Illinois Right to Life Committee
PRO-LIFE BLOG
Friday, Feb 26, 2010 -- More concern about hospice care, based on experience I received an email earlier this week as follows: My name is Susan. Today again, I woke up thinking about my mother who died in hospice in November of 2006 at the age of 76. My mother was in the hospital for 3 weeks before going to hospice after, in my opinion, being talked into it by a hospice nurse. When asked about going to hospice her initial response was no she did not want to go, she wanted to continue to fight to go home. Up until the time spent in the hospital she worked a part time job and lived alone for 14 yrs since my father had passed away. She had rheumatic fever when she was 15 yrs old and was told she should never have children. She went on to be the mother of 11 children. The rheumatic fever had done damage to her heart but for her it was never a problem. After getting a sore on her leg which took longer to heal then she wanted it to, she went to a wound clinic, who in turn sent her to a vascular surgeon, who in turn wanted a cardiologist to clear her for surgery. Without anyone knowing a persantine stress test was ordered for her. I believe the stress of that test really set her back. After 3 weeks and the doctors not really knowing what else to do for her, the nurses began mentioning hospice. My mother was always adamant about not going to hospice, but agreed to have a hospice nurse come to talk to her at the hospital. She was told it would be for a few days until she felt better, then could go back home. We the family, not knowing any better at the time, agreed. My mother was never in pain. The night we arrived at hospice she looked up at the ceiling and laughed and said there was a spider web on the ceiling and sure enough there was and she for the first time in days ate a bologna sandwich and a glass of pop. Then the morphine started and that was the last time she ever spoke again. She was in a coma with the most agonizing sounds of her trying to breathe. I remember when she got one of the last shots of morphine asking the nurse how much morphine she gave her and she told me 10 mg. My mother hardly ever took a tylenol in her life. This amount explained the coma like state. I to this day believe hospice overdosed here to hurry death. I feel so much guilt because at the time I was a nursing student and should have asked more questions. I have now been a nurse for 2.5 years and work in a hospital and know what a large amount of morphine she was getting. I also have seen patients die, and believe me, there is a difference between the death of someone not on massive amounts of morphine, compared to someone who is overdosed and starved to death. I am having a hard tome forgiving myself for letting this happen and not speaking up for someone who couldn't do it for themself, but if I knew then what I know now after being a nurse, I would never have allowed it to happen. It is always a thought in the back of my mind that what they did was not right. It is a nagging feeling that I should be doing something so this doesn't happen to someone else, but really have not until I found this website and wrote this letter. I wish I knew what to do if anything could be done to help people in this position, but I don't know where to start. What can I do to help this cause and possibly stop this from happening to someone else?
Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 -- Is fetal pain the next step for banning late-term abortions? Nebraska lawmakers are considering LB 1103, the Abortion Pain Prevention Act, that would ban abortions done on babies who are capable of feeling pain. The bill will provide medical documentation that unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks gestation. If LB 1103 would become law, notorious late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart, who boasts of doing abortions anywhere from 24 to 30 weeks, might be forced to stop committing late-term abortions in Nebraska. Of course, that impact would only occur after the law was challenged as unconstitutional. Carhart previously challenged the ban on partial birth abortion, winning the first decision, but eventually losing when the national ban on partial birth abortion was found constitutional.
Wednesday, Feb 24, 2010 -- Turning values upside down for sport Here is a radical contrast in what politically correct society "tolerates" as a constructive message to aspiring athletes. The NCAA had been contracted to carry a banner ad on their web site. The ad reads, "All I want for my son is for him to grow up knowing how to do the right thing." and shows a father holding a young boy with the tag line "Celebrate Family. Celebrate Life."This ad sounds highly offensive -- right? The decision to drop this ad came after complaints that Focus on the Family's cause is inconsistent with the NCAA's stated non-discrimination policy. A web post by Pat Griffin, a professor who works with the NCAA as a consultant, charged that Focus on the Family "opposes a woman’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. You can bet they are in the forefront of every national and state battle over ... abortion rights. Now they want to impose their values on the NCAA tournament and college basketball fans and the NCAA and CBS are inviting them to. They are rolling out the red carpet and I am deeply offended by the NCAA’s complicity in this." In contrast, organizations partnering to promote "safety" at the 2010 Winter Olympics passed out 100,000 free condoms to the athletes. SafeGames2010, the group responsible for the condom hand-out, is a consortium of Vancouver-based organizations and volunteers dedicated to safety at the Winter Olympics. They provided videos, handouts, and various “harm reduction services” covering drug and alcohol use, and also “safe sex.” Unfortunately, free condom hand-outs to Olympic athletes have become a custom at the Games, dating back at least to the 1992 Games in Barcelona. Which activity is more offensive to you, an ad from Focus on the Family or distribution of condoms to athletes at the Olympics? If you think the NCAA is wrong to pull the Focus on the Family ad, you can contact them by email at pmr@ncaa.org or call NCAA Public Relations at 317-917-6762.
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 -- RH Reality Check really needs a reality check! RH Reality Check is a pro-abortion blog web site whose major contributors think they have the answers on "reproductive health." A February 23rd entry by Amanda Marcotte attacks 40 Days for Life, stating, "anti-choicers kicked off the '40 Days for Life' protests, so believers can avoid focusing on their own sin and instead scream at others for perceived sexual sin, while also avoiding thinking about their own mortality by demanding others give life against their will."For Amanda, this is just the beginning of a trip outside of reality as she conveys her many misperceptions about 40 Days for Life. Apparently, Amanda thinks that being physically present outside an abortion facility constitutes a "protest" and that prayer is "screaming" and that the motivation of participants is to accuse women of "perceived sexual sin." In fact, 40 Days for Life is a very peaceful prayer vigil with no screaming and no accusations about sexual sin. In some cases experienced sidewalk counselors may be present to offer alternatives to mothers who are entering the abortion facility, but often participants are just praying for an end to abortion, and may occasionally try to start a conversation with a mother who is heading into the abortion facility. One source of Amanda's misinformation was Martha Stahl of Planned Parenthood of the North Country New York. Creating her own reality, Martha claimed it is a common occurrence for a "patient" to be told "she will go to hell if she comes into our building." Martha thinks that mothers may choose not to get abortions because "the heavy judgment that anti-choicers express towards women scares many women off in her small community; the fear of having to face your neighbors as they judge you." Next, Amanda accuses 40 Days for Life participants of aggressive behavior that includes use of "big billboards with obscene, gruesome, scientifically inaccurate images" and "passive-aggressive praying" (whatever that might be) and other actions so "patients and escorts have good reason to fear for their safety." Since pictures of aborted babies are not used, prayer is not an aggressive act, and the escorts (deathscorts) are often the aggressive ones trying to "protect" their "patients" from learning about alternatives, these portrayals are a complete misrepresentation of reality. The reality of 40 Days for Life is many babies saved from abortion, lost revenue for the abortionists, conversion of some staff members who quit their jobs, and some facilities closing either temporarily or even permanently. Feedback from mothers who choose life for their babies is virtually always very positive, which is the final confirmation that Amanda Marcotte and RH Reality Check both need a serious reality check.
Monday, Feb 22, 2010 -- 40 Days for Life has begun and babies are being saved The Lent 2010 40 Days for Life, being held at 165 locations, was only six days old when reports already indicated that 45 babies were confirmed to have been saved from abortion. Given that reporting is often slow coming in, and many other mothers never confirm their change of heart, the total number of mothers and babies saved from abortion is well above 45 less than a week into this prayerful vigil.
Friday, Feb 19, 2010 -- Virginia House "gets it" that Planned Parenthood is anti-choice In Illinois the state legislature has refused to allow the option of a Choose Life license plate, with Planned Parenthood heavily involved in blocking it. In Virginia, the state legislature put Choose Life into a bill with other license plate options, and their pro-abortion governor signed it into law, so Choose Life plates are now on the road in Virginia. In response, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU are now pushing a bill to create “Trust Women, Respect Choice" license plates. The funds generated would be directed to Planned Parenthood under the original provisions of the bill.The ACLU has threatened the Virginia legislature with a First Amendment lawsuit if they fail to approve the plate. I wonder why the ACLU in Illinois has no concerns about the free speech rights of those who want Choose Life license plates. Apparently, the ACLU's concern about free speech rights is very selective, or should we say, inconsistent. During debate on the bill to authorize the “Trust Women, Respect Choice" license plate, Delegate Todd Gilbert offered an amendment to the bill providing that all funding would go to the Virginia Pregnant Women Support Fund. Gilbert defended his amendment by noting that the Virginia Pregnant Women Support Fund was a better fit for the language of the plate because Planned Parenthood violates its own message of trusting women. The evidence that Delegate Gilbert cited was Planned Parenthood’s opposition to pro-woman legislation, including informed consent requirements that trust women. If revenue from the plate went to Planned Parenthood, the funds would be going to an organization not in conformity with the plate’s message. Delegate Gilbert’s amendment was accepted on a 56-43 vote! Since the Virginia Senate passed the original bill without amendments, it is not clear whether Planned Parenthood will ultimately be denied any revenue generated by the “Trust Women, Respect Choice" license plate in Virginia. However, the majority of Virginia House members have demonstrated they understand that Planned Parenthood is an abortion provider with no interest in offering choices to anyone to whom they are trying to sell an abortion.
Thursday, Feb 18, 2010 -- "Portable Medical Order" under any name is dangerous The term "portable medical order" appears to be a variation in terminology for a document that originated as a "Physician Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST). This concept was first established in Oregon, the first state to legalize assisted suicide, under a paradigm created by the Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU). The deception begins with the title since the "treatment" is much more likely to be life-ending rather than life-sustaining. Put another way, it is a physician order to end life-sustaining treatment. A POLST Paradigm program must meet specific program requirements that provide an indication of the dangers inherent to this concept. Fortunately, so far Illinois is not involved... read more
Wednesday, Feb 17, 2010 -- Baby saved by sidewalk counseling beyond the call of duty On November 30, 2009, I wrote about sidewalk counseling above and beyond the call of duty. Leah Winandy of Duluth MN tried to discourage a woman from getting an abortion even though she displayed a knife as she approached. Leah described the circumstances. "Before I could talk to her or approach her with literature, she snapped open a knife. She waved the point at me saying, 'Don't come near me.' I stayed where I was and said, 'Please don't kill your baby, fear God.'" Leah continued, "She walked past into the courtyard, so I moved to the fence corner to continue counseling. She then turned around, came up to me and held the point of the knife at my throat." The woman holding the knife was Mechelle Talluah Hall, who pled guilty yesterday to second-degree assault. Under a plea agreement she was placed on probation. Hall revealed to the Duluth Tribune News that, thanks to the Winandys (Leah's mother was with her), she never did go through with the abortion as she had intended. Leah's fearless counseling saved the life of Hall's baby. Hall told reporter Mark Stodghill that she thanked the Winandys for being there. “If they weren’t there, I probably would have gone through with it and regretted it for the rest of my life. It probably would have gone the other way. I’m sincerely sorry for doing that to her.”
Tuesday, Feb 16, 2010 -- How to vote when there is no Pro-Life candidate? The November 2nd election is not right around the corner, but I received an election question by email today: "In the November election for U.S. Senator there are no Pro-Life candidates. Does Illinois Right to Life have a recommended course of action?" To begin my answer, I offer an article entitled "Statements vs. Impact" that provides some perspective on this dilemma. The California example mentioned there sounds similar to the situation in the current Illinois race for U.S. Senate. I also recall that Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life raised a point about how important it is to be the majority party. With abortion advocates currently in full control in both Illinois and Washington, D.C. we can certainly see the negative impacts of that situation. Analysts are now suggesting that Republicans have a real possibility of taking control of both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate in the November elections. That chance would be helped greatly with a Republican winning the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois. I must admit that I am completely upset with how the Republican leadership in Illinois fails to learn anything. Running a so-called moderate as the best choice to win against the Democrats was proven not to work when Judy Barr-Topinka lost to an already unpopular Governor Blagojevich by 57-43 percent in 2006. Now they have created the exact same situation in the U.S. Senate race this year. Can he win in November? I have my doubts based on the results already mentioned from 2006. If he does have the possibility of winning, a vote for him might help Pro-Life Republicans take over leadership of the U.S. Senate. However, I would never be able to campaign for a pro-abortion candidate (e.g. yard sign, passing out flyers, etc.). Since I am sure the same unwillingness applies to most Pro-Life citizens in Illinois, that is one of the reasons why he will have difficulty winning -- no grassroots support from the conservative base of the Republican party. Given my basic agreement with the "Statements vs. Impact" article, I could vote for a "pro-choice" candidate in the circumstances described when I felt it could truly make a difference, such as the potential of Pro-Lifers taking control of the U.S. Senate. Otherwise, I might consider it better if he lost, to again try to teach the Republican leadership what kind of candidates they need to support if they expect to win. In other words, it is not an easy choice.
Monday, Feb 15, 2010 -- Planned Parenthood working toward an abortion monopoly Will there be a monopoly in the abortion industry soon? Evidence from various sources suggests that possibility exists. Operation Rescue has analyzed the number of abortion centers nationwide. Their research finds that while independent abortion facilities are closing, Planned Parenthood is expanding its abortion business. Independent abortion providers are gradually closing their doors for various reasons. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood receives over $350 million in taxpayer funding annually, helping it to overcome any financial storms. Ironically, even Planned Parenthood has closed some locations, but their number of locations committing abortions continues to rise. Operation Rescue reports that abortion facilities total 710 locations. Of these, 306 are Planned Parenthood offices, up from 287 just over 2 years ago. These figures reveal that Planned Parenthood already controls 43% of abortion facilites while currently doing just over 25% of the annual abortions. However, Planned Parenthood just opened two abortion mega-centers, one in Houston and another in Portland. Other recent abortion mega-centers were opened in Denver, CO and Aurora, IL. These abortion mega-centers will certainly increase their market share. Abby Johnson, the former director of a Texas Planned Parenthood, has stated their goal is to "make every family planning center into an abortion center" by dispensing the abortion drug RU-486. They currently have 493 family planning centers that are not yet dispensing the abortion drug RU-486. Pro-Life Wisconsin obtained information about a grant request from Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin (PPWI) to the Susan T. Buffett Foundation. PPWI stated in this grant request, “In January of 2009 PPWI will provide more than 60 percent of the more than 9,000 abortions performed in Wisconsin, and within a decade PPWI anticipates being the sole provider of abortions.” Planned Parenthood expects to have a monopoly on the Wisconsin abortion market by 2019. They already have a monopoly in South Dakota, with the only abortion facility in the state. In how many other states do they have a similar plan?
Friday, Feb 12, 2010 -- Illinois FOCA bill has been re-introduced in the House Yesterday, the Reproductive Health and Access Act was re-introduced in the Illinois House as HB6205. The provisions of HB6205 are equivalent of bills originally called the "Freedom of Choice Act" or FOCA. This Illinois FOCA bill is extremely radical because it goes far beyond Roe v. Wade by establishing abortion as a fundamental right, not subject to regulation. To help generate abortion business, HB6205 also requires government funding of abortion and "provides that all Illinois public schools shall offer medically accurate, age appropriate, comprehensive sexual health education..." For more information on what this provision really means, check Logic and truth tossed out in favor of political correctness. Check Action Needed to stay current on what you can do to oppose Illinois FOCA.
Thursday, Feb 11, 2010 -- Abstinence first, but not only? Today I sent the following letter to the Chicago Sun-Times editor: Government sponsored ads tell teens "Just say no to drugs" and other ads tell parents they can make a difference to prevent drug use by their teenage children. The Ad Council runs messages telling parents to warn their teenagers about the dangers of drinking alcohol. New teenage driving restrictions throw the book at those teens who might drink and drive. Parents and educators would be shocked if programs dealing with drugs and alcohol said abstaining from drugs and alcohol should be first, but not the only, substance abuse education option. The logic would be, since we know at least some teenagers will do drugs and alcohol anyway, we need to teach them "safe highs" and "safe drinking" -- be sure to have a designated driver. Substance abuse education "shouldn't just be about teaching kids to say no." If that concept seems self-defeating, and even downright crazy, then follow the same logic presented by Dr. Laura Berman in her Feb 10th article entitled "Abstinence should be first -- but not only -- sex education option." Is it really going to work to first suggest "abstinence is the best policy" and immediately offer pointers on "safe sex"? Parents know instinctively this approach will not succeed with sex anymore than such an approach would work with drugs, alcohol, or even good eating habits. In the Fall of 2006 Arne Duncan, then CEO of Chicago Public Schools established "comprehensive sex education" consistent with that advocated by Dr. Berman. More than three years later, have teen pregnancy or abortion rates been reduced in the Chicago schools? I don't think so! Abortions in 2008 for Cook County residents jumped by 3,233 (14.5%) to a total of 25,529 after trending downward from 2000 through 2007. Dr. Berman contends "by giving teens info, we aren't giving them permission." Who is she trying to kid? It is time for a reality check on sex education! Abstinence education works for sex just like it does for drugs and alcohol. Mixed messages don't work.
Wednesday, Feb 10, 2010 -- Pro-abortion plates can't compete with Choose Life plates For years abortion advocates have been trying to block Choose Life specialty license plates in almost every state where an effort has been made to obtain them. Now that Virginia has approved a Choose Life plate, abortion advocates there have engaged the ACLU to defend their free speech rights as they push for a "Trust Women/Respect Choice" license plate. The Virginia legislature should make sure they include provisions on the minimum quantity needed before a plate can go into production. Abortion advocates may never reach the minimum order quantity. There are currently three states with pro-abortion plates available, but the quantities purchased are dismal. The Hawaii "Choose Life" license plate is outselling the Planned Parenthood "Respect Choice" plate 5 to 1. The Planned Parenthood plate in Montana called "Pro-Family, Pro-Choice" has only sold 84, compared to 1120 "Choose Life" plates, making the Pro-Life advantage over 13 to 1. In Pennsylvania the "Choose Life" license plate is continuing to outsell the Planned Parenthood license plate 37 to 1.
Tuesday, Feb 9, 2010 -- Statistics reveal opposition to Tebow ad increased response Everything was playing in favor of success for the Focus on the Family Super Bowl ad. The criticism from abortion advocates generated an estimated $10 million in free publicity for the ad prior to Super Bowl Sunday. Might that buildup have helped the Tebow ad achieve the third highest viewership of all Super Bowl commercials? Choosing this Super Bowl turned out to be great timing since it was the first sporting event to ever exceed 100 million viewers. In fact, the 106.5 million people who watched set a new record for television viewers, higher that 1983's M*A*S*H finale with 105.97 million viewers. This huge audience had the opportunity to watch the Focus on the Family commercial early into the game. The Focus web site logged 500,000 hits and 50,000 unique visitors just during the hour the Super Bowl ad aired. "Our traffic jumped to 40 times its normal volume," Focus spokeswoman Monica Schleicher told the Denver Post. Focus on the Family has received considerable traffic on their web site from people following up based on the ad and watching a longer video with the Tebow family that is much more explicit in terms of the conversation about Pam Tebow's decision to not have an abortion during her crisis pregnancy. The Focus web site required additional servers to keep up with the traffic. Jill Stanek observed, "But there was a brilliant strategist involved here Who must be given credit. God's masterful and mischievous hand was clearly on display Sunday. God loves a good laugh, and He must have had a great deal of fun outsmarting, exposing and embarrassing pro-aborts in such a grand fashion."
Monday, Feb 8, 2010 -- Showing intolerance while demanding tolerance Abortion advocates are quick to claim that Pro-Lifers are "judgmental" and "trying to control the choices of others." They go further by arguing that any opposition to abortion is pushing extreme religious viewpoints on them. Instead, they demand "tolerance" of their view of abortion as a "right to choose" that cannot be challenged. When abortion advocates got wind of the Focus on the Family ad to be played during the Super Bowl, they immediately went ballistic, trying to get CBS to cancel it, but they did not even know any specifics about the content of the ad. The tolerance they demand is clearly a one-way street. After the ad played with its "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life" theme, wouldn't you expect abortion advocates to show a little tolerance, even if only out of shame over their ridiculous over-reaction? But no, NOW president Terry O'Neill was quoted as saying: "I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it. That's what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don't find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself." Some abortion supporters did figure out that the level of intolerance displayed toward the ad went too far, recognizing that they had overplayed their hand in light of the actual content of the ad. The pro-abortion Huffington Post called the ad a "stroke of marketing genius." However, the actual intolerance of abortion advocates was on display in the political arena as well. Using the cover that he was uncomfortable with the "politically sensitive" nature of the award, Ohio House Speaker Armond Budish refused to allow Pro-Life teenager Elisabeth Trisler on the House floor to accept a legislative resolution honoring her accomplishment as the National Right to Life Oratory Contest winner last year. Such honorary resolutions are routinely presented at the start of Ohio House legislative sessions to constituents, including those who win athletic championships or academic contests. But Trisler was denied the honor, and will be forced to receive the resolution in the mail. 2/10/10 update
Friday, Feb 5, 2010 -- Super Bowl ad sheds light on life, and its opponents Do not ignore the commercials during the Super Bowl on Sunday February 7th or you might miss the Pro-Life commercial featuring football star Tim Tebow and his mother. Even without seeing the ad, abortion advocates have been going bonkers, demanding that CBS cancel the ad. The theme of the ad is "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life", but based on the Focus on the Family origin of the ad, NOW ("National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time" -- per Sally Jenkins of the Washington Post) has labeled it "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning." Even people who call themselves "pro-choice" have become critical of the effort to get the ad cancelled, recognizing that choosing life over abortion under difficult circumstances is a positive choice. Feminist attorney Gloria Allred called the ad "misleading advertising" and threatened a lawsuit, based on the fact that abortion is illegal in the Philippines, and her assumption that no doctor would recommend an abortion. Then Kim Gandy of Feminist Majority Foundation claimed, "The implicit suggestion that pregnant women whose health is at risk shouldn't worry because nothing bad will happen is downright dangerous, even if the story is true." Thus, the advocates for "choice" think an unseen ad is "offensive and demeaning to women" (because it might suggest that life is a better choice than abortion), "misleading" (because the mother was "forced" by law to carry the pregnancy to term), and "dangerous" (because fighting for the life of your baby is a health risk to be avoided). Somehow, trying to sell these radical ideas to the general public seems to be a losing proposition, but this ad has motivated abortion advocates to put all their cards on the table. It appears they have a losing hand, as their strategy is backfiring tremendously, giving the ad a huge amount of extra publicity that it would never have received if they had just ignored it. In this case, abortion advocates did not get the cooperation they counted on from the media to cover up their losing hand one more time. This time the message that choosing life, even under dire circumstances, is more noble than sacrificing your child to abortion, will be aired for all to see, and even without mentioning the word abortion, everyone will know the issue that is being addressed. That is what is driving abortion advocates bonkers. The truth hurts those who are living a lie!
Thursday, Feb 4, 2010 -- Abortions increasing around the world British-based Marie Stopes International (MSI) just announced that it committed 920,000 abortions in 43 nations in 2009. MSI cited its largest annual growth in the organization's 33-year history. The 920,000 medical and surgical abortions represented a 56% increase over the previous year. MSI revealed that most of its locations are in developing countries and in rural areas or urban slums, where it claims the "need" for abortion is greatest. Whille there is no direct correlation between this huge increase in abortions committed by MSI and funding from the U.S. government, there certainly seems to be a connection between this infliction of more abortions on poor people and the efforts of the Obama administration to expand support for international abortions. MSI is the second major international abortion provider to announce a huge increase in business. Just one month ago International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) revealed a major increase in their "abortion services" in their annual report for 2008-2009. IPPF provided 1,134,549 “abortion services” compared with 652,010 in the previous year -- an even more rapid increase than MSI.
Wednesday, Feb 3, 2010 -- Proposed budget has record deficits, but funds abortion The recently proposed Federal budget for Fiscal Year 2011 projects record deficits because of its expansion of so many gaovernment programs. Included there are provisions to directly fund abortion in a number of ways. These pro-abortion provisions cover public funding of abortions in the District of Columbia, allow the Legal Services Corporation (financed by tax dollars) to file lawsuits against Pro-Life legislation, provide more money for Planned Parenthood, and reinstate funding for the United Nations Population Fund, which has supported China’s one-child policy. The campaign rhetoric of wanting to take steps to reduce abortion always seems to get translated into steps that will increase abortions. That result is certainly consistent with the business plan of Planned Parenthood, as revealed by Abby Johnson, the former director of a Texas Planned Parenthood. She summarized that business plan while attending the March for Life on January 22, 2010 in Washington, D.C.
Tuesday, Feb 2, 2010 -- Who condones violence? When Scott Roeder murdered late-term abortionist George Tiller last May, Pro-Life organizations all condemned the violence, even though Scott Roeder was not affiliated with any Pro-Life group. In contrast, when Harlan Drake murdered Pro-Life activist James Pouillon, abortion advocates raised hardly a peep. Of course, Drake was not affiliated with abortion advocates either. That pattern of silent acceptance of pro-abortion violence has been repeated, but this time much closer to home. A uniformed Planned Parenthood escort, Gerard Nordley, confronted Pro-Life advocate Lila Rose in December, eventually striking her on the hand, knocking her literature to the ground. Planned Parenthood made no statement about this violence, offered no apology to Lila Rose for the actions of their agent, and has failed to respond to inquiries about the incident. Pro-Life blogger Cassy Fiano has called Planned Parenthood's public relations department repeatedly for over a month, but without any response. Fiano stated, "I genuinely wanted to know their side of the story. Have they done their own investigation into this? Is the escort, Gerard Nordley, still working with Planned Parenthood? Do they have a statement? Will they issue an apology?" As usual, the rules Planned Parenthood expects to apply to others never seem to apply to them.
Monday, Feb 1, 2010 -- Abstinence education is thrown out of Wisconsin schools Logic and common sense have now been through out of schools in Wisconsin. The state legislature has passed a bill mandating that all sexual education classes in public schools teach about contraception. The timing could not be more ironic. At almost the same time a study was published that again shows teaching abstinence produces results while so-called comprehensive sex education does not. Another irony observed by a critic of the Wisconsin bill was its justification. Proponents used Milwaukee’s atrocious teen pregnancy and STD rates to push for this bill, but this style of comprehensive sex education is what has been taught in the Milwaukee Public School system for well over a decade, and look where it has gotten them. Of course, when politicians listen to the likes of Planned Parenthood, logic takes a back seat to their political agenda. The mystery is why anyone actually considers their "solution" as viable when it nevers works except to generat more abortion business for them.
|