up for adoption. I don’t want anyone to get an abortion. But that isn’t my choice to make.
Bethany,
I also said that people like Laura are extreme, just like pro-lifers who blow up clinics are extreme.
Dan,
There are no real viability restrictions.
Any woman get an abortion as late as she wants if she goes to a doc who will agree and there are some who for $ will write whatever she needs them to say and claim it is for her health.
Posted by: hippie at January 21, 2008 8:33 PM
…………………………….
And of course bazillions of women are pounding down the office doors of these ‘some’, with bazillions of dollars in their hands every day of the week. @@
jasper, Bethany —
I support people’s right to own guns, but I am 100% anti-gun as much as I believe I have the right to be. By that I mean, I will never own a gun and I won’t live with someone who does. But I think other people should have the right to own guns — my rejection of them is entirely personal. I would never, EVER call myself pro-gun. If forced to define my stance, I would probably have to say pro-choice, though I wouldn’t since it is already linked with another hot issue.
Similarly, I take issue when people call me pro-abortion. I’m not pro-abortion. I’m pro-choice. I think that my personal feelings about abortion should have little bearing on other women’s legal choices.
“I don’t want anyone to get an abortion. But that isn’t my choice to make.”
* washes her hands *
JM, do you think this choice should be legal?
You can’t control whether someone tells the truth, but you can control who you choose to believe and rely on.
Alexandria..I didn’t imply that you were in any way anti-STD testing..if you took it in such a way..I apologize. Some things are lost on the internet unfortunately. I was just merely asking Jess a question, because I don’t think knowing someone “well” means that you know whether they would have an STD or not. You said that you can choose who to believe and this is true, but that person that you believe may or may not have an STD that you are unaware of. Getting a test done together eliminates this doubt for the time being.
I don’t think that sex=warts…but just by thinking someone is going to be honest with you doesn’t mean they will be. I don’t think waiting until marriage guarantees that you will never receive an STD. My aunt had to have a hysterectomy as a result of the cervical cancer she got from HPV from her husband. I DO however think abstinence lowers your chances of getting an STD (which I’m sure we can agree on), but of course we can not predict whether or not the people we are married to choose to cheat on us.
Again, sorry for the miscommunication…it can happen here on the internet pretty frequently. :)
“I think that my personal feelings about abortion should have little bearing on other women’s legal choices.”
How about this choice Alexandra? Should this be legal too?
Well that just made me cry Jasper.
Grrr…and some people aren’t even outraged. What a world.
“Grrr…and some people aren’t even outraged.”
That’s what I just can’t understand Elizabeth.
Jasper, please put warnings with your graphic photos from here on out. I’m not going to be able to finish my sweet potato.
This is why the embryonic-stem cell researchers and Plan B supporter are trying to move conception to implantation when in fact an embryo is already crated. The fact is that when the pill and Plan B work in these situations is that they cause the embryo to starve to death and to die.
Posted by: Jeff Miller at January 21, 2008 7:09 PM
***************************************************
Seriously, people are going to have sex. Taking hormonal contraceptives may be against your faith, which I can understand and respect, so perhaps the best thing for you is to avoid their usage.
In response to the continued tirade against BC pills, I have a burning question. It takes one to two weeks for a doctor’s pregnancy test to determine that a woman is pregnant; by this time, implantation has most definitely occurred. As far as my bioinformatics professor is aware, it is absolutely impossible at this time to detect implantation two days after intercourse. Therefore this warning is just that: a warning about something that may or may not happen, but which has not been accurately measured in humans with the technology available to date. The drug companies are covering their behinds, not supplying a scapegoat for embryo murder.
Since you like gore photos, here’s the outcome of an illegal abortion: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673606694816/image?id=fig4&locator=gr4
SOMG,
The Cemetery of Choice has listed numerous women who died of legal abortion. I wonder what their autopsy pictures looked like.
Can we please not talk about autopy photos…
GOOD GOD PEOPLE!!!
SoMG,
Do you think today’s women would resort to coat hangers if abortion were illegal? I understand they may feel desperate but how can any sane person think doing something as savage as sticking a coat hanger inside her and causing massive hemorraging could be a healthy choice?
Also, Is there a point in a pregnancy where you would not be comfortable killing a woman’s baby?
Yes, some would. More would use black-market misoprostol.
Yes, I would be uncomfortable aborting past viability, unless the abortion were necessary for the patient’s life or health.
Jacque, Jill, MK, Sandy, have a good day in DC! I’m going to be at school for EVER today, so I wanted to say sumfin’ before I left! *waves*
Can’t wait to hear all about it!! Praying for you right now!!
38-year-old Barbara underwent an abortion/tubal ligation at an unidentified New York hospital on December 11, 1981 and was discharged two days later. On December 16th, she was admitted to Princeton Medical Center in Middlesex, New Jersey because of vomiting, back pain, and the inability to urinate. Less than three hours later, she was dead. Autopsy showed that she died from an obstruction in her small bowel that led to overall infection. Both of her lungs had started to fail also. (New Jersey Certificate of Death # 587; Mercer County (NJ)Coroner
Thank you Bethany. These accounts break my heart, truly. How can they not? How can the suffering and deaths of these women, the pictures Jasper posted, the agony of Belinda’s mother not move people?
Ugh. First day of school.
I don’t wanna!
jasper, we were discussing the semantics/linguistics of pro-choice v. pro-gun. Do you not agree that it is possible to be pro-choice on guns? And that perhaps for many people, pro-choice is the best term for them?
Their hearts are hardened, Carla…that’s about the best I can do at understanding it. It’s so hard to imagine looking at those pictures that Jasper posted and saying, “well, it was the woman’s choice.”
That wasn’t a choice. That was a baby.
Do you not agree that it is possible to be pro-choice on guns? And that perhaps for many people, pro-choice is the best term for them?
I know this question wasn’t directed at me, but my answer would be no. It’s silly to call it pro-choice instead of pro-gun when what you support is the right for people to use GUNS. Why make it a euphemism?
Why be offended by the term “pro-gun”? I don’t like cigarettes and never will use them. But I support people’s right to choose to use them. I am therefore pro-cigarette. It’s just basic logic.
JM, I forgot to mention earlier… if you’ll notice, in Jill’s post, she didn’t say pro-abortion individuals..she was referring to the pro-abortion organizations. There is a big difference in the organizations and the individuals. :)
Sigh.
I know, Bethany. My heart was hardened too, once.
“jasper, we were discussing the semantics/linguistics of pro-choice v. pro-gun. Do you not agree that it is possible to be pro-choice on guns? And that perhaps for many people, pro-choice is the best term for them?”
No. I don’t agree.
I noticed you dodged my question above.
I don’t like cigarettes and never will use them. But I support people’s right to choose to use them. I am therefore pro-cigarette. It’s just basic logic.
Nope, Bethany, if you were really pro-cigarettes, then you would like them. You might be for other people having the free choice of using them or not, but that’s a different deal.
Doug
But Doug:
Pro= in support of
Cigarettes= Cigarettes
I am “in support of cigarettes”, therefore, by definition I am literally pro-cigarette, regardless of my personal views on cigarettes. If i am “pro” cigarette, I “support” cigarettes. I am certainly not anti-cigarette, and pro-choice is way too vague to explain what I’m for, unless I said, “pro-choice to use cigarettes”, but that is too long. Therefore, Pro-cigarette is much simpler and explains what I support the right for people to use.
hehe
The pro-abortion movement has made great gains using the “pro-choice” label. First, the “pro-choice” label numbs our moral sensitivity because its masks that anyone really is for abortion, ignores scientific and medical evidence and diverts attention from the act itself. Secondly, the idea of being “pro-choice” seems to appeal to Americans who cherish freedom and the idea of being free to choose rather than being forced to do anything.
Given that the heart of the choice involves an unique, human person, the choice of action becomes clear: to preserve and safeguard the life of this person in the womb or to destroy it. Since this is a person, the latter choice does not involve simply a termination of a pregnancy or the removal of a fetus; rather, the latter choice involves a direct killing of an innocent person, a deliberate murder. Therefore, the act of abortion is an intrinsically evil act.The Second Vatican Council asserted, “Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes”
Interestingly, General Electric had a commercial showing the new technology/photography they developed enabling doctors to see clearly and in color the baby developing inside the womb of the mother. This new technology far surpasses that of ultrasound. The commercial had an impact: Planned Parenthood and the Abortion Rights Action League lobbied General Electric so much that they removed the commercial from television.
We do not have the right to choose evil, no matter what the circumstances are or even if some sort of “good” may arise. To purposefully choose to do evil is an affront to God Himself, in whose image and likeness we are made. In the “pro-choice position,” one is not choosing between two good actions; instead, one is turning a blind eye to the objectively evil action of abortion and pretending that it is on the same moral standing as protecting the child in the womb. To say one is “pro-choice” in this matter is no different than saying one is “pro-choice” for apartheid, Nazi concentration camps, or Jim Crow segregation laws
“To purposefully choose to do evil is an affront to God Himself, in whose image and likeness we are made.”
Well, if you believe this, you’ll probably be against abortion rights.
Doug, and his allies, are the decision to kill, murder, what a women does not desire greatly,wish for(defintion of want) .
Doug is the conclusion of selecting possible alternatives and deciding or picks out, the decision to kill. Doug is “in favor of something”(definition of the word “pro”;Houghton Miflin, ). That “something” is the decision to kill.
The reason for deciding to be in favor of killing?
Dynamic Fortune Telling principled on pessimism.
Doug is in favor of(pro) killing from a great desire and wish(want) for killing.
Thinking, and then a decision based on desire and wishes.
And every person who post here “in favor of” abortion is principled by the desire and wish for death of human life.
Did anyone else notice that only one example of Bethany’s selections came from this century?
With the time span covered, these examples could actually be used to show (statistically) the safety of abortion.
Bethany and Jasper,
Wasn’t “pro-choice” Rosie O’Donnell at the huge Mother’s March against guns? Apparently Rosie isn’t so “pro-choice” when it comes to one’s constitutional right to own a gun. She must not agree that, like her stance on abortion, one can personally oppose gun ownership yet at the same time support the right to own a gun. Odd how her philosophy doesn’t apply across the board.
But then it was pointed out Rosie has armed guards to protect her family. My goodness, was someone suggesting Rosie was being hypocritical?
Why, Rosie was just aghast to learn the guards were armed. She must have thought they used rolled up newspapers.
Uh, Rosie, you hire people to guard your family and are clueless as to how they will do their job?
{rebuttal}:
jasper:The pro-abortion movement has made great gains using the “pro-choice” label.
{Because it is the most accurate label}
First, the “pro-choice” label numbs our moral sensitivity because its masks that anyone really is for abortion,
{because most are not for abortion in the case of a planned, wanted pregnancy, baby and parenthood}
ignores scientific and medical evidence
{nope, thats the purview and expertise of the anti-choice, anti-women’s privacy side}
and diverts attention from the act itself.
Secondly, the idea of being “pro-choice” seems to appeal to Americans who cherish freedom and the idea of being free to choose rather than being forced to do anything.
{add to forced “because of another’s beliefs to which they themselves do not subscribe” and you would be correct}
Given that the heart of the choice involves an unique, human person,
{there you go confusing human and person again}
the choice of action becomes clear: to preserve and safeguard the life of this person in the womb or to destroy it. Since this is a person, the latter choice does not involve simply a termination of a pregnancy or the removal of a fetus; rather, the latter choice involves a direct killing of an innocent person, a deliberate murder. Therefore, the act of abortion is an intrinsically evil act.The Second Vatican Council asserted, “Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes”
{Quite frankly, for those not Catholic and even for many who are, what a bunch of white, out of touch with 90% of society, paternalistic, mysogynistic, unaccountable old men had to say @ 50 years ago, is irrelevant.}
Interestingly, General Electric had a commercial showing the new technology/photography they developed enabling doctors to see clearly and in color the baby developing inside the womb of the mother. This new technology far surpasses that of ultrasound. The commercial had an impact: Planned Parenthood and the Abortion Rights Action League lobbied General Electric so much that they removed the commercial from television.
{Source, please}
We do not have the right to choose evil, no matter what the circumstances are or even if some sort of “good” may arise. To purposefully choose to do evil is an affront to God Himself, in whose image and likeness we are made.
{It is only for those who subscribe to untenable absolutism who see ethical choices as purely good or bad, or for those who live in lalaland to put it in the colloquial. Very often, ethical choices are objective in nature, where one must prioritize which moral principle takes priority. Eg.: normally it is wrong to kill, but if one were defending one’s own life or the life or safety of innocent bystander(s), then killling becomes the moral, often morally laudable or heroic act. Abortion is this type of ethical choice – often one must prioritize existing lives and health or safety of full personhood over human but still potential persons.}
In the “pro-choice position,” one is not choosing between two good actions; instead, one is turning a blind eye to the objectively evil action of abortion and pretending that it is on the same moral standing as protecting the child in the womb. To say one is “pro-choice” in this matter is no different than saying one is “pro-choice” for apartheid, Nazi concentration camps, or Jim Crow segregation laws
Mary, LOL about Rosie! :) SO true!!
Did anyone else notice that only one example of Bethany’s selections came from this century?
On the morning of February 28, 2002, this 25-year-old woman went to her local Los Angeles Planned Parenthood clinic to have an 18-week abortion. Immediately following the D&E procedure, she began bleeding very heavily. She was taken by ambulance to USC Women’s and Children’s Hospital where an emergency hysterectomy was performed to stop the hemorrhaging that was caused by a tear in her cervix. Unfortunately, their efforts were unsuccessful. Diana was pronounced dead exactly three hours after her abortion began at the Kingston Avenue clinic. She is survived by a 1-year-old and a 3-year-old. (Los Angeles County Coroner’s Office, Autopsy Report # 2002-01721)
Also, here are links to stories about women who died during legal abortion, all after the year 2000:
Chanelle Bryant
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl04cbryant.htm
Christine Gilbert
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl05cgilbert.htm
Leigh Ann Stephens Alford
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl03lalford.htm
Edrica Goode:
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl07egoode.htm
L’Echelle Head
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/weekly/aa030903a.htm
Diana Lopez
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl02dlopez.htm
Haley Mason
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl01hmason.htm
Holly Paterson
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl03hpatterson.htm
“adelle” Roe
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl02adelleroe.htm
Tamia Russell
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl04trussell.htm
Oriane Shevin
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl05oshevin.htm
Laura Hope Smith
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl07lsmith.htm
Vivian Tran
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl03vtran.htm
Brenda Vise
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl02bvise.htm
Nicey Washington
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/weekly/aa030403a.htm
Leigh Anne Stephens Alford
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl03lalford.htm
Also here is a short list of just a few of the women who died from ILLEGAL abortions, Post roe:
Herbal abortion death- Kris Humphrey:
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl94khumphrey.htm
Traveled to Mexico for injections- Rosaura “Rosie” Jimenez:
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/weekly/aa040103a.htm
“Daisy” Roe- let her boyfriend do her abortion:
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl90droe.htm
Jennifer Suddeth:
http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/deaths/bl82jsuddeth.htm
And there are still illegal abortions happening every day. Lgal abortion didn’t change that.
phylosopher,
Despite what smug, pompous, radical leftists in black robes might say (who invent constitutional rights to fit their evil cause), a human being is a person.
look it up in the dictionary.
More about illegal abortions being performed today, post Roe:
“Most commonly, they ingest a whole bottle of quinine pills, with castor oil?we try to get them to the ER before their cardiac rhythm is interrupted?Sometimes they douche with very caustic products like bleach. We had a patient, a teen, who burned herself so badly with bleach that we couldn’t even examine her, her vaginal tissue was so painful?.”
“Our local hospital tells me they see 12-20 patients per year, who have already self-induced or had illegal abortions. Some make it, some don’t. They are underage or poor women mostly, and a few daughters of pro-life families?”
If you assume the quotes above come from a veteran of the abortion rights movement, talking about the “bad old days” before Roe v. Wade, when desperate women suffered death and injuries because abortion was illegal, you’d be partly right. The speaker is a longtime worker in reproductive health, whose involvement with abortion started before Roe. But the situations she describes are occurring now.
Jen (not her real name) is administrator of a women’s health clinic in the South that provides abortions. She has noted with alarm the recent rise in illegal abortion in her community
The above quote was taken fromTompaine.com, in an article which tries to spin this as the fault of the anti-abortion crowd.
The facts are the facts… legal abortion has not changed a thing to make people stop having illegal abortions. It has not prevented deaths from women who would seek to have abortions in the privacy of their homes, or in a place where it doesn’t cost them much money at all.
Also, there were not nearly as many deaths from illegal abortions before Roe as the abortion crowd would like us to believe.
Bernard Nathanson, founder of NARAL, admitted openly to his deceit on this subject:
“Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused
enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of
illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but
the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often
enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around
200-250 annually. The figure we constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false
figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to
crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that
legalising abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then
be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of
birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since
legalisation. ”
This isn’t all.
Even so, the situation today is better than the “5,000 to 10,000 women who died annually in the U.S.A. from back-alley abortions,” isn?t it?
These figures, often cited by pro-abortionists, are simply false. During the debate on the floor of the U.S. Senate on the Hatch-Eagleton Pro-Life Amendment in 1983, the U.S. Bureau of Vital Statistics provided the data on such deaths. Its reports showed that you must go back to the pre-Penicillin era to find more than 1,000 maternal deaths per year from illegal and legal abortions combined. The precipitous drop in maternal deaths in the 1950s and ?60s occurred while abortions were still illegal. Before the first state legalized abortions in 1966, the total deaths were down to 120 per year. By 1972, before the Supreme Court legalized abortion in all 50 states, it was down to 39 per year in the entire U.S. Since legalization, the slow decline has continued, so that now the only difference is that more mothers are dying from legal, rather than illegal abortions.
U.S. BUREAU OF VITAL STATISTICS CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL
Reported Maternal Deaths from YEAR Illegal Abortion in U.S.
1940 1,679
1950 316
1960 289
1966 120 First State Legalized in 1967
1970 128
1972 39 Supreme Court Decision in 1973
1977 21
1981 8
From abortionfacts.com:
“On June 18, 1989, CNN World Report, in an hour-long documentary, stated that in Brazil there are 6 million illegal abortions each year and 400,000 women die. But the U.N. Demographic Yearbook of 1988 lists only 40,000 women, age 15-44, dying each year of all causes. Pop. Research Inst. Review, Jan. 1991, p. 12”
“In Portugal the claimed figure was 2,000 deaths. The actual number of deaths of females between the ages of 15-46 was 2,106 in the same year from all natural causes, accidents and illness. There were only 97 listed in the “complications of pregnancy” of which 12 were due to abortion, including spontaneous and induced, legal and illegal. “=Portuguese Anuario Estatistico, Tables 11, 16, 111 221”
“In Italy, the claimed figure before their abortion referendum was 20,000. In the age group 15-45, there were actually only 11,500 female deaths from all causes. Primum Non Nocere, vol. IV, no. 1, 1983”
“In Germany the claim was that 15,000 women died annually. In fact, only 13,000 women of reproductive age died annually in West Germany, and less than 100 died of complications of abortion, legal and illegal. Kurchoff, Deutches Arzteblatt, vol. 69, no. 27, Oct. 26, 1972”
“At the United Nations Habitat meeting in Istanbul, Turkey, in June 1996, the following “fact” was given wide publicity: The UNICEF suddenly claimed that 585,000 women die each year from causes related to pregnancy and birth.”
The pro-life NGO?s for the family immediately answered, “This is wild. According to the U.N. Demographic Year Book for 1990, the total known maternal deaths worldwide for 1986 and 1987 numbered 11,924 (around 6,000 per year). This figure encompasses countries covering 35% of the world?s population.” U.N. Conference, Istanbul, June 1996″
And also, again from abortionfacts.com:
“You mean all maternal deaths from [legal] abortion are not reported?
“That?s exactly correct. The official reporting agency for the U.S. government is the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia. Listen to this: During the two-year stretch of 1991 and ?92, the CDC officially reported only one mother each year dying from induced abortion. In fact, there are 20 documented deaths. Of these, 14 were reported directly to the CDC from state health agencies. The CDC only listed two of them. Mr. Crutcher?s book, Lime 5, which accuses this agency of gross dishonesty and malfeasance in its reporting, is extremely convincing. M. Crutcher, Life Dynamics, personal communication, July ?96 155”
Bethany:
Why be offended by the term “pro-gun”? I don’t like cigarettes and never will use them. But I support people’s right to choose to use them. I am therefore pro-cigarette. It’s just basic logic.
I suppose that’s where we differ. I am in favor of people’s right to smoke, but I am most assuredly anti-cigarettes as much as anyone can be without overstepping their rights. Same goes for guns. I despise them and would never describe myself as for them — to the point where I would much more accurately describe myself as anti-gun, save for my views on legalization. I’ve always understood “pro” to mean “in favor of” or “for,” which is a very different concept from “in support of the rights to.”
jasper:
Do you really think that pro-gun describes someone as anti-gun as myself? Why is that?
I wasn’t dodging your question, I just found it tangential to the discussion that I entered, which centered around whether it’s accurate to call pro-choicers pro-aborts.
Oops, sorry, that was me. Long day at work!
. I’ve always understood “pro” to mean “in favor of” or “for,” which is a very different concept from “in support of the rights to.”
Well, in certain contexts, yes. But in the context of legality (whether abortion should or should not be legal), pro would simply mean that you’re in favor of abortion remaining legal. Which is why if you look in the Webster’s dictionary, the definition of pro-abortionist is:
“Favoring or supporting legalized abortion.”
Alexandria, I hope you have a relaxing evening. :)
Alexandra,
you didn’t answer my question at:
Posted by: jasper at January 21, 2008 9:28 PM
Cut down on the promotion of promiscuity, teach chastity and morals to children at an early age (before public schools can corrupt them) and take away the TAX DOLLARS that Planned Parenthood gets. Oh, and stop the hollywood movies that glorify premarital sex or multiple partner sex.
Education is the KEY to lowering abortion rates to ZERO. Contraception is NOT.
**************************
Truthseeker asked SoMG:
Is there a point in a pregnancy where you would not be comfortable killing a woman’s baby?
SoMG says:
Yes, I would be uncomfortable aborting past viability, unless the abortion were necessary for the patient’s life or health.
*****************************
SoMG,
Why are you uncomfortable aborting a women’s baby when the baby is past viability?
Posted by: SoMG at January 22, 2008 1:50 AM
“Cut down on the promotion of promiscuity, teach chastity and morals to children at an early age (before public schools can corrupt them) and take away the TAX DOLLARS that Planned Parenthood gets. Oh, and stop the hollywood movies that glorify premarital sex or multiple partner sex.
Education is the KEY to lowering abortion rates to ZERO. Contraception is NOT.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 22, 2008 9:19 PM”
Liz, tons of kids get a wonderful education from public schools, and private schools are not automatically pristine examples of morality. Aside from that, you are lumping chastity and morals into the same category, as if they are interchangeable. They may very well be in your value system, but the fact of the matter is that the US government answers to the value systems set forth by many religions (or lack thereof). Besides that, plenty of women have abortions after marriage. To solve the abortion problem, we need a solution that will apply to everyone.
I have to add on to Samantha’s comment.
Form my experience, private religious schools actually seem to be worse off in the morals department. I went to catholic school for 6 and a half years. I heard things said/done that most public school kids hadn’t even thought of yet at my age. Of course this was a small porochial, Catholic school. 30 kids total in my grade, something like a couple hundred in the whole school. It was fiarly well staffed and parents were very involved, yet it was easier to get away with things there then it was when i went to public school (before and after those 6 and half years). Private schools are by no means perfect, in fact public schools really did do a better job looking out for my interests, or so it seems. Especially hearing some of the stories that come out from an all boy catholic high school near where I live. Seems just as bad, if not worse than the stories I hear each day in a public school system.
Liz from Nebraska said:
***********************
Education is the KEY to lowering abortion rates to ZERO. Contraception is NOT.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 22, 2008 9:19 PM”
***********************
And the first thing to teach is that contraception is NOT “safe sex”. The only way “safe sex” is possible is if you are ready to take responsibility for raising a child.
Guttmacher report inaccurate
I reported earlier in the week I was skeptical of The Guttmacher Institute’s most recent report indicating that by 2005 abortion had dropped to 1.2 million annually from its all time high of 1.6 million in 1990 – 25%. Guttmacher,…
I am “in support of cigarettes”, therefore, by definition I am literally pro-cigarette, regardless of my personal views on cigarettes. If i am “pro” cigarette, I “support” cigarettes. I am certainly not anti-cigarette, and pro-choice is way too vague to explain what I’m for, unless I said, “pro-choice to use cigarettes”, but that is too long. Therefore, Pro-cigarette is much simpler and explains what I support the right for people to use.
Bethany, you’re not really “pro-cigarette.” On balance, I think you are anti-cigarette, though you’re still pro-choice on other people, I figure adults, smoking if they want to.
I’d say you are pro-choice on cigarettes, as per the above. Here, on an abortion board, being “pro-choice” is self-explanatory.
Dawg
yllas: And every person who post here “in favor of” abortion is principled by the desire and wish for death of human life.
Nonsense. Pro-Choicers are for what is best for the pregnant woman, for what she wants, for her having the freedom of choice that she does now.
If nobody wants abortions, then there won’t be that killing you refer to. If somebody does, then your desire does not trump theirs.