(Prolifer)ations 1-10-12
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- Pro-Life in TN informs readers that the directors of Nashville’s Rocketown Youth Center decided they would not host the Planned Parenthood-trained PG13 Players Peer Educators event scheduled for this past Monday:
PP hoped to use the event to infer credibility and acceptance in a Christian venue. This backfired when word got out and reaction was swift. Just as PP was rightfully kicked out of our state budget in 2011 (and other states) they were kicked out of Rocketown.
- Americans United for Life points out media bias in the major networks’ lack of (or very sparse) coverage of Planned Parenthood’s scandals and congressional investigation.
- Bryan Kemper reports on a college student’s resignation from Girl Scouts of America (pictured left) after she was told to turn her pro-life t-shirt inside out at work while off-duty.
- Speak Up discusses the many ways rapper Jay-Z’s new song about his newborn daughter, Blue Ivy, with wife Beyonce, speaks to how he viewed the personhood of his daughter from conception onward.
- Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life is happy to see Dear Abby dispensing pro-life advice regarding a couple with “extra” embryos after IVF. She recommends embryo adoption.
- Scott Klusendorf reveals his predictions (many of them dealing with the pro-life movement) for 2012.
- Family Research Council explains the Youth Misery Index and why President Obama’s approval rating has dropped by 30% among Generation Y.
- Operation Rescue has details and audio of a 911 call for a botched abortion that happened two months ago at a Virginia Beach Planned Parenthood:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjiScHKyBTk[/youtube]
Jan.10, 2012 3:30 pm |
Blogs |
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.
Americans United for Life points out media bias in the major networks’ lack of (or very sparse) coverage of Planned Parenthood’s scandals and congressional investigation.
Well..what do you expect when “America’s sweetheart” -Katie Couric- has a picture of MARGARET SANGER hanging in her dressing room? She has pictures of the “women she most admires”, and MS is among them.
I saw that in a magazine article about KC..can’t remember which magazine…
I probably read it in a dr’s waiting room, as I don’t read any magazines at home.
That PP clinic seems so disorganized…scary, if you are the one, I mean the TWO, bleeding.
our local abortionist is martin ruddock. we call him murdering marty. its not at all uncommon to see women leave his clinic in an ambulance. sometimes not even an hour passes since they pass us by and we warn them. you usually get the finger along with the blatant f*** you!
then you see them leaving on the stretcher and the goon squad will try to block their faces by carrying a large blanket to hide the victim. you can usually hear them moaning or weeping while being wheeled to the awaiting ambulance.
Would it be a good idea to pay girls and women who are of reproductive age each month when they are NOT pregnant?
Or to give them some special award or recognition each month they are not pregnant?
I’m just throwing it out as an idea to bring down the abortion rate. Certainly some creative thinking is necessary. However, I want to say again that if it has shrunk from 1.5 million per year to 1.2 million per year, as the last statistic I read indicated, something good is going on.
heather, how often do women leave your local clinic on gurneys in ambulances? I know that pro-life blogs are often all over those incidents, reporting them almost in real-time.
alexandra im sorry to say so but more often then you might think. operation rescue posted about ruddocks clinic of death. the nurses werent taking vital signs pre op. the doctor didnt have emergency contracts with surrounding hospitals. there was one woman who won a 1 million dollar lawsuit because hed left her sterile after botching her abortion. id say once every month. one time there were 3 in 1 month.
also a chilling 911 tape was obtained by one of our pro lifers. he always gets the scoop after going to public records. on the tape the nurse cannot tell dispatch what is going on. she tells 911 op ” we have an obese 33 year old black female who came for an abortion and doctor is having problems.” 911 “what kind of problems? i need you to be specific.” nurse says “hold on.” static……”tick tick tick “okay im going to put the doctor on the line.” people talking….commotion. Ruddock “yes i have an obese female at my clinic at (address given) and i cant stop her bleeding! i cant see what im doing. its a cervical tear. hurry i want her OUT of here”!!!!!!!!
Would it be a good idea to pay girls and women who are of reproductive age each month when they are NOT pregnant? Or to give them some special award or recognition each month they are not pregnant?
No. Because
a). Prolifers have not yet succeeded in undermining medical privacy rights far enough to make possible a monthly update on the pregnancy status of every post-pubescent female in the country, and
b). Your plan would create an incentive rather than a disincentive for abortion, because a woman would “lose” money for every month that she continued the pregnancy rather than terminated it.
Mainstream media networks are business entities – they need to draw ratings, and they report on news that they feel will draw ratings. If people don’t like what news is reporting, get your news elsewhere…which is what most Americans do. They get their news from a variety of sources that they feel is trustworthy and good. I think the dumbest thing to do is complain that people are choosing to get their news from where they get it from – they are simply doing the exact same thing any of the rest of us are.
For those who think the news should be fair and balanced…well, first, these are profit making companies – and second, I think if you believe the media has that much sway over the minds of Americans, than I think you’d be first on board to sign up for an overhaul of how campaign’s are financed.
One other thing – I doubt we have enough info on the girl scouts case. Sure, it could be foul play…but I can say that even if I were off duty, there are certain dress code regulations I have to adhere to if I go into my work.
Also, for those so mad about it, ask if you would be equally okay with a person wearing a pro-choice shirt in their off duty time at work?
Lisa C says:
January 10, 2012 at 9:30 pm
Would it be a good idea to pay girls and women who are of reproductive age each month when they are NOT pregnant? Or to give them some special award or recognition each month they are not pregnant? No. Becausea). Prolifers have not yet succeeded in undermining medical privacy rights far enough to make possible a monthly update on the pregnancy status of every post-pubescent female in the country, andb). Your plan would create an incentive rather than a disincentive for abortion, because a woman would “lose” money for every month that she continued the pregnancy rather than terminated it.
(Denise) The reward would only go to those who don’t GET pregnant, not to anyone who gets pregnant regardless of what they do about it.
Denise, why on earth would we pay women not to get pregnant? Pregnancy is not a bad thing. It’s how the human race continues. And I second Lisa’s opinion, subjecting EVERY girl and woman of reproductive age to a test each month to determine if they’re pregnant is a horrible idea!
Lrning says:
January 11, 2012 at 9:49 am
Denise, why on earth would we pay women not to get pregnant? Pregnancy is not a bad thing. It’s how the human race continues. And I second Lisa’s opinion, subjecting EVERY girl and woman of reproductive age to a test each month to determine if they’re pregnant is a horrible idea!
(Denise) No one can have an abortion unless they are pregnant. Thus, a reward for not getting pregnant would lead to fewer abortions.
Those who want babies would be willing to forgo the reward because they want the babies.
Part of the reason I propose a reward for every month a female of fertile age does not get pregnant — a reward that would be forfeited for a specific time for anyone who aborts — is that it is difficult to get recognition for what is NOT done. This gives that recognition.
Again, why would we as a society reward women for NOT getting pregnant? Pregnancy is a GOOD thing for society. If you feel a reward is the way to decrease abortion, get out to your nearest abortion clinic and offer a reward to all the abortion-bound women if they to choose NOT to abort. That might result in fewer abortions.
What about the child tax credit? We are already provided a tax subsidized incentive for continuing a pregnancy and giving birth. If you are paid to have the baby AND paid not to have a baby…. the “incentive” either way disappears. And I agree with part B of Lisa C’s comment too. Part A is just disjointed from reality.
TheChristianHippie says:
January 11, 2012 at 2:24 pm
What about the child tax credit? We are already provided a tax subsidized incentive for continuing a pregnancy and giving birth. If you are paid to have the baby AND paid not to have a baby…. the “incentive” either way disappears. >>
(Denise) This is not a reward to not having a baby. This is a reward for not GETTING PREGNANT.
Part of the problem here is that there are few positive incentives in place for NOT doing something. This puts in such an incentive for avoiding pregnancy. If a woman really wants a baby, she will easily forgo this reward. However, those who don’t want babies — and thus aren’t likely to carry to term — ought to receive reward to avoiding pregnancy.
Denise, what you are suggesting is not unlike steralization and contraceptive campaigns in other countries. And, regardless of the ‘rules’ such campaigns *always* end up being abusive. Not only due such things unjustly effect the poor, it provides incentives for whoever is doing the reporting to exploit people to make quota or even just keep their job. Bartering a young woman’s fertility away for a monthly stipen or 1 time yearly payment she doesn’t feel like she has any choice but to accept is not a good way to avoid out of wedlock pregnancies or otherwise ‘unplanned’ pregnancies. Every single population control attempt that has been made in other countries, and make no mistake, paying anyone to ‘not be pregnant’ *is* population control, has ended in grievous human rights abuses. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. What you’re suggesting *would* lower birth rates (pregancy rates and possibly abortion rates, although that’s quaetionable) but only at the expense of human rights of the women involved.
If you are unfamiliar with what I speak of i’d suggest checking out pop.org for some of the abuses found in worldwide population control attempts.
Another thing I want to make clear is that it is important to put in incentives to NOT do certain things. People tend to ask, “What do you do?” rather than “What don’t you do?”
I know what you’re saying Denise, I do. But it won’t work. Lets say the incentive is 100$ a month for no pregnancy. And seriously Jesperen is right this would really only be a big deal for the poor.
I believe this would be a common scenario: I’m a student or single mother or blue collar wife, whatever, and need to make my rent so I can’t “afford” to get pregnant. The test comes up positive. I now no longer see a “baby”, but rather “100$ gone, plus the cost of the abortion”, never mind society’s current “babies ruin your life, are a burden, might kill you, etc” anti-life propaganda that rush through my mind. I “have” to get the abortion now right away, so I don’t miss the “deadline” for the next month’s 100$ pay out. I’m now further behind in my rent and now bills because of the abortion cost, I’m under greater stress to catch up and have to take another job or work overtime etc. or lose my apartment. The “incentive” has not helped at all, and a baby has still died. :( Get it now?
I wouldn’t say that it would affect the woman’s “human rights”, but it wouldn’t have the positive impact you are hoping for. And EVERYONE’S “What don’t you do?” list is MILES longer than their “What do you do?” list! If we just incentived a nickle for each one, the country would be bankrupted by the enormous paperwork and pencil pushers and “census takers” (not ot mention the army of gov. “overseers” to “Regulate” them) it would take to document everything possible to be done and question everyone on whether they do them, even before payouts are issued, which would then further bankrupt the country into oblivion! Or lets just say we just incentivize not murdering people, on top of punishing actually murdering people. Even if the incentive is 1000$, which our country can’t afford to pay all the non-murders every year, peoples thoughts change from the moral, spiritual, lawful consequences of murder and become, “I’d pay 1000$ to kill that guy!” or “No, I can’t kill him, I’d lose 1000$!”
Our goal is to encourage value of the PERSON, not the person’s VALUE!
TheChristianHippie says:
January 15, 2012 at 5:06 pm
I know what you’re saying Denise, I do. But it won’t work. Lets say the incentive is 100$ a month for no pregnancy. And seriously Jesperen is right this would really only be a big deal for the poor.
I believe this would be a common scenario: I’m a student or single mother or blue collar wife, whatever, and need to make my rent so I can’t “afford” to get pregnant. The test comes up positive. I now no longer see a “baby”, but rather “100$ gone, plus the cost of the abortion”, never mind society’s current “babies ruin your life, are a burden, might kill you, etc” anti-life propaganda that rush through my mind. I “have” to get the abortion now right away, so I don’t miss the “deadline” for the next month’s 100$ pay out. I’m now further behind in my rent and now bills because of the abortion cost, I’m under greater stress to catch up and have to take another job or work overtime etc. or lose my apartment. The “incentive” has not helped at all, and a baby has still died. Get it now?
(Denise) I was thinking of a system in which any abortion would mean forfeiting the reward for not getting pregnant. The aborter would forfeit longer than the female who carried to term <<I wouldn’t say that it would affect the woman’s “human rights”, but it wouldn’t have the positive impact you are hoping for. And EVERYONE’S “What don’t you do?” list is MILES longer than their “What do you do?” list!
(Denise) This is true. The problem is that, for a teen girl or young woman, her NOT getting pregnant is a primary goal. When NOT doing something, rather than doing something, is a major goal, there are automatically problems with incentives because people just don’t usually get positive rewards for not doing something. Yet young females are to a large extent evaluated on what they don’t.
As a “good girl” during my teen years, I made Not Getting Pregnant my major goal and, to that end, isolated myself.