New Stanek poll: How many states are down to one abortion clinic?
I have a new poll question up that will test your pro-life knowledge:
How many states do you think are down to one abortion clinic?
Vote on the lower right side of the home page.
The majority of you were probably wrong on the previous poll, although to be fair I asked the question before Rick Santorum won three states in one day…
If you voted, find your own brightly colored flag on either the U.S. or International map…
As always, make comments to either the previous or current poll here, not on the Vizu website.
Feb.18, 2012 9:03 am |
Polls |
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.
sad to say not ours………… cleveland has 3 that i know of and akron has 1 that i know of
PS – If you know the answer, don’t give it away!
ah i forgot about PP the PP in bedford ohio ( halley berry is from there ) they do the abortions. plus 3 more PPs that did not used to but a few are now doing the RU486
I think Santorum is still the next to drop…
My area has several although several have closed in the last 20 years. But I could still go for a late term abortion in my neck of the woods. Heartbreaking.
‘We Are Stronger’: Atheists To Hold Massive Rally On National Mall Next Month
By Candice Leigh Helfand
February 17, 2012 1:39 PM
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/02/17/we-are-stronger-atheists-to-hold-massive-rally-on-national-mall-next-month/
———————————————————————————————————————-
The photo that accompanies the story is from the ‘Restore Sanity’ rally organized shortly before the2010 midterm elections. This rally was promoted extensively and attended by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.
I hope that ONLY atheists attend the rally in March.
I expect they could hold it in theWhite House Rose Garden.
The MENSA atheist could meet in the Lincoln bedroom.
I am sure this planned event of microscopic proportions will not escape the notice of the media mavens.
hi sydney…i used to date a guy in Erie PA and we used to commute back a forth. its not to far to drive. i was on the sidewalk once and a guy and a girl pulled up with PA plates. i wasnt sure why but she went in to have an abortion.
sydney i live in ohio
Do we include states where there is less than one baby killilng site?
I don’t even have a guess as to how many states are down to one abortion clinic. I would be very curious, however, to see how the states with fewer clinics line up across the board in terms of healthcare, access to birth control, et cetera. I suspect that states with one clinic are politically conservative and have lower access to birth control. On one hand, although I loathe abortion and would love to see it a closed book (Can you imagine living in a world without it? To live without it would mean that women and men enjoy full equality, there would be no rape, and healthcare- including prenatal care- would be a basic human right! Someday, we will live in this world. I can’t wait!), I would be interested in seeing how states are going about doing this. Are they changing their laws to include measures that will reduce the need for women to seek abortions? Or are they simply closing down clinics? It’s something that I am very interested in seeing, indeed.
It’s been awhile since I’ve been here, but regarding the last poll question: If I had been asked, I would have said Rick Santorum. Since he’s apparently been doing very well for himself as of late, I think the next to drop will be Gingrich.
Okay, so maybe it’s wishful thinking…
I know the answer!!
I believe the answer’s Mississippi. And what a shining star of progress it is, with some of the worst infant and maternal mortality rates in the country, not to mention highest teen pregnancy rates and lowest high school graduation rates.
Where are all the blessed crisis pregnancy centers???
I had to guess. I know there’s only one in Mississippi. I’m also, like, 99% sure there’s only one in North Dakota. So my answer was two. I wonder if I was right or wrong.
(I wanted to say four for Montana and Idaho, but that would have been a complete guess as I know little about those states.)
South Dakota has only one (planned parenthood) abortuary in Sioux Falls; but I think Dr. Marv Buehner in Rapid City is doing RU-486 abortions, so that counts as two in my book.
One of the Plains states just shut down the last one (or was it down to one?)
I’m hoping for the day we can vote with our feet and move to Abortion-Free states. It will be like Free or Slave. Life or Death states.
Ken, Hans – there is no such state… yet!
I know Mississippi is one so I chose one but not sure about others.
“I hope that ONLY atheists attend the rally in March.” – well if it’s in support of sanity and/or reason then that would probably be the case.
Found Trig’s birth certificate yet?
Reality: I believe atheists gave us Mao’s revolution, as well as the Russian one.
Tens of millions dead on their account.
Modernity in action.
A sight to behold!
Tut tut rasqual, talk about disregarding the facts.
No wars have been fought in the name of atheism. Some have been fought in the name of religion, some on political grounds, some on resource control grounds.
Communist revolutions have been just that, communist.
Reality –
Atheism is a necessary part of communism and always has been. Atheistic regimes have killed more people than any wars in the name of religion. Stalin alone was responsible for the deaths of almost 20 million people.
Most communists may be atheists but they don’t act on the basis of their atheism. They act on the basis of their communism.
Most wars have been started by and fought by men. Does that mean that war is fought on the grounds of being male?
“Atheistic regimes have killed more people than any wars in the name of religion.” – that simply is not true.
How many people were killed in world war two?
World War II was not fought in the name of religion. However, I think about 60 million people died as a result of WWII – not sure if this includes the victims of the Holocaust or not.
Are you sure? Almost everyone involved was a member of one faith or another so it must have been fought in the name of religion – if we follow rasqual’s logic anyway ;-)
I think you are fairly correct on the numbers.
The regimes of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and (I believe) Idi Amin killed people in the pursuit of an atheistic state. This is similar to the Crusades being fought for a religious purpose although certain soldiers did not actually practice that religion – we still call the Crusades a war fought in the name of religion. You are trying to separate communism from atheism. These leaders would not accept a religious communist – indeed they would tell you there is no such thing.
“The regimes of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and (I believe) Idi Amin killed people in the pursuit of an atheistic state.” – that is completely untrue. They did what they did for various reasons, none of which was ‘in the pursuit of an atheistic state’. Stop perpetrating dishonesty.
Tell me who and when anyone declared ‘we will fight this war to entrench atheism and get rid of religion. I wish you luck because it hasn’t happened. The nearest would be someone wishing to entrench a communist state and needing to remove the power of religion within certain societies. It wasn’t for atheism, it was for communism.
War in the name of athesim would be pointless anyway. No victor could actually stop someone from believing in a deity.
Atheists are less inclined to violence and war anyway.
In case you can’t figure it out, I left the ‘ off the end of
‘we will fight this war to entrench atheism and get rid of religion.’
Reality –
I have to wonder if you actually believe what you write. Yes, it was just an unimportant coincidence that all those maniacal leaders were atheists because atheists are “less inclined to violence and war anyway.”
Please give me some evidence to support that statement because I have not seen any evidence to back-up that claim.
Also – once more, you cannot separate communism and atheism: this is not a random and unconnected occurrence. BTW Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot all said that they wanted to eradicate religion.
Reality –
Not sure if you are going to respond to my last post, but I will be going to bed now and just wanted to leave you (or more likely others who will read this ) with a source if you need one. Although, to me this is like trying to have to find a source to tell someone the sky is blue. It is such a well-known fact about atheism being a bedrock of communism.
Whether the despot was Fidel Castro or Pol Pot or Stalin, the sentiment was the same: “Religion is poison,” as Mao Tse-Tung was said to have stated. Wherever they went, from East to West, from Africa to Asia, from Phnom Penh to St. Petersburg, communists pursued an all-out assault on religion. Communists quibbled over the details of how to implement Marx’s vision, but they were unanimous in one thing: religion was the enemy, a rival to Marxist mind control, and it had to be vanquished regardless of costs and difficulties.
http://www.globalmuseumoncommunism.org/features/war_on_religion
As mildly interesting as all that may be, it doesn’t change the fact that none of those people embarked on a campaign with atheism as it’s main aim. Their focus was on entrenching communism or similar.
As I stated earlier, there was a need to negate the power of religion. Your statement that they all wanted to eradicate religion plus the cited words “religion was the enemy, a rival to Marxist mind control” support this.
And why might this be? Because communism, like religion can be, is a doctrine of purity and total adherence – totalitarianism. Democratic societies prosper with a mix of theisms and atheism. Communism can’t prosper while religion fights for power over peoples lives.
Therefore atheism in such cases is a means to an end, not the end itself. War is not declared in the name of atheism.
“Atheistic” regimes are not truly so. They extinguish religion meaning all along to replace the void with the State as the one true god.
You may fear a Santorum regime, but I think it would be much farther from a theocracy than a second Obama term. We are sliding into a theocracy with the government as god.
Reality –
There are none that are so blind as those that will not see. As repeatedly stated by these leaders, atheism was not the means to an end – it was the intended result. It was not a byproduct of communism. Communism (and fascism) is a byproduct of atheism. When people believe that there is no other ultimate authority (ie. God) – another person(s) become the ultimate authority and freedom is forfeit.
We are seeing this today in all reforms sponsored by atheists. They do not pray, so rather than allow others to pray in public spaces – no one is allowed to pray. Private clubs and associations, like the Boy Scouts, cannot exist freely with their own set of beliefs. The health care “mandates” (how do you like that term?) also will not allow for any dissension. Nobody wants to outlaw contraception, those who want it can still access it, but, again, that is not good enough – all must pay. The list goes on and on.
Every atheistic legal move I have encountered has involved destroying another’s belief and restricting freedom. In fact, atheism has to do that because it, itself, believes in nothing.
Reality: You’re fighting a proxy war just here, ironically enough.
The point of arguing that religious folk are so dangerous (because they fight “in the name of” their beliefs, or whatever) seems to be to elevate the value of unbelief. “Atheists don’t fight in the name of their unbelief.”
That’s missing the point entirely, which is that their atheism doesn’t prevent atheists from fighting in the name of anything at all. The superset of things people fight for includes things atheists fight for — and kill for, in horrific numbers. Killings for “religious reasons” (many of which, historically, turn out to be quite unrelated to religious belief) are way down the scale, numbers-wise, compared with other things people fight for — including things only an atheist could love (such as worship of the State as the absolute power and mass starvation of anyone standing in the way of u/dys/topia).
You had affirmed: “if [the march is] in support of sanity and/or reason then [it might be that only atheists will attend].” My response mocked the pretensions of modernity exemplified by atheistic hubris (“we’re the people of sanity and reason”). Since nothing mocks that hubris more than the mere citation of the Russian and Maoist revolutions (well, I could have added the French as well), I did so.
On the other hand, your defense seems of little value in sustaining a high view of atheists when you resort to claiming that they are the useful idiots of these revolutions. Mass murderous revolutions conducted by, and advanced on the backs of, atheists.
Wonderful contrast with theists there, Reality. ’preciate it. ;-)
Rasqual – Well put!
BTW – How many states are down to one abortion clinic?
Gees Hans, talk about making things difficult! On one hand I must applaud your recognition that there aren’t ‘atheistic regimes’ but on the other I must disagree with you on the government being a theocratic style replacement god.
Maureen, unless you can come up with some supporting evidence for your claim that atheism is the raison d’etre for the activities of communists I shall just need to file it under ‘claims so blatantly wrong they defy even mirth’.
“so rather than allow others to pray in public spaces – no one is allowed to pray” – that simply is not true.
“Every atheistic legal move I have encountered has involved destroying another’s belief and restricting freedom.” – utter rubbish.
“In fact, atheism has to do that because it, itself, believes in nothing.” – also untrue.
Rasqual, I’m impressed that you could fit so many mixed analogies, falsehoods and inaccurate comparisons into so few words!
I realize, Reality, that the horrors unbelievers have done in the name of any of a number of causes they find of ultimate value (in the absence of God) is an embarrassment to you and other secularists. It simplifies the world to demonize theists and elevate the Enlightenment, I know, and I realize it’s of existential comfort — albeit as a delusion — to you folk. But modernity led directly to the revolutions I spoke of. That’s why we had the philosophical crises of the last century, Reality. Yes, many of my fellow theists are blithely unaware of all that. But that many atheists and neutral secularists remain oblivious to it all as well, and act as if modernity were still intact, is really an insult to the powers of reason which, alone, they purport to find comfort in.
These are complex issues, and atheists are ill-served by mirroring fundamentalist epistemologies in their own simple ways.
Reality –
I cannot help the fact that you are choosing to shut your eyes tightly, plug your ears and blather nonsense to stop yourself from having to deal with the truth. You are the one without any facts at all to back up your claims. The leaders of these communist countries gave quotes about their views on religion. You also did not respond to any of my points other than to ridicule them. As if your opinion from on high somehow decides the issue. It is worth responding to you because, although, you may (or may not) be as oblivious as you appear, others who read this will not be.
Ironic name choice, by the way.
“the horrors unbelievers have done in the name of any of a number of causes they find of ultimate value is an embarrassment to you and other secularists.” – er, no. I do not adhere to the doctrines, isms, whatever that those people may have wrought. they did not do them in the name of ‘unbelief’.
“I know, and I realize it’s of existential comfort — albeit as a delusion — to you folk” – BWAH! That’s so funny.
“But modernity led directly to the revolutions I spoke of.” – (oh this should be entertaining) – why? How? Who? When?
Maureen, your attempts to cling to such a ludicrous premise – that atheism is the driving force and main aim of groups such as communists – is belied by your own words.
“The leaders of these communist countries gave quotes about their views on religion” – yes, as I said, and what you cited supported, they needed to remove one form of brainwashing so they could facilitate their own. Atheism was a tool for their purpose, not the purpose.
Show me anyone, anywhere, anytime who has declared war purely in the name of atheism.
Reality –
Those atrocities were done “in the name of atheism.” Your obtuseness on this issue is astounding to me.
However, I notice that your modus operandi – to make pronouncements with no supporting evidence and keep repeating them – is in full force here. I understand why you cling to this method, as that is one of the ways that we came to have legal abortion in this country. Lies being told repeatedly by people who wanted to see themselves as the intelligentsia. This method does not work on those who know the truth of an issue. Fortunately these numbers grow every day.
Rubbish Maureen. Atrocities were done for the cause of communism. That was the cause, the driver. Atheism may have been a tool or a weapon but it was not the main aim of the game.
You keep claiming that the people you mentioned did what they did in the name of atheism and that is patently untrue.
I ask again, show me anyone, anywhere, anytime who has declared war purely in the name of atheism.