Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Another trip over to "Abortion Clinic Days".

While this site has always been unashemedly pro-abortion, even they stepped beyond the fringe with their latest post, here are some highlights and my responses:

"In the United States since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 there have been over 45 million women who have chosen to have safe, legal abortions. In fact, 37% of American women, over 1 in 3 women, will have an abortion by the age of 45. "

The fact is, this is a false statistic, it is playing with numbers, it takes the number of abortions performed and divides it by the number of women living since 1973. It assumes one woman having one abortion in her lifetime. It does not take into account repeat recievers of abortions, and abortion of more than one fetus at a time. That would greatly reduce this number and its impact.

She then went on to list abortion "stigmas":

Abortion IS mainstream medicine.

Abortion IS a normal part of women’s health care.

So, why is stigma so successful? Why does the shame persist and silence pervade in our culture when so many people share the abortion experience?

Most of the time these 45 million women are silent.

Most of the time the loved ones who helped them with their abortion don’t talk about it either.

In fact, the pro-choice majority is silent.

Most of the people talking about abortion in our society are anti-abortion.

We abortion providers often feel and are looked at as the “radical fringe of the pro-choice movement”

So, their argument is that abortion should be "frequent" (of course, more money for them)

Abortion should be considered "mainstream medicine" (In other words, remove conscience clauses and force healthcare providers to perform abortions.)

Abortion should be a "normal" part of a woman's health care (IOW, every woman should have an abortion, whether she wants to or not, making them no different than a pap smear.)

It goes on to ignore the negatives of abortion, the guilt, shame that accompanies it. They don't make the connection that is the reason women don't talk about it. Many come to regret their decisions, even though you will NEVER hear the pro-abortionists say that.

She then lists more "stigma":

I EXPEREINCE stigma all the time in my work; the hospital will not give privileges to our physicians, we can’t secure local back up doctors, we can’t get anyone to provide us with bottled water or replace our tile floors or replace our roof or resurface our parking lot.

I HEAR stigma everywhere:

“Abortion should be rare”

“Abortion is a tragedy” (and these are our friends!)

“Prevention First”

“I am pro-choice but I’d never have an abortion”

“I am not like those other women”

“I don’t believe in abortion as birth control”

Starting from the top, she implies that they cannot find doctors because of "stigma" the fact is my doctors want nothing to do with Abortion. Perhaps she should ask herself "why"?


The rest of her "stigmas" are shocking in their callousness.

If she believes these are stigmas, then she must believe the converse to be virtues:
She believes:
That private companies, hospitals and doctors, should not have the "right to refuse service to anyone" this is a cornerstone of free enterprise.

Abortion should be frequent.
That it is NOT a tragedy
That prevention is unnecessary
That Pro-choice women should not exercise their "right" to choose, they should choose what this pro-abortionists says they should, which is abortion.
That woman who are responsible about their reproductive choices are "stigmatizing"
That abortion should be an acceptable form of birth control (one that carries risk of sterilization or death, but that is pretty much irrelevant to her)

The article goes on to claim that pro-abortionists encourage women to "be all they can be", in other words, that children dimish a woman and hold her back. This is beyond even radical feminism.

This is the leaders of this movement, and thier biggest liability. While those of us on the pro-life side have our wackos, this article makes it clear the "pro-choicers" do as well. This post of thiers borders on absolute bloodlust and stinks of authoritarianism.

And they claim they are the "common ground"?

Thursday, December 18, 2008

But they're actually saving them!

I checked out the blog abortionclinicdays again, and was floored by the posting over there now. Acorrding to the most recent post over there, abortion actually does the aborted children (or as she de-humanizes them "pregnancies") a favor by saving them from lives of poverty.

She states:
They wanted their pregnancy, they loved their pregnancy, but they could not in good conscience ask their child to suffer the same poverty they were suffering.
First of all, it is a child, not a pregnancy. A slip-up she makes here. Secondly, she tries a justification defense that we are "saving" a person from a life of poverty. Apparently poverty is so horrible that it is better for a child to die than live in it. However, kill your born children and try this defense and you will be laughed out of court. It's called loving your child to death, the same thing Andrea Yates did, she loved her children to much to let them fall prey to the "devil". More of the hypocricy of feminism that one is called a victim and another a murderer.

She goes on to state that until we take care of the children we have, then killing the unborn is acceptable so as not to add to societies burden. (The Nazis called this "Life unworthy of life") And that we should reform adoption laws (which I agree with her)
The fact that a blonde, blue-eyed baby is exponentially more likely to be adopted than a six year-old child of color is an American tragedy. The fact that children with disabilities of any age or ethnicity are lost in the system is an American tragedy.
And why is that white children are more likely to be adopted? It is because the overwhelming majority of potential adoptive parents are white and the majority of adoptable children are minorities. So is racism to blame? No actually, it is because so many "liberals" refuse to de-segregate the adoption process. Trans-racial adoption and foster care is not allowed in most states. Conservatives and family groups for years have called for this, but liberal groups will not allow it to happen, even in her article Ms. Varian does not call to lift restrictions on race, but she does on every other demographic:
We need to recognize the beauty of all kinds of family structures and stop preventing perfectly loving people from adopting and fostering children because they are single, gay, or otherwise non-nuclear.
But to prevent perfectly loving people from adopting based on race is perfectly ok.

I could go on, but read the article and you will see the rhetoric.

Oh, and of course this woman needs to throw it in that she was raised a "devout Catholic".

Monday, December 15, 2008

The truth can be painful.

While trolling around the pro-abortion blogs I found this posting at "Un-Expecting":

Helpful Tip for the Ladies

NEVER Google Image the phrase “abortion.” Ack! I was trying to find a clever image for my profile picture and made the mistake of typing abortion in the search box. It’s just bad, bad, bad. Hence the totally prosaic Gerbera daisy.

Gerbera daises are definitely much nicer to look at.

So, out of curiosity I Google Image'd the phrase abortion, HERE is my result.

And, she is right, it is bad. But that is the truth of Abortion. No matter how uncomfortable it makes people.

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Ah, the hypocrisy

Over at "Abortion Clinic Days" they have posted I am sure what they consider to be a fair sign that they would like to force all health care providers and pharmacists to post in their offices.


NOTICE TO PATIENTS

I follow my own religious beliefs ahead of your medical needs. Therefore, I will not support, offer, or approve any of the following checked off below.

__ I do not subscribe to a woman's right to make her own decisions about her reproductive healthcare.

__I do not believe that a woman has the right to choose her method of contraception and therefore will not sell prescription birth control.

__I do not believe in Emergency Contraception, even if you have been raped, and will therefore not give you Plan B to prevent pregnancy.

__ I do not believe in abortion and therefore will not provide an abortion nor will I offer a referral for an abortion elsewhere.


Of course the first line jumps out at you. A Doctor or other health care provider should be required to violate their principles and religious beliefs. A Catholic doctor should be forced to provide services that go against his conscience. What's next? A Orthodox Jewish doctor should be forced to keep his clinic open on Saturdays as to not place his religious beliefs above that of his female patients? A Muslim doctor should be forbidden from taking time out of his day to observe his times of prayer so not to interfere with his patients care?

Of course, a womans right to choose trumps the Doctors freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. Sorry, this is still America, I have the right to my beliefs and you don't have the right to force me to go against them. Nor, do you have the right to shame me for them.

Here is my response to her post, I don't think it will be posted. A message came up that my email address had been marked as spam:




so, let me get this straight, you support a womans right to choose. But not the Doctors right to choose?

Women have a right to choose an abortion free from ridicule, but health care providers don't have the right to refuse to participate in them free from ridicule?

Nice to know you place a womans right to abortion above everyone elses rights to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.

Better yet, why don't we require doctors who follow their convictions to wear a "A" on their clothes at all times so that they can be recognized as enemies of the state and enemies of women.

Hey, worked for Hitler.