Pro-life activists crash rally; graphic abortion images “stand with Planned Parenthood”
The photos are priceless. Click all to enlarge.
On March 19, 11 pro-life activists “took Planned Parenthood up on their invitation to stand with them during a 1-1/2 hour rally at Cal Anderson Park in Seattle,” wrote the Herring Family at The Anti-Choice Project blog. “You can imagine their surprise when we joined the crowd carrying 4′ x 3′ pictures of what babies look like as they leave PP.”
Indeed. Why the cover-up? You would think pro-abort supporters who “stand with Planned Parenthood” would embrace all that PP stands for, right? But no….
About the protest Gregg Cunningham of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform noted in an email:
Congressman Pence, who is spearheading the effort to defund PP, says this battle is about abortion, but PP is struggling to make it about PAP smears and breast exams.
Then our photos show up and not only change the subject back to abortion but worse, force PP to debate baby-killing instead of “choice.”
PP wants to keep abortion vague so as to lie about who the baby is and what abortion does to him. This is another example of how just a few photos completely panics America’s largest and must powerful abortion provider. Wake up, pro-life skeptics.
See more photos at The Anti-Choice Project.
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.
why are the PP people in hot pink, like they are grown up Barbies? and white? like they are brides? Can we yell at them for corrupting colors and connotations? Why do they get to wear long femme-y clothes in public, but if a pro- lifer wears a long dress, or other delicate, feminine clothing, she’s being brain-washed by the patriarchy?
I’d like a hot-pink and fluffy white feminine life, without being derided as a sellout. Think it’s possible?
I love that people are so threatened by our signs that they feel the need to hide them.
Yawn. I hope they washed that quarter before trying to buy a soda with it.
“Yawn. I hope they washed that quarter before trying to buy a soda with it.” -Joan
The images do not work on all people. If the viewer lacks a functioning conscience, a picture of a baby chopped to pieces evokes no more than a yawn.
Thank you, joan, for so aptly illustrating the kind of attitude most people had about the slaughter of Jews in their own backyards in Germany during the Nazi regime. *yawn* I appreciate your demonstration of what it means to be calloused toward the taking of human life.
Now, go buy that soda.
How in the h*** are breast exams – that you can do yourself or get at any clinic or doctor’s office and are often offered for FREE by local clinics – worth funneling my tax dollars to an organization that primarily kills unborn babies and abets sex traffickers?
I cringe when I see the images, and I’m pro-life. As such, I can only imagine how uncomfortable it makes people who support the act that creates such abominations. This is, of course, the point. The images strip away the euphemisms and empty rhetoric of pro-choice lies; in the end all you are left with is the broken and brutalized body of a murdered baby. That is the reality of abortion.
By the way, “joan,” I imagine your type of “humor” would be widely appreciated amongst a group of immature fourth graders; here, such puerile comments merely expose your ignorance. Grow up.
BTW, I think it’s really funny that these people are saying “don’t take away my birth control!”
Um – as far as I know, you can still buy your own birth control. And condoms are relatively inexpensive.
Buy them yourself.
joan isn’t being “humorous,” Melissa. joan is truly calloused toward the taking of human life. In fact, joan even mocks people with disabilites like Down Syndrome. joan is a good example of depravity in our society.
I hope that when you die, joan, nobody hears the news or sees images and yawns, even though you’d be receiving more than what you’ve given the young human life that was taken to make those photos.
I love this on so many levels:
1) Embracing the “anti-choice” moniker that abortion fans use to make us look bad,
2) having the courage to stand up with the real photos of what PP really does to make their $$,
3) and the obvious discomfort the abortion fans have about the reality of abortion.
Awesome!! Hey abortion fans, since you love to tell people that the photos are fake, I dare you to make a 2′ poster of a “real abortion.” Come on, ersatz Barbies, grow a pair of ovaries and show us what YOU think “choice” looks like!
Wow, that is PATHETIC. How much more obvious does it get that these pro-choicers are completely blind and willing to ignore what PP does?
Sad turnout for PP.
There is a young girl standing next to a young man holding the photo of a beautiful dark haired baby killed at 24 weeks.
Her sign says, “Birth control prevents this!”
Obviously not.
Yes pro-“choicers”..if this is the “choice” you espouse..why are you trying to HIDE it???
This is what you endorse….baby-killing….embrace it!
“The images do not work on all people. If the viewer lacks a functioning conscience, a picture of a baby chopped to pieces evokes no more than a yawn.”
Oh, you got me, Tom. I don’t have an emotional reaction to carefully-doctored propaganda, thus I am a sociopath.
@ Carla It’s hard for me to criticize small turnouts for Planned Parenthood / pro-abortion events. I’ve been to lots of pro-life events with pitiful turnouts.
Great idea. well done to the pro-lifers here
joan says:
March 22, 2011 at 11:45 am
“Yawn. I hope they washed that quarter before trying to buy a soda with it.”
Well Joan, you just LAUNDER get the BLOOD off that MONEY. Claiming that the tax dollars funneled off to Planned PeopleKILLERS covers only “health screenings” is ludicrous & you know it. Those people at that place are beyond evil. You are cold & heartless if you can look at that dismembered baby & feel no sadness.
Their supporters are just like Planned Parenthood – always covering up the truth!!!
Should make up a large collection of “She stands with statutory rapists” to use over the heads of those holding “I stand with Planned Parenthood” signs.
Kel: Then I guess I owe the “immature fourth graders,” to whom I compared joan, an apology. I’m sure most of them have a functioning conscience.
Joan,
What is some evidence that the photos are doctored? Can you take on ninek’s challenge and produce real abortion pictures?
In fact, those pictures are exactly how we would suspect them to look. For you can find images of 8 week old fetuses on any kind of website you like, you can find descriptions of suction aspiration abortion method on the websites of those organizations that perform abortions, put 2 and 2 together, and you would imagine a result quite similar to that of the photos. Increase the gestational time of the fetus, and factor in the D&E and D&X methods, and once again, we imagine that the results of a D&E or D&X look exactly like the photos.
Also, suppose it could be shown that the photos were not doctored. Would you then become pro-life?
To the young lady in black tights and the Ugg boots holding the “Birth Control prevents this” sign:
1. What is depicted is birth control – the child never reaches natural birth – thus it is “controlled”. The only way to prevent what is depicted is to forego abortion.
2. Alan Guttmacher Institute concedes that contraceptives do not prevent abortions. And condoms distributed by Planned Parenthood have been shown to have a 17% failure rate.
If you are defending your sexual activity, you might want to be better informed than merely accepting the Planned Parenthood party-line.
joan said: Oh, you got me, Tom. I don’t have an emotional reaction to carefully-doctored propaganda, thus I am a sociopath.
LOL – joan made a funny!!!
If that’s your idea of careful doctoring joan – then yes, you are a sociopath.
This:
“If abortion is a morally defensible choice, why do you feel the need to cover it up?” (One woman covering my sign even responded sincerely, “That’s a good question.”)
is very telling. What is the matter with people? You can’t have rhinoplasty without being told every risk in the book. But abortion? Pah. The ignorance of the pro-abortion community never fails to astound and frighten me. Absolutely unbelievable.
Cranky Catholic,
My own opinion and observation.
That is not my experience with the prolife events that I attend.
“Supporters” of PP just leave me dumb-founded.
It’s like the sheep being lead to the slaughter PRAISING the slaughterhouse…
unbelievable. Yet, sadly, true.
Joan, I don’t know you well enough to know if you are a sociopath or just exhibit some of their characteristics.
It’s pretty clear from your comments though that you are spiritually dead. And you have a really, really calloused and hardened heart.
Neither condition needs to be eternally fatal as God is very much pro-choice. We all hope that someday you will choose Him and choose Life.
Neither condition needs to be eternally fatal as God is very much pro-choice. We all hope that someday you will choose Him and choose Life
I guess pro-choice clergy, including the Jewish Rabbi who spoke at our PP rally, worship a different – or an evil god?
And funny, somehow I don’t think that you folks would be too happy if we “pro-aborts” showed up with coathangers and “get your rosaries off of my ovaries” signs at pro-life rallies or outside anti-choice churches!
Good job to the folks that crashed this party. We need more of this. The Insurrecta Nex group recently crashed a Catholics for Choice party.
We also need to be showing dead baby pictures to “pro-lifers”. There are groups of “pro-lifers” that collaborate with child-killers by not showing the pictures and by using words like abortion instead of a more truthful word for the heinous act such as child-murder.
Most importantly we should be outraged by “pro-lifers” in our government such as Speaker Boehner who claims to be pro-life but continues to fund the criminal syndicate PP in CR after CR.
CC said – And funny, somehow I don’t think that you folks would be too happy if we “pro-aborts” showed up with coathangers and “get your rosaries off of my ovaries” signs at pro-life rallies or outside anti-choice churches!
Bring it.
This just in:
Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) says he opposes the drastic cuts to Planned Parenthood passed by the House in February because “the proposal to eliminate all funding for family planning goes too far.”
It is, indeed, great to live in an educated and tolerant area of the country where Republicans are enlightened.
And David loves crashing pro-choice parties. How bout if we crash Catholic masses when the priest is doing an anti-choice sermon? Tons of fun, right? And BTW, Insurrecta Nex is headed by convicted anti-abortion thug, Randall Terry. Even the virulently anti-choice Catholic church is keeping its distance from him.
Bring it
We won’t be because we feel it’s crass and inappropriate. Obviously, your side doesn’t have such boundaries. And Chris, I didn’t see any of your pals at our “Stand for Planned Parenthood” rally. You must have been with the much smaller group at Cicilline’s office. BTW, why didn’t those folks protest at Langevin’s office? He voted against de-funding. Seriously, Chris, it must be difficult for you to live in such a pro-choice state.
I’m with Chris, I would love to see baby killers at our events. Then we would know that they have something to fear. Currently people that enjoy cutting babies into pieces and throwing them in the trash have nothing to fear because the pro-life movement has been disemboweled.
We have the SBA List that endorses baby killing candidates like Scott Brown. Then they send out a press release thanking John Boehner for his pro-life stance after he voted to murder babies by funding PP. Other pro-life groups play by the baby killers rules instead of the playbook of past social revolutions.
I’m with Chris, I would love to see baby killers at our events. Then we would know that they have something to fear.
This sounds like something that Scott Roeder and the other abortion doctor killers would say. Here’s the thing David – not all of us believe that a fetus is a “baby.” But I do hope that the Planned Parenthood in your area has good security….
“Something to fear” – Interesting…
CC,
A coat hanger might be construed as a weapon and get you arrested; I’d bring a picture of one if I were you. Bring a picture of the medical instruments used in abortions. (I’m surprised that’s not been done before.) That would be educational for all. ”Get your rosaries off my ovaries” is not offensive but just plain stupid. Trying to get Catholics angry? Won’t work. Leave that one at home.
I’ve not yet been to a pro-life event that didn’t include a few pathetic abortion fans. It’s been “brung”, and brought lamely.
Catholic masses are not pro-life events, but homosexual activists have been crashing them for decades. *yawn* We never know what the homily will be about, so if you’re psychic enough to predict it will be a pro-life lecture, then wow, buy some lottery tickets on your way to church.
Don’t you have 4 dozen cat boxes to clean? Better turn off your computer and tend to that, ma’am.
David, I was caught off guard by your comment about SBA List. Many people and organizations have bad judgments and errors in their history, but you can’t deny that the SBA List has done a LOT to advance the pro-life movement politically.
Your comment highlights the main problem I see with the pro-life movement (and I do it too):
We fight amongst ourselves way too much! We all want the same thing: an end to abortion. While it is right to call each other out on our mistakes, we must be very careful not to judge people or organizations in their entirety by a few errors.
CC – the statutory rapist support bus was in the PPRI parking lot, so intermingling would have been on PPRI’s turf.
Also, I’m well aware from a PR perspective that being in Downtown Providence within walking distance of RISD, Brown and J&W would provide an opportunity for liberal students to attend. 3 young students did come up to the Defund Planned Parenthood event in Pawtucket, with their pinko signs, but ran away as soon as they were noticed. They didn’t stick around to answer questions.
None of this is over.
As for being in RI – it doesn’t bother me – because there is a huge need for truth here.
“We never know that the homily will be about”
In the RI diocese they have an annual “pro-life” Sunday. One assumes that the homilies are about abortion. I do know that they have props such as a baby carriage on the altar.
Aren’t there some “babies” that need protection from the “baby killers?” *yawn* Better turn off your computer and tend to that, ma’am.
Joan,
If those pictures are fake, what would it look like for a 10-week old fetus to be sucked from his mother’s womb and chopped to pieces?
Planned Parenthood – and any other abortion provider – could so easily set the record straight about all these “fake” pictures by releasing authoritative, once-and-for-all, “real” pictures of an aborted baby. Why haven’t they? They’ve had 38 years to do so.
not all of us believe that a fetus is a “baby.” But I do hope that the Planned Parenthood in your area has good security….
So, you think basic biology is a belief that you can embrace or deny? Really. That’s so scientific.
“Something to fear” – Interesting…
Is it? Because according to statistics, the leading cause of death of pregnant mothers is homocide. Not to mention, your kind throw molotov cocktails at peaceful old ladies.
CC said – not all of us believe that a fetus is a “baby.”
Nor do you believe in logical scientific evidence among other things…
On the other hand – it’s pretty clear you believe in eugenics, and denial.
CC – the statutory rapist support bus was in the PPRI parking lot, so intermingling would have been on PPRI’s turf
But you could have stood outside the chain link fence, on the sidewalk, which is where those who harass women, on Saturday, ply their trade. “Huge need for truth” in RI? Right…..Remind me again, how many pro-life bills have been passed, in the last 20 years, in RI? RI – solid pro-choice congressional delegation and governor. You’re shoveling you know what against the tide if you think this will change. Did you see the article in Sunday’s paper about the drastic drop in Catholic weddings in RI?
And “science” – yeah, science according to those who oppose abortion. I suspect that if you check out the medical texts that the students at Brown University Med School use, you’ll find that fetus is the term of choice and there is nor moralizing about how abortion is the taking of a “life.” It’s far more clinical but that’s science, fer ya.
In the RI diocese they have an annual “pro-life” Sunday. One assumes that the homilies are about abortion.
No. The odds are probably 50/50.
Hey CC,
I don’t know the Jewish Rabbi that spoke at your PP event but he is probably spiritually dead just like Joan and many of the Jewish leaders who persecuted Jesus when He walked the Earth.
There are two types of people CC. Those that have acknowledged their sinfulness before a Holy and Righteous God; that consider the crucifixion of Jesus God’s way of paying the price for our sin, of satisfying His claims for Divine Justice; that believe God raised Jesus from the dead; and that have committed their lives to love and serve the One Who saved them. These are they who know their God, have a living vibrant relationship with Him, know of His Goodness and Mercy, and know that their sins have been washed away by His Blood. We serve God with reverence and godly fear because we know that we still have sin and are in desperate need of His Mercy and Grace everyday.
And there are those who don’t know God. They are content to live their lives without Him. They don’t consider the sacrifice Jesus made on their behalf any big deal. They just live their lives the best they can and hope when they die that if there’s a Heaven, they’ve done enough good things to qualify entrance.
And they are totally deceived.
As I said – huge need for truth in RI.
And all you do is provide evidence.
Oh no – I’ve run out completely out of troll kibble!
Ed, I agree with your comments but will add one more:
The individual whom the pro-abortionists worship does have a name: Molech.
If my vet told me that a puppy isn’t a puppy until after it’s born, I’d find another vet.
“And they are totally deceived”
That the pro-life movement is intrinsically a part of extreme, right wing Christianity, is underscored by this intolerant and bigoted comment. Obviously, pro-life Christians feel that their religion is the only “true” faith and that other faith communities, who support abortion, are false. It’s no wonder that so many reality based folks feel that the anti-choice movement are a bunch of religious zealots. It’s no wonder that the majority of American Jews are pro-choice. To say that Rabbi Stein is spiritually dead is making a pronouncement based on a narrow and very judgemental worldview. It’s the kind of dogmatic thinking that paved the way for the Inquisition and other example of religious intolerance. It doesn’t do much for advancing your cause beyond your religious community.
And all you do is provide evidence
So Chris, what’s next for the anti-choice community in our beautiful blue state? What’s your strategy?
Why can’t I watch a documentary on the health channel showing an abortion instead of an open heart surgery or an appendectomy? It’s just another surgical procedure like any other, right? (Or so I’ve been told.) And don’t give me the “privacy” crap. If they can show somebody’s sinus polyps on TV, why not a suction abortion? If they can show childbirth, why not a D&E? WHY NOT?
I bet those sinus polyp photos are just fake and totally doctored.
Um… CC, the pro-life position is that the fetus in-utero is a human. How is that a religious belief?
There are pro-lifers who do not practice a religion.
CC – See your eugenics is showing again, as well as your deceptiveness.
We’re for life – and that means choices – when you have life, you have lots of choices.
To call us anti-choice is disingenuous.
On the other hand you can’t really publicly stand behind what you support – which is the taking of an innocent human being’s life. Whether you believe it or not is not the validity test of truth.
Even Mary Anne Sorrentino admitted that those who deny the humanity of the child after 22 weeks are rather stupid. She voiced her disgust.
And Dr. Alan Guttmacher (yes – former president of Planned Parenthood) in his book “Life in the Making” admitted that human conception brings about life is obvious. Of course that was before he found out how profitable abortion was…
BTW – calling individuals deceived is exactly what you’re doing to us, so tell us again, o hypocrite, how we are being evil…
Oh never mind.
True, there are secular pro-lifers and we’re glad to have them on the team.
CC, obviously you know as much about theology as you do about biology. If, for example, the Dalai Lama announces that he believes in Queztacoatl, it isn’t a right wing ideology to tell him he’s not really a Buddhist: it’s a fact. The same is true for abortion-advocating so-called Jews and so-called Christians.
I agree. Why not show an abortion – or for that matter, any other surgery. There should be a surgery channel! But why don’t you ask the Health Channel? I’d be curious to see their response?
“the pro-life position is that the fetus in-utero is a human. How is that a religious belief”
Ensoulment? The scientific community (except for those who are pro-life) do not classify the fetus, embryo, zygote, etc. as a “human person/being/entity” etc. This is why they are not advocating for the re-criminlization of abortion as they don’t consider a fetus a person. Medical school professors do not tell their students that they are “taking a life” in an abortion.
BTW, ”But at last there’s some good news out of California where two hospitals, UofC, San Fransisco and Stanford, are leading the way in training new ob-gyns in family planning services, including abortion services…The article points out that 81% of all students studying to becaome ob-gyn specialists are women and, according to Lois Backus, director of Medical Students For Choice, this generation of female students “don’t want to be told what they can’t do”.
“I send you like sheep…beware of false prophets” http://bit.ly/9eChG4
CC – here, chew on this:
“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote). … The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.” (Carlson, Bruce M., Patten’s Foundations of Embryology, 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p.3.)
“The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.” [Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
“Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zygtos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being.” [Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]
“Although human life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed. … The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity.” (O’Rahilly, Ronan and Müller, Fabiola. Human Embryology and Teratology, 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29).
“the term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. It is synonymous with the terms fecundation, impregnation and fertilization … The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.” (J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Freidman. Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers, pages 17 and 23.)
“Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.” [Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
“Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus.” (Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146.
“every time a sperm cell and ovum unite, a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.” (E.L. Potter, M.D., and J.M. Craig, M.D. Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant (3rd Edition). Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975, page vii.)
“Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism…. At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun…. The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life.” [Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]
“That the pro-life movement is intrinsically a part of extreme, right wing Christianity, is underscored by this intolerant and bigoted comment.”
Very true. It was Jesus Himself that said, “Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” I’m sorry CC that God is so holy. He really isn’t a big fan of all the wickedness and iniquity going on in the Earth today. The good news is that He sent His Son so that each of us could come to know Him, become adopted into His family and become like Him.
“Obviously, pro-life Christians feel that their religion is the only “true” faith and that other faith communities, who support abortion, are false.”
This is true.
“It’s no wonder that so many reality based folks feel that the anti-choice movement are a bunch of religious zealots.”
Religious zealot? Very true, I definitely qualify. If you knew Jesus you would serve Him zealously as well. Reality based? Sorry, your reality is based in fiction. A non-Christian world view is false.
“It’s no wonder that the majority of American Jews are pro-choice. To say that Rabbi Stein is spiritually dead is making a pronouncement based on a narrow and very judgemental worldview.” Nothing knew here, see Mt 7.13-14.
“It’s the kind of dogmatic thinking that paved the way for the Inquisition and other example of religious intolerance.” Very good point here CC. It’s true that man is so wicked, and his heart so deceptive, that we are capable of taking even a good thing, like a relationship with Jesus Christ, and turning it into a corrupt, evil religion. God be merciful to all of us and keep us in Your Truth.
“It doesn’t do much for advancing your cause beyond your religious community.” On the contrary CC, many souls are being saved and coming to Christ.
He’s Alive!
“the pro-life position is that the fetus in-utero is a human. How is that a religious belief”
Ensoulment? The scientific community (except for those who are pro-life) do not classify the fetus, embryo, zygote, etc. as a “human person/being/entity” etc. This is why they are not advocating for the re-criminlization of abortion as they don’t consider a fetus a person. Medical school professors do not tell their students that they are “taking a life” in an abortion.
No, CC, sorry. “Ensoulment” is a philosophical term. Not a scientific one. A fetus that is the genetic product of both its human parents is… go on, you can say it… human.
I said nothing of legal “personhood” or “ensoulment.” Bait and switch, huh?
“The same is true for abortion-advocating so-called Jews and so-called Christians”
As I said, the intolerance of the anti-choice movement is extraordinary. Here we have a huge swath of the American religious community beingt told that they’re “so called” Jews and Christians. But obviously Ninek knows far more than rabbinical scholars and Protestant theolgians who don’t consider themselves members of “so called” religions. Inasmuch as the Christians have scipture to defend their pro-life position, these folks have scripture to defend theirs. While I don’t agree with the Catholic position on abortion, I would not say that the Catholic faith was false – but that’s seems to be what is claimed here regarding pro-choice faiths.
A fetus has the characteristics of the human species – but it is no more “human,” in the sense of an independent, fully actualized “being” than an animal or plant. But “personhood” does seem to be important to the pro-life movment and, once again, a fetus is not a “person” – a potential person, yes but a person in the same sense as a “post born” person, no.
If you knew Jesus you would serve Him zealously as well. Reality based? Sorry, your reality is based in fiction. A non-Christian world view is false
Wow. That means that the orthodox Jews and non believers who are part of the pro-life movement have a world view that is “false.” Again, this type of preaching really, really alienates people.
So CC – you’re a potential person too – given your definition.
Can you be aborted?
After all you have the same physiological makeup of those other “human” thingie’s and at some point you might qualify for personhood – that is something else might be added to you that you currently don’t have – like genuine humanity – compassion and mercy.
So I think that really does put you in the abort-able humans group.
CC,
What someone is referring to when they say, “so called Christian” is someone who still professes Christianity but who has strayed from their relationship with Him and has allowed sin or ulterior motives into their heart.
Jesus said many would say to Him, “Lord Lord, did we not do all these wonderful things in Your Name?” And He will say, “I never knew you.”
We need to stay humble before God and allow Him to wash our hearts continually with His Word.
@Tom,
the images may not work on everyone but sometimes when faced with the truth all you can do is yawn, or ridicule to make the otherside seem invalid. These kind of reactions may show that someone doesn’t have a functioning conscience or it may show that they can’t deny the facts, so all they can do is mock and belittle them.
Hey CC – Can you prove that you are a person without your human body?
We can do an experiment – you can jump into a heavy duty wood-chipper, and when you get out your person can thoroughly denounce me for not believing you – okay?
A fetus has the characteristics of the human species – but it is no more “human,” in the sense of an independent, fully actualized “being” than an animal or plant. But “personhood” does seem to be important to the pro-life movment and, once again, a fetus is not a “person” – a potential person, yes but a person in the same sense as a “post born” person, no.
By what scientific criteria do you establish that the fetus is “a potential person?” How do you define “fully actualized?” Your criteria here are not scientific, but philosophical in nature. I repeat, you are not using actual science to defend your position. The fetus does not just have “characteristics of the human species,” the human fetus IS a member of the human species. It is ridiculous and wholly unscientific to claim otherwise.
Regarding “personhood”: The pro-life movement wishes for society to classify in law human fetuses as “persons” because of what science has shown and continues to show us – that the fetus is human, and that the right to life should not be denied anyone who is human, regardless of stage of development, mental ability/disability, race, sex, or location (inside or outside the womb).
By the way, all living things reproduce after their own kind. Just thought you might want to be aware of that.
I think we can agree that professors who teach in medical schools are part of the science community. When they are teaching about fetal development do they use the term “baby” or “human?” When they teaching about abortion techniques, do they tell their students that they are “killing” a “baby?”
“So I think that really does put you in the abort-able humans group”
Is that a threat?
Again, this type of preaching really, really alienates people.
The Gospel, by its very nature, offends. What other kind of preaching would you prefer? Oh, that’s right. You just want Christians to shut up and go away. Such tolerance for Christianity…
1 Corinthians 1:22-25 “For Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength.”
From “Science Blogs”
“An Embryo Is Not A Person”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/sunday_sacrilege_an_embryo_is.php
CC said - Is that a threat?
Now CC – why would you consider that a threat?
Can I take that question as a solid admission you know precisely about the humanity of the unborn and the taking of human life?
I mean you’d have to understand that as some sort of grievous harm being done to a fleshly human body – right? And the basis of that harm is not merely your “person” – is it?
So in wondering if you’re being threatened – you’re also considering how a powerful state should defend you as a human being – but you have no problem bringing absolute power down upon a defenseless human being in the womb?
And no – saying you’re part of the abort-able group is no threat coming from one who believes in the sanctity of all human life – I’m against the killing of innocent human beings. That would mean protection of life from conception on.
So the only one that has a real problem with that statement is you – who understands what abortion really is – but plays semantic games to justify her past actions.
Consider your shear hypocrisy exposed.
Here’s somebody from the “science” community who says “A Fetus Is Not A Person”
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/sunday_sacrilege_an_embryo_is.php
Regardless of the anti-choice “science” position, the law says that abortion is legal. And that’s really the bottom line.
CC,
I appreciate all non-believers that fight to rescue the lives of innocent children being slaughtered. On any team, in any company of soldiers going to war, in any firehouse, you’re going to have people with different ideologies and backgrounds.
You might even have arch rivals, like Michigan and Ohio State fans on the same team.
And what every successful team does is unite around a central cause, like saving the lives of children. We set aside our differences to save babies, because that is a mission we can rally around and agree on that is more important to us than our individual beliefs.
I love all my Pro Life brothers and sisters.
“When they are teaching about fetal development do they use the term “baby” or “human?” ”
They definitely use the term human. That is the species of the embryo. This is the law of biogenesis- that organisms reproduce after their own kind. Humans beget humans. As Chris already showed, the ordinary beginning of development in the human species begins at fertilization. Hence, abortion kills a developing human being.
Trust me, you can embrace that basic scientific fact that all educated pro-choicers do and still remain pro-choice. In fact, here is a great quote from Princeton bioethecist Peter Singer’s book “Rethinking Life and Death”
“[The argument that a fetus is not alive] is a resort to a convenient fiction that turns an evidently living being into one that legally is not alive. Instead of accepting such fictions, we should recognize that the fact that a being is human, and alive, does not in itself tell us whether it is wrong to take that being’s life.”
So why don’t we work together on coming up with a theory to justify the pro-choice position which doesn’t involve denying basic science- science that all those who defend abortion in the public square agree upon.
Here’s somebody from the science community who disagress with the fetus as person argument:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/04/sunday_sacrilege_an_embryo_is.php
I think we can agree that professors who teach in medical schools are part of the science community. When they are teaching about fetal development do they use the term “baby” or “human?” When they teaching about abortion techniques, do they tell their students that they are “killing” a “baby?”
Anyone teaching students how to perform abortions has a pro-abortion agenda. If you wanted to encourage the Nazis to kill the Jews, would you refer to them as “people” or as “human weeds?”
Are you choosing to willfully ignore the science and biology texts Chris has quoted from so you can continue to blindly pursue YOUR agenda, CC?
When teaching about fetal/embryonic development in humans, the proper term is “human embryo/fetus.” When teaching about fetal/embryonic development in dogs, the proper term would likely be “canine embryo/fetus.”
You know, I don’t get how this is hard for you people. Just admit that you advocate the killing of humans who are weaker and less developed than yourselves. You have to totally ignore basic biology, science, and ultrasound technology to do otherwise. If it’s not delusional, it’s pretty darn close.
In fact, I even love sinners like you CC :^)
OK moderator. It’s cool. But please tell the regulars that I’m being blocked. That way they don’t need to respond to me.
Here’s the deal folks – if I post a comment, it will be listed as spam so this is an excercise in futility. But interesting way to keep out the “trolls.” Laissez les bons temps rouler!
“But obviously Ninek knows far more than rabbinical scholars and Protestant theolgians who don’t consider themselves members of “so called” religions.”
I absolutely do know more about theology than many Rabbis and Protestants. Thank you for validating.
But don’t miscontrue my words CC. I’m no better than you. In fact, I’m probably worse. I’d bet on it.
The only difference is that there’s this operation of grace that’s available to all sinners like us. What it does is offer continual cleansing and forgiveness. It’s very very powerful. It only takes a relationship with Jesus to activate it in your life.
Some people know about it, sadly most don’t.
Sorry, CC, I don’t think anyone knew you were postign and it went automatically to spam. Thanks for letting us know. Sometimes when people put up links, they automatically go to spam, and we miss it. You link is up now, and I am happy to look at it and respond.
And believe me, there is NO reason to try and suppress anything PZ Myers says.
Joan, Joan, Joan … (sigh),
“not all of us believe that a fetus is a “baby.” ??? Really?? Are you pro-aborts still there .. stuck with that theory??
Is the life in the womb that of a dog, cat, ape, fish, or bird, etc.? Obviously not. Obviously, it is a human embryo or fetus. Pregnancy is the carrying of one or more offspring. Offspring is the product of reproduction, of a new organism produced by one or more parents. Human offspring are referred to as children. At the moment of conception, a complete and unique set of DNA begins to build a human body that continues to grow long after birth. It’s a scientific fact.
A parent is a caretaker of the offspring in their own species. In humans, a parent is the mother or father figure of a child (NOTE: “child” refers to offspring, not necessarily age).
And please don’t use the objection that that the embryo is only a potential human and not a full human because it is not capable of living independently of the mother. There are many humans living today that are dependant on others … ie. Some disabled, some elderly, some mentally challenged, etc … and ALL BABIES & CHILDREN.
May God share truth & wisdom with you.
Sorry to see you go CC.
I thought we had a very “popcorn-worthy” exhange going.
I pray you are apprehended by the Lover of your soul.
CC – P.Z. Myer? You’re kidding, right?
CC,
I read the article, and he makes not a single good point, or says any kind of science that refutes Chris’s numerous quotes. The closest he gets to addressing teh issue is when he writes
“The embryo is not the adult.”
Am I supposed to be imprtessed with this observation? Honestly, does he think that pro-lifers claim taht teh embryo is an adult? What am I supposed to think about someone’s seriousness when it comes to this issue when they putting up strawmen like that?
“It does not contain the full information present in the newborn — that will be generated progressively, by interactions with the environment and by complex internal negotiations within an increasingly complex embryo.”
None of this undermines our position. We all could have told you that. Does having information fully present make you worthy of life? Is that what makes a human being? He also writes
“The fertilized oocyte is a human cell, but it is not a human being.”
offering no evidence. Again, I am sure what he means is “human person” in a philosophical sense.
Now, if you think Myers makes a good point, please let me know what it is and I would be happy to refute it. But it is clear that Myers isn’t very well aware at all of what the pro-life claim is, nor has he given much thought to his position. So I would ask, 1) what is a good point that he makes and 2) what does he say that refutes all of Chris’s quotes?
The “bottom line” of human oppression, slavery and injustice may have been the “bottom line” for a long time, CC.
Years ago, people just accepted that the Negro was not a full person, nor did he have rights. He was property. But the “bottom line” said so.
I guess all those abolitionists were just religious nutjobs, though.
CC,
“Regardless of the anti-choice “science” position, the law says that abortion is legal. And that’s really the bottom line.”
If that is your main thesis, then we completely agree. The law says abortion is legal. I fully admit that, and so does everyone else here. If that is all you wish to convince us of, then you have succeeded. But I would ask, if it is legal, is it moral?
In fact, let’s look at what he is saying a little more. He is basically looking at the fact that some pro-life groups advertise against abortion by stating scientific facts, but showing pictures which do not correlate to those facts. Here I may agree with him that this is not really a good pro-life argument. Indeed, an embryo does not look like a newborn baby. But again, these are bad pro-life arguments that he is attacking (if we even consider them arguments put forth by pro-lifers since it was simply inferred from the billboards). The pro-life position does not hold that an embryo is intrinsically valuable because it has fingernails or toes. So again, Myers does not do a good job of interacting with good solid pro-life arguments. Instead, he chooses to attack a strawman (albeit one that is sometimes put forth by pro-lifers who mean well but aren’t very careful) duping his readers into thinking that he has added something intelligent to the debate.
CC Summed up:
1.Clergy who agree with me are good. Their religious contribution is valuable and you should never question their understanding of their faiths. Clergy who disagree with me are religious fanatics. You should question everything that comes out of their mouths. Especially if they’re Catholic.
2. I live in an enlightened state
3. Jewish Rabbis are awesome. Unless they’re pro-life.
4. Did I mention RI is super educated? Upper-class? Oh and me too – uber educated and enlightened. That’s why I live here. Me and RI are like peas and carrots….oh I forget myself, that’s what peasants in the rest of the country might eat….we’re like Beluga Caviar and Champagne.
Embryo, fetus, infant, baby, toddler, child, preteen, teen, youth, adult, elder – every one of these is nothing more than a qualification of the general term ‘HUMAN BEING’, each of those words simply conveys additional information about the human being. There is no valid logic possible that would justify drawing a line and saying that a human being is of more value at one stage than at another. It’s all the same entity, from conception to death. All human life deserves the same protection.
Legality isn’t a solid foundation to stand on; in fact, what we are debating here is precisely whether abortion SHOULD be legal. Remember that slavery was perfectly legal in the old South, as was segregation for decades after slavery was made illegal, and that everything Hitler did was legal. No, the fact that abortion is legal is no kind of defense at all.
By the way, I’m proud to be the one in the first picture, holding the signe over my head!
Scragsma, awesome!!! Babies everywhere are grateful for your witness to their humanity.
I find the whole personhood debate ridiculous. All humans are persons, all animals are not. I don’t call a monkey a person, but I might say, “Gosh, he acts just like a person.” The baby-isn’t-a-person is a new concept, thrust onto us by abortion fans who want to further dehumanize very small humans.
Fetus? That can describe a pig, a puppy, or an elephant as well as a human. So fetus is not THE end all BE all scientific term for a very small pre-born human.
Scragsma!! Thank you for your silent witness. God bless you!! Thank you for standing for truth. That abortion hurts women and kills children. I am so proud of you!!
I do enjoy the lady trying to cover the truth with her jacket! :)
You know CC,
You do a lot of talking about pro-lifers being intolerant and forcing their religous views on others but what about you forcing your view on the unborn child. You may not think that unborn are a person or a human being but that is only your opinion and you are still forcing your view on a lot unborn babies that could be human beings. There’s a lot of scientific evidence that would dispute that claim that the unborn aren’t persons. Even if it wasn’t certain why would you take the risk of killing human beings?.
You are forcing your view on the unborn and defining them out of personhood to take their rights away, you don’t even care if an innocent child suffers. It’s better to err on the side of caution if there’s a risk that you will kill an innocent person, I mean if killing an innocent person matters to you.
Why are my comments being removed? I didn’t say anything wrong. Is my rhetoric too strong? You aren’t censoring people that thinks it is ok to murder babies, why censor me?
David,
I looked in the spam folder and did not fin your comments. Did you have a link in your comments? Rest assured, we do not censor- only if someone uses bad language, blasphemy etc. Let us know the next time you post and it doesn’t show up. There may be a glitch on our end or yours, but keep trying and again, let us know when a comment doens’t post so we can see if it automatically went to spam or something. We’ll fish it our for you.
scragsma said: No, the fact that abortion is legal is no kind of defense at all.
Right, the other way of putting that is that if the state is the one that can grant the right to life – they can also take it away.
Thanks for standing tall and displaying the truth!
Despite the effort to cover it up – did you ask her why she felt compelled to cover it, if there’s nothing morally wrong with abortion?
I like how the pink throw they’re trying to cover one of the posters with is see-through. They just look pathetic. XD
Here’s some authentic scientific background and reading for CC, Joan and anyone else needing more education on the subject. Nothng “potential” about the expert witness of these professionals.
“Scienists attest to Senate Subcommittee that Life Begins at Conception”:
http://www.humanlife.org/abortion_scientists_attest.php
Carla @12:11 on 3/22/11:
Great point, Carla. How do we know that this 24 week old dead fetus/baby isn’t the consequence of failed birth control? Praying for you and other post-abortive women and men daily. God Bless you.
This is ridiculous. Were any of you even at the rally? Because I was. Planned Parenthood’s primary service is NOT abortion, it is prevention. By cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood, women across the nation would lose their opportunity for birth control which would create more unwanted pregnancies which would lead to MORE abortions. And beyond that, Planned Parenthood provides breast exams, cervical cancer screenings and many more services for both insured and uninsured women alike. The rally wasn’t for abortions, it was for Planned Parenthood. As far as the pro-life protesters who showed up, they should have read what the rally was actually for. We were not looking for a debate between pro-life and pro-choice; we were standing with Planned Parenthood.
Thanks, Boomer! That is an AWESOME resource!
The rally wasn’t for abortions, it was for Planned Parenthood and the Pimps!*
There JB – fixed that for you.
(No abortions were performed at the rally.)
(*Not to be confused with Gladys Knight and the Pips!)
(take only as directed)
(your truthfulness may vary depending upon your degree of denial)
(see a real doctor who believes in doing you no harm if you find yourself pregnant)
(Pimp offer only valid where-ever participating Planned Parenthood offices are found.)
(Can someone please inform JB that the A-word should not be associated with PP and the Pimps…)
What could we be thinking? I mean, it’s not like Planned Parenthood has committed millions – MILLIONS – of abortions, or anything.
It’s not like Planned Parenthood has been caught aiding and abetting underage sex trafficking or anything.
It’s not like PP has been caught NOT reporting statutory rape (because, as PP of IL stated, that would “overwhelm the system”).
Oh, wait a minute…
By cutting off funding for Planned Parenthood, women across the nation would lose their opportunity for birth control
Wow, really? Because the Health Department offers birth control, too. So do OBGYNs. And the corner drugstore or your local Wal-Mart – let’s see – yep, they all carry condoms. Do you think PP gives out birth control for FREE??
We have video proof that they charge upwards of $80 for appointments just to GET a Rx for birth control. http://www.liveaction.org That’s not counting the cost of the birth control.
Please enlighten me how they provide anything different (besides abortion, perhaps) than a regular OBGYN.
Carla says:
I do enjoy the lady trying to cover the truth with her jacket
xalisae says:
I like how the pink throw they’re trying to cover one of the posters with is see-through. They just look pathetic. XD
No kidding! They’re exercising their First Amendment Rights while denying others the same right!
Rachael C. (on a public library computer until ours gets fixed)
http://mylifeinreflection.blogspot.com
Hi anon,
Please pick a moniker and come on back. :)
First amendment rights are only for those that agree with you. Right??
It’s me Carla! (as I signed below), but I’m on a public computer at the library, which saves your text box imput, which I unfortuantly can’t change, & I’m not comfortable leaving my name & such on a public computer, so if it’s alright, I’d like to post as anon, but sign my name & blog below so you know it’s me :)
As for your second comment, that seems to be the attitude in the pro-choice movement ;)
Rachael C.
http://mylifeinreflection.blogspot.com
Oh duh. LOL
HI RACHAEL C.!!!
Hi Carla!! LOL!
Rachael C.
“Were any of you even at the rally?” -JB
I held the camera.
“Planned Parenthood’s primary service is NOT abortion, it is prevention.” -JB
Arguing over what their “primary” service is is irrelevant. PP is directly responsible for the deaths of more than a quarter million American babies every year. I am not in the habit of weighing any perceived good someone does against the lives of babies he ends. You cannot shelf the baby killing and engage in rational discussion of positive attributes of PP any more than we could shelf the Jew killing and discuss positive attributes of Hitler. (If Godwin is a sticking point for you, just replace Hitler with Pol Pot.)
“The rally wasn’t for abortions, it was for Planned Parenthood.” -JB
Again, you’re trying to divorce Planned Parenthood from baby killing, and so long as they remain the nation’s largest abortion provider, that just isn’t possible. Imagine if I attended a rally in support of federal funding for the Ku Klux Klan, and you showed up with pictures of blacks being lynched. What would you think if I posted that the rally wasn’t for lynching blacks, it was for the KKK?
“As far as the pro-life protesters who showed up, they should have read what the rally was actually for. We were not looking for a debate between pro-life and pro-choice; we were standing with Planned Parenthood.” -JB
No, you are right. PP is never looking for a debate with us. We deliberately force the debate on them whenever and wherever we can. By confronting PP with pictures of their handiwork - the horrifying and undeniable proof that abortion kills a baby - we force them to defend their raison d’etre without recourse to twisted, ambiguous and misleading language (‘choice’, ‘clumps of cells’, ’reproductive rights’, etc).
Thank you, Tom for the photos and the excellent comments!! :)
I’ve read surveys that over 60% of abortions are coerced, by parents, boyfriends, husbands, employers, pimps, and pedophiles.
About 54% of women who’ve had abortions say that they were using contraception when they got pregnant.
JB, if I run a candy store and I sell 1,000,000 million gumballs for a penny each, but I also sell only 25,000 expensive chocolate bars for $2 each – and you were my accountant: tell me, how I am really making money? What’s making me more money, the gumdrops or the chocolate bars? I hope you can do the math, otherwise you better ask your math teacher for some tutoring.
In response to Kel: You can’t discount an entire organization because of the mistakes of a few people within it. There are bad seeds in everything, including Planned Parenthood. But there are also bad people within political parties, within churches, within the military, and so on. Regarding your other comment, many women are uninsured or can’t afford birth control, or may not have parents that are supportive of their being on birth control. Planned Parenthood offers this service to women. They also offer other health care services, which once again, many uninsured women can’t receive elsewhere. The focus of Planned Parenthood is sexual health and the opportunity to PLAN your parenthood.
In response to Tom: I understand that Planned Parenthood offers abortion. But federal funding doesn’t even go to providing abortions because of the Hyde Amendment. Once again, we were there in support of Planned Parenthood and the health services they offer across the country. You showing up to the rally didn’t prove anything, beyond the fact that you didn’t really know what we were standing up for. Therefore, your pictures were irrelevant.
JB – you obviously don’t know what fungibility means.
Planned Parenthood doesn’t help anyone with actually planning for a family – that requires understanding numerous characteristics, such as honest, integrity etc. which they don’t possess.
On the other hand – it does a great job of denial of actual parenthood – because when a woman is with child (pregnant) she and her sexual partner are already parents.
They can’t be made non-parents, only they become parents of a dead child.
As far as showing up only to have PP supporters cover-up – I think that proves quite a bit. People usually cover up what they are ashamed of…
What are you ashamed of JB?
What are you trying to cover-up?
Regarding your other comment, many women are uninsured or can’t afford birth control, or may not have parents that are supportive of their being on birth control. Planned Parenthood offers this service to women. They also offer other health care services, which once again, many uninsured women can’t receive elsewhere. The focus of Planned Parenthood is sexual health and the opportunity to PLAN your parenthood.
Uninsured women can receive health treatment in this country at other places than PP. There are signs in every hospital that state you cannot be refused care, even if you are uninsured/underinsured. That is the truth. THAT is the law. The local health department is actually cheaper – according to PP themselves, if you’d care to watch the videos.
Are you advocating that teenagers, living under their parents roofs, should be encouraged to have sex and obtain birth control without their parents’ knowledge? It doesn’t bother you that PP overlooks likely statutory rape cases? Have you SEEN the LiveAction.org videos? My guess is no, you haven’t. Their responses to statutory rape and sex trafficking: all the same, except for one unfortunate soul who went a step beyond and encouraged the supposed trafficker to let his prostitute work from the “waist up” after an abortion.
STD testing, pregnancy testing, and ultrasounds can be obtained at a pregnancy resource center. For FREE. Birth control can be obtained through the health department. Pap smears, breast exams, too. Condoms are set out in your local obgyn’s bathrooms for anyone to take. Free. Mammograms – not at PP. Those must be taken at other medical facilities.
Look, I don’t think we need to be outlawing birth control here. Do I believe hormonal birth control is harmful to women? Yes. It should come with a serious warning label. But illegal? No. Abortion, on the other hand, is not “family planning.” It is the destruction of already-conceived human life. If you support Planned Parenthood with funds, you also support their millions of abortions.
But I guess I can’t discount the Nazis for gassing the Jews. I mean, they did a lot of other good for Germany, you know…
The “pro-choice” people are so honest and strong in their “pro-choice” stance, or “Freedom of choice” stance that they deny freedom of choice to the pro-lifers who display the poster with the mutiliated, butchered new human being-baby on them.
What’s the matter, “pro-choice-freedom of choice” people? Are you upset or afraid of something?
If elective abortion – butchering tiny, new human beings is such a wonderful thing, why hide the graphic display of the outcome of that wonderful thing?
Pro-choice my foot!
Pro-choice is nonsense! It means NOTHING!
Pro-choice?
Who isn’t pro-choice, aside from Islamic jihadi-militant males who won’t allow women a choice, save to be beaten, stoned to death, undergo genital mutilation, restricted from going anywhere without a male escort, not permitted to go to school, work, to drive, or anything else, and, when raped, the women are charged with fornication and whipped or stoned to death.
Pro-choice?
I am “pro-choice.” I like Indian food. I like to have the “choice” of choosing to prepare Indian cuisine, or to travel to an Indian restaurant, or the home of an Indian friend, or anyone, who will prepare delicious Indian cuisine.
I am “pro-choice” on flavors of Ice Cream. I prefer Chocolate, Mango, and Vanilla as my first three choices.
I am pro-choice.
I am pro-choice on which movie to see, where to go to take a nature walk or hike, which sea-side location to visit, where to go for a camping trip, and so on.
Pro-choice is just a hyphenated word. It is not a complete sentence which gives information. Which choice are you “pro?”
Obviously the pro-aborts in the photographs deny freedom of choice to display the barbarism of elective abortion, as the pro-aborts, the pro-slaughter/butchering of new human beings, of tiny babies via elective abortion deny “choice” to those they slaughter, as well as to pro-lifers who are exercising their “freedom of choice,” their right to be “pro-choice” to show the sick, violent, offensive outcome of abortion.
On March 22, 2011, at 1:19 PM, CC said, ” … Here’s the thing David – not all of us believe that a fetus is a “baby.” … ”
That is hilarious, CC!
” … not all of us believe that a fetus is a “baby” and not all of you believe the sky is blue, or that the elephant is the largest, strongest land mammal known to man, or that the Blue Whale is the largest creature on earth known to man, or that the Nile is a River which flows through the Continent of Africa, or that The Pacific Ocean borders the West Coast of the Continents of North and South America, and the Atlantic Ocean borders the East coast of the continents of North and South America.
Not all people believe that China is a nation found on the continent of Asia, or that Secretariat was one of the greatest thoroughbred race horses in the history of horse racing, or that a person can travel by fan jet aircraft airlines from the east coast to the west coast of the United States in mere hours instead of days or months as travel used to require one hundred years ago and more.
Denying a fact, that the human fetus IS, in fact, a human being, and, yes, also a “baby” does not make that fact false, but merely indicates that the person denying that fact is merely in denial, incorrect, and wrong.
The term “baby” is used, and has been used for a very long time, to refer to a living human being from the time their lives first begin, which normally takes place in vivo, upon first contact of sperm of the father and oocyte of the mother, with the penetration of the zona pellucida of the oocyte by the sperm, but which also takes place during twinning, etc., in vivo, as well as taking place ex vivo, such as in IVF, ARTs (Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Artificial Reproductive Technologies), through cloning, and other methods, ex vivo, and in vivo, sexually and asexually (identical twinning, triplets, etc., is an example of asexual reproduction which does occur “naturally” in vivo).
The prenatal – before birth – developmental stages of human beings is divided into two main stages; the embryonic stage, which, in normal sexual reproduction begins upon the penetration of the zona pellucida of the oocyte by the sperm – first contact, and continues until the end of the eight week, followed by the fetal stage, which continues from the ninth week until term-birth. The embryonic stage is the most rapid stage of development in a human being’s life. During this stage the new human being’s body and major organs are virtually all formed. As early as 18 days the baby’s heart beat is detectable by current technology. After the embryonic stage comes the fetal stage. From the fetal stage till term baby’s body and organs mature. Baby’s development is not complete at birth. Baby continues to develop throughout his or her life.
Nurses, doctors, midwives, parents, the mother’s co-workers, friends, acquaintances, etc., refer to the baby inside mother as “baby,” as in “when is your baby’s due date,” or “when are you going to have your baby?” or “how is your baby?”
The doctor, nurse, and midwife often tell mother, “There is your baby’s heart beat,” and “see, there is your baby’s head, there is your baby’s foot, there is your baby’s bottom,” and so on.
What do you think is inside mother? A tree? A giraffe? A whale? A macaque? A spider? An alien from outer space?
Do you think that baby inside her mother is a new form of creature waiting to scratch its way out of her belly to wreak havoc on mankind?
Do you think that baby inside mother is something else, not human, not alive, etc., until he or she emerges from mother’s body?
What justification can you possible have for denying that “baby” is an actual “baby?”
Of course, there is no real justification. The only reason someone would dare be so foolish as to claim that they do not believe a living human being during the fetal stage, or even during the embryonic stage is not alive and is not a human being and is not a human baby is denial, stubbornness, lack of education, or ignorance.
@JB
I’m sure you are sincere in your belief that PP focuses on prevention, rather than abortion, but the facts say otherwise. Abortion is where they make most of their money. Over the years, they have pressured their facilities to bring in more and more abortions, and as their number of abortions goes up, the number of other services they provide to pregnant women has gone down, to the point where most facilities don’t provide ANY other pregnancy services. As for birth control, again the facts dispute what you say; as birth control has become more available, the numbers – and the proportions as well – of abortions have risen along with it. Just from a statistical point of view, if you really wanted to reduce the numbers of abortions, it would make more sense to reduce the availability of artificial birth control!
More to the point, however, is your underlying assumption that if PP were to lose its funding, all the services it provides would somehow disappear from society. That’s false. There are so many other agencies that provide those services, and the money would simply go to those agencies rather than to PP. The services would continue at the same level, we just wouldn’t be funding the killing of the unborn along with them.
further to JB:
It’s really disingenuous of you to claim that the crimes found at PP, primarily by LiveAction, of aiding sex trafficking and hiding statutory rape, etc., were simply isolated instances of bad employees. In each type of transgression, it was demonstrated to be a widespread and institutional phenomenon, occurring more often than not. If you want to hear it “from the horse’s mouth” get a copy of the book ‘Unplanned’ by Abby Johnson, who worked for Planned Parenthood for eight years.
In response to everyone- In lieu of trying to make my point clear to you for a third time, I will only say this: If you don’t want an abortion, by all means, DON’T GET ONE! If you don’t want to support Planned Parenthood, then don’t! But by denying the freedom of choice for women everywhere, America would be taking a HUGE step backwards in the ongoing struggle for the equality of women in our society; not to mention the giant breach of privacy and freedom that America claims to be founded on.
Hi JB.
“If you don’t want an abortion, by all means, DON’T GET ONE!”
This “argument” is question begging. It assumes that abortion does not kill an innocent human being which is the very thing that we are claiming abortion does. If you were telling me of the evils of spousal abuse, I would certainly not respond by saying “Don’t like spousal abuse? Don’t abuse your spouse!” It does not at all address the fact that we have been arguing that abortion is an evil that should not be accepted by anyone, regardless of whether or not we are affected by it. I care if there is female genital mutilation going on in Africa, even if it does not at all affect me because it is a violation of a human right. Similarly, we claim that abortion is a violation of a human right. Saying “don’t like abortion don’t have one” does not at all address that claim.
“But by denying the freedom of choice for women everywhere, America would be taking a HUGE step backwards in the ongoing struggle for the equality of women in our society”
Again, this is question begging. It is assuming that abortion should be a right and that women need to be able to kill their unborn in order to be equal. If abortion is the taking of teh life of an innocent human being, then it is not needed for equality. If abortion does not unjustly take the life of a human being, then there is no need to justify abortion and it is perfectly acceptable.
JB,
The argument to not have an abortion is ridiculous and only works on an amoral act. How about this argument?: “Don’t like slavery? Don’t own a slave!” See? It doesn’t work. Abortion is the taking of a human life, and it is WRONG.
Also, where in the constitution are we guaranteed a right to privacy?
In amendments 5 and 14, it guarantees a right to life. On that stance alone, Roe V. Wade is unconstitutional.
What is your stance then on incest and rape? Make the woman have a child that was unwanted when conceived and will be unwanted when born? That choice isn’t up to you, it is up to the woman. Abortion is a personal decision that should only be made by the woman, and no one else. Besides, by making abortion illegal, there would only be an increase in back alley abortions which would lead to the deaths of the women who were driven there.
On a side note- Andrew, Amendment 14 states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Therefore, the law does NOT protect unborn fetuses.
JB, that language in Amendment 14 is pertaining to the definition of a U.S. citizen. It is not saying non-U.S. citizens don’t have a right to life. In fact it continues, “nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” You also ignored Amendment 5 which pertains to due process of law against criminals.
Tell me, what crime did the unborn baby commit when conceived in rape or incest that due process of law has dictated deprives him/her of his/her right to life?
We don’t make crimes legal because people might be harmed or even killed committing them. On that note, rape and incest are crimes for a reason. All rapists need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but that should not include condemning the second victim, the child, to death!
“What is your stance then on incest and rape?”
First of all, JB, notice that in bringing these issues up, you have abandoned the defense of abortion on demand, and we are now arguing about very specific conditions. But the exact same principle that was mentioned above still holds- that is, one can not kill an innocent human being. Notice I mentioned nothing about “abortion is immoral because someone chose to have sex.” Of course, rape is a terrible situation and I have nothing but compassion for a woman who has a pregnancy as a result of rape. But it would be a false compassion to try and tell her that it would be immoral to kill the innocent human being in her womb. Indeed, there is a conflict of interests between a woman who is experiencing an unwanted pregnancy and the unborn’s right to life. Whenever you have a conflict of interests, the law should fall on the side of teh one with more to lose. The unborn’s life is on the line and hence, the unborn’s right to life should prevail.
“Make the woman have a child that was unwanted when conceived and will be unwanted when born?”
Again, notice I never claimed that the right to life or the inherent dignity and moral worth of the fetus is based on whether or not it is wanted. That is irrelevant to the action of what abortion does which is to deprive the unborn of a right to life (moral right to life, not constitutional).
“That choice isn’t up to you, it is up to the woman.”
I never claimed abortion was up to me, and I don’t know what person out there would claim that they have the choice whether or not someone else has an abortion. I am claiming that it is a grave moral evil, and saying things like “it isn’t up to you, it’s up to her” doesn’t address anything. I realize it isn’t up to me but I am trying to put forth my case using reason, working with the assumption that a reasonable person may find it compelling. “it isn’t up to you, it’s up to her” really doesn’t interact with anything.
“Besides, by making abortion illegal, there would only be an increase in back alley abortions which would lead to the deaths of the women who were driven there.”
Why should the law be faulted because we foresee that people will break it and hurt themselves doing it? We would make abortion illegal precisely because it is so evil and dangerous. It’s illegal, meaning you shouldn’t do it. Furthermore, this argument is question-begging (as 90% of all abortion arguments are). It assumes that an abortion is a moral act and hence should be legal because when done improperly, people hurt themselves. Is the idea that, in general, even if something can be shown to be immoral but we have reason to believe that making it illegal will result in people attempting to engage in the immoral action and hurt themselves doing it, should we tolerate that evil act for teh sake of those people that will hurt themselves attempting it when it is illegal?
What is your stance then on incest and rape? Make the woman have a child that was unwanted when conceived and will be unwanted when born? That choice isn’t up to you, it is up to the woman. Abortion is a personal decision that should only be made by the woman, and no one else. Besides, by making abortion illegal, there would only be an increase in back alley abortions which would lead to the deaths of the women who were driven there.
Hey, JB, didja know those “back alley” abortionists are the same ones which decided to set up storefronts once abortion became legal?
And did you also know that the reports of deaths from illegal abortion were grossly exaggerated? So said the man who invented the phony stats, Dr. Bernard Nathanson. The founder of NARAL who became pro-life years later.
@ JB, concerning your appeal for exceptions on rape and incest.
What is substantially different ABOUT THE BABY in the womb of a raped woman compared to THE BABY in the womb of a woman under your ideal circumstances?
Nothing. So why should one of them be allowed to be killed and the other protected?
Please see this site: http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html
And actually take the time to consider the testimonies of the people’s lives who you are so quick to cast off as hopeless and worthless.
MAJOR difference between Pro-Lifers and Pro-Aborts: Hope vs. Despair.
You look at life so negatively. Life you to is not worth living (or even giving someone else the CHANCE! of living) if it doesn’t meet your utterly arbitrary quality of life standards.
Your side’s solution to Rape, Incest, Down Syndrome, Poverty, lack of education, emotional discomfort, or anything else that is less than your version of perfect? Just kill ’em.
We look at these scenarios and are moved with compassion to care for and love those in need. To build up, not tear down.
Does that ever bother you?