For many years, my colleagues in the pro-choice movement have made a big deal out of the fact that “87 percent of the counties in the United States do not have an abortion provider.” They have used that statistic to raise money and to try to raise awareness of the problems posed by the “abortion provider shortage.”
There is no arguing that in some parts of the country, abortion doctors are a scarce commodity. But let’s delve a little into how bad things really are.
The reality is that abortion is a very specialized form of medicine. Contrary to what the pro-life moment thinks, women who suddenly find themselves pregnant just don’t run down to the ole abortion clinic and – wham bam thank you m’am – have an abortion.. In several states, they have to go to the clinic and check in to start that absurd 24 hour waiting period clock that does absolutely nothing to enhance the decision making process. Sorry folks, but they’ve already thought about it prior to their visit. In rural areas, this waiting period does one thing – it makes the process more expensive and, thus, might be a deterrent which, of course, is the real purpose of these laws. When they are ultimately ready to begin the abortion process, they undergo some form of counseling, oftentimes they have to listen to some gobblygook mandated by the state, they may ultimately get the abortion. If it is a late term abortion, the process could be three days. After the abortion, they may have either physical or emotional issues afterwards that the clinic will try to address. And if the woman is using the abortion pill, there are other factors to consider.
The point is that, unless you are dealing with a sleaze ball abortion doctor, the process is more complicated than getting a root canal or even knee surgery. And that’s why I would suggest abortion is a “specialized” form of medicine that needs specially trained staff.
So, the fact that abortion doctors are not on every corner in the country is no surprise to me. Indeed, I am not sure if I would want too many out there because it might lower the standard of care. Also, I can say from the experience that there are a number of doctors or clinic owners who at times were not thrilled if another doctor moved into their neighborhood. After all, this is – YES I’LL SAY IT – a profit making venture so who in their right minds would want someone to move in who will take away some of your business?
Now, when we get to states like North Dakota and Idaho, getting an abortion might be more of a chore because of the distances one has to travel. But a woman seeking an abortion will find that clinic and, yes, she will have to travel a great distance. And, if there is a 24 hour waiting period, that makes the process all that more difficult. But when you are seeking some “rare” kind of surgery, you often have to travel great distances to find that specialist. Just look at how many people fly to the Mayo clinic to treat a rare form of cancer or some other disease.
I remember years ago when the feminist movement was so excited that the “abortion pill” was coming onto the market. They predicted that doctors would come out of the woodwork to offer this “simple” alternative to surgical abortions. And while the doctors already practicing publicly applauded its introduction, privately they were very nervous that all of these new doctors would be competing with them.
So, when the pro-choice movement starts talking how so many counties don’t have abortion doctors, I have an interesting reaction. Sure, in North Dakota we could use another clinic on the western part of the state. But, then, on the other hand, in places like New York or Detroit, there is practically an abortion provider on almost every corner…


May 17, 2011 at 7:09 am
Pat, It’s my impression, drawn from interactions with ACN members and the Feminist Majority, that the doctor shortage is alarming because it creates real obstacles to women seeking abortion. No woman should have to endure obstacles to health care in the United States. And, yet, women seeking abortions, who are without insurance, money, childcare, transportation or safety to leave their spouse (or boyfriend), are further disadvantaged by this shortage, to say nothing about the egregious laws that only impact abortion. In other words, it’s not just a shortage or just because these doctors are specially trained. It’s a complex of issues that all too often create unwarranted difficulties for women. If men were to be subjected to all these difficulties, things would change in a heartbeat.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 8:07 am
Abortion is a routine part of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
It is safe and easy to perform.
Pro Lifers have made stupid laws that create unneeded hurdles, creating a specialization of abortion care.
In fact, if there were no Pro Life movement there probably would be no Abortion Offices, as regular OBGyns would just do them in their office.
That is sort of an irony, that the ProLifers instigated the creation of Abortion offices that they try and shut down.
The fact that ProLifers commit heinous crimes, harass innocent women, and murder innocent people doesn’t help either.
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 10:57 pm
“as regular OBGyns would just do them in their office.”
some already do and have for years.
before roe v wade, doctors, nurses and midwives sometimes performed them and recorded the procedure as something else.
“The fact that ProLifers commit heinous crimes, harass innocent women, and murder innocent people doesn’t help either”
i agree.
but it also doesn’t help that choicers have done the same and the movement as a whole overlooks that fact as much as the pro-life movement overlooks the evils committed by many of its own flank
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 8:16 am
Wish I had gotten to this before Kate and Fran had a chance to fling their crap.
Here’s my comment: “If I were able, I’d have written this myself.”
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 8:30 am
Who is this person John?
Why does he need to use profanity?
What does his “comment” even mean?
Is this real?
Could someone educate me?
This seemed like a very nice blog, what kind of people do you allow on here?
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 12:39 pm
John Dunkle is a white senior citizen who, along with two other white senior-aged males, has become radicalized in his antiabortion activism outside abortion clinics, doctors’ homes and abortion clinic directors’ homes. And while you asked about Mr. Dunkle, I believe it’s important to see the actions of these men together first, then look at the particularities of his behaviors through video examples. All three of these men claim to be practicing Catholics. They are Saturday regulars at the Allentown Women’s Center in Pennsylvania where they harass, shame and terrorize women, their companions, clinic staff and volunteers. In my opinion they suffer from religious tribalism, that evil and ultimately self-destructive mythology that identifies others as less than human. It’s clear to even casual observers that these men feed off each other’s bravado, commune in the sharing of their personal stories and work with bloated self-righteousness. In my opinion, They suffer from what Jessica Stern (U.S. expert on terrorism and lecturer at Harvard) termed “extreme doubling” where a person extinguishes his ability to empathize with his victim, in this case a private client, and creates an identity based on opposition to the Other. In other words, all three of these men have left their former selves and have become a morally disengaged self that views women as the Other. They are global evil in a microcosm. Inside their prolife world, these ordinary men commit seemingly demonic acts. And while I know John’s ego will be stroked if I suggest you watch him, I believe the need to see his evil at work overrides my hesitancy to give him any more attention than necessary. To view their activities, consider watching the “cinema verite” of the three of them at work. John is the one with the orange cone, his toy megaphone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwJgO6UGuB4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nDokMdhyxk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoQpx5PJCLQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FNmM8axbeg
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 1:24 pm
Kate,
Thank you for that info.
The video reveals it all.
You are very articulate.
As a practicing Catholic (I am embarrassed to admit that now!), I condemn the behavior of these men as they do not emulate Jesus. They disparage all Catholics by what they do.
I did not understand earlier.
Why do they bother women?
How do they know what a women is at a Doctor’s office for when they are antagonizing them?
She could be there for primary care as most are?
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:33 pm
Why do they bother women?
I would bother Nazis too if they were walking by me transporting Jews into death chambers.
How do they know what a women is at a Doctor’s office for when they are antagonizing them?
I only go there on killing day.
She could be there for primary care as most are?
I can flap my arms and fly, fran. Believe me?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 5:48 am
Do you actually claim you have never bothered a women over the years that was not entering the office for an abortion?
Seriously?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 9:12 am
So far as I know.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Ridiculously impossible you moron.
Admit the truth.
You do not have any knowledge of why a women is walking into a doctor’s office.
With the amount you do what you do, you have definitely harassed women for no reason.
You are too pathetic to admit it you beast.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:12 pm
He won’t answer he is incapable of truth.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:37 pm
You do get my good angles, Kate. Any more of these videos? I’ll buy copies.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 4:52 pm
Fran, in addition to what Kate says about those guys, the issue does have deeper and more disturbing connotations, based on the fact that people who call themselves “pro-life” care far more for the fetus– a life they CANNOT care for unless they undertake to be the surrogate host (and they don’t)– than they care for real children!
Why this weird disconnect at the delivery room door? The over-simplified answer is, they are actually taking care of their own needs, and the fetus is an admirably hand tool to employ for their own purposes. Google “aborticentrism” to get the full picture. They are a sad, sad lot indeed.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 11:51 am
Who is this person John? a very nice fellow, elderly, but that’s his only drawback
Why does he need to use profanity? Aw, Fran, “crap” ain’t that bad!
What does his “comment” even mean? It means Pat wrote a post that I’d have written if I could, and I’m envious.
Is this real? ?
Could someone educate me? Now you’re asking for the improbable.
This seemed like a very nice blog, what kind of people do you allow on here? Not everybody, but you’re OK, you can stay.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 12:42 pm
John,
Thank you.
I apologize if I wrote harshly, I was really confused.
Do you run this blog?
It is very good.
You are very fortunate to have Pat Richards. I have been reading the perspective in the posts. They are very interesting.
I’m just learning to comment.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:06 pm
Fran,
I interviewed John while he was making a spectacle of himself on the sidewalk in front of a doctor’s home. Because I wanted to know, I asked if he still used his megaphone to yell at women who enter the clinic and, if so, why. His response was quite revealing of how morally disengaged he is, such that he would terrorize women by yelling at them as the enter the front door, “Mommy, please don’t let them tear my arms and legs off” or “Don’t go in there, sweetheart. You’re not just killing your baby, you’re killing yourself.” His justification, as he told me, was that yelling at them will make the day memorable” like going through the gates of Hell.”
That’s John Dunkle for you.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:17 pm
Kate’s chronology is askew here, Fran, but otherwise she’s got it.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 4:18 pm
What chronology is askew?
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 4:40 pm
First I tell the tell the girl that she might well be killing herself as well as the baby. When she nears the gate of hell, I become the voice of the baby she is carrying in there and shout mommy and such.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 5:50 am
He is a repulsive person in my view.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 9:19 am
Careful of pronoun gender here, Fran: Kate is not at all repulsive. Hotheaded, maybe, and fearful. But repulsive? Not at all.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:38 pm
Do you run this blog? No, it is fun, though, isn’t it.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:02 am
It is less enjoyable now that I know what kind of person you are.
Kate writes very well. I like reading her point of view.
John,
If you do not run the blog, then why were pretending to give me permission to stay (essentially lying)?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 9:21 am
I am the moral authority, Fran; somebody else crosses the t’s and dots the i’s.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
What is your evidence that YOU are the moral authority?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Just listen to what I’m telling you.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:14 pm
The best that can be said of Dunkle is he evades truth. He really adds nothing to the discussion.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:43 pm
I can’t believe this is you,Louis. You are much more excitable.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:06 pm
Dunkle is crazy Fran.
He worships murderers of innocent people.
Read the blog more.
LikeLike
May 17, 2011 at 3:41 pm
You do get lots of people like Jhanshon, here, Fran. I call them adolescent illiterates (AIs). They are better than nothing, though. Believe me.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 5:53 am
Who are you to call someone an adolescent illiterate?
Your ego must be huge. A very bad thing for an evil person to have.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 9:40 am
“Who are you to call someone an adolescent illiterate?” Just take a look at this: “Dunkle is crazy Fran.” Jahn is saying I’m you! I don’t think he means that but this, “Dunkle is crazy, Fran.
That’s what I mean by illiterate. I’ll get to adolescent later.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:41 pm
You make less sense than anyone on this site.
It is so bizarre that you have the psychological pathology to not get it.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Aw, shucks, another AI. Better than nothing, though.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 5:55 am
From what you admit doing on this very page John, you behave more like an adolescent than anyone.
You should be dispelled from the Church.
There is no Christ in you.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:43 am
Fran,
I’m not convinced that they Church would see Dunkle’s behavior as evil enough to excommunicate him. There have been equally demonic individuals in the hierarchy who have yet to be dismissed. Besides, he, along with others, see themselves as warriors in the abortion war. I view all of the protesters, but especially Dunkle, Kubich and McWilliams (the Saturday morning regulars), at the abortion clinic in Allentown PA as domestic terrorists. Using Jessica Stern’s definiton, she claims that terrorism is “an act or threat of violence against noncombatants with the objective of exacting revenge, intimidation or otherwise influencing an audience.” This threat of violence is used for dramtic purpose to deliberately instill fear or dread in the target audience; hence, the orange megaphone to scream at women.
So to return to your point, Fran, should the Church dismiss him? I suggest that the larger question is why is he doing this? It’s clearly not to dissuade or offer help or compassion but to exact an old man’s love of humiliating women. But why?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:57 am
Why don’t the old men help people instead?
Like volunteer at a homeless shelter?
Or help children presently living in poverty?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:13 am
They would rather terrorize women. The link pasted here shows the three men, two of which have pamphlets they try to hand out to women. It also shows McWilliams getting in a young man’s face, “Don’t murder your baby, Dad.” Then immediately yelling at me to “Get that thing out of face.” It’s OK for them to get in people’s faces but not OK for anyone else.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:14 am
Sorry, I forgot to post the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoQpx5PJCLQ
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:31 pm
Kate
Thank you for this valuable info.
Dunkle(?)’s mouth in his orange megaphone looks like a Mangina.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Why do old smelly men want to terrorize women instead of helping the needy?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 4:11 pm
Fran, it sounds as though you haven’t checked out the topic I suggested. You would better understand him if you do. You’d also be more forgiving of his condition.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 7:59 am
Chuckles, I can read and I can’t even understand that blog. How do you expect an illiterate to understand it!
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 9:33 am
Fran, you are confusing adolescence with being young at heart. And be careful about that Christ stuff. Everybody has Christ in him because everybody is made in the image and likeness of God (even Chuckles).
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:35 pm
John,
You are one scary guy.
If I was near you I would have a stake and garlic for protection.
I did not realize how bad you were on first comment.
You have no Christ in you. That is quite apparent. Satan has taken your soul, you just are not knowledgeable of that fact.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:20 pm
“If I was near you I would have a stake and garlic for protection.” You wouldn’t need it, Fran. I love arlic. I so admire Kate and Matt because they place their faces right in front of my garlic breath- filled megaphone. They truly are dedicated.
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 11:03 pm
hi fran.
i have never encountered you before, and i have been busy of late, so i don’t have time to be online much, but welcome!
pat tries to go above and beyond to make all the posters feel at home, and i hope you will feel the fruits of those efforts.
as far as dunkle being expelled from the church, i must disagree with you.
those who spew vitriol in the name of god need him especially
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 4:41 am
Rog got a little confusing after talking a while with
Chuckles (and who wouldn’t) but I’m going to assume this is a compliment, and say thanks.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:17 pm
Dunkle does worship murderers. He admitted it.
That is the monster you discuss with.
I frankly wouldn’t bother with someone so irrelevant.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 5:58 am
Louis, there used to be a popular saying in the nineteenth century, “Peel a Russian, find a Tartar.” It was the European nobles’ way of dismissing the Russian nobility as nomadic hicks at heart.
Peel a so-called “pro-lifer,” find a John Dunkle. He does what they approve of and what they would themselves do if they were more unbalanced. You will not find any bishop stopping him, nor others in that dysfunctional self-help movment blockading him.
There’s a picture in the June 2011 National Geographic (page 86) that graphically depicts at least four evils that befall children who are not cared for. I recommend you make a copy of it and ask the so-called “pro-lifers” you know if they can identify any of them. To get the answers, ask the man who says he opposes fetal “torture.”
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 8:03 am
Chuckles focuses on “at least four evils that befall children who are not cared for” while ignoring, actually supporting, the worst evil, that of being torn apart.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 11:10 am
Dunkle and I went through the question of whether it’s better to be aborted than to be tortured throughout one’s life, and he came down in favor of torture throughout one’s life. Talk about being so focused on abortion that you can’t care for human life! That’s why he can’t identify ANY of the evils in that photograph.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 12:51 pm
That’s Hitler’s argument: let’s put them out of their misery.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 1:17 pm
Dunkle refuses to help them out of their misery once they beome viable human beings. He is so strongly focused on abortion the idea of protecting and defending them as functioning human beings is quite alien to him.
LikeLike
May 20, 2011 at 3:59 am
Chuckles knows “they become viable human beings” well after birth. Earlier I asked him if he were in favor of infanticide as well as feticide. He didn’t answer there but here he does. What about you Pat, Kate, Rog? And you AIs, Fran, Louis, and such? Go along with him?
LikeLike
May 20, 2011 at 1:06 pm
This is the Word of God: Ecclesiastes IV, 1-3:
” 1. Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:
I saw the tears of the oppressed—
and they have no comforter;
power was on the side of their oppressors—
and they have no comforter.
2. And I declared that the dead,
who had already died,
are happier than the living,
who are still alive.
3. But better than both
is the one who has never been born,
who has not seen the evil
that is done under the sun.”
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 2:27 pm
Sure, but, still, you can’t kill innocent people!
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 4:22 pm
Why can Pro Lifers Kill innocent people?
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 4:42 am
same reason you can’t
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 8:13 am
Philosophers traditionally identify three kinds of evil: moral evil—suffering caused by the deliberate imposition of pain on sentient beings; natural evil—suffering caused by natural processes such as disease or natural disaster; and metaphysical evil—suffering caused by imperfections in the cosmos or by chance, such as a murderer going unpunished as a result of random imperfections in the court system. With this typology of evil,I’d suggest that abortion is not a moral evil because the fetus is not sentient. Nor would abortion be metaphysical evil for the same reason: a fetus does not suffer.
The Loser Cruisers, the three white senior males, epitomize moral evil as men who deliberately act out of rage and take pleasure in their victim’s emotional pain, who shut off the knowledge that the women are human beings and act in unspeakably cruel ways. And while they treat each other with respect, they have lost the ability to empathize with their victims, the women who are clinic clients. In a sense, through the act of inflicting emotional pain on others, they feel purified, sanctified. In fact, Dunkle once said he does what he does to women so that he can save his soul.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 11:26 am
ON the practical, as opposed to the philosophical, plane, there are explanations as to why they would choose to be evil and why they cannot recognize their actions as such. If those so-called “pro-lifers” are faced with true evil (such as is pictured on page 86 of the June 2010 National Geographic), they cannot recognize it, which marks the psychological/emotional basis of their psychopathy.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 1:19 pm
But many of the finest terrorist experts deny psychopathology. While many will use mental illness as the culprit, these experts are acting on their views of rationality to prevent evil. Like the men who took control of U.S. aircraft on 9-11 to right the wrongs of modernity, the chaos of a world turned away from God and the gross capitalism that is the hallmark of America, other terrorists, domestic and international, act of their views of rationality. Dunkle and his fellow protesters have little problem denying the humanity of women in order to save themselves and their mission they call the war against abortion. There’s really very little difference between them and the Nazis who intentionally dehumanized Jews to save themselves and to fight for their Aryan nation. The U.S. military does the same thing to other countries in the name of democracy and freedom (and all the oil we want).
What has also been posited is the inherent evil in humans. Even Jung talked about the shadow side of each one us….the potential to do evil. But is it psychopathology? I’m not sure. I’m certainly not qualified to argue with any authority.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 2:04 pm
“I’m certainly not qualified to argue with any authority.” Well that’s for sure, but neither is Chuckles. I love it, though, when you two phonies set at each other. I wish I could just retire and enjoy the spectacle.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:37 pm
Whoever runs this site, why do you allow the crazies on here?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:21 pm
I told you, Fran, I run it!
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:19 pm
John,
Please stop your endless lying.
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 11:18 pm
there is a policy of free speech here, fran.
it is just unfortunate that some people don’t understand that with rights, comes responsibility.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 4:44 am
See how clear this is? Couldn’t have said it better myself.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 6:54 am
Because if it were just us pro-choicers, it would be boring!
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 9:56 am
Don’t believe it? Just ask Kate.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 4:06 pm
Kate, it’s a matter of understanding the pathology and focusing on the cure. The pathology in the abortion war is not that of the individual so-called “pro-lifer.” The pathology to be treated is the public’s acceptance of him as caring about human life. The more clearly the public understands he does not care for human life, but only for a manufactured image, the easier it will be for the mayor of Allentown to say he’s not going to wait for bodily harm before he shuts down the clown show.
So, do you have any ideas how to do change the public’s perception?
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 11:08 am
I guess not?
LikeLike
July 1, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Lady, re-defining morality with your intellectual gymnastics does not make evil good, nor good evil.
You can vilify the 3 old white Catholic guys all you want, but if you were down and out or in trouble, any of them would give you the shirt off his back.
You are a liar and a hypocrite of the worst sort, because you try so hard to call evil(abortion) good.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 9:28 am
Why didn’t you stick with me on that video I dominate, Kate. You had to switch to Joe, then Gerry, didn’t you. Neither is anywhere near as photogenic. No wonder you didn’t win that contest at UNC. And I can even remember volunteering to help you, too.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 3:39 pm
Can you make the private jokes more understandable to the rest of us?
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:24 pm
You simply do not read, Fran. Are you illiterate too. Up above I said that educating you was improbable. Now you’re making me change that adjective to impossible!
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Fran,
Don’t ask John any more questions unless you really want to flatter him. Even derisive comments give him the Viagra-like thrill that he seeks on this blog and with in his pathetic attempts at activism.
In other words, he’s a shameful attention hound.
LikeLike
May 18, 2011 at 7:47 pm
Damn, she’s zeroing in!
LikeLike
May 24, 2011 at 7:49 pm
is that the only thrill you get out of life Funkle? that and stopping baby killing?
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 5:56 am
ProLifers are just dumb as one can see from all over this site!
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 8:05 am
“ProLifer is,” Annie. There are no others.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 11:18 pm
As I said ProLifers are just dumb.
LikeLike
May 19, 2011 at 11:21 pm
But why are ProLifers so much dumber than the rest?
Everything about the reams of stupidity.
When they burn in He’ll they will finally get it.
Oh well, it will be too late then.
LikeLike
May 20, 2011 at 6:12 am
Kila, it’s not that so-called “pro-lifers” are dumb; it’s that they have a deep-seated insecurity about their death that they try to resolve by proving to themselves that they can live beyond their death the way that all heroes do– in the memory of those who still live.
So rather than actually being heroes, they play at being heroes. They create a victim and a villain.
The victim they create is flawless. It has no imperfections, no character flaws, and no shady past. How much more heroic can they be than to be rescuing such a victim? And of course they rescue it from the worst thing they imagine can happen to anybody– death! So their created victim is the fetus and its evil opponent is death.
Since they imagine all of this, it’s a very easy way to become a hero– they don’t have to learn anything, they don’t have to spend years in a confining discipline, and they don’t even have to pay attention to facts.
So, they’re not stupid. They’re worried, they’re imaginative, and they’re lazy.
And those are their good points.
LikeLike
May 21, 2011 at 4:04 pm
Aborti is right.
I just never heard expressed so eloquently.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 1:44 pm
“So, they’re not stupid. They’re worried, they’re imaginative, and they’re lazy.” I admit to being all four plus lustful.
LikeLike
May 27, 2011 at 12:19 pm
As so-called “pro-lifers” seek power over death, they will use any means available to prove their potency. Being against things is a far easier way to demonstrate potency– lust, alcohol, and a Negro President are some of the easier ways.
LikeLike
May 21, 2011 at 11:04 am
Charles, where do you get this thing about “pro-lifers being insecure about their death?” What does that mean exactly? I would think that if they were serious catholics, they would be okay with death cause they’re going to a better place (?)
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 11:21 pm
patty, try to remember that chuckles has admitted to painting with a wide brush.
he admits to exceptions when he sees them, but agree with him or not, he calls ’em as he sees ’em.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 6:50 am
I remember, Rogie, thanks!
LikeLike
May 27, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Pat: Ernest Becker’s book, “Denial of Death.” Becker was your average NYC schlub teenager when he got drafted for WWII and was one of the dogfaces that found the first concentration camp in the American theater of war– probably Bergen-Belsen. The experience got him out of his rut in life– he probably would have worked in a deli or been a sales clerk in a hardware store– and he majored in psychology under the GI Bill. Over the years he kept wondering why the inmates clung to life when it was so horrific. He concluded that because life is all we know, we are tenacious in holding onto it. (Look at how we spend 50% of our lifetime healthcare costs in the final year of our life. This is not just the elderly, but the terminally ill children, the triaged aircraft crash victims, etc.) So, if you want to read the book, I recommend it highly.
One of the delightful passages in it is Becker’s account of how children have to learn that they are not the center of the universe (a necessary step the development of a real human being; my gloss.) There comes a day when he first realizes that no matter how much he fusses, his want (or worse, his need) is not only not being met, but the person who has the power to grant it is REFUSING to grant it! The passage sprang from serving his two kids a meal, and goes something like this:
“I want chicken.”
“That IS chicken.”
“It’s not chicken like he has.”
“Here! This piece is very much like what he has.”
“No, it isn’t. His has a big part on it this one doesn’t.”
“You’re going to have to put up with it.”
“How come she has more peas than I do?”
“I thought you didn’t like peas.”
“Well, I don’t, but why should she have more?”
“Do you want more?”
“No! You take away hers. And how come my peas aren’t on the same side of the chicken as hers are?”
(Turns his plate halfway around.) “There!”
“How’d you do that?”
Now, let’s get down to so-called “pro-lifers” being insecure about their death. This I abstracted later in the book. The book is not about just dying; it’s about dying even though life is the thing you want to hold onto so much, your body resists your mind’s intention to commit suicide. (Try it, and you’ll see.)
Becker wondered why people would risk or sacrifice their lives in order to achieve some goal– such as saving a child from a burning house or manning a machine gun outpost during a retreat– and determined that what motivates people in large part is that the act itself is done in the belief that it is a transcendence of death. They believe that they will live on, much the way heroes of the past still live on.
So, walk that back with the so-called “pro-life” movement: They themselves proclaim they are rescuing “innocent victims.”
Ergo, as rescuers they are heroes. Why do they want to be heroes? It must be because they believe they can transcend death.
If they feel that they HAVE to transcend death, it must be because they fear death to a greater degree than people who do not call themselves “pro-life.” (True, the other people fear death just as much, but handle that fear in other ways that makes it unnecessary for them to behave like a so-called “pro-lifer.”)
So, if they claim to be doing the work of heroes AND they do it because they want to transcend death, then we look at the nature of the work they do– and we find there is NO sacrifice, NO school of discipline (e.g., military training), NO corpus of knowledge or skills that must be mastered, and NO commitment of talents, skills, time or money beyond the ordinary– and we have to ask, “Why do they put themselves in this peculiar position of trying to be heroes on the cheap?” And the reasonable conclusion is that they are like all of us insecure about their death but unlike many of us not dealing with it very well.
For a specific illustration: There was one on this site who despite his age and obvious inevitable end has quite simply stated he is not going to die. It’s part of their whole package.
LikeLike
May 27, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Pat, why is Chuck picking on you!
LikeLike
May 21, 2011 at 4:01 pm
I’ve noticed (anecdotally) the most insecure people about death are the highly religious. I don’t get it. All my Agnostic and atheist friends are quite content with the inevitable.
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 2:30 pm
Kila, why do you capitalize “agnostic” but not “athiest”?
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 2:37 pm
Interesting question, John. There must be a psychological reason, huh??
LikeLike
May 27, 2011 at 12:15 pm
As Freud said, “sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Read his monograph, “The Psycopathology of Everyday Life.”
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 2:36 pm
I’m an agnostic, Kile, and I am petrified of dying, if not a little obsessed with it. Everytime my heart flutters or something, I think “here comes the big one!”
LikeLike
May 22, 2011 at 4:29 pm
Are you afraid of the process of dying (that can really be painful)? I was speaking to one’s nonexistence.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 6:51 am
I’m just “afraid” of leaving this world suddenly. I dont know if I want to go slowly or quickly…
LikeLike
May 27, 2011 at 5:35 pm
Im afraid of whats to come after there is so much energy its hard to tell where we go, our civilization has yet to even grasp limits of our own physics, i believe being an agnostic puts you at an ease more because most agnostics or agnostic or athiests understand the condemming potential religion suggests. And in understanding that we can know No matter what we have to enjoy the time and memories we can hold on to, for now and worry about later when it arrives, thankyou for making such a site for women! Good articles pat!
LikeLike
May 27, 2011 at 5:51 pm
I love ya, Adriana, because you’re here. That means you’re alive, not dead. But, please, will you just listen and not talk, until you learn how to talk.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 4:48 am
What was it that Henry James said, Ah, here it comes, that special moment — something like that.
LikeLike
May 23, 2011 at 6:20 am
said on his deathbed
LikeLike
May 28, 2011 at 5:47 pm
Sorry, Pat, personal note: It would have warmed you heart, Kate, if you’d been at the AWC this morning. A cop arrived and told me to get rid of my orange megaphone. There is a City ordinance against amplifying your voice! Well, that’s what he said. I wasn’t even through with my class!
LikeLike
June 5, 2011 at 4:26 pm
Haven’t you been using that megaphone for a long time? They only now took it away from you?
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 7:31 pm
Yeah, I’ve been using if for at least a year. Someone like
Rog who claims she is prolife but who saves most of her bitterness for other prolifers who don’t do what she wants keeps calling the cops on me. May she’s responsible.
LikeLike
May 29, 2011 at 10:20 am
Pat,
So are you saying that the surplus of abortion clinics in metropolitan areas like New York and Detroit is a bad thing because it allows for more clinics with mediocre doctors? I would think that an area with lot of clinics would create competition between them to offer the best services and, in turn, would benefit the women seeking the abortion. Also, do states like North Dakota and Montana (those with small populations) need more clinics? It seems that this “shortage” might be just the proportion to the population.
LikeLike
June 5, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Skyler, I’m not saying it would be “bad” to have a lot of clinics but, yes, you always have to be on the lookout for sleazeballs. On the other hand, competition is good as long as the service does not suffer. North Dakota and Montana….I guess the goal would be to have a clinic in every metro area to make it easy for women but for places like N Dakota, it would be very hard for another clinic to survive. After all, you need a certain amount of patients to pay your bills and if you divided the patients suddenly in that state it might affect the other clinic.
LikeLike
May 29, 2011 at 9:22 pm
Hi, Skyler~~ When it comes to health care (and other non-mercantile things), “competition” is not what you want. You want quality. For example: Competition in provision of abortion services would lead to the use of hangers instead of curettes because they’re cheaper. It’s the same with the provision of all other forms of health care. Please, please, please rent Michael Moore’s DVD, “SiCKO.” It will be very helpful to you.
I recently found out through reading Rachel’s Vineyard and checking recent Vatican happenings that an aborted fetus provides a link to Heaven for the once-pregnant woman, and that with Limbo abolished, aborted babies must go directly to heaven! Which means that so-called “pro-lifers” are interfering with God’s plan to call a fetus directly to life eternal, without exposing it to those Satanic lures which they so vehemently despise and fear….
LikeLike
May 30, 2011 at 4:10 am
Since my job here is to prevent Chuckles from distorting truth, here goes:
1) Limbo was never abolished because it was never taught; it was suggested. I still find the suggestion persuasive.
2) Aborte4d babies do not go directly to heaven; what happens to them is they escape condemnation. Only we who have escaped the killers’ knives face condemnation — it all depends on how we behave here.
3) God calls everyone to life eternal, even Chuckles himself. We mere mortals cannot interfere with that. But God also wants everyone to be tested. When we prevent that, we condemn ourselves.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 2:18 am
i would be interested in seeing links within the RV and vatican websites that support that statement.
LikeLike
July 12, 2011 at 6:45 pm
There are three statements, Rog.
LikeLike
June 1, 2011 at 7:27 am
Sorry, but when Limbo is taught to Catechism classes in the Fifities, it’s taught, much the way Creationism is taught in Bible Belt public schools.
Fetuses are not babies unless the term is applied by the woman who was carrying them. To call them “babies” is just a PR ploy used by so-called “pro-lifers” to make themselves look like heroic rescuers.
They “escape condemnation”?????? So much for the God who loves them! This is an example of how aborticentrists play fast and loose with the conceptual framework of their belief system (consider how creationists do the same, incidentally). Both words are heavily freighted with implications for the so-called “pro-life” movement, whose members hate the idea of someone “escaping” and especially escaping “judgment.”
Not a word about the aborted fetus being a link to Heaven…..??? It’s taught in Rachel’s Vineyard, the way Limbo was taught in Catechism.
LikeLike
June 1, 2011 at 2:51 pm
Someone who simply refuses to learn will never learn. I’ve had several students like Chuckles in my long career.
LikeLike
June 5, 2011 at 9:44 am
When it comes to the mutability of Catholic truth, Mr. Christopher agrees with him.
Many of you might remember him as the former Saint Christopher, who bore the increasingly heavy Christ Child on his back to help Jesus cross a stream. It turned out the reason the kid was so heavy was that he was bearing the sins of the world, and Christopher was bearing him.
Of course, millions of lira were made selling statues of St. Christopher, and as a result only 50,000 lives were lost every year in car crashes in America (although some of those averted were due to God being the co-pilot, if bumper stickers are to be believed.
Then in the Sixties and Seventies, it was determined that a number of saints never existed, among them not only the former Sts. Philomena and Juan Diego (the latter of Guadelupe fame), but also Mr. Christopher. He went to the dustbin of history.
But only for fifty years. With Pope John Paul John Paul pushing canonizations at almost the same rate that the Rev. Sun Myung Moon pushes weddings, Mr. Christopher was BAAAACK! He is again St. Christopher!!
So, how long is Limbo going to be out of fashion.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 2:16 pm
My guess is November, ’11.
LikeLike
June 5, 2011 at 4:31 pm
I hate it when you two guys start going on these deep, religious conversations 🙂
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 2:49 am
* brings over a pitcher of yueng-ling and two mugs*
how ’bout dem yankees?
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 6:04 am
I hear ya, Rogie. My Yankees are making me nervous this year!!
LikeLike
June 5, 2011 at 6:08 pm
Pat, in general the public greatly underestimates the power and use of metaphor in the internalization of a values system. Limbo and Mr. Christopher’s story are two that are useful in reminding the deceived populace that original sin burdens each of them, just as the so-called “pro-life” movement gets the population to internalize the falsehood that the fetus is a fully-formed and -informed human being.
Meanwhile, he hasn’t responded to the fact that Rachel’s Vineyard (an approved Catholic “therapeutic” regimen) says that the aborted fetus is the woman’s link to heaven.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 2:50 am
when has RV ever said that?
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 6:05 am
I had never heard that either!
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 6:15 am
Step 12, quote: ““After the abortion, the baby is the mother’s lifeline to spiritual life…”
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 9:40 am
RV is not a 12 step program.
i googled your quote and it came from a pro-life priest who stated that after an abortion, the baby “CAN BE” the mother’s lifeline to god.
this means, in effect that if the someone feels distance from god because of the abortion, that grieving for the baby ( which some of us have a need to do ) can bring us closer to god.
there is quite a difference.
i went through RV ans i assure you that what you are saying is untrue.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 2:25 pm
I was going to correct Chuckles, too, Rog. But I’ve been away, and now that I’m back I see you’ve done it better.
I’ll just comment on this: “. . . the falsehood that the fetus is a fully-formed and -informed human being.” Neither Chuckles nor I am fully-formed. I used to be about forty years ago but it’s been down hill ever since. And Chuck has never been fully informed; but we’re both working on that, ain’t we.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Read. The. Book.
Your memory plays you false, especially if you were not one of the “facilitators.” That is a direct quote.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Folks, I often do not know who you are addressing. Please write that person’s name.
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 8:20 pm
which book are you referring to, chuckles?
have you been on an RV retreat?
LikeLike
June 6, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Good research, Rogie. Charles?
LikeLike
June 7, 2011 at 5:54 am
Oh, you haven’t read the book.
Here’s the information: Rachel’s Vineyard: A Psychological and Spiritual Journey of Post Abortion Healing: A Model for Groups by Theresa Karminski Burke and Barbara Cullen (Dec 1995)
Order it through an inter-library loan.
I haven’t been on this particular retreat. but the Living Scripture sections are so cunningly crafted that as a participant I would regret the abortion I had, even though I’m a man and have never had one.
LikeLike
June 7, 2011 at 7:37 pm
i just phoned the director for our local RV and she assures me that you are incorrect about this matter.
but for good measure, i just emailed kevin burke.
i might add that you changed your statement from the baby being the life line to heaven to being the life line to spiritual life.
the statements are quite different.
i find it interesting that you would judge the living scriptures based on your own personal belief system, rather than the one it is based on.
the retreatants are there because they regret their abortion experiences, not to build regret. if they did not already have regret, they would not be there.
did you mean to state that you have never had a personal experience with abortion?
it is quite possible for men to regret their experience with abortion. for you to state otherwise would suggest internalized misandry.
LikeLike
June 8, 2011 at 6:13 am
Rogelio, re: Rachel’s Vineyard quote: That was a direct quote from a copy of the facilitators’ manual that was an interlibrrary loan from the University of Virginia. I regret that I ommitted to copy the publication date and cited page, but that is a direct quote. Either the woman you talked to is lying, too lazy to re-read Step 12’s Living Scripture section, or, more likely, is reading from a copy which has been revised to erase that particular claim the same way the Catholic Church has erased Limbo. I suggest you get the UofV copy to read for yourself.
Had I been lying about the quote, I would not have changed it to be different from my claim that the book says the aborted fetus is the woman’s lifeline to heaven. (This contrasts with the blatantly dishonest forgery of a Mein Kampf passage by a so-called “pro-lifer” in this site.) My characterization of the quote is honest, albeit rhetorical: what does one develoop one’s spirituality for, if not to have a connection to one’s Heaven? You should grant me the same slack you grant so-called “pro-lifers” who claim to be so passionate about their “unborn humans” even as they walk away from them at the delivery room door.
The retreatants are there largely because their abortion experience is but one of a host of problems they have– and the authors wisely recognize this in the proveably effective group therapy part of each chapter.
The flaw with Rachel’s Vineyard is the “living scripture” sections, which prey on the participants’ confessed weaknesses, fears, feelings and troubles to gull them into believing that the answer to their issues is to rely on the love and forgiveness of an authority figure (Christ) whom they have caused to suffer (thereby being even more subservient to him than otherwise, thus reinforcing their status as unable to think and judge for themselves), and whose approval they can continue to enjoy only if they keep doing what is expected of them (the message immplied and stated by many an abusive male). As my maternal grandmother (eight children, six survived, no abortions) was one who believed that crap (not from her spouse, but from God himself), she and her children paid dearly for it.
Above all, keep in mind that only about 2% of women who have abortions claim to suffer from “post-abortion syndrome” (the most famous being faux spiritual and “pro-life” counselor Carol Everett), but that in truth their problems lie with other issues– which as I have said the manual addresses rather professionally.
Half of the women I know (and statistically, half of those you know) have had abortions. Their mental health ranges from enviable to deplorable. I have discussed the personal experience of abortion with women ranging from sisters and nieces through cousins, lovers, friends and strangers. I have always respected their decision, and sometimes I have despaired for their children.
***
Now, someone who claims to be a so-called “pro-lifer” will indicate he doesn’t understand any of this.
LikeLike
July 1, 2011 at 1:45 pm
Quite to the contrary.
Any counselor in a CPC or a social work setting will tell you clearly that the issue is NOT the unplanned pregnancy.
The real issue is that the pregnancy is the straw breaking the camel’s back.
For a married, pro-life catholic woman, every pregnancy is “unplanned” to some degree. But these are not crisis pregnancies.
Every crisis pregnancy is due to underlying issues of social, emotional, and other causes.
Prolifers get this extremely well. The false promise of abortion is that it will “fix” the crisis. the fact is it just gets rid of that last straw (for now) and brings on problems of its own.
LikeLike
July 1, 2011 at 3:12 pm
To #5, about the three old male demonstrators giving a down and out woman the shirt off their back: Make thazt “two of those…” One of them is so clueless about caring for life he didn’t understand the perils faced by a dog he might abandon in a parking lot. Would you trust him to know what a child needs?
LikeLike
July 1, 2011 at 3:20 pm
Re the “false promise” of #17: I will not accept the evaluation of any CPC counselor. Carol Everett is the avatar and seal of their level of professionalism. Not every unplanned pregnancy is a crisis, but so-called “pro-lifers” WANT it to be a crisis so they can act heroically. For those which are crises, the causes can be numerous.
that’s all apart from the genuine therapy offered in the Rachel’s Vineyard course and the poison chalice offered in the “living Scripture” bits.
LikeLike
July 1, 2011 at 4:38 pm
Here’s another one: it came alive, and then collapsed.
LikeLike
February 10, 2014 at 8:38 pm
Our world demands that our kids be able to dneefd what they believe in a logical and thought out manner. It is vital to teach our children that the Bible is God’s history book!
LikeLike
July 11, 2011 at 10:23 pm
[…] will have developed to the point where there are identifable fetal parts. Indeed, after a LATE TERM abortion the physician must insure that all the parts have been recovered to avoid any […]
LikeLike