Pro-Choice // Current

Boxer: Senate has votes to block Stupak amendment

One of Congress's foremost champions of abortion rights said on Monday that the Senate... more

fountaingoats
added this
14 days ago
|
4 comments

Okla. Abortion Publicity Law Blocked by Court

Enforcement of an Oklahoma law that will publicize an unprecedented amount of personal... more

slarabee
added this
1 month ago
|
19 comments

Bans 'do not cut abortion rate'

Restricting the availability of legal abortion does not appear to reduce the number of... more

Vierotchka
added this
1 month ago
|
4 comments

Pro-Life group wants to make abortion and birth-control illegal in Florida

A nationwide anti-abortion group launched an effort in Florida Friday to outlaw all... more

Future_America
added this
2 months ago
|
0 comments

Police Arrest Abortion Shooter

Authorities have charged an Owosso, Michigan, man with two counts of first-degree... more

Future_America
added this
2 months ago
|
1 comment

Where Does this Fit into a Pro-Life Moral Universe? (Disturbing Video)

I'd really like to know. A quotation from the Book of Job won't suffice.

numinant
added this
3 months ago
|
0 comments

Will God put his abortion practice on hold for 40 Days for Life campaign?

In a recent press release David Bereit, national director of 40 Days for Life, said,... more

V1ktor
added this
3 months ago
|
0 comments

Dutch Abortion Ship Under Threat

You can hardly imagine a more provocative organization than Women on the Waves.... more

btucker
added this
3 months ago
|
33 comments

Pro-lifers attack possibility of public option coverage for abortions

Think debate over the president's healthcare plan is contentious? You ain't seen nothing yet. Cue center stage the divider of all dividers, the heart of the country's culture war -- it's ... drum roll ... abortion. There is no mention of the issue in the critical healthcare bills currently being considered in Congress, but abortion foes argue that the legislation would allow, maybe even require, federal funding to cover abortions and make the procedure both more accessible and more common. Despite this recent chatter, Obama didn't explicitly speak to the issue of abortion during Wednesday's press conference on the healthcare overhaul. (Although he did obliquely emphasize "choice.")

"This is a president who says he wants to reduce abortions," says Douglas Johnson, director of the National Right to Life Committee. "But the actual policies that this administration is promoting will result in massive public subsidies for abortion and result in a massive increase in the number of abortions" -- because poor women who previously lacked insurance might suddenly have a real choice about carrying their pregnancy to term.

Conservatives would also have us believe that federal money would be directly funneled to abortion. The truth, however, is just as Politico's Ben Smith put it: "The 'government option' or 'public plan' is only administered by the government; the actual services will be paid with the same mix of private money and vast new subsidies that will pay for private plans, some of which now cover abortion."

Still, some Democrats have suggested a "common ground" approach: Let insurers decide what coverage they offer, just as they do now. Abortion coverage would neither be required nor prohibited. A more popular Democratic solution is to have an independent medical panel determine which procedures should require coverage. This approach is dissatisfying to abortion-rights supporters and opponents alike: One group assumes abortion will be covered, the other assumes it won't -- and neither is happy about said assumptions.

Certain conservatives are going as far as to call for a clear ban on funding in the pending legislation. If they succeed, a whole lot of women will lose medical benefits under Obama's plan: Roughly 86 percent of employment-based insurance plans covered abortion in 2002, according to the Guttmacher Institute. As Laurie Rubiner, vice-president for public policy and advocacy at Planned Parenthood, told Politico: That goes against "the first principle of health care reform, which is: Don’t make people worse off under health care reform than they are today."Think debate over the president's healthcare plan is contentious? You ain't seen... more

WakeUpPeople
added this
4 months ago
|
34 comments

3 Reasons Why Murdering an Abortion Doctor Isn’t Being Called “Terrorism”

Dr. George Tiller, one of the few late-term abortion providers in the country, was murdered inside his church on Sunday, and the only suspect is Scott Roeder, a man The New York Times said “had professed an anti-government, anti-abortion philosophy.” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder called the murder an “abhorrent act of violence,” but he hasn’t used the word “terrorism.” Not once.

Why?

As a bit of context, if you’re new to this website, the FBI labels the animal rights and environmental movements as the “number one domestic terrorism threat” even though those activists have never harmed a human being. At the very worst, underground groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front have released animals from fur farms, destroyed SUVs and set fire to empty buildings.

When animal rights activists or environmental activists are arrested, though, the government immediately sends out press releases and holds press conferences trumpeting the arrest of “eco-terrorists” and “domestic terrorists.”

So it’s pretty startling that government hasn’t used the T-word, considering that we’re talking about murder, and, as James Ridgeway notes over at Mother Jones, Roeder was also arrested in 1996 with ammunition, gunpowder, a blasting cap, and a fuse chord in his car. He was sentenced to two years of supervised probation. (By contrast, the SHAC 7 received years in prison for running a website).

What gives? Why hasn’t the murder of an abortion provider been labeled “terrorism”?

IT'S NOT A THREAT TO PROFITS. Time and again, we’ve seen that a driving force behind the domestic “War on Terrorism” is protecting corporate interests. The ELF, ALF and above-ground, lawful activists all directly target profits. As the Department of Homeland Security said in a memo, “Attacks against corporations by animal rights extremists and eco-terrorists are costly to the targeted company and, over time, can undermine confidence in the economy.” Similarly, the State Department has warned corporations how to protect their profits from “eco-terrorists.”

HEALTH CLINICS AND NONPROFITS DO NOT HAVE THE LOBBYING POWER OF MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS. NOW is already pushing to label this crime as “terrorism.” I wouldn’t be surprised if they also push legislation to label anti-abortion violence as terrorism. The problem, though, is that groups like NOW and Planned Parenthood don’t have the political influence (read: money) as Pfizer, Wyeth, GlaxoSmithKline, and all the other multinational corporations who push “eco-terrorism” legislation like the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.

IT'S NOT THREATENING "THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE." In my reporting I’ve found that the word “terrorism” is typically applied to two types of crimes. The first are crimes that go up the chain of power (so, for example, the U.S. military bombing civilians is not terrorism, but an Iraqi civilian bombing the military is).

The second are crimes that challenge dominant American values. Let me explain: Attacking African American voters is not terrorism, right-wingers like Chuck Norris calling for armed revolution is not terrorism, Timothy McVeigh bombing the Oklahoma City building is not terrorism. Why? Because the values behind all of those actions– racism, capitalism, and Christian fundamentalism—are business as usual.

So, for example, if Dr. Tiller had been murdered by Muslim extremists proclaiming jihad against the West, the government would be labeling this “terrorism.” The exact same crime committed by Christian extremists is merely a “wicked deed in Wichita”Dr. George Tiller, one of the few late-term abortion providers in the country, was... more

animalia_libero
added this
6 months ago
|
24 comments

An Open Letter to the Wichita Shooter Who Killed Abortion Provider Dr. George Tiller

To the shooter:

If you are reading this, I know you feel justified in your act of entering a church with a loaded gun, and shooting a doctor to death in front of his family and friends. I know you felt righteous in your motives as you sped from the scene in your blue Ford Taurus, your head spinning with all the Pro-Life slogans and fund raising letters, expertly designed to induce such hate. You probably even thought Bill O'Reilly might call you a hero.

I can imagine your motivation, thinking the killing of this one man would save the lives of babies who have not yet even been conceived. But you are wrong. The murder you committed will not change women's minds, or their determination do what they know in their hearts is right. When a woman makes the decision to have an abortion, she does so with great reverence, forethought and clarity. Women have done this since the beginning of time, and will continue to do so regardless of your misplaced passions or judgment. Women like Julia, who spoke before the Texas legislature on the subject of late term abortion: Julia knew she needed an abortion to save her dear and much loved baby from needless suffering. The baby in her womb suffered from a condition known as arthrogryposis. In her testimony Julia explained:

The ultrasound showed that Thomas had clubbed hands and feet. His legs were fixed in a bent position and his arms were permanently flexed straight. He had a cleft palate and swelling on his skull -- a condition that would likely kill him in and of itself. Due to his inability to move, Thomas's muscles had deteriorated to 25% or their usual size, and his bones to 25% of their usual density.

My husband and I were sent home to grapple with the news and face an unwelcome decision: whether or not to continue with the pregnancy. By the time the amnio results came back, we had two days left to make a decision before hitting the 24 week mark -- after which, no doctor in Texas would terminate a pregnancy. The results were devastating. Our son had no chromosomal disorder. There was no explanation at all for his condition, and as such, no way to predict the scope of his suffering. We would have to make our decision based strictly on what the ultrasound had revealed.

My husband and I decided that we would have to use the golden rule. We would do for Thomas what we would want done for us in the same situation.

We tried to look at the evidence as honestly as we could. Even the best case scenario was abominable... Thomas would lead a very short life of only a few years at the very most. During those years he would be in constant pain from the ceaseless, charley-horse-type cramps that would rack his body. He would undergo numerous, largely ineffective surgeries, just to stay alive. He would never be able to walk or stand; never grasp anything, never be able to hold himself upright. He wouldn't even be able to suck his own thumb for comfort. And this was only if we were lucky. The more likely scenarios tended toward fetal death and serious health complications for me.

We made our decision with one day to go and left for Houston where we would end Thomas's suffering in one quick and painless moment. Though we wanted to stay at home that was no longer an option, as all of the hospitals were religiously-backed and there was no time to convene an ethics committee hearing.

In Houston, God graced us with some of the most compassionate people we'd ever met. The first was our maternal-fetal medicine specialist, who confirmed that the prognosis was even direr than originally thought. In a procedure very similar to an amniocentesis, Thomas's heart was stopped with a simple injection. In that moment, as I held my husband's hand, I met God and handed him my precious boy to care for, for all eternity.

Follow link for the rest of Julia's story at The Huffington Post.To the shooter: If you are reading this, I know you feel justified in your act of... more

slarabee
added this
6 months ago
|
7 comments

George Tiller's Clinic To Reopen, 'Resume Normal Operations'

After a week of closure to mourn the death of murdered physician Dr. George Tiller,... more

slarabee
added this
6 months ago
|
0 comments

School Makes Teen Reveal Pregnancy

How far should a school go to get help for a pregnant teen? A mom in Texas says her... more

retro_Syl
added this
6 months ago
|
13 comments

The pro-life delusion

Is America becoming more pro-life? A new poll by Gallup says so. The poll, released on... more

atomiclegion
added this
6 months ago
|
0 comments

Center Loses Grant Money For Abortion Stance

"The Vermont Workers Center lost a $30,000 grant from a Catholic group because it... more

DeliaTheArtist
added this
7 months ago
|
0 comments

Justices to weigh in on 'Choose Life' plates

The last time the Supreme Court considered what the First Amendment has to say about... more

fountaingoats
added this
7 months ago
|
4 comments

Aussie teen charged with aborting foetus herself

A 19-year-old girl who allegedly took an abortion pill illegal in Australia was... more

abbym0308
added this
7 months ago
|
7 comments

I’m not gay, I’m just confused!

Is it ok to let a man ram his penis into my anal region? Are violated rectums what’s “in” today? Is aids the “cool” std that’s sweeping the nation? Does cock smoking get you as high as smoking weed? Is a guy’s butthole really the “other” vagina? By now if you don’t realize this is satirical humor, fall on something sharp. When did being gay become a fashion statement? Why would an employer hire a gay man over a straight man? Is it because he’s less masculine and therefore seems as if he presents less of a threat?

Am I homophobic or are you just heterophic, staring at my jeans watching my genitals bulging? Why are all the new comedy movies filled with gay jokes? Is gay humor really that funny? Why do gays have to get “married?” Why can’t they get “butt-buddy’d,” “scissored,” or even “carpet-munched,” in unholy matrimony? Why must they be so unoriginal? Why not get their own thing?

Why is it so wrong if I have sex with a 13 y/o Indonesian prostitute in a soggy cardboard box in the streets of Subang? Am I hurting anyone? Did I force anyone to do anything? So how could that be anywhere near wrong if being gay is “right?” Or is majority tolerance selective to what it’ll tolerate? Which in-turn tells us what about “human” tolerance? Collectively, it’s worth less than a pillar of dirt when not backed by fundamental principals in my opinion. Basically, who cares what you think, you’re just another human…

Don’t say I can’t compare homosexuality to pedophilia either. What’s so different about them? Objectively, they’re both just a selfish pleasure of the flesh. They’re also unproductive. Two men can’t procreate, only fornicate. Just as in most cases, older men aren’t having sex with underaged girls to procreate, they just like younger girls. By that standard, I hold them to be the same. Some might say if gay couples were married, then they wouldn’t be fornicating. I beg to differ. It’s very possible and quite common for married couples to fornicate. The objective of sexual intercourse is to procreate, it’s not to have a good feeling. It does feel good, but what happens when it doesn’t? What’s the purpose of it then? If you’re not into it at that time and doesn’t feel good but you still conceive, what was the purpose of it then? Anything outside the realm of sexual intercourse with the full intent to conceive, bare, and give birth is fornication. That married couple is fornicating by Israelite law, which is pretty much the oldest law there is. If you look at it from the standpoint of where the law came from, you’ll find that Moses got it from A’hyah (A’hyah Asher A’hyah, means I am that I am). You should also note that that law has always stood. I don’t use this western law as my standard of living, I also don’t omit myself from wrong doing....Follow this link to read more! http://theaftoo.ning.com/forum/topics/im-not-gay-im-just-confusedIs it ok to let a man ram his penis into my anal region? Are violated rectums what’s... more