Roe V Wade

Archived Posts from this Category

November 6, 2010

Abortion Rights and the Next Congress

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Oval Office, history, morning after pill, Politics, Roe V Wade, Supreme Court, The Future of Legal Abortion, Vote | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[47] Comments 

Election Results for the House of Representatives

Okay, now that I’ve recovered from my Election night (and, by the way, birthday night) hangover, let’s try to figure out where the hell we are.

By now, everyone knows that the House of Representatives went to the Dark Side by a wide margin.  And while The Force still controls the U.S. Senate, it is by a razor thin margin.  But the one thing you must remember is that there are a number of Senate Democrats who vote pro-life.  I have yet to see an analysis by the pro-choice groups, but although the Democrats still run the Senate, the pro-life forces are in pretty decent shape over there as well.  In the House, they are firmly in control.

So, what this means is that the House of Representatives will pass any pro-life piece of legislation that is offered.  They will no doubt come up with all sorts of ways to make abortion less accessible.  We will probably see some kind of national 24 hour waiting period, so-called “informed consent” measures requiring women to view photos of the fetus, etc.  Anything that is proposed will pass.  However, the Republican Party is not dumb enough to go all the way and try to pass a bill or constitutional amendment banning abortion.  That ain’t gonna happen folks.  That’s because there’s no guarantee that they have the necessary two-thirds vote in both houses.  And the Republicans are thinking that if they’re gonna lose, why ask their folks to stick their neck out on this controversial issue and piss off a bunch of possible pro-choice independents when the measure is unlikely to become law?

So, the House will pass some things and then send it to the Senate.  Pro-life forces basically need 60 votes to pass something in the Senate and those votes over there will be close.  But, let’s say they do pass a 24 hour waiting period.  Fortunately, sitting down at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue (at least for now) is pro-choice President Barack Obama.  If any pro-life bill comes to his desk he’ll veto it and that will be the end of it.

So, as far as attacks on the accessibility of abortion, there will be a lot of talk.  You will get a lot of fundraisingletters from both sides asking you to contribute money to help their lobbyists fight the good fight but, at the end of the day, ain’t nothing terrible gonna happen.

House of Representatives

There is one real problem, however, in the U.S. Senate.  And that has to do with the situation when/if Obama gets to nominate another justice to the U.S. Supreme Court.   That’s where it will get very interesting.  Without having seen the exact numbers, I can virtually guarantee you that the pro-choice forces do not have the necessary sixty votes to confirm an obviously pro-choice justice.  And while great deference is often given to the President’s nominee, if Obama nominates a clear pro-choice justice, there will be a major battle.  That’s because the Court right now favors Roe v Wade by a 6-3 margin.  If they can pick up another pro-life vote, then it becomes a 5-4 margin in favor of abortion rights.  So, come nomination time the pro-lifers will be smelling blood.

So, the bottom line is that Obama will have to nominate some “stealth” candidate who has no clear position on abortion.  It will be a crapshoot.  And as history shows, other presidents have found themselves in a similar situation where they nominated someone hoping they would follow the President’s ideology only to find them on the other side of the fence.  This could happen to Obama.

Stay tuned folks.

 

October 29, 2010

An Irresponsible Documentary

Posted by Pat Richards under Aborticentrism, Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Documentary, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Christian Murder, Church, Dr. Tiller, Late Term Abortion, Late Term Abortions, Liberal, Lies, Roe V Wade, Scott Roeder, Supreme Court | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[36] Comments 

Doctor Tiller

The other night I watched a documentary entitled “The Assassination of Doctor Tiller.”   The film followed the events leading up to the brutal murder of Doctor Tiller, a physician in Wichita who performed late term abortions.

I hated the film.

No, let me clarify that.  I think it was dangerous and irresponsible.

Let me remind everyone that I knew George Tiller very well.  We were good friends, spent a lot of time together.  We had informative conversations about his controversial work.  He was an amazing, dedicated man.  And while I appreciated how this documentary discussed to some extent his life and his work, I am very concerned that the film could incite more violence.

Of course, the mainstream pro-choice groups all think it was a wonderful film in that it documented how abortion providers have been stalked, bombed, threatened and, yes, killed.  They say it’s important for the public to know about the “domestic terrorism” that took place or is still taking place around the country.

Now, I am not naïve.  I understand there are anti-abortion protestors who continue to stand in front of clinics and harass women.  I know that some of the more unstable ones call clinics and threaten the staff.  Those with too much time on their hands will follow the doctors to and from the clinic.  Basically, a lot of stuff is still going on and abortion providers cannot let their guard down.

But the fact is that, compared to the 1980’s and 1990’s, when anti-abortion groups like Operation Rescue could get hundreds of people to block the front door of an abortion clinic at a moment’s notice,  these days things are relatively quiet.  There are a few reasons for this trend.  Years ago, the pro-choice movement (with my assistance) passed federal laws that protected clinics and women entering clinics.  Meanwhile, the number of protestors on a general scale is smaller as the anti-abortion leadership has become older and has moved on to other issues (issues that might be able to raise them more money).  Then there is a very cooperative Administration that is making sure the FBI and BATF do their jobs.  Surely, things are not perfect by any means.  For example, there are still people like Bill O’Reilly who continue to preach hatred (and who was particularly focused on “Tiller the Killer.”)  But my point is that things are much quieter compared to a decade or two ago when the shit was hitting the fan everywhere.

The film, meanwhile, focused on the heyday of Operation Rescue, particularly that time when they surrounded George’s clinic for a whole month as part of their “Summer of Mercy.”  And I guess it’s good to have a history lesson lest we forget.  But what really bothered me – and concerns me – is that the film spent a lot of time focusing on Scott Roeder, the man who assassinated Doctor Tiller.   In my opinion, that was totally irresponsible.

I am not a criminologist but I do know that history is replete with cases where someone killed

Scott Roeder

someone after being “inspired” by some other violent event.  There’s always a copy-cat killing after a sensational murder.  Just remember the rash of school shootings that occurred after Columbine.  The fact is that there are idiots out there, total losers, who are looking to depart from this world with a large bang.  They’re thinking how they’ve got nothing to lose so they decide they might as well take out 20 people at a local McDonalds and get their name on the front page of all the newspapers in the country.  These people are violent extensions of all of those folks who feel a need to go on Doctor Phil or Oprah and talk about their sex change operation or their fight against obesity.  We are a nation of narcissists and sometimes those narcissists take their need for attention a little too far.

So, imagine there is this guy sitting in his dark bedroom, which is located in the basement of his parent’s house.  He is 30 years old, he just lost his job and his wife and two kids are living in another state.  He spends all day playing video games or watching reruns of “Cops.”  He’s got nothing to look forward to.  And he’s got several guns in the closet.

Then, while channel surfing, he runs across “The Assassination of Doctor Tiller.”  He is mesmerized at the films of Scott Roeder, the confessed killer of Doctor Tiller.  He watches his wedding ceremony films and learns how Roeder lost his job soon thereafter and his wife threatened to leave him.  He listens to the ominous background music while he watches grainy films of Roeder standing quietly in front of an abortion clinic.  The film then jumps to Roeder testifying during his trial about how he started thinking of killing Doctor Tiller.  He is impressed with Roeder’s cool demeanor on the witness stand, how he admitted right up front that he did it, that he put the gun to Tiller’s head and fired.  He finds himself getting excited at all of the attention Roeder is getting and how Roeder is cool, even relieved, as he testifies.  He does not sweat a lick, even though he is going to jail for the rest of his life.  Fucking A  – he is the man!

Then maybe this guy in this dark basement starts to get his own ideas…

Protestors

It happens every day.  It’s the same pattern.  And that’s what concerns me about this documentary.  The pro-choice movement has basically done all it can to protect themselves.  They have passed every law imaginable.  But they cannot stop a lone madman from taking the law into his own hands.  If a person wants to kill and give up his own life, you’re not going to stop him.

And what bothered me about this film is that it may have given some wacko out there another idea.

 

October 27, 2010

Shame on the New York Times

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion Rights, Liberal, Politics, Roe V Wade, The Future of Legal Abortion, Vote | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[42] Comments 

A short rant, if I may.

I read with interest the October 24 edition of “Evening Hours” in the New York Times which

NYT Evening Hour

reported on events around the city benefiting the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian, the Korean American Community Foundation, the Frick Collection, the Norman Mailer Center and the International Fine Art and Antique Dealers.  Lots of pictures of people in evening gowns and tuxedos.

Then, in the middle of the page, there was mention of a “dinner” at the Pierre hotel where people were celebrating “50 years of women’s advances since the birth control pill.”  There was no mention of who was having the party.

Was not that dinner hosted by a particular organization?  Or did a bunch of folks, including Cybill Shepard, just happen to be in the neighborhood and decided to party for the night?

I know exactly what is going on here.  Even the liberal New York Times felt they shouldn’t stir things up by mentioning that the party was hosted by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League.

Shame on you, New York Times…

 

April 6, 2010

Regretting One’s Abortion

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rights, Pregnancy Test, ProLife, Psychology, Roe V Wade | Tags: , |
[5] Comments 

A few years ago, the pro-life movement started collecting stories from women who were allegedly emotionally “harmed” after having an abortion.   This national effort was ultimately dubbed the “Silent No More” campaign. 

The pro-life movement organized press conferences, held rallies in front of the Supreme Court, and initiated letter writing campaigns.  They signed up celebrities like Jennifer O’Neill (“Summer of ‘42”) who spoke of their personal pain.  They testified on Capitol Hill.  I assume there’s a website.

The purpose of this effort, of course, is to discourage women from having abortions.  While the women who had been “harmed” by their abortion were able to exercise their right to an abortion at the time, their message now is that they made a mistake and that, if you had an abortion today, you would be emotionally scarred for the rest of your life.  

I have no doubt that some women who have had abortions ultimately come to regret their decision and, yes, I’ll go so far to cede that some may have been emotionally “scarred” from the experience.  I feel for those women.  But what the pro-life movement never says is that numerous, objective studies over the years have shown that most women had a feeling of “relief” after having an abortion and they have moved on with their life.  Many of those women ultimately had families.   

Actually, I find it interesting when some of these women say they regret their abortions.  I picture a woman who has two kids, who is doing well financially, who starts thinking about what could have been.   Of course, it’s so easy to think that she could have had another child by now, that if she hadn’t gone to the clinic that day things might have been different.  But don’t we always reflect on the past?   I don’t know about you, but practically every day I think “what if?”   What if I had gone to that other college and hadn’t met my spouse?   What if I had forced my kid to take golf lessons much earlier in his life like Tiger?  What if I never started eating fatty foods?  I mean, the second guessing could go on forever.

But now these women are saying let’s take away the right to abortion which, uh, yeah, I exercised at the time.  How convenient and how selfish is that?

I grow weary when the pro-life movement makes broad generalizations about abortion, especially when it comes to an issue that they may not know a lot about.  Because they find some women who suddenly regret their abortions and are willing to talk about it, they generalize and say that all women will regret their abortions.   I will add, however, that the pro-choice side generalizes as well.  For example, I really wish they would stop saying that abortion is the “most difficult decision a woman will ever make in their life.”   Gimme a break, will ya?   It’s just not always that difficult for some women.

We love to paint things with a broad brush because, well, we can.  I mean, how many people who opposed the healthcare bill really understood what was in it?  On the other hand, how many people who supported the darn bill actually knew what was in it?  

We just don’t have enough time to study the issues, so we generalize.   But, I’m sorry, abortion is different.  It is a very personal, private matter and both sides should stop painting it with a broad brush.

 

April 5, 2010

Who Does More to Prevent Abortions?

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Law, Abortion Pill, Catholic, Dr. Tiller, morning after pill, Obama, Pat Richards, Pregnancy Test, ProLife, Psychology, Roe V Wade, RU486, Sanger, Supreme Court, Vote | Tags: , , , , , |
[43] Comments 

President Obama has indicated that he wants to help the pro-choice and pro-life movement find “common ground” on the issue of abortion.  There are lots of cynics out there, from pro-lifers who say they could never agree with a “baby killer” to ardent pro-choicers who distrust anyone who would take away the constitutional right to abortion.  Still, the President has persisted and several months ago his office sponsored a telephone conference call with representatives from both sides of the issue.  Most participants say they felt that not much was accomplished.

Let me suggest that, if there is one thing that both sides of the debate have in common, it is they want to reduce the number of abortions.  And to do that you need to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.   You know the phrase:  “every child a wanted child.”

What is the pro-life movement doing to reduce the number of abortions?

First of all, many of them, despite the position of their church, do support birth control.    Some of them are reasonable and enlightened enough to understand that people will have sex and if they do they should use birth control.   Then there are others, who are a little more dogmatic who say abstinence is the only way – the “Just Say No” crowd.  A nice thought, but not very realistic.  And, they say, if you have sex and become pregnant, well you’re out of luck.  You’re having a baby.  Get the shower announcements printed.

Of course, there are the pro-lifers who believe that they stop abortions by “educating” women as they are entering an abortion facility.   If they can, they stop the women tell them “the truth about abortion.”   If they cannot stop the women, they’ll scream at them at the top of their lungs.  I’ve talked to pro-lifers about these tactics and they swear that they have “saved” a lot of “babies.”   They tell me about the woman they talked to who suddenly learned exactly what abortion is.  And they tell me she went home instead.  Of course, they do not realize that that woman probably called a different clinic the next day and had an abortion elsewhere.  But that is beside the point.

The general pro-choice movement certainly supports sex education, birth control, etc. which does reduce the number of pregnancies in this country.  But I want to talk about the clinics that are listed on the website (www.abortion.com) that sponsors this blog.   That website is a directory of clinics that perform abortions and offers other reproductive health services.  And I would suggest that they do more to stop abortions than the average pro-life activist.

What most people don’t realize is that when a woman enters one of these clinics to have an abortion, the first thing that happens after filling out the paperwork is a counselor sits down with her and discusses the circumstances that led to her getting pregnant.  During that conversation, the counselor will discover whether or not the woman was on birth control.  I once attended a session and, when asked what kind of birth control she was on, the woman responded “I use Lady’s  Luck.”    I asked her what she meant and she replied “I just hope I get lucky and don’t get pregnant.”

The counselor will then spend time trying to determine what form of birth control is best for that woman:  the depo-provera shot, birth control pills, an IUD.  If it is determined that birth control pills are the best option, the counselor will usually give the woman a free, three month supply of pills.  For many women, pills are very expensive so the clinic tries to make it as easy as possible to get that woman used to taking those pills.   Once these discussions are complete, the woman will then have her abortion.

When a woman comes to an abortion clinic, the staff is ready to help but they also never want to see her again.   The goal is to put the woman on a regimen that will hopefully prevent any more unintended or unwanted pregnancies.   Despite the accusations of the pro-life movement, abortion providers are not anxious to see a woman several times for an abortion.  While they would never judge them and will facilitate their desires, they also hope that the woman (and man) take less risks in the future.

I suggest that the pro-life movement does practically nothing to stop abortions.  Their response is just don’t have one.  On the other hand, the real work of preventing abortions is taking place right inside that very clinic.

 

January 22, 2010

Roe v Wade Anniversary – Let’s Celebrate our Freedoms!

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Law, Abortion Rights, Bush, Roe V Wade | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |
[10] Comments 

A few miles from where I sit, the anti-abortion crowd is assembling (in the rain) near the White House, getting ready for their annual March on Washington.  What I have never understood is how the anti-abortion movement made this “their” day?

They march to the Supreme Court, dragging little kids with them, making them holding disgusting signs.  They give vicious, anti-women speeches, they excoriate doctors who perform abortions, they swamp the Capitol Hill offices demanding that Roe v Wade be overturned.

Why are we not marching on the Capitol?   Why are we not celebrating this Supreme Court decision that liberated millions of women?  Why are we not barraging the media with stories of women who were saved by abortion?   Why are we not publicly praising this decision that gave women control over their own bodies? Why are we not thanking the doctors and staff that work at the clinics?

The anti-abortion movement has successfully stigmatized abortion, which has lead to an erosion of support for the pro-choice position.  Meanwhile, even the pro-choice movement tends to shy away from the word “abortion.”   Those of us who support abortion rights have to speak up about the benefits of the availability of this procedure.   We need to celebrate how abortion has actually saved hundreds and thousands of lives of women who, were it not for Roe v Wade, might be dead by a self-induced abortion. We do not need to be afraid of the word “abortion.”

Meanwhile, women who have had abortions need to speak up and talk about their experiences.   I trust women to be able to make this decision on their own, unlike anti-abortion zealots who want to control women, who want to force them to raise children.  But women whose lives were saved by abortion need to relate that experience and not hide in the shadows.   Their silence is deafening.  Over one million women a year receive an abortion.   Why are we still under attack?

We also should be celebrating the election of a pro-choice President. Barack Obama won a landslide, generation changing election while not shying away from his support for abortion rights.  We should be in front of the White House today, holding signs saying “Thank you, Mr. President.”

There will be battles ahead.   There will no doubt be vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court that need to be filled.  Yet, while I am heartened that we have a pro-choice President, we must not let our guard down.  We must INSIST that the next appointments reflect the President’s support for abortion rights.

Today’s anniversary should be a wake up call to the pro-choice movement.  We need to take back Roe v Wade day, it is our day of liberation!   It’s too late to do anything on this particular day but let’s vow to reclaim this anniversary as a celebration of our essential freedoms!

 

January 22, 2010

Rejoice! Today is a day of Liberty!

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Rights, ProLife, Roe V Wade, Supreme Court, Vote | Tags: , , , , |
[10] Comments 

Abortion

The Liberty we recognize today, stands so immensely tall, proud, and strong, it’s message of glowing hope and freedom travels through the minds of the world, and resonates, drawing individuals who suffer under tyranny to our shores in our third century still.  We are the flagship of freedom in a sea of that tyranny.

An example for the world.  Women shall not be subjugated in this country.  They will not tolerate it.  Neither will men, as we all are determined that no one regardless of their attributes be denied the inalienable rights so well articulated.

Our Republic evolves and continue to create the most optimal society. We prove over time, people can govern themselves. There is no other option.

Liberty in her Statuesque form stands literally in concrete and steel, on the impervious massive pedestal of righteousness. She stands as a metaphor, and as an image, enduring, and indelible, unknown to few, celebrated worldwide.

Roe v Wade is in the company of the most important decisions that the Supreme Court has accurately ruled upon.  The decision reaches back through the historical events that were the maturation of our Republic. Now, again, a precedent etched in the Granite of Freedom, IT WILL ENDURE.  It is in our self governance, our own implicit contract with society, the binding of freedom, that we are in comfort that the flaw has been fixed, and shall stand. We will continue this effort on all fronts, tearing down any barriers as we find them.

The sentinels of freedom shall never be unaware of attack. The guard never let down.  There is still work to be done, and it shall. We are a Union of self governance that proves to the world that it can be done. There is no other choice, except the choice to abide by the laws we construct for ourselves.   And we take comfort in that knowledge.

Rejoice on this blessed day the Anniversary of Roe v Wade.  As few in this world have what we do, as we routinely do not even notice as we journey though our lives in freedom.  Freedom to control our own bodies, and make our own decisions.

The old notions will die off as they have over the generations, and freedom will endure and the people of our nation will cradle in that joyous comfort.

 

« Previous Page