by JivinJ
The Washington Post links to and writes about a new statement from the Vatican entitled Dignitas Personae, which focuses on various bioethical issues including embryonic stem cell research and human cloning. Glenn McGee has a truly odd quote on the second page of the article wondering where all the Catholics who comment on bio-ethics have gone….
It’s amazing the things some pro-choice representatives will say. Here’s Nita Lowey on RH Reality Check claiming the Mexico City policy (aka the Global Gag Rule) would be “patently unconstitutional” if it was applied in the U.S. Lowey’s knowledge of the Constitution is apparently so scarce she thinks it would be an unconstitutional violation of free speech for the U.S. government to make decisions on which organizations it provides taxpayer funding based on whether they perform or promote abortion. What she doesn’t seem to understand is that if the Mexico City policy was applied for domestic funding, it wouldn’t prevent organizations like Planned Parenthood from talking about and promoting abortion, it would merely prevent them from receiving government funds. There’s a big difference between the right to free speech and the privilege to receive government funding.
Catholic Online has reprinted a Public Discourse essay by Robert George regarding the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists paper on the conscience rights of physician who are opposed to performing abortions.
Those responsible for the report purport to be speaking as physicians and medical professionals. The special authority the report is supposed to have derives from their standing and expertise as physicians and medical professionals, yet at every point that matters, the judgments offered reflect their philosophical, ethical, and political judgments, not any expertise they have by virtue of their training and experience in science and medicine.
The Belfast Telegraph has an op-ed by Laurence White entitled “Why assisted suicide should not be an option in our society.”
Remember that when the Abortion Act was introduced it was for well-defined exceptional cases, but over the years has become so debased that terminations are now often contraception for the forgetful.
Tags: abortion, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, anti-abortion, anti-choice, anti-life, assisted suicide, Jill Stanek, Mexico City Policy, Nita Lowey, pro-abortion, pro-choice, pro-life, RH Reality Check, Robert George, Washington Post
Dec.12, 2008 1:50 pm |
Blogs |
by JivinJ
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.
It would benefit America if Planned parenthood was unfunded. Boeing lost contracts when they cheated the government and having planned Parenthood cut off for cheating is a good thing.
“What she doesn’t seem to understand is that if the Mexico City policy was applied for domestic funding, it wouldn’t prevent organizations like Planned Parenthood from talking about and promoting abortion, it would merely prevent them from receiving government funds. There’s a big difference between the right to free speech and the privilege to receive government funding.”
-PP receives gvt funding because they are a NP organization that provides free or discounted heath care (reproductive) to the public. Like public health clinics. If public health clinics recieve gvt support, there’s no reason to deny those funds to PP.
No, planned parenthood promotes a distorted view of sex ed by promoting inappropriate behaviors to children as young as 11 or 12, helps teens keep contraception and abortions a secret, encourages promiscuity, refuses to acknowledge that abortion causes mental and physical harm to women, and refuse to tell the truth about fetal development.
They are also still a racist organization, which explains why black women still are three times more likely to abort than a white woman.
PP is NOT a good organization.
PP is a godsend to many women, bash it as much as you wish.
Liz, how is it “racist” to provide an abortion for a black woman who has an unwanted pregnancy?
IS the woman told she “can’t raise a baby”?
Its racist because they sneak their “clinics” into poor minority neighborhoods claiming that the women that live there NEED their services, when the truth is, they just want to target them, drawing them in for the low cost health care and then getting them hooked on promiscuous sex and then when their contraception FAILS, they get abortions.
Its like the cable company offering three free months of HBO, but the catch is you must be a full channels cable subscriber, not just a basic cable subscriber.
My gracious, Liz, that’s some wild propaganda there.
No, she’s not told any one thing. She has an unwanted pregnancy and she goes to a Planned Parenthood or some other provider. Whether she’s rich or poor, and whether the clinic is close to her or far.
No child is unwanted. There are MANY childless couples that would adopt — they would even adopt a child with disabilities or that’s biracial.
Margaret Sanger was a big fan of Eugenics. She also said:
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
They continue her agenda to this day.
Yeah, some people did think like that.
Has nothing to do with a black woman, now, with an unwanted pregnancy.
She certainly doesn’t “owe” a baby to people who want to adopt. If they do want that, there are lots of kids now, in the care of the state, in foster care, etc.
“It is poverty to decide that a child should die so you may live as you wish.”
“How can you say there are too many children? That’s like saying there are too many flowers.”
“My body, my choice.”
“Keep your freedom-killing wishes out of the law.”
Liz, bumper-sticker slogans miss the point about an individual woman deciding, although it is indeed her choice.
Not every pregnancy is wanted – that’s fact. Saying “a child dies” is at least stretching things. There are many, many born children dying and enduring horrible things every day – more than enough to worry about before we get to what one woman is going to do as far as keeping on with a pregnancy or not.
Its not a woman’s body, its an innocent child who was conceived at an “inconvenient” time. Quite sad.
I am tired of the term “unwanted”. Again I’ll say: No child is UNWANTED. I hate that society insists that pregnancies be PLANNED out perfectly and that big families are attacked for being open to life.
Unplanned Pregnancy can be an UnPlanned BLESSING.
AMEN, Liz!
Thanks Bethany. Take over for me, cause I am leaving soon to see The Nutcracker Ballet with three nieces, my mom, and my mom’s friend and her granddaughter.
I am tired of the term”unwanted”. Again I’ll say: No child is UNWANTED. I hate that society insists that pregnancies be PLANNED out perfectly and that big families are attacked for being open to life.
Unplanned Pregnancy can be an UnPlanned BLESSING.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at December 13, 2008 11:54 AM
I don’t care if you want to have a big family, and society dosen’t say you have to plan really carefully. Your own choice there too.
But not every pregnancy is wanted, regardless.
Josh, good and to the point comments.
What do we call kids in foster care, under state care, etc?
Someone wants that child, someone who can’t have children or someone who wants to add to their family.
And not every child in foster care or under state care is ELIGIBLE for adoption anyway.