Friday, November 25, 2011

Pro-Choicer With A 'Superior' Attitude, and She's a Liar to Boot.

I'm not sure how I happened upon this, but I did.  This is not an educational post, unless you want to learn about pro-abort trolls from Twitter.  I posted this for ME!  Remember, my goal is to bring awareness of what goes on in the minds of pro-aborts.  Sometimes, they just let it fly from their mouths.

Samantha stated what pro-lifers say all the time. A child is a child, regardless of the reason he/she came into being.  That's not what pro-aborts like to hear.  It makes them well, crazy.image

@SineQuaN0nUSA a/k/a @SineQuaN0nTX (her twitter jail account, don't have to wonder why she needs one) said "telling rape victims to love their babies from rape".


So I asked....


@SineQuaN0nUSA in all her superior academic authority tells me I must use "accurate terminology" when addressing her.  She thinks the term 'baby' is not appropriate.  Well, most pro-aborts try to keep the baby out of the conversation.  It makes killing him/her a lot easier, I'm sure you understand.


I explained that I used the same term she did. 


She proceeds to tell me to "stop lying or pay attention". 


Maybe she should stop lying and pay attention eh?

Disclaimer: Not all pro-choicer's are as mean-hearted (if she has one at all) as @SineQuaN0nUSA, thankfully. 

Are you #ProChoice, but #Anti-Abortion for Yourself?

This courtesy of @HeatherTMT on Twitter.  I show the re-tweets so you can see how other pro-choicer's repeat, ad-nauseam, something of interest to them.  I would venture to guess that some re-tweeted because agree with her, and some just re-tweeted, well, because they could.


Just to be clear, Heather would never consider having an abortion herself.


Obviously, I like to ask thought provoking questions, so here goes.

If you consider yourself pro-choice, but would never consider having an abortion, why not?  You support abortion, but why not for yourself? 

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Where Does #ProChoice Draw The Line On Pregnant Women Taking Risks?

Easy answer is, they don't. Today I had a long twitter conversation with @Auragasmic, who whole heartedly defends the actions of Jennifer Fox, the woman in the occupy Seattle protest who supposedly miscarried 5 days after being pepper sprayed by police. It appears Jennifer's story may be something she concocted for attention.

Fox said she had three ultrasound pictures of her fetus in her tent, but declined to show them to reporters

She also said she did not plan to pick up medical records at Harborview Medical Center that could document the miscarriage until after a planned memorial service Saturday, and she declined to sign a waiver allowing reporters to obtain the documents independently.

    "My daughter is a compulsive liar," Stebbins said. "She's a wannabe drama queen." - Ms. Stebbins is her former foster mother.

    "I seriously doubt, that if she is claiming she had a miscarriage, that she was even pregnant," said Nicole Botes, who has known Fox for a decade. "I'd like to see actual medical reports."

There are three possibilities to this story.

  1. She was telling the truth
  2. She was lying
  3. We'll never know because we can't prove she was lying, and she won't prove she was telling the truth

I'm going with #3. I'll post an update at the bottom of this post if I'm wrong.

Now back to @Auragasmic. I posed this question: "I take it you would defend a woman who took unnecessary risks, and lost her baby as a result?" Her answer shouldn't surprise any of us.


So when should a woman be held responsible for the death of her unborn baby? Auragasmic seems to think 'never'. I disagree. Some scenarios I used in our conversation were jumping out of an airplane, and running with the bulls. She used less risky scenarios, like driving to work.

If a pregnant woman gets into an auto accident on her way to work, and her baby dies as a direct result, is it the woman's fault?

If a pregnant woman jumps from an airplane, and her baby dies as a direct result of a bumpy landing, is it the woman's fault?

If a pregnant woman gets gored while running with the bulls, and her baby dies as a result, is it the woman's fault?

We can go further:

If a pregnant woman has two options to cross a river, one being a bridge 100 ft away, the other being a fallen tree right in front of her, she chooses the tree because she likes challenges, she falls, her baby dies, is it her fault?

Where would you draw the line?

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Occupy Seattle Protester Blames Police For The Murder Of Her Unborn Baby

From the Stranger, author Dominic Holden quotes part of an interview with the woman who says Seattle police murdered her unborn baby.

"I was standing in the middle of the crowd when the police started moving in," she says. "I was screaming, 'I am pregnant, I am pregnant. Let me through. I am trying to get out.'" At that point, Fox continues, a Seattle police officer lifted his foot and it hit her in the stomach, and another officer pushed his bicycle into the crowd, again hitting Fox in the stomach. "Right before I turned, both cops lifted their pepper spray and sprayed me. My eyes puffed up and my eyes swelled shut,"

A friend called for an ambulance near the community college campus. (Fox says she has been camping with Occupy Seattle since it first began in Westlake Park. She is homeless and says, "I don't have a place. This is the place I call home.")

As for joining the protests, she says, "I was worried about it, but I didn't know it would be this bad. I didn't know that a cop would murder a baby that's not born yet... I am trying to get lawyers." (emphasis is mine)

"It hurts. It's upsetting. I was ready to have a kid, because my family was going to support me in taking care of the child. Her name was going to be Miracle."

So let me get this straight. A pregnant woman stands in the middle of a crowd of protesters, not on the edge where she would be safe and escape would be likely. The police exercise a lawful order to protesters to leave the area, they refuse, the police use pepper spray. The pregnant woman gets blasted right in the face.

Some time later, she miscarries, but it's the cops fault. She was 'ready to have a kid', yet she was homeless, even though her family was going to support her? Sure. "Her name was going to be Miracle", even though at 2 to 3 months pregnant, there is no way to know if the baby was a boy or a girl. So much of this story doesn't jive.

It's a sad day when any unborn child is lost, but this is no more than a vain attempt at sensationalism. The woman will get her name and picture in media across the country. But the police, civil servants who's job it is to protect us, are the bad guys. The shenanigans of the protesters is perfectly fine. Blocking bridges, entrances to banks, even hindering traffic to the local children's hospital is fine!

Feminists have been shouting for years they want equality. Well welcome to equality ladies!

***UPDATE*** Follow the updates from author Dominic Holden on the Stranger. The credibility of the woman referenced above, is shrinking... fast.

***UPDATE*** Some of the headlines I'm finding on Google:

Flaws noted in Occupy Seattle protester's miscarriage stor

Seattle police investigate protester's claim that she miscarried ...

Seattle police probe protester's miscarriage claim -

Questioning the Accuracy of Jennifer Fox's Miscarriage Claim ...

Monday, November 21, 2011

PersonhoodUSA Gearing Up For Personhood Campaign in Colorado

Bruce Finley writes for The Denver PostPersonhoodUSA is gearing up for their next personhood campaign in Colorado.

From the article:

The new version of the measure "will protect every child, no matter their size, level of development, gender, age or race," said Jennifer Mason, spokeswoman for Personhood USA.

New language "will explain again that every human being is a person from their earliest moments," Mason said. "And it will include some extra information that hopefully will prohibit lies of our opponents. . . . It will be a departure from what we've done before."

What should we expect?  We should expect the same ad nauseum lies and scare tactics we heard during the Initiative 26 campaign in Mississippi, such as those listed here.  We expect Planned Parenthood will set up another pretentious organization, just as they did in Mississippi.  

Can we win?  Yes.  But it won't be easy.  We can only win if you and I continue to point out the lies, and spread the truth.  So get ready, and stay tuned!

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Have you seen the movie '180' yet?

If you haven't seen the movie '180' yet, it's worth 33 minutes of your time. It is thought provoking, and may make you think differently about the issue of abortion.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Pro-Choice Invites Violence, Pro-Life Declines

Ben From Canada writes "Pro-Life: Why So Non-Violent?". 

I thought I figured out the pro-life side of the abortion debate...however, my solution only brought more questions, troubling questions that I hope some pro-life person will answer.

Chances are, Ben hasn't figured out anything about the pro-life side of the abortion debate.  But let's play with it, shall we?

Most of us pro-choice types figure that "abortion is murder" & other such phrases are hyperbole. No one is really silly enough to believe that a clump of cells in a woman's body is a human being...right?

If an adult willfully kills a born child, is it murder?  What if at some point (hypothetically), it becomes legal for an adult to kill a born child?  Would it still be murder?  Would you consider it murder even though it would be at that point in time legal?  Ben, you an I are both 'clumps of cells'.  All human beings are. 

Well, as it turns out, these people DO think that a fertilized egg is really a person. Perhaps it's through brainwashing, simplistic logic, or just plain bad information, but they believe it wholeheartedly, as recent pushes towards "personhood" laws have shown. So that explains why they're fighting so hard to "save" these "babies". But that opens another question. 

Actually, we think/know, a fertilized egg is a human being.  And as such, we believe they deserve to be granted rights of personhood.  You know, like the right to not be willfully killed.  No Ben, brainwashing and simplistic logic, along with a lot of bad information, is what it took to successfully dehumanize HUMAN zygotes, embryos, and fetuses.... you know, like in your view.

Now, if it were me, and I literally thought there are people who are legally allowed to kill babies by the truckload, and all attempts to change the law were destined to fail, well...I'd be taking the law into my own hands right now. In fact, if the propositions "abortion is murder" and "abortion will not be made illegal in our lifetimes" are both true, abortion bombing is the only moral route.

So that leads me to the question: why are you not bombing clinics, pro-lifer? Why are you not assassinating doctors? What will it take to make you start doing so? (emphasis is mine)

That would be because pro-lifer's are for the most part, law abiding citizens.  Exceptions being the Scott Roeder's of the world.  Thankfully, they are rare.

Or is it that the "saving the babies" rhetoric is a smoke-screen for your desire to control women and your wish to enforce your repressive sexual views on society as a whole? 

Of course all this is about sex.  Why not?  What's more important to a pro-abort than an orgasm?  Nothing, not even the life of a developing human being.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Have I mentioned how proud I am of Mississippi?

As you all know, Mississippi's Initiative 26, the Personhood initiative, was defeated on November 8th.  I was disappointed, maybe even a bit depressed, but we must move on. 

After reflecting on the events for a couple of days, I've come to realize that things are not nearly as gloomy as they seemed.  Four of ten people voted yes to protecting the unborn. They voted yes even though the initiative wasn't as clear as it could have been.  Four of ten.  That's incredible, and something we should all be proud of.

Of the people who didn't vote yes, a vast majority were mislead by Planned Parenthood's false claims of birth control bans

We all want to reduce the number of abortions, but 26 is so extreme that it would ban common forms of birth control like the pill.

It was a lie which was repeated ad nauseum.  There was also the scare tactic that women with ectopic pregnancies would be left to die.  And the one that couples who need IVF intervention, wouldn't be able to access it.  All lies, but  effective.  Most good liars are effective though, aren't they?  

But even with the lies, four out of ten people voted yes. 

The initiative wasn't perfect, but it was a place to start.  As we move forward. we must remember something.  If the initiative had passed, it certainly would have been contested in court.  Of course that was the point.  But if because of it's ambiguity, it failed, it could have set us back another 40 years on overturning Roe.  None of us want that.

Let's trust the people who know what steps must be taken, and when to take them.  Let's get this right.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

"Mississippians for Healthy Families" IS Planned Parenthood!

Someone just tweeted this article to me.  Take note.

Stan Flint, a consultant for Mississippians for Healthy Families — a group that opposes the measure —image

Blah, blah, blah... Not once was Planned Parenthood mentioned in the article by Elizabeth Crisp, The (Jackson, Miss.) Clarion-Ledger, not once!

Stan Flint is a consultant who works for Southern Strategy Group. Stan Flint is a PROFESSIONAL LOBBYIST who works for PLANNED PARENTHOOD!

Enough with the underhanded tactics of Planned Parenthood.

Mississippians for Healthy Families IS Planned Parenthood!

Mississippi, if you want healthy families, vote YES on Initiative 26. 

Was Governor Barbour Under Pressure From Pfizer?

RH Reality Check's Robin Marty wrote an article regarding Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour's hesitance to vote yes on Initiative 26, the 'Personhood Initiative'.  While Governor Barbour did eventually vote yes on the initiative, to my knowledge, he has not completely embraced it.  This is disappointing, but not completely disheartening. 

Robin states "Now, Prop 26 supporters are accusing Barbour of being wooed by money, not conscience".  I'm sure a lot did.  It crossed my mind as well.  She cites HuffPo in the article, which states:

The Personhood USA campaign retaliated on Thursday by pointing out that Barbour took campaign contributions from Monsanto and Pfizer -- pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the abortion pill.

"We thought it was really strange that he would oppose this measure, since we have the support of nearly every other politician in the state, both Democrat and Republican. So we did a little digging," Jennifer Mason, spokesperson for Personhood USA, told HuffPost. "We discovered that he has received campaign contributions from the makers of the abortion pill as recently as 2007."

Pfizer makes Misoprostol tablets, one of the two pills taken to end early pregnancy, which would be banned if Mississippi voters pass the personhood amendment at the ballots next week. According to a campaign contributions database, Pfizer contributed $7,000 to Barbour's reelection campaign in 2006 and Monsanto, Pfizer's parent company, contributed $1,000.

Barbour's office did not immediately respond to calls for comment.

Do I find it unacceptable that Governor Barbour accepted money from the makers of abortion pills?  No, I don't.  As Robin stated:

Of course, pretty much every politician with any sort of national standing, especially a Republican, has probably received donations from Pfizer.

She's right.  Not necessarily about 'especially a Republican' though, since the tables turned when democrats took control of Congress.

Pharmaceutical companies upped their donations to Democrats by $2.9 million, while reducing their donations to the GOP by $3.9 million. 

But pharmaceutical companies do contribute to politicians all the time.  And a lot of other industries do so as well. 

In my opinion, I doubt if Governor Barbour's hesitance had anything to do with campaign contributions from Pfizer, considering he's not up for re-election due to term limits.  More likely, he was a victim of the scare tactics being used by Planned Parenthood to thwart Initiative 26's passing.  Things like birth control being banned, women with ectopic pregnancies being refused treatment, and so on. All lies, all initiated by Planned Parenthood

Finally, I just got a link for the audio of a robocall sponsored by YesOn26 and PersonhoodUSA.  And you know what? Governor Barbour STILL sounds unsure of when life begins, but at least he voted yes!

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Addressing Medical Misinformation: D. Eric Webb, MD on Amendment 26

Pro-Choicer Thinks All Fetuses Are Dead

Kushielsmoon, who is a self proclaimed pro-choice Christian, tweeted this yesterday.image

I called her on it with this tweet:


One wouldn't have to wonder what, or in this case, who she was talking about.  She used hash-tags common to the abortion debate on twitter, #NOon26 #yeson26 and #prochoice.  No and Yes on 26 are both relating to the Personhood Initiative 26 in Mississippi.  I've also written about different aspects of this initiative here, here, and here

This is clearly about abortion.  And abortion clearly involves the killing of live fetuses, and also live embryos and zygotes.  The only logical conclusion, is that she was referring to unborn children.  Fetuses certainly have bone and flesh, yet they are unable to breathe.  Yet she denies her intent, her implication that fetuses are all dead.  Surprised?  No, of course you aren't.  Honestly, neither was I.


The lies and denial don't stop there though.  She goes on to purport the lies that Initiative 26 would ban birth control, IVF, and even life saving surgery for ectopic pregnancies. 


Astounding isn't it. Lies, lies, and more lies, from a supposed Christian.  Don't listen to the lies. You can find real answers to questions about Initiative 26 here,

Poll results - Pro-life, Pro-Choice, with God or without?

Some time ago, I posted a poll on this blog.  The question posed was:

"Regarding your political views on abortion, as well as your personal belief about God, which answer below is closest to your belief?"

  • Pro-Choice and I believe in God           24 (19%)
  • Pro-Life and I believe in God                73 (58%)
  • Pro-Choice I do not believe in God      19 (15%)
  • Pro-Life I do not believe in God             9 ( 7%)

Out of 125 respondents, 65% said they were pro-life, regardless of their belief (or lack of) in God.  Of respondents who do believe in God, three times as many are pro-life as are pro-choice.  And of those who do not believe in God, twice as many are pro-choice as are pro-life.  No surprise there.

Of those who are pro-choice, 19% believe in God, as compared to 15% who do not.

Of those who are pro-life, 58% believe in God, as compared to only 7% who do not.

What does this mean?  It means that people who believe in God are also more likely to believe in the sanctity of human life.  We're not against abortion because we have religious faith, we're against abortion because killing an innocent human being is wrong.  One third of the atheists who participated in this poll believe that as well.

Governor Haley Barbour Voted #YesOn26, The Personhood Initiative

Just seen on Jill Stanek's website, Governor Haley Barbour calls a halt to "Mississipian's for Healthy Families" deceptive robo-calls regarding the Personhood Initiative.  And as Jill stated, he tweeted it too!

Go Governor Barbour!!!


Thursday, November 3, 2011

Governor Haley Barbour Ambiguous Regarding Personhood Initiative

I saw a video a day or two ago, of Mississippi's Governor Barbour on Fox & Friends talking about his thoughts on Initiative 26, the Personhood Initiative, which is on the ballot for the Nov. 8th election.  He stated concerns over the wording, or ambiguity, of the Initiative.  The text of the initiative is below, as seen on the YesOn26 website. image

The initiative would protect life from conception, or fertilization, a no-brainer.  It would protect life created by cloning techniques, another no-brainer.  Most assuredly, Governor Barbour is confused about "or the equivalent thereof".  What does that mean exactly?  That's what's ambiguous, no one knows exactly. 

I view "or the equivalent thereof" as protection for new human life in the future, because who knows how new life will be created 50, 100, 125 years from now.  Initiative 26 is designed for the unknown, to protect life in the future.

On the Fox video, Governor Barbour stated "I'm somebody that believes that life begins at conception". 

In another article, it was stated Governor Barbour said 'he believes life begins at conception, but he thinks that's different than what the initiative asks.'

Isn't that what every state needs?  A confused leader?  Perhaps he's read about the scare tactics from the pro-aborts.  Some are listed here.  Perhaps he's paving his way to a new future, since he will be term-limited out of office next year?  Perhaps he's just ignorant on the entire personhood debate.  He's a governor, maybe he just hasn't taken, or had the time to get into it.

As it turns out, he *said* he voted YES today by absentee ballot.

Barbour told reporters Wednesday he was undecided because he thinks the initiative is ambiguous and he had concerns about how it might affect in vitro fertilization and ectopic pregnancies.

Barbour says he still has concerns about how it might affect health care, if passed. He says he voted for it, ultimately, because he believes life begins at conception.

Well Governor Barbour, either life begins at conception, or it doesn't.  And since it does, shouldn't you be doing whatever you can to protect it?

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Hey Mississippi - Planned Parenthood EXPOSED!

Live Action does it again. Planned Parenthood has been exposed!!!

The force on getting a no vote on Initiative 26, "Mississippians for Healthy Families", is none other than Planned Parenthood and the ACLU. Surprised? No, of course you aren't.

Some people will do anything to support to right their right to collect funds for killing a mother's unborn child.