One of the unspoken but heavily insinuated arguments against Obamacare is that it’s a way for the federal government to steal health care from white people and give it to black people….

Ever since the HHS announced that contraception would be covered as co-pay-free preventive service, conservative media has gleefully portrayed the ACA as a program to give hot young sluts an opportunity to screw on the public dime.

~ Pro-abort Amanda Marcotte, as quoted by Newsbusters, March 6

[HT: Kelli]

… [P]roviding abortions is part of the mission of Planned Parenthood, and they do make it a priority. It’s a necessary service, after all. I think some times that point gets lost in all the discussion of the 97% of their services that aren’t abortion.

The other reason I suspect these regulations would harm PP’s ability to keep as many clinics open to offer non-abortion services as they currently do is that a complete shut-down of abortion services would create a cash flow problem for them. Abortions are 3% of the actual services Planned Parenthood provides, but they constitute a larger chunk of their income, around 15% nationally. Which makes sense; abortions simply cost more than Pap smears and birth control pills, and Planned Parenthood provides a huge chunk of all the abortions in the country….

~ Pro-abortion blogger Amanda Marcotte (pictured), commenting on Virginia’s new regulations on abortion clinics in the state, Slate, September 16

[HT: Lisa Graas at Live Action]

While I think all abortion industry types are crooks and liars, there are some pro-abort ideologues who I believe are misguided but genuine.
Until 2 days ago I had Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon in that category. She’s harsh and anti-Christian, but I thought she was honest.
No more. On April 22 Marcotte wrote a post attacking my first post on the issue of vaccines containing aborted fetal cells potentially causing autism.
I anticipated pushback from the Left on the question of the autism connection (although I don’t know why it’s such a leap when it is commonly believed mercury in vaccines causes autism) but not on the fact that some vaccines indeed did and do contain aborted fetal cells. That’s just a fact. But Marcotte wrote…

[Read the rest of this entry…]

by Carder

To know what the actual anti-choice movement is about, you need to look at what its members do, not what some random people say about how they label themselves.

And, increasingly, anti-choice activists are free about their larger objections to women being able to choose non-procreative sex.

Indeed, when I first started writing on the topic of reproductive health care, even the slightest intimation that anti-choicers have a problem with female sexuality was enough to cause conservatives to cry foul and howl about how they don’t care what you do in bed, it’s about “life,” and blah blah blah.

~ Amanda Marcotte (pictured), alleging that pro-lifers’ anger over women engaging in sexual activity is the underlying reason for  being pro-life, RH Reality Check, January 27

[Photo via Marcotte’s Twitter page]

It’s no doubt tempting for abortion opponents to cite the many stories of turnaway mothers [women denied abortions] who grew to embrace motherhood as a way to make their case for banning abortion. But bluntly put, what other option do these women have?

In addition, being able to love a child who is actually here while being opposed to having the child while it’s in the womb highlights the very real difference between an actual person and a potential one, a difference the anti-choice movement tries to deny.

~ Abortion advocate Amanda Marcotte, reacting to a recent study which showed that “turnaways who keep their babies eventually come around to accepting and even embracing their status as mothers. (Only 9 percent give their children up for adoption),” Slate, June 12

[Photo via Slate]

Well, this is a red letter day. Amanda Marcotte gets mentioned here twice. I see she also likes to wear red. Appropriate.
And there’s more symmetry. This is also the same day her former boss, John Edwards, will terminate himself from the presidental race, much as he terminated Amanda for being too liberal.
Which right there explains how far left Amanda leans.
Case in point, Amanda’s January 28 lambast against the March for Life, which included this gem:

[W]hy on earth are all those people standing around listening to speeches while their sex cells die unused inside them? A holocaust! Never mind the actual holocausts where people suffered and died, people with names, families, lives. You know, actual people. Once you start breathing and feeling, these supposed pro-lifers stop caring. I’d suggest they all go take a visit to the Holocaust Museum, which is in the same city as the march after all. Wonder if they could muster up some sympathy for victims of the actual Holocaust, or if real people just interest them less than potential people.

I wonder if Amanda has actually ever toured the Holocaust Museum. If she hasn’t, I’d recommend she steer clear near the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Sandy, MK, Jacque, and I arrived there January 21 when it opened at 10a, and the line of pro-lifers waiting to get in – mostly teens – stretched around the building. Our ticket into the exhibit was stamped 12:45p, so we had to wait nearly three hours.
Pro-lifers understand there’s quite the correlation between the Jewish Holocaust and the Abortion Holocaust.

And someday there will be an Abortion Holocaust Museum, perhaps in DC, although likely in Wichita.
And Amanda will find herself in it, as disgraced and on the wrong side of history as the Nazi prison guards who also enabled the killing of millions of innocent people.
[HT: reader Phil]

Affirmation comes from the strangest places.

Actually, the sort of affirmation I might strangely prefer is acknowledgement from the other side, backhanded as it may be, that I’m being heard. The hope is the messaging is getting through to someone over there, somewhere, and that I’m not just preaching to the choir.

Most here know of Amanda Marcotte, a militant pro-abortion feminist who writes some of the most acerbic, jaw-dropping stuff out there. Amanda may be exasperating and even infuriating, but she is refreshing in that she takes her movement’s beliefs to their fanatical conclusions, which they more often than not try to hide.

That’s the set-up for a piece Marcotte just had posted on Salon entitled, “7 women working tirelessly to attack equal rights for other women” (same piece at AlterNet: “7 women working tirelessly to screw over other women,”) with the subtitle, “Sadly, these women find it personally advantageous to reject feminism and continue perpetuating sexist social norms.”

So I made Marcotte’s list of “women who have made a career out of opposing women’s struggle for social, political and economic equality,” along with icons Phyllis Schlafly (“original gangster”) and Lila Rose (Planned Parenthood demoniz[er]”) and other dedicated conservative women I haven’t had the pleasure of meeting – quite an honor.

About me Marcotte wrote:

3. Jill Stanek. Many women have found their calling in attacking contraception and abortion access, but Stanek, an ardent blogger, brings a hatefulness and obsessiveness that helps her stand out from an already unpleasant crowd. After getting old enough that unwanted pregnancy stopped being a personal concern, Stanek “discovered” that contraception has been evil all along, dedicating much of her blog to arguing that pregnancy prevention is a uniquely modern evil.

Stanek also notoriously celebrated domestic violence, arguing that men should hit women who have abortions. “That spontaneous slap was the reaction of a real man who a woman had just told she aborted his baby,” she said of a notorious scene in Godfather II in which a gangster hits his wife. “Compare that to the modern-day cowardly male response, ‘It’s your choice. Whatever you decide, I’ll support you.’”

Sometimes I wonder if what I write does any good. And I’m not as prolific as I’d like to be. To be viewed by someone on the other side as “an ardent blogger,” who “stand[s] out from an already unpleasant crowd” is quite the compliment.

I don’t need to tell you that which pro-lifers promote is the opposite of how Marcotte portrays it. The reality of Marcotte’s ”equal rights” movement is that over half the preborn babies they kill are female, the pills they push are dangerous artificial steroids that kill women as well as their tiny human offspring, and the sexual abandonment they hail has wrought nothing but brokenness and disease.

And so, as hateful, obsessive, and unpleasant our messaging may be, we press on, although we do try to present truths in the spirit of Christ. He was hated, too, but He presented His messaging in a God-pleasing way. That’s my goal. I fail more than succeed at that, but I’m working on it.

So, thanks for the encouragement, Amanda. And seriously, I’d love to someday meet you for coffee.

Apologies in advance if that was somehow a misogynist request. :)

(Be sure to voice your vote on this question on the poll at the bottom of this post.)

Former tennis champion Jimmy Connors is taking heat for outing the abortion of his 70s girlfriend and tennis champion Chris Evert in his new autobiography, The Outsider.

From a May 20 Slate article by abortion proponent Amanda Marcotte entitled, “Jimmy Connors is woefully out of line on Chris Evert’s abortion”:

Connors is trying to shame Evert by making a spectacle of her private reproductive choices. And while Evert shouldn’t need a defense either way, the memoir seems fantastically unwilling to acknowledge that a tennis star at the top of her game has good reasons for not wanting to be pregnant….

In a statement released on May 9, Chris Evert seemed understandably upset:

“In his book, Jimmy Connors has written about a time in our relationship that was very personal and emotionally painful. I am extremely disappointed that he used the book to misrepresent a private matter that took place 40 years ago and made it public, without my knowledge. I hope everyone can understand that I have no further comment.”

Here’s how I would have phrased it:

Look, Jimmy, it’s totally unfair that some of us can get pregnant and some of us can only impregnate. But in the grand scheme of things, this system brought to us by mindless evolution is much more unfair to women than men. Not only do women have to undergo the indignities of menstruation and routine gynecological care, but if we do get pregnant, we’re the ones who either endure the abortion or have our bodies painfully bent out of shape to bear the child. In exchange, we get decision-making power over those pregnancies. Full stop. The alternative—giving a man the right to force childbirth or force abortion simply because he once had sex with you—is too terrible a violation of human rights to be tolerated in a civilized society.
So stop whining already. You sound like McEnroe.

Marcotte went further than my question does, claiming not only should fathers have no say about killing their offspring, they should say nothing in the event it happens.

What do you think? Should outing the other parent of a child killed by abortion be taboo? Is it acceptable to out the mother or father of one’s aborted child?