Scientists to UN: Abortion increases violence against women
Scientists met this week in New York to discuss recent scientific evidence regarding abortion as a form of growing violence against women and girls.
Indiscriminate practice of abortion is correlated with coercion, a history of sexual abuse, violence during pregnancy, intimate partner violence and with psychological consequences that may lead to suicide.
The scientific evidence was discussed in the meeting… in parallel to the 57th Session of the Commission of Women Status of the United Nations, whose priority theme is the “elimination and prevention of all types of violence against women and girls”, which continues until March 15th….
During the opening of these UN Sessions and commemorating the International Women’s Day, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon remarked “There is one universal truth, applicable to all countries, cultures and communities: violence against women is never acceptable, never excusable, never tolerable.”
In this context, the scientists assembled in New York voiced their concern in regards to the alarming expansion of abortion as a form of violence against women in the world, something that should not be dismissed by any nation that respects fundamental human rights.
~ Science 2.0, March 8
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.
It would be nice if Ban Ki-moon (love that name) would have mentioned Planned Parenthood directly as the biggest offender. After all, Planned Parenthood actually goes to court and fights for the right to cover for sexual predators by committing abortion on minors and keeping it private. With the dawning of the ultrasound and scientific advancement; history will judge Planned Parenthood and Ashley Judd and all those who continue to support abortion as being insane.
ABORTION the ultimate war on women!! Especially little baby women in the womb!
True it is TS…As far as women choosing career over motherhood go ahead but i have a huge problem when they come back being hurt because men have left them. Really don’t want to get on the Hollywood people again but lets take Jennifer Aniston for a minute. She wanted to be big movie star after making millions after FRIENDS went off the air. Pitt should not have cheated. He should have pursued a divorce first. He wanted to start a family and Aniston kept stalling. He moved on to a woman who wanted a big family . Now she’s lost him and her movies have been one flop after another.
For the record I’m not a Pitt fan either. He’s a liberal too and donates to many liberal organizations.
Jennifer Aniston Americas sweetheart? Not to the unborn!
Oh, poor Pro Aborts! You think the scientists are with you, and they break your heart every time!
Abortion the ultimate war on women. Look at all of the women dead from abortions that left them dead too. CEMETERY of CHOICE !!!
Abortion the ultimate war on women …look at all of the women stuck in post abortion syndrome .
Abortion the ultimate war on women …breast cancer on the rise killing us!
The Feminists who support the abortion industry are in a schizoid paradox. They have to choose: Do they want to prevent violence against women, or do they support broad and unrestrained access to abortion?
Support for abortion means letting Gosnell and Carhart kill multiple women before law enforcement investigates.
Support for abortion means letting sexual abuse of adolescents go unreported.
Support for abortion means giving another weapon to those who physically and emotionally abuse women.
Support for abortion means cooperating with sex traffickers in their enslavement of women, and enabling women who are addicted to the sex trade.
Support for abortion means that we must not inform a desperate and frightened young women about her health and development, especially if this means inserting an ultrasound wand partway toward where that suction cannula will go.
“Oh, poor Pro Aborts! You think the scientists are with you, and they break your heart every time!”
So true! I’m still waiting for a scientific reference that says life does not begin at conception.
To anyone thinking of taking up my challenge, do remember I said scientific so don’t bother citing any religious beliefs to make your point, as often seems to happen in these things.
Of the 55 million plus babies aborted since 1973, over 37 million were female. That is well over half. About 18 million males were aborted, so over twice as many females as males have been aborted. There is documented evidence that Planned Parenthood welcomes those wanting sex selection abortions, who most often choose to abort females.
Then, there are the women that we know of who have been killed during abortion or by complications afterwards, as well as countless women severely physically, psychologically and spiritually damaged because they had abortions. We only see the tip of the iceberg because there is a coverup by the abortion industry. This also has been well documented.
Also, Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation abortion mills have been caught red-handed not reporting sexual abuse of minors as required by law, and helping sex-traffickers. They do this in order to have more very likely candidates for abortion, which is their cash cow.
If that isn’t a war on women, then I don’t know what is.
What’s the number one cause of death for pregnant ladies?
Murder.
Imagine that. When people are convinced that their own children are disposable, turns out those children’s mothers are viewed as just as disposable (if not more so).
Thanks for that, Xalisae!
I do not support the death penalty. Intentional Killing is never the just solution to any problem.
But the criminal killing of a woman because she is pregnant is both a double-murder and a hate crime. If this is not automatically worthy of the death penalty, then nothing else is.
I used to correspond with a woman named Renee Nicely who was imprisoned for beating her toddler to death. The prosecution pushed for the death penalty but the jury went for life in part because they accepted the defense argument that a recent abortion (only a few days before the kid was beaten to death) had unhinged her mind.
I wrote an article on Fumiko Kimuro who attempted to kill herself and DID actually kill her two very small children. Fumiko had undergone an abortion in her youth. When she found out her husband was cheating, she also learned that the mistress had recently had an abortion. It seems to me that this discovery may have triggered feelings left over from her own abortion and contributed to the double infanticide she committed while trying to commit suicide.
Xalisae, you are so right. I would go so far as to say Lacey Peterson would be alive today were it not for legal abortion. For exactly the reason you mentioned: the notion that people are disposable.
JDC says:
So true! I’m still waiting for a scientific reference that says life does not begin at conception.
To anyone thinking of taking up my challenge, do remember I said scientific so don’t bother citing any religious beliefs to make your point, as often seems to happen in these things.
Wouldn’t you agree the belief that life DOESN”T begin at conception kind of borders on a religion of its own? It takes a lot of blind faith to deny the scientific proof that ultrasound so easily shows us.
“Wouldn’t you agree the belief that life DOESN”T begin at conception kind of borders on a religion of its own?”
Yes, I would. It explains why so many of them want to talk about how different people have different beliefs whenever this topic comes up.
JDC says:
March 10, 2013 at 10:09 pm
“Wouldn’t you agree the belief that life DOESN”T begin at conception kind of borders on a religion of its own?”Yes, I would. It explains why so many of them want to talk about how different people have different beliefs whenever this topic comes up.
(Denise) What is irrational is the either/or dichotomy: either a human life is definitely in place at conception or the case against legal abortion collapses. A great deal of rapid development takes place in the first month of pregnancy — before the female can even know she is pregnant. The embryo is “formed” at the 6th week of pregnancy, very soon after that first missed menstrual period.
You don’t need to insist life begins at conception to oppose legal abortion. A life is probably in place by the time most abortion takes place as limbs, a torso, a head, a beating heart, and even primitive brain function have started before the second month of pregnancy.
People opposing abortion don’t hold up images of 1-celled zygotes but often hold up images of 6-week-old embryos.
Right. Because looks determine the facts on everything. And that belief is totally rational and fact-based.
Why, if I take a block of Spam, and carve it into the shape of a human being with a little torso, arms and legs and whatnot, it’ll actually be way more of a person than a blastocyst! Because looks!
RATIONAL! *jazzhands*
xalisae says:
March 11, 2013 at 9:57 am
Right. Because looks determine the facts on everything. And that belief is totally rational and fact-based.Why, if I take a block of Spam, and carve it into the shape of a human being with a little torso, arms and legs and whatnot, it’ll actually be way more of a person than a blastocyst! Because looks! RATIONAL! *jazzhands*
(Denise) Do people at rallies demanding abortion be criminalized hold up pics of zygotes?
It is entirely arguable that a blueprint or seed developed into a human life during the first month of pregnancy. This argument also supports criminalizing abortion since a human life may exist by the time most women can abort.
Do people at rallies demanding abortion be criminalized hold up pics of zygotes?
Some do. But I don’t think people at rallies with mostly signs trying to make an argument in brief slogan/bumper sticker form are really the zenith of our argument.
It is entirely arguable that a blueprint or seed developed into a human life during the first month of pregnancy.
Not really, since I’ve seen you try to argue this before, and I refuted it. The “blueprint” thing was, at least. I do believe I quoted my Biology textbook and pointed out to you that blueprints are not self-directed as a human embryo is. The “seed” thing is right on the money, but I think people who use this argument are unfamiliar with exactly what it is seeds are and are, like you, fallaciously hung-up on appearances causing this specious argument.
“A seed is a small embryonic plant enclosed in a covering called the seed coat, usually with some stored food.”
It’s like an “out of sight, out of mind” kinda thing. People seem proud of their argument from ignorance that “a seed is not a tree” because the seed coat obscures what they cannot see and apparently do not know, that a seed contains the plant, just as a pregnant woman obscures the very real, very alive and growing child.
“Do people at rallies demanding abortion be criminalized hold up pics of zygotes?”
Does it matter?
OK, I see that x has just done a better job of making the point I was making. All well, I still like the pithiness of mine. :)
If women put themselves and their desires first, would more women abstain from the type of sex that leads to pregnancy?
“If women put themselves and their desires first, would more women abstain from the type of sex that leads to pregnancy?”
i don’t know, a lot of women seem to desire that type of sex.
*I
Just curious to which parallel/side event this was? I was there but only during the second week, just wondering who the sponser and the speakers were?