For many years, anti-abortion activists have lobbied their state legislatures to pass laws that require abortion clinics to share certain information with their patients. These so-called “Right to Know” laws take many forms: giving the patient a brochure that shows the stages of fetal development, taking an ultrasound and showing it to the woman, reciting a script to the patient that is a litany of things that can go wrong with an abortion, etc., etc.
Although the pro-choice movement regularly opposes these laws, I have written in the past about how the affect of these laws on the woman is rather minimal. For example, most women casually look at the brochures, if at all, then toss them into
the garbage. I’ve been in the rooms with woman as they observed their ultrasound, asked questions about the fetus then proceeded to have the abortion. It’s all a rather big waste of time if you ask me, but if the anti-abortion movement wants to spend their time on this kind of stuff, go for it. And, after all, it’s all well-intentioned, isn’t it? Sure, they would prefer to make that woman’s act totally illegal, but since they can’t do that they want to make sure that a woman is making an informed choice. How compassionate of them, huh?
Meanwhile, up in New York City, the City Council has taken a great interest in the activities of a number of “crisis pregnancy centers” that, according to testimony provided in a hearing, are engaging in “deceptive” practices designed to convince the woman that they are actually medical facilities. It seems that the staff in some of these cpcs a
re doing some interesting things. For some reason, they are collecting personal and insurance information in the waiting room, the consultations are taking place on examination tables with the woman in the stirrups and “scrub suited consultants” are giving free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds. On its face, it sounds a little deceptive to me but I’m sure these reports are not accurate because we’ve been told so many times that cpcs do not engage in this kind of behavior.
Still, this crazy ole City Council is concerned about this alleged behavior so they passed a law requiring the cpcs to post signs saying they have no doctors on site and don’t’ give advice about abortions or birth control. Sounds kind of like the “Right to Know” laws that are being imposed on abortion clinics.
But, lo and behold, here comes the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian advocacy group, and they challenge the law, saying it would have violated the center’s right to free speech. And, recently, a local judge agreed with them and slapped an injunction on the new law.
Putting aside all the legal mumbo-jumbo and the current status of the law, what I cannot sort out is why anti-abortion advocates want abortion clinics to inform women of everything but the kitchen sink, but when the NY City Council wants to ask them to give out just a little information about their centers, they balk at the idea?
Somebody help me here, please!
Related articles
- These Pictures Speak a Thousand Words (abortion.ws)
- No One Cares About the Science (abortion.ws)
- The Rape and Incest Exception – Trying to Have it Both Ways (abortion.ws)
- Dem Governor Will Allow Missouri Anti-Abortion Bill To Become Law (huffingtonpost.com)
- Abortion-rights activist plans Wichita clinic (sfgate.com)
- New Missouri Anti-Abortion Law Eliminates “General Health Exception” (alan.com)
- Mo. gov. lets late-term abortion bill become law (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
- States more than double previous record for anti-abortion legislation in 2011 (dailykos.com)
- Abortion-rights activist plans Wichita clinic (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
July 15, 2011 at 7:58 am
I’ll try to help you on this one, Pat, even though I don’t know much about the CPC’s. My guess is that many make no attempt at all to pretend they are anything but prolife. However, if there are no others that pretend to be pro-death, so that they can do everything possible to save someone’s life, then there should be.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 10:22 am
The whole abortion debate is hypocritical. Let’s face it. One prolific prolifer on this blog, in particular, said about prochoicers,”They tolerate no choice but their own.”
Well, well. Sounds to me like the prolifers tolderate no choice but their own, as well. Or, more accurately, she tolerates no choice but her own. (there, that’s better)
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 10:40 am
Pro Lifers think that people are one homogenous group as you refer to above.
DeAnna’s ridiculous statements about Pro Choice individuals all thinking the same is an insanity.
Pro Choice mentality is to tolerate choice and differences of opinion, the exact opposite of what DeAnna says.
She also said that a few people represented the Pro Choice movement.
That was ridiculous as well. No one has been elected as the singular Pro Choice representative on this blog.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 12:00 pm
“Pro Choice mentality is to tolerate choice and differences of opinion, the exact opposite of what DeAnna says.”
Really? If that is true then why am I continually attacked for being pro-life and Christian? You can look back at Pat’s last article and see clearly that this is the case, that is if you are honest about it. So, why then is my opinion, being different, not tolerated? I was called names and my religion attacked, at every turn simply because of my pro-life OPINION and my belief in God? It seems to me that what pro-choicers tolerate is their choice ONLY even in religion. How can you dispute this based on the responses to my comments on previous articles. And if I hang around and comment on this article the same thing will happen again to prove my point.
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:25 pm
That was dumb.
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 1:11 pm
Pro Choice would have no problem with Pro Life if they didn’t want to force everyone else to be Pro Life. By being Pro Choice you are not forcing a view, your letting everyone make their own view, hence tolerance of opinion. Pro Lifers on the other hand demand that laws require everyone to conform to their views only.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 12:24 pm
Kate,
Your definition of tolerance is odd. I didn’t call people names, curse them, attack their religion, or any of the other things that was done to me simple because I am a pro-life christian. I do not like abortion, I think it is horrible. But I have never attacked someone who believes differently nor have I attacked their religion. What I have done is state my opinion, which of course is not allowed UNLESS I am for abortion.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 2:24 pm
Where did I put forth a definition of tolerance?
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Sorry, that post was meant for Julie.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 2:48 pm
How do you distinguish between stating your opinion about something that you think is horrible and telling someone that what they do is horrible? How do you distinguish between stating your belief in your religion and telling someone who is of a completely different faith that they’d better choose carefully if they want eternal life (implying your faith is the one path)? I ask because I interpret your rhetoric as attacks-by-acccretion. You don’t use curse words. Big deal. But what you do use is volumes of impertinent data, biased sources and melancholy anecdotes shot back in rapid-fire at anyone who differs. Rather than listening, you act like the protesters in Allentown. You shout and spout all manner of misinformation. You don’t listen to anyone’s concerns because you have one answer–carry the pregnancy to term. Period.
I have a good friend named Emma who was a debutante from the south, a wealthy young woman with whom I had the pleasure of working for several years. She was articulate, like you, Deanna. But Emma could tell someone to their face to go to Hell and they’d be none the wiser. It seems to me that you, Deanna, hide behind all your bluster, trying to drown out or wear down those with whom you disagree. Obviously it’s not worked. While you deny attacking anyone, I disagree.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 3:30 pm
“impertinent data, biased sources”
I challenged you and each other person who said that each time you have said this to tell which thing I said was biased and to prove it with your own neutral documentation. As of now you have produced none.
“implying your faith is the one path”. This is my belief and my opinion. Take it or leave it but do not attack me for it.
“rhetoric” What rhetoric would that be exactly? You mean my OPINION and my choice that you have no tolerance for?
“You shout and spout all manner of misinformation” Again I have challenged you to provide neutral documentation that disputes what I have said each time and you have yet to do that.
“you have one answer–carry the pregnancy to term. Period”. By virtue of me being pro-life this is and will be my stand. Again, my right, my choice. tolerate it without calling me names, getting angry and being nasty.
” Deanna, hide behind all your bluster, trying to drown out or wear down those with whom you disagree. Obviously it’s not worked. While you deny attacking anyone,I disagree.” How, when, where did I attack? What I did was answer questions from the PRO-LIFE position (If you remember this is what I was invited here to do) when presented with non-biased documentation to back it up.. Answer questions about my faith when presented and answer questions and accusations about me personally. If this feels like an attack to you then that has nothing to do with me.
“hide behind all your bluster”. Bluster? How do you mean? Have I been loud? Aggressive? No, I stated facts and when attacked for stating them I was firm but not loud and aggressive. On the contrary others have been loud and aggressive towards me. I saved a sample of the things I and other pro-lifers were called for an article that I am writing. And these were BEFORE yesterdays free for all. Does this look like tolerance to you? Did I do this to anyone? My comment stands! Pro-choice is really anti-prolife and anti-Christian.
Mental midgets (my favorite)
Self righteous
Pretenders
False Christians
Ignorant
Nutty
Small thinkers
Full of nonsense
Tax evaders
Deceitful
Barbaric
Creeps
War mongers
Frozen brain
Repulsive
Full of falsehood
Sickening
Fringe group
Hoodlums
Lunatics
A waste
Irresponsible
Full of Satan’s deception
Horrendous source of lies
Cretins
Self absorbed
Disgusting
Liars
Despicable
Laughable morons
Bizarre
Illogical
Worthless scum
Crazy
Idiots
Stupid
Worms
Clueless
Abortion supporters (through taxes)
Selfish
Freeloader
Illiterate
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 4:07 pm
You have been informed on numerous posts about the problems with your sources, so I’ll refer you back to those posts rather than repeat them here.
As for the rest of your diatribe, I’d suggest you learn to listen/read what people write instead of your rapid-fire response that is nothing more than shouting.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Actually I was accused of having biased sources but proved otherwise in each situation with documentation.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 3:12 pm
Kate is accurate again DeAnna.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 5:23 pm
Thirty-seven percent of those adolescent name-calls are Kate’s!
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 7:50 pm
Such a marvelous statistician
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:26 pm
DeAnna,
your ignorance is so profound you do not even understand what you do.
LikeLike
February 9, 2014 at 4:24 am
Hiya, I am really glad I have found this info. Nowadays blggreos publish only about gossips and net and this is actually annoying. A good website with interesting content, that is what I need. Thanks for keeping this site, I’ll be visiting it. Do you do newsletters? Cant find it.
LikeLike
April 8, 2014 at 9:02 am
Didn’t know the forum rules allowed such brilliant posts.
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Kate, your response to deanna ‘s charge that people who call themselves prochoice actually forbid choice — “Sounds to me like the prolifers tolerate no choice but their own, as well” — is foolish. Of course we don’t tolerate choice if the choice is to kill someone. That’s why we don’t call ourselves prochoice! But you’re not prochoice either. You’re pro-killing.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 10:09 pm
ProLifers are a bunch of hypocrites.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 3:19 pm
July is a hypocrite (and her real name is February).,
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 10:49 am
I have found that those who claim the prochoice attitude vary widely from indiscriminate use of abortion without any remorse for any reason–all the way to abortion only in extenuating circumstances. As a member of ACN, we also know that prolifers have brought their daughters in for abortions because of their “special reasons” all the while condemning others for being sluts and murderers. Hypocritical much?
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 1:27 pm
>>>the prochoice attitude vary widely from indiscriminate use of abortion without any remorse for any reason–all the way to abortion only in extenuating circumstances. <<<
yes it does.
to state that choicers are all one homogenous group is absurd, as is to state the same about lifers.
it also perpetuates a we vs they mentality
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 1:23 pm
i have worked in conjunction with 2 chains of cpc’s that were upfront about who they are and what services they offer.
i also raised some eyebrows when i refused to support a cpc whose manager admitted that they do not bother to tell the women who enter that there are no abortion services or referrals there until much later in the dialogue with the women after the scare tactics had been employed.
when i questioned the manner in which they worked, she looked at me and said “well, it’s about saving the babies!” and winked at me.
this particular cpc would only offer any sort of help when available up to one year of age, whereas the others offer help whether or not a woman is pregnant and into schoolage for all services, and even more for some others.
when i questioned the age limit, she informed me that they simply don’t have the resources.
i told her that maybe if she put as much effort into being upfront about who they are and what they can do, as they do about spinning a web of deception, they would find that god brought more resources to their door.
then i stood up and informed her that if she wants to save babies, she might start by trying to help save the mothers.
i then exited the meeting.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 2:31 pm
Oh you did good Rog, and I’ll bet if you had found a family hiding Jews from the Nazis, you’d report this: “i told them that maybe if they put as much effort into being upfront about who they are and what they can do, as they do about spinning a web of deception, they would find that god brought more resources to their door.”
Then I bet you’d stand up and inform them that if they want to save Jews, they might start by trying to help the fatherland survive the desperate situation it was in.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Lets face it, abortion is not ideal and I am pro choice I don’t go around preaching that that is a way of life. I wish the procedure did not have to be used ever, that would be ideal.
The fact that law makers want women to stare at the fetus that they already decided they don’t want is mental torture.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 7:29 pm
“Actually I was accused of having biased sources but proved otherwise in each situation with documentation.” So, say, Deanna.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 7:33 pm
Who proved the veracity of your biased sources, dear heart?
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:29 pm
DeAnna has no veracity.
She is the prime example of the far out prolifer,
who wants to get rid of a lot of birth control – most pro-lifers are not in that group.
She has no goodwill of veracity.
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Let’s all be real, here. Face the facts.
Deanna Does No Wrong
Deanna Tells No Lies
Deanna Provides Neutral Sources
Deanna Never Threatens People
Deanna Saves Babies
Deanna Loves All Babies
Deanna Is Christian
Deanna Never Uses Sources Incorrectly
Deanna Never Attacks Anyone
Deanna Does No Wrong
Deanna Loves Deanna (hence the gravatar)
Deanna Loves Deanna More Than Her God
Deanna Loves Deanna Loves Deanna Loves Deanna Loves Deanna
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 7:56 pm
Point proven! Pro-choice =intolerance for anyone who is not pro-choice!
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 8:04 pm
Are you really so full of your self that you believe you are that magnificent?
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 8:13 pm
What are you talking about?
LikeLike
July 15, 2011 at 8:45 pm
You want to know something Kate. I am very busy today I had no intention of even commenting on this article because I know that I am not going to have time to get into another marathon name calling session. But first thing you and Julie made your statements about me and then here comes Aborti with his usual nonsense, yet again, about me. If nothing else proves your intolerance this does. You weren’t even focused on Pat’s article but instead on me not because of me, you don’t even know me.it was because I am pro-life. It was you that first started calling Christians Bible thumpers. Why so much hate coming from someone who preaches tolerance?
As I said I have no time this week for useless arguments that are meant to do nothing but attack my character so I’m not interested in taking this conversation any further. Have fun with it!
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 5:20 am
Hoorah!
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Honestly, reading through this its almost a limpse into tge fight of two parents both sticking to there guns as they would say, but although i will not comment on the ” i love deanna” post i have a question maybe one that you would reply to eventually,
Deanna, where did this come from i mean honestly what are you fighting, kate is not contriving against you, well maybe to an extent.
But with every twist and turn wether it be cpcs deceptivity, or blame against this or that, why do you support a system that has faults?
Carrys un spoken diseases, (nuns), marrige with sky figures, and most of all supports, discontinueing a service that helps so many women save their own lives,
yes they could go to families to be helped but they will just be percieved as ADHD prone or depressed, get prescribed zoloft or adderal or riddilin at the age of 8.
end addicted worn and strung through a defficiacy they didnt have in the first place. And for what?
What are these people hurting? These doctors?
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 12:45 pm
Enough! Enough! I forbid anyone from writing on this blog who hasn’t yet learned how to write!
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:16 pm
Dumpkle,
You have no power to forbid or do anything!
I laugh at the thought of your sense of self esteem that you think you could even try you pathetic powerless nitwit.
You are a wretched old fool who is powerless, and no one respects your opinion. Even your pro life friends. They won’t even stand by your murderer loving rhetoric.
You appear ridiculous when you pretend otherwise you murderer loving coward.
LikeLike
July 17, 2011 at 3:50 am
Aw Kaly, you ruined it. Now all the other illiterates will chime in.
LikeLike
February 10, 2014 at 6:58 pm
Hi Mary,Thanks for reading and tkanhs for the vote! I really liked your site too, so I added a link.You hit the nail on the head with my dog. My pug is definitely more difficult to train than any horse I ever trained. Deanna
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Please derive one of your stupid formulas.
Thanks
Merril
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 8:19 am
Thanks to Rogie for actually addressing the topic of the piece I wrote. Now, if some of you could just divert a minute from your tit-for-tats, I’d be very interested in knowing how the pro-lifers really feel about this article and about some cpcs that are deceiving women. Deanna, do you condemn that kind of deceptive behavior as you would condemn everything that is done in an abortion clinic?
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 10:23 am
Pat,
good luck with an answer.
DeAnna would not even acknowledge that these abuses at CPCs occur in the beginning.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 3:15 pm
I guess Ariel is correct!
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Actually Guss, I did answer it. Scroll down and you will see it. It did take me a few days though because one of my children had surgery. Your rude remarks are inflammatory and unnecessary.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 4:34 pm
Actually I did answer it. Scroll down and you will see it. It did take me a few days though because one of my children had surgery. Your rude remarks are inflammatory and unnecessary.
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:16 pm
Let’s get back on track here….Would any pro-lifer like to comment on the allegations made by the NY City Council regarding the allegedly deceptive practices of the CPC’s?
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 7:18 pm
Seriously, can you Pro Lifers answer a simple question?
No.
That is the answer I have seen so far.
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 10:50 pm
i can’t say for sure whether or not the allegations are true, as i am unfamiliar with those paeticular cpc’s.
i see nothing wrong with informing women what medical procedures performed at the cpc is.
generally they are limited to pregnancy tests and ultrasounds,and they are free, so there is no need for any sort of insurance information.
i fail to see how requiring the centers to be upfront about the services that are and are not available is an infringement of free speech.
i have found that cpc’s that are upfront offer by far, the resources that can help these women.
LikeLike
July 17, 2011 at 3:56 am
“Let’s get back on track here” Sure , let’s go back and reread what I said in #1. (Notice that Kate jumped track in #2.)
LikeLike
July 16, 2011 at 11:24 pm
I am a pro-lifer. This is my first time to the site and would love to discuss this issue with a pro choice advocate who is capable of having a conversation without being condescending. I truly would like to ask some simple questions. Thanks, Kelly
LikeLike
July 17, 2011 at 9:35 am
*gasp!*
a virgin!
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 11:00 am
Be nice…
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 11:02 pm
ok
i’m sorry, kelly
i was just joking
welcome to pat’s blog!
i am a lifer and i have met some really nice choicers here, and i have never found them to be condescending to me.
i have grown close to several of them and i hope you will as well
once again, WELCOME!
LikeLike
July 17, 2011 at 11:09 am
Kelly: welcome to the site! Ask your questions and I’m sure they will be answered. But, understand that this issue evokes a lot of emotion and at times someone on either side of the issue can get a little out of hand and downright nasty. Ignore them. We’ll get your questions answered. And, a suggestion, dont ask twenty questions at one time because it’s easy to overlook the questions. Keep it simple and we’ll give you a simple answer!
Meqnwhile, Rogie, thanks for your easy to understand and direcft answer. But I do find it inte4resting when people say “if the allegations are true” because there are some pro-lifers who will take everything that comes from a pro-life organization about abortion clinics and just naturally assume the allegations are true….
LikeLike
July 17, 2011 at 1:07 pm
>>>But I do find it inte4resting when people say “if the allegations are true” because there are some pro-lifers who will take everything that comes from a pro-life organization about abortion clinics and just naturally assume the allegations are true….<<<
i find it interesting that you would comment on that because a while back, there was an article in lifenews that was extremely misleading about a doctor who performs abortions pulling a gun on protesters.
as it turns out, i am friends with a lady who ran that clinic and i asked her the deal because there are two sides to every story.
the protesters there are loud and trespass onto clinic property.
one of the protesters admitted to lifting his hand as he stood that the doctor's car.
the doctor carried a firearm because he was in fear of his life.
according to the laws of that state, the doctor was not violating the law by having the gun in his car.
yet he was arrested.
i did a great deal of study and despite being anti-abortion and anti-gun, if i were on a jury, i would acquit that doctor.
i have my bias to be sure, as does everyone else if they are honest.
i am unfamiliar with the cpc's in question in your entry and i would like to read the testimony myself, but i see nothing wrong with the proposal of the city council in regards to the cpc's
LikeLike
February 9, 2014 at 3:43 pm
I dunno, Gordon. Seems a little crepey to me. It’s like men who cheat on their wives with online only affairs and then claim it is just fantasy and nothing wrong with it. Don’t think so. Emotionally cheating is cheating. Writing sex stories for money influences how you interact with other people.
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 10:55 am
Thanks, Rogie, I knew you would be candid. I’m very interested in hearing from Deanna about these cpcs…
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 7:46 pm
Pat,
Before I can give a genuine opinion about that I would first have to know from a neutral non biased source if the allegations were true/partially true. With that said, assuming simply for the sake of argument that the allegations are true, I do not agree with deceitful practices. I don’t think it is effective nor necessary. However, for the record I have heard of some CPC’s that are actual clinics, run by M.D.’s with trained ultrasound technicians on staff. In this case I don’t think it is deceptive to take insurance information, etc or call themselves a medical facility because that is what they are. This may be some of the clinics you are referring to. If they are not true medical clinics and there is no reason to take the insurance info other than to appear to be a true medical clinic then no I do not agree with that. NONE of the CPC’s that I personally am acquainted with use deceptive practices. However, I do have an understanding of why some would feel justified in using these practices. I assume that they think the end justifies the means. If they save a baby then it is worth it. In that case I would have to agree. But my personal opinion is that it most likely causes more harm than benefits but I really don’t know for sure because as I said, I know of none firsthand. And frankly the biased documentaries that are out there produced by pro-choice advocates mean nothing to me. I would like to know what these “clinics” success rates are for women changing their minds because if they have any success at all then one would have to weigh the pros and cons. Not that I think deceiving is ok but if is truly saves a life then I would have to put a lot of thought into it. As far as laws being passed forcing them to say they do not provide abortion information goes I would agree to that only if abortion clinics were mandated to have signs that say “We do not give information on resources to help you keep your baby if you decide not to have an abortion. We will go through the motions of handing you pamphlets about adoption and parenting but we offer no practical help whatsoever.” I say this because it’s two sides of the same coin. They want the CPC’s to be upfront about what they will not do so the clinics need to be upfront about what they will not do.
Planned Parenthood was caught on video telling someone that a 7 week fetus had “no head, no arms,no legs,etc.” They said the baby was a “blob” at this stage. This was a total lie designed to sell an abortion. They have been caught in many more similar lies as well. This “selling” of abortions by clinic workers is well documented with some even hiring trainers to come teach the people who man the phones effective selling practices. You’ve been around a long time Pat, I am sure that you know this fact as well. So, you have to ask yourself the question, if the clinics are lying to make money by killing a baby and the CPC’s are lying to save a baby then which is worse?
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 11:10 am
There is one thing that i keep trying to understand but it is almost impossible… Yes the subject is something that does drive people crazy because each one wants them to agree on their side… But why the name calling… Why to offend someone else’s beliefs…
Deanna, i understand your point of view and it is very annoying to be called names all the time… So my suggestion to you, keep your posts, keep giving information, and whoever decides to check the info you post and wants to debate, without calling names, ok, otherwise, ignore them… not worth it!
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 11:13 am
Pat, if the service is free, why do they need the info on the insurance?
Also, the woman who is inside a abortion clinic is already decided in what she will do it… i find hard to believe that a picture or a chat will change her mind!!!
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 8:26 pm
Actually Sonia a lot of women change their minds after ultrasounds because they believed that is was only “tissue” or “a pregnancy” but when they see it they decide not to have an abortion. This is why informed choice is important. Some or even most may not change their minds but some do.
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 11:04 pm
>>>Pat, if the service is free, why do they need the info on the insurance?<<<
they don't need it
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Well Rogelio, unless i am going blind, what it is possible, i read that on the piece Pat put above… please don’t tell me i am going crazy, not yet!!!
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 1:51 pm
according to pat’s article, women stated that they were asked for insurance and other personal information at the cpc.
you asked why the cpc would need it
i said they don’t.
therein lies a problem
they have no business asking for such information
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Absolutely.
The criminal behavior at CPCs has been well documented, and legislation passed to protect women from the CPC’s practices.
Even the phone book changed the way they list them because the way CPCs deceive women.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 4:37 pm
If it has been “well documented” then lets hear it. I want to see unbiased proof from a neutral source. The only people i have ever heard accuse them are people in the abortion industry or pro-choice advocates. You guys demand that my sources be unbiased. I demand that yours be. Produce proof if you have it!
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 6:51 pm
From what you write I can see you are not worth the effort.
It is widely known, call the Print Yellow pages, they will tell you.
You are not wasting any more of my time.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 7:23 pm
Sure thing Richard. You don’t have time to prove me wrong. Ok.
“The criminal behavior at CPCs has been well documented”
Last time I checked posting ads under the wrong category in the phone book was not criminal behavior.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 7:46 pm
“You are not wasting any more of my time.” W., is that a promise or just another killers’ helper lie.
LikeLike
February 10, 2014 at 8:42 am
Watched Andy Rooney on 60 Minutes last nigh (right after the Roger Clemens denial ieretvinw) and he was wondering whatever happened to presidential sounding names like Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt?Huckabee or OBama ????? Think we will name schools streets after them? LOL
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 2:23 pm
For us prolifers the laws that permit a young person to be murdered are even worse than the laws that permitted a Jew to be murdered just because she was a Jew or an African-American for the same reason. It would be absurd to suggest that prolifers in the early nineteenth century should not have broken the laws that enabled slavery or in the early twentieth that enabled the German holocaust. But here in the early twenty-first we have prolifers all over the place condemning those who’ve broken our pro-death laws. Just read Rog on this blog, and he represents the very large majority. So of course CPC’s should break the law that forces them to tell a pregnant woman right away that they don’t kill, well before they are allowed to persuade her why she shouldn’t. Of course they should, but, I’m willing to bet, most of them don’t.
That’s why I blame us prolifers for this American holocaust. You killers’ helpers would never say, like us, that someone killed before birth is a young person. What you do say, and in many cases believe, is absurd, but it is your very absurdity that will save your souls. We prolifers have no excuse.
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 3:47 pm
John,
I appreciate your passion on this issue. You appreciate life and think it should be protected, I am a pro choice and I too appreciate life and think it should be protected but we should be the women’s choice to keep or not her pregnancy, don’t you think? I too think is killing, if you have an abortion you have to be aware that that is what you are doing, I don’t buy into the bullcrap that is just a blob of cells, something is alive, I think we all know that.
Ultimately the women will carry that(guilt, memory) with her for the rest of her life, don’t you think that is enough?
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 3:53 pm
…but it should…
LikeLike
July 18, 2011 at 4:36 pm
“It should be the women’s choice to keep or not her pregnancy, don’t you think?” Absolutely not. No one has the choice to kill a small child.
“Ultimately the women will carry that(guilt, memory) with her for the rest of her life, don’t you think that is enough?” Of course not. See above.
That being said, Mellisa G, I thank you for your civility and your gentleness.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 11:12 am
A woman faced with an unwanted pregnancy is in a very sensitive position and it pains me to think that there are folks/clinics/cpcs on both sides that seem to be fighting over that woman. So, some clinics and some cpcs will “lure” them in, try to get their hands on them and convince them that their way is the best way.
I think that kind of behavior is reprehensible. Instead of trying to mark up another “victory” both sides should be totally up front about who they are and what they do and let the woman sort out the information and make the decision as to who to go to, if not both. It disgusts me how both sides sometimes treat women in this situation as a piece of meat….
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 1:22 pm
Pat,
If I were a woman considering abortion I would want to know the TRUTH of the matter. It is extremely unfair for these women to be lied to about what is happening for the sake of money or a political stand or even a principle like “women’s rights’ . While I do not believe in deception I can understand it if someone thinks they are saving a life. If you knew someone was going to drive off a bridge and you had to lie to them and tell them the car wouldn’t start then you would do that in order to save their life. I would imagine that these fake clinics look at it the same way and I understand that. And I see that completely different than someone lying to a woman to get her to have an abortion for the sake of money (the clinics “bottom Line”). That is infuriating and it is documented that it happens.
I know that it is easy for people on both sides to get caught up in the “principal” of the matter. But lets face it. One sides argument is that the woman has a right to kill and the other sides argument is that she shouldn’t have that right. I think that the side who should be focused on stating the truth at all costs in spite of their financial bottom line should be the side where someone dies if the lies are believed. As I have stated before, even the “Pregnancy Option Workbook” is very slanted and has mis-information in it. Although from a pro-choice perspective I can see where they may not see it as being slanted. But that doesn’t change the fact that is is. For example: the pro-choice clergy taking scripture out of context to make abortion seem to be o.k. with God. That is a big deal and there are probably thousands upon thousands of “Christians” who have believed these lies and aborted their babies when the Bible in no way indicates that God is ok with abortion. How sad it must be when they realize that they were lied to. If a woman is going to make a choice so life altering and life ending then she needs to make it having been given disclosure of non-biased non-slanted FACTS. It makes me angry to think of all the ones who have been deceived into killing their babies because I have seen the devastation that brings to them later.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 2:28 pm
What truth Deanna?, she has to know that she is killing her fetus, so what else there is to know?
What CPC’s do is bullying, tormenting.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 3:25 pm
Melissa,
Women are told things like, God approves of abortions, it’s only a blob of tissue, it’s “only a pregnancy” or an abortion gets rid of the “contents of the uterus” and even sly things like “you are aborting a pregnancy.” As if “a pregnancy” is separate from a living human fetus. Some women, although not most, fall for these lines and abort without all of the facts. Although, I do think you are right that the majority do know they are aborting a fetus. But some do not and some that do are duped into believing that it is acceptable to God.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 7:06 pm
The first three sentences go along with the first couple of chapters of Abby Johnson’s recent publication, “Unplanned.” She accepted what she was told, and she ran a PP mill! I would change the third sentence to say, “Most women, although not all.”
LikeLike
July 21, 2011 at 3:35 pm
It’s up to the woman to be smart enough to get past all the bullshit people will spill. It’s up to her to make her own opinion. She shouldn’t listen to all the ”this way, that way, he said, she said”. It would be better for clinics to offer straight, hard facts, then let the women mule over it and THINK for themselves. Ultimately, the clinics and cpcs can’t be blamed. We’re all our own person. No two people are alike, yada yada. WE are our own decision-makers. We sign on the dotted line. They just carry out whatever decision WE make for OURSELVES.
LikeLike
July 21, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Very true statement! We are all responsible for our own actions.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 2:27 pm
I wonder, why people can’t have a nice talking, even when they don’t agree… why it always has to call names and be so bad to each other! I decided not long ago that instead calling names i will just ignore whoever call me names or say something i don’t like it!
If the same person is nice later on i will answer without a problem.
LikeLike
July 19, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Good question Sonia.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 9:25 am
Deanna, for lots of times i told you that i do appreciate all your comments, because i do see some sense on those… And if somebody wants to hate me for saying that, go ahead, be my guest!
What i liked even more about you is that even when i did not agree with you, or when i said that i do live on a fence on this subject, and i do hold the decision of it when and if the situation occurs, you never told me i was wrong or criticized me calling me baby killer… for that THANK YOU.
What bothers people most of the times when people like you don’t use profanity when arguing is because that is the only way they can win a discussion! Lack of intelligence, argument etc… so, for your own sake, ignore the comments that offends you and keep it true to the subject.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 10:01 am
Thanks Sonia. I appreciate your openness and willingness to be fair. If some of the other pro-choice people were as fair as you are then I think we could actually make progress in our discussions. I do plan on ignoring the name callers.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 10:10 am
Sonia are you lesbian?
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 11:07 am
Balony, are you?
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 11:18 am
LMAO
No Malony, i am not. But if i was, is there a problem?
You made me laugh…
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 9:44 am
Deanna: How many abortion clinics have you been in? How many times have you been through the counseling sessions in the clinic? I have to say that I grow weary of your holier than though attitude. All of the clinics lie, women dont know what the hell they are doing, all clinics (including the non profit ones I guess) are in it for the money. Everytime you say things like that, in my eyes you lose some credibility. And, of course, the cpcs are allowed to lie because they are saving a “life”!!! At least I have been upfront enough to acknowledge that there are bad clinics out there. You, on the other hand, basically can do no wrong, huh?
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 10:29 am
Wow! You sure do make some sweeping comments.
1st) I have never been into an abortion clinic. There are so full of death and dying and misery that I don’t think that I could stand it.
2nd) I have never personally been involved in counseling in an abortion clinic. BUT I have counseled women coming out of them and know that many were lied to and not given full disclosure, treated poorly, etc. I have read the Pregnancy Options Workbook which many clinics use as part of their counseling and that book is slanted and biased. I have watched the videos that are shown in the clinics of the “clergy” taking scripture out of context explaining that God “approves” of abortions. I have heard testimony after testimony of women who have had abortions who say they were lied to,mistreated, etc. I have heard testimony after testimony of former abortion providers who admit that they lied to women for the sake of money. These same providers admit that they did not tell women the truth intentionally. I have seen documented reports of women being lied to in clinics so that they will have the abortion. And I have heard the testimonies of clinic workers who say the same. So, there is no way that it is some conspiracy as the pro-choice propaganda would have people believe that all of these people are lying or have made up their stories in order to get attention, sell books, or get their names on the who’s who of pro-lifers lists. The reality is that there are SOME clinics who by the testimony of women who have had abortions at them, congressional testimony, and documented and filmed instances, lie, mistreat women, and do pseudo counseling to keep the abortion machine turning. If me saying so takes away my so called “credibility” then so be it.
3rd) I stated clearly that I do not agree with the CPC’s lying but I understand it. I also said I would like to see proof. That is a reasonable request. I did not say that they can do no wrong. I simply said that the ones that I am personally knowledgeable about do not use deceptive practices.
4th) My statement stands that if they lie and the result is that a life is saved then I think that is justifiable although I wouldn’t do it as a practice.
On the other hand if an abortion clinic lies to a woman and she kills her baby as a result there is no justification possible for that.
As I said, one side argues for the right to kill, the other side argues that this should not be a right. Anyone looking at these two ‘sides’ who is not biased would be forced by morality to say that the side who argues against killing has the correct argument in spite of some wrong practices in their arguing.
Note that I did not say that there were NO wrong practices. To be clear, what I said was that they (1)May be justified if they save a life (2) I would like to see non-biased proof (3) Even if they do have wrong practices they are STILL on the right side of the argument which is arguing for someone to stay alive.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 3:10 pm
DeAnna,
has no credibility!
Just another religious pro lifer, brainwashed by religion.
She has never even been in an office that does abortions?
Yet she makes sweeping generalizations?
She has been utterly clueless on multiple points, just go back and read them, I will not retype them all here.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 4:24 pm
You won’t re type them because there aren’t any. If you decide to accuse me then you have to back it up or otherwise it is useless. Provide documentation to back up your accusations or be quiet.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 6:54 pm
I won’t type them, because you already did.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 7:25 pm
“She has been utterly clueless on multiple points, just go back and read them, I will not retype them all here.”
If I am clueless then say when. Quote me with documented proof that I didn’t know what I was talking about. Otherwise that was a baseless accusation.
LikeLike
July 24, 2011 at 6:08 am
Guys like Gus, d, you can’t tell them to be quiet. They don’t understand that. You have to tell them to shut up. Then they get scared and run.
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 11:30 am
[…] It Sounds a Little Hypocritical to Me… (abortion.ws) […]
LikeLike
July 20, 2011 at 11:40 am
???
LikeLike