An Illinois pro-life organization has rated candidates beginning like this:

1 = Fully pro-life
1# = Rape and incest exception
2 = Not in full support of all pro-life issues

Do you think a pro-life organization can hold this position?

Or do you think it is inconsistent for a pro-life organization to condone the concept that how one is conceived determines one's worth?

Abortion marketers have successfully persuaded many Americans who would normally believe otherwise to call themselves "pro-choice" because of their concern about rape and incest victims.

Although the number of mothers aborting for rape/incest is no more than 1% according to the research arm of Planned Parenthood, Alan Guttmacher, (13,000 of 1.3 million annually), pro-aborts hold this reason in front of all abortions to stop reasonable people in their tracks from condemning any other abortions, most of which are committed for convenience.

The successful marketing technique is currently being used in California to change public opinion on Proposition 73, that would mandate parents be notified before their minor daughters abort.

As quoted from yesterday's Sacramento Bee (complete article on page 2):

But opponents of the measure told the committee that the initiative could further endanger young girls who are victims of sexual abuse or family violence.

Although Proposition 73 would allow minors to petition a judge to bar a parent or guardian from being notified of their plans to seek an abortion, opponents say the requirement would traumatize already confused and frightened girls.

"I believe it would create profound obstacles to public health," said Dr. Norma Jo Waxman, a family and reproductive health physician at San Francisco General Hospital.

"This initiative will cause frightened young women to delay seeking health care."

Pro-lifers must work harder to educate about the rape/incest rationale.

Sacramento Bee

September 21, 2005

Story appeared on Page A1 of The Bee

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday he supports the primary aim of a ballot initiative that would make most abortions for minors illegal without prior notification of the girls' parents or guardians, saying he'd "kill" someone who took one of his own daughters for an abortion without informing him.
"I have a daughter," Schwarzenegger said in an interview with The Bee. "I wouldn't want to have someone take my daughter to a hospital for an abortion or something and not tell me. I would kill him if they do that."

Schwarzenegger, who has two teenage daughters and two preteen sons, said in response to a follow-up question that he didn't literally mean he'd kill someone. But, in some of his first public comments about the substance of Proposition 73, the Republican governor left little doubt how he feels about young girls getting abortions without their parents being notified ahead of time.

"It will be the ultimate of being outraged about it and angry about it," he said.

"They call me when my daughter falls off the jungle gym in the school and they say, 'What do you want us to use? Can we put a Band-Aid on it? Do you want to come in? She's crying a little bit.'

"They call us about everything. I don't want them in that particular incident not to call us."

If one of his daughters sought an abortion on her own, he said, "then I would deal with that also."

The initiative would prohibit abortions for minors until 48 hours after a physician notifies a parent or legal guardian. If the proposed amendment to the California Constitution passes, abortion providers who violate the law would be subject to civil penalties.

The measure would allow a pregnant girl to petition a juvenile court judge to waive the notification requirement.

Despite what he called his belief in "the concept" of Proposition 73, Schwarzenegger, who supports a woman's right to have an abortion, said he's not sure whether he'll endorse the measure.

Schwarzenegger is already pushing four initiatives on the special election ballot Nov. 8, and he may not want to divert attention from those, he suggested. But he also knows the abortion measure is a potential wild card come November, when some political experts say it could be a big draw for conservative Republicans.

Such voters make up the core of Schwarzenegger's political support these days.

"There's many reasons why you get involved with an issue and why you don't," he said.

"It could be that we don't. We want to just keep (the agenda) narrow like the way it is now. It could be that we endorse. You've got to let me make that choice of when it is the appropriate time to do that."

In the 20-minute interview with The Bee, the governor said he is confident of winning passage of his ballot measures once the public hears more about them and sees more ads on television over the campaign's final six weeks.

Schwarzenegger made his remarks in one of a series of interviews he's doing this week with Capitol political reporters.

At about the same time, a joint Assembly and Senate Health Committee held a hearing assessing the potential impacts of Proposition 73.

Proponents for the initiative argued that the measure would protect a fundamental parental right to be consulted on matters involving their children's health and well-being.

"In California, a young girl under the age of 18 can't get a flu shot or an aspirin from the school nurse without a parent being notified," said Paul Laubacher, a Sacramento nurse and the official ballot proponent of the Proposition 73 initiative. "But a doctor can perform an abortion without notifying a parent or guardian."

But opponents of the measure told the committee that the initiative could further endanger young girls who are victims of sexual abuse or family violence.

Although Proposition 73 would allow minors to petition a judge to bar a parent or guardian from being notified of their plans to seek an abortion, opponents say the requirement would traumatize already confused and frightened girls.

"I believe it would create profound obstacles to public health," said Dr. Norma Jo Waxman, a family and reproductive health physician at San Francisco General Hospital.

"This initiative will cause frightened young women to delay seeking health care."

Some 34 states have passed laws requiring either parental notification or consent for minors seeking abortions.

The New York Daily News reports:

[A]ides to [New York] Gov. Pataki spelled out what it will take to get the bill signed [to make the morning after pill available with a prescription]. Pataki, who has supported abortion rights, wants to bar men from buying the pill, wants to restrict the number of capsules a woman can get and wants the pill available only to females older than 16, aides said.

All three of Gov. Pataki's points address valid health and safety concerns with the morning after pill. Yet NARAL ignored them and instead accused Pataki of "selling out pro-choice supporters." The hidden truth in NARAL's accusation is that pro-aborts could care less about women's health and safety of women but care only about the blood-stained buck.

On behalf of Concerned Women for America, Wendy Wright and I provided testimony to the FDA in December 2003 and to the Illinois General Assembly in March 2005 that included this vital point:

In Thailand, where the morning after pill has been available without a prescription for 18 years, the Bangkok Post reported in 2002 that it is advertised in men's magazines, and that men feel they don't have to use condoms because of this back-up plan. The article concludes, "Although many feminists believe that the morning after pill gives them more control over their own bodies, it would seem, judging from the few studies conducted so far, that it is actually being used by men to exploit women."

The article further stated that men are the most frequent buyers of the MAP.

I further honed the point in my column, "FDA poised to approve pedophile thrill pill," stating:

Sexual predators would welcome this tool to keep assaults of stepdaughters, nieces, daughters of friends, or infatuated students hidden, storing a stash of ECs in their bedroom drawer or pocket to give their victim after each rape. No pregnancy, no evidence.

In addition, addressing Pataki's point #2, there have been no long-term studies conducted on MAPs. Who knows how these megadoses of hormones will impact girls' and women's bodies, particularly if not taken on a true "emergency" basis but relied upon as a primary birth control measure?

The Palm Beach Post is reporting that the alleged rape of a 17-year-old by her stepfather was covered up by the girl's mother, who took the girl for an abortion so authorities couldn't perform a paternity test on the baby.

Abortion is a sexual perpetrator's best friend....