Planned Parenthood’s obscene profits
My syndicated column this week turns the spotlight on the nefarious business practices of the government-funded, billion-dollar Planned Parenthood empire. Congress has interrogated banking, energy, tobacco, and oil execs–treating them like serial killers before the cameras. When will they go after a corrupt industry that has real blood on its hands?
On a related front, pro-life groups are pushing Bush to de-fund the abortion industry. “Centrist” Republicans are balking. Conservative GOP Rep. Mike Pence, leading the effort to cut the abortion subsidies, is “befuddled” by the White House’s reticence on the issue. Me, I’m no longer befuddled by Beltway GOP leaders unwillingness to lead on basic conservative issues. It’s the fecklessness we deserve.
***
Planned Parenthood’s obscene profits
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyrights 2008
GOP presidential candidate John McCain sounded more like a Democrat presidential candidate (a recurring trend) when he joined the Left’s oil industry-bashers a few weeks ago. Asked by a North Carolina voter whether he supported a Jimmy Carter-era windfall profits tax, McCain responded: “Um, I don’t like obscene profits being made anywhere–and I’d be glad to look not just at the windfall profits tax–that’s not what bothers me–but we should look at any incentives that we are giving to people or industries or corporations that are distorting the market.”
Here’s an idea for all the hand-wringing GOP strategists in Washington wondering what it will take to win back disgusted economic and social conservatives: How about a Republican presidential candidate who will talk about the tax-subsidized abortion industry the way McCain talks about oil industry?
In April, the annual report of Planned Parenthood Federation of America revealed that the abortion giant had a total income of $1.02 billion—with reported profits of nearly $115 million. Taxpayers kick in more than $336 million worth of government grants and contracts at both the state and federal levels. That’s a third of Planned Parenthood’s budget.
And what market-distorting results do we get for those government incentives? 289,650 abortions in 2006.
Oil execs, tobacco execs, banking execs, pharmaceutical company execs, and baseball players have all been hauled up before Congress for highly-publicized whippings by crusading lawmakers. But the executives of Planned Parenthood have escaped government scrutiny and public accountability for their predatory behavior, dangerous medical practices, deception, and deadly windfall.
In Washington, D.C., the family of 13-year-old Shantese Butler filed a $50 million suit against Planned Parenthood after a botched abortion left the girl permanently injured and infertile. Students for Life of America reports that Shantese was left with “severe abdominal bleeding, severe vaginal injury, severe injury to the cervix, significant uterine perforation, and a small bowel tear.” In addition, parts of the unborn child were found inside Shantese’s abdomen.
In Nebraska, Planned Parenthood refused to disclose the terms of a settlement with another victim whose botched abortion resulted in a perforated uterus, massive blood loss, an emergency hysterectomy, permanent infertility, seizures, and lifelong pain and suffering. According to the suit obtained by Life News, the woman told the abortionist and his assistants to stop, but was told: “We can’t stop.” The Planned Parenthood employees held her down to complete the procedure.
Where’s the subpoena-wielding Henry Waxman? Can Orrin Hatch (CORRECTION: ARLEN SPECTER) spare a moment from investigating the New England Patriots for a second to probe Planned Parenthood’s efforts to advise underage teens on how to circumvent parental notification laws to secretly obtain RU-486, the abortion drug cocktail? Where is the concern for the women and children who were mistreated by Planned Parenthood clinics in Kansas, where Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline has filed a 107-count criminal complaint against the abortion racket with charges ranging from falsifying documents to performing illegal late-term abortions?
And where are Nancy Pelosi and the For The Children brigade to investigate the shocking evidence of Planned Parenthood’s nefariousness exposed by undercover student journalist Lila Rose?
Last year, Rose caught a Planned Parenthood official encouraging a female minor to evade statutory rape laws in order to obtain an abortion in California. In February, Rose released undercover tapes of her discussion with an Idaho Planned Parenthood official eager to accept money from a racist donor who wanted his funds earmarked for aborting black babies. In April, she released video of clinic officials in New Mexico and Oklahoma willing to take money from a blatantly racist donor. One Planned Parenthood staffer openly admits that “for whatever reason, we’ll accept the money.”
For whatever reason, Washington has turned a blind bipartisan eye to this bloody, government-funded business—and pro-life, limited-government conservatives in the Beltway have gone along with subsidizing it. “Obscene profits” indeed.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Other McCain: Abortion butchers
- “Pro-Choice” = Government-Funded Population Control
- The Conservative Pulse: Jindal, Sheehan’s Campaign, Planned Parenthood, and more at The Liberty Preservation Alliance
- Sufficient Scruples » Blog Archive » Malkin Spreads More Stupid, Shills for Misogyny
- Media Mythbusters Blog » Blog Archive » Media Bias Roundup - 06/04/08
- Baby killing: A most lucrative business, Part Deux « Seeing Red AZ
- It’s Past Time To Stop This « Tai-Chi Policy
- Southern Appeal » Planned Parenthood
- NEWS ROUNDUP (5 JUNE 2008) WITH A MICHELLE OBAMA WHITEY HATER UPDATE | Democrat=Socialist
- Population Problem - Western Paranoia & Eastern Gullibility! « 2ndlook - View From A Square Prism
- Pro-life Good News | Catholic Exchange
- Michelle Malkin » The Radical, Intellectual Roots of the Eugenics Movement
- Michelle Malkin » DNC Dispatch: The Planned Parenthood protest
- DNC , The Planned Parenthood Protest « POLITISITE: Politics from the RIGHT Side of the WEB
- DNC , The Planned Parenthood Protest « POLITISITE: Politics from the RIGHT Side of the WEB
- So now you know: Women really can't choose...
- Pilgrim’s Progress · She Got It Half Right
- Michelle Malkin » Undercover at Planned Parenthood
- Planned Parenthood Covers Up Sexual Abuse of 13-year Old « Combating Moonbat News
- Making A Bloody Buck Off Of Little Girls | Ft. Hard Knox
- Pro-Life Hotline » Blog Archive » Baby Boy Survives Abortion, Is Born Healthy
- Planned Parenthood…the nonprofit agency? « Deliberate Engagement
- Cassy Fiano » Planned Parenthood covers up abuse — and this time, it’s not a fake
- Planned Parenthood covers up abuse — and this time, it’s not a fake : Stop The ACLU
- Orange County CA Aborts Planned Parenthood | DBKP - Death By 1000 Papercuts - DBKP
- Planned Parenthood Fails Our Daughters Again « Grand Rants
- Fausta’s Blog » Blog Archive » Let me rain on your Woodstock parade
- finger excercise
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Abortion
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» OGreen Room
» Times Slimes Obamic ClimesLegal Insurrection
» Nation Mag Outs Secret U.S. Anti-Terror Program
I’m still keeping it civil, sorry to see others arent
Rusty, I want to correct a statement though, in relation to IUD, the morning after pill, and so on…
I think that’s more accurate. From what i’ve read so far (sorry, i dont have the reference onhand, i’ll get it if its needed), things like the morning after pill are used as a cautionary measure…woman has unprotected sex, wants to just cover the bases in regards to not getting pregnant, and takes it. I wouldnt believe the actual cases of women who have conceived at this point would be lower, since they really dont know if they were pregnant to begin with or not.
I
wouldntwould believe the actual cases of women who have conceived at this point would be lower, since they really dont know if they were pregnant to begin with or not.Sorry for the typo.
There is something very crucial missing here, Rusty. You are being purposefully deceptive.
You lose credibility every time you ignore what this discussion is about. ABORTION.
Your 100 percent right! But you just admitted that want them protected.
Oh, I see your logic.
So if the US Government were to give a grant to the KKK and stated that the funds could not be used for racist activities, and the KKK promised that the funds would be used only for snacks and drinks for thier members, then the government has no involvement in their racist activities and is in the clear?
Are you seriously making that argument, Rusty?
Again, 3% of PP’s budget is dedicated to abortion. This isn’t about abortion, it’s about Planned Parenthood. And they provide important and necessary services to women.
Sambo, I think it;s beyond the pale to abort for reasons like gender, eye color, disability, and, hypothetically, homosexuality. It’s not a choice I would ever make (nor is abortion though that hasn’t been tested, knock on wood).
But it’s a choice that women and families have and should have.
By the way, Sambo, way to name yourself after a racial slur.
Stan, the KKK’s purpose is inherently racist and would never get past federal and state discrimination laws. Same reason the Boy Scouts (of which I was an active member) should not receive federal or state funding.
Thats not very pro choice of you. You wouldn’t want a woman being punished with a kid she didn’t want.
It’s not a racial slur! So are you now the name police?
On June 4th, 2008 at 11:53 am,
No Rusty, it is a very clever way to run a eugenics/abortion/baby killing program. And it is most certainly a eugenics program devised to eliminate the weeds of the lesser races and classes. That has been a goal of the Progressives from the late 19th century. The term was Racial Hygiene. Offering services such as pap smears, mammograms, and STD prevention is but a hook. That white, middle class women opted in surprised them big time.
But regardless it is murder and there will be a judgment for murder. They may well convince this world that it is not, but in the end this world’s judgment does not matter.
Have a nice life Rusty. Try not to deny life to the unborn.
“emergency contraception” = murder by chemical weapon
So your comparing the KKK with the Boy Scouts and implying they’re racist. You’ve lost it.
Then by that same logic, why should PP get federal funds? It has been proven repeatedly that they do discriminate and break the law. Why should they be rewarded?
And please answer my original question of how PP can get money and say it does not go towards abortions?
Organizations that the Marxists, Oops, I meant Democrats support to buy votes get funded.
Conservative causes or organizations that the Democrats find not holding with their Socialist Agenda do not.
Simple to understand?
3%—>Planned Parenthood—>Abortion Doctor—>13 Million times a year.
But,
“This isn’t about abortion, it’s about Planned Parenthood.”
heh
Rose, this would be because you don’t understand or care for liberty. You do however, care for self righteousness and you have exhibited that quite effectively.
McCain not only does not have a “spotless” pro-life record but even worse, he has a very glaring record in terms of waffling and compromising (or “reaching over the aisle”).
Are there people who will chose to not vote? Probably. But I will vote and I will not vote for McCain or any leftist. His total disregard for our sovereignty, our Constitution, and our liberation from big government is deeply troubling and reminiscent of a liberal.
The problem comes down to you and your RINO comrade’s inability to support a man based upon his principles and republican attributes. Like a well oiled politician, McCain has studied the political landscape over the years, but unfortunately, like a typical liberal, has no clue why the American people vote a certain way or that the people actually DO have a brain and pay attention. Being in the military and being strong on overseas military and showing on the outside that you are pro-life is not all that is going to cut it for conservatives when your record shows a disregard for the desires of the American people and a disregard for the Constitution.
You can vote for McCain, but you can’t convince anyone else, so you have resorted to just insults, which is fine as well. But a vote for McCain means defeat just as well as a vote for a true conservative candidate.
I agree with 30!
While I’m sure Rusty is probably one of the nicest, most thoughtful people one could ever hope to meet in person, I do think it is patently deceptive (and somewhat disingenuous) of him to attempt to justify PP’s abhorrent pro-abortion agenda, by always pointing to their nominal efforts at putting forth a feigned concern for women’s health, e.g. free pap tests, mammograms, contraceptives, etc.
This means of equivocation does not lesson the harshness of PP’s true mission – the business of aborting babies – and is far beneath Rusty.
But again Rusty, this IS about PP…and the abortion service they provide. The word “abortion”, or other forms of the word thereof, appear 12 times in MM’s article. I would say that the dicussion, in fact, is not about pregnancy prevention, but termination.
You can say that PP provides 97% prevention and 3% termination services. Now apply those statistics to something else you find abhorant. What if we only racially profiled 3% of the time. Or if we simply executed 3% of those at GITMO. Are those acceptable statistics?
Ok, so other than the GITMO part, no
Its the rational, cool headed belief of people such as myself that feel that even 3%…is still 2.99% too much (notice i’m giving headway for rape/incest/life of mother instances, which are documented as being rare compared to the stats). I further disagree with the fact that money i pay in taxes is being used to fund something i find so objectionable.
That, rusty, is the point. If you keep referring to the same “its about health issues” as you have above, i’ll just keep pointing this post out.
Stan, the federal money they get goes towards Plan B, birth control pills, mammograms, gynocologists. Federal money can not legally be spent on abortion. That’s really all there is to it.
So, by depriving PP of federal dollars, all you’re accomplishing is making it harder for women to stay healthy. The abortions won’t stop until the Supreme Court says they stop. So why punish poor women who need mammograms?
Sambo, I am not comparing Boy Scouts to the KKK in any way other than that the Boy Scouts discriminate based on religion. The KKK does the same. Therefore both have no business receiving federal money.
As for Sambo not being a slur, oh man, you are way off. If double dog dare you to find a black person on the street and call him Sambo.
Abstract, your point is noted, but taking away federal funding won’t stop abortions. It will stop condoms, BC pills, Plan B, pap smears, and mammograms. PP is the largest non-profit provider of those services.
The abortion debate is different than the PP debate. Perhaps it’s my error to ask people to be pragmatic on an issue that is literally life and death to pro-lifers.
But breast cancer, cervical cancer, and HIV prevention are matters of life and death too. PP will never stop providing abortions. Doing what MM asks puts their other programs at risk.
And that were you are being deliberately deceptive and why my KKK analogy is right on.
PP provides X number of services. Some of those services pertain directly to abortion. PP recieves money from the Federal government that cannot go towards abortion services. PP says “This is great. Take the money we WERE going to spend anyway on mamograms and put that money into the Abortion Services and let the government pay for the rest.” Voila, the Government is funding abortion thru PP and it’s all LEGAL!
And you said you were a Boy Scout? If you really were, you’d know that BSA DOES NOT discriminate on the basis of Religion. It’s only requirement (one that has existed in it’s 100+ year existance) is that you recognize a higher power… ANY HIGHER POWER.
The God and Country award can be awarded for Buddhist, Muslim, Christians, Jews, even Zoroastrins (sp?).
“A Scout is Trustworthy…”, Rusty. If you want to claim to be a Scout, at least try to follow that part of the Scout Law!
Al Capone ran soup kitchens.
God willing they will one day, but probably not before this country falls into near-total depravity and near-total destruction at the hands of evil people like you.
Well then if someone is offended I better quit calling my daughter that. How dare me! Go ahead and write me a ticket.
Really? Well, you will have to excuse me because when I think of Planned Parenthood the first thing that pops into my mind isn’t anything other than abortion mill.
According to the Intellectual Giant, Patty Murray, bin Laden builds roads and schools.
therefore…
YAAAAY !!!
Thats descriminating agaist liberals. There is no power higher than them.
Still waiting on a logical defense of abortion.
If it’s such a good idea, defend it please.
No, it’s discriminatory against atheists. Atheism is a religion too.
I’ll be sure to let them know that the next time they are yelling at me in a debate that their beliefs are the absence of any religion. Lol. More wisdom from our Demon Puppet.
Rusty. For full transparency, I found out it was considered a slur on here from a military memo about six months ago. I did look it up and decided that has absolutely nothing to do with me. So when Sam is upstairs, or in the store, or wherever, and its time to go…it will be ‘lets go Sambo’.
I’ll agree with that. They have there own book and doctrine, but they won’t agree with you.
That’s correct Sambo, atheism is NOT a religion and the attempt to label atheists as such will meet with heavy opposition.
The gays have the same attitude toward there being such thing as an ex gay.
While the “pro-choice” abortion enthusiasts and, from your statement, pro-homosexuals are more likely to get abortions.
Seems a bit self exterminating, doesn’t it?
Well, Henry Ford notwithstanding, I don’t think you can link any eugenics program to Ferdinand Porsche, creator of the Volkswagen. How about Citroens, made by a Nazi collaborator?
Getting women in for pap smears, pregnancy checks etc., is a sort of bait and switch maneuver, wherein they establish a relationship and a level of trust for future direction towards abortions if “needed.”
You can’t get past the “coincidence” that more minority women get abortions than other groups. And of course, there is the aforementioned Rose tape showing that they will accept money earmarked to abort black babies.
Another coincidence, no doubt. Just like redlining by banks for minority mortgages.
How does the NAACP, the ACLU etc., get federal funding? They clearly discriminate against certain groups. And don’t start on the Boy Scouts. They are doing what the Catholic church should have done all along, and is frequently suggested by liberals: keep groups with potential attractions to the minors in their charge separate. That means heterosexual males don’t take girl scouts on camping trips, and, similarly, homosexuals don’t take boy scouts on camping trips.
I agree with you: the Boy Scouts should not subject themselves to federal funding. I believe, as a private institution (the reason they can exclude homosexuals), they do not. Private charities, under pressure from homosexual groups, withdrew their donations, and state and federal buildings were rendered off limits to “teach them a lesson.”
Rusty: What type of religion is atheism? I believe an atheist is one who believes that there is no deity. If no deity, then they belive in no power greater than themself. Do you mean they are part of a religion that worships themself. I’ve not heard they’ve organized yet.
By the way, since when is it wrong for people of like minded values to join an organization that espouses those ideas and prevent people from joining who don’t?
The Boy Scouts have every right to exclude girls; homosexuals; and atheists if they so choose contrary to what politically correct liberals and legislating courts say. The constitution still says we have the freedom of assembly (or not to). It doesn’t say the government has to pick and chose who are acceptable or who aren’t in order for groups to assemble.
Since when have liberals defended the Constitution for any other purpose than their own twisted agenda? Second Amendment, First Amendment, they read those how they want to read those while taking away people’s God given rights in the process. “Welcome to America! Leave your guns and Bibles at the door.” -new slogan of the Democratic Party.
Federal funding for “charities” in and of itself is a sticky point and point where republicans got themselves into trouble anyway. It is much easier to not straddle the fence (feels better too).
I don’t believe in federal funding for the Boy Scouts as much as I don’t for the PP. Real, genuine institutions don’t need it and shouldn’t want it anyway, as the faithful and loyal members will keep it running. On top of that, federal funding for anything creates a new leader doesn’t it? Which is exactly why the feds want to fund these things.
I think getting into an argument about anything else is pointless. The real issue at hand is the hypocrisy of politicians in the handling of audits of certain industries and institutions (but does anyone question that politicians are hypocritical?) But the main issue is the giving of federal funds to any of these organizations. If you believe in it than fine, but that is where the argument should originate.
I came late and found what I expected. Abortion trolls espousing;
How great it is that our country provides abortions and how great it is to kill babies.
Was about all I could care to add to this most vile of subjects/deeds.
Proof that with liberals, UP is DOWN, and LEFT is RIGHT. They really don’t care how nonsensical their statements are.
DP is on a roll with those today, scroll up further where he espouses homosexuality is “thought to be biological. Not genetic”
At least he is a good clown, bringing laughter and knee-slapping all around.
What is the difference between biological and genetic? Could it in fact be the result of a sales pitch or two?
What we need is a referendum across the nation in every state asking the people if they agree with someone’s “choice” to kill an innocent baby. I am confident that the vast majority would be heavily ensconced against such practices.
Follow that up by a constitutional amendment being passed in Congress and sent to the states for the two-thirds ratification. Oh! And, list any legislator on the federal and state levels that votes against what that vast majority voted for on the prior referendum, so that have a frame of reference on how well their representatives represent their interests.
There you go, SCOTUS is out of the loop then.
In the interim, defund Planned Parenthood off the government teat.
Any portion of their budget, even if Rusty is on target with the 3%, is too much going toward the willful killing of an innocent baby.
Our government, through our tax dollars, should have no role in the taking of a baby’s life, period.
That absolutely is their right. No one here is arguing that the boy scouts should be forced to accept atheists or whomever. But if they choose to exercise their right, as with any group that discriminates, they should forfeit the opportunity for public funding.
Whites have the plurality of all abortions in America. I am aware that there are considerably more whites than blacks in this country, but, again, it doesn’t seem to fit in with the eugenics theme.
Dimsdale, your point on Boy Scouts doing the right thing by barring homosexuals isn’t being well received on my end. You say they are preventing people from spending time with minors they may be attracted to? Homosexuals are not pedophiles.
My mom, last I checked, is a straight woman. She was also an Assistant Scoutmaster who loved it so much she spent two summers living on a Boy Scout reservation in New Hampshire. Was she a risk to those Boy Scouts?
A few towns over from me in Bourne, MA, there was a horrible scandal where a female Scout leader was statuatorily raping a 12-yr-old Scout. Clearly that means straight women should have no part in Scouting, right?
Scientists have discovered a link between homosexuality and the order in which they were born. In other words, the first born male is least likeliest to be gay. The second slightly more likely. And on and on. It obviously isn’t genetic since, well, that gene, even if it’s recessive, would eventually die out. To be fair, I have seen no such correlation between biology and lesbianism yet.
Finally, to not accept someone who doesn’t believe in God is very much discriminating based on religion. You have to be pretty thick not to think that’s the case.
Exactly, so all those private non-profit atheist groups banning or discriminating against Muslims and Jews from joining their ranks should be damned sure they don’t get any public funding. Same to all those private non-profit gay groups banning or discriminating against heterosexuals.
Rusty,
I understand your positions…i’m just trying to say that if they removed that aspect of the business, i’d have no problem with them receiving funds. I dont think it would cut into their bottom line too terribly to do so.
Outside of that, this thread is starting to drift towards religion and not the topic at hand. I’ll abstain, since honestly…i dont have the civility available to discuss religion today.
I do agree, however, that groups like BSA, ACLU, and so on…should find funding on their own and not lean on the taxpayer.
The Boy Scouts do not get public funding directly. If they receive the right to use city, state or federally owned property (indirect) so do other groups. They are not given access that is not afforded to other groups.
The Boy Scouts were brought into this discussion by our resident liberal, Rusty. I wasn’t sure what they had to do with any of this. I believe he brought the KKK into it too.
Um no, because atheism isn’t a religion according the words of its own members. Go ask Richard Dawkins if he is a member of a religion.
Scientific (we’re talking science here, not statistics) data to back up this absurd claim? I work in and have a degree in the medical field, if there was something “biological” that could be concretely pinpointed to someone being gay or not it would have been front page headlines by now. But nice try at wording it to sound scientific when there is not scientific backing to your claim.
Rusty: There you go again.
You may or may not be technically correct. It seems the preponderance of male pedephile’s victims are young boys. You can split hairs all you want but when a male is attracted to a male, that is homosexuality. The problem is compounded when they chose to victimize young boys.
Rusty, have a big glass of water, sit down and try to breath normally. You are losing it. Atheism may or may not be a religion, I don’t care about the debate. Planned Parenthood IS first and foremost an abortion provider and most certainly dedicated to racial hygine; they pull silly and dishonest accounting tricks to avoid federal law which makes them liars too.
Change the argument, change the debate at your own peril. Some of your arguments are real close to untruthful themselves. It is fine to be passionate. Try to be honest when you are.
You are denying someone membership for not believing in your religion or in an aspect of your religion. That’s discrimination based on religion.
And, regardless, atheism is a religion. It’s an answer to questions about God and reality. Just because the answer is “none of the above” and they don’t have ceremonies doesn’t mean it’s not a religion.
More wisdom from our resident clown. Mind if I link this comment to atheist sites today? I need a good laugh.
No it isn’t. That’s a lie. Three percent! They are first and foremost a birth control (excluding abortion) provider. They are second most a woman’s health provider. They are third most a comprehensive sexual education provider.
Abortion comes in at number four.
As for the eugenics arguments, that is ridiculous and stupid. The same sort of stuff I would associate with conspiracy-addled Truthers.
So you want us to believe that Ford’s and Volkswagens are evil because their designers were Nazi-sympathizers, yet you are willfully ignorant to the original intent of the PP organization and the writings of Sangers, who is still sited as the founder of the organization?
Really trying to control both side of the argument, aren’t you Rusty.
Rusty said:
Rusty you should take a trip to Mecca and complain about discrimination based on religion, tell me how far you get.
PS: does anybody know what happens to Christians who wander into Mecca by accident?
Besides this about Planted Parenthood which happens to be devoid of all religious morals and ethics, it’s a death machine that kills the ‘low lives’. PP is the closest thing to a Nazi death camp you’ll see functioning in the United States.
Today, with advances in medicine, abortion is almost never necessary to save the mother. I would like the libs to point to just one single instance when abortion is necessary. That is why doctors nowadays when performing partial birth abortion (late abortion) use the mother’s MENTAL state as an excuse.
As to McCain, I WILL question his so called pro-life record. Please, enlighten me on SPECIFICS as to what he was done for the pro-lifers. I know specifics of him oppsing pro-life things, such as his statement that Roe v. Wade should not be overturned since it is established law and precendent for a long time and his lawsuit against the Wisconsin right to life, whcih he took all the way to the US SUpreme Court to lose. McCain has done little, if anything, for the pro-life movement and that is why people liek Dr. Dobson cannot support him.
As to profits, I think his wife’s OBSCENE profits off of beer, a danger to many Americans, should be confiscated, based on his arguments.
Oh! But, that is different. Didn’t you get the memo?
PP is the largest abortion provider in the nation. The stats you prop up go hand-in-hand with this very fact. You, Rusty, can’t shake that no matter how hard you try.
No, I did not get the memo, my bad. I guess I will go yell at myself for attacking beer profits.
Question if anyone knows: does McCAin, who makes over $400K and his wife over $6 mill per year, donate his $60K disability benefits from the US government? I think he should, to vets. It does not make sense that someone SOOOOO wealthy, should keep government benefits that would be better used for needy vets.
As far as McCain…not a Dobson kinda guy, so…not sure how to approach all that. If he’s doing something thats not supporting the position he claims to have, we can take that to task.
As far as the abortion angle though…
I would want to see some statistics for late term abortions, just so i have the numbers. I would say that as far as abortions performed before that time, that mental status -should- be taken into account. I know that this examples represent a minority of total situations, but…for sake of argument:
A woman is raped (honestly, whether she knows the person or not doesnt matter in this case) and gets pregnant as a result. Could you blame this woman for wanting to terminate a pregnancy that was forced on her by the rapist? What kind of mental AND physical anguish has she suffered, to now have this on her plate?
What about people who are mentally deficient or who cannot care for themselves effectively(read: i’m talking about people with issues such as schizophrenia -sp- severe personality disorders)? If it were deemed they were a danger to themselves, or could be to someone else, would an abortion be something they could use to curb the issue?
For clarity, i’m against abortion in any other instance…but i can also see where people in tough circumstances like those above would make that choice. For someone who just chose not to be safe, or cant keep their legs closed…well, then they dont have an excuse.
Abstractmind, all you have to read is the briefs submitted to the US Supreme Court and the arguments re: partial birth abortion and you will see that there was never one proven reason that the mother’s life was in danger. So, go check it out. As to mental state, that should not be ab issue at all, just because you are depressed or have anxiety, whcih most people now claim and anyone can get a shrink to say so, that is just not good enough. I also don’t think rape is an excuse, esppecially when you KNOW the person. Mentally incapable perosons, I guess they were nto that incapable, enough to have sex. Hey, anyone who can’t care for a child, give it up for adoption, people are clamoring to adopt. Your reasons are not good enough. So, again, give me one time when a mother’s life was put at risk by having a baby, that is the only reason to allow a baby to be murdered. In fact, it has been shown that the mother’s mental health IS affected negatively by abortion, some mothers even end up commiting suicide. Also, it affects the health of the mother because it increases the chances of having certain types of cancers. SO, abortion is actually BAD for the health of women.
No. I don’t think that at all. I was arguing that people who think PP is about eugenics shouldn’t be driving those types of cars.
And then you call that kind of thinking “ridiculous and stupid”? et tu, Brutus?
It still concerns me that this orginization you so loudly support was started to weed out undesirables (and she meant blacks) and still to this day has no problem taking money from people specifically to kill blacks. How do you justify that, Rusty?
Dip, duck, dodge. Still waiting on that “scientific evidence” (that doesn’t exist) there DP.
Abstractmind #159:
Why not wait until they are born and if they are schizophrenic or have a severe personality disorder then euthanize them? Then we can get the mongoloids too. After that, those who are cross-eyed. The list goes on. Who decides what is an acceptable or unacceptable quality to determine who lives or dies?
Ask these people if they would have wanted abortion
When you get rid of the ifs and buts, there are but Two choices remaining – life or death.
How does adding her being party to the murder of her own baby lighten her load of mental anguish that will in turn manifest itself physically though?
I’m not being a smarta$$. Just askin’. From those actions, we end up with the one victim we had from the rape to a rape and a murder. There really isn’t much other way to put it, is there?
Adoption is always an option. There are loving families waiting in line to adopt children who are unable to have their own. And, there are many well-known people that were raised via adoption.
I’m against abortion under and circumstance. When we had our son, the doctor told us some of his screenings were a little irregular, indicating he might have Down’s Syndrome, and asked us what we wanted to do. My wife and I were both in staunch agreement that we would have our child and love him regardless of whether he was “normal” or not. He was perfectly healthy, as it turned out, but we were prepared to love him either way. I, personally, was not going to kill him, because he might have been an inconvenience or anything else to us. That would have been one of the most ultimate acts of selfishness of which I can think.
Rusty: I’m still waiting…
Your silence on the LOGICAL basis for abortion is telling me that you don’t have one. And if you don’t have one, butyet are supporting it, then I’d say you are very confused.
Rusty said:
Rusty I hate to present you with fact for in your case thet may be hard to swallow but the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was in fact an ardent eugenicist; peruse some of her writings:
Sanger was a proponent of eugenics, a social philosophy that gained strong support in the United States in the early 20th century. The philosophy claimed that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention. Methods of social intervention (targeted at those seen as “genetically unfit”) advocated by eugenists have included selective breeding, sterilization and euthanasia. In “A Plan for Peace” (1932), for example, Sanger argued for:
A stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.
Her first pamphlet read:
It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them. Herein lies the key of civilization. For upon the foundation of an enlightened and voluntary motherhood shall a future civilization emerge.
Sanger promoted the idea of “race hygiene” through “negative eugenics,” an attempt to reduce the fertility of “dysgenic” groups. Sanger considered the unchecked multiplication of the “unfit” to be “the greatest present menace to civilization.” She suggested Congress set up a special department to study population problems and appoint a “Parliament of Population.” One of the main objectives of the “Population Congress” would be “to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population.”
Sanger saw birth control as a means to prevent “dysgenic” children from being born into a disadvantaged life, and dismissed “positive eugenics” (which promoted greater fertility for the “fitter” upper classes) as impractical. Though many leaders in the eugenics movement were calling for active euthanasia of the “unfit,” Sanger spoke out against such methods. Edwin Black writes:
In [William] Robinson’s book, Eugenics, Marriage and Birth Control (Practical Eugenics), he advocated gassing the children of the unfit. In plain words, Robinson insisted: ‘The best thing would be to gently chloroform these children or give them a dose of potassium cyanide.’ Margaret Sanger was well aware that her fellow birth control advocates were promoting lethal chambers, but she herself rejected the idea completely. ‘Nor do we believe,’ wrote Sanger in Pivot of Civilization, ‘that the community could or should send to the lethal chamber the defective progeny resulting from irresponsible and unintelligent breeding.’
When Nazi Germany adopted the principles of eugenics to create a Germanic “master race,” Sanger did not publicly denounce the racist and anti-Semitic program of the Nazis. However, in a letter she wrote:
“All the news from Germany is sad & horrible, and to me more dangerous than any other war going on any where because it has so many good people who applaud the atrocities & claim its right. The sudden antagonism in Germany against the Jews & the vitriolic hatred of them is spreading underground here & is far more dangerous than the aggressive policy of the Japanese in Manchuria..”
About placing the responsibility for eugenic control in the hands of individual parents rather than the state, she wrote:
“The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics…. We are convinced that racial regeneration, like individual regeneration, must come ‘from within.’ That is, it must be autonomous, self-directive, and not imposed from without.”
We maintain that a woman possessing an adequate knowledge of her reproductive functions is the best judge of the time and conditions under which her child should be brought into the world. We further maintain that it is her right, regardless of all other considerations, to determine whether she shall bear children or not, and how many children she shall bear if she chooses to become a mother… Only upon a free, self-determining motherhood can rest any unshakable structure of racial betterment.
She nevertheless advocated certain instances of coercion, in cases where she considered the parents unfit to decide whether they should bear children:
“The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind.”
Normally you and I agree, but this time we’re going to have to agree to disagree.
I’ll check the stats for those when i have a chance.
I’ll break the rest down though.
I agree. Going to a shrink and saying “my life sucks and i’m sad about it” is not good enough.
I hate to say it, but thats rather callous of you. If a 13 year old girl is raped by her father and comes up pregnant, you’re saying that in that instance, abortion is *especially* abhorant. I would point to the girl’s situation as already being in the pits. In any case of rape (as pretty much any expert or victim will tell you), the emotional and psychological damage done to the victim is one of the most destructive and painful things one can experience. I can only imagine that finding a few weeks later you’re pregnant with a child that was fathered out of violence, degredation and pain is a sitation most peopl
Well put barry.
Honestly, I’m not sure how a woman could react to those. I’d have to present anecdotals to back up my thoughts on it which doesnt help but so much. I’ve known 2 people in life who had abortions…a close friend of mine who was raped, and a woman i was dating and she got pregnant.
in the first case…she was, as a person, broken. she didnt trust anyone like she used to. It was a person she knew, but wasnt close to…it was a friend of her roommate. her whole life shut down when that happened. she was beaten in the face and had her arm broken in 2 seperate places in 2 seperate acts of pure malice from this scumbag. she was a single girl, church going, the whole 9. When she found she was pregnant, she REALLY lost it. for a month, she didnt leave her room, didnt call anyone, and barely ate. At the end of it, she went with her sister and had the proceedure done. I did the best i could to help her, but in the end…she told me it was too painful to think of a child fathered in such a way. to this day, she refuses to go places alone, and even with people like me that would go down swinging on her behalf…she adamantly refuses to be alone with a man in a room. very sad.
The second…well, thats a story told before. I didnt agree. She did it anyway. i hated her for it and left.
I understand that there are many who want to adopt, and give any child a loving, wonderful home. But its the process on the part of the mother to have that child, and bear the physical and mental burdens along with it under the circumstance, that I call into question.
Like i said…if it was just someone who wasnt being responsible, and just was looking to use this as a means of birth control, then no…they dont deserve any sympathy or quarter.
And having multiple children…i wouldnt change having them for the world
Abstract, when RealImmigrantChick made the claim that abortions lead to increases in cancer, she forfeited the privilege of being listened to by people who know better.
Claiming that rape is somehow less monstrous when the victim knows the rapist is also beyond the pale.
She doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Leave her be.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Kettle, this is Pot!
WOW!!! Please tell me you’re not actually that stupid?
Jim C
I couldn’t argue about the physical burdens of a woman who carries a child to term and endures labor to deliver that baby into the world. But, fathers, at least any father worth anything, carry mental burdens in the childbirth process. For that child to be killed does absolutely nothing to decrease mental anguish.
There are many women, at least the ones ready to talk about their abortions, that experience post-abortive regret. They suffer many things, following abortions. There are physicians that are oppossed to abortions.
I, like many others, cannot get past the issue of creating another victim in a situation. Again, I’m not trying to be a smarta$$. It just seems to be adding to the problem, not solving any problem by having an abortion.
One of the women I dated in my younger years, who was rather loose with her morals, most of the time, would grieve every year on the date she had an abortion. No matter how promiscuous she continued to be, she was saddened each year at the same time. Not that it swayed her behaviors much afterwards but she did suffer that emotional distress on a recurring basis, at least once per year.
I understand, and i’m certainly not taking your comments as you being obtuse, so no harm and no foul.
In the rape scenario tho, the father doesnt care about the child to begin with…so i’m not sure how to approach that argument anyway. As far as establishing another victim…thats a tough call, and one my personal principles can only address as calling on the individual to make the best choice they can. If they choose to do so, then so be it…and they are stronger than many others. But not everyone cares to, or can, bear the brunt of that situation completely.
I have no doubt, and can relate all too well, about regret on this matter. it is something one thinks of, and it becomes a part of the burden one bears…it is not an easy path, and one that i dont envy others who walk the same road.
This issue, no matter how well we communicate or discuss…really has no easy answers.
On June 4th, 2008 at 9:49 am, conservativesRus said:
You prove my point, and then some. And you also can’t read.
I didn’t say that John McCain voted pro-life 25 years ago. He has been voting consistantly pro-life FOR the last 25 years, and he STILL IS. He is easily one of the most outspoken right to life advocates in Washington.
Please re-read my statement above.
Hello?
You might try actually reading his voting record… too much to ask for I guess.
The fecklessness has ALWAYS been there…it is simply waxing considering the Repoublican leadership we have now.
What a great day it will be when our military has all the money it needs and PP has to hold a bake sale to fund an abortion.
I’m pro-choice and have no problem standing before God and telling him I give money to PP because I believe his book does not consider abortion to be a crime. I will also have no problem telling God that all of you who claim the Bible definitively says that abortion is murder should be burning in hell because you have defiled his word.
Some of you should also be careful what God does to you after you die.
I see IRose didn’t bother to google McCain and Wisconsin, since she’s still spreading the “McCain is pro-life” canard.
Since she won’t test her hypothesis concerning “McCain is prolife”, I’ll let the cat out of the bag, and ask:
Why does he write amicus briefs on against pro-life org.s?
These are more than the one case.
Strange behaviour for a pro-lifer.
– martin.musculus
Excellent column Michelle.
You will find that your ability for freedom of speech ends at the doorway of judgement. In your infinite amount of bible knowledge I am sure you recognize God doesn’t really care what you think and certainly has no need for you to “tell” him anything.
Nice back up with scripture on everything though.
IRose, before you pass around the hypocrit label, look to your own house.
McC. lies like obamassah, holds grudges like saint hillery[sic] and has his own brand of hypocrasy in illegal aliens.
When he stops kissing LaRaza’s browneye, I’ll vote for him — it will mean he’s at least trying to learn honesty.
– musculus
Sorry, but I don’t find anything in the Bible to say that abortion is murder. I’ve read all the clauses that people cite and they really don’t answer the question. In fact, some of the Old Testament stuff suggests abortion is not murder.
If the Bible is supposed to be the definitive word on everything, then why didn’t God say more on abortion? Is it because he’s a stupid writer?
Add to that fact that The Glorious McCain’s Cap & Trade will turn us into Europe, with a completely planned economy, and I see what sort of conservative you are:
Most Conservatives believe in the three legged stool model. Irish Rose conservatives believe in the “one-legged re@mer” model.
Guess who&what’s getting re@med.
– musculus
Oh, holy one fill us with your wisdom tell us of our transgressions. sarc/off
You shall not murder. ring a bell
A woman with child was once considered a life inside her until the liberals got a hold of roe v wade.
Jim m, a coupla questions (really no dis, I just want your thoughts).
1. If contraception is frowned upon would that not imply?
2. How is it the business of government to tax me pay for abortions? If you want to support it that is your biz… why tax me?
juss askin.
Again, where does it say that a fetus is a person? “Do not murder” doesn’t answer that question.
No, I don’t think that it’s right to tax people to pay for PP. Of course, I also don’t think it’s right to tax people so churches, with tax exemptions, pay no taxes. It would be much better to tax churches on their income.
Wow, where to begin? I guess first off, I pity a man so callous as to what you claim you would say to the Creator of the Universe. Good luck with that.
There are a lot of “specifics” the Bible doesn’t mention by name because sin is still sin and the Ten Commandments are engraved on all our conscience. I guess you could say the people 2000+ years ago where just smarter than your average liberal and knew what murder was and didn’t need further clarification. You don’t have to be a Christian to know murder is wrong, I can go to China and get the same response that murder is inherently evil as I would asking someone here in the U.S. Murder is murder and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that a child in the womb if it wasn’t murdered in the womb would have grown up like the rest of us did into adults.
But judging on what little I reference I have for your worldview, I would suggest you delve deeper into the Bible and actually spend some time there in prayer because you sound more like an atheist to me than someone that actually follows what the good book preaches.
#175 Rose
It appears to me you’re looking at a different McCain than I am. I’m looking at the one who called Roberts and Alito dangerous choices for SCOTUS. The one who thinks it’s good to “work across the aisle” with Kennedy. The one who thinks it’s more important to address “windfall profits” than to take away funding from an abortion provider. (Please show me the McCain sponsored/introduced Senate bill to accomplish such). His voting record and behavior is NOT what you proclaim.
Jim M #178. I’m quite sure GOD Almighty maker of heaven and earth isn’t really too concerned with what you think his standards might be. HE and HE alone makes the standards, if I’m going to error, I’m going to error on the side of caution. Further, I’m pretty sure you and I are reading different bibles. Don’t blame me, I didn’t write it and I didn’t make the rules. I’m saying – who are you to tell GOD what to do. The clay doesn’t tell the potter what to do.
Russ, you can err on the side of caution and do nothing everyday.
God made me in his image. God gave me a mind. God trusts me. If God thought abortion was so wrong, he would have been clearer about it. Period.
We just disagree.
jim m
You may not know me, but I know everything about you. Psalm 139:1
I know when you sit down and when you rise up. Psalm 139:2
I am familiar with all your ways. Psalm 139:3
Even the very hairs on your head are numbered. Matthew 10:29-31
For you were made in my image. Genesis 1:27
In me you live and move and have your being. Acts 17:28
For you are my offspring. Acts 17:28
I knew you even before you were conceived. Jeremiah 1:4-5
I chose you when I planned creation. Ephesians 1:11-12
You were not a mistake, for all your days are written in my book. Psalm 139:15-16
I determined the exact time of your birth and where you would live. Acts 17:26
You are fearfully and wonderfully made. Psalm 139:14
I knit you together in your mother’s womb. Psalm 139:13
And brought you forth on the day you were born. Psalm 71:6
I have been misrepresented by those who don’t know me. John 8:41-44
And where do any of those say that a fetus is a person?
The New American Standard Bible (NASB) renders Exodus 21:22-25 this way:
And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any [further] injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
“I knew you even before you were conceived”–Taking that to the most extreme, you think even birth control is murder?
Michelle,
I’ve read and re-read your column but can’t seem to understand exactly what point (points) you are trying to make. The whole column seems muddled.
Are you saying businesses should not make money? Because thats how it comes across to me.
How is it the business of government to redistribute any of my hard earned money? It should be the business of government to protect the country and its Citizens- PERIOD. Anything beyond that is obscene and a usurpation.