Pro-life news brief 1-22-14
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- An abortion clinic escort reviews the study which produced the “1 in 3″ women will have an abortion statistic and finds the study doesn’t really say that:
It is misleading to assume that one-third of a given group of women (such as a group of female protesters standing on the sidewalk) will have an abortion, or that one-third of your friends will have an abortion. I am not implying that anyone who has used the “1 in 3” figure when discussing abortion has been intentionally trying to twist the facts or mislead people. What I am saying is that there are a lot of critical limitations to consider with research – things that don’t fit cleanly into sound bites or onto posters. - Media Matters is hilarious. They have an article entitled, “How The Media Is Helping Conservatives Kill Roe v. Wade.”
- Gerard Bradley looks at the pro-life movement 41 years after Roe v. Wade:
First, there would be — and should be — thanksgiving and even joy. It is evidence of Divine Providence and proof of human love that we are here at all. Quick quiz: which other developed democracy can claim a pro-life movement that is a fraction of the one in the United States? Answer: none….Almost no one now speaks of the unborn as “tissue,” a “blob,” or an internal organ of the mother. Most abortion proponents no longer speak of the unborn at all, because there is nothing they could plausibly say that would serve their “pro-choice” cause….
Yet we have not won. We are not even winning. And the pro-life movement faces challenges greater than it has ever confronted.
Jan.22, 2014 1:00 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.
Media Matters is hilarious. They have an article entitled, “How The Media Is Helping Conservatives Kill Roe v. Wade.”
That really is funny! I laughed out loud for quite a while!
Then I went to read the article and I saw every pro-abortion myth trotted out, ending with this:
“When journalists ignore the evidence to parrot the anti-choice myths that lead to these restrictions, it looks a lot like Roe never even existed.”
One of those “anti-choice myths” is the one about how Kermit Gosnell was doing late-term abortions.
Another was the myth that abortion clinics are often nasty places that do not meet the expected standards of quality healthcare.
And the myth that banning abortions after 20 weeks might be a reasonable thing to do.
It is a fun article to read, just to see the pro-aborts anguish over losing the culture battle even though the press is still doing everything they can to prop the abortion industry. Check the coverage on the MARCH FOR LIFE, if you doubt it!
So, did all the people at Media Matters just take one long nap during the coverage of Wendy Davis’ filibuster?
Didn’t we pretty much have to aim a flamethrower at the media to get them to cover the Gosnell trail? And even then, they dropped it as soon as the Boston Marathon Bombing gave them something else to cover.
And nothing in the media about Karpen. Nothing the $million+ fraud settlements that PP-Texas had to pay out. And nothing -again- about the March For Life…. failing to notice half-a-million people in a civil rights march at our nation’s capital.
The media are doing everything they can to keep the truth under wraps. The folks at Media Matters do not do well to complain about it!
The Washington Post covered it Del! I’ve seen two articles online.
Half a million?
Civil rights?
The Gerald Bradley article boils the abortion issue down to the true “pro life” message. And that is one of pro birth no matter the situation. It is wonderful to see the author simply states that a woman’s justification for an abortion is simply not good enough. As more antichoicers scream this message (especially in Senate/House elections), women begin to see through the “pro life movement” and come to the prochoice view. When Mitt Romeny lost so badly in 2012 the Republicans and Conservatives talked of a rethink of some of their positions. Abortion not so much. Luckily this is a winning issue for Democrats, I mean 55% of women voted for Obama. I wonder why?
You accidentally raised an interesting point, Steven.
We don’t need politicians and parties to turn the hearts of Americans.
But without political allies to prop them up and keep feeding them with our tax dollars, the abortion industry is toast!
Concerning your question as to why 55% of women voted for Obama? — Because a lot of the women who voted for him in 2008 changed their minds about him by 2012.
Steven,
Most polls show that women are actually more likely to be pro-life than men. More women voted by Obama because they are more likely to men support increased welfare and other government handouts. Abortion has nothing to do with it.
Del, America is a nation of laws. How do we make laws….well we elect individuals to represent us at the government. Yes you don’t need politicians or parties to change hearts or minds…but they help when making and protecting laws. Roe v Wade which the Supreme court again affirmed with the recent Arizona ban being struck down is one example. The court will continue to uphold Roe. And because we have a Democrat in the white house we will continue to put justices on the court who support abortion rights.
Andie, welfare and other government handouts? Ok keep your conservative delusions and see how well they serve you in the next election. Abortion scares women off in droves…How did the most vulnerable Democrat in the 2012 Senate elections, Claire McCaskill, end up winning? Well Mr. Akin her opponent screwed up by letting people really see what antichoicers really think. 56% of women voted for her. Handouts had NOTHING to do with it.
Hi Stevie: methinks you read “dreams from my father” twice.
Anything about the march on this blog?
Did anyone go?
Steven — Methinks thou dost protest too much!
Yes, we are a nation of law. Our representatives have passed more pro-life laws that protect women and children during the reign of the most pro-abortion autocrat in our nation’s history.
I am glad that you must depend on a pro-life candidate to make a monstrous gaffe in order to keep your vulnerable pro-abortion industry shill in office.
Meanwhile…. we will continue to win hearts for life, and eventually the legislature will represent a pro-life culture. We might even persuade you that your life has value, Steven. And you then you can love the vulnerable women and children who need real men to help them.
Well said Del!
Delaware If “your representatives” are so pro life why is abortion still legal in the United States? Obama is the most proxhoice candidate we have ever had and he has not signed one anti choice bill and never will.
Monstrous gaff? So even you admit that what Mr. Akin said was a monstrous gaff? Yeah rape sometimes results in pregnancy and a women should not have to keep it. Maybe you should tell your anti choice brethren this simple fact so they don’t screw up any more elections.
“Eventually the legislature will represent a proliferation culture”…not if your views are rejected at the ballot box time after time as too extreme.
My life does have value. But so does a women to live her life with the full range of reproductive health care. I want to help all women in that respect, you sir do not.
Steven,
You are a sad pathetic little man by refering to me as “Andie”. Your post about McCaskill did not address my comment at all. Akin lost the vote of both men and women because he tried the Barbara Boxer method of argument (Boxer tried to argue against the partial birth abortion ban on the claim that partial birth abortions rarely happened) and the media refused to call her out on it like they did Akin. Akin, by the way, never said it was impossible, just rare for a raped women to get pregnant and by using the term “Legitimate Rape”, he was just refering to actual rapes rather than women who lied about being raped when polled in order to morally justify their abortions. He was not implying the women who do become pregnant via rape were not really raped. It is also well known, that women under a high amount of stress have trouble conceiving. Some do believe the trauma experienced by a rape victim could prevent conception in some cases (Akin said he heard this argument from a doctor), but I don’t believe there have been any scientific studies on the issue. It would be difficult because a study would require actual victims to be used in the experiment, which is simply not a humane thing to do. Akin could have been wrong on this, but that does not make him the devil. Nevertheless, Akin should know better as many well-known pro-life leaders such as Ryan Bomberger and Rebecca Kiessling were concieved in rape and telling thier stories would be a much better argument.