New York Times: Planned Parenthood CEO’s “strategy for the produce aisle”
Newsweek, April 29, featured an email round table discussion by pro-aborts on “The future of the abortion-rights movement.” Abortion proponents were given 3k+ of unchallenged word space to show how civil, respectful, intelligent, and thoughtful they were.
I wondered how it would feel for Newsweek to give pro-lifers such nice treatment, equivalent to an MSM pedicure?
But I made up my mind a long time ago there’s no sense pining for fairness from MSM, much less pampering. Hence, here I am. That said, I do note the bias every now and then when it’s flagrant, such as was that Newsweek piece.
And here’s another fine example.
On April 29, the New York Times did a nice puff piece on Cecile Richards, distancing her as far as is humanly possible, I think, from the reality that she is CEO of the United States’ largest abortion profiteer… from the reality that suctioning and dicing babies is actually what gives Richards her comfortable life.
NYT portrayed Richards as a conscientious wife and mom of 3 who, yes, even bakes apple pies! – while currently reading War and Peace on her iTouch in between jogging through Central Park before purchasing organic fruits to take to her Upper West Side apartment for which she is currently shopping SoHo for just the right chairs.
Very nice. One thing I did learn was Richards’ husband is Kirk Adams, “a health care organizer for the Service Employees International Union,” according to NYT, a match made in Obama hell.
How nice, an apartment and chairs bought with the blood money of killing innocent children.
With those positions, Richards/Adams have to be raking in the dough. When was the last time Richards/Adams were audited by the IRS? I am guessing never, kind of like Geithner (whose father was a friend of Obama’s mother). Think of all the “dissenters” who are audited almost yearly.
The IRS is the harassment branch of the gov’t, a sort of soft Stasi.
With those positions, Richards/Adams have to be raking in the dough.
hippie, just think how PP stands to benefit from Obamacare if implemented, with the home visits to newly pregnant women and pregnant teen initiatives. Hard to imagine something like this will be out of the ordinary.
C. Richards:
“But I’m too impatient to ever finish the Sunday puzzle on Sunday. Also I’m fascinated by the marriage pages; such amazing stories, it’s like this little slice of life, this hopeful moment. It makes me wonder how my kids are ever going to find someone great and fall in love.”
Oh, the irony.
Praying for Cecile and her family that they may have a change of heart on abortion.
Newsweek piece….painfully boring.
Cecile, darling. Your children may never find someone to love and marry because your company may have aborted their soul mates. Food for thought.
I think it was Cecile Richards that came to Lincoln a few years ago for a talk at UNL. A few pro life students went quietly to learn some information….and IIRC (it has been at least 2 years, probably 3) she ABORTED one of her pregnancies, so technically she has 4 children. I THINK this is what the pro life students had heard.
It’s like trying to put frosting on a moldy, month-old-maggot filled cake. Still repulsive and cause to vomit.
Cecile, darling. Your children may never find someone to love and marry because your company may have aborted their soul mates. Food for thought.
Posted by: Sydney M. at May 3, 2010 11:27 AM
________________________________________________
Sydney, I was thinking the exact same thing!
How absolutely arrogant to portray such an idyllic life while allowing oneself to believe that it’s totally OK to deny this same idyllic life to others by aborting them in the womb. It’s just too evil to think that there are people in the world like Cecile Richards.
The parable of the “Rich Man and Lazarus” immediately comes to mind.
Hey Cecile, you listening? It’s a warning.
Let’s discuss EVERYTHING but what she does for a living!! How stupid are we??
Allow me to borrow a bit of social commentary from the O’Jays: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fow3VIXxW_M
I keep hearing from the anti-aborts that Planned Parenthood makes huge profits off of abortion. Could anyone provide me with links to any primary sources with this information. Abortion is only one component of what they do; although you wouldn’t know that from reading the anti-abort material. As they service many in the low income community, whose Medicaid doesn’t cover abortions, the fee for this service is very low.
And love the smear on ACORN. Many of these folks are involved in the health care industry and do thing like care for frail elderly. If your aged parents are hospitalized and need their diaper changed, they might be taken care of by an ACORN worker. But they vote Democratic and are mostly minorities (some of whom might be anti-aborts) so I can understand why the right wing loathes them. Yes, they did support Obama; but then the Christian anti-abort right supported Bush. And speaking of profits – many of Bush’s Christian right pals, who ran ineffective abstinence only education, made big bucks off of it.
And who gives a s&%t if Ms. Richards aborted a child? You’re so derogatory to those women who have had abortions and moved on with their lives. I do wonder if, down deep, you might even be jealous of those women who don’t hew to the patriarchal system of misogynist suppression of women via their reproductive organs. That you constantly refer to abortion as either “murder” (legally it’s not) or “killing” indicates that you also believe that the women, who have aborted, are “killers” – ergo, you hate these women, eh?
Artemis, I don’t think you know what “ergo” means.
You made a huge jump in logic between your premise and your conclusion.
Shocking as it may seem, you can correctly call someone’s act “killing” without hating that person.
As I recall my reading of WWII history, most of Hitler’s inner circle were regarded as model family men.
So Richards is doing the Martha Stewart Living gig in NYC. Like her SS forbears in the Third Reich, she lives that comfortable existence at the expense of slaughtered human beings, literally feeding her family from the profits of their slaughter.
That’s the true picture. Far from glamorous, it’s as grubby and foul an existence as anyone can lead.
We need to pray for her, in all sincerity, that the same grace that has moved several abortionists to convert may take root in her heart. Imagine what could be accomplished if she took the same knowledge and skill set and turned it around on PP.
Stranger and more wonderful things have happened.
Is Artemis Amanda Marcotte?? hhmmmmm
Patriarchal-check
Misogynist-check
Suppression-check
Posted by: Courtnay at May 3, 2010 12:29 PM
Too bad for you that the “killing” isn’t legally murder – otherwise these cold blooded “baby killers” would be safely behind bars. Right? And as far as killing what’s in one’s body – gee, I killed my uterus. Ewwww. I’m also very adept at killing house plants. My grandmother used to kill chickens; but I prefer to buy them at Whole Foods!
I know that Cecile’s mom, the former Texas governor, had some personal problems; but I was so impressed with her when she took the stage a Democratic convention and said “I’m Ann Richards, I’m pro-choice, and I vote.” Yes! And BTW, looks like the openly gay, pro-choice mayor of Providence might stand a very good chance of winning Rep. Patrick Kennedy’s seat!!
Speaking of votes, there weren’t enough votes to override the governor of Kansas’ veto of some anti-choice legislation. And the George anti-choice law that was supposed to help minority “babies” failed. Yes!
And one more observation of the folks here. Rather than argue the law and the *science (which some do) the preponderance of commentary seems to invoke the bible – and for those of us who don’t subscribe to this kind of thing, it’s not very persuasive. Also, there seems to be sentiment that pro-choice women are “post abortive” and because they can’t deal with this, they are pro-choice. It’s truly a bizarre virtual psych diagnosis because lots of pro-choice women have never had an abortion. There are many lesbians in the movement who also never aborted. Strange “logic” here…
*Nadal is obviously a scientific professional so when he argues the science, it’s almost persuasive – but then he goes all Goddy and we’re back to square one.
Yes, Artemis you are here to be persuaded. LOL
Back on topic.
Do not feed the troll.
“And as far as killing what’s in one’s body – gee, I killed my uterus. ”
This is perhaps the most ignorant statement I’ve read from you yet, Artemis.
The human being killed during abortion is not “your uterus.” It is *inside* your uterus, but it is not actually a part of your body.
I thought we’d moved past this belief sometime in the 1st century, but it appears it needs to be reiterated.
As for religion, you’re the one constantly bringing up pro-choice religions. I’d say you make some jab about it every day. Then you act shocked when people debate you on religious grounds. It’s really quite flabergasting.
Artemis, you ask, “who gives a (explic.)if Mizzzzz-z Richards aborted a child?” Are you for real?? Can you hear yourself? You have written, in fact, in this ass-inine question, that Mizzzzz-z Richards “aborted a child”. Then you follow by making yet another duh-mass statement: “you constantly refer to abortion as either “murder” (legally it’s not) or “killing” indicates that you also believe that the women, who have aborted, are “killers” – ergo, you hate these women, eh?”
Good-grief.
That “child”(your words)that Mizzzzz-z Richards aborted was more than likely another female. A female human being!
Who cares? Who cares if Richards aborted a child? Any decent human being who believes in the right to life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness-you recall those words, right? Those inalienable rights endowed to all human beings by Our Creator? Now where have we heard those words before? These words which DEMAND that one person’s right to life DOES NOT supersede the right to life of another? Point in case-Richard’s unborn aborted child. You know, the basic natural law of “doing unto others as you would have done unto you”, if heeded, would do away with abortion.
Because it hasn’t been heeded, euthanasia is the justice meeted out and is the natural consequence for the generations who have created and chosen the culture of death. When “Planned Barren-hood” runs out of babies to murder, they’ll change their murderous focus to the aged who aborted their offspring and/or have no one but the government to care for them. This, of course, will be in an effort to “allieviate society of the burden of the non-productive elderly, and to end their suffering”. It’s already started.
In a related new item:
German historians uncover evidence that Dr. Joseph Mengele was a ‘loving husband and devoted father and also served as an usher and greeter at his local Eugenics Society.
Clearly Artemis has never clicked on my name.
Posted by: db at May 3, 2010 1:15 PM
My bad;) I meant to say aborted a fetus. All your anti choice lingo must be getting to me. And too bad for you that the SCOTUS determined that fetuses don’t have a “right to life.” The “right to life, liberty, blah, blah,” pertains to “post born” fetuses! What you argue is that the rights of a fetus supercede its carrier. You argue that a woman does not have the right to do what she wants with her body. That “logic” would dictate that government can mandate that a person cannot smoke or drink. Oh, hey, should we set up laws prohibiting pregnant women from smoking and drinking. And if we do, the state will take custody of the fetus? Again, our bodies, our choice.
And nice conspiracy about what PP will do if abortion after all the fetuses are aborted (WTF?). They were in business before Roe – doing things like mamograms, providing contraceptives, pap smears, etc.
But I love the PP as “death panel” meme. LOL!!!
Artemis wrote:”Speaking of votes, there weren’t enough votes to override the governor of Kansas’ veto of some anti-choice legislation. And the George anti-choice law that was supposed to help minority “babies” failed. Yes!”
Guess you missed this, huh Artie? See:
ishttp://lifenews.com/state5054.html
Artemiss:
“*Nadal is obviously a scientific professional so when he argues the science, it’s almost persuasive – but then he goes all Goddy and we’re back to square one.”
I was baptized a Roman Catholic Christian. That is who and what I am at the most essential core of my being. I also happen to be a scientist. That I can reconcile the truth of science with the truth of Christianity, reflecting objective reality is a function of my honesty and integrity at doing both.
You should try your hand at faith and integrity some time. You’ll wonder why you didn’t start sooner.
Get well soon.
Posted by: Kelsey at May 3, 2010 1:39 PM
While I disagree with you, you have far more credibility than the religious zealots who argue from a religious perspective – particularly the ones who talk about buring in hell, yadda, yadda. Your take is refreshing.
Back on topic.
Do not feed the troll.
Posted by: carla at May 3, 2010 12:56 PM
Good advice, Carla. I noticed the NYT article glossed over Ms Richards’ progressive ties by describing her as “a onetime labor organizer and co-founder of America Votes.” Her history is more extensive than that.
Posted by: Artemis at May 3, 2010 12:45 PM
“Rather than argue the law and the *science (which some do) the preponderance of commentary seems to invoke the bible – and for those of us who don’t subscribe to this kind of thing, it’s not very persuasive.”
—————————————————
arttheemystified,
You have rejected logic and reason.
Your fairy tell/tale/tail religion is an ambiguous as your baseless contentions.
I for one would not waste a ‘religious argument’ on your narrow and bigoted excuse for an inellect.
In a word, you are ‘hopeless’.
But there are some people who post here, both prolife and from the ‘dead babies r us’ mob, who have a theistic world view, some of whom, but not all, hold the ‘book’ as some sort of road map to a moral journey in this life.
I suggest when you get the first hint of a ‘religion’ of which you do not approve that you exercise your ‘choice’ to join the wack jobs at feministing or dailykos where I am sure you will be right at home.
When a woman is pregnant with a boy is that her penis then? Her penis, her body??
Posted by: Artemis at May 3, 2010 12:18 PM
Here’s a definition from my cyclopedic medical dictionary for you:
Life: Biologically, the life of a system begins at the moment of conception and ends at death…
And according to dictionary.com:
Kill: to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay
Murder: to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.
And by the way, just because something is legal, does not make it morally right, just as once slavery was legal in the USA, it was not morally right; killing Jews in Germany was legal before and during WWII, it was not morally right.
Killing a child before it even gets it’s first breath of air, when it’s at its most vulnerable and can’t fight back or even scream, though it may be legal, it is not morally right.
Posted by: carla at May 3, 2010 1:57 PM
It’s still part of her body – no different from a tumor or a parasite and host. A fetus is not a “human being” because, until it’s born, it’s not an independent “being” but rather an adjunct to a woman’s body. But here’s a theistic question for those so disposed – if embryos, in labs, are “babies,” shouldn’t priests baptize them before they get flushed because otherwise, they won’t go to heaven?
Posted by: D at May 3, 2010 2:02 PM
According to your “moral” system – but not according to other’s. The “morality” of abortion is not an absolute. Sorry, but that’s the reality. And BTW, equating abortion to the holocaust is very offensive to Jews – the majority of whom are pro-choice. Sorry, but that’s the reality.
Artemis wrote:
“My bad;) I meant to say aborted a fetus. All your anti choice lingo must be getting to me. And too bad for you that the SCOTUS determined that fetuses don’t have a “right to life.” The “right to life, liberty, blah, blah,” pertains to “post born” fetuses! What you argue is that the rights of a fetus supercede its carrier.”
Art, honey, you are getting yourself tied up in knots of rhetoric, aren’t you. “Post-born fetuses”, for example. Wow-that’s a real stretch. Kind of reminds you of that saying:” Oh, what an evil web we weave when first we venture to deceive.”, doesn’t it?! That’s just a way-out there adnormal tag for a baby.
And about “Planned Barren-hood” turning to euthanizing the elderly-another saying might come to mind in making the idea of this more clear to you, Art- “What goes around, comes around”. Does that ring a bell? If life is declared to not be life at one end of the age spectrum, what’s to prevent the same mentality to declare it on the other end? Maybe start off with age 90 as being the cut-off for a “productively viable human being”. After that, well, we can push the “viable age” down to 89, 88, etc., as the economy and government dictates. You get it, I’m sure. Just figure out a rhetorical alternative to the aged. Too many of them can and do still vote right now, so we need to get past that somehow. Just watch out for those rhetorical snares and inconsistancies, though, right Artie?
Posted by: db at May 3, 2010 2:17 PM
Currently, the law protects those who are “post born fetuses.” (snark alert). Despite your paranoia, “death panels” do not nor will not exist. But a fun conspiracy – sure has more red meat that 9-11 being an “inside job.” But wow, Planned Parenthood getting into euthanasia. That’s a good one! ROFLMAO!
Laugh now, Art, but it won’t be long, you won’t always be young and productive-none of us live forver in this world. It’s already on the horizon. Look at Europe-obamanation’s “model of what America should become”. Euthanasia seems to be a quick fix for medically/mentally ill and the aged people that drains the economies over there. But, maybe I’m scaring you. I hope you’re scared. If any part of human life is not respected, none of us are safe. I hope some day you will see “Planned-barrenhood” and other factions of the culture of death for what they are, a way for some to benefit from the obliteration of others and will be appalled and remorseful, and turn it around for yourself. You still can, you know. It’s never too late, not until you die, to repent of promoting this culture of death.
Artemis,
Thank you for speaking for all of the Jews.
For you to continually refute all religious discussion about abortion why do you care whether embryos are baptized??!!
I was pregnant 3 times with little boys. Not my penis, Artemis. Not my body. Theirs.
Please with valid scientific facts and solid logic explain how a growing, unborn human child is NOT killed during an abortion.
(HT Bobby Bambino)
” A fetus is not a “human being” because, until it’s born, it’s not an independent “being” but rather an adjunct to a woman’s body”
You are an idiot. We have shown you the science on this again and again and yet you continue to make claims like this. It’s really quite amazing.
Extreme LOLZ at Artemis’s ignorance of theology regarding baptism and childlike belief in the absolute infallibility of the Supreme Court. Also love the “woo hoo, I’m for the gays and I speak out for the offended Jews” bit. Yeah, because they need you to. Not.
Incredibly, she does have a point in that non-religious people don’t care about religious arguments against abortion. Stop the presses, Artemis and I agree on something.
Artemis, I have to ask: when you comment on this site, what purpose do you have in mind?
@Artemis
Below is the link to Planned Parenthood’s website and their Annual Reports for 2007 and 2008. You will find that abortion accounts for 3% of their services. Planned Parenthood also notes that they receive between 35% and 36% of their total revenue from their “Health Clinics” alone.
Since Planned Parenthood does not disclose the price of each abortion, we can conclude their revenue from abortion alone using the numbers they have provided. I will start with the 2007 report.
-2006-2007 # of Abortions: 289,750
Cost of Pill: $350-$650
Cost of 1st Trimester Surgical Abortion: $350–$900
-If all the abortions were via the abortion pill or 1st Trimester Surgical Abortion at the cheapest price of $350:
289,750 x $350 = Total Revenue of $101,412,500
-If all the abortions were via 1st Trimester Surgical Abortion at the most expensive price of $900:
289,750 x $900 = Total Revenue of $260,775,000
*From this we can conclude that the 289,750 abortions performed at PP from the 2006-2007 fiscal year provided revenue somewhere between $101,412,500 and $260,775,000. Their total revenue reported from their CLINICS was $356,900,000. This means PP’s revenue from abortion accounts for 28%-73% of their total CLINIC income. YET ABORTION ONLY ACCOUNTS FOR 3% OF THEIR SERVICES.
Still don’t think the numbers are that staggering? It gets worse. (For the 2007-2008 report, I will leave out the math and just provide the numbers.)
Abortions:305,310
Clinic Revenue:$374,700,000
-If all the abortions were the cheapest procedures:
305,310 x $350 = $122,608,500
-If all the abortions were the most expensive procedures:
305,310 x $900 = $274,779,000
*Thus, abortion accounted for 34%-79% of the total clinic income. Still, abortion accounted for 3% of all services.
What does this mean? It means $$ in the bank.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/annual-report-4661.htm
Posted by: Artemis at May 3, 2010 2:11 PM
Was I equating the holocaust to abortion?
You missed my point by a few miles, and I thought I was making it simple for you, forgive me. Somehow you have it in your head that just because something is legal, it makes it okay, and I was pointing out that just because something is legal does not make it okay. I thought I could illustrate with a few historical examples, I must have confused you.
Is that better?
Did you understand the rest of my note? Did the definition of life confuse you, too?
According to your “moral” system – but not according to other’s. The “morality” of abortion is not an absolute. Sorry, but that’s the reality. And BTW, equating abortion to the holocaust is very offensive to Jews –
Posted by: Artemis at May 3, 2010 2:11 PM
Uh, huh. Well if the immorality of abortion isn’t absolute, why is the immorality of the holocaust absolute?
Current popular opinion?
If you just make it up as you go along to fit the interests of those in power, you can make up anything. You can make anything legal or illegal, moral or immoral.
You don’t get the sustained level of opposition to something like abortion, slavery, etc. in civilized culture for no reason. Likewise, even evolutionary psychologists note the persistence of religion requires that it fill a basic human need and is a group selection strategy.
As for what Jews think, there is a difference between religious Jews and ethnic Jews. FWIW plenty are self identified atheists. The rest of us are free to say what we will whether it offends or not. My uncle lost virtually all of his relatives other than parents and siblings in the holocaust.
Posted by: Lauren at May 3, 2010 3:31 PM
A fetus is not a human being, no matter how you spin it. Biology texts refer to what is growing in a uterus as a “fetus” – not a “baby.” If “science” determined that “fetuses” were “babies” then why isn’t there more of an outrcy against this “holocaust” in the scientific community? Face it, Lauren, the science doesn’t support you and face it, Lauren the scientifically based rational community sees anti abortion zealots, like you, as silly and occasionally dangerous idiots who seek to intrude into a personal decision made between a woman and her doctor. And until you pursuade the “idiots” on the Supreme Court, those clergy who don’t believe that abortion is “murder,” and a whole lot of folks like me who don’t believe that abortion is just soooo evil, then you will be relegated to name calling and an occasional abortion doctor homicide. Of course if you can persuade politicians to pass anti choice laws, in the less enlightened areas of the country, you might be able to have an impact – but face it, Lauren, women will travel to states like mine to do what they deem necessary. And Lauren, you might want to rally your troops against the labs which provide embryos for in-vitro cuz they’re obviously “killing” “babies.” And you think I’m an idiot? LOL!
Posted by: hippie at May 3, 2010 5:36 PM
So Reformed rabbis aren’t religious?
Reform Judaism would not hesitate to permit an abortion. This would also include cases of incest and rape if the mother wishes to have an abortion
Read more: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/judaism/FAQ/10-Reform/section-21.html#ixzz0muUfcQif
Reform Jews are dying out according to the Jewish Population Survey due to low birthrate and outmarriage. Orthodox Jews are 9% of Jews and 27% of Jews under 18. Note the trend is the same in Israel.
Here is an interesting article from Haaretz on political differences between younger and older Jews.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/elections/sarah-silverman-was-wrong-older-jews-more-likely-to-vote-obama-1.256470
excerpt:
“That survey, compiled from the monthly averages of Gallup’s daily tracking polls, including interviews with more than 500 Jewish registered voters each month, found that while 74% of Jews aged 55 and over were supporting Obama, only 67% of those under 35 said they’d vote for the Democratic nominee..
“This finding doesn’t come as much of a surprise to voters like Zach Hanover, a 19-year-old sophomore at The George Washington University who plans to vote for McCain when he casts his first ballot. Hanover, an Orthodox Jew reared in Memphis, where his father, a Democrat, would drag him to rallies with Bill Clinton and Al Gore, said his decision to be a Republican was an easy one.
“I just made a bullet list – abortion, taxes, spending, size of government – almost word for word it was the Republican platform,” said Hanover, adding that the traditional values he shares as an Orthodox Jew fit well with the values embraced by the GOP. “If you look at the biblical liturgy, the Judaic religion is about life.”
“A fetus is not a human being, no matter how you spin it.”
Human:
1. A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens.
Being:
1. The state or quality of having existence.
A human fetus does indeed have the “state or quality of having existence” and as such is a “human being.”
“Face it, Lauren, the science doesn’t support you.”
Yes, it does. See Dr. Nedal for an extensive scientific explanation of human reproduction.
“And you think I’m an idiot? LOL!”
I don’t think you’re an idiot, I know it. You have shown yourself to be an idiot again and again. It’s a matter of indisputable fact.
Posted by: Artemis at May 3, 2010 2:11 PM
“And BTW, equating abortion to the holocaust is very offensive to Jews – the majority of whom are pro-choice. Sorry, but that’s the reality.”
————————————————–
Luke 11:43-46
43 Woe to you, Pharisees! For you love the best seats in the synagogues and [you love] to be greeted and bowed down to in the [public] marketplaces.
44 Woe to you! For you are like graves which are not marked or seen, and men walk over them without being aware of it [and are ceremonially defiled].
45 One of the experts in the [Mosaic] Law answered Him, Teacher, in saying this, You reproach and outrage and affront even us!
46 But He said, Woe to you, the lawyers, also! For you load men with oppressive burdens hard to bear, and you do not personally [even gently] touch the burdens with one of your fingers. AMP
John 5:15-18 15 The man went away and told the Jews that it was Jesus Who had made him well.
16 For this reason the Jews began to persecute (annoy, torment) Jesus and sought to kill Him, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.
17 But Jesus answered them, My Father has worked [even] until now, [He has never ceased working; He is still working] and I, too, must be at [divine] work.
18 This made the Jews more determined than ever to kill Him [to do away with Him]; because He not only was breaking (weakening, violating) the Sabbath, but He actually was speaking of God as being [in a special sense] His own Father, making Himself equal [putting Himself on a level] with God. AMP
It is NOT always a bad thing to offend a Jew, even an overtly pious and educated Jew.
And like most people they are most easliy offended when they are publicly confronted with ‘truth’, especially the ‘truth’ of their self serving duplicitous and hypocritical behavior.
Any person, Jew or Gentile who is offended by the comparison of the killing of hundreds of millions of prenatal human being with the killing of millions of Jews in the holocaust is a shallow and superficial thinker who deserves to be offended.
Artemis, this may come as a shock, but one does not need a job or even a degree in a field in order to understand it. I regularly argue that unborn children deserve life on a scientific basis. And if that argument is correct, it is not negated if I or Nadal (or anyone else) also argues on a religious basis. The fact that someone also sometimes uses another argument you find less compelling does not make another argument of theirs false.
I know of a lot of cases where women are more open to life than men. When I married my husband, he wanted 3 kids at most and I wanted 3 at least (though abortion never would have been an option). Luckily–through my research and then my testimony to my husband–God showed me that birth control of any kind was not the path He wanted for us. It is completely my decision to have as many children as God sends me (by which I mean, not as many as possible, but as many as come naturally).
Right now we are raising up two children in our beliefs, and hoping for many more. You had a child, but he or she is dead, and now you are old and alone. Which of us will have more influence? Which side will win?
Artemiss,
You really are an ignoramus. The field of embryology has spoken definitively about the human identity of the embryo. You choose to ignore every time I post a list of quoted from embryology texts.
I do so again in response to your misinformation campaign.
http://gerardnadal.com/2010/01/07/more-from-the-scientific-community-on-the-identity-and-status-of-the-human-embryo/
Get well soon.
Artemis,
The burden of proof is on you to prove that a fetus is NOT a human being, since that is your claim. Cite your studies, quote some sources. Prove it.
Fetus is Latin for “little one” or offspring, btw.
Artemis…my pediatrician calls my son “toddler”. Can I then say “AH HA! You called him a toddler. Therefore he is not a human being. Therefore I can kill him today when he starts a temper tantrum”
Fetus is just another name for a human being at a particular point in the “vector of life” to quote former abortionist Bernard Nathanson. Embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, child, teenager, adult, old fart. They are just phases of life Artemis. I mean you fall in the O F category now, don’t you? Are you less human as you age and become more dependent on others? God forbid you need any assistance in your “golden years”. That, according to your rhetoric, would be a perfect reason for society to off you.
Biology textbooks use biological terms. They also don’t call infants babies, and they don’t call adolescents teens. Saying that a fetus is not a baby because a biology textbook doesn’t call it one is like saying a 14-year-old isn’t really a young woman, she’s an adolescent according to biology textbooks, so she’s not a woman at all. First, the terms in textbooks carry no moral meaning; biology textbooks do not speak to whether abortion is a moral choice, though they may describe it, just as they might describe the effects of alcohol on the 14-year-old without making a statement about whether she should be imbibing. Secondly, biology texts are clear that a human being begins as a zygote, develops into a morula, a blastocyst, an embryo, a fetus, and a neonate, and so on… yet is from the beginning a complete human being, not merely a part of his or her mother. (And yes, a zygote has gender, though there is not yet expression of that. One’s gender is determined by chromosomes, of which the zygote has a complete set (usually 46).)
No one is arguing that the rights of the fetus supersede the rights of the woman. If both lives are in danger, I think everyone here would agree that abortion should be an option. If the mother’s life is in danger, and the child can be safely removed, it would seem most could agree that would be the best course of option. If the child can be delivered early and given care to survive, why kill him or her? Why should abortion after viability ever be an option? If my born child required food, and I had no formula, and I could breastfeed him, I am legally obligated to do so. I can’t just stop breastfeeding without making some other arrangement. He needs use of my body to survive, and the law is on his side. If my husband left me, he would still be required to provide for our children. My daughter is almost 2, so it’s been a while since she was directly dependent on my body, but I still buy her food and prepare it for her, and my husband is still legally required to contribute to her support, even if he chooses not to take part in her life. We do not have the option of just leaving her in her room until she dies. It’s called neglect, and not only is it illegal, almost anyone thinks that it is despicable. (And that wouldn’t even be taking an action against her, whereas in abortion the child is killed. Neglect would be more like not stopping preterm labor.) (I am happily married to my husband, and have no intention to neglect any of my children.) Parents are obligated to care for their children from birth until age 16 or arrange for someone else to do so. If I were to decide I no longer wanted my two-year-old daughter, I can’t just leave her in her room or kick her out of the house. I would be obligated to care for her and keep her from harm until I could turn over her care to the proper authorities.
Not abusing or neglecting one’s children is the law after birth. A breastfeeding child does have the right to “use” his or her mother’s body, and the mother is required to end that in a way that is safe for the child should she choose to end it. Even if a man does not want his child, even if he never wanted that child, he is required to support his child.
All those of us who are anti-dismemberment require is that this same basic responsibility–to care for one’s own offspring until and unless that care can be safely handed over to another–be extended to the child in the womb.
Excellent, excellent post YCW.
YWC wrote:
“No one is arguing that the rights of the fetus supersede the rights of the woman. If both lives are in danger, I think everyone here would agree that abortion should be an option.”
I think that the Catholic Church’s teaching on this is that both mother and baby should be helped. Generally, if the mother is dying, the baby would die as well, although there have been heroic ordeals where the mother was kept on life-support until the baby could live outside the mother. St. Gianna Molla’s life was one exemplifying the love of Our Lord Jesus-she laid down her life for another, her baby. Check out her life in the lives of the saints. Inspiring and hope-giving.
> It’s still part of her body – no different from a tumor or a parasite and host.
Sorry, but a parasite is, by definition, an organism that harmfully feeds off another organism of another species.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite
A parasite is not a part of the host; they are two organisms in a type of symbiotic relationship known as parasitism.
I know that 2+2=4.
I knew it before I knew Jesus.
I continue to know 2+2=4 even after I have known Jesus.
Before I knew Jesus I was complicit in the murder of my prenatal son.
After I knew Jesus the fact that I had been complicit in my prenatals son’s murder still remained, but I had been relieved of the death sentence and the guilt.
And 2+2 still =4.
arttheemystified,
Begins with her preferred conclusion and then walks backward grasping at fairy tails/tales/tells to preserve and protect the bliss of her self imposed ignorance.
In arttheemisinformed’s little delusional fantasy world, just because a=b and b=c does not mean that a=c if she ‘feels’ the logic is too rigid to include her favorite conclusion.
If you live in Iowa and would like to assist in a “welcoming reception” for Cecile Richards on May 20th in Cedar Rapids, contact your local pro-life club for further information. It could be a lot of fun, and you’ll meet fellow pro-lifers from the state.
Carla/Artemis, regarding your inquiry about baptism,
‘If embryos, in labs, are “babies,” shouldn’t priests baptize them before they get flushed because otherwise, they won’t go to heaven?’
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1257, regarding The Necessity of Baptism, “The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament….”
Also, according to the Catechism , #1261, “As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.”
Also, according to #1256 of the Catechism, regarding who can baptize, “The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize, by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.”
God’s name is Mercy, but He is also Justice. Know this, Carla/Artemis, that during your lifetime, Jesus will never cease to pursue you with His love. If you refuse to hear Him, He shall be unable to do anything more for you after your death. And then His justice will have to be accomplished.
A message to you, Carla/Artemis from Jesus, as was told to Marguerite in Message of Merciful Love to Little Souls…
My poor child!
What am I going to do with you?
I bring you love and peace; you give me indifference and sarcasm.
Behold, the Light is coming towards you.
Are you going to receive it as you should?
Have you noticed the brevity of the passing days?
For all things pass away.
Do you not understand that you are striding towards eternity?
What is a year, two years?
Another few years and soon you will be a thing of the past.
No one will even remember you on this earth which corrupts you.
But there, where you are going, nothing is forgotten.
You will reap what you have sown.
You will be judged on the evil you have done and rewarded for the good you have acquired.
Reflect and pull yourself together.
There is still time.
Throw yourself into My arms.
Is it possible that on the cross, prisoner of My love, I shall embrace nothing but the void?
Carla,
My apologies…I thought from the baptism posting that you and Artemis were one and the same. I realized my mistake only too late. I am new to this type of exchange. My above posting is directed at Artemis, but the message from Jesus is relevant to all who do not hear Him. It is such a beautiful message of love, don’t you think?
You all have so much faith. When someone is hard core pro-death I have trouble believing that they will ever actually be sorry for that. I believe in their soul it’s all about them. I believe the reason light does not reach their soul is because in their thinking they are light. They’ve convinced themselves that they are right. Some of them will never be Christians there reprobates. My soul does not cry for them it cries for the carnage that they are responsible for. I think the only reason they have received mercy thus far is because God knows there judgement awaits. That’s what gives me hope not mercy because they laughed at the mercy of God. And they do possess a soul and I do believe mercy is available to all who are truly sorry I just have trouble believing that these hard core pro-deathers are actually ever sorry. I also believe that when a mother’s life is truly at risk you deliver the baby and pray for life. The God I serve is the God of Life not the god of sacrifices.
Myrtle,
Of course God is the God of Life! He is the source and purpose of all that is. But, to say that He is not the “God of sacrifice” is to overlook the fact that He gave His only Begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus, as The Ultimate Sacrifice, a sacrifice of His passion of suffering and death on a lowly cross for His created children-us. The life of Our Lord Jesus is the living example to each of us. We are to pick up our cross everyday, and be willing to, in that same love He presented us with, sacrifice and lay down our lives in love for our brothers and sisters in this world. Everyday, everywhere we look, there are those walking the path of Our Lord as they lay down their lives, their wants, their desires, for the sake of another. Mothers stay awake all night with a sick baby, neighbors helping others clean up after a flood, a wife vigilantly staying by the hospital bed of her husband nearing death, a man jumps into a pond to rescue someone who’s car ended up in it-all acts of self-sacrifice and of love. Our Lord said; “There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for another.” To love IS sacrifice, and we all know that God is Love.
We, as pro-life persons given the grace to follow Christ and a desire to do His holy will, need to also sacrifice our time in prayer and in trying to educate those whose minds are steeped in the culture of death-to do so is an act of love, whether they are accepting of it or not.
To the point:
Jesus Christ is Saviour and Lord. He is pro-life.
Jesus Christ is Judge of all mankind.
As disciples of Jesus Christ we will always be pro-life. We will never advocate for abortion unless the mother is to be saved with one.
Jesus Christ is the Way, Truth, and LIFE.
Jesus Christ has all power in heaven and earth.
All that has been stated is true with or without your assent.
Repent, receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.
No worries, Susan!! Thank you for sharing.
I am a moderator here and Artemis is here to stir things up a bit. :)
Still waiting for Artemis to read what Gerard has written about the status of the unborn.
Crickets chirping…..
So will all the mega-Planned Parenthood employees be part of “Mr. Cecile’s” SEIU? Is there a conflict of interest?
myrtle, artemis is not pro-death; she is simply biologically misinformed.
“NYT portrayed Richards as a conscientious wife and mom of 3 who, yes, even bakes apple pies! – while currently reading War and Peace on her iTouch in between jogging through Central Park before purchasing organic fruits to take to her Upper West Side apartment for which she is currently shopping SoHo for just the right chairs.”
Reminds me of Fox News’s treatment of Lloyd Blankfein.