Categories
Abortion Planned Parenthood Truth

Planned Parenthood’s Political Juggernaut Is Meeting Its Match

By Peter B. Gemma

Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion provider and a powerful multi-million-dollar political machine. Hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding go for its non-profit “family planning services.” In truth, however, that facilitates Planned Parenthood’s political activities, underwritten by private donations, in support of politicians who keep the federal funding flowing.

Fortunately for the pro-life side, the Susan B. Anthony List has reached parity in political fundraising and organizational operations on the ground. Of course, it gets no tax dollars. And the Trump administration has been a great restrictor of the abortion giant with executive guidelines.

Recently, the Trump administration enacted a rule that would require family planning clinics to be housed in separate buildings from abortion clinics, a move that would cut off Planned Parenthood from some federal funding. The new guidelines apply to a $286 million-a-year grant, known as Title X, that pays for birth control and testing of sexually transmitted diseases for four million of its low-income clients. It requires the “physical and financial” separation of family planning services and abortion referrals. Planned Parenthood clinics will be able to talk to mothers about abortion, but not where they can go to get one. The organization receives between $50 million and $60 million from Title X.

Of course, the new federal rule is being challenged in court. Several state officials, including Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, and presidential candidate/Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, have announced an intent to sue over the new policy.

Legal battles may not be good news because right to life advocates have not fared well in the courts lately.

In June 2017, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Medicaid Act “authorizes a private right of action,” allowing Medicaid recipients to challenge the disqualification of a health care provider. Louisiana and Kansas, which had stripped Planned Parenthood of state Medicaid funds after evidence that the abortion provider was harvesting and selling fetal body parts, proceeded to appeal the ruling to the U. S. Supreme Court. On Dec. 10 2018, by a vote of six to three, the High Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the lower court ruling stand. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented. Instead of supplying the fourth vote needed just to allow for a hearing, Chief Justice Roberts and, in a surprise to many (not all) pro-lifers, Justice Kavanaugh, sided with the four liberals on the Court.

Meanwhile for Planned Parenthood, it’s business-as-usual and business is good as it is cashing in on the Trump era. In 2018, taxpayers were charged for a $20 million increase in federal funding according to the organization’s annual report – a total of $564.8 million in government subsidies. Planned Parenthood also received $100 million more from private contributions and bequests in 2018 than it did in 2017, with Warren Buffett, the investment guru, leading the way. He has donated $63.5 million to Planned Parenthood since 2014 through his family’s foundation. Planned Parenthood’s total net assets have increased from $1.6 billion last year to nearly $1.9 billion in 2018.

And Planned Parenthood has now ramped-up its abortion services. They are providing travel expenses and financial assistance for clients in states where abortion is restricted and regulated, to states where controls are loose to non-existent.

Curiously, despite receiving regular increases via taxpayer dollars and boosts in their private fund-raising efforts, Planned Parenthood’s services have declined. The organization’s 2015-2016 report revealed that Planned Parenthood served 100,000 fewer women in 2015-2016 as compared to 2014-2015. But their abortion machine is in high gear: 323,999 abortions performed two years ago, 328,348 last year, and 332,757 in 2018. Planned Parenthood has cornered 35 percent of the abortion market.

In 2015-2016, Planned Parenthood performed 83 abortions for every one adoption referral. The abortion giant referred about 3,000 women to adoption services during 2018, one thousand less than the year before.

Planned Parenthood’s new president, Dr. Leana Wen, has acknowledged that abortion isn’t just a service the organization provides, but the bottom line of their business: “First, our core mission is providing, protecting, and expanding access to abortion and reproductive health care. We will never back down from that fight.”

What is the secret of Planned Parenthood’s success? The organization’s previous CEO, Cecile Richards, put it simply: “We have the potential to swing the vote and that’s a lot of power. The question is, what are we going to do with it? We’re going to be the largest kickass advocacy organization in the country!

Planned Parenthood and its political arms are separate on paper (because taxpayers are forced to give the abortion chain over $500 million a year for health services). However, private and corporate donors direct their money into Planned Parenthood’s political agenda – and abortion business – rather than to fund the other services the organization provides. In 2018, donors invested $532.7 million dollars in Planned Parenthood, including $21 million from left-wing billionaire George Soros.

Planned Parenthood has some 40 corporate backers, including:

  • American Express
  • Levi Strauss
  • AT & T
  • Macy’s
  • Avon
  • Microsoft
  • Bank of America
  • Nike
  • Bath & Body Works
  • Pepsi-Co
  • Clorox
  • Starbucks
  • Johnson & Johnson
  • Verizon

Federal law prohibits government funding “to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion” (except in cases of rape, incest, or an amorphous ‘danger to the life of the mother’). That’s where Planned Parenthood’s private donors step in. Last year they bankrolled the organization’s $160 million expenditure on “public policy” (lobbying) and “movement building to engage communities” (grassroots organizing; there are more than 50,000 student members on 350 campuses.)

In addition, Planned Parenthood poured over $20 million directly into the 2018 midterm election. And there’s more. Because of its partnership with the Win Justice Coalition (which includes the Service Employees International Union, the Center for Community Change Action, and the Color of Change PAC), Planned Parenthood’s 2018 war chest actually topped $28 million.

In 2016, according to the Federal Election Commission, Planned Parenthood invested $12.6 million into independent expenditures – nearly all of it to support Democrats or oppose Republicans. That figure includes $2.8 million to attack Donald Trump and $2.4 million to back Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid.

George Soros and his family are major donors to Planned Parenthood Votes, giving a combined $4.75 million in two election cycles. Last year, Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire and former mayor of New York City, contributed $1 million to one of Planned Parenthood’s political operations.

On the positive side, the largest pro-life political action committee that is a muscular match for Planned Parenthood, the Susan B. Anthony List, has matched the abortion giant’s financial clout politically along with its organizational skills. The group raised and spent some $28 million in 2018, which matches Planned Parenthood and its partnership organizations combined. The Susan B. Anthony List also marshaled enough troops to knock on the doors of some 2.7 million pro-life households as part of its grassroots efforts to get out the vote.

The Susan B. Anthony List has become a force to be reckoned with and one that, while largely ignored by a medial that is slavish in producing pro-abortion puff pieces, is making its presence known in political elections.

Of course, the newest and biggest asset of the right to life movement is the Trump administration.

Scores of federal judges who, by-in-large, have pro-life records have been nominated and appointed and the impact is now being felt. This month, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Ohio’s right to defund Planned Parenthood, asserting that there is no “Fourteenth Amendment right to perform abortions.” It reversed a lower court’s decision by an 11–6 vote, with all four Trump appointees ruling against Planned Parenthood. 

Many federal government agencies and departments are creating pro-life policies.

For example, President Trump has expanded policies to ensure American tax dollars are not used to fund the abortion industry in all global health programs. The new Trump policy protects over $8.8 billion overseas aid from funding abortion. Recently, the Department of Health and Human Services  established the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division within the Office for Civil Rights that will work to protect health care professionals who do not want to participate in abortion.

And the Trump administration has hired pro-life personnel.

Bethany Kozma, senior adviser for the Office of Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment at the U.S. Agency for International Development, told the annual U.N. Commission on the Status of Women meeting that the “U.S. is a pro-life nation.” An overstatement for certain, especially considering the strengthening political clout of Planned Parenthood, but it rings truer than it has in a long, long time.

Peter B. Gemma is a freelance writer whose articles and commentaries have appeared in USA Today, AmericanThinker.com, and the DailyCaller.com.


Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Abortion Truth

Ghandi Would Be Aghast At New York’s Abortion Law

by Julio Gonzalez, M.D., J.D.

“A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members.”
Mahatma Gandhi

Let’s look at New York’s new abortion law, because it is the one actually passed and cheered by the state legislature.

On Jan. 22, 2019, Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the Reproductive Health Act into law. The purpose of the new statute is to update the rights of women in accessing abortions and (anti)reproductive services. The law also makes it legally impossible to charge someone with the murder of an unborn child.

So this immediately begs the ongoing question: What is a human life?

One of the great falsities promoted by pro-abortionists is that an unborn child is not a human being. Well, if she’s not a human being, then what is she? She’s not a car.  Or a boat. She is most assuredly alive, and she has all the genetic information that other humans have. So, if she’s not human, what is she?

Pro-abortionists argue that the baby is not a human life because it is not independent. But none of us are. We are, by nature, social animals, which make us inherently dependent on others. And truly, if we are to use dependence as a cut-off for human life, then why do we not allow for the termination of the lives of the disabled simply because they are unable to provide for themselves? These people are just as dependent as any unborn baby for their survival, yet the Left, at least for now, is not arguing for their active extermination.

Pro-abortionists also argue that the pre-born individual could not be considered human because she has not reached some preconceived point in her development.

Well, if that’s true, then what is that point? Does a baby magically and suddenly become a human being when it crosses the birth canal or exits the mother through the abdominal wall? Certainly, it is hard to fathom the difference between the humanity of a just-delivered baby and that same baby literally 30 seconds earlier. Does the baby suddenly become human when her heart first beats, or when she feels pain, or when we can see her femora on ultrasound?

The fact is that any definition of when a baby becomes a “human being” other than at the moment of conception fails under the weight of its own capriciousness.

And so, we arrive at the only conclusion we can. A baby is an independently identifiable and uniquely genetically defined human being from the moment of her conception.

There is a lack of necessity for late term abortions, and a vulgarity.

Help us fight

One of the two most significant changes in New York’s Health Reproductive Act is to allow for a legal abortion after the 24th week of gestation. The statute accomplishes this by stating that an abortion may be performed, at any time, “to protect the patient’s life or health.” Not only is this provision abjectly immoral as it allows for the senseless killing of a viable human being, it creates an escape clause for a mass murderer (the late-term abortionist) to kill viable babies.

It is virtually impossible to conjure a situation where an abortion is medically necessary after 24 weeks of gestation. The reason is supremely simple: since the baby is viable in such situations, the way to protect the mother’s health after 24 weeks of gestation, if the rapid discontinuation of a pregnancy becomes necessary, is by delivering a viable baby, not by killing it.

With this law, the legislature in its rancid corruption and gross disregard for the sanctity of life has essentially created a new statutory (not medical) provision where the mother may demand to kill the baby.  That provision is that when the baby is more than 24 weeks gestational age, and the mother demands it be killed for her own health.

It will be interesting to see how physicians respond to this request when they are fully aware that all they need to do to address the mother’s life-threatening or health related issue is simply to deliver a viable baby.

If you are further along than 24 weeks in your pregnancy, you should avoid New York.

A second appalling provision in the Reproductive Health Act is the provision prohibiting the killing of an unborn baby that is greater than 24 weeks of age from being considered murder.

Suppose a robber attacks a woman for her purse, and the assailant pulls out a knife, or even a gun, in order to perpetrate the crime. Suppose further that the mother is due to deliver later that day. As a matter of fact, she is on her way to the hospital to deliver her baby. The robber then shoots the mother, killing the baby. The mother survives. There is no murder. In fact, a murder charge is specifically disallowed, as if the baby is invisible.

Say, instead that an enraged father does not want a late term baby to be born. The mother and he are in a heated fight. The father, in his rage, repeatedly punches the mother with the intent and effect of killing the baby. Or perhaps, the father grabs a kitchen knife and stabs the baby through the mother, and the baby is more than 24 weeks of gestational age. The baby, of course, dies. The mother survives. In New York, no murder will have taken place. Only an assault and battery upon the mother. No justice for the baby is ever served.

Section 4164 of New York statutes required a physician be available to resuscitate a child who has survived an abortion. The Reproductive Health Act admits that although this baby is legally a person, it repugnantly removes any requirement to save the life of a living, grasping, breathing human being.

This is a horrible stain on New York

Gandhi did say that the measure of a great society lies in how it treats its weakest members. Well, the weakest members in our society are the unborn who are at times so weak that they cannot survive outside of the mother and are so silent that it is impossible for them to voice their opinion or defend their most elemental interests.

A review of the meaning of fundamental and inalienable rights does provide a mother the ability to pursue an abortion. But just like her right to punch another in the nose ends at the point where the other’s nose begins, her right to actually undergo the abortion ends at the point where the baby’s cells begin.

By any measure, on Jan. 22, 2019, grossly disregarding the humanity of the unborn child and exculpating future killers of murder, the New York legislature and its executive demonstrated themselves to be among the worst and most vile of institutions.

Categories
Abortion Planned Parenthood Trump Truth

Trump Team Rolls Back Planned Parenthood Abortion Funding

Rod Thomson

As the Trump Administration continues to roll back terrible rules and policies from the Obama Administration and earlier, it has now tackled one that will take up to $60 million in taxpayer money out of Planned Parenthood’s pockets.

Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar is changing a rule in Title X implementation policy that would eliminate abortion providers from receiving the federal money they currently receive through the federal program. Of course, the largest by far is Planned Parenthood, which gets up to $60 million of the $287 million Title X program every year.

The rule change would also prohibit facilities that receive Title X funds from referring patients to specific abortion centers, although it would still allow employees to counsel women about abortion options generally.

This federal program is designed specifically to provide contraceptives to low-income or uninsured people, including those who are not eligible for Medicaid.

The rule change actually reverts back to one that President Reagan instituted in the 1980s. President Clinton, however, did away with it, President Bush did nothing about it and President Obama strengthened it. Trump is obviously a different kind of president.

Importantly, the Reagan-era rule, which the new one mirrors, was already upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. That doesn’t mean that Planned Parenthood and surrogates won’t challenge it, but they won’t win. (Outside the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.)

Like Us On Facebook

This rule change does not defund Planned Parenthood entirely. That will probably require action by Congress, which has shown itself unwilling. The abortion giant still receives funding from other government programs and departments. In fact, the Government Accountability Office found that in a three-year period, the federal government paid abortion providers $26.5 billion. So while federal money is legally barred from paying for abortions, Planned Parenthood’s finances are fungible enough that the money is undoubtedly supporting abortions.

This is all the more important as Planned Parenthood continues to reel from one ugly scandal after another.

Life News reported just yesterday: “The Planned Parenthood abortion chain has been caught repeatedly performing abortions on abuse victims as young as 12 and 13 years old, failing to report suspected sexual abuse to authorities, and sending victims back to their abusers. A new investigative report report chronicles these cases and reveals Planned Parenthood’s decades-long pattern of helping child sex abusers cover up their crimes.”

Join Our Fight For American Values!

This comes on top of the sting operation last year by Project Veritas that uncovered Planned Parenthood’s routine selling of baby parts from aborted babies that created a national outcry, despite being attacked in the media.

There’s still a long way to go when it comes to not paying for abortions. But even if Congress is not up to the fight, President Trump is willing to do what is necessary and legal to keep as much public money out of Planned Parenthood as possible.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS


 

Categories
Abortion Gender Planned Parenthood Transgender Truth

Planned Parenthood Targets Minors For Transgender Treatment

Rod Thomson

In a virtually ignored development, Planned Parenthood has found another way to make a buck on the backs of mostly impressionable young people.

On top of its massive abortion industry, and the more recent discovery that it was selling baby parts, the nation’s largest abortion provider is now offering transgender hormone therapy for women who want to become men and men who want to become women.

Planned Parenthood’s abortion business model is threatened as the U.S. abortion rate continues to decline, new regulations are put in place on the horrific and unpopular practice of late-term abortions and the American public becomes more inclined towards curtailing abortions as science reveals more of what is going on in the womb.

Further, there is substantial momentum toward defunding Planned Parenthood at the federal level, which would be another blow to the abortion giant’s revenue stream. Congress can’t quite get its act together on this, but the Trump Administration is actively helping states in the fight for unborn babies. The Health and Human Services administration, working with the Alliance Defending Freedom legal team, is telling states they no longer have to comply with Obama regulations that threw up roadblocks for states trying to exclude Planned Parenthood from their state Medicaid programs.

Declining abortions and reducing tax funding is putting a crimp in Planned Parenthood’s money flowing style. So it is not surprising that the organization turned to transgender hormone — or sex change — treatments in 2016. But it is quickly going for the younger, more impressionable teens who are in vulnerable years of life.

The Revolutionary Youtube Channel

Until literally the last few years, gender dysphoria was understood to be a psychological disorder, and very treatable. Importantly, most young people who experience this condition of gender confusion outgrow it as adults and no longer suffer from the dysphoria. Somewhere between 75 percent and 95 percent of children experiencing gender dysphoria will outgrow it as adults. The majority grow up to be gay adults. The minority are traditional adults.

But the LGBTQ activist community continues to undermine every scientific reality with its powerful political machine and a sympathetic media. Just off their successful dissolution of marriage as being between one man and one woman, the LGBTQ activists immediately turned to mucking up the differences between the two sexes. Boys can be girls and girls can be boys, whatever they feel like, science and biology and known reality be damned.

One of the earliest Planned Parenthood groups to begin selling hormone therapy drugs is based in Sarasota, Florida, where it is now dishing out the irreversible body-altering drugs to about 250 people on a regular basis. The Guardian newspaper reported that “Planned Parenthood is one of the largest sources in the U.S. of transgender healthcare.”

And now, it will be “offering” its drugs for sale to minors with parental consent. But anyone paying attention knows that the parental consent portion will be under attack almost instantly.

This is abominable considering most of these minors will outgrow their gender confusion as adults, but with these drugs, they will be unalterably changed. Many of their lives will be severely degraded because of the drug regiment they chose to buy from Planned Parenthood as teens. But the LGBTQ community will further its destructive agenda and Planned Parenthood will play its part while making its millions.

Most transgender hormone treatment clinics require a therapist’s letter for giving out the irreversible, body-altering drugs — providing some tiny level of protection from compulsive acts — something teens are famous for. But Planned Parenthood does not. In fact, all the group’s policy requires is to simply inform confused young people of the risks of treatment. The patient signs the form, the treatments begin, and the money flows in.

The hormonal ‘sex-change’ treatments are not supposed to be funded by tax dollars, but they are when it is deemed “medically necessary,” according to the National Center for Transgender Equality.

Thus a brand new revenue stream is spawned for Planned Parenthood, and more lives will be unnecessarily devastated.

Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. Rod is co-host of Right Talk America With Julio and Rod on the Salem Radio Network.


Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy. Whatfinger.com  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


 

Categories
Abortion Gender Immigration Truth

COUNTDOWN: The Top 5 Lies of the Left

Rod Thomson

American political liberaldom relies heavily on empty canards, name-calling and scare tactics to stay alive and shut down opposition.

There are few if any deep and penetrating debates on major topics that drive the politics of the left. They simply will not allow it. So they create fictitious arguments (the nice way of saying lies.)

With that in mind, here are a few major shibboleths of at least the activist left which verge on the incredulous, but which are used regularly and magnified by the sympathetic media megaphone.

 

No. 5 Lie: Border security is racist

If you believe that America should act like most every other country in the world and protect its borders, you’re a racist.

If you believe that America should have the authority to let in who it wants to and keep out who it wants to like most every other country, you’re a racist.

If you believe America should know who is here and who is coming and going like most every other country, you’re a racist.

This stems from candidate Donald Trump running on a campaign to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border to stop the millions of illegal aliens (that is the actual, legal term) from crossing back and forth like it was a state border.

This quasi-open border is the result of an unholy alliance between businesses that want cheap labor and Democrat political interests that see future Democratic voters and a play to current Hispanic voters. And it is the issue that Trump claimed in order to peel away blue-collar Democratic voters.

The left rarely tries to argue the merits of open borders, because most Americans oppose that. So they devolve to the thought-free name-calling of racism because, you know, Mexicans are brown and therefore opposing them, or anyone else, breaking into our country illegally is racist.

 

No. 4 Lie: Asking questions is science denying

Speaking of science and politics, the inquisitive, independent thinkers among us are now considered anti-science — if they are asking questions about the degree and causes of climate change today.

Yes, while it is obviously the antithesis of actual science, which involves continually asking questions, forming hypotheses, testing, re-testing based on results and so on, this tactic now is employed to shut up any opposition to the climate change political agenda.

The data seems to suggest modest warming since the mid 1800s and there seems to be a connection between carbon in the atmosphere, trapped greenhouse gases, and global warming.

But if you question the data because of a series of scandals revealing how leading climatologists have conspired to alter older data creating cooler temperatures to suggest more rapid warming now, you are a denier.

If you question the degree to which human activity is impacting climate change by pointing out a nearly two-decade pause while carbon emissions continued to increase, you are a denier.

But these and many others are reasonable questions. That we are not allowed to ask them without being labeled flat-earthers suggests this is a lot more about politics than about science.

 

No. 3 Lie: Men can be women can be men, or whatever

One of the most mind-boggling absurdities foisted on us by the modern liberal is that a person’s sex is dependent on what they think it is. Any “assignment at birth” is an arbitrary constraint to who that person really is.

So, if a person has one Y chromosome and one X chromosome and they have the full package of penis and scrotum, it is not arbitrary to call them male. That person is a man. That is actual science.

But the left — in true full science denial — says those physical realities can be trumped by a person’s feeling. If that person feels like a woman, then they are a woman trapped in a man’s body and they should be allowed and encouraged to dress like a woman or have full-blown surgery to become a woman. And they should be allowed to use women’s bathrooms, locker rooms and showers — even though they are a man.

Until just the past few years this was considered a psychological condition that should be treated. But now, the left celebrates children as young as four years old being encouraged to be the sex they are not.

One could reasonably call that child abuse.

 

No. 2 Lie: Hate speech is not free speech

No less a luminary than former Vermont governor, DNC chairman and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean tweeted out this past week that “Hate speech is not protected by the first amendment.”

The internet blew up over such a ridiculous statement. Even PolitiFact and media organs called him to task. But the thing is, his tweet got 700 retweets and 1,400 likes. Dean actually doesn’t have that big a Twitter following, meaning the tweet got strong traction among those following him.

Too many on the left, most particularly those on college campuses, view hate speech practically as any speech with which they disagree. Of course, many of these same campuses actually have speech codes and “free speech zones” with the overt meaning that outside the zone is not for free speech.

The unfortunate truth is that many college liberals, trained by professorial liberals, think that they should be able to shut down speech they do not appreciate or agree with. They have safe spaces and mainstream American views can be shouted down and pushed out with threats and actions.

These people leave the campuses today and in a generation will be leaders in the nation. It matters. The radicals running campuses know this.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel!

 

No. 1 Lie: It’s not about innocent life, but reproductive freedom

And coming in at number one in our countdown is the oldie but definitely not goodie, the abortion non-debate.

Increasingly, science (which worldview seems to be anti-science here?) is showing that by every objective definition the baby in the womb is indeed a human, with the inherent rights of a human, within a few weeks of conception. From brainwaves to heartbeats to pain reaction, a person. Science continually pushes this obvious definition earlier and earlier.

But the left forces the debate to revolve around women’s rights. Not the 50 percent of female babies aborted — not those would-be women — but adult women who should have the right to kill their unborn baby at any point in a pregnancy for any reason they deem. Period. This is the classic Planned Parenthood position on choice.

Because abortion is conflated with birth control, it is called a reproductive “right” on the order of getting a contraceptive device or even pap smears and mammograms — anything except actually talking about whether we should condone the often wanton taking of an innocent human life. Any restrictions on abortion therefore are restrictions on a woman’s access to healthcare. See how much you can get away with when you refuse to call something what it is.

Oh and coat hangers. Don’t forget coat hangers.

But there is an encouraging side to this falderal. All of this avoidance on major issues means that conservatives actually have the stronger cases. Otherwise, liberals would not avoid the debate. We just need to be courageous enough to make those cases over and over and over.

Categories
Abortion Politics Truth

ANSWERING FACEBOOK: Playing Dodgeball with Abortion Realities

By Rod Thomson

The abortion debate inevitably travels in the same issue-avoiding circles. I was recently on an ABC panel debating the courts blocking Florida’s 24-hour wait period for a woman to get an abortion after receiving counseling, providing time for her to weigh more information into her life-and-death decision.

Naturally enough, it devolved into a debate on abortion — as it always should. I was debating a pro-choice feminist and board member of the ACLU. And a friend. Our debate was feisty but civil — an important goal.

However, the debate continued on Facebook, where it became decidedly less civil. One of the great canards thrown at me all the time is that I cannot have an opinion on this because I am a man. This is so easily cut down and burned that there is never a response to my point. It’s just reiterated that I can’t. I’m male.

What this and so much of the rest of abortion debate dodgeball suggest is that rational thought, morals and, more than ever, science, make the pro-choice position completely indefensible. There is simply no way to defend a woman’s “right” to end the life of another human being for any reason she chooses, at any point in the pregnancy she chooses.

 

Canards flying everywhere

Hence we have the dodgeball arguments that this is a “choice”; that this is about “reproductive health rights”; that this is about “health care”; that a man cannot have an opinion.

No, the first and central issue is whether that which is in the womb is a human being with rights inherent as a human being. Most people actually see that is the case, at least after a month or two. Science gives us evidence with brain waves, heartbeats and in-womb pictures.

So when I make these points, they are really never refuted head-on. This is demonstrated with painful clarity in the Facebook debate that followed. It’s linked below.

Here is a sampling from Facebook, from both men and women:

“I watched it last night. I still don’t understand why men think they have a say in women’s health.”

“The next segment should be on prostate health. I’m looking forward to (a woman) expressing her opinion on that.”

“A man’s opinion on a women’s health and body issue is just not on equal footing with (a woman’s), no matter how eloquent and reasonable it may be.”

“What if women were up in arms because of men’s selfish refusal to get vasectomies?? What if we tried to FORCE men to get vasectomies for the safety of women?”

“Another man chimes in, lol.”

FYI, the response that men cannot have an opinion on this is astonishingly faulty thinking. Morals are not gender-dependent. Right and wrong is right and wrong. There is not a different set of rights and wrongs based on gender. It is not morally acceptable for a woman to steal from a man because she is a woman, because *stealing* is wrong. It is not morally acceptable for a man to kill a woman, or another man, because *murder* is wrong. Stealing and murder are wrong independent of which gender is doing it and which gender is considering its morality. In the same way, killing an unborn baby is either morally acceptable or not morally acceptable, independent of which gender is doing it or which gender is considering its morality.

 

Let’s play abortion dodgeball!

All of this is dodgeball. You see how all of the accusations avoid the central point. I’m convinced most know deep down this is the willful taking of an innocent human life. They know that is not defensible on any moral grounds.

So they play dodge the issue.

  • I throw out “Is it a human life in the womb?” They dodge left with “It’s a woman’s choice!”
  • I throw again “Is it a human life in the womb?” They dodge right with “It’s about reproductive rights!”
  • I throw again “Is it a human life in the womb?” They duck with “It’s about healthcare!”
  • I throw again “Is it a human life in the womb?” They spin sideways with “Pro-lifers don’t care about the life outside the womb!”
  • I throw again “Is it a human life in the womb?” They slide down with “If pro-lifers really cared about abortions, they would support better sex education!”
  • I throw again “Is it a human life in the womb?” They spin sideways with “You’re a man!”

I throw one last time “Is it a human life in the womb?” And one may finally answer with “No! It’s a clump of cells. Nothing more than a tumor.”

Finally. Someone admits to being a science-denier. But at least we can get on to debate the core issue with all the scientific evidence that it is indeed a measurable human being within weeks. We measure the death of a human with heartbeat and brainwaves. The baby has both of those in six to eight weeks.

That’s it. Dodge the ball of what abortion really is.

None of these remotely approach a defense for a state policy of allowing the willful killing of a human being with inherent rights by another human being for any reason, or no reason.

Categories
Abortion Christianity Culture Politics

Is Hillary Clinton the Best Choice to Reduce Abortions?

The Christian Post recently ran a provocative column entitled Hillary Clinton Is the Best Choice for Voters Against Abortion

It’s not click bait. The author means it. And so it demands a corrective reply.

First, we need to understand with laser clarity that abortion is not a woman’s choice. It is a deeply immoral, gender-indifferent act.

Eric Sapp, the author of the piece, does not dispute that and is apparently pro-life. His primary point — other than seeing hypocrisy only in Republicans — is that statistically abortions always rise under Republican presidents and stay steady or decline under Democrat presidents. He claims this makes sense because Democrats are better at reducing poverty — a metric associated with abortion.

Sapp writes: “Abortions rose steadily during the tenure of the first ‘pro-life’ Republican President, Ronald Reagan. They reached their highest level under President H. W. Bush. Abortions then dropped dramatically under President Clinton, falling to 60% of the high under his pro-life Republican predecessor. That downward trend stalled during most of President W. Bush’s tenure, and remained basically flat until the final two years of his term when Democrats retook Congress. And then abortions plunged again under Obama, falling to their lowest point in 40 years.”

This summary paragraph presents several fallacies and a few simple falsehoods. But it is exemplary of the overall dishonesty of the article.

  • First, the statistics are dishonestly cherry-picked. The charge that abortions rose steadily during Reagan is true. But they also rose steadily under Carter, also. Sapp leaves the Democrat president out of his stats because it does not fit his conclusions. The Roe v. Wade ruling was still fairly new and the culture was going through the sexual revolution. That they rose under both presidents makes sense, but he cherry-picked only one. Dishonest.
  • Second, he is factually wrong on his assumption that they reached their highest level under George H.W. Bush, then declined under Clinton. His own reference shows abortions declining in 1991 and 1992. Both years were part of George H.W.’s presidency. Clinton was inaugurated in January 1993 and his policies kicked in in 1994 at best — four years after the decline started. So he is factually wrong using his own citation. Did he and the Christian Post think no one would check? Dishonest.
  • Third, he claims abortions “stalled” under W. Bush. That’s a fun sleight-of-hand way of just flat out lying. Abortions continued to decline six out of eight years under George W. Bush until 2006 — when the housing and banking crisis hit (propelled largely by Democrat lending policies and Republican negligence) and people got very scared. So factually wrong and dishonest. Again.

Sapp uses overarching stats, which we have demonstrated to be totally dishonest, to make a causal point, when the best they can show is correlation. He may understand this, and so he tries to create the causal link by overlaying poverty.

Here is his somewhat snooty case:

“Want to guess which political party is more effective at reducing poverty and unwanted pregnancies? I’ll give you a hint. It’s not the ‘pro-life’ Party that in this last Congressional session alone fought to cut medical care for poor mothers and children, food programs for kids, and contraception coverage and access for women.”

He betrays a lot of his personal politics in this paragraph. But notice what is missing? And it is missing from the rest of the article on this point.

Right. Statistics. He provides no links to any stats. He does not even try to back it up like he dishonestly tried to in the previous paragraph I quoted. Apparently, he actually uses his own fallacy for proof by claiming Democrats reduce poverty because they talk about reducing poverty. Words. Actually using facts, it is clear that Democrat policies do not reduce poverty. We can take a measure of the policies from the Great Society onward and see that after trillions of dollars in transfer payments, poverty is largely unmoved.

But let’s use the author’s admittedly weak method. This chart is from Wikipedia, as his above was. (See larger here.)

number_in_poverty_and_poverty_rate_1959_to_2011-_united_states

Looking at poverty overlaid with Republican and Democrat presidents, we see no correlation. Actually, poverty declined under Reagan, rose under H.W. Bush (recession) declined under Clinton, was flat under W. Bush and actually has risen under Obama.

So it turns out there is a good reason he did not use any facts to back up his smug “Want to guess which party…” sentence. There are none.

This is a wholly dishonest article, from logic to facts to reason. It’s sad that the Christian Post published it as something legitimate.

Categories
Abortion Truth

Why Abortion is Not a Woman’s Choice

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court truncated the democratic process of dealing with abortion from state to state in 1972, the issue has been defended as being a “woman’s choice.”

Apologies for bluntness, but this is an immoral position.

There is really only one question in this debate: Is that which is within a woman’s womb a person, or is it a blob of protoplasm that might one day be a person? Secondarily, if it is the latter, at what point does the transformation take place? From these answers will flow rational and moral clarity on the question of abortion.

In 1972, you could at least rely on scientific ignorance to claim the fetus was equivalent to a tumor. Although even then, the medical profession knew because of what came out of a late term abortion or miscarriage. That’s probably why so few doctors ever have performed abortions. It was not particularly rational, considering women feeling the punch of an elbow or kick of a heel — person parts. But the general public could squint its eyes real hard and blur to the idea that it was not a baby until birth.

Technology clarifier

But now, with the advance of technology, we can see clearly the baby in the womb. We can measure brain waves, heart beats and most heart-rending, we can watch the baby’s response to threat and pain. Planned Parenthood harvested human organs from “aborted fetuses” and then sold them. Human organs. That’s a pretty compelling case for that being a person in the womb.

The world understands that carrying a baby to term and giving birth and then having a child to raise is an enormous undertaking. That’s why it is supposed to be done in families, in which a mother and a father are committed to each other for life. It is meant to be a shared undertaking and a thing of beauty — not something to be destroyed when inconvenient or accidental.

The magnitude of the task notwithstanding, however, the science is overwhelming now on the morality of ending a pregnancy.

Considering what we know today about the fetus in the womb, it is morally indefensible to any longer consider that fetus anything other than a person. The obviousness of this point — made by Planned Parenthood, no less, selling human body parts — is a primary reason why every attempt at debate on the issue is deflected. It is a woman’s choice. It is between a woman and her doctor. It is about women’s health. It is reproductive health care and so on. Staying on the point of this being the purposeful death of a baby is a losing position, so it must be shifted from that.

Now, it is no longer simply squinting to make abortion acceptable, it is eyes tightly closed while repeating “woman’s choice” and “women’s health” arguments. In this one area, defenders of a “woman’s choice” are arguing that it is okay to kill a baby. There is no way around it. It is obfuscation at the highest level, for the lowest purpose.

Is early on OK?

Now perhaps you can see this when the baby in the womb is developed, but not so clearly at the earliest moments of conception. After all, even science does not suggest brain waves or heart beats in the first days.

Those two measurements of whether a person has died or is a live still show up at three weeks for the heart pumping blood and six weeks for brain waves to be measured. The problem immediately encountered here is exactly when should we say, with life-and-death certainty, that the non-human fetus becomes a human. Any point along the line is going to be arbitrary, meaning that we will be assigning death sentences based on an arbitrary line. That does not really hold moral water, either.

Remember, pro-choice activists and leaders support a woman’s right to kill her baby up until it exits the birth canal. That is the position of Hillary Clinton, the Democrat Party and some in the Republican Party. Sometimes they chant woman’s choice, sometimes they make the viability argument. It is not a human with rights until it is viable outside the woman, by which they mean the umbilical cord has been cut and it can survive on its own. But this also holds no intellectual water as the baby is still totally dependent on the mother’s, someone else’s, care for many years.

In the end, the “woman’s choice” defense of aborting unborn babies is morally and intellectually indefensible.

baby-premy

Pro-choice says a woman has a right to kill this if she so chooses, through several subterfuge arguments. Let your own eyes decide if that is moral or immoral.