Why don’t we, as a progressive community, introduce legislation that would make it a felony to give healthcare advice to a pregnant woman if the advisor is not a currently licensed healthcare professional? This legislative idea and article was inspired by and with thanks to Todd Stave, Voice of Choice. However, I would add that the legislative bill should read that is would be a felony to give healthcare advice to a pregnant woman if the advisor is not a currently licensed healthcare professional 1) with a recognized OB-GYN specialization and 2) employed within a state-licensed health care facility. The implications for this legislation are such that healthcare advice would mean that clergy, Options Centers volunteers and the protesting general public would be guilty of a felony if they provided any healthcare advice to a pregnant woman.
This advice would include any information about the risks of abortion, options, cancer, or emotional distress. As a bill it would target people who hold signs or offer literature that offer dubious medical claims like “abortion is murder” or “abortion stops a beating heart” or claims that a fetus can feel pain. The reasoning behind this bill would be to protect pregnant women from false medical claims, charlatans who practice medicine without a license and unlicensed individuals posing as counselors who offer unscientific, non medical information whether in the confines of an office or outside on the sidewalk.
Consider, for a moment a particular scenario. Any doctor or nurse who stands on a sidewalk telling you that your obesity is a moral failure and an offense to God, would be immediately discounted as a foolish. It’s no different than unlicensed people “advising” with their quasi-medical counseling at pregnancy centers or on the outskirts of abortion clinics.
There are quacks who attempt to counsel pregnant women and have the best intentions. Take for example the protester called Linebacker who wore an apron with a white person’s rendering of what he thought Jesus looked like but who added her own touch. She glued a fetal doll to her apron (see image below, to the right). Persuasive? NO, but it does make the point that what we’re dealing with here are folks who are six peas short of a casserole, a few clowns short a circus, a few bricks short a load. You get the point.
So, let’s be honest.
They’re no better than the randy salesmen who try to sell snake oil or Lydia Pinkham’s elixir or who believe that holy water helps or that serpents cure in The Almighty Temple of the Baby Jesus.
It seems only judicious that the authority of doctors to practice medicine and the authority of nurses to practice nursing should remain within their relationships with women patients, within the exam room and not out on the street or in some hole-in-the-wall called pregnancy care. When corporate entities, religious cartels, state or the federal governments or the average anti abortion buffoon attempt to micromanage medical care, they should be in fear of breaking the law. Neither reliable, professional doctors nor nurses would work on the streets outside an abortion clinic or within some fake healthcare facility without risking their license.
Only hookers, hoodlums and drunks work the streets. Why should the government or any professional certification organization qualify frauds or potential felons to provide medical information?
There is precedence here. Nurses are not allowed to suggest that a pregnant woman sip some wine to ease her Braxton Hick contractions without violating the parameters of their professional practice. Priests are not supposed to participate in political activities without losing the church’s 5013C status with the IRS. Legislators are not licensed to practice medicine. Dentists aren’t allowed to give immunizations. Pharmacists are not allowed to dispense medications without a prescription.
So in this era of excessive government interference in all things private, it makes perfect sense to expect that those who counsel pregnant women should have the appropriate, state-recognized medical credentials.

June 7, 2012 at 7:56 am
I think Kate Ranieri is saying here that she and Todd Stave believe only “licensed healthcare professionals” should be allowed to talk to a woman who is forcing someone into an abortion mill, one of those little auschwitzes that dot our country — in other words only those who have a financial interest in seeing that the someone is dispatched, uh, tortured to death.
I think, because, as usual, it’s a struggle to get through Kate’s writing, but did I get it right, Todd ole boy? Is that what you think too?
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 2:56 pm
Another Incredibly Powerfully written Post by Fem.
Decimating the mentally challenged maniacal Anti Abortion Crowd.
Thanks you Fem!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:31 pm
Another Incredibly Badly written Post by Fem.
Decimating the mentally challenged maniacal Pro Abortion Crowd by representing them.
Thanks you Fem!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm
This Dunkle is a real dumb dumb!
All this person can do is repeat and change pronouns, he seems to have no original thought . . .
I wouldn’t expect any more from a misogynist in my opinion!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:26 pm
This Rita is a real dumb dumb!
All this person can do is say something stupid, she seems to have no original thought . . .
I wouldn’t expect any more from a misogynist in my opinion!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 8:14 am
Why does this blog allow such an obvious troll spammer? He is just copying what people write. He makes the blog unreadable as he does not have anything to say. He just SPAMs. SPAMers should be discarded.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:12 pm
Hi Dunkle you Blog Spamming Troll.
Don’t you have Anything intelligent to write?
You write like a third grader does when you just copy other people.
I vote to have you kicked off the Blog again.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:23 pm
Mr. Dunkle is very correct. In my country, and under Sharia Law, abortion is very wrong. As Mr. Dunkle has pointed out in the past he is in agreement with Sharia Law, the Law of the one True God, and Women must be punished very severely if the have an abortion. That is done here and works very well. Thank you Mr. Dunkle for supporting the laws of Sharia.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Sorry for extra comment. I feel I must add. Mr. Dunkle is very correct. The women must follow the rules of the man. It is how the One True God has made the Universe. Thank you Mr. Dunkle.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:08 pm
John,
Does a Mormon have admittance into heaven?
LikeLike
June 26, 2012 at 5:03 pm
yes
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Mr. John Dunkle,
Why do you not answer my questions, or many other good questions I see?
You spoke reasonably about the Jews and Catholics, why wonted you answer now?
LikeLike
June 26, 2012 at 5:04 pm
I just answered above. I must have missed it.
LikeLike
February 10, 2014 at 7:51 pm
This “free sharing” of intomrafion seems too good to be true. Like communism.
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 8:36 am
Frightening consequences when legislators attempt to legislate morality and practice medicine:
mandatory delay requirements were associated with a 13 percent increase in child homicide deaths
Read this abstract:
The purpose of this study is to explore whether, in the U.S., there are associations between state-level variations in mortality among young children and state abortion restriction policies – such as parental-consent requirements, parental-notification requirements, mandatory delay laws, and restrictions on Medicaid funding for abortion. To investigate this, we used NCHS Multiple Cause of Deaths public-use data files for the period 1983–2002, and compiled data on children ages 0–4 identified as having died as a result of assault/homicide in each state and year. Medicaid funding of abortion, mandatory delay laws, and parental involvement laws for minors seeking abortions were included as the main predictor variables of interest. Multivariate count data models using pooled state-year-age cohort data, with state and time fixed effects and other state-level controls, were estimated. Results indicated that, between 1983 and 2002, the average increase in the number of homicide deaths for children under 5 years of age was 5.70 per state among states that implemented stricter abortion policies over that time, and 2.00 per state for states that did not. In the count data models, parental-consent laws were associated with a 13 percent increase in child homicide deaths; parental-notification laws were associated with an 8 percent increase in child homicide deaths though the results were less robust to alternate model specifications; mandatory delay requirements were associated with a 13 percent increase in child homicide deaths. While these data do not allow us to discern precise pathways via which state abortion-restrictions can lead to more child homicide deaths, we speculate that state restrictions on abortion may result in a disproportionate increase in children born into relatively high-risk environments. Additional research is called for to explore the association of state abortion-restrictions with other measures of infant/child health and well-being.
Social Science & Medicine; Jul2012, Vol. 75 Issue 1, p156-164, 9p
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 9:35 am
So there, Johnny Boy! Try to rebut that study!!!
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 8:28 pm
I guess you’re saying I have to read it. I’ll try again tomorrow.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 4:34 am
Other than Kate who can read this academic gobbledegook with a straight face? One cannot parody this style; the real thing overwhelms any attempt at imitation.
And what does it say? It says a woman prevented from killing a child before birth is more likely to abuse that child after birth. Duh!
Does that mean we should make it easier for her to kill? You know, to help the kid avoid later abuse? Now we’re back to #4 on Chuck’s four absurd pro-killing arguments.
As I’ve said often here: no matter how absurd the pro-legal-child-killing argument is, bet that it will resurface.
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 11:42 am
From USA Today, May 2012
Where are the doctors?
By Marcia Angell and Michael Greene
Women’s reproductive rights were hard-won decades ago, and while there have been encroachments and threats to them over the years, they have generally been supported by the law. And women have availed themselves of those rights in large numbers.
Since the choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy was established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 in Roe v. Wade, almost one in three women have had abortions. The legality of contraception was established even earlier, in 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut, and tens of millions of women use some form of artificial contraception.
But there is now an unprecedented and sweeping legal assault on women’s reproductive rights. New legislation is being introduced, and sometimes passed, in state after state that would roll back access to abortion and contraception, mainly by intruding on the relationship between doctor and patient.
Women have reacted strongly, as evidenced by a growing disaffection among female voters with the Republican Party and its candidates; there is now a double-digit “gender gap.” But where are the doctors? They have been strangely silent about this legal assault, even though it directly interferes with medical practice.
A lengthening list
Consider some of the new laws:
•Nine states require doctors to perform ultrasound examinations on women seeking an abortion, and to encourage women to view the images. (This requirement was justified by Alabama Sen. Clay Scofield in his deeply patronizing comment, “This bill just allows them to see the child inside of them, so it’s not just out of sight, out of mind.”) Three of these states also require women to listen to a description of the fetus.
•Counseling is now mandated in 35 states to dissuade women from having abortions.
•Five states require doctors to tell women that a link might exist between abortion and breast cancer, despite the fact that careful studies have not found any such link.
•Similarly, eight states require doctors to tell women that abortion could cause psychological problems, despite evidence to the contrary.
•Arizona is considering a bill that would hold doctors harmless from lawsuits if they intentionally withhold information from a woman, such as the presence of major fetal abnormalities, because they believe the information might cause the woman to seek an abortion.
In short, legislatures are ordering doctors to lie about the medical evidence, the patient’s condition and their own medical judgment.
Even more regressive than obstructing the right to abortion is the recent effort to block access to contraception. The current attempt to turn the clock back nearly a half-century is cloaked in high-flown rhetoric about the rights of employers and insurers to deny coverage for contraception if it violates their conscience (it also saves them money).
But employers and insurers are not doctors, and should not be permitted to decline to pay for a category of medical services that they disapprove of. Appealing to conscience does not change the fact that employers and insurers, regardless of their own beliefs, do not belong in decisions about what constitutes good medical care.
Legislators vs. physicians
The unspoken assumption by state legislators seems to be that doctors will, of course, acquiesce with these new laws, that they are simply neutral agents who will comply with whatever the state orders. Physicians, however, have ethical commitments to patients that they cannot and should not be required by state law to set aside.
Prominent among them is the responsibility to place the welfare of their patients above all other considerations. In light of this, requiring doctors to perform procedures that are not medically indicated, or to provide false information about medical evidence, doesn’t just violate women’s rights. It also leaves doctors with an untenable dilemma: Violate state law, or betray their professional obligations to patients.
Physicians, both as individuals and as a profession, should stand with their patients. They should make it clear that they will not perform procedures, such as ultrasound examinations, unless they are medically indicated and desired by their patients. And they should refuse to provide inaccurate information about the consequences of abortion, or to follow any other prepared script in counseling their patients, particularly when it involves treating women like children.
Such acts of civil disobedience by individual doctors should be only the starting point. The profession as a whole, as represented by its professional organizations, needs to become involved, so that physicians are not left to fend for themselves.
It is time for the American Medical Association and, particularly, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to take a public position on behalf of the patients they are pledged to serve, and to support their members in doing so.
Marcia Angell, MD, is senior lecturer in social medicine at Harvard Medical School and a former editor in chief of The New England Journal of Medicine.
Michael Greene, MD, is professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School and chief of obstetrics at Massachusetts General Hospital.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 4:38 am
LDM, what the heck are you trying to say!
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 4:51 am
Oops, this should come after #6.
This should be here:
Everyone wants to make child killing rare, even Clinton and Obama, our greatest killers, right? So what do we learn from all the above? We learn that in 1965 we made it legal to kill our youngest kids, the embryos. Eight years later we made it legal to kill the older guys, the fetuses. If the obvious connection between the two escapes you, realize that your religion comes from Hell.
If BO gets reelected, we will soon make it legal to kill the older kids yet, the infants.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:15 pm
If Romney gets elected no one will have a choice to even get birth control so their will be so many unwanted pregnancies there will be even Mre abortions you moron.
LikeLike
June 26, 2012 at 5:06 pm
stoopit
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 1:07 pm
well in every notion, John still had yet answered any question i presented- with any dignity- Thus, we have to take him with a grain of salt.
i would like to comment on the fact that, this entirely sums up how you can have cause back your law. if you could get a representative to talk at colleges people would listen.
Thank you for finally giving light to the hate, people like john, bring to the streets, good one Fem!
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 8:30 pm
Smitty, what the heck are you trying to say!
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 10:26 am
Agreed that Dunkle is incomprehensible.
More importantly the uneducated average religous fanatic morons that work at the Crisis Pregnancy Center Mills should not be disseminating medical advice.
I would be for people that do this on a routine basis be open to the same quandaries of litigation that an ObGyn must endure when dispensing advice to the very same questions.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 11:30 am
Asi, how you talk: “More importantly the uneducated average religious fanatic morons that work at the Crisis Pregnancy Center Mills should not be disseminating medical advice.”
I know lots of these folks, I even hold prayer vigils at the home of one of them, Jen Boulanger, and I would never call them morons. Also, I don’t think they’re very religious. But goodness sake, give them a break, most of them don’t ever realize they’re like the people who ran Auschwitz in the earlier Holocaust.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 12:11 pm
I love how these anti abortion fanatics reveal how crazy they truly are by their very own writing, Dunkle Style!
Thank you Dunkle for being a Dunkle, you help galvanize support for women’s rights and harm your cause everything you comment.
Please keep up the good work.
You even are abhorrent to fairly conservative members of your community!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm
I love how these pro abortion fanatics reveal how crazy they truly are by their very own writing, Jenny Style!
Thank you Jenny for being a Jenny, you help galvanize support for young people’s rights and harm your cause by your every comment.
Please keep up the good work.
You even are abhorrent to fairly reactionary members of your community!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:47 pm
Again!!
This is a riot!
This idiot cannot do anything except be a disabled Parrot!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:28 pm
Again!!
This is a riot!
This idiot cannot do anything except be a disabled Parrot!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:18 pm
You are right. I consider myself a person that does not believe in abortion. People like Dunkle create great harm to the Pro Life movement everyday because they make us all look like we are crazy nutballs, when in reality the Dunkles are just a tiny minority of MisFit Pro Lifers. They should move to Chile!
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 10:31 am
Dunkle has been Slam Dunkled again by Fem!
Fem’s powerful statements ride over the illiterate retorts of The Dunkle every single time!
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 11:31 am
“The Dunkle” — is that like “The Donald”?
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 12:12 pm
It appears very clear to all that are literate what Curtis is stating.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Is that why you don’t understand it, Jen?
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 5:40 am
“Dunkle” you only wish that you could have the $$ and intelligence that “The Donald”…the only thing ya’ll have in common is that he says some pretty “stupid things some times”…you say some “really stupid things ALL the times”!!!
“Dunkle” really I am beginning to think that “someone” in your “band of Idiots” is paying you for “each word you write” just to clutter up the space!! Because all this repeating everything that everybody says is getting old!!
I think you need to be warned that “YOUR FORM OF SPAMMING IS STILL SPAMMING” and “WILL NOT BE TOLLERATED”!!!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 6:01 am
“Is” that “a” threat, “LDM”? “Are” you “saying” that I “may” not show someone “how” stupid “her” remark is? Are “you” saying I have to “allow” the stupidities to “slide” by “if I” want to “avoid” getting erased”?”
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 8:24 am
I agree, this guy is a SPAMer, as I look at this page now. Blogs are not good places for SPAMers, and he is a typical SPAMer.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 8:25 am
If he cannot write something original I vote to kick SPAMers of any site I visit.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:05 pm
I think you need to be warned that ‘YOUR FORM OF SPAMMING IS STILL SPAMMING’ and WILL NOT BE TOLLERATED’. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:29 pm
No,
I said The Dunkle because I do not believe you are real.
No living real Human Being is a stupid as the Fake Avatar Dunkle.
I think your a fake Avatar to make Pro Lifers just look stupid. It’s obvious, just admit it so people can have real dialogue.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 1:30 pm
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 5:27 am
Curtis….you are very funny!! Keep chiming in!!! Sometimes this “most serious” subject can use a little “humor” it…
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 8:30 am
I didn’t get the Slam Dunkled Phrase before.
Now that I see how much this person interrupts intelligent conversation I recommend anyone running this site to kick off the spammers. Makes the BLOG a better site and just easier to read.
If someone is not smart enough to do more than copy and paste a nearly identical reply to a comment I’d say goodbye to them.
By definition they contribute nothing and just waste a lot of time by readers, and they only prove how dumb The SPAMer is.
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 1:54 pm
A most excellent proposal! I hope state legislatures enact it.
LikeLike
June 7, 2012 at 8:31 pm
Chuckles! You’re back! And I didn’t realize you could read the unreadable!
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 1:35 pm
As much as this is a bit of a joke because it would violate free speech in many respects, it would be appropriate to have crisis clinics or pregnancy programs refrain from practicing medicine. It’s impossible to stop the loonies outside abortion clinics. Of course, who in their right mind would believe anyone who stands around screaming, wearing bizarre signs of grotesque images or holding signs with threatening messages? To think that people believe they have any impact on stopping abortion with that kind of behavior illustrates the depth of their delusions.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 3:22 pm
Underneath it all, Kate you have such naivete. If we had no impact on stopping abortion, you would love us because we would be promoting your agendum — the continued legal killing of young people. You would not waste another ounce of energy doing what we are doing even better than you can do.
Don’t you realize that the more you scream, the more we realize we’re on the right path? (I have little naivete but lots of stupidity. Otherwise, why would I tell my enemy what’s effective and what’s not. But I just can’t help it; I’m welded to the classroom.)
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 3:42 am
You know what they say…”Be careful what you wish for”!! A law like that tacked on to some of these “anti-abortion laws” so called…”have an u/s save a baby laws”…or wait for 24…48…72 hrs after receiving…state mandated info on what they think your “baby” is trying to tell you in your womb!!”!!
I think that if a legislator with a little sense could get something like that tacked on to some of this crazy legislation and it would pass!! How could they dispute it?? I would love to see someone try it!!!
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 10:28 am
There should be legislation to get rid of the Anti Abortion Gauntlet Protest Mills as well. It is just pure old fashion abuse to women. It should not be tolerated.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 1:40 pm
In their version of reality, the anti abortion vermin are just doing what they believe is compassionate—meaning screaming about the horrors of what the abortion-minded women are about to do is compassionate. But of course, they have trouble telling reality from fantasy or truth from fiction. Then again, they simply don’t care about women. They just fetishize the fetuses….
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 2:15 pm
Those Vermin are sick, and they need to be treated by executive branch of government properly.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 3:03 pm
Treated to dinner?
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 3:20 pm
Another example of a stupid Dunkle-a-Tron Automaton reply that does not further conversation.
He basically has the cognition of a knee jerk reflex in my opinion . . .
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 5:33 pm
K, cognition does not reside in the knee.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Dunkle it appears that you are not familiar with the high degree of processing that goes on the spinal cord level, yet still has numerous fascicles, afferant, and efferent, running up and down the cord to several areas including the PreFrontal Neo Cortex, as well as the Somatosensory Cortex. Before you comment on things could you educate yourself the slightest bit? You make yourself foolish with all you illiterate remarks.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Yeah, but that don’t stop me.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:46 pm
Agreed Dunkle,
Your lack of any real knowledge has never stopped your wildly pathetic erroneous beliefs.
The sign of a true ignoramus. One who does not take the time to learn fact and makes comments, then when fact is revealed their pathetic Dunklish Ego disallows them from having intelligent conversation.
Dunkle, why be such an illiterate person when you could try and actually do something positive. Your immortal soul is in grave danger by this behavior!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:30 pm
Agreed K,
Your lack of any real knowledge has never stopped your wildly pathetic erroneous beliefs.
The sign of a true ignoramus. One who does not take the time to learn fact and makes comments, then when fact is revealed their pathetic Karlish Ego disallows them from having intelligent conversation.
K, why be such an illiterate person when you could try and actually do something positive. Your immortal soul is in grave danger by this behavior!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:56 pm
The Dunkle fake Avatar Slam Dunkled Again(!) by the Powerful words of fact and intelligence.
Get rid of this fake morononic Avatar. No real human is that stupid. It’s obvious!
The Avatar is obviously a dumb poorly written computer program as it only repeats back what a person writes.
The Bear Jamboree Automatons ( from the 70’s!) at Disney World have more intelligence built into their programming!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Yo John , name the time and the place.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:52 pm
The Vermin are sick freaks, outliers in the regular behaviour of truly compassionate humans.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 2:57 pm
If all of you would be put into one room what do you imagine would happen? Perhaps we will start with the kindergarden crowd. To see some real heroes go to see the movie For Greater Glory and take note. I don’t think you would even agree to the thought of being together and trying to interact for the common good. You are all wimps, as you will find out from the movie.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 3:12 pm
Despite enough good intentions to pave a four-lane highway, the ardently sincere but dramatically unfocused For Greater Glory plays like a multipart miniseries that has been hacked down to feature length.
Some of the funding came from the Knights of Columbus, and help on marketing came from ARC Entertainment, which also helped out with marketing for the Sarah Palin documentary, “The Undefeated,” and Emilio Estevez’s heartfelt meditation on Catholic duty, “The Way.”
In other words, an educational film for Catholics…..
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 5:35 pm
Willy, Willy, believe me, I try. I can’t even get them to talk to me on a public sidewalk. A room? forget it.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 3:20 pm
For those unfamiliar with the latest propaganda tool of the far right, read this excerpt:
“I describe Gorostieta as a Mexican William Wallace,” Dennis Rice, CEO of Visio Entertainment, told me, referring to the medieval Scottish patriot portrayed by Mel Gibson in Braveheart. It was late on a Thursday night in May, and Rice had called me from a taxi on his way back from the Waldorf-Astoria in New York. He had just spoken at the annual black-tie gala hosted by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the conservative legal organization that last year filed the first lawsuit against the Obama administration’s ruling requiring that religious organizations provide coverage of contraceptives in their health insurance plans.
“Freedom is not just for writers and for politicians and for fancy documents!”
New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, who led the Catholic Church’s public campaign against the ruling, had given the invocation at the dinner, and Rice had shown a clip from For Greater Glory, a historical drama about Gorostieta and the Cristeros, which he is marketing. For Greater Glory is among the most expensive movies ever produced in Mexico and was the second-highest grossing movie at the Mexican box office in late April. But, in the United States, where For Greater Glory opens on June 1, the hope among conservative Catholic leaders is that the film will deliver a different kind of performance–as a weapon for winning one of this political season’s great culture-war skirmishes.
THE CONNECTION may not be immediately obvious to non-churchgoers. But, for anyone familiar with the air of aggrieved persecution that has permeated the Church, as well as right-leaning Protestant institutions, since President Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued its ruling on contraception, the allegorical value of a Western-style epic about rugged God- and gun-loving individualists doing battle with an overreaching federal government is hard to miss. “Freedom is not just for writers and for politicians and for fancy documents!” Gorostieta, played by Andy Garcia, shouts to his men in the scene that Rice showed the Becket Fund crowd. “Freedom is our home, our wives, our children, our faith! Freedom is our lives–and we will defend it or die trying!” Watching the scene at a recent press screening of the movie, I half-expected to see the Cristeros ride off to battle in sweater vests.
After speaking about the administration’s contraception ruling at a mass at St. Matthew’s Cathedral in Washington in April, Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl urged parishioners to go see For Greater Glory. Los Angeles Archbishop José G–mez has praised the film’s “message of the importance of religious freedom [that] has particular resonance for us today.” Organizers of the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast invited the film’s producer to Washington in April and screened For Greater Glory for an audience of Catholic thought-leaders. “I don’t think the Catholic bishops are going to let the opportunity pass,” Ed Morrissey, senior editor at the popular conservative blog Hot Air and an early champion of the film, told me. “I think they’re looking at this as a great springboard for discussing the HHS mandate.”
Two Thumbs Up. By: HOMANS, CHARLES, New Republic, 00286583, 6/7/2012, Vol. 243, Issue
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 2:16 pm
!!! Excellent comment !!!
Such a pleasure to read such intelligence.
The anti Abortion Pro Lifers do not appear to have a single articulate person in their group! Why is there such a disparity between the lack of intelligence in Anti Abortion People compared to the vastly superior intelligence of people that are Pro Choice and are humanitarians and support women’s rights?
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:20 pm
!!! Stupid comment !!!
Such a borer to read such drek.
The anti Life Pro Deathers do not appear to have a single articulate person in their group! Why is there such a disparity between the lack of intelligence in Anti Life People compared to the vastly superior intelligence of people that are Pro Life and are humanitarians and support women’s rights?
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:38 pm
Here it is again.
As it was commented before the Dunkle has been SLAM DUNKLED by more intelligent people.
This pathetic excuse for a human being cannot come up with an original thought!
Shows again, there is no reason or logic behind his statements. I do not believe a person this dumb is even real.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:32 pm
Here it is again.
As it was commented before the Rita has been SLAMMED by more intelligent people.
This pathetic excuse for a human being cannot come up with an original thought!
Shows again, there is no reason or logic behind hER statements. I do not believe a person this dumb is even real.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:41 pm
It is well established that the average IQ of people that represent opinions like Dunkled are significantly lower than the average person with compassion.
Nobel Prize winners are very secular in general, and it is very rare for someone like a Dunkle type to get an award of distinction.
The Dunkleds of the world will be dying of old age soon, and the world will be a better place.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:34 pm
It is well established that the average IQ of people that represent opinions like rt are significantly lower than the average person with compassion.
Intelligent people are very religious in general, and it is very rare for someone like an Art type to think straight.
The Arties of the world will be dying of old age soon, and the world will be a better place.
LikeLike
February 9, 2014 at 4:09 am
Kudos! What a neat way of thnnkiig about it.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 9:17 am
aborticentrism, Karl…. but you’ve already been told about it.
The interesting thing about this particular issue is that they are claiming it’s a matter of “freedom of religion.” It’s not. It would be a matter of religious liberty if the government forced members of any particular religion to use birth control. Since a church isn’t a person, compelling one to provide its employees with the option of using birth control is not religious discrimination. However, slipping a huge condom over the steeple of St. Patrick’s or the Mormon Tabernacle might be.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 4:25 pm
Editing footage from observations of protesters. Here’s a juicy tidbit, thanks to the wisdom of Republican, Catholic Joyce, for teenage women looking for a part time job:
Start a government agency to pay girls who are pregnant to take care of themselves and give the kid up for adoption. Essentially, get paid $10, 000 for part time job (on the government dole) so rich white folks can adopt your kid.
That’s right, folks. Essentially, Joyce is suggesting “using” these teenage girls as brood mares. Sounds a bit sick and twisted to me.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 5:40 pm
See below.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 4:41 pm
Oh, gosh, it just gets better. More creepy comments from Joyce, as I watch footage. Joyce is haranguing some young client about why she is so flip about killing her baby then moves on to say:
“Do you know how many couples can’t have children. I know three people who have asked me to help them find a baby.”
So, I guess that’s what Joyce was really doing when pretending to be a sidewalk counselor (aka anti abortion terrorist) on the streets outside the clinic… she was trying to broker deals for babies. Isn’t that illegal?
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 5:39 pm
You’re in worse shape than I thought, Kate. Someone is trying to help someone else stay alive, and you’re ridiculing her and threatening to call the cops. That’s ugly.
LikeLike
June 8, 2012 at 6:50 pm
Is Kate for real. Must be someone uneducated in the political arena. Lots of words, no emotion, no caring, just ramblings. Have you seen the movie Kate or are you just listening to the comments of others. Have a look see for yourself. Don’t know if you are Catholic but that shouldn’t matter, it is the passion these people had to protect their religious freedom.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 1:05 am
we have been super-duper busy this week, so i was unable to respond sooner, but this was a very powerful entry, kate!
i have a question though about this proposal.
it is specifically about the part declaring it illegal for protesters to hold signs that state “abortion stops a beating heart”.
i agree that cpc’s and protesters should be forbidden from giving medically inaccurate information.
but depending on the circumstances and the procedure, that is accurate.
of course if the woman has a medication abortion before the heart starts beating, or if the baby has died in utero ( or wherever it has implanted if we are discussing an ectopic pregnancy) then the abortion does not stop a beating heart, but otherwise, it does.
would the proposal target those with that sign because they are not licensed health care workers, or would it do so in order to have a sort of bargaining chip at the table?
i find the politics surrounding abortion very confusing, but i guess it is what it is. and i have zero impact on the laws in this country anyway.
is there something i am not seeing because of my anti-abortion bias?
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 4:32 am
No, you’re seeing it pretty accurately this time, Rog.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Rogelio, it was suggested by Todd Stave and I just took it a bit further to see people’s reactions. Of course, CPCs should be barred from giving any medicial advice and from receiving any funds from any government coffers.
The loons on the street have free speech rights including holding signs that both speak the truth (abortion stops a beating heart) and lies (all women regret their abortion, abortion causes breast cancer, etc). We can’t stop them nor should be for fear of risking our our free speech.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 3:38 pm
Damn, Rog, I wish I had your ability. You can turn Kate on the spot!
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Can we, the pro-choicers, say with absolute certainty that abortion does NOT cause breast cancer? Has that been proven? I hear where you are coming from Kate, but I’m having a problem agreeing on regulating their words if a woman knowingly enters that facility. Are we gonna start prosecuting people for lying in general?
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 6:16 am
I do not believe that any medical researcher or practitioner would ever say with absolute certainty that abortion does not cause breast cancer. I didn’t realize we were talking in absolute terms. More to the point, is that the human body is far more complex than to use machine logic of yes/no, up/down, go/no go processes. Further, it is from the likes of the National Institutes of Health, the CDC and the American Cancer Society that I draw my comments about the ABC myth.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 11:58 am
while i wonder about that link, or lack thereof, because i was reading about a choicer doctor named dr janet daling, whose research showed a link, although she cannot get published, hence no peer reviews, i really hope that the results of current research is correct and that no such link exists.
but if, for the sake of argument, such a link did exist, i don’t really think it would make much difference.
a woman who is seeking an abortion isn’t looking 20 years into the future. she is dealing with the unplanned pregnancy and with any obstacles she is facing in her life NOW.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 6:41 am
Good question “Roggie”!! Good answer Kate!! There can be good interaction between both sides (as seen here)…Just treat each other with respect!!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:01 pm
i have always found kate to automatically show respect to others, regardless of their views, opposing or otherwise, until their behavior indicates that her respect should be withdrawn.
i think that is second nature to her. i wish it were for everyone.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 11:50 am
ahhh, ok.
i was simply wondering about the rationale behind a proposal to bar people from holding that one particular sign.
personally, i would like to see cpc’s focus on the actual services they can provide for women facing unplanned pregnancies. than using efforts that deceive them “for their own good”.
i have found that cpc’s that are forthright offer a far wider range of services and are more effective at preventing abortions because
it is simply more effective to be womancentric than aborticentric.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 5:37 pm
I agree with Rogie. Abortion DOES stop a beating heart at some point.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:24 pm
When does it stop a beating heart exactly?
As a Physiologist I suggest that some pulsating smooth muscle cells are not a heart. They are not even differentiated from the muscular propagation smooth muscle cells of the rectum . . .
What are you people talking about not knowing anything about anything?
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 4:01 pm
>>>When does it stop a beating heart exactly?<<<
um… er… when the zefb dies as a result of the process.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Karl, Tho pro-life people have nothing to prove. Silence is the best answer. Why should pro-lifers enter the arena when we know who wins in the end.
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Willie! Because it’s fun’!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 8:46 am
William,
Your claim that the pro life people have nothing to prove is disingenuous. They want to prove that their singularly narrow code of morality is the only standard of morality and to do that they do not remain silent.
LikeLike
February 8, 2014 at 3:24 pm
As Charlie Sheen says, this article is “WIN!INGN”
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 9:09 am
William, they are compelled by their aborticentrism; they are members of a dysfunctional self-help program, trying to address very deep needs, but in an extremely unavailing way.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:26 pm
Mr. William, could you translate what you said into articulate English please? Otherwise it is impossible to respond.
Thank you and Regards,
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Mr. Sir William,
Have the Catholics ever apologized for murdering the innocent lives of millions of Muslims worshipers of the One True God? They need to do that before they have any respect for an answer to silly questions.
Have the Catholics ever apologized to suppressing science that we as Followers of the True and only Faith of Islam do not harm?
Have the Catholics ever apologized to all the innocent blood they spilled during the Crusades, The hundreds of years of Inquisitions, the Witch Burnings, the rampant modern Pedophilia in this deviant cult of Abraham?
When the Catholics apologize, only then may they have the forgiveness of the One True God and be led down the only path to righteousness. . .
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 9:34 pm
yes, yes, and yes
LikeLike
June 9, 2012 at 8:10 pm
Curtailing free speech is unconstitutional, BUT insisting on professional standards is desirable. We have societies that confer legitimacy on all sorts of practitioners, from hair stylists to brain surgeons.
Rather than making unprofessional advice-giving a felony, it would be far better to insist that ALL professional entities offering prenatal services be staffed by licensed professionals, which is required of medical offices across the country. State and local Boards of Health would know what is needed for a practitioner to offer sound advice and proper resources.
What’s fair for Planned Parenthood would be fair for Care Net, etc. . . Kate has only to tweak her proposal a tad.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 5:55 am
Make a proposal that is, in fact, outrageous, but frame it in the name of health standards or for the good of women and it sounds like a modest proposal. Jonathan Swift wrote A Modest Proposal suggesting the poor Irish eat their young for the benefit of society. Swift wrote his essay lampooning the government for their ridiculous social engineering. It was in this satirical vein, that I wrote my modest proposal. The GOP’s War on Women demands at the very least a counterproposal of equal outrageousness as the ones they make while practicing medicine without a license.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 9:07 am
Compared to yours, then, mine is reasonable to the point of implementation….
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 7:11 am
The one very important point that needs to be made is that the Pro-Choice community “as a whole” gives out accurate information to women about birth control and the side effects, pregnancy and abortions.
Women come to us for those reasons!! We do NOTstand on sidewalks,,,to give advice that was NOT asked for…If they choose NOT to use our services we do NOT call them,,,or send sstuff to their homes!!
We do NOT “lie” to women…they know that they are pregnant when they make an appointment for an abortion..and that when they have the abortion they will NOT be!!
Once again in all the years I was the Director of Charleston Womens Medical Clinic “Roggie” is the only “pro-life” person that I know that shows compassion to a pregnant women and actually gives of himself by giving shelter to her in her time of need with a hand to hold!! I believe he would offer that whether she terminated her pregnancy or carried it to term!! But then he quietly prayed at clinics he didn’t yell and call her a “slut” a “whore” or all the other colofull language that the “anti-choice terrorist” use…notice the difference between “pro-life” and “anti-choice terrorist”!?!?!
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 8:42 am
Agree with prochoice community and truth claims….
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 3:49 pm
oh lorraine…. i love you, my sister, my friend.
and of course you are correct in your beliefs that any aid i would offer would be given regardless of the choice she makes.
i met my last roommate AFTER she had an abortion when she approached me, as she was leaving the clinic.
both you and kate were instrumental and so willing to give me advice when i asked for it, in trying to help this young woman and her three children.
through the years, there have been other women who have been roomies with me AFTER an abortion.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 9:50 am
A woman brought you into this world, so you have no right to disrespect one. Tupac Shakur
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:29 pm
Hi!
Thanks Fem ( I know I do not know much about Tupac) but thank you for revealing to me a positive quote from they guy. My uninformed impressions appear to be wrong about Tupac.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:14 pm
Entering into another venue why should Catholics be forced to advance such health care policies as unlimited contraception, even abortion inducing drugs, sterilization, and abortion as if there were no moral content to such actions? Is it really necessary to deprive believing Catholics of their rights of conscience? Some even go so far as to say that priests, bishops and believing Catholics are at war against women. Have any of you fallen for this LIE?
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 12:24 pm
William, there is a difference between a person and an institution. Compelling an employer to allow employees to decide for themselves whether or not they want to use a product or service is different from compelling a person to make that decision. And that’s just the tip of the situation. You also have to consider other factors such as what is in the best interests of society (e.g., mandatory flood or fire insurance, etc.).
You cannot deprive an institution of its “right of conscience,” because it doesn’t have one.
As a recovering Catholic, I assure you that quite a few priests, bishops and believing Catholics are indeed at war against women.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:13 pm
Yes, you are correct Sir Dunkle. Especially the Jews, they Killed our lower Prophet Jesus, and they have Horns, and drink the blood of the abortion. Do the Catholics do that too? We think the infidel Catholics do as you say Sir John. I am searching the Holy True Word of God to find the Answer Right now.
But you are right! The Catholics murdered so many innocents of Islam, they will forever be forsaken in the one true God and his major Prophet M …
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 3:58 pm
hmmmmm
your words belie the true teachings of islam.
i greatly fear that you will taste the wrath of allah subhannah a tuallah
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 5:49 pm
I do notted understand?
Do you deny the Catholics did all these horrible things?
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 9:42 pm
of course i don’t deny the atrocities that were committed by catholics!
why that would be like denying that the holocaust occurred!
what i was referring to was you calling people of the book, “infidels”.
for that reason, i suggest that you are not truly muslim, but rather a troll.
if you did indeed identify as muslim, then you are a kafir who is guilty of shirk.
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 1:55 pm
In response to Rogelio’s query about Dr. Janet Daling:
She has published many remarkable articles. In fact, she’s been lead author of many publications. But her work does not focus solely on abortion….it’s breast cancer….
Dr. Janet Daling
Professor Emeritus, Epidemiology
http://depts.washington.edu/epidem/fac/facBio.shtml?Daling_Janet
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Thank you for that scholarly reply . . .
With great admirance …
LikeLike
June 10, 2012 at 2:17 pm
(blush) thanks.
LikeLike