Planned Parenthood lies about lying
It’s the day after Halloween, and I’m still feeling spirited.
The Planned Parenthood Aurora blog was complaining about pro-life pickets of the Weitz Company in Denver and homes of its leaders, which I’ve reported on extensively. Weitz has agreed to build PP’s new largest abortion mill in the U.S. there, coming in at 50k sq. ft., more than double the size of the Aurora mill. Said blogger Marie…
… [I]n light of these types of situations, why do some people still not understand why some Planned Parenthood affiliates must choose to use a low-visibility approach regarding permitting processes for new facilities? This is EXACTLY what Planned Parenthood/Chicago Area wanted to avoid in Aurora.
As I said, I’m feeling feisty. Probably had too many Skittles last night. I’ve never commented on the PPA blog before but wrote:
“low-visibility approach”? Planned Parenthood’s new term for fraud and lying?
But PPA censored my comment.
I’m highly visibly hurt.
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.
Does it make you feel better to know that I love you, Jill.
If not, here’s a highly inappropriate graphic in honor of Halloween:
You must have eaten too much sugar last night, too?!
I liked the Feminists for Life ad, too, btw.
Thanks, Jill.
I actually haven’t had any sugar. I have no excuses. :)
My sister wanted to put on cheesy Christmas sweaters and go carolling for Halloween, but I opted to go to mass and turn in early. I’m become less and less fun as I age…
“low-visibility approach”? Planned Parenthood’s new term for fraud and lying?
But PPA censored my comment.
I’m highly visibly hurt.
LOL
I know I had too much sugar myself…I’ve been in a hyper silly mood all morning. lol Yesterday night was the worst. MMMMm candy!
Excuse me?
There was once a thread on this board about a Planned Parentood ad that featured the smolderin remains of a clinic. A number of the regulars on this board – incliding some of the fairly sane ones – maintained that it was no big deal because the picture was old and nobody was injured.
When you are dealing with a bunch of terrorist with a casual attitude towars firebombing, it’s always a good idea to keep a low profile.
“Planned Parenthood lies about lying”
Vice does not produce virtue.
Jill,
Just went on PP’s site from your link…They called the baby in the picutre a fetus!!! I can’t believe it! I thought they told the girls that it was just a “blob of tissue”!
When you are dealing with a bunch of terrorist with a casual attitude towars firebombing, it’s always a good idea to keep a low profile.
Be afraid, Laura. Be very afraid.
My response to their post, which will likely be not be posted, either.
______________________________________________
No one wants to experience harassment – especially not for simply doing your job.
Where have we heard that before? Oh yeah- NUREMBERG.
______________________________________________
What I wanted to say was, “If ‘simply doing your job’ involves dismembering innocent unborn babies, I am going to harass your @ss off.”
But I went the kindly, gentler, veiled “You’re an abortion Nazi” approach.
-Jacqueline “Tactful” Harvey
Jacq,
LOL! I would of posted both!
PL Laura,
It’s true! If they didn’t kill babies, we wouldn’t harass them.
Another comment,
“Maybe you’re harassed because your job involves killing human beings. I’m a statistician and I’m not harassed for “simply doing my job.” Neither are most legitimate jobs. Whatchothinkaboutthat?”
You go, girl!!! BE CAREFUL, THOUGH…they may consider your posts harassment!
BE CAREFUL, THOUGH…they may consider your posts harassment!
They have the legal “right” to kill babies. I have the legal right to express my disapproval. And I will express said disapproval until the misbegotten “right” to kill children is removed and replaced with a harsh ex-post-facto penalty for those people.
This is a repost because I posted on the wrong thread.
Jill,
Thank you so much for your blog.
Since I have been reading your blog, I became aware of the difference of opinion on the abortion, pregnancy, breast cancer issue.
Some who post to the blog cite studies that conclude that abortion and breast cancer are not linked.
However, that conclusion is based on the supposition that full term pregnancy reduces risk substantially.
The studies state that abortion does not increase breast cancer risk AFTER ADJUSTMENT for established risk factors.
These studies clearly state the data set includes the age, number of births, age at births, age at time of abortion and age at time of cancer diagnosis.
They do not mention family history, smoking, weight etc. etc.
From this data set the only established risk factors (or mitigators) that can be calculated are the age at time of full term pregnancy and number of pregnancies.
I know many just read the abstract and see the conclusion and don’t realize that the researchers base their conclusion on the premise that full term pregnancies protect against breast cancer and those in the abortion group have fewer full term pregnacies and therefore more cancer.
If you reject the notion that full term pregnancy especially full term pregnancy before age 19 protects against breast cancer, you reject the basis of the conclusion that abortion does not cause breast cancer and you are left with the 30% higher incidence of breast cancer evidenced by the raw data.
I refer to the following studies.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/336/2/81 posted by Somg
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/167/8/814?lookupType=volpage&vol=167&fp=814&view=short posted by Laura
I will tell you what I tell everyone else. Don’t believe me. That’s right, don’t believe me. Read the full text yourself. Look at the raw data, calculations etc.
Perhaps you know someone who does statistics and can explain better than I can how researchers adjust for established risk factors.
I think this would help people understand that they can’t have it both ways.
I think the following post illustrates the basic misunderstanding of what research has shown.
………….
You are pretending that your unsupported and borrowed theory that full term pregnancies magically decrease the chance of breast cancer is an actual fact. It is obviously not so. You serve no one by lying so. Full term pregnancies are not proven to decrease the risk of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, cervical cancer or anything else.
Women do not need ‘protection against bc’. They need religiously unpoluted scientific minds working on their health needs. Kinda leaves you out of any solutions.
Posted by: Sally at November 1, 2007 2:44 AM
Jacq,
Me too!
You guys could look at it this way. Laura and Sally are attracted to pro lifers. I wouldn’t care to sit around a chat with a bunch of “nuts” every day. I guess they like us.
I guess they like us.
Can you blame them? :)
I like that picture Jacqueline.
You should see the picture of my friend/crush(though he doesn’t know that last bit) Dan…he wore some of my more…skanky clothes (ones I almost never wear except on…Halloween) at the lab yesterday. :-p
Rae- Do you have facebook or myspace? I wanna be yo’ FRIEND.
Yeah, me too, Rae.
PP will delete Jill’s and Jacqueline’s posts because PP is very concerned about what women think. *Guffaw*
Wouldn’t it be funny if the webmaster deleting the posts on PP’s site was a man?
Yeah, John. It looks like there are still no comments on the PP blog.
* Updated List of Leaders Condemning the Evil PBA Ruling :
Ambassador Alan Keyes, RenewAmerica (see his 30-sec video clip)
Rev. Tom Euteneuer, Human Life International
Judie Brown, American Life League
John Archibold, founding member, AUL and Nat’l RTL
Prof. Charles Rice, Notre Dame Law School
Dr. Patrick Johnston, ProLifePhysicians.org
Jim Rudd, Covenant News
Cliff Zarsky, Corpus Christi RTL
Chris Mohr, on Board of Columbus RTL & Ohio RTL
Erik Whittington, Rock for Life
John Lofton, The American View
Eric Guttormson, TheologyOnline.com
Brian Martin, TheologyWeb.com
Jim Anderson, LifeCommercials.com
Cal Zastrow, Michigan Citizens for Life
Judie Zabik, Michigan Personhood Leader
Matt Trewhella, Missionaries to the Preborn
Brannon Howse, WorldviewTube, Christian Worldview Net
David Brownlow, Life Support and LS Oregon
Louis Wein, Ass’t Mayor of NYC; NY Governor candidate 1990
Steve Curtis, Former State Chair, Colorado Republican Party
Julie Niccum, Wisconsin Personhood Leader
Jo Scott, ProLife Colorado
Gino Geraci, Calvary Chapel South Denver
Bob Enyart, Denver Bible Church
Chuck Baldwin, Crossroad Baptist Church
Rev. Clennard Childress, L.E.A.R.N. & BlackGenocide.org
Flip Benham, Operation Rescue / OSA
Bob Dornan, 20-year U.S. Congressman
Brian Rohrbough , Colorado Right to Life
Judge Roy Moore, Foundation for Moral Law
That PP blog is pretty funny. I like the post that says pro-lifers are big fat phonies if they’re against contraception. Yeah, because if you don’t take birth control pills, you just magically get pregnant. You don’t actually have to do anything; it just ‘happens’! Like when you just happen to stub your toe, or you just happen to get a pain in your neck, or you just happen to go into the voting booth in Chicago and pull the Democrat lever in spite of the fact that you’re dead.
Zeke, the sad reality is that that “evil PBA ruling” is the best we’re going to get as long as there are only four originalists on the Supreme Court along with four pro-abortion activists and one wishy-washy idiot. Note that the idiot (Justice Kennedy) wrote the decision.
We need at least one more originalist before we can have a decent ruling on any abortion issue.
hee hee hee…..I love that picture, Jacqueline. :)
*Lyss*
It’s just unbelievable to me that people want PBA to be legal! That is the most upsetting thing I have ever heard of. It’s bad enough that an abortionist will actually DO IT, but it’s even worse when people SUPPORT IT!
@Jacqueline: You can findz me at Alison Begeman on facebook, my network is “Minnesota” I think… :)
RAE!!!! *TACKLES AND HUGS AND GROPES*
Sorry, Jill, I don’t think that’s appropriate…but…I
…but I
What the heck, I can’t seem to finish my posts! I submit them, and half of the posts get deleted!! No!!
LYSSIE!!!!
*tacklehug*
How are you? I’mma gonna go see Gogol Bordello tonight! Yee-haw!
“Start wearing purple for me noowwwwwww…”
I’m damn skippy, Rae, m’dear. Eating an orange, just bought a scintillatingly hot dress, and am looking forward to a night of hot chocolate and organic chem with my boyfriend. Sounds sexy, doesn’t it? Hahaha…
*hug*
Have fun tonight….while I plug away at writing sociology papers and organic chemistry. *mwah!*
BY THE WAY, RAE:
I gots a job in a lab here at Penn State working on cDNA libraries and helping to clone christmas trees and working with microRNA’s!!! I’m really excited (getting paid too). Mwahahahahah!! (I’m working on all different projects with different researchers…booYAH!)
That’s awesome! Congratssssss!
miRNA is soooo cool. Have you ever heard of siRNA (small, interfering RNA)? It’s neat stuff, but I don’t think it’s exactly the same as miRNA…
I’ll add you Rae. Lyssie, add Rae!
I love Gogol Bordello.
“Start wearing purple, wearin’ purple…”
Hi – I noticed that you linked to me back in Sept. and I thought I would give you an update on what PP has been up to in building => Denver’s Death Camp. Thanks for helping spead the word.
God Bless!
Jacqueline, I’ve been conversing with Rae for a long time via Facebook. Already been added. :D
(I think you can tell she’s cool).
It’s funny, Jacquie, because I considered using my middle name on here when I started posting here. Luckily enough, I didn’t. Because my middle name is “Rae”, too.
Back to the PP rejection of abortion causing bc (an other side effects), as long as PP is getting federal funding, no amount of “data and studies”, testimony from knowledgeable researchers, or any other documented PROOF about how abortion is just bad news all around, they will CONTINUE to debunk everything. Their Guttmacher institute reports are obviously going to be biased because they are paid by PP.
People don’t WANT to know the truth about abortion and everything that goes along with it…and PP is more than willing and happy to keep their grizzly secrets hidden. Being the largest providers of abortion, they will continue to spew their lies and deceit and masquerade as a “health care provider” until enough evidence of their agenda is made public…and it’s happening all to fast for them at the present.
Until America sees what PP is all about and sees the graphic photos etc. this country will continue to turn a blind eye to what they’re doing.
How long will parents of underage girls put up with PP ususping their parental rights and permit PP to distribute condoms, info. on birth control etc. to their children?
I would be TERRIFIED to be a parent of an underage boy or girl in these times we are living in.
sorry…meant to say “usurping”…bad spelling on my part…
and PP is more than willing and happy to keep their grizzly secrets hidden.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
…But reveal their polar and panda secrets.
” “low-visibility approach”? Planned Parenthood’s new term for fraud and lying?
But PPA censored my comment.”
Of course… no disenting opinions allowed there, because they know their wrong.
John L, the abortion decision will soon be taken out of the hands of the Supreme Court anyway.
and PP is more than willing and happy to keep their grizzly secrets hidden.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
…But reveal their polar and panda secrets.
Posted by: Laura at November 1, 2007 7:19 PM
ROFL!
John L, the abortion decision will soon be taken out of the hands of the Supreme Court anyway.
Posted by: SoMG at November 1, 2007 11:46 PM
Great, that’s what prolifers have wanted for 34 years.
In all reality, with such a strong precedence of judicial review, nothing will really be out of the hands of the supreme court, unless filtered out by the apellate courts, or if denied because they agree with the lower court ruling.
and hippie, im pretty sure hes referring to FOCA, essentially the opposite of Ron Paul’s right to life bill