October 24, 2010

The Party

Posted by Pat Richards under Aborticentrism, Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Doctors that Have Lost Their Medical License, Abortion Documentary, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Oval Office, Abortion Rights, Abortion Violence, Cannot Support Opinion, Church, Community Development Block Grant, Congressman, Late Term Abortion, Late Term Abortions, Vote | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[68] Comments 

On January 22, 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court handed down the Roe v Wade decision which declared that the constitutional right to privacy extended to abortion.  Supporters of legal abortion rejoiced, although some did object to the fact that the decision allowed some restrictions on the procedure.  At the same time, the pro-life movement declared it as a dark day in history.

Over the next few years, however, the pro-life movement actually took “possession” of January 22.  They started organizing large rallies on that day across the country and ultimately launched the annual “March for Life” where hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers came to Washington, D.C. to express their opposition to legal abortion.  The pro-choice movement could only watch feebly from the sidelines.

Abortion

In late 1997, as a staff person for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, it dawned on me that the next January 22nd would be the 25th anniversary of Roe v Wade.  I started to think about how we could “take back” that day.  Remember that this was a time when abortion providers were under attack.  The bullets were flying, clinics were being bombed, every day was another battle in the constant war.  Ironically, I came up with the idea of actually having a party, a celebration commemorating the work of the doctors and staff at the abortion clinics.  Indeed, for years at the annual NCAP conference, we always had a dinner dance to help us wind down after a full day of seminars and lectures.

But I started wondering why we shouldn’t go a step further?  I had been in Washington, D.C. long enough to know that other organizations, from the realtors to the bankers, regularly had formal, black tie parties.  Why couldn’t we do the same thing?  Why not have a real “grown up” party?

At first, some of our members were reluctant.  It was almost as if it would be a sacrilege for the doctors and staff to “dress up.”  But within a few weeks, the idea spread like wildfire.   On email and over the telephone, people started talking about what they were going to wear, how they needed to rent a tuxedo and other logistical issues.  While they were still nervous opening up their car doors, I could tell they were even more nervous about how they were going to do their hair that night.

To make the evening extra special, I booked the main ballroom at the famous Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.  I then spent weeks looking for a live band and finally found one that I liked.   Everything was in place.

Since they were in town anyway, we offered our members a series of lectures during the day.  They sat through speeches on “head and heart” counseling and how to advertise on the Internet, but it was clear that no one was concentrating.   They were thinking of their “coming out” party.  Finally, the time arrived.  My staff and I got there early and stood at the door greeting folks as they shuffled in.  I was literally taken aback.  I had gotten to know these folks intimately, had talked to them for years about the protestors and the murders, was accustomed to seeing them in their scrubs or casual “clinic wear,” but now they were coming into the room with flowing gowns and jewelry that had been in storage for years.  Instead of bullet proof vests, the male doctors now had shiny tuxedos.  They were different people.  They were finally having fun, getting all “gussied up” as one person put it.  The music, the food and, yes, the booze flowed all night.

A few weeks earlier, I had spoken with a writer for the “Style” section of the Washington Post and she thought it was fascinating that abortion providers would even consider having a party.  I invited her to come and she readily accepted.  The next morning, after a very long night of revelry, our conference attendees had copies of the Post delivered to their hotel rooms and there on the front page was an article entitled “Dinner Break From a Hot Issue.”   The joy of those interviewed jumped from the pages.  Doctors who drove to

Abortion

their clinics with blankets over their heads for security purposes openly talked to the reporter about the great time they were having for that one evening.   Clinic owners spoke candidly about how proud they were of the work they performed.  Directors of clinics talked about the women they served and about whose gown they were wearing.   We had created an alternate world for one magical evening.

Within a few days, everyone was back at their clinics.  Waiting for them were the local protestors, the anonymous phone calls, the nasty unsigned letters and the myriad of issues that come up daily in a medical facility.  But for weeks, they just talked about “the party.”

On that night, we had taken back Roe v Wade.

 

October 11, 2010

Election Day and Abortion – Vote!

Posted by Pat Richards under Aborticentrism, Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion Rights, Supreme Court, Vote | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[130] Comments 

 

Abortion Issue

 

Besides being the day before my birthday, November 2 is Election Day.  If you are concerned about the abortion issue, this is a rather important election.

At this moment, both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives are controlled by the Democratic Party and, for the most part, the Democrats support abortion rights.  Still, the votes in the House and the Senate are often very close because there are a number of Democrats who are pro-life.  We saw the impact of that situation when the Congress considered health care reform and a number of pro-life Democrats who supported the bill forced President Obama to assure them that the new law would not fund abortions.  Desperate for votes, Obama took the extraordinary step of signing an Executive Order confirming that the new law would not pay for abortions.  That satisfied those Democrats, so they voted for the bill.

Since the Democrats are the majority party in both houses, it means that every chairman of every committee is a Democrat.  And it is in the committees where all the action is.

Every year, pro-life Members of Congress introduced legislation that would in one way or another outlaw abortion.  These bills can take different approaches but the bottom line is they want to make abortion illegal again.  When those bills are introduced, they are usually referred to the Judiciary Committees.  The Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is John Conyers, who is pro-choicer.  When he sees these anti-abortion bills, he says thank you very much and proceeds to stuff them in a drawer, basically killing any chance of their being considered.  They are DOA.  The same thing happens in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

Abortion

 

But this November, it is very possible that Democrats in the House will lose a number of seats and the Republicans could actually be in the majority.  If that occurs, come next January, when the new Congress is sworn in, a bill that is introduced to outlaw abortion could very well go to a new Chairman of that committee who would probably be pro-life.  In that case, it is very possible that that chairman could then take steps to move that bill for consideration.  Then the battle will be on.  Yes, President Obama will be there for us to veto any bad bill but the pro-choice forces will have to mobilize, raise money, etc. to fight the bill.

Then there is the U.S. Senate.  When President Obama has to nominate someone for the Supreme Court, the nomination goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is run by pro-choicer Pat Leahy.  The current chairman will do everything he can to assure that Obama’s nomination is granted smooth sailing in the committee and on the floor of the Senate.

But should the Senate fall into the hands of the Republican Party, then you will have probably Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah as chairman and he is very pro-life.  So, a nomination that is sent to his committee will have a much tougher time of it.  Indeed, if the Republicans take over the Senate, there is a good chance that Obama’s pro-choice nominations will be defeated and he’ll have to nominate someone who is “neutral” on the issue of abortion.

So, the bottom line is you need to vote.

You need to do your research, find out who is running and vote for the one who is pro-choice.

You’ve got the power – use it.

 

October 1, 2010

My Friend, Doctor Dendres

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Rights, Vote | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |
[28] Comments 

Abortion

When I joined the National Coalition of Abortion Providers in the early 1990’s, I was excited at the prospect of representing these courageous doctors and clinic staff who put their lives on the line for hundreds of thousands of women.   I was overwhelmed at the thought of representing them on the national scene.

One of my first tasks was to raise money.  After all, you can’t have an organization without money so I started communicating with as many abortion doctors or clinic owners as possible to try to convince them to join our fledgling organization.  I was a little anxious but confident that I could persuade them that they needed someone combing the halls of Congress to protect their unique interests.

To compile a list of potential members, I asked the founders of NCAP who I should contact and the name of one doctor came up several times – Doctor Gary Dendres.  I was told he was important because he was the owner of a large chain of clinics in Florida and New York.  He was a player, a powerful one and we needed him on our team.  I was also told that he never joined anything and preferred to stay under the radar.  He was very much the “mystery man” in the world of abortion clinics.

After weeks of persistent calling, I was finally told that Doctor Dendres would meet with me.  I gulped and jumped on a plane to Tampa.  From the airport I took a taxi to his small corporate office a few miles away.  I was very nervous, didn’t know what to expect and I sat in the waiting room for 45 minutes.   Then, suddenly, there he was, standing right in front of me.

“Hey, are you Pat Richards?” he asked.  Before I could get a word in, he interrupted.  “Well, c’mon in, I don’t have much time.  I have a tennis lesson.”

Abortion

He was nothing like I had imagined. He was about 50 years old, 5 feet 9 inches, a little on the rotund side, a very expressive face and, by the way, a long pony tail.  In true Florida style, he was wearing a bright orange flowered shirt, shorts and sandals.  It was clear he had no use for me and I started thinking about catching an earlier flight out of Tampa.

“So, tell me why you are here again,” escorting me into a very small room.

I was ready with my pitch.  I told him how abortion providers needed a presence on Capitol Hill and before I could detail what I would be doing for the organization, he stopped me.

“Okay, let me tell you something” he said.   “I don’t give a crap if Roe versus Wade is overturned so don’t even go there.”

With a puzzled look on my face I asked “what do you mean?”

“Okay, so if Roe is overturned then the issue is left up to the states, right?  Well, I’ve got clinics in Florida and New York and they’re pretty liberal states.  So, if all of those other backward states outlaw abortions and my two states keep it legal, then all of those women are going to have to come to me.”

It was my first lesson in the business of abortion.  I suddenly needed a new approach to woo him.

From the beginning, I recognized a New York accent.  I inquired where he was from and he said Long Beach.  Since I was from Brooklyn, I thought I’d try to make him more comfortable by talking about my love for the New York Yankees.  At one point, I mentioned that I had been a pretty good ballplayer in my day but I know he didn’t believe me.   Suddenly, he jumped from his seat and said “Crap, I forgot about my tennis lesson!”

He ordered me into his car and we drove out to his club.  He introduced me to Bob, his tennis pro.  It was a typical muggy Florida day, very breezy.  I took a seat and watched the good doctor volleying with his pro.  I was impressed at how light he was on his feet.  I could tell he was an athlete in his day.

“Okay,” he yells at me.  “You say you were a ballplayer, huh?   Well, I’ll make you a deal.  I’m gonna have Bob hit three balls as high in the air as possible.  If you catch all three, I’ll join your organization.”

I was puzzled but, heck, I really had nothing to lose except my pride.  I was very concerned about the wind but I said “okay, you’re on.”

Bob hit the first ball a mile up into the wind and I had to run all over the court, but I caught it.  I then caught the next two balls as well.  Piece of cake.  I think Doctor Dendres was impressed but he didn’t say a word.   He then asked how much it cost to join the organization.  At that point, NCAP had no set fees, we were just trying to collect as much money as possible.  I also had no idea what was a lot of money to these folks.

I gulped and said “$3,000.”  He didn’t say a word.

Abortion

We spent more time together that day.  He entertained me with stories about the “old days” of abortion.  He performed them for years but had stopped to focus on running his clinics.  Like any businessman, he wanted to make money but I learned also that his prices for abortions were not that high and, indeed, his clinics often performed them for free for women in need.

Over the years, we have become very good friends.  Our families know each other, he constantly asks about my kids (he offered them both their first cigar).  He is also one of the few people that I can go to to get a straight answer.  The staff at his clinics love him and most of the directors have been with him for twenty years or more.

Oh, and by the way, a week after catching those three tennis balls we got a check from the good doctor for $3,000.  And over the years, he became a player in our organization.

Here’s looking at you, Gary.

 

September 7, 2010

Don’t Feed the Anti-Abortion Monsters

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Medical, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rights | Tags: , , , , , |
[17] Comments 
ABortion shot of Paul Jennings Hill.

ABortion shot of Paul Jennings Hill.

Years ago, I received a call from Paul Hill as he was sitting on death row in a prison in Florida.  Paul had been sentenced to die in the electric chair for murdering Doctor Baird Britton, an abortion provider in Pensacola.   From the time I first met Paul when we both appeared on “The Donahue Show,” I had struck up a strange relationship with him.  For those of you who don’t remember, Paul was the first person to say that it was “justifiable homicide” to kill a doctor who was about to “kill a baby” via an abortion.

During this conversation, I asked Paul why he had finally decided to pick up a shotgun and murder the doctor (and his bodyguard).   “Well, Ron, I wanted to send the message to others that it was time for them to take up their arms and stop the baby killing…”  As he talked, my head started spinning and, to this day, I don’t remember much about that rather surreal conversation.

The bottom line, however, is that Paul always enjoyed the attention, he enjoyed giving interviews at the drop of a hat, he enjoyed making people feel uncomfortable with his bizarre doctrine, a doctrine that made even most pro-lifers uncomfortable.  Indeed, I once was in Birmingham, Alabama to witness a demonstration by the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue when their leader, Flip Benham, came up to me to ask if I could get any “dirt” on Paul.  Flip was concerned (or perhaps, jealous) that Paul was getting a lot of attention with his “wacky ideas.”

So, the other day I thought of Paul Hill’s desire for attention when I heard the “breaking news” that a gunman was holding several people hostage at the Discovery Channel corporate headquarters in neighboring Maryland.  Eventually, he was killed by the police.

The next day, however, this guy’s face was plastered all over the newspapers, the televisions and the Internet.  He apparently was into some environmental cause and he stormed the building to – you guessed it – bring national attention to his mission.  Over the next few days, there were the inevitable full page stories about him, his family, his website, his reason for taking the hostages.  In other words, he got his much-desired publicity after wrecking havoc for several hours.

It’s the same pattern, over and over again.  Someone does something “spectacular” to bring attention to his cause.  And the media gives them their attention.  Timothy McVeigh, to name one.

Why?

Why publish their names?   Why write articles about the perverted group that they were part of?

How about this one:   what if the media didn’t tell us the person’s name and didn’t tell us about their organization or their cause?  I’m not saying don’t report the incident.  Of course, we need to know something has happened.  But why do I need to know the name of the person?  Why do I need to hear about their wacky cause?   Believe me, we’re gonna forget about them rather quickly anyway.  In fact, here’s a test:   what was the name of the Virginia Tech shooter?

Why put these people on the cover of Time Magazine when that is EXACTLY what they want?  Personally, I don’t give a flying fig that their neighbors thought the killer was “such a quiet boy who was never a problem.”   It’s the same old pattern, time and time again.

Years ago, drunken baseball fans used to run onto the field to get attention.  Then, Major League Baseball stopped showing them when they ran onto the field.  And guess what happened?  The number of such incidents dropped dramatically because those drunken fools didn’t get their attention.

So, the next time a pro-lifer kills another doctor, don’t bother telling me his name, his motivation, the church that he attended.

Don’t feed the monster.

Related Articles
 

August 26, 2010

“Regulating” Abortion Clinics in Virginia – An Opportunity

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Pill, Ken Cuccinelli Abortion | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[8] Comments 
Ken Cuccinelli Abortion

Ken Cuccinelli Abortion

A few days ago, Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli (“the Cooch”), said in a legal opinion that the state’s Board of Health could “regulate” abortion clinics.  In response, the local pro-choice folks claimed that such action could close 17 of the state’s 21 abortion clinics.

The first bit of info that is missing here is that abortion clinics are already subject to a number of regulations on the state, federal and local level.  I mean, after all, they are MEDICAL facilities, aren’t they?  Does the Cooch think that their doctors don’t have licenses, that there is fetus blood all over the floors, that they do not use sterilized instruments?   Has he never heard of OSHA, CLIA, HIPPA and the other acronyms that mean nothing to me but strike fear in the heart of any medical office?

The second thing is:  what makes him think that abortion clinics need more regulations?   Has there suddenly been a series of deaths in the abortion clinics?   Are hundreds of women calling to complain about unsanitary conditions at these facilities?  Of course not.  To the contrary – abortion remains one of the simplest, hence, safest medical procedures available in this country.

The third thing that hits me is:   Has the Cooch ever been in an abortion clinic?  Has he ever toured one of the four abortion clinics that are right around the corner from his office in Richmond?   Does he even know how abortion clinics operate?  Of course, the answer is no.

What the Cooch and his allies are attempting to do is to close down abortion clinics, pure and simple.  Years ago, in South Carolina the state passed a number of regulations that basically required that abortion clinics be regulated as hospitals.  They required the clinics to widen their hallways.  They said the thermostat had to be set at a certain temperature.  They even required the clinic to control the insect population on the lawn.  I kid you not.  It was absolutely absurd.  As a result, two clinics that could not afford to make those very expensive changes went out of business.

That’s what the Cooch is trying to do in ole Virginny.   He is anti-abortion and this is just a sneaky way of pushing his anti-abortion agenda.  It has nothing to do with enhancing the safety of abortion or protecting women’s health.  This message is very confusing to me – he wants to outlaw abortion but he “cares” about the women and wants to make sure that they are getting the best abortion treatment.  That’s totally screwy.

On the other hand….yes, there’s always another hand.

The pro-choice groups are apoplectic.  Oh my God, they’re gonna close all of these clinics!   Women will not be able to get abortions.  Please join us in fighting the Cooch and, by the way, please send us a million dollars today so we can save women’s reproductive rights.

Okay, my fellow pro-choicers, calm down.

The fact is that the Cooch’s legal opinion says that the Virginia Board of Health could impose additional restrictions.  It’s all up to them.  They can take the Cooch’s cue and say thanks very much, but I got better things to do.  Or they could try to determine if there are actually some constructive new regulations that might benefit women.   We just don’t know what they’ll do.  Indeed, some observers of the Board are suggesting that the majority of its members will do nothing because they were appointed by the former pro-choice Democratic governor.

We’ll have to watch things closely, of course, and we appreciate local pro-choice organizations like Virginia NARAL.  Meanwhile, however, if I ran a clinic in Virginia, I’d be writing a letter to the Board of Health inviting them to visit my clinic so they can see how great my facility is.   I would tell them that if they have any constructive suggestions then of course I’d consider them, but I will oppose anything that is mere harassment.  Here’s a chance for abortion clinics in the state to take the high road and to remind everyone that they are upstanding medical facilities and not “back alley” abortion clinics.

Related Articles
 

August 12, 2010

Guaranteeing Access to Abortion Clinics – The Time the Government Helped

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Community Development Block Grant, Cranston, Late Term Abortion | Tags: , , , , , |
[29] Comments 
Cranston Abortion

Cranston Abortion

This past weekend, I got a great treat.  I was alone in my house.

Now, don’t get me wrong – I absolutely love my family.  But I have to admit it was fun to just putter around the house, drinking wine at 1:00 in the afternoon, taking a nap, drinking wine at 5:00.  At one point, however, I found some old newspaper clippings and noticed an article about something I was involved in when I worked for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers.

In the 1990’s the anti-abortion movement would hold massive demonstrations in front of abortion clinics.  It seemed like they could get hundreds of people at the drop of a hat to converge on a local facility.  They would march to the front door and sit down, preventing women from entering the clinic.  Of course, the clinic staff would immediately call the police but in conservative cities like Fort Wayne, Indiana or Birmingham, Alabama the police would just watch the demonstration.  That’s right – they would do absolutely nothing.  Hundreds of protestors were clearly trespassing but the police would just sit on their hands and let the demonstrators do their thing.  It was totally outrageous.

One day I was talking to a friend of mine who worked for Senator Alan Cranston of California and I told her about this problem we were having.  We started to think about how we could get local police to enforce the trespassing laws in those cities.  We came up with a brilliant idea.

In those days, just about every city in the country received “Community Development Block Grant” (CDBG) funds from the federal government.   These CDBG dollars were used for all kinds of projects:  to build affordable housing, construct new sewer lines, repair roads, etc.  Cities got millions and millions of these dollars (I know, those were the good ole days).

So, one night, when the U.S. Senate was in session Senator Cranston proposed an amendment to a bill saying in so many words that if the police did not do their job and arrest the trespassers, then that city would lose its CDBG funds.  Before the anti-abortion Senators knew what was going on, the amendment passed and ultimately became law.

The first thing we did was write a letter to every mayor of every major city in the country to tell them about this new law, just to put them on notice.  Our announcement caused an explosion around the country.  For example, within two days of the letter going out, I got a call from the Mayor of Philadelphia asking me about the new law.  No, that’s not entirely accurate.  What he actually said was “What the *%$)(#*@&% is this new law all about?   What the *#%()@#*%$# are you doing?”

After picking myself off the floor, I politely told him that he just had to make sure the police did their job and he would have nothing to worry about.  “*$()@*@(#%$,” he concluded and hung up the phone.  We never had a problem in Philadelphia again with protestors.

Also, whenever we heard about a demonstration that might take place, just to make sure I would call the Mayor of that city and warn him or her that they stood to lose a crap-load of money if the police ignored the protestors.  All of a sudden, police started making arrests in the most conservative of cities.

A lot of people are down on government.  They say there’s too much of it, it’s broken, keep it out of my face.  I get the argument.  But there are times like this one when government actually helped us guarantee that women would be able to exercise their constitutional right to have an abortion.

Is this a great country, or what?

 

July 20, 2010

This is what a Dunkle looks like on FaceBook.

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion Advocates, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Documentary, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Cannot Support Opinion, Cartoon, Catholic, Dr. Tiller, Dunkle, history, Jesus Camps, Lies, Paul Hill, Stupid, Uneducated, Vote | Tags: , , , , , |
[9] Comments 
Abortion Dunkle

Abortion Dunkle with a sign, he burned an American flag he said to honor a convicted murderer.

This is what a Dunkle looks like on FaceBook.

John, get with the program and Join!!

 

July 12, 2010

Abortion and Normal Rockwell

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rights, Abortion RU486 | Tags: , , , , , , |
[118] Comments 
Abortion

Abortion

Yesterday, to escape this blasted heat, I went into Washington, D.C. to catch an exhibit of Norman Rockwell paintings that had been donated by Stephen Speilberg and George Lucas.  It was nice just taking my time walking around, examining every amazing detail in Rockwell’s works.

At one point I came across a piece entitled “Free Speech.”  The piece focuses on one man, standing in the middle of a crowd.  The caption next to the painting said this was a man who disagreed with the crowd on some issue, but his opponents were listening to him intently, respecting his right to say what was on his mind even though they ultimately would not support him.   I was almost brought to tears.

Today, of course, that person would have been shouted down, totally discounted as some nut ball by his opponents.  That’s just where we are as a society these days.  We just don’t listen anymore.  Worse, when someone tries to suggest something contrary to our beliefs, we try to silence him with harsh words, with guffaws, with rolling eyes, as if this person could never say anything that was remotely of some benefit.

Of course, we see this kind of behavior all the time in the abortion debate.  Indeed, the harsh back and forth is probably more pronounced when discussing the abortion issue than any other issue.  We are so locked into our beliefs, the battle lines are drawn oh-so-clearly and you cannot cross them lest you be accused of ceding some valuable territory to the opposition.  Just watch an abortion debate on television.  You know exactly what I mean.  It’s a constant screaming match.    “Abortion is murder!”   “A woman has the right to control her body!”   And on and on and on.

No one is communicating.  They’re just yelling over each other.  Actually, years ago I stopped watching these “debates.”

I’m pro-choice, I’ve worked for pro-choice organizations for years.  But, much to the chagrin of many of my colleagues, years ago I started reaching out to pro-life people in an attempt to try to get inside their head, to learn more about them and, hopefully, to allow them to learn more about me .  I actually started engaging the other side after I learned that a number of the abortion clinics that I represented engaged in the same discussions with their local anti-abortion activists.

At the same time, I challenged my pro-choice colleagues to address the tougher questions about abortion.  When I visited the clinics, I talked to the women and it became clear to me that they were not there to make a statement about their constitutional rights or to promote some feminist ideology.  They were there because they were in a difficult situation and they needed help.  They also had to deal with something that pro-choice organizations would rather not address – they were carrying a baby that they didn’t want.   I soon discovered that the bottom line was that abortion is all so complicated.

So, amidst the screaming and yelling, the women continue to seek abortion services.  I think that anti-abortion folks owe these women more respect and the pro-choice activists should not try to reduce this issue to a simple bumper sticker.  Both sides should listen more to the other side with the goal of having a civil debate about abortion – kinda like that group in the Normal Rockwell painting.

 

June 4, 2010

Are They Really Pro-Choice?

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion Medical, Abortion Mifeprex, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights | Tags: , , , |
[49] Comments 

The other day I wrote about how a reporter for Fox News let Governor Mitt Romney off the hook when Romney suggested that he is “pro-life.” I expressed my puzzlement that the reporter did not ask the obvious follow up question which would have flushed out exactly what “pro-life” meant. I argued that it was one thing to say you’re “pro-life,” but it’s another thing to say that, as President, you are going to fight to make abortion illegal in this country again.

Well, this duplicity works on the pro-choice side as well.

First of all, like Mitt Romney (who used to be pro-choice), there are many politicians who have flipped from the pro-life side to the pro-choice side. I’ll never forget years ago, when the Reverend Jesse Jackson indicated his interest in securing the Democratic Party’s nomination for President. Until that point, Jackson had been openly pro-life. But he could read the tea leaves and he knew that the Democratic Party activists, i.e., the ones who would name the nominee, were overwhelmingly pro-choice. So, Jackson simply switched his position. There are others who did the same. Congressman Edward Markey of Massachusetts once got the notion of being a U.S. Senator from that state. Markey, a strong Catholic, had voted pro-life for many years and it served him well in his heavily Catholic district. However, when he started to focus on a statewide seat and looked at the polls, he knew he had to switch to pro-choice. He did, but still didn’t get the nomination. Interestingly, he remained in Congress and voted pro-choice from then on with no damage to his office. Then, there was Senator Edward Kennedy who, in the early days, argued that “life begins at conception.” Ultimately, however, he made the slow switch over to the pro-choice position.

But what does it mean to be pro-choice? Here’s where you have to be careful. There are a number of politicians who say they are pro-choice, but that just means that they would not make abortion illegal in this country. Ultimately, however, his or her constituents might discover that their Member of Congress actually supports parental consent laws, 24 hour waiting periods, informed consent laws and other proposals that restrict access to abortion services. Sorry, folks, I forgot to tell you about that one!

So, when some politician gets up and says they are pro-life or pro-choice, don’t let them off the hook! Ask the follow up questions, just like the reporters do at the White House press conferences. Delve into their feelings about the issue. After all, chances are very high that that politician will never get a chance to vote on the legalization of abortion, but they will be voting on the ancillary issues, on proposals that practically make the right to abortion null and void.

 

January 18, 2010

Forget the Religion Already. We live in a Republic.

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[5] Comments 

It has been with great dissapointment that many have commented using religion as a basis for discussion.

One recent commentor, was inciting hatred an dposssibly even worse. In response to Aleen, I am compelled to reply on this post.

I’m tired of the same old nonsense, but now after Dr. George Tiller, a wonderful caring man, was murdered in church, it must be said again, sadly to people who’s minds just don’t work.

Terrorism is not OK. When you are a baby, you implicitly sign a contract with society. A social contract. You probably don’t know it, bubt you do.  SO if you don’t want to work within the system, then LEAVE.  No one wants you.  Even the vast majority of people that harbor your crazy belief systems.

Wow, The bible itself recommends INFANTICIDE, talk about a worthless book. No more Bible nonsense. It is so annoying. What deteriorating brain would use that as a valid authoritative source on anything? This is The UNION of The United States of America. Not a Bible belt bonehead study group. So if you want a theocracy, go live in IRAN.

But I’ll indulge for a moment.

A Republic.

From the essence of the beginning was made clear, first and foremost (!), that we are not a theocracy. They figured out how stupid that was well over 300 years ago, and figured out how to make a Union.

One of the most IMPORTANT pieces was Separation of Religions from the Republic. The founders constructed it so, Without ambiguity. Washington
Adams (Even though one of the few that believed some of this stuff knew it should be out of government as did his son.) Jefferson
Madison
Monroe
Quincy Adams
Jackson defended the Union (despite his horrific crimes),

Lincoln (A Republican) did it again, only to be murdered by a christian.

And the war cost, what, 500,000 American lives?

Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Then fought for the 13th Amendment.
Then finally after he did so much good, some bonehead Christian kills him, while his friends try and Kill Seward (The Secretary of State) and other members of the cabinet.

McKinley assassinated

Theodore Roosevelt a Conservative, had to take charge, a Conservationist, did the same, and on and on.

Aleen, how could you be so clueless?

And inciting of violence?

You should be banned from the site.
There is scholarly information here. And misrepresent mistranslations, of languages you probably do not even speak, that have gone through well over a thousand years of revisions and editing.

It’s sad.

The Biblical God is NOT a pro-lifer, he advocates child murder, infanticide, child abuse and abortion: I see so many retarded ass Christians talking about abortion being a crime against God. It’s not a wonder that they are hard pressed to find a conclusive biblical statement to corroborate their position. In their determination to control woman they have been forced to rely on exceedingly weak sections such as “thou shall not kill”,”I kneweth thou in the womb” and their favorite: “When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman’s husband shall lay upon; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth…“–Exodus 21:22-24 The problem here is that the man who injures a pregnant woman in the process, shall repay her according to the degree of injury inflicted on her, not the fetus. I am often dumbfounded at how Christians can assume that abortion is wrong judging by these feeble verses when the Bible clearly advocates infanticide and many other atrocities against children and pregnant women. I can no longer allow such ignorance of the Bible and deem it necessary to expose the true agenda. I am tired of the many young Christians who are brainwashed by their clergy. They are only taught the “love and mercy” parts of the Bible and never bother to read what is not so openly preached . The Church thrives off of speaking in half truths and concealing their blood soaked robes. Of course my job as preacher of an Atheist parish is to give a sermon about those things that the Bible TRUTHFULLY commands.

Here they are, god’s views on the unborn, the actions of righteous men” and god’s commands of infanticide and child abuse: (note-There are Torah verses in this list but I will not attack the Jewish faith for being pro-life since they are not rampant advocates of the matter.) Abortion: Hosea 9:11-16 Hosea prays for God’s intervention. “Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, 0 Lord: what wilt thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. . .Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.” Clearly Hosea desires that the people of Ephraim can no longer have children. God of course obeys by making all their unborn children miscarry. Is not terminating a pregnancy unnaturally “abortion”? Numbers 5:11-21
The description of a bizarre, brutal and abusive ritual to be performed on a wife SUSPECTED of adultery. This is considered to be an induced abortion to rid a woman of another man’s child. Numbers 31:17 (Moses) “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known man by lying with him.” In other words: women that might be pregnant, which clearly is abortion for the fetus. Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”.

Once again this god kills the unborn, including their pregnant mothers. 2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”. And the Christians have the audacity to say god is pro-life. How and the hell is it that Christians can read passages where God allows pregnant women to be murdered, yet still claim abortion is wrong? Infanticide: 1 Samuel 15:3 God commands the death of helpless “suckling” infants. This literally means that the children god killed were still nursing.

Psalms 135:8 & 136:10 Here god is praised for slaughtering little babies. Psalms 137:9 Here god commands that infants should be “dashed upon the rocks”. The murdering of children: Leviticus 20:9 “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.” Judges 11:30-40 Jephthah killed his young daughter (his only child) by burning her alive as a burnt sacrifice to the lord for he commanded it. Psalms 137:8-9 Prayer/song of vengeance “0 daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” 2 Kings 6:28-29 “And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him today, and we will eat my son tomorrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.”

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.” Judges 19:24-29 “Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.” To put it very bluntly this poor, young lady was murdered by her mate for being raped. Exodus 12:29 God killed, intentionally, every first-born child of every family in Egypt, simply because he was upset at the Pharaoh. And god caused the Pharaoh’s actions in the first place. Since when is it appropriate to murder children for their ruler’s forced action?

Exodus 20:9-10 God commands death for cursing out ones parents Joshua 8 God commanded the deaths of 12,000 men, women, and children of Ai. They were all slain in the ambush that was planned by god. 2 Kings 2:23-24 The prophet Elisha, was being picked on by some young boys from the city because of his bald head. The prophet turned around and cursed them in the Lords name. Then, two female bears came out of the woods and killed forty-two of them.

You would think that God could understand that sometimes the youthful make childish jokes. Calling someone “bald head” is far from being worthy of death. Leviticus 26:30 “And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” 1 Samuel 15:11-18 God repents of having made Saul king since Saul refused to carry out God’s commandments (i.e., Saul refused to murder all the innocent women and children.) At least god realizes what an immoral, murderous pig he is on this one. I Kings 16:34 Laying the foundation for a city using your firstborn child and using your youngest son to set up the gates. Isaiah 13:15-18 If God can find you, he will “thrust you through,” smash your children “to pieces” before your eyes, and rape your wife. Jeremiah 11:22-23 God will kill the young men in war and starve their children to death. Jeremiah 19:7-9 God will make parents eat their own children, and friends eat each other. Lamentations 2:20-22 God gets angry and mercilessly torments and kills everyone, young and old. He even causes women to eat their children. Child abuse: Genesis 22:9 & 10 “And they came to the place which God had told him of and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.” It matters not that god let Abraham get out of murdering Isaac.

To put a knife up to your son’s throat is child abuse.

Abraham, our patriarch. What a loser. I fI start hearing voices and want to put a knife to my kid, please, lock me up, and a quick gignatic dose of Thorazine.

Seriously, were the jokers that wrote this crap on drugs?

I Kings 3:24-25 “And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king. And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other.” This test was of course given to see who the real mother of the child was. Christians view this king as a wise man. I look upon his suggestion with far more revulsion then I give accredit to Susan Smith. Proverbs 13:24, 19:18, 22:15, 23:13-14 & 29:15 God commands repeatedly that you beat your children. Matthew 19:29 If you really loved Jesus then he insists that you abandon your wife and children for him. Only that way will he allow you to go to heaven. (That is if you meet his other hefty requirements, don’t slip through the loopholes, and ignore the contradictions.) Mark 7:9 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law.

In Summary I end this list with a verse that should keep the pro lifers in check ( but won’t, you can’t persuade imbeciles even with overwhelming fact ass we have seen over and over again on this site.). It is Romans 13: 1-7 “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which god has established. The authorities that exist have been established by god. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what god has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he shall commend you. For he is god’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is god’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. There fore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

This is also why we pay taxes, for the authorities are god’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes, if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.” Clearly it is the job of Christians to obey the laws, and the laws of this country clearly state that abortion is legal. So too should Christians respect and honor that law. God commands them to NOT disobey, which entails attempting to get the law overturned. If god wanted abortion to be illegal he wouldn’t have appointed authorities to make it legal.

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »