Tag Archives: Planned Parenthood

Pro-life blog buzz 6-26-15

pro-lifeby Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

A parting note from Susie:

I have co-authored the Blog Buzz (formerly called Proliferations) for five years. Time flies when you are having fun. I can think of no better movement to dedicate your life to than protecting the sanctity of all human life. Congratulations to Jill as she starts on a new venture in a new season of her life. I have learned so much from contributing to this blog and hope the readers will look for ways they too can take a stand for life in their own sphere of influence. As Jill did not seek the spotlight years ago, she did not shrink from the cause when it came to her. Look what she has done! We all have a sphere of influence and a talent. How exciting to see what we can do when we use our God-given talents. You may surprise yourself. Join the cause and press on.

For Life,
Susie Allen

  • Pro-Life Action League’s vigilance found that National Health Care, an abortion facility in Peoria, Illinois, has been sold to Whole Woman’s Health, a Texas abortion chain:

    In a letter sent to the IDPH on May 27, NHC administrator Margaret Van Duyn says, referring to Whole Woman’s, “They provide the same quality of care that we do” — which is to say, the same low-quality care. Take, for example, the Whole Woman’s abortion facility in Austin, from which three (3) women were transported by ambulance during a one-month period in 2012. What’s more, as documented by our friends at AbortionDocs.org, the Whole Woman’s Austin and McAllen facilities were also fined a total of $40,000 in 2011 for illegal disposal of the remains of aborted children, as well as private medical records.

abortionpilldrone

  • ProLifeBlogs shares a post from Lake County Right to Life regarding the newest venture of Women on Waves, an abortion advocacy group specializing in bringing abortion to women in countries where it is banned. Their latest plan: Using a drone to drop abortion pills in Poland. No doctor visit, not even a webcam consultation. Just RU-486 from the sky, cross your fingers, and hope that nothing goes wrong when taking chemical abortifacients without medical supervision. The pills are supposed to be suitable only for pregnancies up to nine weeks. What could possibly go wrong?
  • Saynsumthn’s Blog meticulously documents the heavy involvement of eugenics proponent Jonathan Gruber in the crafting of Obamacare – despite the fact that so many in the Obama Administration acted as if they’d barely heard of him. He pocketed $400k for his consultations with the administration. What is significant is that Gruber, as part of his eugenic views, supports abortion as a means to achieve his goal of saving welfare money by eliminating more children of color. Perhaps #BlackLivesMatter to this administration only when it’s politically expedient?
  • Wesley J. Smith believes that there is a media effort underway “to make suicide more palatable and normalized – at least for some categories of people.” The new AP Stylebook used by journalists recommends avoidance of the term “committed suicide” unless a direct authority is being quoted. Why? Smith opines:

    My theory – call it Smith on media bias – is that advocates convinced AP that using the word “committed” – even though accurate, as it means to intentionally perform an act – implied a negative judgment about that act. And that conflicts with the drive to make at least some suicides more palatable generally – or to put it the other way around – that not all suicides are bad or wrong. In short, this is a political act – not the first by AP in this regard, heck, not even the second – and it won’t be the last.

mega-center-release-graphic

  • Americans United for Life has just released a must-read, comprehensive report showing how Planned Parenthood has built a lucrative business model from ending human lives – and we, the taxpayers, are helping them to do so with our tax dollars. “The New Leviathan” details how the billion-dollar abortion profiteer has increased its profits and market share, even as fewer U.S. women seek abortions:

    Unlike the national trend observed by the Associated Press last week, the Centers for Disease Control, and everywhere else that abortions are on the decline, at Planned Parenthood abortion sales are up – meanwhile its overall patients and other services are down. This is as a result of a move to create abortion mega-centers to mass-produce abortions at an even deadlier rate.

[Photos via CNN.com (from Women on Waves); Americans United for Life]

Pro-life blog buzz 6-23-15

pro-lifeby Kelli

  • Abstinence Clearinghouse points out how the Boston Globe surprisingly admits that part of the nation’s abortion decline is likely due to “an ’empathy-driven reaction’ for all of the Americans that grew up in a world of vivid ultrasound images and miraculous neonatal medicine for preemies.”
  • At Live Action News, Susan Michelle promotes the upcoming #ProlifeYouth tweetfest, to be held on Thursday, June 25th. The goal is to engage more people in the pro-life movement and to “show the world that youth are pro-life, contrary to what the media portrays.”

Continue reading

Why former PP director no longer agrees with the rape exceptions

abby_johnson_sidewalk_road-copyby Carder

I said to myself… okay, then let’s go after the exceptions in the Hyde Amendment. I went to the Hill and made some appointments with several pro-life legislators. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM told me that they would NEVER try to repeal the exceptions in the Hyde Amendment. One of them actually told me that if he went after that, it would be an “election killer” for him. I had one female legislator tell me that closing any rape exceptions would be “unkind” to women who had been raped. Seriously?? Unkind? Unkind for who? It is certainly not unkind for these unborn babies. And it can’t be unkind for a woman who has conceived in rape to have equal rights and information as women who have not conceived in rape.

So that was it for me. I knew that we had to have clean bills go in and clean bills come out… because our politicians will NEVER allow rape exceptions to be closed. To be perfectly honest, they don’t want them closed.

~ Former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson, explaining the difficulties she experienced in attempting to convince legislators to remove rape exceptions included in so much pro-life legislation, Epic Pew, June 10

Pro-life blog buzz 6-9-15

pro-lifeby Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

  • Americans United for Life applauds Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, who “signed into a law a groundbreaking, pro-life measure that passed with tremendous bi-partisan support and will expand the enforcement options for any violation of state abortion laws as well as provide greater protections for young girls who become victims of sexual abuse.”

    As seen in Live Action’s undercover videos, Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry train their staff to turn a blind eye to sexual abuse and statutory rape. (“I didn’t hear the age. I don’t want to know the age.”) AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest adds, “Too often, sex offenders fake a parent’s signature to use abortion as a cover up for abuse, and for too long, the abortion industry has turned a blind eye to crimes committed by evil men, as they profit from the cover up.”

Continue reading

Stanek weekend Q: How to respond to assertion abortion isn’t in the Bible?

Pray-In

Rev. Harry Knox, CEO of The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, recently posted an op ed at Talking Points Memo, using the Bible to support abortion as an act of compassion.

Ironically, the photo accompanying his piece included me, from a day earlier this year when pro-life activists conducted a prayerful sit-in at Speaker Boehner’s office, which resulted in arrest.

From Knox’s piece:

With the myriad ways that God was invoked on the House floor, one might reasonably assume that the Almighty had sent a gilded memorandum, replete with red letters to the Speaker of the House.

Let’s be very clear: The Bible says nothing about abortion. Anyone who tells you otherwise is offering you their inaccurate interpretation of scripture. But let me tell you what is in the Bible: compassion. Indeed, compassion and love of neighbor are common to many faith traditions.

We read in Zechariah that God proclaims: “Make just and faithful decisions; show kindness and compassion to each other.” Paul writes in Colossians that we ought to, “Put on compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience.” And in the Quran, compassion is the most frequently used word.

It’s simple: Our faith traditions call us to acts of justice and compassion. Yet that isn’t what anti-choice legislators are offering….

Women seek abortions for many different reasons. God trusts and empowers us to make the best decisions for ourselves and our families. It’s not our place to judge a woman’s personal decisions. God calls us to offer compassion, respect, and support so she can be at peace with whatever decision she makes. We believe this not in spite of our faith, but because of it.

How do you respond to Knox and others like him who say that since abortion isn’t specifically mentioned in the Bible as a sin, it is not only not a sin but a deed to be supported as an act of faith?

Pro-life blog buzz 6-3-15

pro-lifeby Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

  • At Live Action News, Sarah Terzo refutes the outrageous claims of pro-abortion Methodist minister John M. Swomley, who argues that preborn children are not innocent (due to original sin) and therefore cannot be considered harmless if their existence produces a threat to their mothers. As outrageous as these arguments are, it is even sadder to hear them coming from purported representatives of the Gospel. Terzo rightly points out:

    Swomley’s argument would also justify infanticide. A baby outside the womb would still be considered to have “Original Sin” until baptism, in many faith traditions. Therefore, prior to the moment when the priest or pastor pours water on the child’s forehead (or baptizes him some other way) it would be permissible to kill the child.

maynard

  • At First Things, Michael J. New points to a disturbing trend that should concern pro-lifers:

    Last week, Gallup released a poll which showed a large short term increase support for physician assisted suicide. In 2013, only 45 percent of Americans found doctor assisted suicide “morally acceptable.” Last week’s poll indicated that percentage had risen to 56 percent. It is likely that the fawning media coverage of Brittany Maynard’s [pictured left] assisted suicide this past November shifted public attitudes.

  • Euthanasia Prevention Coalition reposts an article by disability rights expert Marilyn Golden on California’s assisted suicide bill SB 128, which is modeled after Oregon’s law. Unfortunately, not only does OR allow physician-assisted suicide, they keep very poor statistical records, leaving many questions unanswered and unanalyzed. Golden asks, “Is this the model California really wants to use for something this important?”
  • JivinJehoshaphat dissects a pro-choice Salon article in which an abortion worker acknowledges the humanity of the preborn child while diminishing it:

    What I noticed is how Beeman admitted earlier that the unborn have tiny arms and legs, yet goes on to use the intentionally dehumanizing term “unwanted growth” to describe them as if the human individual these arms and legs were torn from was like a wart on a foot….My thought is that the idea that a woman should be able to kill the helpless human being living inside for whatever reason she wants is not a position most people are comfortable defending even if that’s the actual reason they favor legal abortion. It’s much easier to push those tiny arms and legs aside and imagine the unborn as a bunion or a pimple because making the bodily autonomy argument is much easier if another human being isn’t being torn apart.

gapjustinbrown

  • Fletcher Armstrong ran into an issue at Tennessee Tech University when school officials were unaware of their own policy “allow[ing] individual students (not just student groups) to host events on campus”:

    [W]hen national pro-life award-winner and TTU student Justin Brown contacted us about bringing GAP [Genocide Awareness Project], we were eager to go….
    As it turns out, every public university student has the same right that Justin exercised at TTU; their universities just don’t know it… yet. The rights of free speech and equal access to university grounds are individual rights, not group rights. They cannot be denied to an individual student simply because he hasn’t identified others willing to join him in that speech. TTU has figured this out, and they deserve credit for that.

  • Clinic Quotes uncovers a statement from Lawrence McKinney, who was a Planned Parenthood board member in upstate New York. Note his sneering disdain for larger families (especially those on welfare):

    All I do actually is to multiply them by $600, which is deductible from their income tax and realize that I, with only three children, am paying for them. The McKinney suggestion, which has and will go nowhere is: 1) give everybody a tax reduction for four children and after that make them pay $600 for every other child. The only trouble with my system is that since most of the explosive families are on relief anyway, there is nothing to deduct from or to tax with.

[Photos via usmagazine.com and Fletcher Armstrong]

“Immediatist vs Incrementalist” debate analysis: Epilogue

SHALL WE DO NOTHING- AHAIn the scheme of things, the “Immediatist vs Incrementalist” debate between AHA’s T. Russell Hunter and Center for Bio-Ethical Reform’s Gregg Cunningham on April 25, 2015, was iconic. AHA’s immediatist philosophy was laid bare as contradictory, confused, and even nefarious.

Most extraordinary was that Hunter came so ill prepared, after beating his chest for months for prudentialists to “choose a man, and let him come down to fight me,” in the words of Goliath.

Witnessing social movement historian and master debater Cunningham methodically take down each of AHA’s talking points, only to receive such  flummoxed responses by Hunter, was a sight to behold. Cunningham was quick to challenge Hunter’s “conflated” and “binary” arguments, and with no keyboard to hide behind, Hunter’s half-baked theories, groundless accusations, and inaccurate portrayal of history were laid bare.

Hunter asked me this question in a comment on my post, “Immediatist vs Incrementalist” debate analysis, Part II: There’s only one way to cut down a tree?:

Jill Stanek,

Do you agree with your readers that “AHA” is some kind of a pro-choice plot? A group sent by pro-aborts to bring the PLM down?

Russ

This was in response to commenters like Kate, who wrote:

I’m convinced that Abolish Human Abortion are pro choicers disguised as prolifers with the mission to bring the prolife movement down. It is one thing to disagree, it is another to go after your own, as they constantly seem to do.

I don’t know why Hunter cares what I think, since he actually accuses me of being part of the “pro-choice plot” for supporting incremental legislation and thus advocating, so he says, abortions that are “safe, early, and painless.”

As you can see, the conversation can (and often does) get stupid. Another for instance, when AHA responded that my hatchet-job on Hunter’s tree analogy was misplaced, because silly me thought he was actually making a tree analogy…

11124720_10155448994180364_1226978605_n

… which was to say the tree analogy only works if it supports AHA theory.

But I will answer Hunter’s question. Actually, I’ll let others who have already said it better than I could. The first thought comes from a pro-life proponent who would prefer no attribution:

T. Russell Hunter and AHA are not dissenting voices in an intellectually honest discussion. They are intentionally poisoning the well and confusing the faithful. Heck, not only does Hunter break down under cross-examination, he can’t even clarify his own position – thus, the endless stream of sandwich-eating videos.

When you can’t clarify your own position, something other than your position is the real agenda. That “something else” in this case is a personal hatred of pro-lifers who are recognized (and paid) for working hard and actually getting things done.

What has AHA done other than attack pro-lifers? Reach a few students here and there with a quick sermon? Demonstrate abortion to a handful of folks via a picture provided by CBR? In short, we are dealing with malcontents who rival Planned Parenthood in their efforts to confuse and distort reality.

Watch this clip from Band of Brothers. I’ve seen it a number of times and weep each time. This is what we fight. Everyone in our sphere would save as many of these people as we could. T. Russell Hunter and his cronies will not work with Catholics and secularists to free these people. He would not save them incrementally (click on screenshot to view video)…

2015-05-20_1236

So what’s the lesson? Simply this” We are not dealing with rational dissenters who contribute something to our understanding and thus make us better. To the contrary, we are engaging a moral sickness combined with unthinkable arrogance. I’d rather be known for opening the camp gate.

Steve Hays of Triablogue also answered Hunter’s question in two succinct blog posts on May 17.

Why does AHA discriminate against babies?

Abolitionists accuse prolifers of “discrimination” because they lobby for laws that protect some babies rather than all babies. But the allegation is ironic:

i) To begin with, the charge of discrimination is nonsensical. For instance, it’s discriminatory to choose one group over another group if you’re in a position to choose both groups.

If, however, prolifers are striving to save all, and only those babies who can be saved right now, that’s not discriminatory. They lack the wherewithal, at present, to save more babies. If they could, they would.

ii) In fact, it’s actually the abolitionists who are guilty of discrimination. They discriminate against the babies who are savable by opposing incremental legislation. They discriminate against those babies by refusing to take feasible measures necessary to save them.

So not only is the abolitionist accusation false, but it boomerangs. On the one hand, prolifers don’t discriminate against babies. On the other hand, abolitionists do discriminate against babies.

Abolitionists discriminate against babies in the present in the hopes of saving all babies in the future.

Why does AHA support abortion?

Abolish Human Abortion: Abolitionists will also continue interposing themselves between the innocent unborn and the rhetoric of wolves that jovially and enthusiastically support the unjust laws that cement ageism into our culture of death’s psyche.

Translation: abolitionists interpose themselves between innocent babies and the prolifers who could save them. AHA barricades the abortion clinic from restrictive laws. AHA barricades the abortion clinic to prevent restrictive laws from saving babies.

Instead of protecting babies from the abortionist, AHA is protecting the abortionist from laws that limit his access to babies. They don’t allow the prolifer to come between the abortionist and the baby. They give him free rein.

By opposing incremental legislation, AHA protects the legal status quo. They stand guard at the abortion clinic to keep restrictive laws at bay.

In closing, a thought by Maggie Gallagher of National Review Online last week, upon the passage of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which AHA opposed:

I remember being at the table in New York City in the 1980s, discussing abortion strategies with people who said they could never support any law except a constitutional amendment protecting all human life. Otherwise, they told me, their hands would be dirty.

I remember thinking: Your hands may be clean, but the babies are still dying.

Read previous posts:

Prologue
Part I: Let babies die today, we can save the rest later
Part II: There’s only one way to cut down a tree?
Part III: Social justice history vs TR Hunter
Part IV: Straw men and the Bible
Part V: Sacrificing children to the idol of abolitionism
Part VI: Christians and the legislative process
Part VII: So fundraising is wrong?
Scott Klusendorf: Debate between Gregg Cunningham and T. Russell Hunter
Jonathan Van Maren: Four observations from the Cunningham vs. Hunter debate

Also, fyi, we are in the final stages of preparing an ebook compiling all the analyses of the Cunningham-Hunter debate into one document. Stay tuned.

Matt Walsh to Cecile Richards: You don’t know compassion

StadiumBaltimoreby Kelli

Planned Parenthood, as you know, has always been repugnant, vile, abhorrent, cruel, destructive, racist, brutal, and murderous, but it used to be pretty upfront about it. Now you do the same things while hiding behind a thick wall of propaganda and deception.

It’s cowardly, ma’am. You are a coward. You all are.

And you clearly lack respect, to put it mildly.

But lots of organizations thrive on manipulation and obfuscation. What really sets you apart, of course, is the murdering. You, Ms. Richards, are personally responsible for 327,000 children being executed this past year alone. In all, your abortion retailers have slaughtered over 6 million human beings, which makes you about as prolific as the Nazis, and equal in moral depravity.

To put this in perspective, consider the professional football stadium in my hometown of Baltimore. It has a seating capacity of about 71,000. I would need more than 4 stadiums of that size to fit all of the children you’ve slain in one year. That’s four entire football stadiums stacked with dead bodies, and even then we’d run out of room. I could fill every football stadium in the country 3 times with the people you’ve killed over the course of Planned Parenthood’s existence.

So, compassion?

Really?

I want you to actually visualize it, Cecile. Visualize 90 stadiums packed with maimed, rigid corpses, and and then tell me again about your compassion and respect. Tell me how “compassion and respect” slaughters 6 million people.

You’re a certifiable lunatic if you legitimately believe mass genocide is compassionate. But you don’t actually believe that, do you? You know better. You’re a businesswoman, not a psychopath. Killing is just your business.

~ Blogger Matt Walsh in his open letter to Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards (who lambasted a 20-week abortion ban as “lack[ing] compassion and… respect”), The Blaze, May 15

[Photo via baltimoremagazine.net]