(Prolifer)ations 8-16-11
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- Culture Campaign reveals another assault against parental rights in CA – forced vaccinations. A new bill would allow the government to administer the dangerous HPV vaccine Gardasil, and other sexual health treatments, to children 12 years of age and up without parental consent. Predictably, this is backed by the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.
- Jakubczyk on Life happily reports on the Arizona Court of Appeals’ decision to lift the injunction against pro-life laws passed in 2009:[The court] examined the laws passed and determined that the legislature has the right to pass reasonably tailored laws to protect patients’ lives, to protect parents’ rights, to insure compliance with rights of conscience and to prevent patients’ from being at additional risk to unscrupulous abortionists.
- Down on the Pharm directs readers to a WorldNetDaily article on the Girl Scouts’ association with Planned Parenthood and its detrimental effects on enrollment. Many girls are leaving to join alternative organizations that espouse positive, pro-life values.
- Catholic Vote praises a victory for some UK nurses who were being forced to participate in chemical abortions once per week at an abortion clinic off hospital grounds until the Thomas More Legal Centre persuaded the hospital to respect the religious and conscience rights of the nurses. This situation could have implications even in the US.
- Christina Martin of Moral Outcry challenges Planned Parenthood’s director of African-American media relations Veronica Byrd (pictured below left) on her recent piece for the Huffington Post entitled, “Why African-Americans support abortion rights.” Martin writes:
- [Byrd] did mention hearing some “noise” coming from the religious right, and “small enclaves of the far left.” “Zealots,” as she called us who “portray us as unwitting dupes of a racist “abortion industry” that wants to keep us childless – or perpetrators of a “black genocide” attempting to obliterate our race. Thankfully, most African Americans know that is nonsense.” Do they now? Your need to address the noise from the right and the billboard campaigns would say otherwise. You don’t try and swat an insect you can’t see. You save your swatter for the big bugs that are buzzing in your ears, the ones you can’t ignore because they’re disturbing your peace.
- Abortion in Washington points out that the placement of Patty Murray on the Super Committee means Planned Parenthood will have a friend there protecting federal largesse toward their organization.
- Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life highlights WORLD Magazine’s “revealing story on the use of tissue from aborted babies for medical research,” cosmetics, and vaccines such as varicella (chicken pox):Some contend that since aborted unborn children have already died, we might as well make use of their bodies for a good end. But there is a moral difference between using the remains of a human being who has died of natural causes and using the remains of someone who has been unjustly killed.
“Only if nothing can be done to prevent the ongoing evil does the argument from salvaging good have merit,” write J.P. Moreland and Scott Rae. “Surely one is not justified in obtaining a benefit from evil while doing nothing to prevent it.”
- Abolitionist Society posts on the final three foundational questions in the abortion debate. The first two points were covered previously here.” Questions are:
1) Does a right to life even exist for anyone?
2) If it does exist, how and when is the right to life conferred to an individual?
3) Are there instances where a person’s choice has more value than another person’s right to their own life?
When it comes to PP, their “peace,” is directly connected to their pocketbooks. Any threat on the massive cash flow that comes from the blood of black babies must be swiftly addressed. Hey, let’s even make it seem like the growing outcry from the black community against abortion is nothing but a few “radicals.” Better yet we can focus on their religious beliefs and political affiliations which in the eyes of some diminish our black “status” and therefore our voice on the matter. In the past our skin color would have been enough to place us on the auction block together but nowadays our voting record seems to be proof of our ethnicity or lack of.
Clearly PP is worried that their support from African-Americans is waning.
[Photo via Meghan Hickey, Flickr]

Using tissue from aborted babies?
Hold up……they actually use “the blobs” for something??
I have been told over and over and over here that they are “just blobs.”
Is there a reputable source for cosmetic lines that do this? I did a google search and found nothing but contradictory information, which is disturbing because I use some of the supposedly “high end” cosmetics they talk about. This is sick; if it is true I will go back to using olive oil or something like that for moisturizer. It is beyond sick. Snopes says it isn’t true, Lifesite says it is, and I have no clue who is right.
sabella
No, Carla, they are “potential” people, only living if their mother loves them. *gag*
It makes me sick how abortion advocates act like they are doing something wonderful by using fetal remains for research. Just because these poor babies might help save some lives or advance research doesn’t mean that killing them is justified. I mean, I have a bunch of rare blood type organs that could save several lives, is it justified to kill me to obtain them? Crazy…
@sabella: Neocutis has a brand of “age-renewing” cosmetics that, by their own admission, does indeed use fetal cells, or at least cultures created from fetal cells. Quoted from the above link: “A small biopsy of fetal skin was donated following a one-time medical termination and a dedicated cell bank was established for developing new skin treatments.”
At best, Snopes is just plain wrong. I am not currently aware of other cosmetic lines which use fetal cells, but I have no doubt that the idea has at least been toyed with by other groups.
It is unfortunate that:
1) The Culture News blog either is unable to read the language of an actual bill and
2) That this site would simply support, as fact, a posting that at best, is ignorant, and at worst, is deliberately lying.
I’m not saying I support the CA Assembly Bill 499 – but “forced” vaccinations? Seriously?
EX-RINO, a twelve year is not able to make adult decisions and can be easily manipulated. If an adult convinces a twelve year old to do any number of things it comes really close to ‘forced’ conduct. Especially when they take the steps to keep the decision away from the childs legal guardian and the perps make bonko admistering the drugs to them.
I know, Ex-GOP. You’d think that people would be thrilled about a vaccine that can prevent cancer. Opposition to the vaccine is usually just ideological foolishness. Even if a person remained a virgin until marriage, they could contract HPV from any number of premarital activities that still don’t ruin one’s “technical virginity.” Or they could get it from a spouse who wasn’t similarly celibate before marriage, or was unfaithful during. And then there’s the horrific notion of getting an STI through sexual assault…an unfortunate occurrence entirely preventable if people got the vaccine.
Some young people have already died from complications of the vaccine, but then again abortion advocates don’t get riled up by death as long as babies keep dying too.
I know, Ex-GOP. You’d think that people would be thrilled about a vaccine that can prevent cancer.
25 girls or young women dead in 18 months’ time (after receiving the vaccine), one of which was 11 years old, four of which were 12 years old, and one of which was 15.
Yeah. As a mother facing a possible MANDATE that my children be given this vaccine, lemme just tell ya, I’m freaking STOKED. 9_9
This vaccine was not extensively tested. This vaccine caused adverse reactions that were swept under the rug. This is NOT “ideological foolishness”, this is me refusing to use my children’s blood to help line the pockets of big pharma.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2008/jun/judicial-watch-uncovers-new-fda-records-detailing-ten-new-deaths-140-serious-adverse-e
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB2ZvCWXSY0
Well, X said exactly what I was going to say. Meghan, this vaccine HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN TO PREVENT CANCER!!!!!!
truth – so even you admit that, at worst, it comes close to forcing. The context of the post says…”another assault against parental rights in CA – forced vaccinations.”
That, to me, is outright lying, which is unfortunate, since I think intelligent conversations could be had around this bill without stooping to lying.
Sydney – did a little research after this post – do you feel Merck’s phase 3, double-blind study was flawed?
I have been told over and over and over here that they are “just blobs.”
Carla, we all are, from one way of looking at it, even “Barack O’Blama.”
X-Gop, you really think that Big Pharma can be trusted to objectively study the drugs they stand to make BILLIONS of dollars off of? Did you know that once a vaccine is put on the schedule by a government agency its ABSOLVES Big Pharma (in this instance Merck) of any LIABILITY from lawsuits due to vaccine harm?
Don’t you think Big Pharma has friends in CA gov that stand to make a lot of money too forcing this vaccine on young girls and absolving Merck in the process? Its not about saving lives. Its all about money.
I didn’t ask if they could be trusted – I asked if you thought it was flawed, and how?
I don’t trust big oil, big pharma, big energy, big big box – big anything – but without any sort of facts, all I’m going to end up doing is sounding like some crazy old cranky dude who lives in the woods.
Their study wasn’t long-term. That’s all I need to know about it.
I haven’t actually looked at the study X-Gop so I don’t know if its flawed. I would say based on what I know about OTHER drug studies that yes, it probably is flawed but until I looked at it I couldn’t say yes, its flawed.
X –
How long of a study do you think is needed?
Also, JAMA found deaths in about 1 in a million doses. If the rate of cancer death of NOT getting it is much higher, would you support it then?
Does it bother you that Rick Perry added it to the state’s mandatory vaccination list?
Sydney – I’m going to look into it more, and I hope you do to. Unfortunately, in years past, people have freaked out about some vaccinations, and it has led to outbreaks of illnesses that should be long gone (like the measles outbreak in CA). I’m not saying there’s no reason to freak out – again, I’ve only looked into it a little. I just am not going to make a decision just because one site tells me.
How many 12 years olds are going to say no when all her friends are getting it? They aren’t old enough to be making a decision about a vaccine against an entirely preventable disease. These vaccines have life and death and potentially life long side effects. Parents should be involved in this decision. I have no problem with a woman making a decision to vaccinate herself, but these are children. Under the law they aren’t legally considered capable of consenting to the behavior that causes the disease, but they’re legally capable of making a complex medical decision? It doesn’t make sense.
EX-GOP, it bother’s me anytime a government representative tries to force citizens to do anything. And it does bother me specifically that Rick Perry, who campaigns as a champion for less government intrusion, would have made a vaccination mandatory. He has since said he made a mistake to do that. But it does give me pause. But I am still enthusiastically backing him to get rid of the ‘Debt Man Walking’.
It will be interesting to see who ends up the GOP nominee. I could easily paint a picture where Romeny wins. I could also easily paint a picture where Obama wins and has an edge in the house and senate. I think Obama now is like Bush in 2004 – he’s vulnerable, but only if the other side has a good candidate. I’m not convinced any of the current GOP field guys is that good candidate – but only time will tell. A lot can happen in a year and a couple of months.
You could easily paint a picture where Obama wins and has control of the house and senate again? I guess you are a really creative artist then. Were you also going to paint S&P giving us our AAA rating back and the people embracing the Obamacare mandate?
A lot can happen in a year and a couple of months.
Ex-RINO,
What do you think about Obama/Pinetta looking to take away the pensions of military service prsonel and moving them into 401k’s instead?
A lot can happen in a year and a couple of months.
Ex-RINO. the decimation seems limitless and endless under Obama. He really has been going after the military persomell though. Maybe he wants to try and unionize them. He threatened to cut off military personell pay at least two times I can think of and now he wants to go after their pensions. It is really scary to think how he could destroy America if he had another four years. It is scary that Obama would still get your vote.
Ex-GOP: Romney wins? With Perry in the picture?
Not likely.
Doug, Barack O’Blama? I see you’ve heard his latest lament, blaming his lousy economy on the “Arab Spring”, Japan’s earthquake, etc. I blame the 50 mil + who voted for him!
Ex-GOP,
Big Abortion is the worst of them all.
truth – first off, remember that I said multiple scenarios could easily happen, and a lot could happen in a year.
I do think one of those scenarios is that the GOP picks somebody like Bachmann or Perry that won’t appeal well to independents, and Obama hangs onto the White House.
Have you seen the trends on congress polling? Majority thinks incumbents need to leave, and on the most recent generic congressional ballot, the Dems had a decent size lead. The tea party has fallen in regards to approval ratings – I think (though it is early) that there is a very decent chance the house could flip.
The senate though, I think there’s a pretty good chance GOP takes that just because of the numbers – I believe 23 of the 33 seats up are dems/independents – so that will be harder to hold onto.
truth – on your last two questions, no strong feelings as of yet, though you are wrong on the 401K plan – it was suggested by a Pentagon panel of military advisors as an option.
Rasqual -
Romeny and Perry have the best chance – they have the most money.
It is early with Perry – my gut feeling is he’s going to be too extreme for the independents – so if he gets the nomination, it will be tougher for him than Romney. Romney would be very attractive to independents – not so much with the far right.
Perry is the darling at this point if only because people haven’t had a good chance to dissect his record. Give it a few weeks.
Ex-GOP: I think you’re only considering that attraction factor, for independents, with regard to Perry. There’s something new of late. A repulsion factor from Obama. That’ll matter.
There’s a large slice of independents for whom all Perry — or anyone else — has to do, is not be Obama.
Doug, Barack O’Blama? I see you’ve heard his latest lament, blaming his lousy economy on the “Arab Spring”, Japan’s earthquake, etc.
Hans, I was thinking of something like “Oblobma” – trying to work “blob” into it, but “O’Blama” sounded better.
The old rule of thumb for Presidents was “take your pain early,” i.e. in general have higher interest rates, do any spending-cutting in the first couple years, etc., then go hog-wild with “easy money” and expansive policies as election time comes around again.
That’s now vastly overshadowed by budget and deficit concerns, and the willingness of Congress to go along with any Presidential proposals. Really, what can Obama do to “make the economy better”? McCain didn’t have a magic wand, either. If we want to curtail gov’t spending, then much of the “stimulus” stuff and Keynesian approach goes out the window.
truth – on your last two questions, no strong feelings as of yet, though you are wrong on the 401K plan – it was suggested by a Pentagon panel of military advisors as an option.
Ex-RINO, it was suggested by Leon Pinetta who Obama appointed a few weeks ago.
Rasqual – that population you talk about has a name – it is a Republican.
truth – you are going to have to post a source – everything I have found it that it is from high level talks that have been going on for a while, and that Panetta commented on it when questioned (after it was broken by CBS) – but who knows whose idea it was.
A few other things though:
– Panetta said it would probably only affect future people, not anyone in the military now.
– This is government spending – I thought you GOPers hated government spending? Especially pensions – if anything i learned in Wisconsin is that pensions are and should be a thing of the past, right?
Ex-GOP: Who said GOPers hate government spending? You’re confusing the party with its putative first principles — something you shouldn’t do with Democrats either. Right?
Is defense an enumerated constitutional duty of the federal national government? If so, then that’s part of the definition of conservative “limited government.” If so, then it’s just snark to suggest that conservatives should hate spending on defense.
There’s a raft of non-enumerated spending by the federal national government. Pare that back, return responsibility for governing in those respects to the states, and let a whittled-down national federal government do its merest duties.
– This is government spending – I thought you GOPers hated government spending? Especially pensions – if anything i learned in Wisconsin is that pensions are and should be a thing of the past, right?
Ex-GOP, the teachers in Wisconsin (and everybody else in the USA) owe a great debt of gratitude to every military service member. They get paid a lot less than teachers annually and teachers don’t sacrifice a fraction of what service members do for our country. The fact that you don’t see that obvious difference is shameful.
Rasqual: Is defense an enumerated constitutional duty of the federal national government? If so, then that’s part of the definition of conservative “limited government.” If so, then it’s just snark to suggest that conservatives should hate spending on defense.
There’s a raft of non-enumerated spending by the federal national government. Pare that back, return responsibility for governing in those respects to the states, and let a whittled-down national federal government do its merest duties.
Agreeing, mostly, Rasqual. Deficit-spending, per se, is bad. I will say that past a point, and we’re well past it, spending on the military hurts the standard of living of a country’s citizens.
truth -
Come on, don’t be lame. In my job I work with military people – I appreciate the sacrifice, you appreciate the sacrifice. No need to be overly dramatic in trying to make your point. I’m the one who supports teachers and obviously thinks that pensions are good for some employees (government or others) – you would be the one that the viewpoint is less obvious about.
You and I BOTH know that during the Wisconsin collective bargaining debates, the common word was that pensions were the thing of the past. I didn’t see you or anybody else drawing lines between good pensions and bad pensions.
So fine, let’s keep the pensions – raise them even – let’s just raise taxes and make sure we’re sufficiently covering our commitments.
rasqual –
cute post. Who the stink uses ‘putative’ in an online forum?
I know the GOP doesn’t mind defense spending – they don’t mind any sort of spending. They just are less moral about it than even the democrats. At least the democrats are honest to say “hey, we want to spend more, but we’re going to tax higher to pay for it”. The GOP says “we’re going to spend more, but we’re going to whine and complain and yell if anyone tries to raise taxes and we’ll sound all pure about it.”
Me and my man Mike Huckabee can see it – I think he called the GOP ‘budget busters”.
But at least they talk a good game. Though I’ve never heard them use ‘putative’, so I guess the game you talk is even more impressive!
Ex-RINO,
Your inability to see the diference between the sacrifice of a soldier and a teacher is telling. Next time a teacher loses his or her limbs or life for the our country then come and cry to me aboout them having to pay something into their own pensions.
truth – did you even read my post? You are creating your own reality here – it is sad to see.
Ex-RINO, what is sad to see is that you were so disillusioned with Bush that you vested yourself enirely into an incompetent Obama administration. Free yourself by admitting that he has been an abject failure. Look at his signature legistion Obamacare. It has our economy and businesses tied in knots cause it has been deemed unconstitutional by a federal circuit court. If he cared about the US instead of his re-election campaign he would be bringing it to the Supreme Court for resolution rather than delaying judgement (at the expense of the American people and businesses).
What about project gunrunner? Here is a link to a speech given by our Deputy Attorney General in March of 2009 where he outlines the ATF selling and tracing guns in order to ‘disrupt’ the Mexican drug cartels.
http://nation.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/11/flashback-video-obama-directly-linked-project-gunrunner
And you still have Holder and Obama in 2011 denying knowledge of any such operation. How can you still back them when they blatentely lie to us?
truth -
Obama’s administration has done just fine – his biggest failure is actually trying to work with the GOP, a party that has moved so far back into the dark ages that they would have kicked Dick Cheney out for being too moderate.
The President can’t choose supreme court cases, the supreme court chooses them. They said early in the game they would let this one play out through the courts. You never know what justices that have become politicians, but I would be surprised if the case gets thrown out – the justices rarely limit the power of congress and their ability to pass laws.
So what GOP potential nominee are you supporting?
“Obama’s administration has done just fine”. An outright delusion. “His biggest failure is actually trying to work with the GOP”. An outright untruth. He wouldn’t even invite the opposition to the White House the first year. He shoots daggers at Paul Ryan at the healthcare meeting he had long promised to be on C-SPAN and finally, grudgingly acceded to as a one-off. He invited Ryan to a press conference to excoriate his budget plan to his face. He uses taxpayer money for a campaign bus disguised as a listening tour. He makes Nixon look genteel in his accusations of all opponents.
It’s no wonder. He hadn’t been in office long enough to work with anyone across the aisle. Those who voted for this man-child have created a monster.
I disagree Hans – if you got outside of Fox News for a while, you’d see that Obama has been HAMMERED by the far left for compromising too much and working too much with the right.
And I wish he would have dropped the GOP input earlier in the health care debate – once they decided to go the obstructionist route, he should have left them all behind.
I disagree to agree. :)
“You’d think that people would be thrilled about a vaccine that can prevent cancer. Opposition to the vaccine is usually just ideological foolishness.”
It’s not about opposition to a cancer vaccine. It’s about parents wanting to be involved in the decision as to whether their children should be administered a new vaccine that has been associated with serious adverse reactions, including fainting, seizures, and death. A new vaccine for a certain few strains of HPV – a disease that is sexually transmitted and not nearly as communicably infectious as those that standard mandatory vaccines are meant to prevent, such as measles and polio. A certain few strains that may or may not cause cervical cancer, and do not lead to cervical cancer in the majority of cases. If you think it’s worth the risk for your child to get the vaccine, then go right ahead and see to it that your child receives it. But why not allow other parents to decide whether a vaccine that can possibly cause fainting, seizures, or death is in the best interest of their own children?
“Opposition to the vaccine is usually just ideological foolishness.”
In other words, “Christians/conservatives are prudes.” Slick of you to jump on the opportunity to make that point. Sure, the scenarios you outlined for contracting HPV aren’t impossible – there’s a whole variety of possible scenarios out there for contracting HPV, and nobody is arguing otherwise; but it doesn’t mean that parents should be taken out of the equation, whether they are Christian/conservative prudes or not.