Protestors Holdilg Gross Signs
It goes without saying that the abortion issue is probably the most controversial issue of our time. Beginning in earnest after the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Roe v Wade, the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” forces have been going at for years – and there is no light at the end of the tunnel. And if you read the polls, it’s really had to say what side is actually “winning.” Indeed, I’m not even sure how you determine who is winning. The bottom line is I know abortion is still legal in this country but they are harder to get. You decide.
Some even go so far to say we are in a “war” over abortion, although I wouldn’t go that far because to me a “war” is when two sides are engaging in violence and, as far as I can tell, the only violent acts have come from the pro-life side (and please, if you are pro-life, do not bore me with the “violence in the womb” argument). But, for the moment let’s say we are engaged in a war. The question now is how far are you willing to go to win this war? In the world of international relations, somewhere along the line we came up with the rules of the Geneva Convention which set some boundaries for conduct that warring parties are supposed to adhere to (although not everyone complies). In this abortion “war”, I think there should be boundaries as well. And recently, one pro-life group crossed a boundary that makes my head spin.
By now, everyone involved in this issue knows that Doctor Lee Carhart, a physician from Nebraska, has decided to carry on the work of the late Doctor George Tillerby performing later abortions and he
has established a practice in Germantown, Maryland. He has been there for several months and has been so open about what he is doing that he even gave a front page interview to the Washington Post a short while ago. I’ve written in the past about how I wish my friend Lee would just “shut up” and do his work quietly (out of fear for his safety), but Lee is not built that way. He is an advocate as well as a physician.
Not surprisingly, there have been protests at the Germantown clinic. That’s okay, that’s the First Amendment in action. I don’t like it but I support their right to be out there on a Saturday yelling and screaming and parading around with their gross signs. But now here comes a pro-life splinter group with a new tactic that boggles my mind. It seems these folks found out who owns the office complex where the abortion clinic is located. Yes, they had enough negative energy stored up that they probably combed the real estate records in the county for his name. I have no doubt that they probably tried to find out where he lives but have not yet been successful. But, after discovering the name of the landlord, they found out where his CHILDREN go to SCHOOL. And, once they discovered that his children went to an elementary school in Maryland, they came up with the idea of picketing the kids’ school! Yep, they went out there just a few weeks ago during the day and stood in front of the school with their ugly signs and blaring the name of the landlord (and, by reference, his children).
Dr. Carhart and Dr. Tiller
Just think for a second about not just his children, but all of the children as they jumped off the bus, already thinking about their lunch period or recess and then they see this sick group of people holding signs. When they look closer, they may see the pictures of a dismembered fetus, they may see lots of blood, they might see the word “abortion” in big red letters. Of course, they are probably too young to even comprehend what is going on but – as this group would say – THEY NEED TO LEARN ABOUT THE HORRORS OF ABORTION!
Who are these nut balls who believe it is up to them to introduce these young children to this difficult issue? Aren’t they the same ones who scream about parental control? The thing is I know who they are, they are the ones whose own children will be forced at a very early age to stand outside of an abortion clinic on a beautiful Saturday, be forced to hold a disgusting sign, chant a slogan, scream at the women. And they’ll say their six year old told them they’d rather be out there than playing soccer with their friends.
I have always encouraged a healthy, honest debate on this issue. But a line has to be drawn somewhere. Again, I would support their right to do this, but do these folks have no shame? Besides, from a strategic point of view it’s a pretty stupid thing to do because they are pissing off a lot of parents, even those who are pro-life.
I wonder how these folks would feel if we went to their kid’s school and held up signs of women lying in a pool of blood after a botched abortion? We could easily do it, we’ve got the pictures.
The difference is we’re too civilized.
Abortion - Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information 
September 20, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Pro Lifers are repulsive.
To show up at a school and protest in front of children, and shame children, that have nothing to do with the issue?
Typical Pro Life nonsense.
Thank goodness most Pro Lifers are not like the crazy ones on this page.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Ah Jon, you hurt our feelings. Now we gotta go pout and write some Shakespeare Greek Mythology poetry to make ourselves feel better.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Kate says
“you obviously have a low degree of respect for the intellectual capabilities of others,”
respect for others? only those who are “choosen to be born, choosen by “trusting women” is who you ONLY have respect for.. to heck with the preborn…YOU have NO respect for THEM.
Get it through your thick skull…THEY are PEOPLE “TOO!
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 2:14 pm
According to the law, a fetus (your “preborn”) is not a person. Goodness knows how many pre-dead folks would like to make embryos/fetuses legal persons but it just has not happened. My guess is that those thick skulls types who make the laws don’t have the same capacity for the imaginary worlds of the preborn as you and others like voice or Nunya have.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 2:46 pm
But Kate…you were a pre-born at one time.
And yes we do want to make them legal persons. They are persons so it’s about time that the legal thick skull types figure that out.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:41 pm
A “pre-born” is like a beer can waiting in the fill line at the brewery. It’s not a beer until it’s fulfilled its potential.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 7:27 pm
Oy-vey!
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 8:38 pm
No, a pre-born is like the beer in the barrel, waiting to be let out, but still beer just the same.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:53 pm
No, no. A preborn is like the hops and barley. Not beer just the potential to be beer.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 11:26 pm
I’m assuming that if the barley and the hops have mated in the barrel, since I stated that that is where it was, it is beer. And the can will never be beer, btw. But I digress into the absurd. I’m gettin’ outa here.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 4:22 am
And leaving in her wake floundering fools.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 5:38 pm
Anybody over fifty who didn’t grow up in Milwaukee is not qualified to talk about beer.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:26 am
Chuck! I’m barely outta my teens!
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:06 pm
Fetuses are people? Do we count them in the census? Do they get social security cards? With all due respect, where do pro-lifers get off on saying things like this when the supreme court, the congress and others have never declared them as “people?”
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Well, Pat, other governments have gone wrong. It is possible that those guys are wrong, isn’t it? And it is possible that we can get it right here. After all, we perverts have spent, now, years arguing the matter from every different angle, something, I’m sure, none of those perverts ever did. But you are now, again, zeroing in on the only possible point to argue: were you alive, and were you profoundly independent, and were you you before someone else named you? That’s what we have to argue. And throw out all that Katichuck ad hom stuff. It wastes time.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:06 pm
Did we count blacks in the census at one time Pat? Could they get government benefits? Were they considered human beings? Believing our government is morally infallible is intellectual suicide.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:50 pm
Your statements are fraught with illogical premises. Comparing an unborn fetus to a person of color essentializes both and gains no credibilty for you, especially in light of your dearth of historical context. Then making some presumptuous statement about “believing our government is morally infallible” comes out of the blue and is as random as the comment about intellectual suicide. An odd pair—morality and intellectual suicide.
Personally, I can’t help but wonder if the prolife industry isn’t suffering from intellectual suicide.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 1:41 am
“Your statements are fraught with illogical premises.”
Here are my statements, or questions.
1. Did we count blacks in the census at one time Pat?
2. Could they get government benefits?
3. Were they considered human beings?
4. Believing our government is morally infallible is intellectual suicide.
1. Well okay, slaves were marginalized, under counted and not even named, but they WERE counted, so you got me there. I thought I was making a point, not giving a history lesson.
2. Maybe they had 401k plans and insurance, I don’t know. I started to look it up but realized I was falling into your trap Kate; to get our minds off my original point by diverting us with a history lesson.
3. I’m relatively sure of this one, but I’ll restate: they weren’t afforded the basic human rights given to those who didn’t consider them to be persons.
The statements may be true or false, but illogical?
“Comparing an unborn fetus to a person of color essentializes both…
Pat basically said that a fetus isn’t human because the government says it isn’t. I made the point that the government used to say that blacks weren’t people. They were property. Like the fetus. I think the fetus is a person, like a black person. Uh oh, you got me again on the essentializing.
“and gains no credibilty for you,”
Get your own material Kate.
“especially in light of your dearth of historical context”
How the heck is there a lack of historical context? Are the first three “statements” in the context of his comment about the government deciding person-hood or not? The point was not how well I remember my history lessons from grade school Kate. The point was that the government (people) has been wrong before, in a massive way, about just who is and is not a person.
“Then making some presumptuous statement about “believing our government is morally infallible” comes out of the blue and is as random”
If Pat states that abortion is okay because the government hasn’t pronounced a fetus a person, and I assume everyone knows it is a moral issue, then how is my statement presumptuous or out of the blue? Surely you don’t deny that the whole world calls it a moral issue?
“is as random as the comment about intellectual suicide. An odd pair—morality and intellectual suicide. ”
Okay Kate, you win, I’ll restate it. To believe that it’s okay to kill someone because the government, made up of fallible human beings, has ignored science and refused to legally validate unborn humans as people, is stupid. Just like it was with the blacks. Happy?
And yes, it is an odd pair. A better pairing is immorality and intellectual suicide.
I leave you with a little history lesson of my own, to prove the validity of the point I made, which was neither random or presumptuous…
“Physicians in the antebellum period gave different treatment to blacks because of the belief that the black physiology was inferior to whites and thus differed with regard to intelligence, sexuality, and sensitivity to pain. These racist beliefs in the subhuman qualities of the “Black race” were responsible for blacks being used as subjects in excruciating medical experiments. For example, between 1845 and 1849, Dr. J. Marion Sims, the father of modern gynecology, subjected three African-American women in Alabama to 30 operations without anesthesia to perfect a surgical technique to repair vesicovaginal fistulas. During the same period, another physician in Georgia, Dr. Thomas Hamilton, subjected black bodies to high temperatures by burying them with their heads above ground in his quest to test the remedy for heatstroke so that slaves could work longer hours in the field. This tragic legacy of unethical race biology research was evident in the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study, in which 399 black men in Alabama unknowingly participated in a study (from 1932 to 1972) to determine the health consequences of untreated syphilis, even though there were known treatments for the disease during this period.
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/african-american#ixzz1YZ6c5XVI
All of this was allowed to happen, not to mention all the other atrocities, because the GOVERNMENT said so. So I state again, that the government hasn’t declared the fetus a person is proof of nothing, and if you follow it blindly, you are committing intellectual suicide, and subjecting yourself to moral decay. So there.
Now Pat, this little foray into the absurd was in no way meant as an insult to you, I was forced into the woods by Kate and had to drag you with me. Sorry.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:00 am
“Your statements are fraught with illogical premises.”
Here are my statements, or questions.
1. Did we count blacks in the census at one time Pat?
2. Could they get government benefits?
3. Were they considered human beings?
4. Believing our government is morally infallible is intellectual suicide.
1. Well okay, slaves were marginalized, under counted and not even named, but they WERE counted, so you got me there. I thought I was making a point, not giving a history lesson.
2. Maybe they had 401k plans and insurance, I don’t know. I started to look it up but realized I was falling into your trap Kate; to get our minds off my original point by diverting us with a history lesson.
3. I’m relatively sure of this one, but I’ll restate: they weren’t afforded the basic human rights given to those who didn’t consider them to be persons.
The statements may be true or false, but illogical?
“Comparing an unborn fetus to a person of color essentializes both…
Pat basically said that a fetus isn’t human because the government says it isn’t. I made the point that the government used to say that blacks weren’t people. They were property. Like the fetus. I think the fetus is a person, like a black person. Uh oh, you got me again on the essentializing.
“and gains no credibilty for you,”
Get your own material Kate.
“especially in light of your dearth of historical context”
How the heck is there a lack of historical context? Are the first three “statements” in the context of his comment about the government deciding person-hood or not? The point was not how well I remember my history lessons from grade school Kate. The point was that the government (people) has been wrong before, in a massive way, about just who is and is not a person.
“Then making some presumptuous statement about “believing our government is morally infallible” comes out of the blue and is as random”
If Pat states that abortion is okay because the government hasn’t pronounced a fetus a person, and I assume everyone knows it is a moral issue, then how is my statement presumptuous or out of the blue? Surely you don’t deny that the whole world calls it a moral issue?
“is as random as the comment about intellectual suicide. An odd pair—morality and intellectual suicide. ”
Okay Kate, you win, I’ll restate it. To believe that it’s okay to kill someone because the government, made up of fallible human beings, has ignored science and refused to legally validate unborn humans as people, is stupid. Just like it was with the blacks. Happy?
And yes, it is an odd pair. A better pairing is immorality and intellectual suicide.
I leave you with a little history lesson of my own, to prove the validity of the point I made, which was neither random or presumptuous…
“Physicians in the antebellum period gave different treatment to blacks because of the belief that the black physiology was inferior to whites and thus differed with regard to intelligence, sexuality, and sensitivity to pain. These racist beliefs in the subhuman qualities of the “Black race” were responsible for blacks being used as subjects in excruciating medical experiments. For example, between 1845 and 1849, Dr. J. Marion Sims, the father of modern gynecology, subjected three African-American women in Alabama to 30 operations without anesthesia to perfect a surgical technique to repair vesicovaginal fistulas. During the same period, another physician in Georgia, Dr. Thomas Hamilton, subjected black bodies to high temperatures by burying them with their heads above ground in his quest to test the remedy for heatstroke so that slaves could work longer hours in the field. This tragic legacy of unethical race biology research was evident in the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study, in which 399 black men in Alabama unknowingly participated in a study (from 1932 to 1972) to determine the health consequences of untreated syphilis, even though there were known treatments for the disease during this period.”
The reference will follow when the comment passes moderation.
All of this was allowed to happen, not to mention all the other atrocities, because the GOVERNMENT said so. So I state again, that the government hasn’t declared the fetus a person is proof of nothing, and if you follow it blindly, you are committing intellectual suicide, and subjecting yourself to moral decay. So there.
Now Pat, this little foray into the absurd was in no way meant as an insult to you, I was forced into the woods by Kate and had to drag you with me. Sorry.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 5:21 am
Translation: I’m not responsible for my own actions. It’s Kate’s fault.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 9:01 pm
Not at all. The translation is that Kate can’t take it when reason prevails, therefore tries to divert her thoughts away from reason by pulling pigtails.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:31 am
Okay, thank you all for not pointing out the obvious…that I need to log in on each device, lol. Hopefully this fixes my problem. Let’s hit post and see…
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:47 am
Nope, wasn’t it. Pat, help! I’m lost in lala land again. How do I show up as Nunya on a different device? I originally logged in on my laptop, but I’m using my notebook now, because my laptop is a minivan, and I’m enjoying driving a coup for awhile!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:49 am
Well Hallelujah and pass the pancakes!! I’m baaaaccckkk! I want to humbly admit that I’m that person the finger points to on the “I’m with Stupid” t-shirts. All I had to do was input my name again. Duh…
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 1:58 pm
I was told to look at this site re Kathleen’s whining about me.
1. It was Joyce who said “they kill babies in there”. When Joyce said this, she was blocking the back of her car so that I couldn’t see the license plate. Kathleen was at least 30 feet away in the other direction, and Joyce’s voice would have been blocked by Joyce’s car, so Kathleen could not have heard her. If Joyce denies this, Joyce is a liar.
2. I never heard Kathleen ask for help with a flat. All I heard was her asking me to call AAA for roadside assistance. I do not have a cell phone and am not in AAA. She and Joyce are often talking on their cell phones while protesting, so why even ask me to make the call?
3. But even if she asked for help with a flat, I would have ignored her. That she is 78 is not of concern to me. I am not exactly a spring chicken, either. If she is young enough to come out and protest, she is young enough to fend for herself. I’d help a 25 yr old person, if that person deserved positive attention from me. Kathleen doesn’t. However, If she had said, “If you will help me, I will stop coming here,” I would have helped in an instant.
4. We knew the tire was flat because one of the other escorts could see it. Personally, I couldn’t see that.
5. Later “voice” wrote: “You [Kate] were mean to a 78 year old woman.” It was me, not Kate, who was mean to that 78 yr old. That 78 yr old is mean to other women, some of whom are supporting the patients and do, in fact, look to be of a similar age. Kathleen deserves to receive what she offers.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 2:01 pm
Well, if Kathleen said she talked to the girls on the bikes and not Joyce, she is also a liar. Wow, that’s something to chew on…two women who claim to know the truth.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 10:18 am
KATE, I told you what I said to those young girls, never said anything about Joyce,. Show me where I said that and I will correct it. I was too busy trying to figure out how I was going to get home on time. (and not Joyce, she is also a liar) Liar, terrorist, wonder what else you say I am.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 2:54 pm
“But even if she asked for help with a flat, I would have ignored her”
You are the gentleman aren’t you?
“If she is young enough to come out and protest, she is young enough to fend for herself.”
What about a disabled protester? Would you help them up if their wheelchair tipped over? Not according to your statement you wouldn’t. You guys are proving what we have been saying all along. The only people you supposedly “care” about are the ones headed in to kill their babies. Why is that?
” I’d help a 25 yr old person, if that person deserved positive attention from me”.
She deserved attention because she is human. However your attitude isn’t surprising seeing how the very reason that you are out there is to advocate for the killing of humans.
“It was me, not Kate, who was mean to that 78 yr old.”
Kate was mean by telling her to learn to change a tire or stay at home. You both are proving that the only thing that matters to you is your baby killing agenda and anyone who dares try to stand in the way of that gets your wrath. Do you understand what you are?
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 5:49 pm
Doug Marsh! Son-of-a-bitch! If someone had told me you spoke up here, I’d a called him a liar, but I see it with my own eyes! I had you figured for a real dummy. But you’re not at all. See what happens when you forget to hide, to slink around, to snicker to the choir? So keep it up. Express yourself to the enemy. And see if you can get Pat, fx, and Matt to express themselves too. Pastor and Bill and sometimes Sharon talk. Why not all of you?
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:10 pm
I gotta tell ya that, as an “outsider” I think this thread is hilarious. Look at what you folks are arguing about. As always, I gotta feeling that the truth is somewhere in between. Meanwhile, however, I’m getting a real picture of what goes on in Allentown on a regular basis.
Meanwhile, however, I grow weary of how the pro-lifers on this blog deal in absolutes. There is a God: no questions asked. The fetus is a person: dont even argue with me. All abortion doctors are sleazy, money grubbing slime, none of them is a decent person. Planned Parenthood wants 6 year olds to have sex so they can then perform an abortion on them. Oy vey….
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:24 pm
“There is a God: no questions asked. The fetus is a person: dont even argue with me. All abortion doctors are sleazy, money grubbing slime, none of them is a decent person. Planned Parenthood wants 6 year olds to have sex so they can then perform an abortion on them”
Couldn’t have said it any better myself.
Here’s the deal….we believe in moral absolutes and you don’t so to you our moral absolutes sound like know it all arrogance. But they aren’t.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm
God performs 3.5 million abortions every year; obviously He has a different take on the fetus than self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” do.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 5:53 pm
God’s gonna kill me soon, Chuck. Does that give you the OK to do it?
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 8:52 pm
The whole point is that we aren’t God Chuck. When you start taking matters like this into your own hands, you’ve crossed a religious line as well as a moral on.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 5:35 pm
I’m just saying you’d better take a second look at who your Big Buddy is….
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 9:02 pm
I will, the moment I take my last breath.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 4:25 am
ah ha
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:42 pm
So by saying “we believe in moral absolutes” are you saying that ALL prolifers are a homogenous group and that you’re their spokesperson?
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Yes Kate I am! Geeze! Give it a rest already. Thou dost weary me with thou incessant groaning. Give thy thoughts no tongue for I am not bound to please thee with my answer. Sorry, I have Shakespeare speak stuck in my brain for some reason.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 8:48 pm
John Dunkle allows you to speak for him? He’s so talented and attention-starved, I’d suppose he’d rather speak for himself. And to think you are the spokesperson for the likes of Scott Roeder and Paul Hill. Lovely.
So much for your moral absolutes, eh? Thou shalt not kill but it’s OK to kill a doctor? Are you saying Roeder and Hill and Dunkle and you are homogenous? Really? Does Randall Terry know about you? How about Frankie Pavone or Joe Scheidler or Alveda King or David Gushee?
Did you really think this through when you were answering yes and trying to be cute with your attempts at taming the shrew?
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:15 pm
“Did you really think this through when you were answering yes and trying to be cute with your attempts at taming the shrew?”
Responding to obvious sarcasm by pretending it was legitimate. That’s a new a tactic. Then calling obvious sarcasm “trying to be cute.” Hmmm. I’ll have to think about that one.
“Did you really think this through when you were answering yes and trying to be cute with your attempts at taming the shrew?”
Um, I don’t really think you’re all that important in her life Kate.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:37 pm
I’m curious about your pronomial reference regarding voice.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 1:56 am
Good grief, first a history exam, now grammar!
Hang on, going to look up pronomial…
Back.
Still don’t get it.
But to answer your question, you strike me as having an exaggerated sense of your own importance, and I was just pointing out that we don’t all feel that way about you. Sorry for the confusion and for my presumption in assuming what other lifers here think of you. My bad.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 4:37 am
“John Dunkle allows you to speak for him?” I do indeed. I allow all my prolife intellectual superiors to speak for me, and that would include you, Kate.,
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 8:55 am
Kate you really are scraping the bottom of the toilet to come up with that remark. Everyone knows it was sarcasm so maybe you should go back to the think tank…um…..bathroom and see if you can come up with a legitimate…um…reasonable….um….non asinine comment. Thanks
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:08 pm
“So by saying “we believe in moral absolutes” are you saying that ALL prolifers are a homogenous group and that you’re their spokesperson?”
No Kate, that would be you.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:27 pm
I think it’s great, Voice, that you are confident in believing your moral absolutes. Go for it. Good for you. I sincerely mean that. What bothers me is that you are trying to impose those morals on me….can’t you just leave “me” alone?
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:39 pm
No Not when “me” kills other humans(or advocates for it). At that point it isn’t just about “me”. It’s about “me”and another human being. Can’t leave that one alone.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:01 am
So, Voice, were you outside the prison last night protesting the execution of that guy (whose name I cannot recall at this moment)?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 2:00 pm
Pat,
No but I was at home praying for him. That may not mean much to some of you but I bet it would of meant something to him. At least I was doing the one thing I could since I could not be there in body but I was in spirit. Don’t split hairs with me on this one as I have closed the door to any stupid comments about God. Troy Davis at least take the time to remember his name.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 9:38 am
Pat,
You and Kate speak of moral absolutes as if they are a bad thing that only narrow minded people adhere to. But you also believe in moral absolutes when they apply to you and something you believe in.
If a killer entered your home your moral absolute would be killing is wrong.
If a thief stole your car your moral absolute would be stealing is wrong.
If someone raped your child your moral absolute would be rape is wrong.
If someone hit your wife your moral absolute would be hitting your wife is wrong.
If someone lied about you your moral absolute would be lying about you is wrong.
If someone stole your identity your moral absolute would be stealing your identity is wrong.
If someone murdered your grandchild your moral absolute would be murder is wrong.
You do believe in moral absolutes when the morality involves someone or something that you personally care about.
Kate thinks that protesters speaking harshly to women is wrong. That’s a moral absolute.
Kate believes that violence against an abortionist is wrong. That’s a moral absolute.
So why is it that you guys believe in moral absolutes when they apply to you and something that you love or care about but not when it is something that someone else cares about? Pro-lifers believe that the most fundamental moral absolute is that it is morally wrong to kill any human at any gestational age. So we try to stop it. Why can’t you guys understand that and respect it?
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 9:14 pm
What do you think of the Warren Jeffs case Pat?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:02 am
Honestly, anonymous, I dont know who you are talking about. Please elaborate, thanks!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:19 am
That was me Pat. Warren Jeffs is an old man and a polygamist arrested for marrying and having sex with 13 and 14 year old girls in front of other old men.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 5:51 pm
I love “oy vey.” I’m Jewish.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:03 pm
Pat, I’m surprised at your attitude, since at other times you seem to understand where we are coming from. I respect a person for standing firm and unmoving on what they believe in. Fence sitting is for weaklings. I’d hate to see soldiers trying to face gunfire if they weren’t sure they were fighting for a good cause. I literally am amazed that you don’t respect people for having made a decision about whether they believe in God or not. Is this attitude directed at pro-lifers only? What about ministers who believe in God absolutely? The Pope? Obama? Millions of Muslims? What about Mother Teresa, did she disgust you for being unmoving about what is right and wrong, about whether there is a God or not? Gandhi? Just how far does your disgust reach Pat?
Take away the money and have the abortion doctors do it out of the goodness of their hearts at the free clinic, and we’ll weed out the good one or two. I’m sure they don’t do it for the money at all.
You disdain people for having made a decision and sticking with it about God, yet you respect PP with it’s dubious history, and the demographic they target, PLAINLY telling children, in black and white, you can go there and read it, that they MAY be ready for sex. Why are you so loyal to PP?
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:34 pm
What I grow weary of, Nunya, is when people just think their answer is the only one, that they know everything and “the other side” is so totally wrong. I think on a general level that’s why the country is such a mess. We all dig in with our bumper stickers and never ever listen to the other side, never cede a point. And so we dont learn, we stagnate. I think I feel this way because, as John knows because he’s been following my stuff forever, I have actually criticized the bad doctors and the pro-choice movement on a number of occasions. So, I’d like to think that that would give me some credibility in this debate but when I try to educate folks on why the clinics do what they do, it’s like none of you are listening. And, believe me, I am not “loyal” to PPFA. Go back and read a blog I wrote months ago about them… I’m sorry, but no one – none of us – has the monopoly on truth here.
Okay, blast away folks….
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Pat, you shoulda said no one other than Dunkle has the monopoly on truth here.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:02 am
Funny, John, funny…..
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 5:34 pm
Pat, I don’t think they’re totally wrong; I just think they can’t help doing what they do. It’s a syndrome: proclaim to care for human life, yet be so uncaring about it once it starts to tax the limit of their convenience.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 11:27 pm
No blasting needed Pat, since I am of the same mindset. The problem begins when moral absolutes are involved. I asked you in another comment about Warren Jeffs. There is NO argument or other “side” of the issue of an old man marrying a child, then consummating the marriage while surrounded by a circle of other old men.
Do you see? There ARE moral absolutes that have no argument or other side to them. To me there is no argument concerning the existence of God, and I’ll talk to others all day long about him and his love for them if they allow it, without needing to force the issue. It hurts only the person rejecting God if they do. But when it comes to ending growing, developing life, to me that’s not really a religious issue, (although to me all things do lead back to God) but it’s an issue that affects another person, and ultimately all of us.
What would happen to society if we accepted the “religion” of Jeffs? Abortion is an absolute to us that has no other “side.” We should handle it as Jesus would, for sure, and we mess that up all the time, but the bottom line is that it is wrong to kill what we do know is a developing human life.
Do you ever wonder why the last couple of generations are killing each other and their children? We have taught them, as a society, that it is acceptable to kill children, the tiniest, most defenseless segment of us. They have no respect for life because we’ve taught them that they and their rights are preeminent over everything else, even the life of another. We’ve shown them by example that if you don’t want to be bothered, you kill what’s in the way of your selfishness. I know that’s a generalization, and it isn’t the reason behind all abortions, but it is the reason behind the vast majority.
There are moral absolutes Pat. Surely you don’t think Jeffs “religion” is wrong just because the law says it is? Do you have a young girl in your family that you love Pat? What if society decided that Jeffs religious freedom trumped morality, and they legalized what he does. What if the parents of that child you love joined that religion and betrothed her to him, to be married and have sex in front of other old men. Would you just sigh and let it happen because you don’t want to force your beliefs on them? I can tell you right now, that I have a 12 year old granddaughter and a 1 year old granddaughter, and if that happened, I’d disappear with them until they were grown. I mean that with every fiber of my being. Let the law be damned in that situation, I’ll take my chances with jail if they find us, but I would never stand by and let it happen just because the society we live in had declined to that degree. That is exactly how we feel about abortion.
The Chucks and Kates of the world would say that I am a sick, disgusting witch for standing in the way of those poor parents as they tried to bring up their children in their own religion, which is their right. He’d be writing reams about my psychosis and how it caused me to kidnap my own granddaughters, subjecting their parents to upset and horror.
As I think about it, if showing pictures of old men watching other old men have sex with little girls would stop some of the parents from doing that to their children, I’d probably do it. With the girls faces blacked out of course.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:07 am
Anonymous, up above I asked about this case but you have given me enough information now. I hear exactly what you are saying. Of course, that kind of conduct is reprehensible and “immoral,” no questions asked. As everyone knows, I am not the deep thinker here so I wanna give your interesting comments some thought today. I am actually running out right now to a meeting with a dozen school counselors to talk about a new charitable organization I have founded to help needy children in my area. I’m very excited about it. But I promise to respond after I get my head on straight!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:22 am
Sorry again Pat, the whole Warren Jeffs thing is me. It was late and I didn’t notice I was showing up anonymous until I had made several comments. I finally figured out all I have to do is input my name again.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Somewhere in this thread, some anti-choice person (voice maybe) claimed that both sides more or less equally spew disgusting things. The source of the claim seemed to be what he or she viewed on news reports. Apparently the writer has not spent much time at an abortion clinic. I have – more than 500 hours of escorting. The fact is that the escorts almost never have signs, and most of the ones they do have are limited to just a few words. I have never seen one with any pictures that are not suitable to be seen by a 5 yr old. While the protesters shout at patients and support, as well as at escorts, it is rare that escorts say anything to protesters. Sometimes they do and sometimes its not nice, but it is rare. It is not surprising that news reports would show this.
Protesters think pro-choice people are directly or indirectly murderers. We pro-choice people view the extremest wing of anti-choice as terrorists (based on his writings and legal record, John Dunkle is in this group). So how would anti-choice people react if pictures of bodies from terrorist bombings were walked in front of their homes where their children or grandchild could see them, along with the words “Terrorist lives here”? Dunkle would try to claim to the children that he isn’t a terrorist, but the trauma would already have been done.
It is well established that if a sought after thing (booze, gambling, weed) is not legal, people will get it anyway, the risk be dammed. Does any anti-choicer believe making abortions illegal or harder to get won’t have the same result? Does any anti-choice person really want to return to the back alley reality that preceded Roe? The Gosnel horror in Philadelphia was know to some of the patients, yet they went to him because safe alternatives were out of there reach.
I went to high school in the 1950s. I never even heard the word abortion until about 10th grade. Then I had to do some sneaking around in libraries to find out what all that meant. Sounded pretty bad. When I got into college, I started to learn about illegal unsafe abortions and the horrible results. I learned that women of means could always get safe abortions while those with less went the dangerous route. Many died or were maimed for life. The adoption option existed, yet many women couldn’t take that path. Perhaps they understood that the 9 month bond would not let them sign off. The back alley abortion risks were well know yet the choice of a dangerous abortion was seen as their only real option. That’s when I realized that women should not have to take that risk. They should be free to choose. I realized that the fetus is not a separate entity until it became viable. Abortion should be legal until then. The Supreme Court came to the same conclusion almost 10 years later.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 6:00 pm
Blah, blah, blah — usually when someone mentions my name I get interested. But not here. The rehashing of truisms, the tired rhetoric, the endlessly repeated excuses have gotten to me.
Look, David, step down from the pulpit and talk to me, or even to us. We’re not objects! We’re people!
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 4:57 am
I take that back, D; it’s not as bad as I first thought. But you’ve packed too much stuff in here, at least for a dummy like me.
Stick to one point, for example: “Does any anti-choicer believe making abortions illegal or harder to get won’t have the same result? Does any anti-choice person really want to return to the back alley reality that preceded Roe?” That way even a dummy like me can recognize the absurdity of what you’re saying.
See D? It is simply absurd to claim that by making baby killing legal we did not increase astronomically the numbers of those murdered. That is absolutely the stupidest of all of you killers’ helpers absurd claims. And here you make it again with hardly a second thought.
LikeLike
September 20, 2011 at 9:26 pm
David, I was the one who mentioned the TV. Most everyone here knows I have also protested at abortion clinics. I have seen things first hand as well. And I’ve also seen how biased the news media is toward pro-lifers. I’ve seen it for 20 years. I worked as a news reporter in a small small town, and STILL there was slant and bias. Don’t kid yourself. By your comments I take it we should throw out the law and have no legal limits, since people will just break the law anyway? Why would a nine month incubation of a non person blob of tissue preclude a woman making a choice to place her newly morphed human for adoption? Obey the law, don’t get pregnant, should you find yourself pregnant, put the baby up for adoption.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:37 pm
I will agree with Nunya that I always felt that most media folks were generally pro-choice. Can’t prove it, but just a hunch…
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:58 pm
And real scientists, the chemists, the biologists, the physicists, the theologians, and so on, too, not the phony ones. I just heard that 93% of them are pro-death! (Well I actually heard that 93% of them did not believe in God, but it comes to the same thing.)
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 4:45 pm
Pat, most media folks are probably “pro-choice,” but the media owners are not. Three of the biggest reasons are: 1) If it’s controversial, it sells advertising, which makes money. 2) Liberals are not as focused on revenge or retaliation as conservatives are; their anger levels are much lower and much more controlled, so media owners don’t worry about offending “pro-choicers” as much as they worry about offending the religious right. 3) Where ownership is personal (e.g., NewsCorp is still really Rupert Murdoch, despite Saudi Arabia owning 40% of the voting stock), owners are usually neurologically and temperamentally inclined to being far right wing (in other areas, consider Adolph Coors, the young Ted Turner, Bob Perry); where ownership is corporate, the amoral and psychopathic nature of the for-profit corporation disregards any and all social/moral/behavioral/ethical contexts it can.
As a result, even though employees (show and segment producers, writers, editors, etc.) are “pro-choice,” they know what they have to do to keep their job. A Faux News employee once related how as they leave the building, its workers ridicule their employer’s dishonesty, willful ignorance and blatant bias. Anybody who knows anything about Roger Ailes will have to agree with them.
Nevertheless, Faux News marches on, keeping its viewers the most ignorant of all TV news fans– thanks to the daily labors of a lot of “pro-choice” staffers!
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:35 pm
Welcome, David. Very articulate. I’m sure John will totally agree with you!
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 2:59 pm
tic
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Thank you for your comments, David.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 4:55 pm
“Put the baby up for adoptiion.” The self-proclaimed “pro-choicer’s” wet dream. Only 160,000 babies get adopted every year, and many of them are from other countries! Since there are probably 1.2 million so-called “pro-lifers” in this country, why don’t they each adopt a child every year, including the vegetables, the psychopathic teens, the anencephalics?
There’s this magical thinking about how wonderful everything will be once a baby is born, and hardly a friggin’ one of those people dials up their state child protective services agency and says, “Send me your neediest kids.”
What’s worse, they love their dogs more than they love their so-called “unborn humans.” Nunya won’t talk to me about why she will or won’t let me have her dog but will make me have a baby (and magically thinks I would put a baby up for adoption); voice prizes her bichon more than she prizes a baby she insists a stranger have, and she wiliingly will turn her second-best dog over to me without a second thought.
They use force, they use fraud, and they work to put idiots in legislatures across the nation in order to see their self-therapeutic fantasies achieved.
LikeLike
September 21, 2011 at 11:51 pm
Here is a fine example of someone twisting words and manipulating truth to put forward his own agenda, just like the news media does.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 4:38 am
Chuckles do do something strange, don’t he, and yours is as good an explanation as any.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:11 am
C’mon, Anonymous, now be honest. Advocates on both sides of this (and other) issue are always twisting words to forward their own agenda, no???
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:03 pm
My agenda is to point out that the so-called “pro-life” movement exists to help itself through difficult personal issues, which is the only plausible explanation for their general disregard for the needs of real human life.
Just because it’s an agenda, it doesn’t mean it’s wrong; it means it ought to be discussed.
NunYa, you have talked about people in general letting me have their dog, but you haven’t talked about you in particular letting me have YOUR dog (or equivalent family pet). I get the sense that you and voice are in the same boat, valuing the welfare of your pet over the welfare of any child you insist (or prefer, or desire) be born to a stranger.
I’d appreciate it if you’d reflect on what that says about how and why we value things in a certain way.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 12:19 am
I don’t have a pet Charles. I have 7 grandchildren, and you can’t have one. Get your own!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:10 am
Charles, do you know how many kids are eligible for adoption each year in this country and how many actually get adopted? I’m too lazy to Google it, figure you have this in your head!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:26 am
Get off talking about this and sundry other topics, and get back to the main one: should the law allow us to continue to kill innocent people. I’ll be away till Monday and if I see any other topics raised between now and then, I’m sending out a contract.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:04 pm
Listen to him, Pat: keep the focus on death, not on the needs of life. You’ll never be a so-called “pro-lifer” if you can’t do that.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 9:47 am
I co-opted my daughter’s computer in West Hartford so I’m here early. Where you live, Chuck?
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 9:16 am
Identify yourself. Nobody can get into West Hartford. The roads are closed down.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:34 am
I have a few questions for any of the pro-choice Allentown folks who care to answer:
(1) Why is it if the clinic that you guys volunteer at and support makes women pay for counseling when at other clinics it is a free service. It seems that if they had the women’s best interest at heart they would want them ALL to be counseled to make sure they are getting clear information. It seems greedy to me and not in the best interest of the women.
(2) If there is no such thing is post abortion syndrome as Kate likes to say why do they offer post abortion counseling and support groups?
(3) Why does the place look so nasty and run down with grass growing up through the fence lines, etc?
(4) There are several you tube videos featuring protesters at the Allentown clinic. They seem to be about nothing. It appears as if whomever posted them is trying to make a big deal out of nothing. One women went into the clinic and picked up a piece of literature and they called that “trespassing”. John asked someone not to kill their baby and that was “harassing”. A lady named Mary asked the clinic director to stop killing babies and she was “screaming.” Then there is the documentary sounding one that HAD to be Kate’s doing claiming that women are terrorized, etc. So the question is why make such a big old deal out of non things. These same things happen at clinics all over the US and world and it isn’t even barely noticed? You guys are causing scenes by making big deals out of non-issues. Why?
(5) There was a video by the director of the clinic speaking to political candidates in which she asks about penalties for women seeking abortions. Why does she look and act like a crazed lunatic in this video and a few others. I am from the outside looking in and I have to tell you she really does act unstable. Does that not concern you?
(6) That clinic has not always passed health inspections, even recently. Why do you support a clinic that puts women’s health in danger?
Kate, don’t lash out, these are legit questions.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Being the ever-ready devil’s advocate, I dare you, you quick-witted voce: visit the Pennsylvania Dept of Health and on their web site you can find real facts. Facts are objective data that can and do include information such as recent inspections of all medical facilities.
FYI, from May to the most recent inspection that the state has listed, the clinic has been in compliance. So, tell me, my little drek-filled dumpling, don’t the state facts just about shoot your idea in the ass, you know, the one about putting women’s health in danger? Just asking
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:26 pm
They were cited earlier in the year then came into compliance at their follow up inspection. We have discussed this with great detail on this blog. It is fact. If you go to the Pa department of health. Look up the clinic inspections dated 5/25/2011 you will find the citation.
Here is the first part of the citation;
No POC Required STANDARD
Recommendation
Name – Component – 00
Observations:
Based on a tour of the facility on May 25, 2011, and interview with staff, it was determined that the Allentown Women’s Medical Center failed to maintain a safe and sanitary environment.
Findings include:
A tour of the facility was initiated at 10:15 AM on May 25, 2011, with facility staff. ……
It goes on to list several problems along with a plan of correction.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 12:22 am
Well that seemed to shut Bonzo up just fine.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 5:57 am
In all of these points made, no patient was harmed. That seems to be the bigger issue.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 9:52 am
Kate, don’t you get weary of getting shot down, legitimately?
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 12:14 pm
“Kate, don’t lash out, these are legit questions.”
OK, I’ll not lash out. I’ll just laugh myself silly.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 4:58 am
No need to laugh for that.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 11:26 am
Here’s another thought. Abortion advocates are continually fighting against any kind of regulations that would make clinics safer, make them tell women the truth, and provide full disclosure of the abortion (ie. informed consent laws). I really don’t understand that given the warnings that are on the Allentown Women’s Center internet page. The specifically warn women about the very things that pro-lifers complain about and try to pass laws to prevent. Why then if they admit that there are crappy clinics with deceitful practices by virtue of them warning against them, do they turn and fight the very laws that would prevent it?
From the Allentown Women’s Center page:
“1. DO NOT TRUST THE PHONE BOOK!
Just because the ad is big or looks nice, it does not mean that it is a good facility. Furthermore, the ad may not be completely truthful. Before you call, do further investigating. Many times clinics advertise that they are located in a specific town, but when you call they may say “we’re near there” or “we’re not open there yet” – be careful… you may be in for a longer trip than you first thought. You may find they are actually in another state. If they are not truthful in their yellow page ad it is a red flag – find out more about this clinic. Further, if you find that a clinic is giving out false information, call the phone directory and the better business bureau to complain.”
“2. Get a referral from someone you trust.
If there is a friend or family member you feel comfortable asking, talk to that person. You can also anonymously call a local hospital or physician’s office that you trust and ask them who they refer to for abortion services. Call national organizations, such as the National Abortion Federation or the Abortion Care Network, whose members have to abide by high standards of high medical and counseling care.”
“3. Call the clinic on the phone.
How do they sound? Are they friendly? Do they listen? Do they answer all of your questions? Ask if you can set up an appointment to see their clinic before actually making an appointment. Is the clinic actually located where the ad in the phone book says it is?”
“4. Ask about their services.
What do they offer? Is your support person allowed to participate in any part of the process? How many visits are required? What is the procedure like? What types of anesthesia are offered and what are the risks? Who administers the anesthesia and what are his/her qualifications? Do they offer routine services as well? What type of medical protocols do they follow? What do they do in case of an emergency? Do they provide free options counseling?”
“5. Ask about their fees.
Do the fees sound “too good to be true?” If they do, they probably are. Some clinics tell you a lower fee when you first call but you end up paying more for services that were not included. Find out which charges are included in the fee. Is a follow-up exam included (this is a necessary exam that, if not included, may cost an extra $50 – $100) Are all medications included? Is an ultrasound included? Is the price of anesthesia included? Is a method of birth control included? Is counseling included? Do they participate in insurance plans? Do they give reduced fees if you are a student or if you have medical assistance? Do they provide funding or will they assist you in funding if you cannot come up with the whole fee? If you cannot come up with the fee, will they turn you away? Are there payment plans?”
“6. Ask about the qualifications of their doctors and staff.
Both OB/GYNs and non-OB/GYNs perform abortions. Things to ask include: How many procedures has he/she performed? Where was he/she trained, and who were they trained by? What degrees does he/she have? What is his/her specialty? Does he/she have any hospital admitting privileges anywhere? Has the physician lost his or her license in any other states? Although you may not be able to get the name of the physician because of confidentiality issues, you can ask about how the physician was trained and what his or her credentials are.”
“What about the staff? Do they have Registered Nurses on staff? What about the counselors? Who provides counseling and what is their training? Will the counselor talk to you about your decision at no charge if you are unsure? Are there counselors available to accompany you in the procedure if you request it? Do the counselors provide post-abortion counseling if you need it?”
“7. Take a look at the clinic and the staff.
Most clinics are busy, because there are not many providers. Is the clinic clean? What type of instruments do they use and how do they clean them? What is the atmosphere like? Is it cold and sterile or warm and friendly? What do you prefer? How is the staff? Do they dress professionally and appropriately? Do they act professionally and appropriately? Do they treat you as an individual and with respect and understanding? Can your partner talk with someone privately if he or she wants to? Are the procedure rooms clean and private? Do they have pamphlets on decision-making, birth control methods, and descriptions of the procedure including risks? Do they provide referrals for adoption and pre-natal care? Are their explanations thorough?”
“We know it can be difficult to trust a medical provider that you have never seen before and we hope these suggestions help. You really won’t know exactly how your experience will be until you go through with it, but you do have some control over it. Be sure to give the staff feedback – both positive and negative – that will help them serve women better. “
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 11:48 am
“Do they act professionally and appropriately?”
This one made me giggle a little considering that Jen looks a little crazy in her videos. Wearing professional clothing does not make one a professional. It’s about more than that.
“What type of instruments do they use and how do they clean them?”
This one is a little odd since this clinic just got busted by the health department for using out of date supplies.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 10:00 am
” . . . Jen looks a little crazy in her videos . . .” You mentioned this earlier, v, andI noticed it because I had observed something similar. It seemed to me that Jen is always on the verge of tears. Considering what she’s done and how she’s done it, she has to be one tough lady, but it sure is confusing.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Kate likes to comment about the “embryo’s” that are aborted and how they are not babies and about how baby Malachi pictures are misleading since abortions are mostly on blobs. But at the Allentown Women’s Center where she is an escort they abort babies up to one day shy of 18 week gestation.
The brain is fully developed and the fetus can suck, swallow, and make irregular breathing sounds. Fetus can feel pain (New England Journal of Medicine). Fetal skin is almost transparent. Muscles tissue is lengthening and bones are becoming harder. Liver and organs produce appropriate fluids. Eyebrows and eyelashes appear and the fetus makes active movements including kicks and even somersaults. His ears are developed and he will jump at loud sounds. He sucks his thumb as well. The baby’s genitals are developed and the mother can feel him moving. He blinks, grasps, and his hair has grown on his head. Vocal chords are complete, and the child can and does sometimes cry (silently).
In order to kill him the abortionist will use a D&E procedure: Dilation and Evacuation
This method is used up to 18 weeks’ gestation. Instead of the loop-shaped knife used in D&C abortions, a pair of forceps is inserted into the womb to grasp part of the fetus. The teeth of the forceps twist and tear the bones of the unborn child. This process is repeated until the fetus is totally dismembered and removed. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove them.
Allentown Women’s Clinic charges the woman $900 to do this to the baby.
So, what was it you were saying about baby Malachi Kate? It seems that his picture is very appropriate being that they kill babies exactly like him at the Allentown clinic. Any you can’t figure out why pro-lifers are so determined to stop this, why we beg women at the clinic door not to go in? Jen can’t figure out why we are so persistent? Just remember this Saturday morning when you walk that women into the clinic:
“The teeth of the forceps twist and tear the bones of the unborn child. This process is repeated until the fetus is totally dismembered and removed. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove them.” ……..and you just helped!
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 10:02 am
It’s hard to see how Kate will recover from these onslaughts and come back with something silly, but she will.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 1:14 pm
dang Voice..you are amazing! let’s see them wiggle out of that one! I, too, am a person on the outside looking in and have to agree that there is something very demented going on there. I went and looked at their web site and low and behold the mission statement was written by someone named Kate! could it be the snarky Kate from this blog? I think so, and I also think she must have some kind of financial interest in the business called Allentown Women’s Center. Why else would she be so threatened by the protesters helping women? Why is she threatened by a different “choice”? Could it be that they are taking money right out of her very own pocket? THAT would explain A LOT. And might I ask, what exactly is “reproductive justice framework?”
Mission Statement PDF Print E-mail
Written by Kate
Wednesday, 19 January 2011 10:42
The Allentown Women’s Center© provides the community with
high quality, accessible, and patient-centered healthcare. AWC
provides counseling and education to assist patients and their
support systems in making complex life decisions on issues
of reproductive health, gender, and sexuality. AWC is
committed to providing all services, outreach education and
advocacy within a reproductive justice framework.
Last Updated on Wednesday, 09 March 2011 16:05
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Here’s another little tidbit of information:
In their “warnings” to women who may consider going elsewhere for an abortion they ask of the other clinics:
“Do they give reduced fees if you are a student or if you have medical assistance? ”
The Allentown clinic is apparently proud of their “reduced fee” they give students and medicaid patients. Why? It’s a measly $20 bucks for student’s and $50 for medicaid patients.
“Fee Reductions (Medical and Surgical):
As a courtesy, AWC will take a $50 reduction for anyone who presents a medical assistance card. Medical Assistance includes Access, Gateway, Keystone Mercy, and Amerihealth Mercy.
Students: AWC will give a $20 reduction for any patient that presents a current school ID.”
How kind of them since the average cost of an abortion at the Allentown Clinic is $596. They do about 3000 per year. 596 x 3000= 1,788,000. According to those figures that’s One Million Seven Hundred Eighty Eight Thousand Dollars that they make off killing babies each year. So it makes sense that they don’t want the protesters messing with their bottom line. It’s not about the women. It’s about the money! No wonder Jen gets so angry that she looks homicidal. Money Money Money to the tune of almost 2 million per year. WOW!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:27 pm
How is this a “little tidbit of information”? more like lapses in logic (flights of fantasy that are insane by any standard, with the exception of the sublime logic found in the idiom of cartoons). So when you and your fellow moral storm troopers start proselytizing as you have, then you should be prepared to be told that a great many of us think your cosmological conceptions are a steaming pile of behemoth dung.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Are you related to Kate because your writing sounds just like hers…….over the top?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 7:25 pm
I was just gonna say the same thing! whenever I see a post of hers I just think of that charlie brown cartoon, when you hear the grown up speaking and what all the kids hear is mwa mwa mwa mwa etc LOL
Now Kate, don’t let it go to your head that you are a grown up and we are just a bunch of little kids, oh well, on second thought go ahead and think that, I don’t want to grow up anyway.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:13 pm
Who is charlie brown?
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 10:05 am
I don’t know, but, Bozo, I know this — you’re Kate Ranieri.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 12:31 am
Hi Kate!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:09 pm
What is driving your obsession with money? And where does the web site mention the annual number of abortions? Did you pull this number out of thin air?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:32 pm
No, it’s been quoted on this site multiple times.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:09 pm
Quoted by you?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:11 pm
No not me. There are people on here that are very familiar with that clinic. They posted that stat.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Prove it. Bet you can’t. You are probably among the delusional who will believe anything. You have no proof. Face the truth. It will set you free.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:23 pm
Oh, it’s been quoted by who? some drek hiding behind a false name….no credibility. sorry voice. You are meaningless and so are your sources. You know nothing.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:43 pm
Well until one of the people who quoted that stat speak up and tell their source lets do it another way. There are almost exactly 5000 abortions per year in the county that the clinic is located in per the Pa. Dept of Health. AWC is the busiest clinic in that county seeing that the others are only open 1-2 days per week with one getting ready to be shut down permanently any minute if there is any justice in this world since the owner is a criminal (Bringham), so common sense tells us that AWC does the majority of those abortions. 3000 is probably an accurate number.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 6:01 am
makes me giggle a bit reading voice’s comments:
“There are almost exactly 5000 abortions per year” amost exactly? too funny!
“3000 is probably an accurate number” and there you have it–the mathematical wizardry of almost, probably
giggle giggle
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:26 pm
So, WHAT IS YOUR OBSESSION WITH MONEY? Why can’t you answer a simple question.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:27 pm
Obsession? Quoting stats is obsession? ok Whatever you say.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 2:23 pm
Nowisalie
Well I’ll be darned, you have struck a chord. That explains why Kate lives in a wealthy neighborhood, her and her husband drive upscale cars, dresses to the nines. She is protecting her income. Right on Nowisalie, right on. It is all about the money. Explains why she looked down on one of the pro lifers recently.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:23 pm
Actually, so-called “pro-choicers” are in general better-educated, wealthier and have fewer children than self-proclaimed “pro-choicers.”
I think this socio-economic inferiority gives rise to a sense of powerlessness and vindictiveness which fuels the anti-abortion movement: If you can’t be as rich as they are, at least you can get even.
It in part explains why they use “personal responsibility” as a reason for not praising parents who raise their unwanted child. They are not into rewarding parenthood above the average, but in seeing that people who have sex pay for it. It is one way of satisfying their need for respect and power when they can’t achieve it with income and education.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:31 pm
The prolifers theme song is:
Clap your hands and honk your horn,
we love babies until they’re born.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Yeah, so since we don’t take care of them why don’t you just go ahead an smash them up, behead them and dismember them. Feel better now?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:10 pm
It gets rid of the surplus population. Feel better now?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:12 pm
You are sick!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:08 pm
Personally, it’s probably better to atomize them with suction. It’s quick and painless for all concerned. And at this early gestational timeframe, there’s no crunchy skull crushing. It’s all together so easy.
And, yes, thank you, I do feel bettter.
Cheers!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:09 pm
Actually, voice, I’m not sick. I’m not physically or intellectually or emotionally sick. In fact, I’m certifiable healthy. You, on the other hand, are suspect.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 1:17 pm
Atomize? Yuck.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 2:28 pm
So, voice, your concern for the well-being of children isn’t triggered until it reaches a level of violence? People who truly care about children start caring for them long before it reaches that level– and they don’t limit themselves to fetuses.
Would you call your mode of behavior aborticentric?
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 12:14 am
You know Bonzo and Kate, what should be posted on the signs the lifers carry are your comments in this thread. Kate, NEVER tell me again that you care one whit about the women going into these clinics, that it’s hard for them, and that you care that they are making a heart wrenching decisions. Don’t even go there with your speeches about how the people on the street are traumatizing the women who are already in crisis. I believe you are Bonzo, but regardless, you reply to his insult to every woman who has made the heart wrenching decision to abort by replying “yuck.” I wish someone would make a big poster with both of your comments and hold that in front of the clinic with your name in black and white. No Kate, you just proved you are about the bottom line. You are there because you have a stake in it, if not you are there for the fodder for your documentaries. You are NOT there out of any sense of caring for those girls or you would have seen Bonzo’s comment as as offensive and disrespectful as it is. Pat didn’t speak up. Chuck didn’t speak up. I’m betting there are very few women who have had abortions who would think that comment was okay on any level, and they would be very surprised to find out how the people escorting them into those clinics really feel about their “heart wrenching” decision. Someone from Allentown should copy this thread and make sure it gets published somewhere. Make copies and put one into the hands of every woman you can. In fact, read it to the news media. Lets prove once and for all how choicers really feel about these
women and their babies. There IS no excuse, so don’t even try.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 8:58 am
I agree! The cold uncaring attitude is an insult to the women. I wonder if while escorting Kate whispers to them that it will be “yucky” as they murder the baby?
and yes…Bonzo is either Kate or one of her minions that she trains in killing propaganda over at the college.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 1:49 pm
I can’t bring myself to repeat what Bonzo said, actually several things, but one was the absolute worst. Kate replied “yucky” to HIS comments, not to abortion in general. Bonzo is Kate or I’ll eat my hat. No one else commented or called her down, and they’ve all been on since it was said. But for Kate to escort these girls into that clinic pretending to care whlie saying the things she does, or backing up someone who says those things and has that kind of attitude is sick and repulsive. If she was repulsed, as she should be, she would have at least not commented at all. To comment “yucky” put her completely in his corner, in agreement with him, joining in the “hilarity” of abortion.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 12:16 pm
I’m sorry to say that what you have written explains nothing about me but a whole lot about your psychology, your sense of self. What a pity.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 5:16 am
You got one thing wrong — Kate does not escort, she supervises. You got the rest right, though.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:14 pm
So, tell me, NOWISALIE, who is wiggling, what are they wiggling out of? It seems to me that you, voice and others are a combined force…not a powerful force, more like a collective of a few brain cells that have been given a directive….you all are so transparent…but why is that so shocking? zero times zero is still ZERO
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 2:07 pm
and yet they fight the laws that will make it “safer” for women to get abortions in facilities to upgraded medical necessities..like wider hallways (for instance) They hold on to that blood money. Even Veterinary buildings are more regulated than those of abortion clinics. Just look at the pictures of the antiquated “recovery” rooms in AWC. old granny afghans and old recliners..ewww… who would want to go there, let alone get so called “health care” from them. Which by the way, Abortion is NOT health care. It doesn’t matter how you try and dress it up…Abortion is, plain and simple…the killing of the most innocent among us.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Those “old” recliners look exactly like the ones in several local hospitals, institutions that do NOT provide abortion care….
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 1:22 pm
You begin with talk about fighting laws, move on to blood money, then veterinary buildings and jump online pictures and then leap to a smashing finish about abortion and killing. Not bad….is that some sort of mind dump?
By the way, isn’t all money “blood money” in that it takes blood, sweat and tears to earn money?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 2:41 pm
Oh, yes, another wretched pile of dreck from the moral storm troopers waging a war against the choices of free women.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 3:39 pm
Ok Bonzo, If what we say is a “wretched pile of dreck” then prove us wrong. Name on thing that was reported that wasn’t true. Everything we said can be backed up with videos, websites, and photos. Do you have anything to back up your claim that we are wrong?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 3:52 pm
Everything? It’s a bit presumptious of all you moral storm troopers, don’t you think? Since when are videos, webistes and photos artifacts of solid evidence, the likes of which could stand up in court? I’d suggest that you little dreck makers revist all your piles again before the flies begin swarming and laying their eggs.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 4:23 pm
What is presumptuous about it?The stats are all there on the clinic website. All you gotta do is math.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:06 pm
You mentioned videos and photos, remember? You dropped behometh piles all over the map, not just stats. And your math? Drek.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 6:23 pm
Bonzo, you are ridiculous. The math is on the website for anyone to see. The videos are on Youtube for anyone to see. NOWISALIE apparently has access to photos of the recovery room. I am sure NOW would be willing to share them. What else do you want to know?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:31 pm
Oh, fun, let’s play the name game.
No, YOU are ridiculous!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:34 pm
Yes, I am. I know it too!
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 8:36 pm
Not sure what you mean by “we” unless you (voice, NOWISALIE, etc) are a bunch of kids playing with your smart phones….anyway, here’s a little game you can play. Match everything you said above, one by one, to the web site. Bet you can’t do it…nanna nanna boo boo
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:10 pm
Why would I when they can just go look it up. I don’t have the time nor the energy for that. Plus I just don’t want to.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 9:16 pm
Ah, jeepers creepers, voice. You put it out there and pull the “lazy ass” card. How does that work. You ask others to believe your drek. and then pull the play ground trick “I don’t want to play with you”
Yellow Voice: how utterly convenient, how utterly cowardly of you,
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:22 pm
🙂
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 1:23 pm
moral storm troopers! me like
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 4:07 pm
A question for Kathleen: How much did you campaign against abortion before Roe v. Wade?
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Above, Pat asked me how many children are unadopted in a year. I found this on the Net:
Pre-Adoptive Home – 13%, 13,581
Foster Family Home (Relative) – 22%, 23,735
Foster Family Home (Non-Relative) – 55%, 58,633
Group Home – 4%, 3,872
Institution – 5%, 5,775
Supervised Independent Living – 0%, 84
Runaway – 0%. 465
Trial Home Visit – 1%, 62
Children 16 years old and older whose parents’ parental rights have been terminated and who have a goal of emancipation have been excluded from the estimate.
Total, 106,207. Knowing what I know of emancipated teens, I would add 5% to that total, for a more accurate total of 111,507.
Which means that coming out of the Baby Store (visit the aborticentrism site to view the rest of the doomed parade), every 12 seconds a baby is born who will be unadoptable at some point in his life, often for years or to majority.
Way to go, so-called “pro-lifers!” You’d rather grab your smelling salts and clutch your pearls talking about butchered little baby bits than take care of an abandoned child. Tell me again how much you love your dog.
source: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110620125028AAmUJRo
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Not so Chuck, if you told me they were hacking children in foster homes to bits I’d go try to stop it there too.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Well, they ARE hacking children to bits in the Congo, Somalia, Eritrea and various other Third- and Fourth-world countries. How much are you concerned about those real children? Or do you just limit yourself to American fetuses?
Now, let’s finish up our discussion about the mindset of a person who will not let me have her dog (like voice and her Bichon) but would make a stranger have a baby: Why do they value a dog higher than they value a child? Or, if you’re totally unacquainted with the joys of pet ownership, why would you not let me have one of your orphaned grandchildren but force me to have a baby?
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 7:28 pm
Nobody forces you to have a baby. You already have one. The question now is: Will you pay someone to decapitate it in order to make your own life better?
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 12:29 am
’nuff said.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 5:31 am
Notice that after Chuck says something ridiculous: “Ignore the kids being pulled apart near where you live. Go to Africa because that’s happening there too,” he quickly jumps to another topic, hoping to avoid having you think about what he’d just said.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 7:15 pm
bonzo, anyone can look at the photo’s of the recovery room! why they would have them on their facebook page, is beyond me! oh, maybe it isn’t a recovery room after all, maybe, it is where they all sit to watch all the ridiculous videos they make. ??
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 7:49 pm
No, I think you are right. That looks like the recovery room with the recliners.
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:17 pm
maybe, maybe, maybe….is that the best you can do? you are so desperate, so pathetic
sad times for the prolfe dreks
LikeLike
September 22, 2011 at 10:23 pm
🙂 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
September 27, 2011 at 4:54 am
Drek, drek, dump, dump — why is Kanzo obsessed with fecal matter?
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 10:28 am
Hi, kiddies! Are we having fun yet? Who is winning?
I dont know where to start but I hope everyone knows by now that I have a lot of experience with clinics and I’m pretty candid about what they do. So, if I may, let me clarify one thing to begin with…..
I’ll start with one simple statement to demonstrate how some people just dont have the facts and you can believe me or not: Voice said: “Abortion advocates are continually fighting against any kind of regulations that would make nics safer.” That is not a true statement, Voice. I can think of several states, including South Carolina and Virginia, where the staff at the clinics actually worked with the state to come up with agreeable regulations. The clinics are regulated to some extent. They’ve got to deal with OSHA, HIPPA and so many other rules and regs already. But, they have always been open to new regulations/ideas that are designed to actually enhance the delivery of health care. If there is a new idea out there, they’ll listen. But, they vehemently oppose any “regulations” that are designed to cost them more money and close them down, like they did in South Carolina. So, in Virginia the state is saying that the clinics need to add more parking spaces. What the heck does that have to do with patient care? It is simply designed to cost the clinic more money. It has nothing to do with health. And the kicker is the current clinics, which like many businesses in a complex have only so many designated spots, are not grandfathered in.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 11:39 am
I may have not made it clear when I said that but I was talking specifically about AWC’s website that warns against sleazy clinics but then the director, Jen, testified before a Senate committee against regulations. I could put the website link on but it might stay in moderator limbo land for days (I put one up at the beginning of the week that is still in limbo). But here is the subtitle for the report on the hearing. Basically she was complaining about the length and frequency of inspections.
TESTIMONY OF JENNIFER BOULANGER,
ALLENTOWN WOMEN’S CENTER
BEFORE THE SENATE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE COMMITTEE
ON REGULATION OF ABORTION FACILITIES
SB 642, SB 732, SB 660, SB 662
APRIL 13, 2011
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 11:54 am
Voice,
is this verbatim testimony what you call complaining?
We appreciate that Senators Vance, Corman, and Hughes are addressing key issues surrounding regulatory enforcement that will uphold reasonable health and safety standards. Improving upon existing regulations is an appropriate focus. Had existing regulations been properly enforced, the horrid conditions described by the Gosnell grand jury would never have been permitted.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 4:41 pm
no, it was this and other comments:
“recently the department responded to a complaint from a patient who was at a freestanding abortion facility for a contraceptive appointment. The patient complained that she believed that she should not have to pay for her contraception. Inspectors from the Department of Health arrived for an unannounced inspection, and demanded to review six months worth of patient records, and questioned the staff for over two hours, despite the fact that the patient was not being seen for abortion services. We believe these demands made by the Department were unreasonable and that they did not fall under its regulatory oversight. ”
why complain about ANY inspections if the purpose of them is to keep abortion clinics from being sleazy??
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 7:59 am
It’s always legitimate to complain about harasssment, and it often is actionable, especially when it’s done by a governmental agency.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 9:11 am
Voice, do you own a business? If so, you would certainly agree that impromptu “inspections”, while they serve a purpose, can also go over the top. Every business in the world complains about the gov’t coming in and reviewing if they have their OHSA forms on the employee’s locker room bulletin board, etc. we all know that gov’t workers can get a little excited about their jobs.
I can’t find Jen’s testimony but I’ll guarantee you she said tha reasonable, health driving regs are not off the table, it’s just when the regs are clearly designed to make it impossible for the clinic to meet them and, thus, shut down. There is a fine line there.
Indeed, would you be okay if the crisis pregnancy centers were subject to the same/similar regs? Or any regs at all?
Finally, I apologize if some of your comments are “in limbo.” That is totally NOT my doing. I really do not have control over how this bloggy things works internally and I hope you know that, with a serious exception or two, I never ever delete things.
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 1:09 pm
“Voice, do you own a business? If so, you would certainly agree that impromptu “inspections”, while they serve a purpose, can also go over the top.”
No, but I know that beauty shops, barbers and restaurants all have impromptu inspections. And no, I wouldn’t mind if I knew it was for the public’s safety that they were doing it.
Indeed, would you be okay if the crisis pregnancy centers were subject to the same/similar regs? Or any regs at all?
If they were doing invasive medical procedures, then yes.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 11:55 am
It seems to me that Pat’s response and the excerpt from the testimony contradicts your conclusion about Boulanger’s words.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 4:43 pm
No it didn’t. Read above.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 7:27 pm
Oh, I see. You are the arbiter of all things just and true? You are the one and the true who assesses the virtues of your comrades’ statements?
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 7:32 pm
Your rambling again Kate.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 5:34 am
Since the alternative is sputtering, I prefer rambling.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Getting back to Pat’s article here:
Here’s a lovely post script about the unscrupulous protesters who chose to behave in an inappropriate way. Using a grassroots effort, including personal phone calls and emails, over 80% of the folks who were part of this misguided effort asked to be taken off the contact lists, wanting no further contact but also not wanting to be associated with these types of picketers. So now, there’s a new organization called vochoice.org that will repeat the same process for those in other parts of the country who are harassed by ugly protesters. With a list of names, addresses and phone numbers, volunteers will make contact them AND the org will contact the press (WaPo was quite obliging). In other words, their efforts will be shared and publicized and there will be outreach. I simply love the idea.
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 2:41 pm
Can you explain this again in English, and with details, for those of us who have no idea what your talking about?
LikeLike
September 23, 2011 at 3:33 pm
In English:
Step #1
Read Pat’s article above for background
Step #2
Google vochoice.org web site for clarification, as I posted
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 12:37 am
Good grief, we’ve been wandering in the woods for so long that I forgot there WAS an original article. I truly had no idea what Kate was talking about. Sheesh. But Kate, your wording still made no sense, you must have written it in a hurry or something. What exactly is it the news media will do?
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 8:52 am
It didn’t make any sense to me either. Maybe she was drunk when she wrote it?
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 4:53 am
“With a list of names, addresses and phone numbers, volunteers will make contact . . . I simply love the idea.”
You would. It’s right up your alley, ain’t it. Don’t forget, though, what happened when one of us turned the tables.
LikeLike
September 27, 2011 at 4:58 am
I tried to register for vochoice.org but never heard from them.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 7:37 am
voice says, “Nobody forces you to have a baby. You already have one. The question now is: Will you pay someone to decapitate it in order to make your own life better?”
Here’s the scenario, voice: I’m pregnant and I hate the “baby” (actually, fetus). So, I’m going to carry on as I always have: binge drinking, smoking, consuming heroin instead of food, selling my body for more drugs. When the fetus becomes a real baby, she will have a 30% chance of spina bifida, a 50% chance of being a school dropout, an 80% change of impaired brain function and a 95% chance of a very expensive stay in a neonatal intensive care unit ($8,000 per day) which I will not be able to pay for.
So, what are you going to do to protect your “baby” while she is in my body? And what is your track record for caring for others like her after they were born?
Sometimes death is a mercy, especially when so-called “pro-lifers” won’t care for real human life.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 8:50 am
so decapitate it…that will make all the ills of the world go away won’t it ?
Mom might do drugs and hurt the baby or be prostitute….
Baby might be born with a defect…..
Baby might drop out of school…..
Baby might have impaired brain function….
so…………save everybody some trouble and decapitate it. God knows we don’t need any of those poor retard cripples from drug infested homes littering up society. I mean, come on, can’t you understand that the world is made for the fit.
Really Chuck? or Charles (is that last name Manson by any chance?) do you even hear yourself?
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 9:11 am
Listen to yourself, voice:
“Mom might do drugs and hurt the baby or be prostitute….
Baby might be born with a defect…..
Baby might drop out of school…..
Baby might have impaired brain function….
But it’s been born, and I feel good about that!”
That’s the psychopathic aspect of aborticentrism. I suggest you be the home health aide at minimum wage for Barbara, a blind and developmentally stunted 35-year-old woman I know who was a shaken baby (by her dad) and in the course of her life was raped by the garbageman. She needs someone like you every time she goes outdoors.
You didn’t have to worry about her pregnancy, and you never worried after she (or any other like her) was born. This is what self-proclaimed “pro-life” heroes are all about.
LikeLike
September 24, 2011 at 2:18 pm
Here’s the thing Chuck–all of you choicers need to be honest and tell the truth to the women going into the clinics. Escorts need to joke about it the way Kate and Bonzo did. Choicers on the street need to hold posters that say “You hate it, so kill it before you abuse it!” and “Most of you are drug abusers/kill it before you birth it sick!” and the most appropriate would be “Poor+uneducated+unwanted=Ted Bundy makers. Kill it first and do the rest of us a favor!”
Throw away all those TRUST WOMEN! RESPECT WOMEN! signs. At least be honest about how you REALLY feel as you educate others about abortion, or as you escort those unsuspecting women inside.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 9:03 am
NunYa, your proposed sign betrays your focus on death– why can not you self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” step up for the needs of real children? Joel Steinberg and Hedda Nussbaum were pulling in a combined income of six figures when in his cocaine-fueled rage he beat their (arguably) adopted chld Lisa almost to death and then let her die. The next week’s issue of Weekly Standard was full of outrageous invective by people who never lifted a finger to care for an unwanted child.
Where does this compulsion to focus so completely on abortion come from? You jump for joy every time a woman is prevented from having one, you contemn counter-protestors as vicious baby-killers, and you can’t see that every child born needs more than you will ever willingly give. It’s sad.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 12:32 pm
What’s sad is that you perpetually refuse to listen. Nunya has made point after point after point that not only proves you wrong but also proves that you are incapable of having any true points to your argument. She has torn down every one but you refuse to acknowledge it in all cases and ignore her questions in most. I don’t even know why she bothers with you. You sound like a robot repeating your programmed responses over and over.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 12:44 pm
Magical thinking, voice. The record of caring for children you and your ilk don’t want to raise is less than stellar. All the talk about the sanctity of human life, its worth, its importance and your great concern for it falls before your actual level of care for the children you want born to others. Try 600 hours and 8% for a year and get back to me.
Too bad the whole purpose of being against abortion is so that you can feel good.
LikeLike
September 25, 2011 at 6:43 pm
How do you know I haven’t taken 600 hours a year plus many more? You assume a lot Charles. Just because I don’t tell you about myself does not mean that you have the right to assume. Not playing your game!
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 1:58 am
I actually think he has invented a “bot” that recognizes every time logic and reason are strung together in a certain pattern of words, and the “bot” then pastes his canned response right under it. And I am done with him. I threw in the towel eons ago. I just throw him a bone every once in a while, just to prove to myself the “bot” is still up and running.
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 6:30 am
voice, you don’t even write like someone who understands the needs of child development, much less someone who is able to set priorities for the best use of scarce resources of time, money and talent to help children.
If indeed you have anything close to a 600/8% track record, then your self-proclaimed “pro-life” stance is a fraud, because you know better.
Bot message #319
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 8:45 am
Once again Charles. You have no idea what you are talking about. What if I am a group home mother? That would mean I put in 24/365…way more than your stupid 600 hr figure that you pulled out of your butt.
What if I run a special needs foster home? Again 24/365
What if I am a full time social worker? 40/5
What if I adopt special needs children? 24/365
What if I run an adoption agency? 50/5
What if I run a Big Brothers/Big Sisters? 50/6
What if I do any number of things that you don’t know about.?
Because you don’t know you assume that I don’t.
Keep assuming. I am sure people assume things about you too.
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 9:14 am
Well, voice, if you do any of those things and don’t get paid for it, then you are operating at the same level as a parent who would only put in that many hours/days. If you are getting paid, how much is the prospect of no pay motivating you to keep doing them? How many parents keep parenting well for no pay? How willing are you to do anything for a child for no pay?
As I say, your willingness to let a child suffer for his entire life simply so you can feel good smacks of the psychopathic.
When you show a willingness to commit 100% to the next child you insist be born– and remember, you want ALL of those fetuses to make it to the delivery room– then you will start to escape the accusation of being pathologically self-centered.
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 1:01 pm
I have decided that you are either typing from the day room at the mental hospital or are on drugs because you clearly are not in reality. Go chant to someone else. You’re boring me now.
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 2:35 pm
gotcha. . .
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 6:22 pm
Don’t we wish. But he doesn’t. He will repeat one of his incredibly stupid arguments for keeping baby killing legal, maybe the one that says, “Kill him because he might turn out to be Ted Bundy.”
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 6:24 pm
Or maybe the one that goes this way, “Dunkle is mentally ill; therefore, I can help kill as many people as I want.”
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 7:05 am
Kaili Jon Gray, at Daily Kosd,on Texas’ cutting of social service programs for children while pouring money into anti-abortion efforts:
“You know what that means? That means that when a poor woman who is considering an abortion finds herself at one of these state-funded “crisis” centers, worrying about whether she can afford to support a child, she’s told not to worry because there are great social services programs that can help her.
“Except that these are the very programs that “pro-lifers” like Rep. Christian and Gov. Rick Perry are all too eager to cut. In tough economic times, tough choices must be made. And people like Christian and Perry have chosen to fund bogus pregnancy centers rather than fund the services that actually help women and children. Services, by the way, that have nothing to do with abortion:
Focus on abortion, so great as to preclude care for human life. Be proud of yourselves, self-proclaimed “pro-lifers”!
LikeLike
September 26, 2011 at 7:09 am
Geeze Chuck! Weren’t you the one who criticized some prolifer for misusing quotation marks? I count four misuses above!
LikeLike