AZ law takes effect today that will stop Planned Parenthood nurses from commiting abortions
An Arizona law passed over a decade ago to protect aborting mothers from unsafe and unskilled practitioners finally takes effect today.
Dubbed “Lou Anne’s Law,” the legislation was adopted in 1999 following the April 17, 1998, death of Lou Anne Herron at the hand of late-term abortion hack John Biskind, pictured right at his 2001 trial for which he was convicted to 5 years in prison for manslaughter.
Among other guidelines, Lou Anne’s Law stipulates that:
- A doctor is the only one who may commit a surgical abortion.
- The aborting doctor must have admitting privileges at an accredited hospital in case of an emergency.
- The aborting doctor must remain on the clinic premises until all patients are stable and ready to be discharged.
The kicker? These regulations were “drawn from the abortion industry’s own internal standards,” as AUL’s Denise Burke wrote. How could the industry protest? Yet it did.
We now know it is no wonder Planned Parenthood of Arizona took the lead vehemently fighting to kill Lou Anne’s Law.
In 2007 it was revealed – only after a complaint was filed – that Tucson PP nurse practitioner Mary Andrews had been committing abortions through 16 weeks since 2001.
The pro-abortion AZ Board of Nurses ultimately dismissed all charges against Andrews, instead voting in 2008 to allow nurses to commit abortions up to 13 weeks gestation.
Furthermore, a conglomerate of abortion groups began conducting legal research in 2000 of 10 states, including AZ, to pursue allowing not just nurse practitioners but also midwives and physician assistants to commit abortions.
According to the Arizona Daily Star at the time, “Nothing in state law specifically spells out that only doctors can terminate a pregnancy.”
Now it does. PP tried to stop enforcement of the law, stating there weren’t enough abortionists to keep up with demand.
Maricopa Co. Superior Court Judge Donald Daughton ruled October 27 that was PP’s problem, not the state’s.

Well, so much for the ardent desire to keep abortions safe…
That was 40 years ago. But death cults get drunk on blood, and when they get drunk, they get sloppy. Case in point. They have long since dropped the pretense at wanting to protect women. Now it’s a two-for-one if women die or end up sterile, or if they deliver prematurely or miscarry as a result in future pregnancies.
They fight us on making known the ABC link.
They fight us on providing qualified physicians.
They fight us on making known the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer.
They fight us on making known the CDC data indicating that condoms are frightfully inadequate in preventing disease:
http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/latex.htm
They fight us on making known their own Guttmacher Institute data that 54% of women seeking abortions were using contraception in the month that they got pregnant.
They fight us on parental notification laws, leaving children without post-operative supervision and care at home.
They fight us on abstinence education and try to suppress the data telling of its success.
And when they lose the fight, they enlist willing allies in science and medicine to deny what the research indicates. They lie through their teeth.
They are just sloppy drunk and desperate now. We, on the other hand, have an ever-growing mountain of scientific and journalistic data chronicling their beastly deeds and their effects. We grow ever more disciplined and armed with data while they are unraveling and showing the true face of their evil and mental illness.
It’s all breaking our way.
Abortion is between a woman and her
doctornursemidwifedouladentistreceptionist.This is another reason that parents need to be involved. When I take my kids to the doctor, I ask questions (side effects of meds, what to do if there are complications, who to call, etc). There is no way some kid (I am 48 so that includes those in the late teens and early 20’s) will know to ask those questions, especially if they are needing to ask an authority figure.
I have always been concerned when the pro-aborts don’t want parental notification. What are they trying to hide from the informed parent. Well, now I know: some nurse or whoever doing abortions. And this had to be a law, where is the sense of taking good care of the patient. Just shows us again, they are just out to make a buck.
I say GO AZ! Good job with everything their doing!
Well said, Gerard, I couldn’t do better.
So an abortionist can kill a child as well as a nurse? Yep. The outcome is the same.
You must be so happy, Nick.
NO difference in outcome between abortions done by docs and abortions done by their assistants/trainees.
Yup. Who needs a doctor’s degree to kill defenseless humans? It is not a surprise to the prolife movement that killing little humans is not a real challenging job, dear.
The goal of REAL doctors, nurses and assistants is to save people, not kill them.
Dr. Nadal, it is you who is doing the fighting. You are the ‘attacker’. Pro-choice people are simply resisting your offensive.
‘They’ resist the misinformation espoused by anti-choicers regarding the ABC link.
Why are oral contraceptives part of the abortion battle? Just part of the whole antiquated conservative mindset? ‘Just don’t have sex’.
The links I was provided with on this site don’t describe condoms as ‘frightfully inadequate’. They are still better than nothing.
Abstinence fails. And the outcomes are riskier.
“it’s all breaking our way” – in your dreams.
cran, what do you have to personally lose when abortion becomes illegal?
I would lose the knowledge, the feeling and the sense that women can control their own destiny and not be subject to the varying whims of the patriarchal power play. It would be like introducing legislative changes which resulted in marriage being returned to it’s historical origins.
And what do you personally lose over someone else having the right to have an abortion?
so killing their children while they are vulnerable and unable to defend themselves empowers women? No, it makes them slaves to men, more and more. Men use women for sex and then when a woman becomes pregnant, they tell the woman to “take care of it” or “get rid of it”.
And half the babies that die in abortion are FEMALE. I think the feminists keep forgetting that.
Cranium,
Only in the sick and twisted world of abortion is hardcore scientific and medical data so willfully ignored, savaged and shredded.
Only in the sick and twisted world of abortion do school nurses conspire with the likes of PP to pump children full of steroids and perform surgery on them without the parents’ knowledge or consent.
And only in the sick and twisted world of abortion are such horror stories regarded as an offensive and not welcome insights.
You and Nick deserve each other.
Now let’s just see if this law is actually ENFORCED. Knowing PP, they’ll just continue on regardless of any new law. Since when does PP adhere to ANY law ?
Gerard: You’re BRILLIANT !
Oh, and Nick…
Jill outed you on another thread, so why not just write under your own name? Typically, people with the courage of their convictions do that sort of thing.
You’re certainly not a scientist. If you want to cheer on the slaughter of babies and dress that up in pseudo-scientific verbiage, hey, it’s a free country.
Say it loud and say it proud: You’re pro-abortion! As for PA’s NP’s or anyone else, even a pro-abortion troll such as yourself must admit that a woman deserves the physician, not the assistant, if she starts to go south on the table.
Or do you hate the women as well?
LizFromNebraska, science tells us that a fetus is part of the human species. It also tells us that a fetus has it’s own DNA. It doesn’t tell us that it is a ‘baby’. That is the subjective interpretation and application of language.
Your analogy regarding “it makes them slaves to men, more and more. Men use women for sex and then when a woman becomes pregnant, they tell the woman to “take care of it” or “get rid of it”.” – is misrepresentative of the reality. Yes, there are some ‘neanderthal’ types who behave that way. The vast majority do not. Your claim is no more accurate and widely applicable than would be ‘all priests are paedophiles’.
Dr. Nadal, pot, kettle, black – I find that you perpetrate “medical data so willfully ignored, savaged and shredded”.
You are in no position to tell me what I deserve.
Cranium, that’s because:
A. You don’t know what you’re talking about, and,
B. Because you are so committed to the slaughter of babies that you can’t see straight.
Even the Brinton Gang at NCI continue to publish the link between abortion and breast cancer. They at least do honest science. They just lie through their teeth to the public. So you see Cranium, the Brinton Gang and I all understand the literature–THEIR literature-in the same way.
You are the outlier here. In your craven ignorance all you have to fall back on is asserting, in your willful ignorance, that I can’t read. Remember, I thought the pro-lifers, who were telling me of an ABC link, were loons. I thought it sounded absurd and only read the literature with the expectation that I could show them where they were wrong and get them off my back.
So I came at the literature expecting to find nothing there. Give up. You’re outgunned here.
cranium
November 1st, 2010 at 7:59 pm
And what do you personally lose over someone else having the right to have an abortion?
One fourth of my generation.
You see, I was born after Roe. If my mother had been pro-choice and hadn’t wanted me, I might not have been born at all. As it is, for every three people in my life, in my circle, that I know, one person is aborted. I may not have liked all of these people. In fact, maybe some of them would be people I can’t stand now.
I shouldn’t have to wonder. I should know. They should be alive to be those people, whether I liked them or not. And now I have spaces in my life that those people ought to be fitting into. That’s what I loose.
“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
And what do you personally lose over someone else having the right to have an abortion?
Keli already said it best. “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Abortion is a huge example of injustice.
It would be like introducing legislative changes which resulted in marriage being returned to it’s historical origins.
I would LOVE to meet your ex-wife. I have a feeling that she and I would have a lot in common and could share some great stories about our former marriages.
From Dr. Nadal’s blog, 11 September 2010:
“But choosing Christian civilization will require more than defeating the enemy wherever he hides and plots. Islam is overtaking Christianity in Europe simply because they are having large families and Christians are contraceiving and aborting themselves out of existence. France, Italy and Spain are projected to have Muslim majorities by the middle of this century. If radical Islam is patient, they will win through attrition. We can’t very well blame them for having families as we commit civilizational suicide. Contraception, abortion, passive and active euthanasia, healthcare rationing, embryolethal research; ours isn’t such a pretty track record either. In the interim, I am left with the memories of that terrible day nine years ago and its aftermath. They are memories that are a looking glass into the future if we do not come to our senses and turn from our own death cult a la Margaret Sanger, who is Catholicism’s Osama bin Laden.”
Message is loud and clear: the female body must serve as the battleground in this crusade against Islam, 2.0 Sound the battle cry! Sabotage the EC, burn the condoms! Even the reproductive desires of married women must be subordinated to the interests of the Christian State.
I’d love to see this Manichean, pro-natalist ideology actually implemented. I suppose Personhood 62 is a start. What’s next? Should the country reward women who give birth to the most children, like Ceausescu’s “Heroine Mothers”? Would you assist in the monitering of women’s menstrual cycles, Dr. Nadal, to make sure those who get pregnant stay pregnant? What would state anti-contraception propaganda look like? And would hardline pro-lifers be willing to convert their CPCs into orphanages for all those children gallantly saved from the toxicity of the Pill/selfish anti-life desires of Mommy/hands of the abortionist? Cighid seems to be a model worth emulating…
And every time my parents use a condom, Keli Hu, I lose out on a potential brother or sister. Boohoo.
Dr. Nadal:
1. so you say, yet I have demonstrated on previous threads that your asserted ABC links have been fundamentally refuted.
2. and you appear to be blinded by some sort of ….light.
Come on, is it craven ignorance or wilfull ignorance, make up your mind.
I did not assert that you can’t read. Maybe there are things that you ‘don’t’ read. But that’s different.
What I object to is your words, your writing. They are what is untrue.
“Give up. You’re outgunned here.” – more wishful thinking! My we are busy today.
Keli Hu, I am quite sure that any ‘rational psychologist’* would find your words very interesting. To miss something that never was. To dream and imagine scenarios based on such a premise. The old ’empty chairs in the classroom’ theory. You can’t lose what you never had.
If your mother had not wanted you you would have no awareness of it. None.
Praxedes, I see much more injustice in other places and in other guises than abortion.
My ex-wife is an extremely bitter and hate filled person, would you like to have that in common with her? She is also pro-choice. Very.
* – there are those who claim that this term is an oxymoron :-)
And every time my parents use a condom, Keli Hu, I lose out on a potential brother or sister. Boohoo.
Only if your mother is actually fertile at that time.
Oh, and btw, you pretend not to know this, but killing someone who is already living is different than preventing conception in the first place.
Megan:
“Message is loud and clear: the female body must serve as the battleground in this crusade against Islam, 2.0 Sound the battle cry! Sabotage the EC, burn the condoms! Even the reproductive desires of married women must be subordinated to the interests of the Christian State. ”
Not so! No one is saying that. However, your feminist sisters in Europe are closer to the day when they will wake up and find themselves under Sharia law. All of the warnings about the decline of the Christian west will come home to roost when the overwhelming demographics cause a shift from self governance to that of strict Islamic based laws. You talk about “subordinated to the interests of the Christian State”. How do you think you would like being mere property? That is the status of women under Islamic law.
We ought to be on our knees thanking God that we were born in a country that has at least a semblance of Christianity remaining.
Are you aware of the latest developments in France, the Netherlands and Germany Jerry?
Cranium, why should Charles Manson go to jail for killing people and not women who murder their own kids or “foetuses”?
(or what ever you wish to call a small person, living inside their stomach.)
And when do you think a child should gain the protection of the Law?
After it is born?
When it turns 21? Or when it is old enough to pay taxes?
And furthermore, would it be allright with you if someone got your mothers permission to kill you?
Or is abortion just ok when you are not the one being aborted?
If the Foetus wished to end its own life, it could do so by strangeling itself with the umbillical-chord.
That would be a “Choice”.
But if the mother gets to choose death for you, it is not a choice, now is it?
Calling the Pro-Murder people “Pro-Choice” is the greatest lie in history. Even their name is lie.
The only reason women are against criminalization of abortion, is because if abortion becomes a crime;
They cannot be whores no more.
Simple as that.
Gabriel, we don’t condemn women who have had abortions here, or refer to them as whores. You’re not being helpful.
Gabriel,
I’m a post abortive mom. I have been called a whore more times than I can count.
I am not a whore.
A woman does not get pregnant alone.
On the idea of empowering women…..last Friday, Oct 29, 2010, I observed a young woman dodging her male person with her, as he shouted: We are here (at Planned Parenthood in Forest Park and Boyle, St. Louis, MO), so come on and get IN there!. Finally, dishelved hair, visibly pregnant and not happy, she went with him into the killing site.
This is empowering women….hmmmm, well…..he was just….you see….they agreed at home…she would…and he would pay…and they could return to their ‘life’ as before.
Research has shown that 83% of women seeking an abortion are being forced to abort the child. Well, it empowers the woman because she has a choice to abort. Oh, really, how about a choice to choose adoption! Planned Parenthood does not stick to the subject and show a cause and effect here….they are as slippery as satan….oh, I said it, satan, evil….killing vulnerable life. How odd to kill one’s own life.
No post-abortive women I have talked to has ever, ever, ever invited me to a party to celebrate her abortion(s). This most common USA surgery and women and men and families do not celebrate it. Or ever introduced me to her abortionist. How odd…..empower women….no denying women freedom, enslaving women. And charging them $500. to do so.
It is murder and should be treated as such.
This is a great article on what Planned Parenthood is doing. There is more:
One out of every 10 college women have an abortion. Once this last kill site closes in St. Louis, MO, we do the same thing we do now at Planned Parenthood…change of place only…mission is the same. Educate not terminate. We go to college and colleges.
The schools are not teaching life, someone has to do it.
I do not hear a cry of dispair from NOW or other liberal women’s organization of unfair that so many girl babies are aborted or that women mourn for decades after their abortion. Patricia Neal got her healing from her abortion just before she recently died.
The most commonly performed surgery in the USA…land of the free and home of the brave.
Good topic for an essay!
In St. Louis, MO Patricia
Insanity. That is all it is. It must stop, (say that 100 times and then volunteer if you bvelieve in what you just said!)
How could I even compare 9 months of my life with the entire life of another human? How can there be any choice in the matter? Could I be that selfish? Is there really no other option? As women , I think we all need to ask ourselves these questions. This is not a judgment on any women who have been coerced or mislead into obtaining abortions. We must not ever depend on the law or secular society to tell us what is right, what is good. WE must ensure that OUR consciences are well-formed. Only then can a right course be determined. It surely will not lead us to end another’s life.
Megan
November 1st, 2010 at 10:32 pm
I’m just going to say “Straw man.” That’s all the response called for to that post. Zero in on what’s actually being discussed here and try again.
WE need to be out there offering desperate women in their time of need a different option! It is up to us to offer them a free pregnancy test, a free ultrasound and all of the support and help, referrals for adoption, and material goods we can!!
It is up to us to shine a light into the darkness of abortion and offer women hope.
Planned Parenthood isn’t going to do it.
I have had enough of this. Since abortion is murder, cut the political correctness and point out the guilty ones.
“We do not condemn post-abortive mothers” Well, I do.
If you are part of a plot to commit murder, or a murderess yourself and choose to kill your kids, guess what!
you should go to jail like anyone else. Mothers included. The Pro-Lifers must grow up and take a real stand. And stop with these ridicolous names both sides have chosen for them selves.
I my self AM NOT “Pro-Life”.
I AM ANTI-MURDER, BECAUSE MURDER/ABORTION IS A VIOLATION OF THE 6TH COMMANDMENT.
NOTHING ELSE.
It`s got nothing to do with a “baby`s right to live.”
GOD HAS BANNED YOU FROM COMMITING MURDER.
AN “ABORTION” IS A VIOLATION OF THE 6TH COMMANDMENT.
IT IS THAT SIMPLE.
“We do not condemn post-abortive mothers” Well, I do.
says GABRIEL
Ah, can you feel the love? Such grace for women that regret their abortions and would do anything to go back and make it right!
Nobody but NOBODY can condemn me for my abortion. I don’t allow it. God has already forgiven me and set me free. :)
THE ONLY REASON ABORTION IS JUDICIALLY LEGAL IS BECAUSE YOU KEEP INVENTING NEW WORDS.
THESE ARE LIES. A CHILD IS A CHILD. NOT A “FOETUS”
A MURDER IS A MURDER. NOT AN “ABORTION”
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN “ABORTION”.
THERE IS SUCH A THING AS A MURDER. NO MATTER HOW OLD YOU ARE.
END OF STORY.
THERE IS SUCH A THING AS A MURDER.
There is also such a thing as forgiveness. As Abp Chaput once said, mercy is never the work of a coward. God bless you, Carla, for showing us what a living portrait of God’s mercy looks like :)
AS LONG AS WE ARE CLEAR ON ONE POINT, CARLA:
IF GOD FORGAVE YOU, IT WAS FOR KILLING YOUR OWN CHILD.
REMEMBER THAT. YOU DID NOT “HAVE AN ABORTION”.
YOU PAID A GUY 500 USD TO KILL YOUR CHILD.
AND I WONDER: DO YOU THINK OTHER KILLERS SHOULD GET AWAY WITH MURDER TOO?
OR IS IT JUST YOU?
Maybe if Gabriel keeps typing in caps I will start to agree with him?
Funny you pro-lifers balk at this dude’s hard-line stance. This is what a pro-life mindset engenders. The bodies of pregnant women are all potential crime scenes.
And sorry, Keli sweet, but Dr. Nadal’s Catholic, pro-natalist ideology colors all of his “scientific” research. I’m rightfully pointing this out. He said it, not me: we must repopulate the Christian West to win the War Against Islam, no? He has plenty of models to look to if he wants to so strictly curtail reproductive freedom in the name of Christ or the State. Iran, Nazi Germany, Romania, Nicaragua…just a few come that come to mind. The women in these countries are really healthy and happy, too. They love being treated as breeders…
I AM ANTI-MURDER, MEGAN. NOT “PRO-LIFE”.
Like I don’t remember that my daughter was killed in my abortion?! What do you think God has forgiven me for, GABRIEL?
There is nothing I need to get clear with you on, GABRIEL.
Get behind me satan.
In order to be convicted of murder, you have to have knowingly ended the life of a human being with malice aforethought. Women and girls who believe the lie that an unborn child isn’t a human being don’t meet the qualifications – if you destroy something that you were told wasn’t a human being (by a doctor, no less), you’re missing both the “knowingly” and “malice aforethought” aspects.
Once it becomes common and widely accepted knowledge that unborn children are indeed full human beings, there might be a case for convicting women who have abortions. We’re not at that point. We’re at the point where there are pro-choicers who try to deny that a fetus is even alive.
Gabriel, make another comment to harass ANY post-abortive woman on this site, and you’ll be banned. Read the rules and follow them or don’t comment.
YOU THINK I WILL BE SILENCED FROM PROTECTING UNBORN CHILDREN BY YOUR THREATS KEL?
THINK AGAIN. I CARE NOTHING FOR THE KILLERS. ONLY THEIR VICTIMS.
DURING THE WAR, IT WAS JUDICIALLY LEGAL TO KILL JEWS IN GERMANY. BECAUSE NO-ONE SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE KILLERS.
GO AHAED KEL. BAN ME ALL YOU WANT.
YOU STOP KILLING YOUR KIDS. AND I WILL STOP HURTING YOUR FEELINGS.
Hi Gabriel.
I’d like to respond to you, but I”m not entirely sure what thesis you are putting forward. Could you sum up the main point that you would like us to consider in maybe a sentence or two? Thanks, God love you.
ABORTION IS MURDER AND SHOULD BE PUNISHED ACCORDINGLY.
Cranium, here are the things that make me believe that a fetus is the child of the pregnant women.
1. The fetus has biological human parentage, one of which is the pregnant women, so it is therefore the only thing that would have biological human parentage would be biologically her human child
2. Humans reproduce sexually. The fetus has been conceived by the reproductive cells of two humans-it is therefore the offspring of whoever cells they were.
3. This creature is biologically human therefore it is a mammal. The offspring of humans gestate in their mother’s wombs, like mammals. Pieces of my own body do not gestate, my offspring does. This is known as pregnancy.
Science tells us that the being in question is the offspring of the pregnant women. Common sense, not subjectivism, tells me that biological offspring is the exact same thing as a biological child. If I am being subjective to equate the two, perhaps you could tell me the objective discrepancy between the two nouns. (?)
Okay, so the offspring is not yet a born infant, but even though I am an adult now and not a baby, I am still the child of my biological mother, something which does not alter with my age, but came about with my conception with her genetic material and will be a fact for the rest of my life, even if I were adopted. Just like you can’t grow into membership of a species, neither can you grow into a position of having biological parents if you don’t have any. Those things are nature based.
YOU THINK I WILL BE SILENCED FROM PROTECTING UNBORN CHILDREN BY YOUR THREATS KEL?
THINK AGAIN.
What I am asking is for you to be respectful of others in conversation, whether they have committed murder by abortion or whether they have committed murder by the use of hateful words. If you cannot do that, then according to the rules of this particular site, you will no longer be allowed to comment here. Thanks in advance for your understanding.
Y’know, if I were of a more suspicious mind, I’d start wondering if terrorists had finally succeeded in poisoning the USA water supply with some sort of crazy-making chemical; where on earth are all these unhinged people coming from? First: Joan, cranium and Biggz move in under Jill’s bridge; then Ted Shulman appears (masquerading as “Nick”) and starts making threatening and psychotic rumblings; then Megan goes off the deep end; then Gabriel arrives, throws a nutty, and sprays rhetorical bullets in every direction. Wow. Reverse osmosis water for me, for the time being… :)
Megan,
I’m wondering how you would look in a Burkah. The women of Europe are going to find out before this century is over. Perhaps you would care to join them.
You’re extremely crass, so I won’t waste civility on you. You should not use your womb in the service of advancing civilization, because you’ve demonstrated an appalling lack of it here. However, for the rest of the world anxiously eyeing the rising tide of Islamic fundamentalism, yes, the womb is an essential component of that war. The feminists in Europe will be the first targets under the Caliphate Renaissance.
We can continue to contraceive and abort ourselves into oblivion, or we can get busy making large families and raising them with an appreciation of the greatness of Judeao-Christian Western Civilization. It’s really that simple.
I support large families. I am Catholic and I believe the teachings of this Church because I believe everything Jesus, its leader said and did. It makes my life easier when I can make decisions according to my love for this Man….this God who became Man.
I would die for this Faith as many others have done. Easy to say; I hope I follow through!
Patricia in St. Louis, MO
“The women of Europe are going to find out before this century is over” – so you’re not aware of what’s happening in parts of Europe either Dr. Nadal?
“You should not use your womb in the service of advancing civilization, because you’ve demonstrated an appalling lack of it here” – so what? Are you suggesting she abort? What an appalling statement!
Anyone aware of the notorious Dave Mebus, DM, various other pseudonyms? Gabriel seems like either a copy or a weakened version of DM.
Right Dr. Nadal. The Muslim law student I live next to is operating under some kind of false consciousness because she wears a veil, and yet a good Catholic woman like our dear poster Patricia Cornell is not. Maybe you should take a basic anthropology course and figure out that you can’t subsume all 1.57 billion practitioners of the Muslim faith under the category of “fundamentalist,” as you seem to suggest is possible. You would also hope that Catholic cleric-sex offenders don’t become symbolic of the entire faith and its millions of believers, no? Maybe you should also brush up on a recent history of the Middle East, find out why so many young men and women have become so disaffected and angry at the US. Might have something to do with our less-than-scrupulous foreign policy record…but nah, let’s ignore the nuances that could actually help us win a war against a fundamentalist subgroup and demonize a faith to which a quarter of the world’s population belong.
I do not like your politics, Dr. Nadal, and I take offense at your efforts to conscript women into the service of “repopulating the Christian West.” You harness this ethnocentric, patriarchal ideology to the detriment of your credibility as a scientist. Really, condoms don’t help prevent sexually transmitted infections? Abstinence education has proven effective? Married women should only practice NFP?
Megan,
Grow up dear. Use your uterus. Don’t use your uterus. Dig through my blog for unrelated material to derail threads. Act irrational. I really don’t care what a pro-abort troll has to say about me, or what you do with your life. I’m in a different phase of life now and folks like you and cranium who blather on without ever seriously addressing the substance of a discussion simply prove yourselves unworthy of people’s time and attention. You never act honestly or respectfully.
Grow up and get well soon.
I find your response to Megan borders on ‘shooting the messenger’ Dr. Nadal. You simply deride her because you have neither the factual foundation or the willingness to confront the facts she has provided.
You appear to be displaying the same archetypal patriarchal approach as the fundamentalists of other faiths and creeds in the language you are using.
I find your attitude and approach significantly inappropriate for someone of your intelligence.
My friends will verify I am hardly a poster! Cranium and Megan: you are not examining what is being said. Scientists have proof that abortion causes cancer…breast and cervical and other as well. Do you want specific websites…that you cannot do a Google search or go to the ABC Link website?
Of course abstinence works! No sex means no diseases. Do a Google search for
Uganda abstinence lower rate of HIV. One country reversed their AIDS cases from double digit to one digit.
Please either become educated or leave this blog.
You are both rude and are spreading your lack of education all over the screen. A real waste of our time and yours as well. If you prefer to attack people, you have to put up with our responses telling you to either learn or leave…… Patricia in St. Louis, MO
Well said Patricia. These trolls are here only to derail threads ad really don’t care for, or seem to be capable of honest dialogue.
I think you’re a bit late to the debate Patricia. On a number of threads I have provided independent sources (various national cancer councils etc) which have concluded that there is no link between abortion and increased breast cancer rates. These are current and unbiased studies and reports. The opposing view provides outdated, refuted and biased sources.
Yes abstinence works while it is practiced. Pity the failure rate of abstinence itself is so high, thus exposing people to greater risks.
Yep, Uganda. The country which now ‘outs’ gays on the front page of its newspapers while trying to introduce the death penalty for gays. Oh and who was it that visted Uganda and did a bit of preaching and propagandizing?
We are no more guilty of attacking people than many others here Patricia. What we attack is misinformation and misrepresentation. It is through being educated that we are here doing so. What we are not, is indoctrinated.
So attack all you want, but I respectfully suggest you may have to make a bit more effort than throw “learn or leave” at people….. cranium on our planet earth.
Ah, more shoot the messenger Dr. Nadal?
Patricia,
You see, on previous threads the troll cranium has accused me of presenting outdated papers, but if you go to my blog, you’ll see papers from 2009 and 2010. I told this to the liar called cranium, but pro-aborts ignore the truth and shout their lies all the louder, as you’re seeing here.
Cranium only has lies and distortions, because that’s what evil people who push for the slaughter of innocents are all about.
What’s the substance of discussion? The fact that you employ religious ideology in the name of science?
Yes but how many of those articles are directly related to current studies regarding the alleged ABC link Dr. Nadal?
Your blog seems to have become quite broad in its scope of topics lately. Quite interesting.
I am not evil, nor do I push for the slaughter of innocents – your “Hey, you, messenger, BANG” responses are getting tiresome.
Cranium,
My blog has always been broad in scope. Did you bother to look at the Categories window? There are 36 Categories under which I have written. Again, a misrepresentation by you. Or are you lazy and don’t read? You certainly have little facility with accuracy or truth.
Finally, I don’t write for trolls. I heed Jesus’ advice not to throw my pearls before swine. You aren’t a messenger. You’re a liar.
The recent departure from your earlier claimed run of alleged ABC link articles to a string of completely unrelated articles is what piqued my curiosity Dr. Nadal. I only mentioned it in passing, I did not spurt criticism about it. Yes, I have seen your categories. Not much on marriage and nothing I have spotted about homosexuality (apart from your pieces on HIV/AIDs, which seem to be religious in nature rather than scientific – as were the ones on marriage).
A swine and a liar? My word, I just do not know what to say! I’m so offended I might just wake up with leprosy or something tomorrow ;-)
CONGRATULATIONS TO THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE ASKED GOD`S FORGIVENESS, AND LOVE TO CARLA : WHOM HAVE RECEIVED THE MERCY OF THE LAMB.
FOR THE REST OF YOU, GOOD LUCK.
AND BY THE WAY, KEL; “POLITENESS” IS NOT REALLY MY THING.
THIS IS:
http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/resources/gods-wrath-vengeance-is-mine-i-will-repay-says-the-lord
Gerard: I read your comment to me…thank you for that.
The facts of the ABC Link ae all over, one country and then another and then another. People are the same all over. Their bodies react to abortion in similar ways. Remove a living baby and the woman’s hormones go crazy..no matter where on earth she lives.
Show me one man or woman who tells me the joys of her abortion…..lots of people tell of having a tooth that was a real bother removed and are happy.
Cranium, your assignment is to produce current studies of the ABC Link….One week and report back to this blog. Patricia in St. Louis, MO
Gabriel
ALL CAPS is considered SHOUTING in the online world. You sound like another poster, named Joe, whose posts made it sound like he would jail most if not all post abortive mothers. The ones who should be jailed are the abortionists, they are the ones with the blood on their hands day after day. Many women, such as Carla, regret their abortions and have received GOD’s Forgiveness and Mercy. You are in no position to judge the state of their Salvation, that is GOD’s duty and God’s alone.
JOE FOR PRESIDENT.
G.A.AA
Oy, vey. All right… one more time (at least):
In this case, please make the last word plural!
Gotcha Paladin.
Perhaps I should loan this site my pet Rancor that eats Trolls. *innocent*
Liz: (LOL!) I’ll chip in to buy it a new collar, if you do…
AND BY THE WAY, KEL; “POLITENESS” IS NOT REALLY MY THING.
Fine by me. You just won’t be able to comment here if you can’t follow the rules like everyone else. Have a great day! :)
Well, http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/download/Brind_Dolle_2009_analysis.PDF does have current data on the ABC Link, Dr. Nadal is so very correct in this respect. In fact, it was one of the top three choices in my Google search. Goody, goody, life wins once again.
Since I have not seen Cranium or Megan’s homework, I will not assume they have recent data negating the ABC Link. I am praying for Cranium and Megan and the rest of us on this blog.
Saturday, a bunch of my friends will go to the Banned Parenthood site on Forest Park and Boyle streest in St. Louis, MO downarea area. You are all invited to be with us. We will pray the Rosary and say the Divine Mercy Chaplet. Pretty radical to some….it is working as women are coming away from the site telling us they changed their minds!
6:30 AM Saturday and perhaps return after 8 AM Catholic Mass for handing out of literature of Options…..so women have a choice. 83% of women havng an abortion are forced into this situation by husband, friend, parents, etc. http://www.theunchoice.com
Beautiful words I love to hear. And I will pray for Cranium and Megan and all the rest of us, for sure. Patricia in St. Louis, MO
In St. Louis, MO
“Since I have not seen Cranium or Megan’s homework, I will not assume they have recent data negating the ABC Link” – oh how very convenient for you. A good dose of fingers in ears and “lalalalalala” is sooo convincing. If you don’t want to travel back a few threads to find the truth that’s up to you.
In the future you might like to identify, peruse and cite links which are unbiased. It takes a little more effort than picking the first three on google but there you go.
And for those of you may be interested, I didn’t find any signs of leprosy this morning so I guess Dr. Nadal’s offending of me was …. just offensive? :-)
Hi Patricia,
The biology behind breast cancer is extremely complicated. Interaction among genetics, environment and lifestyle factors can impact a woman’s risk of disease. It should be noted that scientists have not only found mixed results on the extent of the association between breast cancer and abortion, but also between breast cancer and supposedly protective factors like breastfeeding. There are still a lot of unknowns even with biological factors that seem to “make sense.”
Here are some studies to ponder:
1. Reeves et al. (2006). Breast cancer risk in relation to abortion: Results from the EPIC study.
-267,261 European women recruited in a prospective cohort study. Researchers controlled for menopause, education level, smoking status, body mass index, and alcohol intake. The relative risk in women who had induced abortions was no higher than women who had not had induced abortions. Breast cancer risk was found to be slightly higher in women who had had two or more miscarriages.
2. Friedman et al. (2006). Spontaneous and therapeutic abortions and the risk of breast cancer among BRCA mutation carriers.
-Matched case control study w/ 1,878 BRCA mutation carriers, 950 BRCA2 mutation carriers and 657 related non-carrier controls. BRCA1/2=risk factors for breast cancer (etiology still not fully understood). Study found no link between induced abortion and breast cancer risk. To the contrary, researchers found that having two or more induced abortions and being a BRCA2 gene carrier actually DECREASED a woman’s risk of breast cancer. However, unlike JStanek, I won’t go shouting this putative new link from the rooftops because the sample size was small, and there are no other studies as of yet to confirm this association. More research needs to be done.
3. Xing et al. (2010). A case-control study of reproductive factors associated with subtypes of breast cancer in Northeast China.
-1,417 study participants. Found an association between one subtype of breast cancer, Luminal A, and induced abortion (Odds Ratio 1.26, CI: 1.02-1.57). This is definitely something to look into–there needs to be more research into the impact of reproductive factors on specific types of breast cancer. However, the study researchers combined postmenopausal women and women who underwent hysterectomies/oophorectomies. These are two procedures that can help prevent breast cancer, and IUDS and sterilization are the two most common forms of birth control subsidized by the Chinese state. This is a red flag. Is the risk of induced abortion on Luminal A magnified if more members of the control group have had their ovaries removed?
To conclude:
The link is still inconclusive. These studies point to some important new areas for research: abortion risk for specific types of breast cancer, and the impact of genetic factors on cancer risk. Tesearchers should not ignore places that indicate an increased risk, especially when the study’s methodology is solid. However, it is just as intellectually dishonest as the Abortion-Breast Cancer coalition saying that abortion is the NUMBER ONE preventable risk factor for breast cancer.
As far as prevention goes, women would serve themselves well by eating healthy foods, exercising, getting genetic testing for BRCA gene mutations, having their children before age 40, and getting their ovaries removed when they’re done childbearing. I’d say avoiding Kentucky Fried Chicken is probably the easiest preventive measure, though :)
and getting their ovaries removed when they’re done childbearing.
Good Lord Megan what in the world are you talking about???
I will keep my 45 year old ovaries thankyouverymuch. Why? Um because they continue to release hormones THAT I NEED!!
Oh, and women should NOT get abortions. You forgot that one.
Continue arguing
Dear Dr….ooops Megan: Try this link…..http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/index/
Rest of you bloggers….read it as well. Sounds like well-documented and extensive research to me. 30 Years ago the WHO spoke of this link…..did anyone listen. Yes, probably only the Catholic Church who came out for having babies and not contracepting, having babies and not aborting.
It makes sense….as this website above explains…abortion is not like removing a tooth. Abortion involves not only removing a living person from a living person, it also messes up the hormone levels. Now, that is the topic for an person expert in hormones.
An interesting note. Both Dr. Bernard Nathanson and Abby Johnson both converted to the pro-life side upon seeing a sonagram of the baby flailing its little arms around inside the womb, attempting to avoid the instruments of torture.
Funny, not so funny; you never hear of a strong pro-life person going to the pro-choice* side of the debate. People go from bad to good, USUALLY and not good to bad, at least on this topic. Just thought I would throw in some interesting bits of information….for you all to chew on!! Good website http://www.theunchoice.com Patricia in St. Louis, MO
Patricia, like I said earlier, try to find unbiased sites which feature current independent studies. The link you have provided does not meet this criteria. Not by a long shot.
“30 Years ago the WHO spoke of this link…..did anyone listen.” – yes they did Patricia. Lots of scientists conducted studies and tests and delivered reports. They still do. They refuted the ABC link. It has been discredited.
Ha, you caught that one, Carla. Oophorectomy: a known preventive measure, but not something I’d actively encourage women to undergo. You’re right. Invasive surgery should be avoided if at all possible, hence the promotion of healthy eating and safe(r) sex.
Thanks for the great website Patricia! Great information that we all need to spread far and wide (especially to our prolife and proabort politicians)!
Hi again Patricia,
Thank you for berating me for not “having done my homework” and then discounting studies published in peer-reviewed journals. If you had read my post, though, you would have seen that we actually agree on one thing: the need for scientists to rigorously analyze the link between abortion and breast cancer. But bleating over and over that “abortion causes breast cancer!” doesn’t do any good.
Scientists on both sides of this debate are too eager to close the book on something they see as definitive. But bing too eager to find or disprove a link means that researchers aren’t asking crucial questions about why studies are so inconclusive. Are these scientists working in different populations, using different methodologies, analyzing different variables, or looking at different causal mechanisms?
If there IS a link between abortion and breast cancer, then the devil most likely lies in the details. As we saw in the study conducted in China, induced abortion is linked with only one type of breast cancer. This statement isn’t meant to minimize this very possible correlation, but to generate more questions: why this particular type of breast cancer? What biological pathway is at work here? Can this potential association tell us anything about how breast cancer works in the body? More productive than screeching “Abortion causes breast cancer!” or “Abortion doesn’t cause breast cancer!”
Hello, Patricia:
The ABC-Breast Cancer website you posted says, “Abortion is the most preventable risk factor for cancer.”
Let’s ignore the fact that this is a subjective statement (most preventable??) wrapped up in scientific language. Why does this website, a supposed authority on the abortion-breast cancer risk, need to minimize other HUGELY prevantable risk factors? A high-fat diet, unhealthy body weight, sedentary lifestyle,consumption of alcohol–all easy ways to mimimize one’s risk. Why does this website only focus on abortion?
“Thanks for the great website Patricia! Great information that we all need to spread far and wide (especially to our prolife and proabort politicians)!” – how amusing.
You do realize that disseminating inaccurate information will eventually damage your cause?
THANKS KEL!
I will have a great day.
Unless my mother kills me and walks away, free of charge that is.
But that is not very likely, as she would never violate the 6th commandment.
Wich is why I am alive in the first place, and able to “have a day” at all.
So to all of you who are still alive today, because your mothers did not murder you and then got away with it, free of charges, have great days you too!
And may God allmighty protect you from your mothers.
G.
And by the way “Cranium”…
not everyone here is bright enough to understand what a “cranium”, or “skull” symbolizes.
So for the future, why don`t you come clean and use your old name; “DEATH”?
You are too old to play with words now, “Cranium”,
are you not?
And by the way, how do you like the apocalypse so far?
Is it all you hoped it would be?
Funny, isn`t it people? That the 4th rider of the apocalypse is an active pro-choice blogger. Should not really come as a surprise though.
Well, well do not forget to feed that horse of yours, now “Cranium”.
It does look a little pale.
Later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cranium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Apocalypse#Pale_Horse
Gabriel… seriously: I’m not sure if you realize it, but your “intensity” (I’m trying hard not to say “hysteria”) is so… well… frenetic that you’re driving away anyone who might possibly listen to you. Evangelists need to be bold and uncompromising in their delivery of the Gospel message; that’s beyond all sane question. But we are not free simply to choose any method of delivery we like. When someone bursts into the room, screaming, and unleashing a flame-thrower in all directions (apparently heedless of choice of target), people won’t listen to you: they’ll either fight you, or they’ll run away.
Is there *any* chance that you could take a few thousand slow breaths, and calm down? I completely understand how the culture of death can drive us half-mad with its smiling promotion of this bloodbath that we see around us. But this is why we need Divine Strength to live in this world, and to deliver the Message as He (Jesus) wants us to deliver it: by hating the sin, while loving the sinner (and acting accordingly). This doesn’t mean that we can’t take people to task and/or rebuke them (perhaps very sternly) for bad behaviour (and calling bad behaviour what it is, instead of minimizing it), or even break off all contact with them (temporarily or permanently) if they simply refuse to listen to reaso;, but never fall into the hatred trap. Pray for them, and pray for the grace to resist pride. Trust me… I speak from experience.
Gabriel said what I only thought…….
start
Is it all you hoped it would be?
Funny, isn`t it people? That the 4th rider of the apocalypse is an active pro-choice blogger. Should not really come as a surprise though.
Well, well do not forget to feed that horse of yours, now “Cranium”.
It does look a little pale.
Later. end
I pray for everyone on this blog….
Patricia,
We provided you with scientific research, you responded with typical pro-life ideology. Your arguments are baselses unless you can come up with some unbiased research.
Love,
Megan
Isn’t it funny how scientists who have pro-choice ideologies are somehow “unbiased” but those who are pro-life are “biased?” How does that work, exactly? :D
You do realize that everyone has his/her own ideology, right? Can you prove, Megan, that pro-lifers who are scientists and researchers falsify their research?
I am a new person on this website, however, I have given information of a scientific kind for people who want to read and decide. I can do not other than that. Gerard Nadal has also provided scientific data related to the ABC Link.
I have never, in my short time on this blog, heard a kind word offered to Nadal by Megan or Cranium…thanks, I will that up…how can that be scientific…..but that is not proof..etc..
anything that lets people on this blog know you are genuinely interested in a discussion on the ABC Link.
Wonder why the suggested sites will just dry up and then no more? Oh, there are lots more to be had out there. But they will not be read on this blog anymore.
Because you both ridicule and make snide remarks and demean any attempt of anyone on this blog to provide information. Makes me wonder the reason you two still blog here….hmmmmmm…..must be known only to you and to God. God bless both of you.
Patricia n ST. Luis, MO
Kel:
The studies I posted were neither pro-life nor pro-choice. By the way, I didn’t cull the scientific literature for studies refuting the link. The ones I posted all demonstrated varying degrees of association (from none to moderate) between abortion and specific types of breast cancer. My point is that by trying to force (or not force) an association between abortion and all types of breast cancer, without considering other factors, the important nuances get missed.
Patricia: That website is biased. It claims that abortion is the most preventable cause of breast cancer, which is unfounded. There are other, more well-established risk factors, like drinking lots of alcohol or experiencing menarche at an early age.
Why do I have this sneaking suspicion that ‘Patricia’ is a sock puppet and/or concern troll?
“Isn’t it funny how scientists who have pro-choice ideologies are somehow “unbiased” but those who are pro-life are “biased?” How does that work, exactly?” – not quite the case Kel. A number of anti-choicers here cite information from anti-choice sites while us pro-choicers cite information from unbiased and independent sites. They also cite information which is outdated or refuted.