(Prolifer)ations 9-20-11
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.
- Catholic Vote analyzes the HPV controversy which continues to dog Gov. Rick Perry in his presidential race. Dr. Diane Harper, a professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (and former researcher on the Gardasil vaccine) is against the vaccine for school children and for that reason, has pulled her support. She states, “Ninety-five percent of women who are infected with HPV never, ever get cervical cancer…. It seemed very odd to be mandating something for which 95 percent of infections never amount to anything.”
- Susan Tyrrell at Moral Outcry takes on the controversy caused by Rev. Pat Robertson’s callous statements to a man whose wife suffers from Alzheimer’s. His life-affirming advice? Dump her and marry your girlfriend – just make sure your wife gets medical care. Tyrrell compares Robertson’s statements to those made by last year by Calvary Chapel founder Chuck Smith, who advised a woman that abortion was acceptable in her case of conjoined twins. She writes:
At first glance I mourned Robertson’s response but dismissed it as being relevant…; it’s very relevant, though. Robertson’s comments are the result of what happens when a culture of death permeates a society so much it creeps into the church.
- The Anti-Abortion Gang posts on abortion apologist Rachel Maddow’s refusal to let the truth get in the way of a good tweet. Recently she posted a photo (shown left; click to enlarge) of pro-lifers supposedly picketing a child’s middle school during a parents’ night because of an abortionist in attendance. Maddow’s attempt at spin failed miserably, though, as the photo shows an assembly of 200 – far more than the 5 people actually in attendance – and the crowd is even dressed for the wrong season! The photo was actually taken at a December pro-life rally outside abortionist LeRoy Carhart’s clinic.
- Fletcher Armstrong tells how the Alliance Defense Fund is helping Christian and conservative college campus groups to apply for free money available to student groups. Universities have been doling out money to left wing organizations routinely and in some cases illegally denied the same consideration for religious and/or conservative organizations.
- Coming Home asks readers to allow the Catholic Church to work out its own issues in regards to Fr. Frank Pavone and Priests for Life, rather than allow bitterness to reign.
- Oops… did Cecile say it again? Live Action scoops on Randi Zuckerberg’s (Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s sister) public note on Facebook, which relays her conversation with Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards. It appears Cecile may have led Zuckerberg to believe “that Planned Parenthood provides countless services around women’s health that many of us don’t even know about: preventative services, screenings for depression, pap smears, STD tests, vaccines for cervical cancer, mammograms, and much much more.”
When confronted with the post, PP denied ever making the claim but we recall the TV interview of Richards in which she claimed PP offers mammograms. So much for that darn fact-checking thing.
- Family Research Council’s blog reports more success stories with adult stem cells including quarterback Peyton Manning’s recent surgery.
- Accepting Abundance discusses the desensitization of children to evil, and describes a teachable moment when her daughter was moved to tears by the Biblical adoption story of Moses as seen in the movie, The Prince of Egypt.
Sep.20, 2011 3:00 pm |
Blogs |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Pat Robertson’s comment about divorce shouldn’t be a surprise given many Christians’ shallow views of marriage as simply a way to increase happiness. If it isn’t providing happiness, then it is a hardened heart that says divorce is the answer, as Jesus described in reference to Mosaic Law. (Mt 19:8-9)
So, because Maddow used the wrong picture in a tweet that somehow diminishes the atrocity of anti-choice groups picketing the school where a doctors child attends? During a PTA meeting? That is intimidation of the first degree not protesting. They should be charged and jailed.
That is SO far out of line I don’t even know where to start….
For the 200th time… Planned Parenthood does offer breast cancer screenings, cervical cancer screenings, STD screenings, pregnancy screenings, as well as birth control, vasectomies, and much more… Do your own research and stop believing everything you read on the internet.
They do not provide mammograms period. They should stop saying they do. Breast cancer screenings include a brochure and a topical exam.
According to PP standards, my junior high sweetheart also did “breast cancer screenings.” LOL!!
Really Ninek? So your high school sweetheart was a doctor or a nurse practitioner trained in the early detection of breast and cervical cancer? Yea I didn’t think so. You humor leaves a lot to be desired…
Susie – Yes some PP’s do offer Mammograms and the ones that do not still refer clients to OBGYN’s that do after they are screened and it is determined they need further treatment. You see it is all about early detection.
Just Goggle “Planned Parenthood saved my life” and you can read all the firsthand accounts of women who had their breast and cervical cancer detected early by Planned Parenthood.
Biggz, did you know more actual breast cancer is caught by the woman’s lover than by mammograms or doctor/nurse exams? Professional cancer screenings catch a lot of false positives because every woman’s breasts are different. But a long time lover usually notices even small changes very quickly. I’ve even had a doctor recommend my husband doing the ‘self exam’ monthly instread of me!
I bet we’d catch a lot more early cancer by encouraginf women to remain in long term stable relationships than to frequent PP and their message of casual sex. What’s more, since birth control pills are class 1 carcinogins that increase breast cancer risk as well as abortion gravely increasing breast cancer risks, PP isn’t really helping the overall cancer problem.
Regarding the disgraceful counsel of Pat Robertson, this is what happens when Christians reject the cross as an integral part of their faith in their daily walk with Christ.
Love that abandons another when things are tough is not really love–at least, not the deepest sort, the sort we are called to in imitation of Christ.
Biggz – you refer us to “planned parenthood saved my life.”
What will you say to the aborted fetus that meets you when you die for continuing this propaganda? Planned parenthood, for any good that it does totally negates it when it kills off a clump of cells, otherwise known as the beginning of human life.
Just curious ..
Did anybody actually go to Maddow’s twitter feed? Unfortunately, I’ve noticed the honesty of a lot of people posting and running blogs isn’t as strong as it should be, so I went and checked…it actually links to a Washington Post article with that picture in it – but the article is about the subject…so the blast should be towards the Washington Post, not Maddow.
On a recent poll showing of all that candidates which candidate is the most pro choice it has Mitt Romney FAVORABLY winning. I would just like to show anyone who has not seen this video already this kind of information.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
Ron Paul is the BIGGEST Pro-Life advocate out of ALL of the potential Nominees. Romney has flip-flopped on every issue for the past decade, I just want people to see that.
Thank you! :)
Planned Parenthood is the devil: the appearance of good masking nothing but blood, suffering, and body parts.
Biggz, we are grown women and we are not fooled.
“What will you say to the aborted fetus that meets you when you die for continuing this propaganda?”
You do realize that not everyone has your vision of the afterlife?
“as well as abortion gravely increasing breast cancer risks,”
Not according to the CDC and mainstream medicine.
“PP and their message of casual sex. ”
Pray tell, how to they promote a message of “casual sex?” You do realize that married women go to PP for their gynencological health that includes birth control. Oh right, you folks want to criminalize that, too. Right? And BTW, of a person wants to have safe casual sex, what business is it of yours?
“Biggz, we are grown women and we are not fooled”
I and lots of other grown women ”stand with Planned Parenthood.”
No, Biggz, grown women understand grown up biology. And they also understand that if you choose your action, you choose your consequence. And grown up women also understand that human life, no matter how it comes to us, is the greatest gift ever.
Biggz, no matter what you say or believe, no matter the crap the PP throws out, you can never, ever , ever win this one. I understand you will try. It’s for nothing. You will always be wrong.
Love wins.
“What will you say to the aborted fetus that meets you when you die for continuing this propaganda?”
You do realize that not everyone has your vision of the afterlife?
Well, hey, he could talk to former fetuses who were aborted and are now living. Melissa Ohden, Brandi Lozier, Gianna Jessen…
“What’s more, since birth control pills are class 1 carcinogins that increase breast cancer risk as well as abortion gravely increasing breast cancer risks, PP isn’t really helping the overall cancer problem.”
There is no such thing as a “Class 1 carcinogen”, unless you are referring to Group 1. Would you even be able to competently explain what it means to be a “Group 1 carcinogen”, or what the significance of falling under that category is? I highly doubt it. Further to that, do you even know why certain kinds of contraceptives are classified as carcinogenic? It’s because they contain estrogen. Hmm… where else can you find estrogen?
“Would you even be able to competently explain what it means to be a “Group 1 carcinogen”, or what the significance of falling under that category is? I highly doubt it.”
Absurd. It is explained at the link and it isn’t very complicated:
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/GeneralInformationaboutCarcinogens/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens
Joan, I have seen it refered to as both ‘class’ and ‘group’ usually I see it as class, so that’s the one I chose. Either way, it means there is a proven link between the substance and cancer. Yes, estrogen exists in the human body, especially in the female. But so does testosterone, yet flooding the system with it has acknowledged and known risks. Such risks that, excepting rare medical conditions, we don’t let people put extra testosterone in their bodies just because they want a certain affect or want to maintain a certain lifestyle. There are real, serious, and long term dangers and changes with flooding the body with too much estrogen too. But not only is pretty much anyone able to get a daily dose from any doctor (now probably for free!) Without any specific medical *need* for it, but high dose is even availible without a prescription! That feminists and the medical community at large ignore and downplay these risks is highly misogynistic and a system of a male-driven ‘free sex’ obession that turns women into faux men or pawns at best, completely ignoring what’s best for them in this suicidal headlong rush to make sex in any form imaginable as common as breathing.
Well, since the information on Group 1 Carcinogens is readily available on the web, even on Wikipedia, those whose intelligence you “doubt” can easily read for themselves. Estrogen is found in many places, and there are natural and synthetic types.
The PIll is being taken by younger and younger women who then delay their first full-term pregnancies. This increases the risk of breast cancer. Delaying first full-term pregnancy is one thing, via abstinence. Adding synthetic hormones into the mix is a recipe for disaster.
Thank you for the link, hippie. While perusing it, something caught my eye:
“Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Note: There is also convincing evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the endometrium and ovary)”
Does that mean we can finally put to bed this nonsense about contraceptives giving you cancer? Not likely.
“Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Note: There is also convincing evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the endometrium and ovary)”
Does that mean we can finally put to bed this nonsense about contraceptives giving you cancer? Not likely.
Uhh… no, because contraceptives DO increase the risk of a particular type of cancer, even if they may confer protective effects against another type of cancer. So, I guess we can give ourselves breast cancer so we don’t have to get ovarian/endometrial cancer?? It isn’t nonsense, Joan, it’s right there in black and white.
“safe casual sex”
There’s no such thing.
Hormonal contraception with man-made hormones are in the same class as tobacco, radiation and asbestos. I hope that makes some people pause. Mayo clinic confirmed that.
Man-made estrogen is a poor substitute for the real and natural thing.
And if you think that those man-made hormones are no-big-deal – just talk with the people who have has complications from the Pill (I know two people who had blood clots directly related to the pill and one is waiting for a double lung transplant right now as a result).
Or how about the millions of women (and men) affected by DES, a man-made hormone given routinely to pregnant women from the 1950’s thru the 1970’s – their offspring were affected with infertility, early cancers of the reproductive organs, incompetent cervixes, misshapen reproductive organs and a whole host of problems.
I am one of those affected by the ‘benign’ man-made hormones. The experts have no idea what will happen to us when we are in menopause. And they found the insult to the body was not only to us – but to our offspring as well.
So as much as people say ‘no dig deal’ I’m here to say it is a WAY BIG deal. When we tamper with nature, we frequently get an inferior result.
So with all the evidence, it’s hard to fathom such a cavalier attitude toward hormonal contraceptives. I thought that people were concerned with women’s (and men’s) health.
And they found the insult to the body was not only to us – but to our offspring as well.
This is very true, and it’s not something we often think about.
“Uhh… no, because contraceptives DO increase the risk of a particular type of cancer, even if they may confer protective effects against another type of cancer.”
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/oral-contraceptives#2
Any increase in the likelihood of breast cancer as a result of using contraceptives (containing estrogen) is both (A) minimal at best and (B) disputed by conflicting research. To go around boldly claiming that contraceptives are going to give you cancer is at best a half-truth, and a half-truth is no better than a lie.
I thought that people were concerned with women’s (and men’s) health.
No, they’re concerned with doing what they want, when they want it, and having it consequence-free. God forbid we should have to exercise some amount of self-control in the sex department. Just give me a pill for that STD and a pill to keep any little “punishments” from being conceived. (But even if they are, hey! We have the chop shop backup plan!) So no, health is really not the concern. “Looking” healthy and sexy – yes. “Being” truly healthy – not so much.
“No, they’re concerned with doing what they want, when they want it, and having it consequence-free.”
While we’re accusing each other of ulterior motives, I’ll come right out and say that I don’t believe for one second that the opposition to hormonal contraception here is so much as even minimally driven by an earnest belief that it can cause cancer. It’s all part of a religious and social agenda; considerations for health are tertiary, at best, and simply window dressing.
Speak for yourself Joan. My family was horribly wronged regarding hormonal items – and when I went to PP as a young and foolish girl, NO ONE ever asked my family history. I knew it – but did not connect the dots until later. They were so happy to push the pills, they did not even care!
I want all women whole, healthy, functioning and well. EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM. And I dare-say that every pro-life poster here wants all people well … And the pro-choicers want SOME of the people well … since it’s the pro-choicers want some of the humans – the unborn – dead via abortion. I would not consider that healthy for unborn, for sure. Tell that to my friend who can not have children due to her abortion history. Yes – real healthy for her! (sarcasm).
I bring women to their doctors’ appointments, to their children’s appointments and even helped a young woman new to this country get the proper medical care and looked at figuring out her medical bills when Planned Parenthood turned her away for care.
Good golly. ‘All part of a religious and social agenda; considerations for health are tertiary, at best, and simple window dressing.’ What a pile of manure.
Sorry – I know that is not totally loving – and I got to call them as I see ’em.
joan, FYI, I don’t think the Pill should be made illegal. I DO believe, however, that they should be informed of all the possible risks before taking it.
So, obviously THIS religion person feels differently than others on this board. I took the Pill years ago until I found out more about it by researching on my own – my doctor, upon prescribing it, never explained anything to me, and I was too naive and trusting to even know what questions to ask. I will never take the Pill again because of what I found out from my research, and I believe other women have the right to know about risks before putting it into their bodies.
Joan, it’s not tertiary, it’s interconnected. We crazy religious types believe in helping the whole person and striving for what’s right and best for the whole individual. Casual sex is detrimental to both mental/emotional and physical health, hormonal contraceptives are detrimental to both mental/emotional and physical health, abortion is detrimental to both mental/emotional and physical health. That we care about more than one thing doesn’t mean that any one thing is ‘window dressing’. We recognize encouraging hormonal contraceptives to allow for casual sex is detrimental to a woman’s emotional and physical health. We *also* recognize that a woman in a loving, long term, monogamous relationship that is using hormonal contraceptives to avoid pregnancy is putting her mental and physical health in jeopardy. We can be concerned about the cancer risk at the same time and with the same truthfulness as we are concerned with the bloodclot risk, emotional side effects, other physical side effects, and the possible abortion risk. Our hearts, and brains, are plenty complex enough to understand and hold more than one aspect at a time.
No idea why anyone listens to anything Robertson says at all.
No idea why anyone listens to anything Robertson says at all.
Yeah…. Ol’ Pat should take a swig from a hip flask before many of the things he says,.