Jivin J’s Life Links 6-9-11
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- Politico notes that defunding Planned Parenthood is becoming a 2012 litmus test.
- Rebecca Taylor looks back at CA’s Proposition 71:
Californians did not realize that with Prop 71 they became venture capitalists funding speculative research that creates and destroys human embryos or that their money would be going to private universities like Stanford. I am certain that they do not understand that if cures do come, they will be paying the high cost along with everyone else. They won’t be getting a break on cures from research that they funded. I hope Californians have learned their lesson and I hope other states will learn from their mistakes.
- New research claims inserting IUDs directly after abortions poses fewer risks to women than previously thought:
Placing the IUD immediately increases the chance – but only slightly – that it will fall out within 6 months, the new study of 575 women has concluded.
- Switching to immediate insertion “could prevent more than 70,000 unintended pregnancies annually in the United States,” the research team, led by Dr. Paula Bednarek of the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, notes….
- The Washington Post has an article on polling research from the Public Religion Research Institute:
Americans, regardless of generation, are deeply conflicted as they wrestle with the legality and morality of abortion, with a substantial majority identifying themselves as both “pro-choice” and “pro-life,” according to a sweeping new survey.
While a solid majority — 56 percent — says abortion should be legal in most or all cases, 52 percent say abortion is morally wrong.
But federal law discourages that practice among low-income women covered by the Title X program. The requirement that no federal money be used for abortion services effectively blocks clinics from giving those women any kind of contraceptive on the same day and in the same facility where their abortion is performed.
The study was designed to see if IUDs, implanted immediately after an abortion or miscarriage, would remain in place. The study also gauged the risk of infection or tears of the uterus. All the volunteers had been pregnant for 5 to 12 weeks.
The IUDs were bought by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which paid for the study, an arrangement that avoided the federal restrictions.
6 months after insertion, the researchers found, IUDs had been expelled in 5% of the 258 women who had received an immediate insertion, compared to less than 3% of the 226 volunteers who had been required to wait. About four-fifths of the expulsions occurred within the first 2 months.
[Photo via babybumpdiaries.com]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Switching to immediate insertion “could prevent more than 70,000 unintended pregnancies annually in the United States,”
And they come to this conclusion how exactly?
Does this Buffett foundation also manufacture IUDs?
The Buffett Foundation is a pro-abortion, pro-population control group.
Not to nitpick, but a few things:
(1) Regarding the WaPo (AP) article, it states:
“Views on abortion have been stable, with 56 percent of Americans telling Gallup pollsters this year that it should be legal in most or all cases compared to 57 percent who said that in 1999.”
I’m not sure where that information came from, but it’s not correct.
Via Gallup’s own information (http://www.gallup.com/poll/147734/americans-split-along-pro-choice-pro-life-lines.aspx), in 1999 between 39 – 41% of the population said abortion should be legal in any/most where that number today is approximately 37%. On the flip side, in 1999 about 57% of the population said abortion should be illegal in most/all where that number today is approximately 61%. Since around 1995 there has been an uptick in people saying abortion should be illegal in all/most by 10% and a downtick in people saying abortion should be legal in all/most by 9%.
Hopefully can someone can call attention to this.
(2) If you read the report (http://www.publicreligion.org/objects/uploads/62/Millennials_Abortion_and_Religion_Survey_Report.pdf), you’d see it points out, and I quote, that “on the question of legality, when controlling for other characteristics, Millennials are surprisingly 1.3 times more likely than older Americans to say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases”. Unfortunately it doesn’t do the same as it relates to being always legal or most cases in comparison older Americans. I can only surmise why they wouldn’t, though in all honesty I’d just be inserting my personal biases into the poll/report, so I won’t. Also, on page 12, it also looks at GSS data, which has more people opposing abortions outside of the generally hard “hard” cases than supporting them, which I’d say is more of a pro-life than pro-choice position. It all boils down to what’s defined as “most”, though pro-choicers aren’t exactly burning down the doors to do so, instead choosing to interpret “most” as broad based support for abortion.
Oh well. It is what it is. I guarantee you the media will run with this, though.
And speak of the devil. The RCRC is championing the poll/report.
“The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC) applauds the findings of a major new survey released today that shows strong support for access to abortion among Millennials (those ages 18-29), mainline white Protestants, African American church-goers, and other religious groups. The survey confirms RCRC’s position that most Americans who are affiliated with a religious tradition support access to legal abortion.”
Thoroughly predictable and sad at the same time.
@Some Guy — I don’t know what to say about these polls. Yesterday I read that Romney and Obama are in a statistical dead heat, and today I read another poll that said Obama is ahead of Romney by double digits. They both can’t be right!!!
Not to hijack – but good news from ND. The recent EMILY’s list supporting appointee to the board of trustees, has resigned b/c of the controversy that erupted over her support for abortion. Score 1 for pro-life pressure:
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/news/local/chibrknews-chicago-businesswoman-resigns-from-notre-dame-board-20110608,0,612906.story