Some of my detractors know that I teach in a private, liberal arts college. From comments collected over the years, it’s apparent that they worry about the negative influence I might have over young lives. In their uninformed perspective, they seem to imagine that I push a pro-abortion agenda (whatever that might mean) in every course I teach. In reality, I don’t worry about such an influence because my teaching aligns with our school’s mission statement. In particular, my goal in teaching is to help students become independent critical thinkers who are intellectually agile, who value vigorous and open-minded debate in a civil context and who challenge intellectual orthodoxy. Somehow, abortion simply does not figure into this goal.
So, in a course that examines mass media, students choose a controversial topic to analyze how it is framed in the media. This aim of this semester-long project is to provide them with the fundamentals of thinking like a scholar—to equip them with the resources and habits of mind to reflect critically about the impact of our media-saturated culture on issues that are often hotly debated in the media. The topics range from gun control to foreign policy, from funding the Head Start program to gay marriage, from immigration to the fiscal cliff and so on. The assignment is not to form opinions about a topic or to be persuasive in their end-of-semester presentation. It is to examine closely how media present the debates. For example, much of the gun control debates in contemporary media frame the issue as a second amendment issue versus and gun violence issue. As always with controversial topics, the media frequently does a poor job at providing much beyond the superficial sound bytes. The abortion controversy is no different. The media use humpty dumpty terms like prolife versus prochoice when in fact the controversy is much deeper.
This controversial issue project affords students the opportunity to look beyond the superficial by developing skills to research and evaluate resources and to see who and what is powering the ubiquitous media. The project also helps expand the awareness of how controversial issues are framed in the media and how these issues impact their thinking, their sense of identity as a citizen and their participation as a citizen in the global community.
In my classroom, students who believe abortion is murder, as some do, hear students who believe that abortion is a woman’s right. Both views are protected. My job is not to persuade them to choose sides. Education is not about competition or proselytizing, or, at least, it shouldn’t be. It’s about teaching them to think critically, to evaluate the validity of arguments, to recognize loaded language, and to identity the power inherent in any mediated text.
But if my sole concern was to push an abortion agenda, a fantasy of some of my detractors, I’d probably begin with video
clips of protesters and reviews of prolife web sites. I’d invite them to consider the definitions of compassion, respect and civility. I would encourage them to think critically about ethics, religion and violence. I would address the rights of women vs the rights of men. With this imaginary abortion agenda, my courses would definitely change. In organizational communication, my abortion agenda would require students to study the mercenary aspects of organizations like Priests for Life, Operation Rescue or Life Dynamics. We’d compare the celebrity machinery of Hollywood to the celebrity machinery of the anti abortion industry, including the actors and the fans. In Documentary Film-Social Justice, I would definitely focus on reproductive rights from a global perspective including family planning, abortion doulas, the women who die from illegal abortions and the impact of religious fundamentalism around the globe. I could go on and on. But I won’t. Abortion is a topic that is critically important for women. But I won’t let it interfere in my teaching. I’ll guide students to think for themselves and leave the proselytizing to the Taliban Club members wherever they live and work–whether it’s in the U.S. or Afghanistan.
Related articles
- Irish PM dismisses Pope’s criticism of change in abortion laws (thehindu.com)
- Poll: Most of Ireland Favors Wider Abortion Access (abcnews.go.com)

January 10, 2013 at 1:56 pm
I, personally am exhausted of reading Anti abortionists uneducated opinions about Abortion.
They usually don’t even seem to have an 8th grade knowledge of biology . . .
Why are they consistently the dumbest people I meet?
Seriously, if I meet a person and I think they are dumb, before I know their stance on abortion, I can almost guess what it is going to be.
Anyone else have this experience?
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 3:03 pm
Totally agree with Jennifer. Not only are they ignorant about biology and completely misogynistic, their grammar is typically awful.
My question to any of them would be, “Do you believe adult women are qualified to make decisions about their own bodies and lives?”
I know that I am, and I know that I will continue to push for wider access to abortion for any women who desire it.
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 3:39 pm
It is ever so easy to create false assumptions about pro-choice people “hating babies”, especially when you can get to make up your own facts. Anti-choice protesters routinely describe an abortion clinic as a “killing mill” and a place where unwilling women are dragged in, struggling, by men. They cannot accept that women who are faced with unplanned and unwanted pregnancies should not be forced to continue them, and that these women have thought long and hard before making that decision. Instead, they fantasize that magically, if abortion is outlawed and a woman is forced to continue a pregnancy, she will suddenly have a change of heart and become a responsible, loving parent. The entertainment media loves that story, the swift, dramatic change of heart. Who would have thought, as early as 10 years ago, that there would be a television series called “16 and Pregnant?” The media’s goal is to make money, and that stuff evidently makes a lot of it, or it wouldn’t be on the air. Add to that the media’s exploiting abortion as a hot-button issue, and you can generate enough controversy to sell some airtime! Respecting women’s rights just doesn’t sell papers, and we are a nation that is about selling. Whether it is weapons, violent games and movies, toxic mortgages, regardless of the harm to people or our environment, we as a nation have moved towards regarding the accumulation of money as the highest sign of capability. So, keep training those kids to think critically, it’s the only thing that may save us.
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 5:49 pm
Think about all the CPC Mills and the harm they create!
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 4:24 pm
Would that the above garbage were true. Alas, it’s definitely not what we (pro-lifers) heard from two of your former students a few semesters ago who came to us for advice. Very sweet kids by the way.
In the matter of abortion – when one is as entrenched with the Evil One as you are that the mantra ‘abortion on demand’ is practically your bumper sticker, one can deduce quite certainly that you bring this bias and mindset of misguided compassion with you into the classroom. Abortion matters run through your veins and make you tick. I dare say it would be an impossibility for you to be impartial, and/or even tolerant to your pro-life students because they are in stark contrast and opposition to who you are and what you believe.
You see, Kate, you are not as impartial as you think. Luckily for these students who approached us they figured it out on their own and basically regurgitated back to you what they knew you wanted to hear (and got a good grade)! You don’t fool anyone – least of all God.
‘Think critically – as long as it’s like me that is,’ says the ever tolerant Kate Ranieri of Muhlenberg College.
Oh and by the way don’t kid yourself regarding the founders of Muhlenberg College. Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, a patriarch of the Lutheran Church, is probably rolling over in his grave because you are so diametrically opposed to his Lutheran beliefs.
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 4:57 pm
There are those of us who know the benefits of critical thinking in education, in our daily lives and in our social justice activism. Then there are those, such as Just saying, who continue to throw themselves against the wall of logic so stubbornly.
We’ll just have to be satisfied that, like gravity, Karma will have its way with you, JS.
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 5:51 pm
The irony is that “pro lifers” rarely do anything to promote life. They really are just Anti Abortion. They should be called by their proper name.
What about this are you incapable of understanding Just Saying?
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 5:53 pm
JS, who is the Evil One?
The Nazi Pope?
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:08 am
Satan
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:57 am
What deity do you worship JS?
What Scripture supports the beliefs?
Why has Satan taken control of the Republican Party? One would think the Evangelical Brain could keep Satan out of their bodies.
Why are so many Catholic Pedophile Priests possessed by The Satan?
LikeLike
January 12, 2013 at 1:25 pm
Apparently JS can’t answer a question, as usual with Anti’s.
In general they are sooo dumb.
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 7:45 pm
Tra il dire e il fare c’ e’ di mezzo il mare
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 7:37 pm
Simply amazing, the nonsense and outright fabrications that JS keeps pulling from hirs nether regions…..
LikeLike
January 10, 2013 at 8:51 pm
The Religious Right: Intolerance. Hatred. Bigotry. Hypocrisy. Anger.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 5:22 am
Ah, at last a worthy successor to John Dungel! Just Saying: I love you! You may tousle my hair any time you want….
So, let’s get started: I’d like to know whether your concern for fetal life matches your concern for real children; that is, what do you do for unwanted children that matches your level of concern for unwanted fetuses?
Are you a public school classroom volunteer, a Big Sister or Big Brother, a guardian ad litem for children in court, a foster parent of a child you don’t want to raise, an adoptive parent?
How much do you financially sacrifice for children? Divide your total household income by the number of household members. Is it indicative of great financial sacrifice ($8,000 or less) for the care of human life? Do you personally spend 8 percent of your gross annual income directly for the betterment of a child whose parents will not or cannot care for it themselves? Do you foster parent without accepting the usual stipend the state provides? How many hours a year do you spend working one-on-one unpaid with those children? Is it at least 600? And are these children you expend such money and effort on children who are not of your social class, your social circle or your church?
Finally, just how great is the gap between what you’ve felt and done for “unborn humans” who are threatened by the “Great Evil” and what you’ve felt and done for real children? Chances are, it’s huge, but you’re the one who has to make the call.
See, the problem is that for almost ALL so-called pro-lifers, that huge gap exists. The question nobody really looks into is, “Why?” Why do they get their knickers in a twist over pregnancy when the neighborhood kids attend a school that is falling apart, or their state has 28,000 children who are unadopted? My thesis (never tested by any of Kate’s students, sadly) is that your focus on abortion has everything to do with a problem you have and nothing to do with actually rescuing a fetus.
I look forward to hearing a response.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 6:03 am
Great questions, Charles. I have to say that I’ve never taught any class that addresses abortion. So you can speculate about any of my students but it doesn’t read true. First, I don’t teach any classes that use methodologies about testing. I’m more drawn to qualitative methods such as case study, ethnography and grounded theory approaches. Second, your questions are more sociological and, as such, would be better suited to either a sociology class or, in my department, to a course on communication and family–media representations of family and health care, education, etc. Third, your thesis comes closer to the truth about these protesters–that they have huge holes in their lives. That hole drives them to stuff religion, proselytizing, fetal fetishization and heaps of anger inside to feel better. But the hole demands more. It consumes one’s life—it’s called clinical psychological pathology, I’m betting.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:11 am
The empty hole in your heart is lacking one crucial element Kate – GOD.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:58 am
Which God do you keep referring to JS?
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 9:04 am
I’m for separation of church and hate.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:42 pm
Thanks for the explanation, Kate. I feel it’s a comfort to a prophet crying in the wilderness.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 9:44 am
Charles, one additional thought about these folks who proclaim a concern for strangers’ fetuses….(drawn from the psychology and social science databases) is that they their moralization is a response to self-threat, to their brand. Further, they search for an interpretation of the evidence that best supports the conclusion they hope to draw, much as a lawyer spins courtroom evidence to present the strongest case. And we know how they spin evidence, anecdotes and hearsay to suit their sense of self.
Reason is but a carriage being pulled by the wild horses of the passions, but the passions must be curbed by a disciplined application of reason. When people are in a good emotional state, they are more rational. Hence, because they are not in a good emotional state, witness the theatrical diatribes on this blog, they lack the ability to be rational.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:21 pm
Charles, one additional thought about these folks who proclaim a concern for women in crisis pregnancies…(drawn from psychology and social science databases as well) is that their lack of morals is a direct result of a Godless society. Further, they search for an interpretation of the evidence that best supports the conclusion they hope to draw, much as Kate spins baby killing statistics of women who say they don’t regret their abortions publicly while privately it’s quite another matter. And we all know how she spins evidence, anecdotes and hearsay to suit her sense of self.
Because she is not in a moral state or is she a God fearing woman, she lacks the ability to be rational. Pray for her.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 10:47 pm
JS, if you’re intellectually incapable of creating your own material and feel desperate enough to resort to parroting someone else’s work, at least ensure it makes sense. Your tower of babel is shamelessly ignorant. And you don’t even recognize it. Take the grammatically flawed “Because she is not in a moral state or is she a God fearing woman, she lacks the ability to be rational” as an example. Is this what we can expect from Christians? Ignorance?
LikeLike
January 12, 2013 at 1:26 pm
JS has no intelligent reply . . .
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:53 pm
Just Saying, you will have to be more specific about America being a Godless society. It would help a bit if you can point out an example of a nation-state which is in its own way a Godly society. (Unfortunately, the only ones I can think of are Muslim, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar.)
I see a commonality between you and bloggingfem about selectively choosing evidence, and I have seen her cite examples of what she is talking about. Apart from your challenge of the anecdotal sort which you cited, can you provide me with a refutation of something solidly based on data, such as the Freakonomics study which shows that the reduction in juvenile and young adult crime starting in the mid-Eighties was traceable to the legalization of abortion? To do so would strengthen your argument considerably.
And of course, my own particular bete noire is the gap between what self-proclaimed “pro-lifers” claim about their care for human life and what they actually do for it. If you can provide statistics showing that they are raising more children they don’t want to raise than the average so-called “pro-choice” couple, again it would strengthen your claims.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 9:04 pm
The rest is silence…..
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 6:12 am
Good morning to all the new respondents and welcome,
Thanks for your insightful comments. As you can read for yourself, we have a respondent, hiding behind the name Just Saying, who loves to hit and run. As you can also read, JS has not responded to any of your questions. And as is evident, the undies of JS are in a big wad over things I write, stuff I believe and don’t believe.
The comment that I am “entrenched with the Evil One” hopefully provided a bit of theater for you all, as it’s as obvious as the nose of one’s face that Just Saying is entrenched with this evil one, just obsessed with me. Just saying. . .
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:15 am
Your being entrenched with the Evil One (Satan) won’t make for good theater at your judgment. Just trying to give you a heads up before you heads down!!
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 9:01 am
Again JS, what scripture do you rely on for your facts?
You don’t make any sense unless you reveal which God you worship. Do you worship the Islamic God? The Hindu Gods? The God of Cthulhu? It gets confusing, so many people worship different God’s – then they refer to their Own God as if we are supposed to know which of the many Gods they are talking about . . .
Help us out and be specific . . . Please?
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 9:01 am
And it is because of people like you I quit Christianity altogether. I simply cannot fathom myself becoming one of you, full of self righteousness, bigotry and utter stupidity.
And thanks for reminding myself how lucky I am not to be a Christian and not to be like you.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:10 pm
Don’t blame me because you quit Christianity. Remember God hasn’t quit on you.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 10:48 pm
No worries, JS. My faith is not about blame. I leave all that guilt and blame to the droids within the Christian faith.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 9:03 am
So you don’t deny your obsession with the entrenched evil one you call Kate? Jeeebus, where do you get these comic book characters like “The Evil One”?
Stop using Jesus as an excuse for being a narrow minded, bigoted arse.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:57 pm
Horace, humans are perhaps the only species aware of their inevitable mortality. Psychologist Ernest Becker, among others, points out that in order to avoid being paralyzed by that knowledge, we develop strategies to comfort ourselves. One of them is religion. Not to say it’s an invalid form of philosophy, but Just Saying exemplifies the lengths to which a person terrified by death will go in order to repress a fear of personal extinction.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 10:56 pm
Charles,
According to Kenneth Burke, humans are the creator of the negative. Cats don’t recognize what’s not there. Horses don’t worry about the fact that their life on the race track will accelerate their death. Nope, humans wallow in the negative, about what they don’t have, about what isn’t….it’s all about the negative for far too many humans.
LikeLike
January 12, 2013 at 5:39 am
Ah! Thanks!
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 3:32 pm
In New Bern, NC, a restaurant owner handed a letter to a lesbian couple, after he accepted their money for their meal. The story about the letter, condemning the fact that they were lesbians, reminds me of other busy bodies here on this site who condemn folks. Unfortunately for the restaurant owner, his actions hit him in the pocketbook. The holy rollers on this blog and outside abortion clinics have community-wide disapproval of their actions
but news of their behavior never reaches their own home communities. Not yet, anyway.
http://www.wcti12.com/news/Lesbian-couple-Restaurant-owner-hands-them-letter-condemning-homosexuality/-/13530444/18086232/-/n0mfvd/-/index.html
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 8:11 pm
Horrors.
LikeLike
January 11, 2013 at 10:52 pm
Thanks, JS. You are so right to say horrors. It’s a travesty to think that this sort of behavior continues in this day and age. So, tell me, what is your thought about this event in New Bern, beyond your brief comment?
LikeLike
January 12, 2013 at 7:05 am
Good morning women’s reproductive rights advocates! I want to share a blog called Words of Choice that has listing of Roe celebrations for 2013.
http://wordsofchoice.blogspot.com/#!/2013/01/happy-decision-day-to-roe-40-year-events.html
LikeLike
January 12, 2013 at 6:22 pm
Drk8 you say that the primary goal of the course that you teach is to teach your students to “think critically” and that “In [your] classroom, students who believe abortion is murder . . . hear students who believe that abortion is a woman’s right. Both views are protected.” In your classroom if you can objectively respect the views on both sides of the abortion issue, and then protect the expression of those views, that is fabulous and I truly congratulate you and applaud you. I don’t for a second doubt the sincerity of your belief that abortion is a reproductive right which should be protected and your belief that you handle the subject objectively in your class. However, I do doubt that you are able to realize, in fact, objectivity on this particular subject. I doubt that both views on abortion are protected. That doubt is based in your current and past advocacy for abortion. You have been a strident proponent of abortion. you are VERY CLOSE to this issue – so close that you may display some subjectivism in you class. For example, even in your post above you called your detractors “uninformed.” Well, some may be, some may not be. The one thing we know for certain that is that your detractors “disagree” with your position on abortion. That disagreement doesn’t make them “uninformed” or “proselytizing . . .Taliban Club members.” I do believe that you believe that you are providing an objective environment in your classroom where students can learn to think critically, to weigh all sided and can come to informed decisions. You may want to give a second thought as to whether abortion is an appropriate subject to be critically analyzed and discussed in your class, since you are a strong advocate on that issue.
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 6:43 am
Dear emcalter,
I guess you missed the post where I said that “I’ve never taught any class that addresses abortion.” It’s perhaps instructive, for the sake of clarity, for you to understand that the course in question examines how the media frame controversial issues. In the process of researching their chosen topics, differences of opinions among the students arise. Those differences are given space and respect. So, if a student chooses the topic of abortion, which two students did this past fall semester, they examine the ways that the media framed the political campaigning around the issue of abortion and rape. While there is plenty of space for opinion in class discussions, the written assignments require that they analyze media framing. It’s not an assignment for propaganda or proselytizing or opinion. Taken verbatim from the document of the semester-long assignment, the document, in part, reads “you are tasked with analyzing more closely an issue for how it connects to course texts, how it is framed in mainstream media, including the competing viewpoints.” And while I find it so curious, if not comical, that you (or is it you all?) obsess about my teaching, I’m not inclined to feed your interests about my pedagogical approaches to critical thinking any further.
I will say that there is absolutely nothing problematic with upholding beliefs about the rights of women, about reproductive rights including abortion and birth control and the rights to free speech.
I do not work without a guiding morality nor without a point of view. In other words, my work is value-laden, fraught with ethical dilemmas as well as richness in the potentiality for those who choose to engage. And for your information, I am not alone amongst faculty who share my position, not here in PA or elsewhere. So, if you and your ilk are inclined to continue a witchhunt for faculty who oppose your beliefs, know that you have a big task ahead of you. Or you can simply ‘live & love’
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 10:19 pm
DrK8 – ok now I don’t doubt that you cannot handle the topic of abortion in your class in a civil rational manner in which both points of view are respected and expressed. I am pretty darn sure you can’t handle this subject in an objective fashion – as you demonstrated in your response to my post. I am not part of an “ilk” and I m not on a witch-hunt. Like I said in my post I do not doubt the sincerity of your beliefs that abortion is a reproductive right. Let me be ABUNDANTLY CLEAR – I actually RESPECT your beliefs. I merely DISAGREE with them. In fact my disagreement is quite strong. However I don’t think you are part of an “ilk”. I don’t try and place you in a cubbie hole. So please do not do so to me. The abortion issue is much bigger than “us” and “them”. The way I figure it – you are my sister or brother and we disagree and we might even debate but I do not wish to insult or injure you in any way. My point was I don’t think you can be objective on this one issue.
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 12:17 pm
Live and Love, are you saying that the issue of abortion should not be discussed in a COLLEGE classroom?
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 10:09 pm
Pat Richards: No, Not at all, Abortion should be discussed. By all means – and the discussion should be rational and civil. I was merely doubting that DrK8 could handle this particular subject in an objective fashion. As is evident by DrK8’s emotional response to my post – DrK8 has demonstrated that DrK8 cannot discuss abortion in rational civil manner.
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 12:37 pm
Congratulations to ACN Clinic of the Day!
Presidential Women’s Center, West Palm Beach, FL
Presidential Women’s Center offers non-surgical abortion (RU-486) and surgical abortions in a private, safe abortion clinic in West Palm Beach, Florida.”
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 5:18 pm
To JS and other BS,
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for and I haven’t heard you construct and defend a strong argument. And until you do, your opinion is a belief that is indefensible.
The problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter beliefs that should have been abandoned. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful. And this attitude feeds, I suggest, into the false equivalence between experts and non-experts that is an increasingly pernicious feature of our public discourse on abortion and everything else.
Plato distinguished between opinion or common belief (doxa) and certain knowledge, and that’s still a workable distinction today: unlike “1+1=2” or “there are no square circles,” an opinion has a degree of subjectivity and uncertainty to it. But “opinion” ranges from tastes or preferences, through views about questions that concern most people such as prudence or politics, to views grounded in technical expertise, such as legal or scientific opinions. Case in point is the anti abortion opinion about a link between abortion and breast cancer. For those who purport to be entitled to their anti abortion opinions, remember that there’s evidence and there’s bulldust.
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 9:25 pm
Yay, Parker!
I’d never thought of it that way before.
LikeLike
January 13, 2013 at 11:34 pm
Live&Love says in #10: ” My point was I don’t think you can be objective on this one issue.”
Live&Love, are there any areas of the abortion issue on which someone can be objective? For instance, coming to agreement on the data on the adult outcomes of unwanted children? The data on the difference between the self-proclaimed “pro-lifer’s” concern for fetal life and concern for children. Or the data on the connection between the legalization of abortion and the precipitous decline of juvenile and young adult crime twenty years later?
LikeLike
January 14, 2013 at 12:37 pm
A discussion about facts is generally beneficially. When discussing factual data – one needs to keep in mind that data can be manipulated – but yes by all means discuss the data. I wish to remove name-calling from the dialogue. I would love to move away from the “us” vs. “them” mentaility and have a “WE” discussion. Where we come to understand what we feel, what we believe and why we feel and why we believe the things that we believe. There will be differences in feelings and beliefs among us – but we need to have the discussion with respect and non-viloence.
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 9:51 am
You think a discussion of facts might be beneficial. Well, define the word *fact* and in doing so, I would argue, you can find the source of much disagreement between those who agree that abortion is a blessing and those who believe it is a curse/sin/whatever.
LikeLike
February 8, 2014 at 8:09 am
A perfect reply! Thanks for taking the treublo.
LikeLike
January 14, 2013 at 6:07 am
Here’s a video from Betty Bowers about God and abortion
LikeLike
January 14, 2013 at 6:39 am
Another, more holistic approach to abortion from our friend and colleague Tracy Weitz
“To say abortion is an individual woman’s business absolves us of our obligation to create a more just world. A focus on privacy cannot address the stigma of abortion. It cannot reshape our economic policies so that all people can parent with dignity. It cannot get us what we want. The future demands that we do more than simply shift away from polarizing language and instead begin to transform our culture, institutions, and policies so that all people can make the sexual and reproductive decisions they want to achieve the lives they deserve.”
LikeLike
January 15, 2013 at 8:28 pm
I like this site very much. Your topics really make sense. I appreciate your post.
LikeLike
January 16, 2013 at 10:50 am
Key in your search engine the following terms to read an exceptional piece on a wordpress blog about abortion as a blessing.
awaypoint abortion as a sacred value
LikeLike
January 16, 2013 at 1:40 pm
Prolifers make the egregious mistake of comparing the Holocaust to abortion. Read this for the real, true American Holocaust….
“When it’s all over, I’ll still be an Indian”
The powerful and hard-hitting documentary, American Holocaust, is quite possibly the only film that reveals the link between the Nazi holocaust, which claimed at least 6 million Jews, and the American Holocaust which claimed, according to conservative estimates, 19 million Indigenous People.
It is seldom noted anywhere in fact, be it in textbooks or on the internet, that Hitler studied America’s “Indian policy”, and used it as a model for what he termed “the final solution.”
Found on Permaculture Media Blog
LikeLike
January 17, 2013 at 9:32 am
Good stuff, Parker, thanks for sharing!
LikeLike