Jivin J’s Life Links 3-23-11
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- SD Gov. Dennis Daugaard has signed a bill to require women seeking abortions to wait 72 hours and get counseling at a pregnancy center. The law takes effect July 1. The ACLU and Planned Parenthood in SD plan to file a lawsuit against the law.
- The DE House passed legislation which is supposedly designed to allow abortion clinics to be inspected but the Democratic sponsors didn’t want abortion mentioned in the legislation. Planned Parenthood of DE supports the legislation:
House Minority Leader Greg Lavelle sought to add language to make it clear that abortion clinics would be subject to inspections. He noted the bill specifically singles out podiatrists and dentists as falling under the proposed regulations.
“We’re here for a reason and it’s not podiatry, it’s not dentistry,” said Lavelle, R–Sharpley. “It’s because of the lack of oversight [of abortion clinics].”
- Various news outlets are reporting Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown opposes the defunding of Planned Parenthood. From the part of his statement that is quoted, it’s difficult to tell if he opposes defunding PP or is opposed to completely cutting Title X funding. He’s already been praised by NARAL.
Mar.23, 2011 2:00 pm |
Blogs |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Scott Brown represents Massachusetts. Voters in Massachusetts do not believe in cutting funding to women’s health services in order to appease a small but vocal number of right-wing religious extremists. Since the people here are very, very concerned with popular sentiment towards abortion (at least when it appears to swing in their favor), they should be happy that the citizens of MA are being represented by someone who is responsive to their interests.
Joan, who commented a while back that a Chinese woman who was assaulted by police and forced to experience the murder of her late term pre-born child, is not aware that public sentiment has swung AGAINST abortion and the funding of it with our tax dollars, and the pendulum hasn’t stopped moving yet. Joan is unwilling to acknowledge the truth about how Planned Parenthood really makes its money (abortion) which helps it fulfill its eugenic mission statement. Joan refuses to acknowledge that Margaret Sanger didn’t care a whit about womens health, nor does her progeny, the behemoth that is Planned Parenthood. Joan refuses to acknowledge that 54% of women who procure abortions were using birth control at the time they conceived. Joan refuses to admit that more than 60% of abortions are coerced by boyfriends, husbands, employers, parents, pedophiles, and pimps. And finally Joan refuses to believe that a woman’s fertility does not and should not make her less equal in the workplace and society than a man, and that destroying her natural reproductive activity does not empower her nor does it empower women as a whole.
And, there is not a Planned Parenthood office in all of these United States that even owns a mammogram machine.
Abortion is a “health service”? Yeah, right. And exactly HOW does it improve woman’s health?
I have no problem with funding health services, as long as they actually lead to improved health. As it is, I don’t see why taxpayers money should go to support other people’s sex lives. It’s time pro-choicers owned up to their own ideology – “My body. My choice. My money.”
Oh, I meant to add that Joan commented that the Chinese woman “got what she deserved” because “she knew the law.” I made the sentence to short, oops.
I’m Christian and believe that we account for ourselves on our Judgement day, whether we experience judgement one at a time, or whether judgement occurs to all simultaneously. Joan will have to answer for every single letter, every single syllable. ,
Joan refuses to admit that more than 60% of abortions are coerced by boyfriends, husbands, employers, parents, pedophiles, and pimps.
Source? And not a “pro-life” source but one that reports straight out stats without deference to a particular agenda.
As it is, I don’t see why taxpayers money should go to support other people’s sex lives.
So your tax dollars shouldn’t provide funding for pap smears, STD testing, and other cancer screenings for women whose sex is within the parameters of marriage?
Joan refuses to acknowledge that Margaret Sanger didn’t care a whit about womens health, nor does her progeny,
Dr. Martin Luther King supported Planned Parenthood. (Right, I know, that’s a pro-abort lie….) Margaret Sanger saw the correlation between poverty and excess fertility. She also saw that disabled babies (remember, we’re talking early 20th century when there were no social servies) had a dismal chance of a quality of life. She realized that those who were comfortable members of the middle class controlled their fertility. She worked with WEB Dubois to enable African American women (who were the “breeders” in the slave culture) to be able to access birth control. She is a hero to those who value reproductive choice. Thanks to Ms. Sanger, poor women have been able to escape a life of poverty by being able to control when they reproduce. And that goes for the rest of us who reject the idea of women as brood mares.
Ta Nahisi Coates has an interesting article which debunks the slavery/abortion connection.
“The Unbearable Whiteness of Pro-Lifers and Pundits”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/01/the-unbearable-whiteness-of-pro-lifers-and-pundits/70002/
Many county health centers already provide those services, plus all the other REAL healthcare that women need. Groping me at the PP clinic by hand does not a mammogram make.
Want to support abortion? Support it yourself with your own money.
CC, you seem to be on the internet a lot. Why don’t YOU find the links? We’ve posted them many times here in the comments on Jill’s site and all you do is find fault with with them or ignore them. If you want to be spoon fed, then wait till you get a couple years older, and if you’re not euthanized by someone younger who shares you’re philosophy about killing off “human weeds” and you get real lucky, someone will spoon feed you then.
For the rest of you: I recommend such sites as Abort73.com, Silentnomoreawareness, and PriestsforLife.org. CC will tell you that they don’t count, but go see for yourself and decide for yourself.
“public sentiment has swung AGAINST abortion” - wishful thinking.
“54% of women who procure abortions were using birth control at the time they conceived” – and what percentage of women not using birth control conceived?
“60% of abortions are coerced by boyfriends, husbands, employers, parents, pedophiles, and pimps” – non-evidential propaganda.
“a woman’s fertility does not and should not make her less equal in the workplace and society than a man, and having control of her natural reproductive activity empowers her and empowers women as a whole.’ – that’s better!
“And exactly HOW does it improve woman’s health?” – easy, it lowers her potential death significantly compared to gestation and delivery.
“As it is, I don’t see why taxpayers money should go to support other people’s sex lives” – so you wouldn’t make any tax claims for dependant children then?
“Joan will have to answer for every single letter, every single syllable.” – subjective opinion.
Brood mares? Would that describe the poor women in India who are brood mares for the white Americans? Or would that describe college girls who are made infertile by the damaging effects of harvesting their eggs? Or would that describe the millions of young women whose uterus’ have been used as ATM’s by Planned Parenthood and the likes of Kermit Gosnell??
Subjective opinion to you, but Joan has many times insisted that she is Catholic herself. You forgot the , I added, which Joan, being such a good Catholic, will recognize from the Gospel as either a yod or a tittle.
Maternal deathrates for mothers who give birth in countries like the US and Britain are at historic lows. However, the leading cause of death for pregnant women is homocide. Some of you might think Scott Peterson is a younger, better looking Dr. Tiller, huh?
Oh, CC, I forgot the brood mares here in the US that are being used by affluent Americans.
You know, kids, abortion fans tout so many wonderful benefits of abortion I can’t help but notice two things:
1) It is the 21st century equivalent of snake oil.
2) It boggles my mind that Harlem doesn’t resemble Scarsdale, what with the 60% abortion rate among African Americans in the NYC area and how swell it is at eradicating poverty.
Hey, do you suppose abortion cures baldness too??
(Fantasy has trouble with the concept of tax break vs taxes being spent. A child is an investment; after two decades these overgrown fetuses start producing, earning, and all that good stuff that helps economies keep running.)
Well, kids, I have to sign off for a while. Good night and have a pleasant tomorrow!
How about going to a regular doctor – so they can check your heart, blood pressure, glucose and other levels for diabetes, check you for asthma, do xrays, set broken bones, etc.
Considering that most PP don’t bother to help women birth their babies – that rules out lots of health care there…anyone can go to an OB/GYN for health – and most towns have low-cost providers or special clinics for that. Health departments also provide testing,and as we saw in the undercover videos, PP routinely sends people there to get some of their testing done.
We don’t need PP – people can medical care elsewhere, and get better service, services and advice. And it was Coretta Scott King who made the acceptance speech – not MLK. His own relatives don’t support PP.
The only thing PP was good for was keeping women away from their parents, helping them get sexually active without really thinking of the consequences. Oh – and ending human life via abortion.
and Reality – just in case you did not know – those contraceptives, if they include artificial hormones (which is the only type of hormonal contraceptives PP handles) is considered a class I carcinogen from the World Health Organization. I know several women personally who had other complications from them: blood clots and lung damage from those clots so one woman now needs a double lung transplant.
so much for health. And some of those contraceptives actually get rendered useless or very less effective when one uses certain antibiotics. When I talked to a young 15-16 year old who just came out with her pills, I asked her if they pointed that out to her – the look of surprise and her answer told me all I needed to know: No.
so much again for health care.
It’s still subjective opinion ninek.
“Maternal deathrates for mothers who give birth in countries like the US and Britain are at historic lows” – but are still significantly higher than the deathrates for women having abortions.
Source? And not a “pro-life” source but one that reports straight out stats without deference to a particular agenda.
ROFL – you mean like Guttmacher? :D I’m betting you have no problem with them, since they are obviously not a “pro-life” source. So they couldn’t possibly be biased, right?
I think I’ve got it: if you’re “pro-life” and you’re also a scientist, you’re automatically biased. If you’re “pro-choice” and a scientist, you couldn’t possibly be biased.
“CC, you seem to be on the internet a lot. Why don’t YOU find the links?”
Is that how this works? You make the dubious-sounding factual claims, then the person questioning the authenticity of those claims has to go find the evidence?
@CC
How on Earth did you go from Amrgaret Sanger supporting birth control to abortin? Sanger was staunchly opposed to abortion, and when MLK received an award from PP in, I believe it was, 1967, PP still– at least outwardly– opposed abortion.
As I said, Scott Brown was elected to oppose ObamaCare and that’s all we can expect from him. The people of Massachusetts vote so foolishly that they probably should have the right to vote revoked from them – at least until they pass a sobriety test. John Adams is most certainly rolling over in his grave. John Adams, the super religious non-denominational Christian who was suspicious of Catholics, now has a bunch of anti-God “Catholic” heretics in charge of his state.
You’re just an over-the-hill fetus. Scram!
Alan, keep talking. It only makes your side look that much more despicable.
Can’t argue so name call and pretend we are not pro-life just so you can sleep better at night.
Hi Ashley,
If you will notice NONE of your comments are being published. There is a reason for this and you know it.
“SD Gov. Dennis Daugaard has signed a billto require women seeking abortions to wait 72 hours and get counseling at a pregnancy center.”
Does he think he is in Europe? Of course in Europe it is actually much much harder to get an abortion. They would consider a bill like that ‘gutting’ the protections they have enacted.
“And exactly HOW does it improve woman’s health?” – easy, it lowers her potential death significantly compared to gestation and delivery.
Significantly? Not. When the risk of something is extremely low, lowering it by an infinitesimal amount is not significant.
Compare that to the huge risk to women’s health by delaying childbirth past about age 20. Breast cancer risk increases from the sky high rate of about 7% to about 14% when women wait till 30 to have the first baby.
Then you have people telling women they can have an abortion and lower their risk of gestational complications from 0.09% to 0.08%. Big deal.
The risk of death from cancer is far higher than the risk of death from childbirth. They just figure the folks that they target are innumerate.
And with all the complications from an abortion (my friend has no natural children now, since her abortion history caused her infertility) – she always told me that if she only knew, she would have never had an abortion!
We’ve had women come to us afterwards – saying that they wished they had not aborted – it has cost them so much – their self-esteem, their health, their mental health, their children.
With anything that is major, there should be a waiting period. Even when you buy a big purchase, there is time to bring it back or void the purchase. But with an abortion – that is something you can not take back, only live with.
When women finally wake up, sometimes 6-8 or 10+ years later, and realize that they were responsible for ending the life of another human, they are in for a huge shock. And it was not a stranger they hurt – but their own flesh and blood, their own children, it is a hard thing to deal with.
Wait? Of course. Look at the living, moving child within you? Yes – that is the truth. Seeing that there is help for your situation? Absolutely. Possibly making the right choice – allowing the child to continue living? Priceless.
King wasn’t a fan of abortion: PP gave him the award, which he did not accept in person, in order to try and legitimize themselves. After all, Margaret didn’t “want it to get out that we are trying to exterminate the negro population.”
Cranky Catholic, I can’t get photos to come up on my comments, can you post that gem with Margaret Sanger addressing all those nice ladies in white hoods?? I’m sure she was only touting her grandma’s crumb cake recipe at the time, natch.
You are wrong hippie. From the data I have seen – independant, consistent and repeated – the fatality rate from abortion is about nine times less than for childbirth. I wouldn’t call that insignificant or infinitesimal.
Reality, is that data from before the discovery of penicillin or after?
It’s recent data John, certainly over the about the past 30 years.
Reality, Is that secret data? No link to back up your absurd claim?
Anyway, even if it were 9x, the rate of maternal death among healthy women is so incredibly low that she is literally more likely to die in a car wreck while pregnant and far more likely to be murdered. So, yes, it is insignificant because the risk is already tiny. Just as absurd as the claim that oral contraceptives reduce risk of ovarian cancer. The risk is so extremely low anyway, it isn’t going to make a difference. However those same pill users dramatically increase their very high breast cancer risk even further when pill use means that their first baby will be born when they are older rather than younger.
The huge health risk is having no children or waiting till age 30 or older. The other risks are tiny. They are measured per 100,000. Breast cancer risk is measured per 100. That is three orders of magnitude difference!!
Go look at the CDC data hippie, or any other independant source. None of it is secret although you may wish it was.
Have you seen the data on ovarian cancer???
The claimed breast cancer link has been discredited.