Planned Parenthood, pro-aborts try to censor Chicago pro-life billboards, ask White House for help
3:30p: According to Walk for Choice (warning vulgarity), the 2nd pro-abort sheet shielding the pro-life billboard has been removed. The billboards are standing uncensored, at least momentarily. Meanwhile, ProLifeHypocrisy worried the cover-ups may backfire, making us “feel righteous and angry.” PLH also posed an astute rhetorical question: “How would we feel if they did this to a pro-choice billboard?”
[HT: ProLifeWisconsin on Twitter]
9:54a: Click photo to enlarge. Read backstory here.
Well, the Chicago pro-life billboards have stayed up longer (6 days) than the New York billboard did (1 day), but it’s not for lack of trying.
Over the weekend pro-aborts attempted to physically cover the signs, which depict a graphic image of President Obama next to the statement, “Every 21 minutes, our next possible leader is aborted.” According to the Chicago Tribune:
Controversial billboard ads recently unveiled in Chicago’s Englewood neighborhood that target the disproportionately high rate of abortion in the black community have been covered by opponents less than a week after they went up.
Two of the 3 identical ads… were covered with fabric banners with messages scrawled in red paint.
One banner says: “In 21 minutes this sign should be gone.” A second banner, which dangled from the billboard Sunday after being blown by the wind, says, “Abort Racism.”
A group described as “social workers and community members,” who did not want their names used, claimed responsibility for the act in a statement emailed to the Tribune. The group said the ads were disrespectful and did not represent the views of the community and that “it wanted to replace the negative, condemning message with a positive one.”
Planned Parenthood is trying to incite an uproar in the black community, according to the Chicago Flame today:
In a press release sent out on Tuesday after the unveiling, PP stated that their organization finds “the billboards… to be an offensive and condescending effort to stigmatize and shame African-American women while attempting to limit their ability to make private, personal medical decisions.”
CEO and President of PP of Illinois Carole Brite [pictured right] said that community members started speaking out against the billboards almost immediately.
“They’re not going to stand for it,” said Brite. “We’re hopeful that this sort of public outcry will force either the owner of the billboard or the billboard company to take it down.”
PP IL has been in contact with organizations such as Black Women for Reproductive Justice, the Chicago Abortion Fund, and the ACLU about the issue. PPI has also contacted community leaders, religious leaders, and elected officials in the Englewood area, to spread the word about the billboards.
Brite hopes that the more people who know about the billboards, the more likely Life Always will be forced to take them down.
Of course. PP is the group primarily responsible for the black genocide and doesn’t want the notoriety – or any revenue loss. Pro-aborts have gone so far as to even try to get help from their pro-infanticide president, also according to the Flame:
BWJR had the opportunity to speak with the White House briefly about the billboards. Scott said they were told that there is not a lot the WH can do about the billboards because President Obama is a public figure and his image is a public image.
[HT: Matt Abbott; photo of Brite via PP IL]
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.
I just linked through “Little Catholic Bubble” to your blog – such thorough work! thank you! This post is so necessary, straightforward, and keeps it real. Great to have people like you who can express the truth so well – thanks.
It’s negative? how so? It states the facts! The black community should be in an uproar that their race is being erradicated via means of abortion. If PP doesn’t like that then maybe they should stop going to such great lengths to abort black children.
More proof the so called pro-choicers aren’t about choices but about abortion. When it comes to choices that interfere with they’re views on abortion then suddenly they aren’t for choices anymore.
Another attack we can make on the most pro-abortion President in U.S. History! Did President Obama steal his 2012 re-election campaign slogan from a rival? http://t.co/pau3Yqu
Amen, Punisher!!
charming canuck: It states the facts! The black community should be in an uproar that their race is being erradicated via means of abortion.
The problem is that that’s not at fact, not at all. The black birthrate in the US is higher than that for whites. In no way is any “eradication” going on. The black population of the US continues to grow, both on an absolute basis and as a percentage of the US population.
Once again – an individual black woman has an unwanted pregnancy, and perhaps she chooses to have an abortion. What will loony hyperbole mean to her? She can dismiss the silly stuff about “genocide” and “eradication” out of hand if she knows the facts.
And why should she be concerned with such in the first place? Do you think women are willingly having kids with the primary intent of increasing their race’s share of the population? Hopefully, she will be having kids because she wants to, because she wants them for themselves.
The building’s owner, who is a pro-life black woman, wants the billboards removed:
“I’ve called and called the billboard company,” Haskins says. “But Jeff (Lee of Lake Outdoor Advertising) has failed to return my calls. I have a contract with the billboard company but I do have a clause: no liquor, no cigarettes, no gentlemen’s clubs – nothing that is detrimental to the community. My attitude about it now is that if he won’t deal with it, I’ll just opt out of the contract and have the billboards come down, period.”
I don’t understand how they are “detrimental to the community.”
Len, there is offense taken, to the billboards, in the black community, and evidently even the pro-life owner sees it.
no gentlemen’s clubs
Calling a “strip joint” a “gentlemen’s club” is like calling a “kill mill” a “medical clinic”.
You’ll find no gentlemen in either place.
VOTE PRAY we must ask God for mercy upon America for our sins of allowing abortion to continue. For allowing a pro-killing president to be elected. God have mercy on us and forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Continue to always spread the good news and pray!
Doug – here are the latest CDC figures for birth rates.When you make a statement, such a blacks having a higher birth rate, it is important to insert a link. When reading the stats, I think you will find that the black pregnancy rate is not higher. The sad fact is that planned parenthood targets lower income communities and the black abortion rate is 50 % per pregnancy while the white abortion rate is 25% of pregnancies.
What do you have against non whites, Doug?
Lee – PP helps all low-income clients regardless of race or sexual orientation. I think the real question here is why are there so many black people in the low-income bracket? That answer has nothing to do with PP at all. As for the black population in America…
2003 – 37,351
2004 – 37,645
2007 – 39,083
2008 – 39,683
2009 – 40,216
(Numbers in thousands. Civilian noninstitutionalized population)
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/race/black.html
Jill, why does your title suggest that Planned Parenthood and “pro-aborts” are responsible for covering up the billboards when the source you quoted says “A group described as “social workers and community members,”…” ?
So if a community decides that your sign is racist and made of false claims, and that makes them “pro-aborts”. Anyone with Google can blow the whole “black abortion genocide” argument right out of the water with real facts. You are jumping to conclusions that fit your narrative without asking the most obvious question. Why are so many in the black community in the low-income bracket to begin with? This problem has nothing to do with abortion in any way, shape, or form. Stop yelling about the sky Chicken Little…
The antics employed by the pro-abortion ground troops and here by the trolls are one and the same: deny, obfuscate, misrepresent, mislead, ignore, bloviate…etc. These are the only tactics available when the truth is not on your side.
Doug – here are the latest CDC figures for birth rates.When you make a statement, such a blacks having a higher birth rate, it is important to insert a link. When reading the stats, I think you will find that the black pregnancy rate is not higher. The sad fact is that planned parenthood targets lower income communities and the black abortion rate is 50 % per pregnancy while the white abortion rate is 25% of pregnancies.
What do you have against non whites, Doug?
Nothing, Lee Anne. I just prefer to speak the truth and recognize them as individuals, versus the silly “conspiracy” and “genocide” talk.
This argument has come up before, and I’ve checked the statistics many times.
What do you think your link proves? It just demonstrates that the birth rate is higher (quite a bit, in fact) for black teenagers versus white.
As to the overall birthrate for blacks and whites, your link does not necessarily prove anything, although of course the higher birth rate for black teens would factor into the overall rate.
If you are seriously arguing with me about the overall birthrate for blacks and whites, I can certainly give you a link, but you should be able to find the confirmation of what I say, quite easily, given the enormous resources right at your fingertips, via the internet.
KushielsMoon: Jill, why does your title suggest that Planned Parenthood and “pro-aborts” are responsible for covering up the billboards when the source you quoted says “A group described as “social workers and community members,”…” ?
Good point. I don’t know who did it, but I’ve seen nothing to indicate they were other than pro-lifers, for that matter, same as the owner of the building.
The antics employed by the pro-abortion ground troops and here by the trolls are one and the same: deny, obfuscate, misrepresent, mislead, ignore, bloviate…etc. These are the only tactics available when the truth is not on your side.
Jerry, clearly – you’re on the side of the obfuscation and falsehoods, here. Incorrect facts and ludicrous hyperbole does not a sound argument make. What actual facts can you present to support your take on it?
Doug – the facts are – abortion kills an innocent, totally innocent human being. THAT is a fact.
As far as the pregnancy rates of blacks versus whites – that is how the CDC breaks them down. I was responding to your quote saying that the blacks had a higher pregnancy rate.
I am not against any group of people – I am against the killing of any human being – period.
Well Lee Anne that is a pretty big blanket statement. I guess I could ask you if you support our troops and the killing of humans they do every day, if killing a mass murder/rapist of school children would be ok with you, or the political assassination of say Hitler or Saddam Hussein would be ok with you, but I would rather tackle your first statement. Please show me a medical journal accepted by the American Medical Assoc. that states that a zygote or a fetus is a baby or person, let alone an independent person. I know that a fetus has its own DNA but so do the fertilized eggs that get flushed out of a sexually active woman’s body every single month. Each fertilized egg on that feminine napkin has its own unique DNA and they are all just discarded… If life begins at fertilization and you have had sex followed by a menstrual cycle you have discarded living, “babies” each with unique DNA… So where would you like to draw this imaginary line in the womb?
How about drawing the line when things are purposely done, as in abortion? To compare and equate as equal death as natural occurring and death on purpose, does not acknowledge the moral underpinnings of society and does not denote reality or intent. Aafter all – death by old-age is far different than death by being pushed off a bridge, or death by torture or beating or any such thing.
Both people are dead – but one is dead on purpose. voila – abortion is the death on purpose. purposeful miscarriage is also death on purpose. miscarriage naturally is nature – not purposeful intent.
Biggz – you asked me a question that is not factual. Not all women pass fertilized eggs every menstrual cycle. And who in the heck uses feminine napkins anymore anyway?
What does the AMA have to do with when life begins? So what if they say that a zygote is not an independent person? You are not an independent person – does that give me the right to harm you?
The fact is that abortions occur after the baby is already at least three weeks old – it has its own DNA. I have to draw no imaginary line in the womb.
I am against the killing of any human being – that is not a pretty big blanket statement. It is my opinion. I am against the killing in war, I am against the political assassinations, I am against the killing of a mass murderer. That killing occurs is a fact – but I find it deplorable.
Actually you know, America produces many more serial killers than presidents so why doesn’t the billboard say “every 21 minutes, our next possible Jeffrey Dahmer is aborted”?
And because of the one serial killer we should decide to end the life of millions of innocent pre-born children? Goodness!
So still – it’s not for the goodness of mankind, for the potential of goodness, for the human children, or all of the future generations. It’s about utilitarian use and balance sheets. And despite the overwhelming slaughter of innocents, Reality uses the lone example of Jeffrey Dahmer as the reason to use abortion for any reason? That’s like using a chain saw to remove a splinter in a pinkie.
Overkill seems to come to mind. pun intended.
“the lone example of Jeffrey Dahmer as the reason to use abortion” – no, I said that there are more serial killers than presidents. Do I need to provide a list of names?
I was responding to the posters claim that an abortion may be killing a potential future president when the reality is that abortion is more likely to be killing a potential future serial killer. Horses for courses!
I wish pro-lifers would carefully consider their ads, posters, signs, etc. from the point of view of those who are not ingrained in the prolife movement or inundated with prolife literature and educated in every every nuance of prolife issues. This billboard could very well be interpreted that obama is the one saying the text on the billboard; to the un/misinformed or mushy middle it looks like obama is prolife. Prolifers too often try to be too clever with ads and videos that presume the viewer can read between the lines and can jump from subtle point A to hidden point B and get our message.
Doug says:
“Jerry, clearly – you’re on the side of the obfuscation and falsehoods, here. Incorrect facts and ludicrous hyperbole does not a sound argument make. What actual facts can you present to support your take on it?”
Proposition: Prove the following: “The black community should be in an uproar that their race is being erradicated via means of abortion” (charming canuck)
Relevant data that supports trend lines:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
“Thirty percent of abortions occur to non-Hispanic black women…”
“Blacks represent 12.6% of the population. 52% of blacks are women, ergo 6.5% are women. Therefore 30% of all abortions in the U.S. were from the 6.5% of U.S. population, which represent black women.
“In 2008, 1.21 million abortions were performed”
This represents a hugely disproportionate number that reflects the goals of Planned Parenthood’s founder, the racist Margaret Sanger, which is eradication of the “human weeds”.
Yes, Doug, you are correct that there is a growing number of blacks, however the growth does not equal the percentage required for replacement (2.1 children per woman).
From http://issues4lifefoundation.wordpress.com/2010/06/:
Black America’s Total Fertility Rate
A total fertility rate of 2.1 represents “replacement level” fertility for the total population under current mortality conditions (assuming no net immigration). According to the United State Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2006 (Vital Statistics page 67, Table. 77), Black America is below the replacement level at 1.9. According to research, in order for a culture to maintain itself for more than 25 years, there must be a fertility rate of 2.1, with anything less, the culture will decline. Historically, no culture has ever reversed a 1.9 fertility rate.
Conclusion:
The long–term trend is “eradication”, thus charming canuck has the more compelling statistic.
Lovely pile of information you’ve provided us with there Jerry.
The only problem is, black women individually choose to have abortion, same as any other woman so it doesn’t amount to ‘eradication’ beacuse there is no deliberate program in place to target any particular group of women.
The issue isn’t whether or not black women individually choose to have abortion, it’s about the impact it has on the community. Even if black women are making these decsions themselves, they are destructive decisions that are hindering the population.
That’s the problem with saying abortion is a woman’s issue, abortion affects society as a whole and it affects blacks more than other groups according to the data Jerry provided.
Lee Anne: Doug – the facts are – abortion kills an innocent, totally innocent human being. THAT is a fact.
No argument there (although there isn’t any capacity for guilt, either), and of course that was not what we were talking about. All I said was true.
____
As far as the pregnancy rates of blacks versus whites – that is how the CDC breaks them down. I was responding to your quote saying that the blacks had a higher pregnancy rate.
No, you’re not telling the truth, Lee Anne. What you said was: “Doug – here are the latest CDC figures for birth rates.When you make a statement, such as blacks having a higher birth rate, it is important to insert a link. When reading the stats, I think you will find that the black pregnancy rate is not higher.”
You were responding to what I said about black birth rates, not about pregnancy rates. Why worry about links that only confirm what I say, rather than keep your story straight, at least?
Black teenagers in the US have a higher birth rate than white teenagers (it being some 236% of the white rate, in fact, per your link), and black women as a whole have a higher birth rate than white women. I have been saying this for years, and it has been true for years.
Now then, if you want to talk about pregnancy rates, then most certainly – black women have a higher rate there too than white women. Why in the world would you say, “I think you will find that the black pregnancy rate is not higher”?
Jerry, good post, and I appreciate the effort you put into it.
Proposition: Prove the following: “The black community should be in an uproar that their race is being eradicated via means of abortion”
You mentioned a good bit about abortion rates, but of course the current rate by itself has no necessary bearing on whether the given population will decline or not. What really matters is the birth rate (among other things), as you mentioned. My point all along is that here we have white pro-lifers bemoaning blacks having abortions, when the black birth rate in the US is higher than for whites. From 2000 to 2010, the black population of the US increased more than twice as fast as the white population.
Not liking abortion and complaining about abortion is one thing, but the black population is growing faster than the white population in the US, and is also forecasted to continue growing faster.
The mortality rate obviously matters, i.e. the replacement rate won’t always be 2.0. So does (in this case) blacks leaving the US or coming to it. I have not yet seen the US Census Bureau’s projections based on the 2010 Census, but up to now it’s been that the black population of the US would roughly double by the year 2050, and thus no wonder the talk of “genocide” and “eradication” sounds mighty silly.
Doug:
The number 2.1 is recognized as the standard for a replacement rate–this is non-changing.
According to the government statistics (linked in the earlier post) blacks are at 1.9. Studies show once this is reached it is hard to reverse–not impossible though. But short of a reversal of Roe v. Wade what would be the game changer?
According to UN tables the demographic implosion in Europe projects 46 countries losing population by 2050 because the replacement rate is south of 2.1. Unless something rather dramatic occurs to reverse the current trend, the same will happen here to both blacks and whites. Any talk of blacks doubling by 2050 is surely based upon more optimistic fertility rates and high numbers of immigrants coming to our shores.
While there are many things that contribute to the declining birthrate–people waiting to marry later rather than sooner, ever increasing usage of powerful chemical contraceptives, lower sperm counts, and widespread acceptance of abortion as a birth control method…it is the latter, abortion, that affects blacks disproportionately. Remember, black women (6.5% of the population) have 30% of the abortions.
Hence the billboards drawing attention to the impact that abortion has on blacks.
The number 2.1 is recognized as the standard for a replacement rate–this is non-changing.
Jerry, that’s the “middle” scenario, related to mortality, i.e. if people are living longer due to medical advances, the replacement rate can be lower, even below 2, or quite a bit above it if conditions are such that people are living shorter lives. Agreed, though – for us, here and now, 2.1 is a good figure, given current mortality conditions. That, of course, neglects immigration, which is the real game-changer.
____
According to the government statistics (linked in the earlier post) blacks are at 1.9. Studies show once this is reached it is hard to reverse–not impossible though. But short of a reversal of Roe v. Wade what would be the game changer?
Well, that was for one year – 2006 – and the actual figure was 1.991 as I recall. Still below 2.1 but “1.9” is almost twice as far from our agreed-upon “replacement rate” figure. I also have a feeling that year was hand-picked by the pro-life website quoting it, since it was lower than all other years I saw.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0083.pdf
However, the above is the latest thing I can find from the US Census Bureau, and it lists 2.155 as the rate for blacks in 2006. It does show below 2.1 for the three prior years. I don’t see what these exact numbers matter all that much. Didn’t “we all” come from other places, really, here in the US? (Except for the argument for indians/Native Americans.) Immigration more than makes up for any slightly-below-replacement-rate birth rates.
____
According to UN tables the demographic implosion in Europe projects 46 countries losing population by 2050 because the replacement rate is south of 2.1. Unless something rather dramatic occurs to reverse the current trend, the same will happen here to both blacks and whites. Any talk of blacks doubling by 2050 is surely based upon more optimistic fertility rates and high numbers of immigrants coming to our shores.
Maybe some European countries actually will lose population – I don’t know. I’ve never seen any realistic scenarios that don’t have the US population continuing to increase, and increase substantially.
____
While there are many things that contribute to the declining birthrate–people waiting to marry later rather than sooner, ever increasing usage of powerful chemical contraceptives, lower sperm counts, and widespread acceptance of abortion as a birth control method…it is the latter, abortion, that affects blacks disproportionately. Remember, black women (6.5% of the population) have 30% of the abortions.
Hence the billboards drawing attention to the impact that abortion has on blacks.
My point is that it’s not having “that impact” on blacks. The black population in the US has been increasing, much faster than the white population, and I see nothing to indicate that it won’t continue to increase, and to increase faster than the white population.
Thinking of the individual black woman with an unwanted pregnancy, why in the world is she going to care about what we are talking about here, anyway? The US population, the US black population, and the world population are all still going up. In my lifetime alone, we’ve gone from 3 billion to 4, to 5, to 6…. Won’t be long and it will be over 7, and very likely still in my lifetime over 8 and 9 billion…
Doug:
Almost all of the long term pop studies show world pop peaking at mid to late 21st century. It may seem counter-intuitive that pop is increasing even as the seeds of our decrease are being planted, and I suspect that is the difficulty here.
Unless trends are reversed this is the path we have chosen.
Jerry, I agree that population growth will slow down and eventually it may level out. I don’t really care if the world “only” goes from 7 billion to 8 billion people, and then on to 9 billion, certainly not to the extent that I’d forbid women from having abortions.
Likewise, let’s say we do get to that time when, for example, we have 9 billion people on earth. What would be so bad for the population to decline some, from that level?