Saturday, December 31, 2011

"Baby" Isn't A Scientific Term

If you know @RealtinConnor at all, you know he refuses to acknowledge that a fetus is a baby.  To him, babies breathe air.  So if it's not born yet, it isn't a baby, to him anyway.  I suppose an 8 month gestational fetus is a clump of cells to him, even though it is completely viable.  No, he would say it's a fetus, but never acknowledge it's really a baby just prior to being born.

Very often, he accuses pro-lifer's of 'confusing' embryos and babies, or in this case, infants.  Embryo is a scientific term, just as 'infant' is.  As @RealtinConnor admits. 'baby' is not.  'Baby' can mean any number of things, such as an infant, or a cat, a truck, or yes, even a fetus.  Anything that means the world to you at the time, can and often is referred to as your baby.  Jacked up 4-wheel drive?  "That's his baby". Big marketing project?  "That's her baby".  You get the idea. 


It kind of makes you wonder who's confused, doesn't it?  Why does the term 'baby' bother pro-aborts so much?  I think you know the answer, as do I. 

The Right to Survive

Many of you are familiar with Judith Jarvis Thompson's article "A Defense of Abortion". 

You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.

My goal here is not to dispute Ms. Thompson's analogy, because to me, it's ridiculously stupid and doesn't deserve comment.  I start with it only as a lead-in to the analogy below.  This new scenario is in response to the tweet below, and fully disputes the insane notion that babies don't have the legal right to use their mother's body.  I look forward to seeing the choicer's attempts at aborting it.


It's a beautiful sunny spring day.  You're in the latter part of your pregnancy, and decide to take a walk to help bring labor on.  You walk on a posted nature trail, but you veer off the beaten path to see an unusual bird.  You're not concerned about getting lost, because you know how to use the sun and shadows to guide your way.  Suddenly, a dark cloud appears that blocks your compass.  You're pretty sure you came from 'that direction', so you walk toward it.  Oh wait, maybe it was from 'over there'.  As you repeat this pattern, you realize you're lost.  You know you're close to home, but you have no idea which direction home is.  You feel contractions beginning.  You walk some more, in an effort to find home.  The more you walk, the stronger your contractions become.  Without knowing it, you've ventured for miles, in the wrong direction.  Without knowing it, there is no one around you, for miles and miles. 

The final stages of labor are well in progress.  You give birth to your baby.  You've had no intention of breast feeding, ever.  You've said "I'm not a diner!" many, many times.  This baby coming when it did doesn't change that.    But if you don't supply the baby with nourishment, it will surely die.  There are no cows or goats around for you to milk, and even if there were, you have no bottle to put the milk in.  You had no reason to bring supplies for this baby, for this was supposed to be just a short walk.  You didn't consider the risk of getting lost and going into labor.

The time it will take you to get home is just a bit longer than your baby can survive with no nutrition.  You now have 3 choices. 

  1. Breast feed the baby.  You're not a diner, but allowing this baby to use your body is the only possible way it can survive.
  2. Let the baby die of starvation and dehydration.  Painful for the baby, and unless you leave it by a tree and walk away, it would be painful for you to watch.
  3. Kill the baby.  So you can rid yourself of the burden it brings.  You will get to your goal, which is home, much quicker this way.

Which do you choose?  Killing the baby, or even just letting it die, is illegal.  Your only legal option is to breast feed the baby.  Which means... The baby has the legal right to use your body, even if you don't want it to.

Now, compare this unplanned birth experience to an unplanned pregnancy.  Unplanned pregnancies occur most often because the woman didn't consider the risk of getting pregnant when she had sex.  And even if she did consider it, she took the risk, in the heat of passion.  She now has 3 choices.

  1. Continue the pregnancy, so the baby can survive.
  2. Take steps to 'let the baby die', by drinking concoctions or falling down stairs, intending to induce a miscarriage.
  3. Go to your neighborhood abortionist and have he/she kill it for you.

Many times in the abortion debate, we hear that "women are not incubators", much like the woman above is not a 'diner'.  But in order for the baby to survive, it must be allowed to take nutrition from the mother.  Whether it's via the umbilical cord in the womb, or via breast feeding, the baby must be attached to the mother.  It's a matter of survival.  And yes, it should have the legal right to survive.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

Abortion Gang Promotes Late Term Abortion

This is truly disturbing.  Over at Abortion Gang, Serena writes about some of the women 'helped' by abortion funds, in this case, in Arizona.  One in particular stood out, because the abortion fund organization Serena volunteers for, helped a woman pay for killing her 21 week old baby. 

Delores was 21 weeks pregnant – bumping right up against the legal limit for abortion in Arizona. She was getting a late term abortion because she didn’t know she was pregnant until 20 weeks. The birth control method she uses eliminates her period. The only clue about pregnancy was the weight gain. We helped Delores pay for her abortion, as well as gave her money for gas and helped connect her with housing, since she, too, had to drive to Phoenix from a small, rural community.

Abortion Gang is headed up by Steph Herold, who herself works to 'help' women pay for killing their babies.  Her twitter handle is @IAmDrTiller, named in memory of George Tiller MD, who specialized in late term abortions.  It should come as no surprise then, that they take great pride in 'helping' women kill their 'half way there' babies. 

If you have any doubt about what that 21 week old 'clump of cells' looks like, look no further than Amillia Sonja Taylor, who was born at 21 weeks gestation, and who thrives today.


Pro-aborts would love nothing more than to abort the 24 week limit on abortion (for any reason).  Pro-lifers are working to stop the slaughter of these innocent fragile human beings.  Personhood will eliminate the legality of slaughtering these tiny babies.

I wonder how Serena feels knowing she helped kill a baby the same age as Amillia? 

Monday, December 19, 2011

Pro-Aborts Raising Awareness of Abortion in the US... Awesome!

Sophia of Abortion Gang started a trend called #10ForTebow.  Sophia wants pro-aborts to pledge $10 for every touchdown Tim Tebow initiates.  The money of course, will fund abortion.

Almost two years ago, Tim and his mom made a commercial funded by Focus on the Family.  Here's Sophia's lead in.  Don't overlook the anti-Christian sentiment.

A few years back, the-best-person-and-football-player-on-the-planet, Tim Tebow, the savior from The University of Florida, Heisman Trophy winner, 2010 number 25 draft pick, and now savior quarterback for the Denver Broncos, made a commercial. That in and of itself isn’t that surprising, pro-athletes make commercials for all sorts of reasons. Except he wasn’t selling football gear, he was selling anti-choice propaganda. (emphasis is mine)

Anti-choice propaganda?  Here's the commercial. See if you can find any "anti-choice propaganda".

Sophia referred to Tim as

the same man that used the Super Bowl to a) build his reputation and brand as the saintliest saint of an athlete that ever lived, and b) raise money for an anti-choice organization that would deny the right to abortion to millions of women

I of course disagree with Sophia's summation.  Tim filmed a commercial with his mom.  A commercial funded by Focus on the Family, and about family values.  Not once was abortion mentioned in the commercial, but that doesn't stop the pro-aborts from attacking him, even two years later.

Today, I saw an interview with Sophia.

"To us that means he is working to restrict access to healthcare options [abortion] for women"

Actually, Tim is just being Tim.  Playing football, and "Tebowing" as he does. 

I really don't want to touch further on Sophia's interview, she's getting her 10 minutes of fame, whatever!  But I would like to thank her, for propelling abortion back into the spotlight.  You see Sophia, the Lord is working through you (and Tim Tebow) to bring awareness to abortion in the US.  Yes, He is.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Want To Keep Your Baby? Don't Ask A Pro-Choicer.

This is the sad truth about pro-choice.  They only help if your choice is abortion.  Shelby Knox posted the tweet below this morning, asking her minions to prevent a CPC from winning $1,000.  Sad isn't it?


Obviously, the answer for us is to go to and vote for The Alpha Center.  They are a medical clinic ran by, get this, religious people!  And they do not perform abortions, or refer for abortions. 

By the way Shelby, it's not Leslee Unruh you're hurting, it's women who want to keep their babies.  Or don't they matter?

Thursday, December 15, 2011

The Tizzy Over OTC Plan B

Pro-aborts, including RH Reality Check, have been in a tizzy since "Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius overruled the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by refusing to allow emergency contraceptives to be sold over the counter (OTC),".  Good for Secretary Sebelius! 

They suggested their decision to deny vulnerable teens access to emergency contraception was based on the lack of evidence on whether young teens would understand how to use the method and whether there might be unknown risks.

Vulnerable teens?  Yep, they sure are.  And vulnerable teens need to be protected. 

Over at Abortion Gang, Kushielsmoon writes:

Plan B One-Step is a brand of morning after pill, which works the same way as birth control pills to prevent pregnancy. It’s more effective the earlier it’s taken, but can be taken up to 72 hours after sex. Plan B cannot terminate a pregnancy- -it is not an abortion pill. (emphasis is mine)

When pregnancy begins is not something science can answer for us.  It's left up to man to pinpoint.  Many years ago, ACOG, The American College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians declared that pregnancy begins at implantation.  Why?  From the Population Research Institute

To understand why we have to go back to 1965, when the American Academy of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) arbitrarily and redefined the terms “conception” and "pregnancy.” The group first threw out the then-accepted definition of conception as occurring at fertilization, that is, when the sperm and egg cells unite. ACOG explained that, since conception could not be “detected,” it was impossible to determine whether new life began at that point. It went on to decree that henceforth pregnancy would be defined as beginning only at implantation. This is the time, five to seven days after conception, when the newly formed person, only a few hundred cells in size, implants in the lining of the uterus.

Why did ACOG engaged in this pseudo-scientific sleight of hand? Its motives involved both morality and money. In 1965 Roe v. Wade was still 8 years away, and abortion was illegal throughout the United States. Most Americans still equated abortion with murder and wanted nothing to do with it. If hormonal contraceptives prevented implantation--and they do--then most Americans would reject them on the grounds that they caused early-term abortions.

By redefining pregnancy to begin after implantation, ACOG attempted to avoid the charge that its members, in prescribing hormonal contraceptives, were actually encouraging, if not performing, early-term abortions.

A recent survey shows us that most doctor's don't agree with ACOG.  57% of doctors said that pregnancy begins at conception.

Most of us know that life begins at conception, when the sperm and egg are joined together. It takes approximately a week for the tiny new life to travel through the fallopian tube, and implant itself in it's mothers womb.  It's in this time frame that Plan B can cause the uterus to be un-welcoming, causing the embryo to be dispelled, washed out with the menstrual flow.  

From Plan B's own website (click on picture to go to the page):


Doing a little research on women who have taken Plan B (or another brand) tells me that it should be prescription only for every woman, not just teens.  This is just a couple of examples from the linked website.  

Hey I had sex with my boyfriend and he used a condom. It didn't break and he pulled out way before he ejaculated. I took plan b right after we had intercourse, just to be safe. 

I took plan b 4 times after having sex. The first time that i took my period had just finished(around april 30). After the fourth time(may 15)

You'll also read how the woman's menstrual cycle is affected, leaving them questioning whether or not they are pregnant.  You'll read how some women spot for days, or bleed for weeks.  Google it yourself and you'll see many many stories like these.

Jill Stanek has a post up, where she quotes from another article, concerns which have already crossed the minds of many people, including myself.

What’s to stop teenage boys from pushing their… girlfriends to forget condoms, since Plan B can take care of everything afterward?

Why wouldn’t sexual abusers of young girls use Plan B to cover up the horror of ongoing abuse...?

Would a boy pay $50 to experience sex without a condom?  Yes he would.  Would an abuser pay $50 for the opportunity to continue the abuse?  Yes, he would. 

So again, why should FDA make this drug available to 11 year olds?  Simple. They shouldn't.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

When abortion was illegal, and why it would be different today

I've just watched the video below, as it's been cited several times recently. "When abortion was illegal" was in my opinion, intended as emotional ammunition, so people will believe if abortion was made illegal today, it would be the same as it was then. It's clear that it wouldn't be.

00:08 Lana was 17 in 1939, married, and had a baby 10 months later. The baby was very ill, jaundiced. Lana's OB/Gyn told her another pregnancy would kill her. 3 months later she was pregnant again. Fearing death, and therefore leaving her baby with no mother, Lana sought out and found an abortionist.

That was a long time ago, and while Lana's story is indeed terrifying, it wouldn't happen like that today. Perhaps back then it was illegal to do an abortion if the mother's life was imminent danger, but it's not now, and it never will be again. Also, with the advancement in medical technology, Lana may very well not have had the complications she had when she gave birth to her baby. She may even have been able to give her daughter siblings.

00:48 Betty was involved with a boyfriend. They talked about marriage, babies, and what they would name a child. When she told him she was pregnant, everything changed. The relationship ended. Having a baby without a husband was just not done back then. Using the phone directory, she found a Gyn, intentionally passing the OB/Gyn's because she thought the Gyn would be more sympathetic. He was.

Betty had an abortion because of the stigma associated with being an unwed mother. Obviously, this is not an issue today. Where there used to be stigma attached to giving your child life, now there is only stigma attached to killing them, as it should be.

01:25 Rosalie was pregnant, and had to keep it an absolute secret. In her words, it was a "humiliating strange kind of experience". She decided she should have an abortion to make the problem go away.

Much the same as the previous story, Rosalie aborted due to stigma associated with being an unwed mother. But Rosalie's story has a Part 2.

22:30 Rosalie found she was pregnant for a second time, due to being raped by an older man. She opted this time to go to a home for unwed mothers. She was told not to look at or hold the baby when she gave birth, but she did it anyway. "That was a terrible mistake". She stayed on awhile and worked in the nursery to work off her debt (room, board, and medical expenses). "That was a very bad mistake" because she was around babies all the time. "And I wanted to keep the baby and I actually held the baby before they took it" (she breaks down here), "Anybody who would think [adoption] that'd be a great way to solve the problem just..." Then she talks about herself at 17, a child who doesn't know her own mind, and we expect her to carry a baby in her body for 9 months, give birth to it, and then just give it away like it's nothing.

Even pro-lifer's like me, acknowledge how difficult it must be to carry a baby for 9 months, give birth, then hand over your baby to someone you probably don't even know. And Rosalie even said she wanted to keep this baby. I'm sure she didn't have a choice legally when the time came to hand her baby over. Regarding "give it away like it's nothing", pro-life wonders every day how women can abort their babies like they are "nothing".

05:03 Mary, a registered nurse, said they had patients with temps of 105, bleeding, totally infected. Some died from shock because they were afraid to tell the truth about their abortion. She said it was just plain housewives, who felt they couldn't afford another child.

Could this happen today? Absolutely. But with the advancements in antibiotics such as penicillin, it would be rare. And too, it's not even close to mostly housewives getting abortions today. From Guttmacher: "Women who have never married and are not cohabiting account for 45% of all abortions".

12:32 Evelyn talks about walking the streets alone looking for an abortionist, most places denied knowledge of one, or said they had moved. She heard of another place and drove the car there in the evening. They gave her no anesthesia, she didn't know it was supposed to be painful, she was very frightened they were doing something terrible to her. Later in the video (16:52), she tells how she referred women for abortions.

Evelyn, as far as I can tell, just didn't want to be pregnant, for whatever reason. I don't think it was a lack of money, because she mentioned having a car, and never mentioned having to scrape up funds for an abortion. It could very well have been the same stigma that Betty and Rosalie were facing.

Back in those days, women faced issues that women today can't even imagine. Indeed, times have changed. No longer does a woman have to deal with having 12 kids because she "didn't know how not to get pregnant". No longer do young women have to feel pressured to have an abortion, just because of what people might think about them being pregnant. We have something they didn't have, highly effective birth control. There are no excuses for the 1.3 million abortions in the United States each year.

Yet, the same Guttmacher report as linked above states "Fifty-four percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method (usually the condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant." 54%. That's a lot of women who had access to birth control, and failed to take advantage of it. Women can do better. YOU can do better. It's your children dying during an abortion, and YOU can prevent it. Hold yourself accountable and do the right thing.