Pro-life blog buzz 10-25-13
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.
- Clinic Quotes features some interesting survey statistics about post-abortive women: 66% report their lives are worse for the decision, 81% felt rushed into the decision, 93% felt they did not have enough information to make the decision, and 40-50% were wavering and hoping for another option to present itself.
- Josh Brahm shares how the pro-life “equal rights argument” is changing hearts and minds on the abortion issue. The argument consists of “asking pro-choice people if they agree that all human adults have an equal right to life” and why.
- Coming Home celebrates a hard-won victory in Washington, D.C. – the availability of a pro-life license plate:
The Children First Foundation of DC sponsored the Washington, D.C. “Choose Life” License Plate which was made available for purchase to residents of the District of Columbia on Wednesday, October 23, 2013, by the District of Columbia Department of Motor Vehicles that welcomed the participation of our pro-adoption, non-profit, charitable, and educational organization into their popular DC DMV Organizational Tag Program. - Jivin Jehoshaphat spots a strange story from Minnesota where a man is being defended for a double homicide in which he killed his pregnant wife and preborn child. His defense attorney claims “the death of the fetus was an abortion, not a murder, and the only person whose rights that such an act could have violated — the mother — already was dead.”
- The Leading Edge reports that New Zealand is opposing a proposal for morning-after pills to be distributed free of charge women under 25. Apparently, facts got in the way: studies in other countries have shown that availability of emergency contraception has not led to a decrease in abortion or pregnancy rates.
- Live Action says Democrat Wendy Davis, now running for governor of Texas after becoming known for her filibuster opposing bans on late-term abortions, now reportedly opposes late-term abortion! How very interesting. Maybe she read some internal polling showing that Texans aren’t quite with her on the issue:
Meanwhile, Davis’ new position is that she only supports late-term abortion in cases to protect the life of the mother, of rape or incest, and fetal abnormalities. The only problem with that statement is that Texas Senate Bill 5, which Davis filibustered for over ten hours in an attempt to defeat, and voted against, did have an exception in it if the life of the mother was at risk. - Kansans for Life reports that Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against Kansas is moving quickly through the courts. Isn’t it interesting how Planned Parenthood fights against factual information?
The lawsuit focuses on Kansas’ 2013 Pro-Life Protections Act, specifically the “first-in-the-nation” requirement that the link to the state “Woman’s Right to Know” abortion information website be positioned on a clinic’s home page…. - Americans United for Life discusses their legal brief filed in a legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act:
AUL argues that the Obama Administration’s “HHS Mandate”—which forces employers to provide insurance coverage for life-ending drugs and devices without regard to the employers’ consciences or religious beliefs—is unconstitutional….“Forcing a private business to pay for insurance covering life-ending drugs is a constitutional violation unprecedented in American history,” said Dr. [Charmaine] Yoest. “Not only does it violate the First Amendment freedom of conscience, it also tramples on the entrepreneurial spirit that is a fabric of American economic life.
[Davis photo by Stewart F. House, Getty Images via LA Times]
Oct.25, 2013 3:40 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.
“the death of the fetus was an abortion, not a murder”
Ah, so I see we are still pretending the two are separate concepts.
Well, to be specific, abortion is actually a subset of murder. So I suppose they are separate concepts in that they don’t have the exact same definition.
They may have been ‘interesting’ survey statistics. But they are rather meaningless and unscientific.
“…one of the most extensive interviews of postabortion women ever done…..The women he interviewed were involved in pro-life ministries…” – ‘extensive’? I don’t think so. Very limited, biased and selective are the more applicable terms.
Davis stated exceptions should include protecting the life of the mother, cases of rape or incest, and fetal abnormalities. The bill only allowed the exception of risk to the woman’s life. Therefore there is no problem with Davis’ statement.
I am not a Texan “reality” but I will tell you that Davis will be laughed off the Gov’s race faster than you can say ‘abortion.’
I would rather rely on these interviews than the pro-aborts beloved guttmacher institute. Anything that comes out of the mouth of a post-abortive woman is worth more than all the meaningless garbage that come out of that death panel..
And so she might “thomas r.”, but that says more about the voters of Texas than her. After all, they did vote for Perry.
The interviews which were only conducted with anti-choice activists? What about the other 99.5% of post-abortive women?
Is that the same guttmacher institute which is sometimes happily quoted here by anti-choicers?
I don’t think so. Very limited, biased and selective are the more applicable terms.
C’mon, Reality. Is it Reardon’s fault that the diploma mill where he bought his medical ethics doctorate didn’t teach statistics? I think not.
Davis stated exceptions should include protecting the life of the mother, cases of rape or incest, and fetal abnormalities. The bill only allowed the exception of risk to the woman’s life.
To be fair to the ersatz journalist at Live Action, she did acknowledge the “rape and fetal anomalies exceptions;” she just followed up with, “It’s highly unlikely that she would have accepted the ban on late-term abortions had they only included language allowing women to abort their late-term babies because they have a fetal abnormality, or because they were raped.” Presumably contributors at Live Action are contractually obligated to make things up, though Davis probably still would not have voted for the bill because it did not have an exception for the health of the woman.
Also, the bill was never only about abortion post-20 weeks; it was also about regulation of clinics that were intended to close down women’s health centers. Davis’s opponents are no longer acknowledging that reality, presumably because they do not want to call attention to the fact that medical associations in Texas opposed the bill.
I would like to give to the campaign of whoever is running against Wendy Davis.
Whoever PP hates the most. :)
LisaC,
“Health” is an all encompassing term which means for any reason, including a woman’s supposed “mental health”.
By “women’s health centers” do you mean OB/GYN offices, GP offices, the health dept., what?
Hi Carla,
Did you read that Alan Dershowitz, author, lawyer, longtime liberal commentator, Harvard law professor, and prominent scholar on U.S. constitutional law has acknowledged he can find nothing in the Constitution supporting the “right” to abortion.
Prof. Dershowitz remains staunchly PC, stating that what he supports and what is in the Constitution aren’t always one and the same.
So when we hear of abortion called a “constitutional right”….., well apparently someone sees something Prof. Dershowitz doesn’t.
“I would like to give to the campaign of whoever is running against Wendy Davis. Whoever PP hates the most. :)”
My understanding is they haven’t had their primaries yet, but said candidate will almost certainly be current Texas Attorney General Greg Abott. He will likely make an awesome governor. Or at least a better one than Wendy Davis. But then again, who wouldn’t.
Every “institute” has its moments “reality” and so does guttmacher (ahh).
And don’t tell me that Perry has not worked hard for Texas’ internal as well as national interests. You may not agree with his politics but the facts of his proper stewardship of that state are undisputable. Just ask PP about the recent settlement with the state of Texas under Perry. On second thought, PP is too upset about that right now…
He has indeed worked hard “thomas r.”. And just think how much more he could have achieved if he hadn’t spent time and effort on anti-social theocratic policies. There are others who could also display proper stewardship, without the social damage.
“Health” is an all encompassing term which means for any reason, including a woman’s supposed “mental health”.
“Health” does include mental health, yes. The medical world now considers mental illness and mood disorders to be actual health issues, not the result of a wandering uterus or evil spirits or whatever else people believed in the bygone era to which pro-lifers want us to return.
By women’s health centers” do you mean OB/GYN offices, GP offices, the health dept., what?
Reproductive health centers. If you’re not familiar with this whole debate, The Texas Tribune has done some fairly extensive reporting that might help you fill in the blanks.
LisaC,
I’m well aware of how the medical field views mental health issues. I’m a PL medical professional and for your info we were never taught mental illness was the result of a wandering uterus evil spirits nor do I know any PL people who subscribe to your absurd mentality.
What I’m pointing out is that “mental health” can mean any reason a woman wants an abortion, not that she necessarily has a mental illness. Same with “health”. Also, there is no mental illness to which abortion is a remedy to. If a woman truly has serious health issues, her OB should make certain she is put in the care of a medical specialist, not just sent to an abortionist.
Reproductive health centers. Now, does that include only abortion facilities? How about fertility clinics? Family planning clinics that do not do abortions. Mammography centers? OB/Gyn or GP offices? Free clinics? The health dept?
You see LisaC, women’s “reproductive health” encompasses a wide range so please be specific as to what is covered. I’m asking you since you refer to these “health centers”. What specifically are you referring to?
Apparently “reality” Gov Perry makes Texans happy. His AG Abbott will be the next Gov and will continue Perry’s policies in the state. Texas has not disintegrated as far as I can tell. It thrives, with majority of “500” companies relocating there. Liberal (dem) states lose business and much needed revenue. You do know that Texas also has no state income tax and Perry has worked hard to keep it that way. Yo need to give credit where credit is deserved…
Like I said before “thomas r.”, that tells us quite a bit about Texans.
How’re their education standards? How’s their access to healthcare? How’s that teen pregnancy rate doing?
The fact that large companies are moving there tells us as many negative things as it does positive.
There’s more to a good life than the almighty dollar.
“There’s more to a good life than the almighty dollar.”
I’m going to remember this line next month when our mortgage payment is due. Thanks for the pointer reality. Here’s hoping the bank will understand…
And here I was thinking your comprehension skills were at least ok.
No income tax and big companies being eager to move there while the social fabric is becoming more threadbare is indicative of a poorly chosen legislative path. Being a more socially responsible society rather than focussing on further enriching the rich does not mean you don’t need to pay for your food and housing. There is no need for greed.
Here’s hoping you will understand…
It does work out for those who subscribe to the separatist view in Texas Reality…
Incidentally, we need Texas’ oil so let’s tone it down a little…
Oh I do wish Texas would secede. And maybe all those who like the way Perry and Co. operate could move there. After all, we are told by the pro-populationists that the entire population of the planet could happily fit into a Walmart carpark or something. Everywhere else could be rational and equitable and launch a survivor rescue mission into Texas after 30 years or so.