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…

 

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 18, 2010

Shaking Things Up in Washington, D.C?

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 Mifeprex, Abortion Oval Office, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rights, Church, Congressman, Free Speech, Free Speech Constraints, Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, history, Supreme Court, Terrorism, Uneducated | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
[24] Comments 

Abortion

I first want to apologize for being incommunicado for the last five days.  My spouse and I slipped out of town to spend some “quality time” together.  We actually had a wonderful time not talking about the kids or about our mortgage payment.  Geez, I don’t even recall having one serious argument!

And now I’m back in the Washington, D.C. area and all anyone is talking about here is the upcoming election.  You just can’t avoid all of the debates, the talking heads on the cable shows, the campaign commercials and the political predictions.   Of course, the group that is probably getting the most attention is the now-famous “Tea Party.”   I’ve written about these folks before.  I’ve talked about how I really have no idea what they want and what they would do if they got elected.  All I can gather is that they are angry at everyone and they think it’s time to “clean house.”    Well, that sounds all well and good and it is a very simple phrase that appeals to a lot of folks in this country who are too lazy to think about the real issues that confront our nation.   Still, there are enough yahoos in the good ole USA that some of these Tea Party candidates actually have a chance of winning.

So, let’s take a minute to think about what would happen if a “Tea Partyer” is sent to Congress in January.

The first thing that he will be asked to do is to vote for the Speaker of the House (the position currently held by Nancy Pelosi).  There will be two people running for that position, one nominated by the Democratic Party and one by the Republican Party.  There will not be a nominee from the Tea Party, so from the very beginning this new person will have to cast their lot with one of the established parties.  And, of course, they’re going to vote with the Republican Party.

Abortion

Then they have to try to get on a committee that will be of great relevance to their district.  If the Republican Party takes over the House of Representatives, as is predicted, the chairman of every committee will be a Republican.  So, that young, brash Tea Party person, who may have spent some time during the election bashing both parties, will then have to make an appointment with the chairman of the committee they want to be on and perhaps have to explain to him why they spent the election season bashing his party.  Now, won’t that be interesting?

Then the Tea Partyer will start voting.  One of the most important matters they vote on first is the budget.  Generally speaking, Members of Congress get to vote on two versions of a budget – one offered by the Democrats and one by the Republicans.  So, the new Tea Party person will have only two options.   Oh, sure, he or she can put together their own budget on behalf of himself and the maybe 3 other Tea Partyers in the House.  That budget might have suggestions like cutting all federal support for public education, eliminating the Medicare program and reducing the minimum wage.  The final tally on that proposal would be in the neighborhood of 4 in favor and 431 against.  Now, that is really shaking up Washington!

So, what it will come down to ultimately is that these Tea Party folks will

Abortion

wind up voting with the Republican Party 95 percent of the time.  Oh, sure, they’ll go to the floor of the House and give a fiery speech about the “special interests” and the old ways of Washington that need to be changed.  They will then make thousands of copies of that speech and mail it to their constituents to show how they are “fighting” for the common man.  Their constituents won’t know that when they gave the speech there was no one else on the floor or in the galleries except for an intern or two.

They will accomplish nothing.  They will vote with the Republican Party.  But their constituents will have no idea.  They will just be thrilled that they sent a “fighter” to Washington, D.C. to shake things up!

Is this a great country or what?

 

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
 

June 29, 2008

Comment Please!

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Law, Abortion Pill | Tags: , , |
[60] Comments 

There have been a large number of commentaries by individuals who dogmatically state that a women has no right ever to choose and abortion under any circumstance.

Yet when replied to by other individuals, they never respond with any objective reasoning?

To note, every professional, professional organization, and many clergy on the planet, from all the major religions, as far as we could tell from our diligence and vetting, including every right to life group that would respond, agreed with the position that women could end their pregnancy under this circumstance.

So Why do the commenters believe otherwise?  I believe we will know by their continued absence of response.  But we would be delighted to hear an intelligently formed argument against a women’s choice in this circumstance.  No soliloquies or pulpits please, just he facts.

We want to give them the benefit of the doubt, so we ask one of these simple questions again.

Some respond with the same rhetorical gibberish, never answering the hard real world questions posed by so many intelligent and concerned individuals.

It is difficult to understand.  It infers that people who harbor these dogmatic beliefs, will not allow their minds to accept the reality of women in need and the difficult choices they may sometimes must make. Instead of educating themselves they withdraw into the catacombs of ancient cliches, and reveal no education into biology, formal logic, ethics, or medicine.  The issues are not that complicated.  Would one person, one, please respond appropriately.  It would be appreciated, as there has yet to be a good response to the very many important issues brought up regarding the women’s right to choose to control her own body.

One simple example I have seed posted, is the women with an anencephalic (a fetus that has had the misfortune of the developmental path that did not create the neurological substrate for brain formation) – In fact many do not even have cranium.  They fetuses all die at, around, or before or shortly after birth and never cognate, unless one believes that cognition takes place in the liver (some do, strangely enough).  It is extremely sad. These women will not have a successful pregnancy, as a severe anencephalic, has never grown a brain.

So, out of the hundreds of thousands of individuals who have been trained in Obstetrics and women care, NOT one has agreed with the lack of choice for that women to end her pregnancy.

That is intelligent to end these pregnancies early (please see the literature on this point as it is overwhelming without any deviance).  As many of these women, if they choose to let the pregnancy continue, end up with hysterotomy, ruptured uterus, hysterectomies and lose child bearing, hemorrhage, infection from bloood transfusion, and even death.

At a minimum, they have gone full term to have a dead baby.

If there is a single person out there which can make an argument to why these women should not have the choice of ending their pregnancy we welcome that point and discussion.  

In the absence of that we will conclude that this issue of anencephally is presently a settled discussion.

 

April 3, 2008

Florida House votes to require ultrasound before all abortions

Posted by Elena Carvin under Abortion, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Law, Abortion Pill, Abortion Rights | Tags: , , , , , |
[25] Comments 

It is obvious that the Florida legislature mounted a multi threaded attack on reproductive rights this week. 

It started by the passing of legislation requiring an ultrasound prior to an abortion and coupled to more egregious terms.  

Terms that are simply rejected by the vast majority of Americans, and over 99% of Nobel prize winners.

That is defining human sentient life equivalent to a full experienced adult at the moment of the meeting of the one cell sperm and the one cell egg whence they fuse and form one slight larger one cell.  Thus a women who was desirous of an abortion must then pay for an ultrasound procedure and  mandated to view the ultrasound image. This would be done before having the abortion, again mandated by the bill passed by the House chiefly divided in a partisan fashion.

The puritanicals and misogynists are truly still lurking among us in droves. Must they die of old age until the generation of rational thinking adults are able to work their way through the political quagmire?  

Oddly also the vast majority of conservatives supprting the measure were older men greyed from age, apparently not from wisdom or a connection to the community.   

The Republican-led chamber also endorsed a “fetal homicide” bill that would create a separate murder charge for anyone who caused a pregnancy to be terminated through an act of violence against a pregnant woman.

This absurdity missed the slew of reasons women may opt for an abortion for very reasonablke reasons, that well over 95% of Americans support. A very limited example include, women with cancer, women with pregnancies in their tubes, women with life threatening heart anomalies (and all other threats to their life) that carry with them a near certain death sentance if they are to remain pregnant through their term of 40 weeks.  

This is well documented in the peir reviewed medical literatue, and is not disouted among proffesionals of either side of the issue to any measurable degree.  The list goes on and on.  

Many of these situations the Abortion Pill could easily solve the end of the pregnancy and save the mother’s life. There are numerous places a women in need of abortion may find an office that perform Abortions safely, securely, privately with respect and confidentiality.

Democrats argued the abortion bill and it’s terms were simply a government invasion into an obvious private health matter.The House’s ultrasound mandate (HB257) requires women who desire abortion to pay for the scans without any assistance, this is a major burden the government would be placing among lower socioeconomic women.

Costs for an ultrasound have great variance and are often a few hundred dollars, stated by an expert testimonial.The measures once again, are micromanaging the method by which a doctor takes care of their patient without regard to the doctor’s experience or training.  

Doctors practice differently because of a number of reasons.  The legislature rarely attempts to micromangae doctor methods of practice except when dealing with abortion care.  The well known safest procedure done in the world, when it is legal.  When it is illegal, women still get abortion, but because of the illegality have to have them performed in areas that are often dangerous and simply just a few decades hospital wards were willed to the brim with women suffering, dying,  and losing wombs to complication because abortion was illegal.  Once again this another fact that is not disputed.

“Are you sure you want to do that?” said House Democratic Leader Dan Gelber, of Miami Beach. “Just to constantly second-guess and challenge a woman who makes what I imagine is one of the hardest and most difficult decisions a person has to make. In that sense, it’s an offensive bill.”  

If the “fetal homicide” bill passed the Senate and became law, anyone who caused a pregnancy to be terminated by assaulting or killing a woman could be prosecuted for murdering the “unborn child” — even if they didn’t know the woman was pregnant.The bill also would apply to drunken drivers, who could be charged with vehicular homicide for causing a pregnancy to be terminated in a car accident.

“It elevates a fetus and an egg, frankly, to the status of an adult person,” said Adrienne Kimmell, executive director of Florida’s Planned Parenthood affiliates. “The purpose of this bill is to create tension with Roe vs. Wade. It’s a chipping-away strategy we’ve seen for years now.”

In this opinion, the imbicilic articulation from the Bill’s sponsor Rep. Ralph Poppell, stated that a fetal homicide bill is an attempt to “curb crime and save lives.”

Clearly it is just another attempt to harm women and march the limitations of reproductive, and private personal matters into the hands of those elite that show no regard or connection to the intelligent women who are quite capable of making decisions and managing their own bodies without a strange antagonistic man’s interference and intrusion.

 

« Previous Page