Pennsylvania’s Proposed Budget Funnels Even More Tax Dollars to Crisis Pregnancy Centers (Updated)


Update, July 14, 2:10 p.m.: After a nasty budget battle that deepened rifts between state Republicans and Democrats and even Republican Gov. Tom Corbett and fellow conservative Republicans, the Pennsylvania state legislature signed off on spending plan “which no one seems terribly proud of.”

Indeed, there are few winners in the budget produced under the gun of a $1.5 billion deficit. The Philadelphia school system, already gutted down to the bones, recently sent out 342 layoff notices; if a plan to tax cigarettes to generate funding for the district isn’t approved in Harrisburg soon, an additional 1,300 more workers could be out of a job.

Even the specter of schoolchildren literally dying at underfunded and understaffed public schools, though, did not deter the legislature from funneling millions of dollars to centers known to lie to women trying to navigate unplanned pregnancies. The legislature bumped the total amount even higher than the governor’s proposal of $5,644,000: The enacted 2014-2015 budget allocates $5,694,000 of taxpayer dollars to Real Alternatives, an increase of 2.7 percent from the previous year.

Real Alternatives, a Pennsylvania-based anti-choice crisis pregnancy center network, made headlines last week when Michigan state government reporters noticed that their legislature funneled $800,000 to the organization, despite its failure to fulfill the terms of last year’s state contract.

From the Detroit News:

The Michigan Legislature won’t fix the roads. It hasn’t shown much interest in the state’s shockingly high rate of unplanned pregnancy, and infant and maternal death, especially in Detroit.

Yet this month, it approved an $800,000 contract in the 2014-15 budget “to promote childbirth,” alternatives to abortion and abstinence education at crisis pregnancy centers.

The no-bid contract goes solely to Real Alternatives Inc., a Pennsylvania nonprofit that helps anti-abortion, mostly faith-based centers comply with separation of church and state regulations and receive government funding.

That didn’t happen last year, however. Real Alternatives failed to see a single client or sign up one Michigan provider during the first eight months of the $700,000 contract, according to the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH). Although Real Alternatives says it recently signed three providers, MDCH is unaware of them.

Despite “failing to see a single client,” the organization received a $100,000 increase in Michigan state funds, even as last year’s allocation sat largely unspent.

$800,000 is roughly equal to the amount of state money Michigan spends on pregnancy prevention education and family planning services, a number that has been steadily going down for at least a decade, according to Lori Lamerand, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Mid and South Michigan.

“Family planning can’t get any money, but we’re going to hold out $1.5 million allocated for this program that has not been able to spend the grant appropriately,” Lamerand told RH Reality Check.

Despite a disastrous deficit of at least $1.4 billion, Pennsylvania is also pouring more money into Real Alternatives.

Like Michigan, the state’s proposed 2014-15 budget carves out an additional $100,000 for the organization over last year’s allocation. Unlike Michigan, though, Pennsylvania’s funding bump has gone unnoticed amid daily chaotic reports over the deficit and missed budget deadline—and perhaps because it’s deceptively coded in the budget as a line item called “Expanded Medical Services for Women.”

In all, Pennsylvania’s proposed 2014-15 budget allocates $5,644,000 for Real Alternatives, an 1.8 percent increase over last year.

According to a budget request submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, the state also diverts $1 million of the federal funds received through the TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) program to Real Alternatives, bringing total taxpayer funding up to $6,644,000.

Historically, Pennsylvania has led the charge to use taxpayer money to fund anti-choice crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs).

In the early 1990s, Pennsylvania became the first state to allocate funding for CPCs in the state budget. In 2002, it became the first state to also divert federal TANF funds to the crisis pregnancy network, an effort initiated by then U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R).

Funding CPCs with taxpayer money is a radical departure from years past, when state officials across the country openly criticized such organizations as a danger to citizens.

In 1986, Texas’ attorney general challenged CPCs in court, charging “deceptive trade practices.” He said, “women are being emotionally harmed when they go to the center seeking abortions and instead are shown films of aborted fetuses.”

In 1987, a Pennsylvania woman duped into an appointment at such a clinic alleged “lacerating psychological attack.”

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

“When I told them on the phone that I wanted to terminate the pregnancy, the woman on the other end of the line said, ‘No problem – just come in and see us,’ ” she said. And so she made an appointment for the free pregnancy test Abode offers.

“By the time I left that place, I was so nauseated I just wanted to die,” she recalled.

The CPC business model is built on deception.

A handbook written by the founder of what were once called “problem pregnancy centers” recommends that anti-choice activists open such centers near abortion clinics and employ a “dual naming” strategy, meaning adopt a name similar to a nearby abortion clinic or regulated health center. The centers counsel against birth control, even recommending abstinence for married women who do not want to become pregnant. They give women false information regarding pregnancy and abortion.

“It is deeply disappointing to see this unregulated program receive additional funds,” Sari Stevens, executive director at Planned Parenthood Pennsylvania Advocates, told RH Reality Check. “Any federal and state funding for crisis pregnancy centers results in tax dollars being used to support deception and lies rather than comprehensive and medically accurate information.”

Today, at least ten states fund such clinics directly. Real Alternatives prides itself on training organizations in other states to replicate their business model.

Tax dollars have fueled rapid expansion. Nationwide, there are an estimated 2,300 to 3,500 CPCs, compared to 1,800 abortion clinics. Pennsylvania currently has 13 health centers that offer surgical abortion services, and at least 95 crisis pregnancy centers.

Meanwhile, Healthy PA, the governor’s proposed alternative to Medicaid expansion currently under consideration by the federal government, is also likely to reduce access to contraception; Pennsylvania does not require that private insurance plans cover contraception.

Last year, a report revealed that pregnant women and newborns in Philadelphia fare worse than in the rest of the state and country. The United Nations Population Fund estimates that one in three deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth could be avoided if all women had access to contraceptive services.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Tara Murtha on twitter: @taramurtha

  • Kathryn Ranieri

    My local legislator’s assistant researched the 2013-2014 budget for Real Alternatives at $6.29 million. I have doggedly pursued information about their operation only to get the strong arm from Baggatta. In a paper I’m writing about Real Alternatives, I argue that RA is a state-supported morality program, informed by the sensibilities and influences of the Christian Right, that poses a public health danger through deceptive practices that misrepresent their services and that disseminate inaccurate medical information.

    Specifically, RA denies the safety and value of abortion as an appropriate option for women facing a crisis pregnancy while ignoring the well-documented risks of pregnancy. It also endorses abstinence as the only moral and healthy choice for all unmarried people using paternalistic rhetoric that stigmatizes young women who are sexually active, particularly individuals with sexually transmitted diseases. Last, while RA rightly values the potential life of the fetus, it does so through visual and textual misinformation about gestation development and does so to the extent that the worth of the woman and her lived
    complexities of a woman are marginalized.

    • amithere

      You are an idiot

      • colleen2

        On the contrary. It sounds as if she has analyzed the lies of the religious right quite effectively.

      • fiona64

        On the contrary, her analysis is quite accurate.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      Thank you. I live in PA. I am going to do my best to put a stop to this Real Alternatives thing.

      • Kathryn Ranieri

        It’s going to be a tough sell because the Catholic CEO is a lawyer and definitely the sacred cow amongst the Catholic Charities/CPCs. Plus, Gov. Corbett has a personal interest in this operation. HIs grandson is the product of a CPC/Adoption. The bigger issue for me is that there is no oversight on their counseling or their literature. While they claim they never use strong-arm tactics or misinformation, their web site tells otherwise. Journalists and activists report their “counseling” done by non-professionals who lack any state certifications prey on women with horror tales, shame and stigma.

        • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

          I wa raised a Catholic and familiarity does create contempt. Thanks for the head’s up.

          • Kathryn Ranieri

            If you are part of an organization that will push for fuller disclosure of RA’s shenanigans or otherwise, let me know so we can help with publicity..

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Will do.

    • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

      I suggest that you include in your article the scientific laws that control abortion. The impact of abortion cannot be calculated without taking into consideration the facts disclosed in the laws and theories that control abortion.
      For example it is a formal fallacy to assume that because all human life is the result of fusion of a zygote, that all zygotes are human life. In fact the formal fallacy controlling that issue is the “affirming the consequent” fallacy.

      • Kathryn Ranieri

        Russell,

        Thanks for your suggestion. I believe that science and medical knowledge based on science should be the standards for legislation which you seem to consider. However, I disagree with you in your assertion about laws and theories that control abortion. These laws are not based on scientific facts with regard to abortion. I’ll offer three examples. First, legislating laws that require ambulatory surgical compliance does not impact direct patient care. It only satisfies the emotive aspects of the issue. In other words, it only pretends to legislate for the protection of women. Ambulatory surgical building codes do nothing for medical and surgical practices, nothing for direct patient care from nurses and nothing that can be assessed to show direct improvement on care. Buildings do not make a practice safe. State professional regulations already in place make for safe patient care.

        Second, regulating state mandated counseling scripts are not based on science and medical knowledge based on science. They’re, again, based on the emotive and, dare I say, moralizing perspectives of those who are anti choice and anti woman.

        Three, a law that mandates women to undergo ultrasounds is not based on science and medical knowledge based on science. It’s based on shaming women. Ultrasounds are used to judge gestational age but they should never be used to advance the anti choice, anti woman agenda. Scientific studies demonstrate that once a woman determines that she wants an abortion, no amount of cajoling with state-imposed ultrasounds will change her mind.

        • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

          “Thanks for your suggestion. I believe that science and medical knowledge based on science should be the standards for legislation which you seem to consider.”

          We are discussing different ideas. There are scientific laws that will completely eliminate the pro life argument.

          “However, I disagree with you in your assertion about laws and theories that control abortion.”

          The impact of a person “disagreeing” with scientific laws is immaterial. For example a person may disagree with a scientific fact and the impact of that disagreement will change nothing. One of the most contentious scientific facts is that any consent to sex is consent to abortion. The concept that one is consenting to abortion by consenting to sex is very difficult to accept. However, the fact is that 70 percent of all conceptions abort naturally. therefore any consent to abortion

          “These laws are not based on scientific facts with regard to abortion.”

          The impact of the scientific laws makes the statute laws moot. For example if a person is “pro life” yet they consent to sex, they have in fact consented to abortion. The first statement by most pro lifers is that there is a difference between an intentional act that causes death and a natural miscarriage. The error in such logic is that there will not be a natural miscarriage without consent to sex. It is a fact that consent to sex is consent to abortion because 70 percent of conceptions do in fact abort.
          As mentioned previously, it is also a scientific fact that life at conception cannot be proved. Why, because until the DNA of the genotype expresses the correct phenotype, there is no human life. And the idea that fusion of gametes in fertilization creates a unique human life is false as shown by the fact it is based upon a “formal fallacy”. The fallacy lies in the fact that even though moving in a retrospective fashion leads to the fact that all human life can be traced to fusion of the gametes, the converse idea that prospectively there is human life at conception is not proved. In fact claim that there is life at conception is a “formal fallacy”, as explained in a previous post.

          All of your examples that followed your first points are moot as shown by the Scientific Abortion Laws. So not one of the anti choice laws would be valid.
          All one needs to accomplish is to make the laws more widely known, then the issue will be resolved.

          • Kathryn Ranieri

            Since last writing, I’ve discovered your web site and realize that, indeed, we are discussing different ideas. May I suggest that you comment on Abortion.ws and contact Pat Richards who would likely be very interested in hearing your work. I believe the audience for abortion.ws would really appreciate your work.

      • Kathryn Ranieri

        I’ve checked out your web site and find it fascinating.

  • StealthGaytheist

    Tax dollars should not go to religious propaganda groups that seek only to decieve and oppress.

    • Kathryn Ranieri

      CPCs lure women into their facilities using misleading names like Pregnancy Counseling Center or Choices, Inc, or Real Alternatives and using deceptive terms to describe the services they provide. For example, CPCs mimic reproductive health care facilities in their appearance and advertising and in their physical and online presence to prey on women facing a crisis pregnancy.

      • StealthGaytheist

        “Real alternatives”, as if one alternative (stay pregnant) is offering multiple, real alternatives. They should all be shut down for false advertising.

        • Kathryn Ranieri

          The one alternative, as you say, is to remain pregnant. The plural, alternatives, is whether to keep/parent or relinquish–both with many potential problems.

      • Arachne646

        The strategy, actually, is to stall the pregnant woman long enough that she can no longer afford to terminate the pregnancy, or afford to travel to where the termination is available. Then she has no alternative at all–the ideal situation for all anti-choice groups in the first place.

        • goatini

          Except if she is “of color” – victims with unsellable issue get funneled into theocratic brainwashing, where paltry amounts of childcare goods are granted for displays of sufficient piety:

          http://www.awomanschoice.org/Necoles-Place.html

        • Kathryn Ranieri

          And the stalling tactics include lying to her about her pregnancy test, delaying appointment with counselor. Does anyone know of any other specific tactics?

  • kitler

    I love how they expect married couples to stay abstinent for 30+ years of marriage.

  • amithere

    Interesting that the “facts” about problems with pregnancy centers are from almost 10 YEARS before Real Alternatives was started. Too many errors to even address them here.

    • colleen2

      Oh please. Y’all are constantly suing for the right to lie to ‘clients’ and the lies are well documented into the present day. You folks are NOT going to enjoy the backlash from the Sharia Lobby decision one tiny bit.

      • Dez

        Can you recommend some reading for the backlash? I’m not clear on what that means in regards to the Hobby Lobby decsion and I want to be better informed. Thank you.

    • Defensor Vitae

      Who are you trying to kid?

    • fiona64

      Interesting that you didn’t address a single one.

      CPCs are suing for the right to lie to their “clients” and to not have to post signage that says there are no medical personnel on staff. Just one of many sources: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2010/03/30/roundup-crisis-pregnancy-centers-right-mislead/

      I posted numerous links above to the lies discovered by undercover reporters. Surely you can have the courtesy to show us a single, solitary “error” in this article?

      No?

      I thought not.

  • Kathryn Ranieri

    Journalist Holly Otterbein writes about her experience with these fake counselors and concludes that taxpayers are getting soaked: “Real Alternatives does none of those things. Rather it is, quite proudly, a massive, statewide anti-abortion information campaign. And you’re paying for it.” http://citypaper.net/article.php?Cash-and-Carry-14671

    The GOP’s rally cry for less government is clearly balderdash. Or is it hypocritical?

  • colleen2

    Crisis Pregnancy centers need some “gentle sidewalk counselors’ so that the women going in these places will understand that they are being lied to and manipulated.

    • Defensor Vitae

      Let’s see how the Great Judge looks upon these liars and manipulators in the afterlife, shall we?

      • kitler

        Irrelevant.

        Not everyone believes in your sky fairy.

      • goatini

        I’m pretty sure the Great Judge is none too fond of hatemongers who call innocent defenders of reproductive justice “Nazi bitches”.

        • Defensor Vitae

          Isn’t “reproductive justice” a misnomer? Don’t you mean “reproductive convenience”?

          • kitler

            No. Pregnancy maims and kills. Birth is torture. Abortion is self defense.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            Pregnancy is a death sentence to 14/100k women. That is a scientific fact.

          • JamieHaman

            And as long as you are a man, and it will never happen to you that’s OK right?

            Guess what? Those numbers may be perfectly acceptable to YOU, but they sure as hell aren’t acceptable to WOMEN.

            The U.S. currently averages about 650 maternal deaths a year, and that number is rising. http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-relatedmortality.htm and here’s another link for you to read. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/19/us-maternal-mortality-rate_n_5340648.html

            You willfully ignoring the possibility of the huge damage that can be done to the female human body due to pregnancy and childbirth is just outrageous. Furthermore it shows your lack of kindness, and consideration for others besides yourself.

          • fiona64

            Russell’s on our side.

          • JamieHaman

            Thanks for the head’s up. I read/interpreted his response completely differently.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            I think you and I agree. Killing 14 per 100K is awful. We are in agreement.

          • JamieHaman

            Sorry for unloading on you that way, I really read that as a total fu. My bad. Glad to know we are in agreement on this.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            The important thing here is that justice be done. You have a choice, you can murder innocent babies or you can choose to murder them and save a fetus instead. Currently, you murder babies. Will you stop and join me in saving life?

  • somebigguy

    Anyone who sincerely claims to be “pro-choice” should be thrilled that young mothers are receiving support to carry and deliver their children. How can those who condemn alternatives to abortion be pro-choice? They appear merely pro-abortion; more to the point, they show themselves as anti-life. By calumniating and vilifying crisis pregnancy centers, such pro-choicers tip their hands, showing for the whole world to see that their agenda isn’t about choice at all, but about death and destruction: the deaths of children and the destruction of mothers’ lives.

    • kitler

      CPC’S drop the woman like a hot potato once the baby is born and they have sold it to an adoption agency

      • somebigguy

        Dropped “like a hot potato” and “sold” to an adoption agency? How ridiculous. Even if it were true, the alternative (there’s that problematic word again) is better than death, which is all the abortion industry offers.

        • kitler

          Not really.

          • somebigguy

            Being dismembered, vacuumed from one’s mother’s womb and deposited in a dumpster is better than living?

          • kitler

            What a typical abortion looks like
            http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls6w7phG8f1qi68z9.jpg

          • somebigguy

            Pictures taken through the open doors of Nazi crematoria weren’t much different. Scattered bits of tissue or a pile of ashes, the reality is the same: slaughtered human beings.

          • kitler

            That embryo is brainless.

            Jewish people had minds and could suffer.

            Women at Auschwitz performed abortions on themselves. Were they also Nazis according to you?

          • somebigguy

            A healthy human embryo at two weeks is no less human, behaving exactly as a human being should behave at that age; the fact that its behavior does not meet your criteria for acceptance into the human population does not change its nature.

            BTW, reference to women performing abortions at Auschwitz is irrelevant.

          • kitler

            It is not irrelevant. You stated that abortion = Nazi genocide.

            So, was Gisella Perl (Jewish obgyn who performed abortions at Auschwitz) a Nazi genocidal killer? Yes or no??

          • somebigguy

            The intentional killing of all human beings is regrettable, even if the perpetrator is a victim. And even if the victim is a perpetrator, as in the case of capital punishment.

            This is not uncommon; women abort because of rape. One tragedy follows another. It is the unfortunate nature of our fallen world.

            BTW, I never stated that women who abort are Nazis, nor that abortion “equals” the Nazi genocide. To be sure, the killing of many tens of millions of unborn persons in America is genocide; it is consciously carried out as public policy in the US, as it is in most countries of the world. And the cultural parallels between the abortion industry and the Nazi genocide are as considerable as they are sobering.

          • kitler

            Bullshit.

            You said that abortion is the same as Nazi cremation.

            Therefore, ANY WOMAN who aborts is as evil as the Nazis.

          • somebigguy

            Nonsense.

          • kitler

            If you are going to compare abortion to the holocaust, at least own it.

            You fucking mealy mouthed coward.

          • somebigguy

            Who are the cowards, really? Persons so frightened of a helpless child– so young she hasn’t even been born– that they demand not only a prerogative but taxpayer funding to kill her? Or those willing to endure the ugly vitriol of abortion advocates when pointing out the obvious parallels between America’s objectification of human beings and similar policies in dictatorships like the Soviet Union, Red China and Nazi Germany?

          • kitler

            So now women who abort are not just Nazis, they are Stalin and Mao combined!

            1 in 3 women will have an abortion.

            That means 1 out if 3 women, according to somebigguy, is as evil as the most sadistic mass murderers in history.

            And you wonder why no one takes you seriously.

            PS. fetuses maim kill and injure their hosts. 300k women are killed by fetuses per year worldwide. A further 20 million are permanently injured by fetuses.

          • Mindy McIndy

            My mother had a breach birth with my brother. She was completely torn from her vagina to her anus and had to have multiple reconstructive surgeries. So yeah, she’s permanently injured. Me, I’m someone with such severe health issues that I would either die or be severely maimed if I carried to term. But I would be a murderer if I had an abortion, despite my health issues.

          • kitler

            She would have been a Nazi!

          • Mindy McIndy

            Which totally pisses me off, considering my grandparents were concentration camp survivors, and most of my dad’s side of the family was wiped out by the Nazis.

          • kitler

            Anti-abortionists only have empathy for embryos.

          • somebigguy

            The truth, of course, is far different; we endeavor to protect both mother and child. But more to the point, all women were embryos once; anyone truly concerned about women understands the need to defend women throughout their lives, from conception to natural death.

          • kitler

            You want females to be born so you can enslave them as baby making machines? or accuse them of being NAZIS should they choose abortion?

            You’re an ass.

          • somebigguy

            Your thinking is perfectly backward.

            I don’t want women born for any particular reason. I just want them born. You’re the feminist. Of all people, YOU should want them born.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Why would anyone want women born into a world out to exploit them as breeding machines? To be born is a good thing ONLY if you have a good life with rights.

            I can see why YOU would want more women born so you can exploit them.

          • kitler

            Yeah. You want them born. But you don’t believe that they should have the same rights to bodily autonomy that men have..

            And you think they are all Hitler if they choose abortion over birth.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You come anywhere near my babies to “protect” them and I will introduce you to Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson.

          • goatini

            Stripping citizens of their civil, human and Constitutional rights to exploit them in gestational slavery for the benefit of the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption syndicate is NOT “defending women”.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No real empathy for embryos either, considering some consider it’s fine to “let them die” as long as you don’t “kill them on purpose”.

            Their only intent is to punish women, zefs being convenient pawns in the process.

          • somebigguy

            Listen to yourself, read your own words. You are casting an unborn human being as villain to justify destroying it.

            Getting back to the subject of the above op-ed, so-called crisis pregnancy centers, the whole point is to offer support to mothers, especially those with unplanned pregnancies. A large percentage of women who abort do so out of desperation, believing they have no better alternative. That’s where CPC’s come in. Again, why would you object to such support for a woman? It is, after all, her choice.

            Is it, perhaps, that the only choice you’re interested in, the only choice you want, like or respect, is destroying a human fetus?

            Now, think about it. Really think.

          • kitler

            Pregnancy maims kills and injures. That’s a fact. No casting of the unborn as a villain need apply. No one should be forced to risk life and health to save another. Parents are not even forced to donate tissue or organs to save their born children. Why all the concern for unborn humans vs born humans? You seem to believe that unborn humans are deserving of SPECIAL rights.

            Anyways, you are still avoiding the issue. You believe that women who abort are more evil than every mass murdering dictator to ever live. That’s pretty fucked up and makes you look like an ultra moron.

          • Defensor Vitae

            No special rights for the unborn; just the same, equal right to life that others enjoy. Simple as that. Those who get special rights are those who think they can dictate whether someone else lives or dies.

          • kitler

            No born person has the right to occupy and use the body of another as life support without consent. If we don’t have that right then neither should unborn humans.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Pray tell, how can the unborn persons acquire the consent of those who conceived them without their consent?

          • Suba gunawardana

            It doesn’t MATTER to the unborn, because they are not aware or sentient. The only “person” who matters in the situation is the woman whose body was invaded. The decision whether to eliminate the parasite, OR to accommodate the parasite at the expense of her body, is totally upto her.

          • Defensor Vitae

            So a woman has no responsibility for keeping an unborn baby alive when it was she who created the situation that caused the “parasite” to be dependent on her? That’s a good one.

          • kitler

            Pregnancy is not consent to be maimed killed and injured. Neither is sex.

          • goatini

            Fetuses don’t have rights. Women do.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Eerily similar to Jews don’t have rights; Aryans do. Or blacks don’t have rights; whites do.

          • kitler

            Youre a narcissistic pro child killing monster
            http://vimeo.com/m/100065750

          • Suba gunawardana

            “Rights” of the unborn ALWAYS come at the expense of the rights of others, because the unborn ALWAYS live inside other people, thereby perpetually violating the rights of others. Whether the unborn get to continue that violation, is totally upto the person whose body they occupy.

          • goatini

            Planned Parenthood provides pregnant patients with ALL options. So-called “CPCs” are in business for ONE reason – to aggregate sellable inventory, via slave labor, for the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption syndicate.

          • goatini

            What a load of total BS. More like, Christo-Fascist fetus fetish freaks spew the ugly vitriol of seditious anti-American hate speech against the inalienable civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens to privacy, bodily autonomy, and reproductive justice.

            Patriotic citizens don’t try to strip away the inalienable rights of their fellow citizens.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            There are a number of forms of killing that are acceptable and not criminal: assisted suicide, defense of self or others, war, execution, police work, abortion.

          • goatini

            //And the cultural parallels between the abortion industry and the Nazi genocide are as considerable as they are sobering.//

            Actually, they are as non-existent as the “validity” of any of your impotent lying “arguments”.

          • kitler

            Read this, and tell me if you think this woman is as evil as Hitler and nazis
            http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/gisella-perl/

          • lady_black

            Well, you see, somebigguy, embryos and fetuses are not engaging in any “behaviors” at all. Reflexive acts are not the same thing as “behavior.” Let me explain the difference. Your hand touches a hot oven rack and without brain involvement, you jerk your hand away. That’s reflexive. The nerve activity travels from your hand to your spinal column and back again without conscious thought. This is a protective reflex. When your flesh is being burned, you don’t have time to think about what to do. It just happens. You see something you want on a high shelf. You think about how best to obtain it, and your higher brain formulates a plan and signals your body to go get a step-stool, climb up the stepstool, and reach out and pick up the item. THAT is behavior. Controlled by higher brain function than mere reflex. All activity of prenates is reflexive. They do not have the structures to have conscious thoughts until very late in pregnancy, and even then, they don’t possess any control over their movements. After birth, reflexes are gradually lost as the ability of the baby to control it’s own movements grows. The difference in the neonate is that the neonate is capable of consciousness in spite of inability to control movements. They experience hunger, pain, anger, discomfort, etc. and respond to negative experiences by crying.

          • goatini

            Oh boy, is this another asshat – like Michael Burgess, R (of course)-Texas – who jacks off to the idea of male fetuses masturbating?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            A fetus does not meet the definition of human being.

          • goatini

            Embryos are not persons.

          • fiona64

            You are typical of the anti-choice male, flapping your gums and demanding that women risk their lives and health in the name of gestation. It’s so easy to make those demands, isn’t it? I mean, after all, those risks will never be assumed by you. Mighty convenient, that.

            What I find fascinating is that you make the pregnant woman less human than an H. sapiens embryo. Why is that?

          • Suba gunawardana

            Again, the method of death doesn’t matter when you are non-sentient.

          • somebigguy

            It matters when you’re human.

          • kitler

            So you like to see animals suffer? Is that what you are saying?

            Human and person are not synonymous

          • somebigguy

            I like to see animals suffer? How in the world did you construe that? As a matter of fact, I hate killing animals. I’m not a hunter and I don’t fish. I must admit that I do occasionally swat insects.

          • kitler

            You seem to think that only human DNA has any value.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So what? You eat don’t you? That means you let others do your dirty work for you (which is far worse than killing your own food with awareness & empathy).

            For every human to live, millions of animals have to be killed. By forcing MORE humans into life (unwanted ones at that) you are actively promoting the suffering and death of billions of animals.

          • somebigguy

            All humans are persons. Not all persons are human. These are well understood and accepted concepts in all cultures.

          • kitler

            Then why are humans without higher brain function allowed to die and organs harvested? The body is alive, but the mind is gone. Why are these patients disconnected from feeding tubes and left to die? Explain that.

            Why aren’t anencephalic babies kept on life support indefinitely? No brain, but the body is alive. Explain that too.

          • somebigguy

            I don’t know why some of these things happen in hospitals to persons with cognitive injuries or abnormalities. You’re touching upon legal, medical and policy issues fraught with debate.

            But as I mentioned earlier, one’s humanity is not dependent on one’s cognitive ability.

          • kitler

            Its not a matter of cognitive difficulty. Its BRAIN DEATH.

            try some critical thinking

            Why is it NOT murder to starve to death a patient who has a dead cerebral cortex? (Higher brain, seat of your mind and personality).

          • goatini

            Personhood, citizenship, and rights are dependent upon birth.

          • lady_black

            Nope. Human remains are human. I would hardly call them persons. They were once persons. Human persons exist from the first breath to the last. Before or after that they are human tissue.

          • goatini

            All persons have been born.

          • fiona64

            Nope, sorry. Personhood, and its attendant rights, is conferred upon birth.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Not to the individual being killed here, a zef, who has no idea it exists in the first place. Death matters ONLY to an individual who is aware they are being killed, and can feel fear or a sense of loss as a result. Such as born humans or born animals. A zef feels nothing.

          • somebigguy

            Whether the person is cognizant of dying or not is completely irrelevant. You equate human life with cognizance or even less, an ability to sense pain. Human life is immeasurably more.

          • kitler

            Human is not synonymous with person.

            Skin cells = human life

            Humanity values itself for our minds, not our DNA. If you are using DNA as your only marker of personhood, then every cell in your body is a person.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Define what you mean by “immeasurably more” here.

          • goatini

            Fetuses are not persons.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I don’t know what picture you’re looking at–I see nothing like that in the photo above.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What does it matter if you are dismembered (or shot or poisoned) if you don’t FEEL it?
            Zefs are non-sentient, unlike CHILDREN who feel every moment of pain and fear when they are being abused & raped by the religious nuts who “adopted” them.

          • somebigguy

            It means you’re dead.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So what? A zef never knew it existed. Makes no difference to it if it’s dead.

          • Defensor Vitae

            In that case, why not be able to kill a born baby up until whatever arbitrary age that someone decides is when he or she becomes self-aware? Or is there something magical that happens to make the baby a person once he or she exits the birth canal?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            It always amazes me how much the forced birth cultists enjoy the thought of killing babies. Because they care. LOL.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Really? They oppose abortion but are OK with killing post-birth babies? You must be confusing us for Princeton Professor Peter Singer, who advocates killing babies up to 2 years old: http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0049.html

          • lady_black

            Singer is a moron. And so are you.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Letting living breathing sentient children die from neglect/abuse, and actively adding MORE children to this misery, is much the same as killing children.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            And some Catholics seem to enjoy babykilling and the fantasy of babykilling to the maximum too.
            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2645870/Mass-grave-contains-bodies-800-babies-site-Irish-home-unmarried-mothers.html

          • kitler

            Once born its no longer infringing on someone’s bodily autonomy.

          • Defensor Vitae

            But it’s OK to infringe on the bodily autonomy of an unborn baby who was conceived through not fault or his or her own yet has to pay for the sins of the mother? Where’s the justice in that?

          • Suba gunawardana

            The culpability of the invader is IRRELEVANT when it comes to protecting your body. That would matter ONLY if you intend to prosecute them.
            Your right to protect your body is not negated or diminished by the “innocence” or “lack of culpability” of the invader.

          • lady_black

            A fetus, by definition, is not autonomous.

          • kitler

            Unborn humans have no bodily autonomy.

            “Sins of the mother”

            You really hate women don’t you?

          • Jennifer Starr

            If it was autonomous, it wouldn’t need to be connected to another body via an umbilical cord.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Non-sentience is not a REASON to kill. Once you made the decision to kill based on other justifications, the METHOD of killing should be chosen based on whether the individual is sentient or not.

            As to justification of killing a zef vs a baby:

            A born baby doesn’t live inside you, so there’s no NEED to kill them in order to protect your body.

            Furthermore, if a woman chose to give birth when abortion was available, that means she voluntarily CHOSE to be a parent, i.e. made a commitment to put the child first, and protect & care fore the child for as long as necessary. Obviously that commitment involves not killing the child due to inconvenience.

          • Defensor Vitae

            This article regarding sentience refutes your premise: http://christiananswers.net/q-sum/q-life021.html

          • kitler

            There is no such thing as inherent capacity for sentience.

            Coma patients don’t lose their sentience. They are temporarily not accessing it. But thr necessary thalamacortical structures are there.

            Prenate don’t have those structures, and may never develop them.

          • goatini

            Rights, citizenship and personhood are all conferred at birth.

          • Defensor Vitae

            If so, what’s up with the laws limiting abortion to certain gestational ages or those that make it a crime to injure or kill a fetus? Prickly little dilemma, no?

          • lady_black

            Magical? NO. Biological? Yes. There are profound biological changes that happen at birth. Unless you happen to be dragging your placenta around with you, you lost a major organ that you needed in fetal life (more than any other organ). The holes in your heart that allowed circulation to largely bypass the lungs closed up, and you began to breathe oxygen. The umbilical veins and arteries ceased function and the cord began to decompose. Now what do you think would be the outcome if that happened during fetal life?

          • fiona64

            Most of us got past existential angst at about age 14. Some of us, apparently have not …

          • lady_black

            No. Women forced to give birth to children they didn’t want have historically deposited them in dumpsters and other places. The products of conception removed during an abortion are hazardous medical waste, and are disposed of according to the laws governing the handling of biohazard waste.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Forced birther cultist brought its murderporn for show and tell. Lucky us.

          • goatini

            Another fetus porn fapper here, I see. Looks like you need some help to save yourself from yourself:

            http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/783/838/b6c.jpg

        • Suba gunawardana

          No. Death bad ONLY if it robs you of a good life. If the only life available is one of misery, poverty, neglect & abuse, then it’s much better to die now than later after years of abuse.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Who are you to decide how the fate of the unborn baby will turn out? That is the kind of sickening evil that swirled around in the damned noggins of the Nazis. By the way, are you Indonesian? Your name indicates that you are. If so, you should be ashamed of yourself, what with the millions of suffering individuals who I am witnessing while visiting the in-laws in Jakarta. Have you no compassion for them? Or would you rather see them tossed into the wood chipper en masse to end their suffering? You’re disgusting.

          • kitler

            Not nearly hyperbolic enough sweetie.

            And I would like to remind you that born children are different from unborn. And that it is cruel and abusive to bring more children into the world if they are going to suffer terribly.

            Thus is suba’s point that you were too dense to comprehend because you would rather sound like a blithering idiot whose undies are too tight.

            Grow the fuck up.

          • Defensor Vitae

            How the hell would you know they are going to suffer, you Nazi bitch?

          • kitler

            I guess mature discourse is not something you are capable of.

            Btw, I would like for you to please explain to me the implication you are making that the Nazis started ww2 and the holocaust to *prevent suffering*.

            I will wait. I’m patient, little one.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Fuck you, you arrogant piece of shit. You started the immature discourse, so you can just go gas yourself and see whether or not whether you’ll be condemned to hell. The reasons for the Nazis killing the Jews and the unborn being aborted make no difference. Both are acts of evil no matter how you dissect it, even when viewed through prism of natural law.

          • kitler

            I told you to grow up. Clearly, you are incapable of sounding like an adult.

            As this latest round of hysterical nonsense proves.

            Keep it up though, I am enjoying the entertainment

          • Defensor Vitae

            Go suck on your arrogance.

          • kitler

            Does that turn you on?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Given your attitude, highly unlikely anyone sucks on you. Ewww. You skeeve me.

          • Unicorn Farm

            “Fuck you, you arrogant piece of shit. You started the immature discourse, so you can just go gas yourself and see whether or not whether you’ll be condemned to hell.”

            There’s that pro-life love and respect we’re used to seeing!!! Slow clap for your display of godliness. I bet Jesus is proud of you, representing his followers so well.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Thank you for the compliment. I figured you’d appreciate it, knowing that’s the kind of wallowing around in the gutter that you’re accustomed to engaging in.

          • fiona64

            Gosh, I’m so sorry I missed that. I could have led us all in a rousing chorus of “And they will know we are Christians by our love, by our love …”

          • goatini

            Go suck on your binky and stroke off to some fetus fetish porn.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Thanks for the suggestion, but I prefer indulging myself in scholarly articles such as this one, which points out something interesting, putting you in league with Holocaust deniers, of all people, as well as the blood-thirsty Mayans: “Holocaust deniers constitute a current example of this syndrome: saying the victims never existed, or the persecution was medically or practically necessary, or the like. Girard calls such concealments of historical facts, “collective bad faith.”

            As the author tells it, this can “shed some light on the particular kind of fear behind the willingness to distort and on the resistance to fact that is such a curious feature of much abortion debate. In debates or published pro-and-con arrangements of arguments about abortion, over and over again, the opponents of abortion present observable facts, and the proponents of abortion present arguments based on intangible values, either their own or those they attribute to their opponents. Photographs are forbidden and medical information dismissed until the dishonesty of the concealment even embarrasses some abortion supporters, such as Naomi Wolf.” http://uffl.org/vol13/ward03.pdf

          • Suba gunawardana

            And you forcing unwanted children to miserable lives of abuse & neglect is not evil how?

          • Defensor Vitae

            Who am I, or better yet who are you, to say how their lives will turn out if not given a chance at life or adoption? Such an arrogant pessimist, are you not? Pray tell, is there anything “evil” about how things turned out for this trio? http://www.lifenews.com/2013/08/12/three-unwanted-children-would-they-have-been-better-off-aborted/

          • Suba gunawardana

            I won’t bother looking at your Lifenews link, which is notorious for lying.

            I accept your point is that a FEW unwanted children might end up with good lives.

            So what? Does a FEW good outcomes justify the HUGE numbers of children forced into misery? Abused, tortured, raped, neglected, abandoned?

            If you were guaranteed a good life AT THE EXPENSE OF abuse & torture to hundreds of others, would you take it? (I bet you would.) Personally I wouldn’t. I would rather die than live at the expense of misery to others.

          • Defensor Vitae

            So what’s keeping you from doing that? It must be whatever prompted Ronald Reagan to remark, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.”

          • goatini

            LIE Spews is nothing but anti-American seditious misogynist hate speech propaganda.

          • Rainbow Walker

            I think someone should keep a close eye on this one. A lot of hostility and lack of reasoning. Probably one of the more violent children of the forced birth terrorist groups.

          • Defensor Vitae

            I’m content to just stand at the gate to the path that is hard and narrow but leads to life in Christ, but if others want to continue on the road that is wide and easy but leads to destruction, that’s their choice.

          • goatini

            I agree, probably has a photo of Roeder on his Preyer Altar.

          • kitler

            “Nazi bitch” was amazing. Thanks for that. I feel special.

          • Defensor Vitae

            You’re most welcome.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Just listen to those family values. Kiss your mother with that mouth?

          • Defensor Vitae

            At least I’m not giving helpless persons who were conceived in the womb through no damned fault of their own the kiss of death, missy.

          • kitler

            You left out “Nazi”.

            Now Jenniffer will feel unloved.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I typically don’t go around kissing the inhabitants of other women’s uteri.

          • kitler

            Nazi.

            (I did it, so you won’t feel left out)

          • Jennifer Starr

            Aww–you’re sweet :)

          • kitler

            I’m sad. DV will probably be banned in the morning.

          • Defensor Vitae

            In that case get yourself to bed. It’s past time for you to go nighty-night, junior.

          • kitler

            Already in bed, enjoying your idiocy

          • Jennifer Starr

            Nah, we’re having way too much fun.

          • kitler

            Suba loves nitwits. Zie will be disappoint if zie misses this gem.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Glad you’re enjoying getting a dose of your own medicine.

          • kitler

            You’re killing us.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Cursing and hysterical theocrats always give us a big laugh.

          • Defensor Vitae

            I figured talking in your own language would produce the desired results.

          • goatini

            We’re not talking in anti-American seditious hate speech, like you are.

          • Defensor Vitae

            No, but you talk a big fucking game about choice and yet you damned blowhards get your tighties into a wad about pregnancy centers offering alternatives. What sorry hypocrites.

          • kitler

            The alternatives = lies and manipulation

          • Jennifer Starr

            I think women should be able to make up their own minds about their own pregnancies, whatever that decision may be

          • Defensor Vitae

            So why not allow them to obtain information that would help them make the right decision? The death chamber known as Planned Parenthood sure as hell isn’t providing alternatives to abortion, so that’s where pregnancy centers come in.

          • kitler

            PP donates diapers and formula to women who choose to give birth.

          • goatini

            Exactly. And so-called “CPCs” offer white women who keep their children (after birth) NOTHING. It’s been proven over and over again.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Untrue. I had a friend who went to Planned Parenthood–she ended up not choosing abortion and they pointed her to various resources–prenatal care, financial help–so she could raise her child.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Information that would help them make the right decision? That’s NOT what CPCs offer. They try to get you breed at all cost by lying cheating and giving false medical information.

            Besides, women are not that stupid that they cannot make their own decision and have to go by the misinformation provided by some lying cheating forced-birth nuts.

          • Defensor Vitae

            So they are to trust only the operators of death camps who would hypocritically tweet “justice for all” to mark Independence Day?

            If you think yours is a winning message, then why the big swing to the pro-life side in recent years? Could it be because of websites like this who are exposing your evil ways? http://www.lifenews.com/2014/07/04/why-do-abortion-advocates-hate-it-when-women-get-abortion-alternatives/

            It must suck to be on the losing side.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Women have the same number of abortions whether abortion is legal or illegal. You have not stopped and cannot stop abortion. All you can do is kill and maim women. We know that is the forced birther cult’s goal = kill and/or control women. Too late.

          • Defensor Vitae

            We’ll see about that, considering the 20-point swing to the pro-life side in just the past decade alone … http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/09/Polls-Show-Marked-Shift-From-Pro-Choice-To-Pro-Life

          • lady_black

            ROFLMFAO @ breitbart.

          • Suba gunawardana

            So what exactly would you accomplish by banning abortion? Breed untold numbers of unwanted children into misery; watch them die slowly from neglect & abuse; and hasten our way to becoming a third world nation. Spoken like a true forced-birth nut.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Breitbart? Bwha ha ha ha ha ha. Ha ha ha. Breathe. Bwha ha ha ha ha. Gasp. Ha ha ha ha ha.

          • Unicorn Farm

            Gerrymandering? ALEC? Citizens United? Republicans trying to rally up the base? Brutes like you who get off, frothing at the mouth, thinking about women being forced to birth pwecious un-born bay-beeeees?

            That moronic website has been around for at least a decade. The number of anti-abortion laws passed does not reflect the country’s attitude towards abortion, or we’d be seeing a drastic decline in the number of abortions. Which we’re not.

          • Defensor Vitae

            While perhaps not drastic, there has been a decline in the number of abortions in recent years. And we’re not gonna stop until state-sanctioned murders are outlawed, fulfilling the words of Ronald Reagan:

            “Simple morality dictates that unless someone can prove the unborn human is not alive, we must give it the benefit of the doubt and assume it is alive. And, thus, it should be entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

          • Suba gunawardana

            No it’s because the evil religious nuts always have enough power and money to subjugate the weak & powerless, and run roughshod over anyone who tries to protect them. This is a pattern that has repeated throughout history, and would not change until religion is abolished.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Not gonna happen, not when Jesus promised that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church and that he will be with us until the end of the age, even if that means he’ll need to dispatch St. Michael the Archangel to kick your ass as he did your lord, Lucifer.

          • goatini

            LIE Spews is a seditious anti-American misogynistic hate speech site.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Oh, really, then why has it not yet been forced out of business by the FCC after so many years in operation?

          • Jennifer Starr

            The FCC doesn’t regulate internet content.

          • Rainbow Walker

            These so called centers offer no information. They warp and distort facts for their own advantage and should be shut down.

            If any other group did such horrid things they would be arrested for practicing without a license.

          • goatini

            Planned Parenthood offers guidance on all options, including adoption, so you’re again full of BS.

          • Defensor Vitae

            If so, what’s up with the recent awarding of a certificate to a Planned Parenthood clinic for exceeding “abortion visits” of the prior year? I wonder whether the Krauts with blood on their hands did the same thing back in the days: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/01/Planned-Parenthood-Gives-Colorado-Clinic-Award-For-Exceeding-Abortion-Visits-Of-Prior-Year

            By the way, it gets you nowhere to whitewash such atrocities.

          • Tiffany Kraus

            So I guess the prenatal care my cousin received through Planned Parenthood was imagined.

          • kitler

            They only provided him with prenatal care so they can send him to a “death camp” when he reaches 18. Diabolical, PP is.

          • Defensor Vitae

            She was one of the lucky ones, considering that PP aborts 392 babies for every one it refers for adoption. Furthermore, should I be impressed by the fact that 7.8 percent of its facilities provide prenatal care?: http://liveaction.org/blog/less-than-8-of-planned-parenthoods-provide-prenatal-care-40-do-abortions/

          • Defensor Vitae

            Kind of like the Nazis deciding what to do about undesirables who threaten white supremacy, no?

          • kitler

            Were the Jewish people living inside Nazi bodies without consent, maiming killing and injuring them?

          • Defensor Vitae

            No, but the Nazis sure were maiming, killing and injuring the Jews without their consent. May I ask whether you have ever taken a course in logics?

          • kitler

            Fetuses maim kill and injure women without their consent.

            Abortion is self defense. Birth is a form of torture.

          • Suba gunawardana

            And that was wrong, because the Jews were NOT violating the rights of Nazis in any way.

            On the other hand it is perfectly OK to kill a zef, who is violating your body by occupying it without your consent.

          • kitler

            You have broken my irony meter.

          • Suba gunawardana

            That analogy would be correct ONLY if Jews occupied the bodies of Nazis, as zefs do with women.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Oh, but they did occupy their lands. Can’t have that threatening white supremacy.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Having your baby sold to the highest bidder to be some religious nut’s sex-toy is certainly not much of an alternative….

          • Defensor Vitae

            Making defamatory remarks to detract from the dehumanizing treatment of your preborn fellow citizens gets you nowhere.

          • kitler

            Can’t dehumanize something that has nothing in common with a person.

            Unborn humans, when the majority of abortions occur, are mindless animal organisms. And zygotes are actual clumps of DNA. Neither of thr above have any of the traits associated with personhood.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Based on your subjective reasoning, of course. But God would beg to differ, for He had said in Jeremiah 1:5: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.”

            The bottom line is that we’ll be answering to Jesus, who entrusted his church with the keys to his kingdom on Earth, which has this to say in the Catechism: The Catholic Church teaches that because children are persons from the moment of conception, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being (#2274).

          • lady_black

            That says that “god” knew Jeremiah PRIOR to his existence. That has nothing to do with the subject.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Once again, if god is against abortion, why does he allow it to go on and never lift a finger to stop it? More importantly, why does god perform billions of abortions on his own?

          • kitler

            A religious argument is not an argument. Try again, with something that is rational, logical and non religious.

          • Suba gunawardana

            The “saint” who was calling everyone “Nazi bitch” is now offended by a “defamatory remark”? LOL

          • Defensor Vitae

            There are times when fighting fire with fire is needed.

          • goatini

            But since what IS dehumanizing is exploiting women with unwanted pregnancies like livestock for the benefit of greedy, selfish, barren vultures, you’re just spreading misogynistic hate speech.

            And fetuses are not citizens.

          • Defensor Vitae

            So you want to limit rights on the basis of age? Tsk … tsk … being discriminatory when it comes to equal protection of the law, aren’t we?

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Pregnancy centers do not offer alternatives.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Oh, but they do offer alternatives to the moral wrong that is abortion. Do you know that the apostles specifically forbade abortion in the Didache?

          • lady_black

            Is this a theocracy?

          • Jennifer Starr

            If this nut had his way, it probably would be.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            These are the rules that Jesus followed concerning abortion. I will stick with Jesus, thank you.

            “Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

            An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another.” – Judaism 101.

          • Kathryn Ranieri

            Projecting much? Hypocrite? Seriously, look who’s calling the kettle black.

          • goatini

            Human trafficking inventory aggregation centers offer NO “alternatives” save gestational slavery.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Just so you know, a report on Life News has this to say: “It cannot be overlooked that there’s a connection between sex trafficking and abortion. It aids the perpetrator in further abusing the girl. And Planned Parenthood has been caught as a willing accomplice to the sex industry.” From: http://www.lifenews.com/2014/02/28/human-trafficking-is-happening-in-america-and-abortion-is-part-of-the-equation/
            So what do you say about the human trafficking inventory depletion centers that offer NO “alternatives” save gestational holocaust?

          • kitler
          • kitler

            Thumbs up for this too.

            *smile*

          • Suba gunawardana

            Because, as I already said: The numbers of children needing homes are FAR GREATER than the numbers of responsible caring adults willing to be loving parents for other people’s unwanted children. UNLESS and until those numbers are equalized,forcing more unwanted children into life only exacerbates the misery. Duh!

          • Defensor Vitae

            Sorry, but that’s only conjecture on your part.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Really? Then why is a child abused every 10 seconds in the US alone? Why do 4 or more children die from abuse every day? (and these are only the REPORTED cases). Why is the US foster system always flooded? Why do thousands of children age out of the system every year, and hundreds die in the system every year?

            I guess because your god likes torturing children, and children have a DUTY to suffer?

          • Defensor Vitae

            Why don’t you instead ask those whose behaviors allow such suffering to happen? Follow God’s laws, listen to the church that Jesus founded and you can bet a serious dent in suffering will follow.

          • Kathryn Ranieri

            Not playing nice

          • Defensor Vitae

            What about those of your ilk who started the profanity-laced tirades?

          • kitler

            You came in here calling us ‘Nazi bitches’ and then told Jennifer that you were fantasizing about murdering her by woodchipper.

            You have severe mental and emotional problems. The police should be warned about you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            A second Paul Hill or Eric Rudolph in the making.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            The Nazis were conservative Christians, just like you. The were strongly pro life and supported “life at conception” to the extent that they impregnated Jewish prisoners and then killed them to track the zygotes and prove life at conception.

            “The national (Nazi) government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality. Today Christians stand at the head of our country. . . . I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity . . .We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press-in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during recent years.”
            Hitler ( a Radio Broadcast July 22, 1933; from My New Order. ) (The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1. pp. 871-872, Oxford University Press,London, 1942)

            The Nazis were strongly pro life: http://books.google.com/books?id=nW2aE5-rAMsC&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=Nazi+laws+abortion&source=bl&ots=WSOIpXivcd&sig=S89QdubMLkbxxliCGZ0B9LxUXNY&hl=en&ei=FNvlTJHOKsOqlAe5vKjtCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ6AEwADgU#v=onepage&q=Nazi%20laws%20abortion&f=false

          • Defensor Vitae

            Based on the following Wikipedia article, you have a seriously deficient take on the Nazis and their supposed ties to the Catholic Church: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_Nazi_Germany

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            Every article on the Nazis admit to one thing, they considered themselves to be “pro life”. They believed the exact same things you believe and made abortion a capital offense, just as you dream to do. The Nazis, just like you, did not save fetuses the considered to be children of their enemies or to be non-human life. So they were exactly like you when it can to life that they loved and revered.
            I have shown you clearly and concisely the scientific proof that you murder innocent babies. And the world showed the Nazis that they were killing human life. Yet neither you nor the Nazis are interested in scientific facts. Your choice, just like the Nazis, is to ignore the scientific facts and to continue to murder innocent life. You are a murderer of innocent life, just as they were murderers of innocent life.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Do you frequently fantasize about your relatives being tossed in the wood chipper?

            Do your relatives know that you feel this way?

          • Defensor Vitae

            No, but I fantasize tossing assholes like you into them. Fortunately for you, God forbids me from doing so.

          • kitler

            Do you do it with one hand down your pants?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Was that fantasy good for you? Need to take a cold shower now?

          • kitler

            I’m giving you a thumbs up because that was so awesome.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your god is a sadistic prick just like you. Why would he forbid your sadistic fantasies? I am sure he approves of all the child abuse you actively promote.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Likewise, he must approve of the worst form of child abuse that you actively promote, namely the killing of innocent unborn people. And I thought Hitler was sadistic.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Stop teaching the Bible if you do not actually read and understand it, Blasphemer.
            Hosea 13:16
            Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped open.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Considering that there are about 50,000 denominations with their own interpretations of Scripture, how could the Holy Spirit possibly be guiding them into believing that theirs is the correct one, hmm?

          • lady_black

            It isn’t.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Of course, it isn’t guiding more than the one, holy, Catholic and apostolic church that Jesus founded: http://www.wakingupcatholic.com/weekly-bible-verses/816-holy-spirit-guides-the-church.html

          • Suba gunawardana

            There’s no “correct” version or correct interpretation. The bible is a bunch of crap written by misogynistic men solely for the benefit of misogynistic men AT THE EXPENSE OF all other individuals including women children and animals, fully condoning the subjugation of the same.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            How do you understand Hosea 13:16?

            You are suggesting the Hebrews did not know about and practice abortion in a number of situations? They used abortion as a tool of social control for example. See the ritual of the Sotah in Numbers for example.

            And the founder of my Christian sect (once I left Catholicism behind philosophically because of its objective disorder and cruelty) spoke directly to your issue:

            “Christ is the Light of the world, and lighteth every man that cometh into the world; and by this light they might be gathered to God. The scriptures were the prophets’ words, and Christ’s and the apostles’ words, and what, as they spoke, they enjoyed and possessed, and had it from the Lord. Then what had any to do with the scriptures, but as they came to the Spirit that gave them forth? You will say, ‘Christ saith this, and the apostles say this;’ but what canst thou say? Art thou a child of the Light, and hast thou walked in the Light, and what thou speakest, is it inwardly from God?”

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            You have a choice to save innocent babies or to let them die and save a fetus instead. Your choice is to murder innocent babies.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Your god absolutely approves of abortion, considering he NEVER steps up to stop it. Not only does he never stop it, but god himself performs millions of abortions himself in the form of miscarriage.

            God revels in abortion, and YOU are going against your own god by trying to stop it.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Have you thought about consulting with a priest rather than just make stuff up,, if not deliberately commit blasphemy, only to end up endangering your eternal salvation? In this case he’d likely tell you that to have God intervene would mean giving up our free will. As it says in Deuteronomy 30:19: I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live.

          • goatini

            Fetuses are not “people”, nor are they “innocent”.

            Women ARE people, and women who obtain safe, legal pregnancy terminations ARE innocent.

            And you are the sadistic one here.

          • Defensor Vitae

            And you don’t think women who have sex without regard for the consequences up to and including killing their own flesh and blood who were conceived through no fault of their own are sadistic? Where’s their accountability?

          • Kathryn Ranieri

            Doesn’t take much to peel back the facade of “christianity”

          • Defensor Vitae

            Funny, I thought the same about the sheep’s clothing disguising the wolves.

          • lady_black

            That would be you.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            You murder innocent babies in an effort to force the birth of fetuses.

            A nation that kills its born to save its unborn can not stand.
            Russell Crawford

          • Defensor Vitae

            I never heard the Catholic Church spew such nonsense, so that can only be inspired by Satan in such a way that prompted Jesus to say this to Peter: “Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block unto me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.”

          • Jennifer Starr

            You do realize that not everyone is Catholic, don’t you?

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            Defensor, you have a choice, you can save innocent babies with me or you can follow Satan and continue to murder live. You have been shown the scientific facts and the Biblical fact that you are commanded to save babies, children, the poor and generally those in you life and area that need help. Your choice is to murder those people under the direction of Satan. You are his tool.

          • Suba gunawardana

            It’s not my decision but a FACT that most unwanted children end up living a miserable life, being neglected abused or raped by whatever uncaring adult they get thrown at.

            As you should know, the numbers of children needing homes are FAR GREATER than the numbers of responsible caring adults willing to be loving parents for other people’s unwanted children. UNLESS and until those numbers are equalized,forcing more unwanted children into life only exacerbates the misery.

            I am not Indonesian, and in any case my nationality has nothing to do with the misery of unwanted children or the stupidity of forced-birthers.

            Millions of suffering individuals in Indonesia? Such suffering is EXACTLY what I seek to prevent. Imagine how much FEWER those numbers would be if they had better contraception and abortion available.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Did you know that before death camps were opened across the nation that there was a natural give and take where unwanted children were adopted, and that there are millions of couples willing to adopt children but are being undermined by people like you who dehumanize others as well as selfishly approve state-sanctioned murders even though they themselves have been born?

            So if you are not Indonesian, then you must be from India. In that case, do I have just the quote for you from someone who hails from that country, namely Mother Teresa, who had this to say to shame you: “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.”

          • kitler

            Mother Theresa tortured people to death in the name of suffering. She is despised in India.

            And Hitler was anti choice, just like you. And catholics revelled in killing Jews and taking their stuff in Serbia

            And catholic Ireland let fleeing Nazis into the country yet denied entry to Jewish refugee children.

            You catholics have loved killing Jews for centuries in the name of your god. Christians invented the pogrom.

          • somebigguy

            Where do you get this nonsense? If this is typical of how you think, it’s no wonder you’re pro-abortion.

          • kitler

            History, you ignorant nitwit.

          • kitler

            The Indian people don’t think too highly of her:

            http://ihyphenhate.blogspot.ca/2007/07/shes-no-mother-of-mine.html

            http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/mother_teresa/sanal_ed.htm

            In the end, the supposed good that they missionaries have done in Calcutta is a bunch of bullshit. Ask the people in the slums of Calcutta. Thousands of independent interviewers have penetrated the façade that is the picture of the generous mother. There are thousands of charitable organizations in India that do more. They do not seek to convert the sick and weak of will, but truly put in their efforts to improve the living conditions of those they touch. In conclusion, Teresa has harmed India more than she has helped her. I am not indebted to her and her missionary for anything.

            Mother Teresa has collected many, many millions (some say: billions) of Dollars in the name of India’s paupers (and many, many more in the name of paupers in the other “gutters” of the world). Where did all this money go? It is surely not used to improve the lot of those, for whom it was meant. The nuns would hand out some bowls of soup to them and offer shelter and care to some of the sick and suffering. The richest order in the world is not very generous, as it wants to teach them the charm of poverty. “The suffering of the poor is something very beautiful and the world is being very much helped by the nobility of this example of misery and suffering,” said Mother Teresa

            In the overcrowded and primitive little homes, many patients have to share a bed with others. Though there are many suffering from tuberculosis, AIDS and other highly infectious illnesses, hygiene is no concern. The patients are treated with good words and insufficient (sometimes outdated) medicines, applied with old needles, washed in lukewarm water. One can hear the screams of people having maggots tweezered from their open wounds without pain relief. On principle, strong painkillers are even in hard cases not given. According to Mother Teresa’s bizarre philosophy, it is “the most beautiful gift for a person that he can participate in the sufferings of Christ”. Once she tried to comfort a screaming sufferer: “You are suffering, that means Jesus is kissing you!” The man got furious and screamed back: “Then tell your Jesus to stop kissing.”

          • goatini

            Those were facts, whether you like them or not.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Each of those calumnies can be easily refuted through a simple online search. You are obligated not to disseminate such falsehoods or distort the facts.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually, all of that’s true.

          • kitler

            Its all true.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            When abortion was illegal there was a decrease in births. And after abortion became legal there was an increase in births.

            “A nation that does as Mother Teresa and murders its born to save its unborn is doomed to failure.”
            Russell Crawford

          • Defensor Vitae

            That does not justify in any way the intentional killing of unborn human beings. And the quote is ridiculous, to say the least.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            Your choice is to intentionally murder innocent babies, in direct opposition to the words of scripture. My choice is to make the positive step and save innocent born babies, children and adults as the Bible commands. You are a proved murderer of human life in your own church. You kill at the command of your leaders, not at the command of Christ. The —-Scientific proof_________ is that you murder life. The scientific proof is that I save life. Your proof is just a claim that you are saving babies, my proof is scientific that I am saving babies. Your proof is a fantasy.

          • kitler
          • Suba gunawardana

            Not from India either, and as I said my country of origin absolutely doesn’t matter. Stop using distractions to avoid my points.

            Your first paragraph is a blatant lie. Misery and suffering abound whenever there is no birth control. This is evident today in many countries where birth control and abortion are illegal, as it was in the US in the past.

            While having plenty of children to enslave is a good thing for the likes of YOU, it is NOT a good thing for those children. They suffer. Got it?

            As others already pointed out, Mother Teresa was no saint. She tortured children for her religious agenda just like all forced-birthers do now.

          • Defensor Vitae

            OK, so let’s say you’re from the West, where 54 percent of women who have abortions were on birth control at the time of their pregnancy according to a study, and of which Mother Teresa has something to say about as well: “The spiritual poverty of the Western World is much greater than the physical poverty of our people.”

            There’s more:

            And the teeming millions of the poor of the Third World have a lesson to teach us in the affluent West, Mother Teresa declared.

            “They can teach us contentment,” she said, her leathery face gently smiling. “That is something you don’t have much of in the West.

            P.S. You from Sri Lanka? I know a priest there who can set you straight.

          • Jennifer Starr

            100,000 children in foster care in the US who are available for adoption right now. They aren’t all cute newborns, of course, but adoption is supposed to be about the kids, after all–not about a selfish couple who wants a woman to carry a pregnancy so they can have ‘a baby’.

          • Defensor Vitae

            So what do you propose be done about the kids remaining in foster care? Hopefully it doesn’t smack of the Nazis’ solution for the “undesirables.”

          • Jennifer Starr

            I would like for all of them to find permanent homes or families. Unfortunately many of them will simply age out of the system and it is what it is. Won’t stop me from advocating for them to be adopted.

            Oh, and by the way, you just got yourself flagged for that. It’s people like you who remind me daily of why I no longer call myself ‘pro-life’.

          • fiona64

            So what do you propose be done about the kids remaining in foster care?

            That they be adopted, obviously.

            How many have you adopted?

          • goatini

            //a natural give and take where unwanted children were adopted//

            I’m sorry, that’s a complete lie. White women were sent to gestational slavery inventory funneling centers.

            http://www.amazon.com/Wake-Up-Little-Susie-Pregnancy/dp/0415926769

            // there are millions of couples willing to adopt children but are being undermined by people like you who dehumanize others//

            Except that YOU and your fellow fetus fetishists are the ones doing the dehumanizing of WOMEN, exploiting them like livestock for the benefit of selfish, greedy, barren vultures.

            //Mother Teresa//

            Agnes Gonxha was nothing but a lying hypocrite who exploited the sick and dying to enrich herself and the Vatican.

          • kitler

            The sad thing is, forced birthers are OK with forced adoption. They don’t give a fig either if it causes the woman future psych problems. Its her fault for spreading her legs after all! And the adoptee should just shut up and take any abuse because ze was allowed to live!!!

          • Defensor Vitae

            I see you have been duped into believing the “forced motherhood” canard as this article points out: http://www.lifenews.com/2013/08/16/the-forced-motherhood-canard-a-false-pro-abortion-argument-attacking-pro-lifers/

            Do note what Troy Newman of Operation Rescue had to say: “I don’t see anybody coming out of that place (A Better Choice) with a sad face,” he said. “Unlike an abortion clinic, everybody who’s going in and out of there are happy.”

            Doesn’t sound like mothers going to a pregnancy center are being forced to keep their babies, does it?

          • lady_black

            I hope that evil woman is burning in hell. It almost makes me wish I believed there was such a place.

          • Defensor Vitae

            P.S. There can’t be redemption if there’s no suffering. Jesus exemplified that very well, thank you.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You contradict Jesus. There is nothing to be saved from. Everybody goes to heaven.
            Teaching the Bible when you do not understand it yourself is a form of blasphemy IMO.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Sweetie, only the Catholic Church, whom the keys to Jesus’ kingdom on Earth were given to, has the authority to interpret the Bible that it gave us. That said, it contradicts what you said. Jesus may have died for our sins, but only to open the gates of heaven to those who keep his and his father’s commandments. After all, why did he give his disciples the authority to forgive and retain sins, hmm?

          • lady_black

            He didn’t. NEXT!

          • Defensor Vitae
          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Quote: “Sweetie, …”
            ………….
            I stopped reading right there. I wonder what you wrote.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, ‘pro-lifers’ love to go on and on about the beauty of suffering and sacrifice–provided that someone else is doing the suffering and sacrificing.

          • Defensor Vitae

            You know, that is exactly what Satan would like you and the others to believe, not what Jesus told his disciples in Matt. 16-24: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.”

          • Suba gunawardana

            So how is it that you are all about crucifying OTHERS (women & children) while you just sit around preaching?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Really? Because what I see here is you running off your mouth about what women should do with their pregnancies and what risks they should take, perfectly secure in the knowledge that it will never be you. I don’t see you–or most ‘pro-lifers’–doing a lot of suffering or sacrifice.

          • kitler

            Is this the kind of suffering that gets you off
            http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/06/virginity-for-sale-cambodia-sex-trade

            Virgins sold into prostitution by their parents because the alternative is starvation. Hey, I have an idea, let’s make even MORE people so they too can sell their children into prostitution JUST TO SURVIVE.

          • Defensor Vitae

            You do know that Jesus spent 40 days of fasting in the desert, not to mention having this to tell the devil who asked him to turn a stone into a loaf in Matt. 4:4: “Scripture says: Man does not live on bread alone.” So it’s their choice if they want to ditch the cross in favor of going it alone.

          • kitler

            So that’s a “yes” I take it.

            You are a pervert

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            That is not true. There is no cost for forgiveness.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Of course, Christ paid for the pardon of sins. But we are still on the hook for any sins we committed. Thankfully, the church Jesus founded and granted the authority to forgive and retain sins to through the sacrament of reconciliation gives us the opportunity to redeem ourselves: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-forgiveness-of-sins

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            There is nothing to be saved from. Everybody goes to heaven. See Jesus description of his God in Matthew 5.
            The Atonement is the most harmful Pagan concept that made its way into Christianity. Jesus was a Jew. Human sacrifice is anathema to Jews.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            You need to fall to your knees and beg for forgiveness for the things you have written on this site that prove you murder children. You have a choice, God tells you who to save, not me. Your choice is to ignore the word of God and murder the babies He commands you to save. That is your problem. Do I think I can stop you? No you must stop yourself. Look at your hands, you do not see blood, yet they are dripping.

          • P. McCoy

            Your hands stink with the excrement of lies you have typed here. If Jesus walked on the earth today you and your fellow fascists would execute him as a Communist, and brag about doing the “Lord’s “work. You are to be taken as seriously as a madman in the nuthouse who boasts to everyone that he’s Napoleon.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You just contradicted yourself. If suffering is good and necessary, why were you bitching about the suffering in Indonesia?

          • Defensor Vitae

            The point I made about the suffering Indonesians is that I have compassion for them yet would rather they have a chance at life when others would just as soon toss them into a wood chipper to end their misery. Failing that, abort as many of them as possible to spare them of that prospect even though we cannot predict what the future holds for them.

          • Suba gunawardana

            There’s absolutely no “compassion” in enjoying the suffering of others; or watching people suffer and actively adding MORE into the misery.
            You have got compassion confused with sadism.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Suppose those folks in third-world countries don’t see their suffering in the same vein as you do, or are actually quite content, perhaps even more content than a lot of elitists who are materially rich but spiritually and emotionally bankrupt?

          • kitler

            If that’s the case, then why did philippinos agitate so hard for legal contraception? Because they don’t enjoy feeding 10+ kids on a dollar a day. They don’t enjoy watching their kids slowly starve to death.

            Do you think people enjoy starvation? Rape? Disease? War? Do you think the people in Africa are currently content with thr recent Ebola outbreak? Do you think Nigerians are pleased that 300 of their daughters were raped and kidnapped?

            You are one sick fuck. Youre a goddamned psychopath.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You seem to have a peculiar fetish about wood chippers.

          • lady_black

            Bullshit.

          • Rainbow Walker

            And why do you think there is suffering in Jakarta or anywhere else in the world? Religion.

            Jakarta has a lot of stupid laws based on Islam [mainly sharia]. Not to say Christians don’t do their share. Would you tell the child I treated who had their genitals burned off for masturbation that they shouldn’t wish they had been aborted instead?

            You religious types are sickening.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Perhaps you have a point. After all, it has been prophesied by Jesus that all this would happen, that the poor will always be with us and that his followers would be persecuted. But we know who wins in the end, as he assured us that the gates of hell would not prevail against us.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            Jesus made it clear that you are to save babies, not fetuses. But you choose to let innocent babies die.

          • Defensor Vitae

            Oh, yes, he did say whatever we do to the least of these we do to him. Clearly the vulnerable, innocent unborn children are the least among us. So there.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What about born children, are they chopped liver?

            Every time you rape a child do you rape Jesus? Every time you force a child into a life of misery, do you force misery upon Jesus?

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            You have a choice, you can do as God commanded and save innocent babies or you can choose to let the babies die and save a fetus instead. Your choice is to let the vulnerable, innocent born babies, children and adults die. That is in direct opposition to what you are commanded to do.

          • Suba gunawardana

            If suffering is inevitable (and also good and necessary as you implied earlier), why try to change anything?

            Is that why you try to PROMOTE the suffering of others (but never your own) by adding more people to the misery? Personally I think you are just a sadistic prick.

          • Defensor Vitae

            No one is promoting suffering, just accepting it when it happens. After all, Jesus did that. The same Jesus who gave up his body so that we may live, in contrast to those who would rather give up others’ lives so that they may live.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            The fate of the unborn baby is controlled by scientific laws. Those laws show that you have a choice. You may choose to save innocent babies or you may choose to let the babies die and instead save a fetus. Pro lifers make the intentional choice to let innocent babies die. The in fact place the life of a fetus above the life of a baby. http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com

            And you understand that the Nazis were conservative Christian pro lifers, just like you. The killed innocent babies, children and adults to force the birth of fetuses, just like you.

          • somebigguy

            Are lies, nonsense and deception all that pro-aborts offer, Russell?

            And instead of “the Nazis were conservative Christian pro lifers, just like you,” how about the truth? The Nazis were rabidly pro-abortion. Just like today’s “pro-choice” crowd, they decided who should live and who should die. They promoted abortion for those they didn’t want, like Jews, just as you promote abortion for those you don’t want– like the unplanned, the disabled, the inconvenient.

            The Nazi party was pagan at best, but largely atheistic– again, like many of today’s pro-aborts; they thoroughly persecuted the Catholic Church and millions of other Christian believers, among them Orthodox and protestants.

            Don’t even go there with the Christian bashing; your calumnies are old and tired.

          • kitler

            The Nazis were rabidly pro-abortion.

            FALSE.

            Anti-abortion policy for healthy Aryan women was paramount for the Nazis. Legislation was introduced that made sterilization and abortion “crimes against the body of the German people.”
            Access to birth control for these German women in all forms was also severely curtailed. Bavaria’s official medical journal characterized abortion as a form of treason. Heinrich Himmler established the Reich’s “Central Agency for the Struggle against Homosexuality and Abortion.”

            Abortions were permitted for German mothers only if the life of the mother was in danger . There were many other exceptions to the rule, however. The Nazi plan targeted Jewish and other women of “inferior stock” specifically as women, for they were the only ones who would finally be able to ensure the continuity of life that was considered “unworthy of life.” As Jews and as women they were placed in situations of “double jeopardy.” The Nazis forbade abortion in order to preserve “healthy” German unborn, but allowed, even encouraged, the destruction of non-German or hereditarily ill German unborn.”

            The Nazi party was pagan at best, but largely atheistic– again, like many of today’s pro-aborts; they thoroughly persecuted the Catholic Church and millions of other Christian believers, among them Orthodox and protestants.

            Hitler was worshipped as a god actually. That was the whole point. He placed himself as another deity.

            And Catholics gleefully took part in the Holocaust, killing Jewish and slavic persons alike in order to take their land.

            Ivan Šarić was the Roman Catholic Bishop of Sarajevo, who supported the Ustaša. His diocesan newspaper wrote:

            “[t]here is a limit to love. The movement of liberation of the world
            from the Jews is a movement for the renewal of human dignity. Omniscient and omnipotent God stands behind this movement”

            One priest, Mate Mugos, wrote that clergy should put down the prayer book and take up the revolver. Another, Dyonisy Juricev, wrote in the Novi list that to kill seven-year-olds was not a sin. Phayer argues that “establishing the fact of genocide in Croatia prior to the Holocaust carries great historical weight for our study because Catholics were the perpetrators and not, as in Poland, the victims

            And Cathoilc Ireland refused to let Jewish refugee children into the country at the end of WWII, yet they had no problem allowing fugitive nazis into Ireland.

            Catholics and Nazis, sitting in a tree, K I SS I N G.

          • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

            “Are lies, nonsense and deception all that pro-aborts offer, Russell?”

            I am simply giving you quotes from books and records about what was written by the Nazis. The laws and words written by the Nazis make it clear what they believed. Your “spin” that contradicts what the Nazis said and believed are really useless and designed to hid your own sins. You murder innocent babies, just as they murdered innocent babies. I am sorry, but you are being exposed. And it will continue for the rest of your life.

            “And instead of “the Nazis were conservative Christian pro lifers, just like you,” how about the truth? The Nazis were rabidly pro-abortion.”

            “That is what you say, because you murder innocent babies, just as they murdered innocent babies. Here is what Hitler said: “The national (Nazi) government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality. Today Christians stand at the head of our country. . . . I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity . . .We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press-in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during recent years.”
            Hitler ( a Radio Broadcast July 22, 1933; from My New Order. ) (The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1. pp. 871-872, Oxford University Press,London, 1942)”

            Now, who should people believe, you or Hitler. You are trying to disassociate your sins from his sins when in fact they are joint sins. You are one and the same, you and Hitler are not following Christ, you are following yourselves.

            ” Just like today’s “pro-choice” crowd, they decided who should live and who should die. They promoted abortion for those they didn’t want, like Jews, just as you promote abortion for those you don’t want– like the unplanned, the disabled, the inconvenient.”

            You make the intentional choice to murder innocent babies. I save those that God commands me to save.

            “The Nazi party was pagan at best, but largely atheistic– again, like many of today’s pro-aborts; they thoroughly persecuted the Catholic Church and millions of other Christian believers, among them Orthodox and protestants.”

            Like the Nazis, you call yourself Christian, but you murder babies, just like them and are not Christian. You are just a common murderer.

            “Don’t even go there with the Christian bashing; your calumnies are old and tired.”

            I am not bashing Christians, neither you nor the Nazis were/are Christian.

          • fiona64

            The Nazis were rabidly pro-abortion.

            Looks like someone needs to visit crackafrigginbook.com. It was illegal for Aryan women to abort, and there were even Aryan breeding farms (you can look up Lebensborn).

            Like you, though, they were just as anti-choice for the “wrong kind” of women. Forced abortion for Jews, etc., is just as anti-choice as forced birth for the “right kind” of women.

            The Nazi party was pagan at best, but largely atheistic– again, like many of today’s pro-aborts

            You really don’t know history very well, do you? Hitler was a devout Catholic, and so were the majority of the party. And your assertion that pro-choice people are atheists is laughable in the extreme.

          • Defensor Vitae

            And exactly how do we choose to have innocent babies die, may I ask, considering we are not gifted with the ability to foretell the future? God and Mary told us to listen to Jesus, who made it clear that those who hear his disciples hear him. That said, what does the Catholic Church, whom the Nazis were excommunicated from by the 1931 edict of the Conference of German Bishops, have to say about what you would have us believe? Oh, yes: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/document.php?n=622

          • goatini

            No such thing as an “unborn baby”, and as the child of a survivor, I am entitled to heartily tell you to go to Hell, because you are full of lying BS.

          • Defensor Vitae

            One would think that Holocaust survivors, with all they had to deal with, would be more sympathetic to the unborn babies who are facing a similar situation, as detailed in this column: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/kellmeyer/071101

          • somebigguy

            Tell that to Martin Luther King, Jr. Or Ray Charles. Or Maya Angelou.

          • kitler

            MLK supported PP and Maya Angelou was PRO CHOICE

            Oh, fyi, Nelson Mandela ALSO pro choice

        • lady_black

          There is no “abortion industry.” But there is definitely a modern-day, sleazy, profitable trafficking in human flesh industry known as the adoption industry. They expect women to hand over the products of their bodies without any compensation to be sold to the highest bidder to line their unscrupulous pockets. That this is defended by you is nauseating but not particularly surprising. What else would I expect from gestational slavers than slavery?

        • goatini

          That’s exactly what happens. There’s also a huge racial divide in so-called “CPCs”. Women with potentially profitable products to be sold in the human trafficking syndicate get lied to and told they will get financial help to raise the child (when born) themselves – right up until the moment that she is too far gone to obtain a safe, legal pregnancy termination. At that point, the human trafficking vultures then play the age-old Fold The Paper game (used since the end of WWII to coerce women with unwanted pregnancies into surrendering the product to be sold on the open market): they get instructed to fold the paper in half, then on one side, write what little they would be “able to give” the child (when born), and on the other side, write down all of the wonderful riches that selfish greedy barren vultures (aka “adoptive parents”) would be “able to give”. This exercise is intended to shame the innocent victim into surrendering her issue to be sold. The women with unprofitable products that will most likely end up in foster care and thus a liability, get funneled into “programs” for poor minority women, including many in which paltry amounts of goods and services are meted out based on sufficient display of theocratic brainwashing and attendant piety. Example: the woman-hating “CPC”, next to the reproductive healthcare clinic that the excellent bloggers at the “everysaturdaymorning.net” blog defend, most definitely has a human trafficking track to obtain desirable and highly profitable inventory, and a track for the less undesirable issue of unwanted pregnancies – here is the latter track, EXACTLY as described above:

          http://www.awomanschoice.org/necoles-place.html

        • lady_black

          Then sell your own kids. You’ll never get any of mine.

          • somebigguy

            Because you’ll kill any you conceive, of course. How terribly selfish.

          • lady_black

            LOLOL. That’s what tubal ligations are for. For NOT conceiving. Am I selfish? No. I don’t want any more children. EVER. I’m preventing that from ever happening again, because I believe all children should be wanted. And yes. I would abort before handing a child over to profiteers.

        • fiona64

          The big bucks are in the adoption industry, sweetie … and CPCs are fronts for adoption mills.

        • P. McCoy

          Cancer cells die too and are as parasitical as the so called unborn- do you troll for cancer cells too?

    • Suba gunawardana

      The fact remains that the numbers of children needing homes are FAR GREATER than the numbers of responsible caring adults willing to be loving parents for other people’s unwanted children.
      UNLESS and until those numbers are equalized, no amount of money going to CPCs would make one whit of a difference for the children. All it’d do is to line the pockets of forced-birthers at the EXPENSE of children and misguided women.
      More money does not magically create more parents able/willing to adopt. To Knowing add MORE unwanted children into an already strained system is willful premeditated child abuse.

      • somebigguy

        “The fact remains that the numbers of children needing homes are FAR GREATER than the numbers of responsible caring adults willing to be loving parents for other people’s unwanted children.”

        This is, perhaps, the abortion lobby’s biggest lie. Witness the length of time many couples wait for adoptions and the heroic efforts they make to find children. I know many couples who’ve adopted from China and India at tremendous expense. And I know many couples who adopted children with special needs.

        But even if your claim were true, what makes killing children the answer?

        • Jennifer Starr

          Over 100,000 children in the US in foster care who are available for adoption and the state will help with the costs. No woman is required to carry a pregnancy for a selfish couple who only wants ‘a baby’.

        • kitler

          Yeah because they only want babies. Preferably white.

          As for people adopting from China and Africa, that is part of the evangelical push to prove how close you are to god by adopting children from developing countries. Those countries don’t take kindly to evangelical adoption industry and are shutting that shit down.

          BTW, black babies go for 20k less than white babies in the USA.

          • somebigguy

            Is that why the abortion industry kills half the number of black children in utero and a much smaller percentage of white?

            Margaret Sanger was, after all, a white racist & eugenics advocate.

          • kitler

            somebigguy, are you telling me that black women are:

            1) too stupid to make their own reproductive decisions

            2) should not be permitted to make their own reproductive choices

            Is that what you are telling me? That you don’t trust black women to plan their own fertility?

            Because that’s pretty racist, big boy.

          • somebigguy

            No, I’m telling you black people should be cherished, allowed to live. Standing idle while they’re being aborted– or, as you do, promoting their abortion– is the real racism.

          • kitler

            So you are telling me that you want to force black women to give birth..like slaves?

          • fiona64

            You’ve spent a lot of time flapping your piehole, but haven’t provided a single source to back up your assertions. Why is that?

            Alternately, you could admit what the rest of us can see: that your “source” is your backside.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Let me remind you again that NO abortions at all are forced here. So what do you mean by “black people should not be aborted”? That black women who seek abortion should be singled out and REFUSED their request? Talk about blatant racism!

          • Jennifer Starr

            I think that black women are just as capable as other women of making their own reproductive choices without help from you. How patronizing that you try to claim the right to speak for them.

          • fiona64

            Thank you. Aside from “skeeved,” I couldn’t find the right word to describe what I felt when I read DudeBro’s post. He is indeed being patronizing, with his talk of how “black people should be cherished.” It reminds me just a little too much of how Southern planters referred to “their people” before the “war of Northern aggression.”

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            ‘Skeeved’ is such great Italian American slang. Sounds like what it means.

          • fiona64

            I stole it from you :-D

          • lady_black

            So, black women are incapable of making their own decisions. How Jim Crow of you.

          • goatini

            Oh, I see, so women of color are even less capable of personal agency than other women. Get lost, condescending mansplainer.

          • goatini

            Oh, I see, a vicious racist who thinks that women of color aren’t capable of making their own decisions.

          • fiona64

            And someone who is taking their playbook straight from LiarRose and LieSiteSpews.

          • fiona64

            Is that why the abortion industry kills half the number of black children in utero and a much smaller percentage of white?

            Citation needed, from a reputable source (hint: not LieSiteSpews). thanks in advance.

        • goatini

          Women with unwanted pregnancies are NOT livestock to be exploited by selfish, greedy, barren vultures.

        • lady_black

          They do not want children for the most part. They want “accessories”. If they wanted children, there wouldn’t be children aging out of the foster care system. And you wish to add to their numbers, while enslaving women like brood mares for profit. You make me sick.

        • fiona64

          This is, perhaps, the abortion lobby’s biggest lie.

          No, dumbshit. It’s not a lie. At this moment, in the United States alone, there are more than 100K children available for adoption. Most of those kids will age out of the system without ever having a permanent home. You are welcome to read the latest available statistics right here: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/resource/afcars-report-20

        • P. McCoy

          You could be adopting older, Black and.special needs children right from the good ol’ US of A in a heartbeat. So what’s your excuse you only want to be an mommy to a disease free Aryan infant or wish to be a’ wannabe tiger ‘mom?

    • lady_black

      I am pro-choice. By definition, that means I accept all alternatives to abortion, and I’m all in favor of women getting help to raise their children when they need it. Crisis pregnancy centers do not do anything for their clients that Planned Parent wouldn’t do. Planned Parenthood will direct women to social services they will need for themselves and their children. They will give pre-natal care up until the time that the pregnant woman needs to be directed to the care of an OB/GYN that does deliveries. They are not a birthing center, and not staffed or equipped to be birthing centers, but they can give early prenatal care because the doctors who work there are OB/GYNs. Crisis Pregnancy centers are not staffed or equipped to be birthing centers either, and many have no medical professionals on staff at all. Not even so much as a CRNM. They are often fronts for the adoption industry. Religious indoctrination is not medical care. And they do not provide contraceptives to women who test non-pregnant. If there are no doctors or CRNMs on staff they cannot prescribe contraception, of course. But no licensed professional is required to at least hand out condoms, for pete’s sake. In short CPCs philosophy is closing the barn door after the horse already escaped. NOT SMART and of no value whatsoever from a medical point of view. They do NOT deserve a dime of Medicaid money, because they do not provide medical service.

    • goatini

      Safe, legal pregnancy termination has nothing to do with “destruction of mothers’ lives”. Gestational slavery, for which you advocate, has EVERYTHING to do with destruction of mothers’ lives.

    • fiona64

      I am pro-reality … and these CPCs routinely *lie.* They pretend they have medical professionals on-hand when they don’t. They tell women they are further along than they are. They tell women they are pregnant *when they are not.* They tell women that abortion will cause breast cancer and mental health issues — also untrue.

      Just a few sources:
      http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/11/15/2948781/lies-cpc-week-action/
      http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/08/08/2433511/virginia-cpc-caught-on-tape/
      http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/06/26/2213991/crisis-pregnancy-center-lies/
      http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/caught_on_tape_crisis_pregnancy_centers_false_dangerous_advice/
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/caitlin-bancroft/crisis-pregnancy-center_b_3763196.html

  • fiona64

    Alveda King? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Thanks, I needed a laugh today.

  • squwelly

    Pennsylvania should create a rule conditioning the receipt of taxpayer money on the recipient organizations’ use of truthful claims when they “counsel” women. Naturally, should such a rule actually be proposed, crisis pregnancy centers will fight it tooth and nail, whining all the while about how the rule constitutes “religious disrimination” against them.

    • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

      We could mandate they have at least one medical professional on hand at all times.

  • Suba gunawardana

    Oh no! Did the rabid forced-birth nut get himself banned? That’s too bad, I was looking forward to another evening of entertainment…..

    • kitler

      For some reason RHRC deleted all of my posts on this article. Perhaps they though I too was trolling because of the idiocy with those two catholics.

      • Suba gunawardana

        That sucks… Personally I think it’s better not to flag anyone at all, to avoid accidental deletions as well as to leave the idiocy of trolls on display for all to see.

        • kitler

          Every single post I’ve ever made has been deleted

          • Suba gunawardana

            I just noticed your posts gone on this thread, but your profile still says 16k plus posts. Are they gone on other threads too?

          • kitler

            Yes. I am deleted from RHRC.

            Two years of posts. Gone.

          • kitler

            Fixed by a mod. She said that RHRC has a script running now.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Yes they sent me a response too that it’s corrected. Glad to see your posts back!

          • Suba gunawardana

            P.S. Well, your posts are still visible on Mother Jones, but seem to be deleted from RHRC. I think it’s worth writing to the moderators. I can vouch for you if it might help.

          • kitler

            Thanks. I’ve messaged them on facebook.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I am not on facebook, and will send a request through RHRC’s Contact us page. (unless there’s a more direct way to contact the mods?)

          • kitler

            Please do. This is absurd.

  • SilverSet

    It’s funny how all those in favor of abortion have already been born.

    • kitler

      We recognize that its a privilege to be born, not a right.

    • Jennifer Starr

      Yeah, I used to think that was a good ‘prolife’ argument. But then I grew up.

      • SilverSet

        So you used to be pro life and now are pro death? Because that is what abortion does, it kills a living human being, a human that has no choice, no voice and whose only crime was to get conceived by someone who is to inconvenienced to carry a pregnancy to term.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Unless you are actually the woman who is pregnant, you don’t get to judge. Nothing is ever that simple and black and white.

        • fiona64

          Do you want someone to bring you cheese to go with that whine?

          You don’t get to decide how much medical, financial, and physical risk anyone other than yourself should take.

        • kitler

          Why should a woman lose her bodily autonomy if her only crime was to have sex while fertile?

          • SilverSet

            So the developing body of the baby doesn’t get bodily autonomy?

          • Jennifer Starr

            If it was autonomous, it wouldn’t be connected to another body via an umbilical cord.

          • kitler

            If you are being raped, does the rapists right to bodily autonomy outweigh your own?

          • SilverSet

            Really? You’re comparing rape to conception? What a logical fallacy.

          • kitler

            Explain how, in detail, it’s a logical fallacy. Please.

          • SilverSet

            You’re comparing rape, a choice a man or woman forces on another, to a fetus who had no choice in the matter of their conception. What else does there need to be explained?

          • Suba gunawardana

            An unwanted pregnancy is a situation FORCED upon a woman. Whether the fetus has a say in it or not, is irrelevant. The fact remains that the woman’s body was invaded without her consent, and she has a legal right to protect her body.

          • kitler

            Are you in need of more entertainment?

            The twits at SPL are killing me. The latest argument to once and for all defeat bodily autonomy will have you rolling on the floor!

          • Suba gunawardana

            Would you post a link? I’ll be there soon.

          • kitler
          • kitler

            So you are saying that conception, on the woman’s part, is a criminal act for which she must be punished with a pregnancy that could maim and kill her?

          • somebigguy

            Anti-lifers need to muddy the waters to justify their position. Common sense and logic are problematic for them. We see it all the time in debates: they must confuse issues, raise irrelevancies, divert the discussion.
            All we who defend life can do, ultimately, is offer the truth. It’s up to them to accept it.

          • kitler

            In other words, we back up our assertions with facts and logic, and you back yours up with sentimental opinion, and try to pass it off as factual.

            We don’t fall for your bullshit.

          • somebigguy

            And more often than not, anti-lifers resort to profanity.

          • kitler

            Your misogynistic viewpoints of women are far far more offensive than a few naughty words.

          • fiona64

            Oh, isn’t that cute? SomeLittleDudeBro wants to tone police the big, mean pro-lifers.

            Guess what? That’s just one more fucking choice you don’t get to make for others.

          • goatini

            I love how these misogynist fetus fetish males get their shorts in a wad over women using the same strong language that males use frequently with great gusto.

          • fiona64

            That’s because men are supposed to be large and in charge, and “the ladies” are supposed to clutch their pearls at the mere *thought* of profanity. What a bunch of bullshit.

          • Suba gunawardana

            A couple of days ago I rebutted every single point you brought. So did others. I don’t see you countering any of my rebuttals.

          • fiona64

            That’s because at this point he’s reduced to clutching his pearls over the word “bullshit.”

          • goatini

            You don’t “defend” squat, and you’re not in any way “pro-life”.

          • kitler

            I can see that you do not quite understand the concept of consent.

            If someone or something is using your body, and you do not want it there, and it refuses to leave, you are within your rights to demand that it stop violating your body – even if the use of lethal force is necessary.

            An unborn human has NO right to use a woman’s body without consent, no more than you, or anyone or anything else does.

          • goatini

            Conception occurs during rape. Valid comparison.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No person is obligated to protect the bodily autonomy of another AT THE EXPENSE OF their own body.

            The zef lost their rights by violating the bodily autonomy of another person.

          • Rainbow Walker

            A fetus isn’t a juridical person and can never be. What you are proposing would be a legal disaster in the making. To give the fetus [a zef who cannot cognate] rights would impinge upon the rights of the woman it inhabits. Then a Jain might argue a virus or bacteria has as much right as you do to live and so let’s abolish all medical
            intervention.

          • SilverSet

            I’m not going to waste anymore of my time arguing with someone who views the beginning of all life as nothing more than a parasite.

          • Rainbow Walker

            Proof positive you have no argument.

          • SilverSet

            No I could continue, but you have been so brainwashed to believe that the unborn are nothing more than parasitic worms that have no more rights than a tapeworm. Even if I were to present facts you would end up name calling and making irrelevant comparisons that have nothing to do with the actual conversation itself. So I’m not going to bother, because I’m not going to change your mind. I’m just going to hope that you can turn away from the inhuman practice of abortion.

          • Rainbow Walker

            Yes being brainwashed by science and education is horrible, isn’t it? But you wouldn’t know. The only brainwashing you’ve had is from an Iron Age majic book.

            I can give you a physiology lecture explaining why you are wrong, but it would be useless. I have done it before with others and it went right over their head. You use emotion instead of rational. Abortion is far from an “inhuman practice”. Humans have been doing it forever. Even your bible allows it. Your elf god is the greatest ab*rtionist of all time.

            Unfortunately being driven by ignorance and emotion you have no idea the damage you are doing. You are defending a lump of cells, mitigating woman’s rights and the right of those children not to be born in misery.

          • Suba gunawardana

            The unborn don’t have the right to invade/occupy/use another person’s body without their consent.

            The unborn SHOULD have the right to NOT be born into misery & suffering they never asked for. A right you work hard to erase.

          • fiona64

            if I were to present facts

            … it would be a miracle.

            There. I finished your sentence for you.

          • lady_black

            Nobody has any “right” to use my body to sustain it’s existence without MY CONSENT.

          • goatini

            Embryos and fetuses don’t have any rights. They’re not persons, not citizens, and have NO rights.

          • kitler

            Its a functional parasite actually.

            It behaves just like one. It even sucks calcium from the woman’s bones.

          • somebigguy

            Notice that anti-lifers do to the unborn exactly what the Nazis did to Jews, the disabled, Slavs and everyone else they wished to eliminate: They use language to objectify, marginalize and even vilify their unwanted. Pro-aborts call unborn children such things as “parasites” and “products of conception.”

            Just as Nazis used euphemisms like “final solution” for the slaughter of their unwanted, today’s pro-aborts use “reproductive health care.” Can they get any more Orwellian? Kill a baby a moment before she’s born and they celebrate it as “women’s health.”

            What a twisted world they inhabit!

          • fiona64

            Funny how many anti-choice idiots want to bring up the Nazis, without realizing that the Nazis believed just what they do:

            — Forced birth for the right* kind of woman? Check. (Look up Lebensborn.)
            — Forced abortion for the wrong** kind of woman (or else she’s a “welfare queen, having babies to get a bigger check)? Check.
            — Religious overtones in everything? Check. (Hitler and the majority of the Nazi party were devout Catholics).
            — Demanding that everyone believe as they do on pain of punishment? Check.

            You need to visit crackafriggingbook.com and learn something. The Nazi party belongs squarely in *your* column.

            * White/Aryan
            * People of color/others of whom the group disapproves

          • somebigguy

            I find it interesting that so many of my posts– purely factual and void of profanity– are being deleted. Among these are those referring to Nazi practices. BTW, my college degree (from a particularly liberal school) is in German history; my concentration was the period from Bismarck (circa 1850) to 1945. I sincerely doubt anyone on this board has a better knowledge of German history.

          • fiona64

            Of course, sweetie. And I’m a coloratura soprano with the Metropolitan Opera.

          • somebigguy

            That’s why I know what I’m talking about and you don’t, fiona64.

          • fiona64

            If you “knew what you were talking about,” you would have known how completely wrong your assertions are, SomeLittleDudeBro …

          • kitler

            Is that why you want to force black women to have babies?

          • goatini

            They weren’t factual, and advocating for citizens’ rights to be forcibly stripped away is profane.

          • lady_black

            Well, other than the fact that the embryo/fetus is of the same species, the developing mammal is functionally, a parasite. It drills into it’s host’s blood supply via it’s placenta, suppresses her immune system, and steals oxygen and nutrients from her blood. It then dumps toxic waste into her bloodstream to be processed by her kidneys.

          • fiona64

            I am guessing you were homeschooled … or you would know that anything connected in utero via an umbilicus is, by definition, *not* autonomous.

          • SilverSet

            No, I went to public school. That’s why I am pro life.

          • Rainbow Walker

            Doubtful. Your educational level and religiosity bespeaks homeschool. Or you come from a backwoods PS where they still hold prayer. I’ve seen them and they need to be reformed and teach real
            science.

          • SilverSet

            Then it must suprise you that I am not in fact religious, and I never once brought religion into this conversation. An that I did not in fact go to a school that had prayer. You automatically assume that because I don’t believe in abortion that I must be some sort of religious nut because you have no other argument.

          • Rainbow Walker

            Oh it doesn’t surprise me. If you will lie about one thing, why not another? You didn’t have to bring religion into it. The mere fact you are forced birth speaks for itself. And your last line proves my point “in the end everyone will die and be condemned if a god does exist or just rot in the ground.” Only a believer would say such a thing. Why would a non-believer think elf god will condemn someone? Even many believers don’t follow that line of thinking. Furthermore [if I read correctly] your profile states you are from MT. They allow PS prayer against federal statute. 20-7-112 Any teacher, principal, or superintendent may open the school day with a prayer. Only religious people are against abortion.

            And of course you’re done. You never had an argument to begin with.

          • SilverSet

            It must suck for you to live in a world where you can only be religious or atheist. Also, just because I live in montana doesn’t mean I went to school here. I’m agnostic and against abortion, so that just blows your argument out of the water. I’m done because your mind is so far gone that only you can change when you want too.

          • Rainbow Walker

            Yes it does suck to live in a world of religion. It’s because of people like you. At least you admit you were lying.

            And no you are not an agnostic. True atheists and agnostics accept science and don’t read forced birth nonsense. Therefore
            an atheist or agnostic forced birther is an oxymoron and doesn’t exit. The idea was created and funded by churches to give some credence to the forced birth movement.

            How many times have you said you were done and you had to come back for more embarrassment? My mind is gone? I’m not the one ignoring science and trying to taking women’s and children’s rights
            from them. And for clarification I don’t mean a zef, I mean the real children you ignore.

          • goatini

            //I’m agnostic and against abortion//

            Oh, so you’re just straight-up misogynist, then.

          • fiona64

            The only thing you’ve blown out of the water, at least for me, is the idea that an anti-choicer can be even remotely intelligent/

          • Suba gunawardana

            If it’s not religion, what exactly is is the origin of the concept that the life a non-sentient zef supersedes the safety and well-being of all other living breathing sentient individuals, including the woman carrying the zef, the child the zef would become if forced to be born, and the countless non-humans that would be killed to sustain the life of the new unwanted human?

          • kitler

            That’s a great question.

          • kitler

            https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/23388-a-defense-of-abortion/

            Read the part about the responsibility objection near the end.

            The pregnant person is not responsible for the zefs non-viability. Its not her fault that it can’t survive ex utero. She did not CREATE its needy state.

            I don’t think that Simon understands Boonins arguments. Then again, he has argued that zygotes are rational because they are self assembling like The Transformers

          • Suba gunawardana

            Thanks, now only I saw your post.

          • kitler

            he is so full of shit

            ‘carry the pregnancy to term and if you don’t you get thrown in jail’

            “no , i’m not forcing the woman to stay pregnant, she has a choice’

            what a dishonest shitstain

          • Suba gunawardana

            If you value the life of human zefs above the life and well-being of all other individuals (including the women carrying the zefs; the children the zefs would become if forced to be born; and all the non-humans killed to feed the new unwanted human lives) then you are automatically ANTI-LIFE, and Pro-suffering.

          • fiona64

            If you attended public schools, I suggest that you sue your district for malpractice … or be made to repeat junior high biology class.

          • lady_black

            Yeah I went to public school too. And I’ve known since, oh, third grade or so, that a fetus is by definition, incapable of autonomy,

          • lady_black

            A fetus, by definition, is NOT autonomous. And cannot be autonomous.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Sure it gets autonomy. I will abort it. It can get a job, a little apartment. Maybe it will write.

          • goatini

            All babies, ever, have already been born. Embryos and fetuses are NOT persons, NOT citizens, and have NO rights. Female US citizens ARE persons, ARE citizens, and have the civil, human and Constitutional right to bodily autonomy.

        • kitler

          Aw, yes, inconvenienced. Let’s review, shall we, the ‘inconveniences’ of pregnancy:

          Normal, frequent or expectable temporary side effects of pregnancy:

          exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)
          altered appetite and senses of taste and smell
          nausea and vomiting (50% of women, first trimester)
          heartburn and indigestion
          constipation
          weight gain
          dizziness and light-headedness
          bloating, swelling, fluid retention
          hemmorhoids
          abdominal cramps
          yeast infections
          congested, bloody nose
          acne and mild skin disorders
          skin discoloration (chloasma, face and abdomen)
          mild to severe backache and strain
          increased headaches
          difficulty sleeping, and discomfort while sleeping
          increased urination and incontinence
          bleeding gums
          pica
          breast pain and discharge
          swelling of joints, leg cramps, joint pain
          difficulty sitting, standing in later pregnancy
          inability to take regular medications
          shortness of breath
          higher blood pressure
          hair loss
          tendency to anemia
          curtailment of ability to participate in some sports and activities
          infection including from serious and potentially fatal disease
          (pregnant women are immune suppressed compared with non-pregnant women, and are more susceptible to fungal and certain other diseases)
          extreme pain on delivery
          hormonal mood changes, including normal post-partum depression
          continued post-partum exhaustion and recovery period (exacerbated if a c-section — major surgery — is required, sometimes taking up to a full year to fully recover)

          Normal, expectable, or frequent PERMANENT side effects of pregnancy:

          stretch marks (worse in younger women)
          loose skin
          permanent weight gain or redistribution
          abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness
          pelvic floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged former child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated with urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of life — aka prolapsed utuerus, the malady sometimes badly fixed by the transvaginal mesh)
          changes to breasts
          varicose veins
          scarring from episiotomy or c-section
          other permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are downplayed by women, because the culture values youth and beauty)
          increased proclivity for hemmorhoids
          loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)
          higher lifetime risk of developing Altzheimer’s
          newer research indicates microchimeric cells, other bi-directional exchanges of DNA, chromosomes, and other bodily material between fetus and mother (including with “unrelated” gestational surrogates)

          Occasional complications and side effects:

          complications of episiotomy
          spousal/partner abuse
          hyperemesis gravidarum
          temporary and permanent injury to back
          severe scarring requiring later surgery
          (especially after additional pregnancies)
          dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other pelvic floor weaknesses — 11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele, and enterocele)
          pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 – 10% of pregnancies)
          eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)
          gestational diabetes
          placenta previa
          anemia (which can be life-threatening)
          thrombocytopenic purpura
          severe cramping
          embolism (blood clots)
          medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother or baby)
          diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles
          mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)
          serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)
          hormonal imbalance
          ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
          broken bones (ribcage, “tail bone”)
          hemorrhage and
          numerous other complications of delivery
          refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease
          aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency of seizures)
          severe post-partum depression and psychosis
          research now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and female fertility treatments, including “egg harvesting” from infertile women and donors
          research also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer survival rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy
          research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease

          Less common (but serious) complications:

          peripartum cardiomyopathy
          cardiopulmonary arrest
          magnesium toxicity
          severe hypoxemia/acidosis
          massive embolism
          increased intracranial pressure, brainstem infarction
          molar pregnancy, gestational trophoblastic disease
          (like a pregnancy-induced cancer)
          malignant arrhythmia
          circulatory collapse
          placental abruption
          obstetric fistula

          More permanent side effects:

          future infertility
          permanent disability
          death.

        • Suba gunawardana

          When someone invades your body without your consent, you have a legal right to kill them to protect your body.

          Do I have a right to use your organs without your consent? No. If I tried to do that you have a legal right to kill me to protect your body. A pregnant woman has the exact same right to kill the invading zef (“human being”) to protect her body.

        • lady_black

          No voice. And no THOUGHTS to give voice to. How old are you, 12?

        • goatini

          Embryos and fetuses are NOT persons, NOT citizens, and have NO rights. And pregnancy is a highly risky and dangerous medical condition, far from an “inconvenience”.

    • Kathryn Ranieri

      Stripped right off the anti-woman/choice list of stupid things to say.

      • Jennifer Starr

        A really lame bumper-sticker slogan–just as lame as when Reagan made a similar comment.

    • fiona64

      Oh, look! A cute little bumper-sticker slogan!

      I remember when I was an anti-choice high school student and thought that constituted a brilliant observation, too. Then I got out into the real world.

    • Rainbow Walker

      Isn’t it funny that those who are against abortion usually have never missed a meal and have never been abused and neglected? Not to mention lack real empathy and focus it on a lump of cells rather than on living, breathing children.

      • SilverSet

        You know nothing about me. I grew up well below the poverty line, and maybe getting one meal a day. Both parents drug addicts and alcoholics. Yes the system needs to change drastically, but killing because someone might suffer is idiotic. That’s like saying we should kill people after 40 so they don’t have to suffer growing old.

        • Rainbow Walker

          I know your definition of poverty line: you didn’t get that Porsche so you blame mommy and daddies so called drinking and drugs.

          I treat adjudicated children. My definition of neglect is dumping a child in a gas station toilet. My definition of abuse is when a child’s genitals are burned off for masturbation by their religious nut parents.

          Yes I do believe in euthanasia. If a person is suffering they should be removed from life. And yes those children who are not wanted will be abused and neglected. It’s a scientific fact. I deal with those children every day. 65 thousand in TX alone. Over 400 million in the world.

          Ask those children if they had wanted to be born. I do. They unanimously say no. You just want those children to be abused to assuage your so called conscious.

          • SilverSet

            You’re a horrible person, you know that? You may think that not getting a Porsche is living below the poverty line, but no my family lived on the street, in homeless shelters and if we were lucky at a friends house. Often time the only meal I would get was the free lunch that I would get at school, my clothes were often found in the dumpster or if we had money from the Salvation Army or goodwill. Those children you say wish they had never been born, I was one of them, I even tried to kill myself once, because life was so rough.

            Don’t presume to know me because I don’t believe in abortion. By the way I’m prolife because SCIENCE says that when a woman becomes pregnant a new life is created, with a unique set of DNA. Killing is wrong, no matter what the reason is.

          • kitler

            Lots if things have unique DNA. That does not make them persons.

            Tell me, what do you think is a person?

          • Suba gunawardana

            That’s exactly why MORE children should not be forced into the type of misery you suffered.

            That you finally beat the odds does not negate the fact that countless others never manage it; neither does it negate the suffering you yourself went through. You may think the suffering was worth it, many others don’t. They end up succeeding in their suicide attempts; living horrible lives of substance abuse, or hurting others.

            That a FEW may somehow beat the odds does not justify knowingly condemning thousands to suffering.

          • Rainbow Walker

            Read my post, I said, “I know your definition of poverty line”. And it stands. Your story is pat. Forced birthers love to play this crap of making up a story to support their position. I was poor too as a child, nothing like the kids I treat however. I remember eating
            roaches for fun. These kids had to. And they pimp themselves. I can’t tell you how many are very matter of fact about selling their bodies for food. But I guess you don’t care about that. As long as you feel better.

            “I’m prolife because SCIENCE says that when a woman becomes pregnant a new life is created…”

            You are delusional. Reading more forced birth crap and not real science. This will be a waste of time but here goes. DNA doesn’t equal life. I can get a piece of your skin or hair and clone you but is that sample you? No it’s just a bit of code nothing more. Life begins at awareness. A complex mix of neurological, physiological and psychological processes that the fetus hasn’t gone through. Science tells use life, or the beginnings, is in the third trimester when synapses, neurons, and thalamocortical projections are formed and come together and pain perception begins.

            Expelling a lump of cells isn’t killing. Having a child and killing them after birth is however. But you don’t care about that.

          • fiona64

            Those children you say wish they had never been born, I was one of them,

            And yet you would cheerfully force other people to give birth to unwanted children. Why is that?

            Killing is wrong, no matter what the reason is.

            Are you vegan?

          • lady_black

            Let’s just assume that your argument is correct, and an embryo or fetus is a person. It isn’t correct, but for the sake of argument, let’s assume it is. That doesn’t make it eligible to conscript the body of another person as life support. You can’t do that. I can’t do it. A fetus is not some “super person” with rights my born children don’t have.

        • lady_black

          If I’m ever “suffering” you can bet I’ll deal with that on my OWN terms. An embryo or fetus isn’t “people” and no woman owes one jack shit from her body. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but it is what it is.

    • lady_black

      All those who love ice cream and baseball have already been born too. Your point???

    • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

      It is funny that those that are pro life, kill life. http:www.scientificabortionlaws.con

  • Kathryn Ranieri

    From my perspective, you are spot on! I’ve found that the average citizen has NO idea the crap that’s going on legislatively, no idea what a CPC is, no idea how horrible “sidewalk counselors” can be toward the very women they wish to “save”
    No idea. So, good for you. Keep up the good work. Are you working in Pennsylvania?

  • fiona64

    Citations needed. For all of it, LittleDudeBro.

  • goatini

    //Half their “patients” end up dead, the other half wounded.//

    The woman is the ONLY patient in the equation. And most patients who obtain safe, legal pregnancy termination experience NO regrets, and DO experience RELIEF. So take that steaming load somewhere else where BS lovers can sniff it.

  • goatini

    Well, I suppose someone needs to be an acquaintance to that woman – that aider and abetter for the misery pimp empire of “Father” Frank Pervert – since her own family has just about disowned her for her lying BS.

  • lady_black

    This might seem like a dumb question, but why would it worry her if people thought a black baby was hers? If she adopts a baby, it IS hers.

    • Suba gunawardana

      I have the exact same question….

  • JamieHaman

    It’s infuriating to see tax-money be given to programs that literally don’t use it for the health of our citizens. To willfully use it to harm women is outrageous as well as offensive as hell.

    • somebigguy

      Exactly, Jamie. That’s why abortion, that harms women and kills children, should not be funded by our taxes. CPC’s, on the other hand, help both mother and child.

      • kitler

        Abortion does not harm women. Women can think for themselves.

        • somebigguy

          Harm and thinking; obviously, two completely different things.

          • kitler

            You are the racist who thinks black women are too dumb to make their own reproductive decisions.

          • somebigguy

            Of course not; never said such a thing.

            It’s very telling that you find it necessary to put nasty words in your detractors’ mouths in order to cast them as villains; you and your fellow abortion advocates have done this throughout this exchange. It’s long been the standard approach the culture of death takes toward those defending human life.

            It’s the sort of tactic one resorts to out of desperation, when one has no better argument– indeed, when one has lost the argument, but refuses to admit it.

          • kitler

            I don’t need to put words in your mouth. You accused black women of genocide for choosing abortion.

          • somebigguy

            Never said or even implied that; you prove my point exactly.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Unless you can prove that black women are being forcibly dragged off the streets to have abortions at gunpoint instead of going in there of their own free will just like any other woman, that’s precisely what you did imply.

          • kitler

            What Jenn said.

          • kitler

            Why don’t CPCs give away boxes like this to pregnant persons
            http://imgur.com/a/JWBac

      • JamieHaman

        I guess I wasn’t clear. I don’t want my tax money to go to any program that doesn’t effectively use that money. Lying to women about the consequences of abortion, such as cancer is dishonest at best, and destructive to women at worst. To get the money, and fail to use it to connect willing pregnant women with potential adoptive parents, to fail to use it to pay for rent, food, or medical care for those pregnant women is a fail.

        These people are doing NOTHING worthwhile with this money, but they are preventing it from being used by others.
        Just an fyi, abortion kills way less women than childbirth does, especially in this country.(USA)

        • somebigguy

          Obviously, as alternatives to abortion, CPC’s save lives.

          And it’s ridiculous to assert that abortion kills fewer women than birth– especially in the USA, where health care is second to none.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Statistics show that early abortion is 14 times safer than giving birth.

          • JamieHaman

            The CDC begs to differ. http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-relatedmortality.htm This link is the average number of women who die every year in the States, due to pregnancy, and child birth. WHO, the World Health Organization also differs substantially, http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/75173/1/WHO_RHR_12.01_eng.pdf on deaths due to abortion.

            The U.S is a long way from first, we are “second” to just about every developed nation in the world.
            This link is for the U.S. comparing costs and outcomes, http://www.businessinsider.com/best-healthcare-systems-in-the-world-2012-6?op=1
            But feel free to Google all these yourself.
            If the only life that matters to you is that unborn life, I suggest you are NOT pro-life, but a forced birther.

          • fiona64

            And
            it’s ridiculous to assert that abortion kills fewer women than birth–
            especially in the USA, where health care is second to none.

            So much ignorance, in so few words.

            Abortion is 14 times safer for women than gestation and childbirth, first of all. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270271

            And, US healthcare is way worse than “second to none.” According to the Commonwealth Fund, we’re the worst in the developed world:

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthcare-ranked-dead-last-compared-to-10-other-countries/

            http://time.com/2888403/u-s-health-care-ranked-worst-in-the-developed-world/

            According to the WHO, we’re #37. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0910064

            You need to get out more, LittleDudeBro.

          • somebigguy

            Here’s another statistic, one I’m certain you’d agree with: Men are to blame for 100 per cent of unwanted pregnancies. That is, if it weren’t for men, no woman would have to endure abortion.

            And yet another: If every woman from now on were to abort whenever she became pregnant, eventually the world would be entirely free of hunger, poverty, disease and strife of any kind. In other words, “women’s health care” would solve all humanity’s problems, if only it were universally embraced.

            Just like the Bible, statistics can be used to prove and justify anything. Especially the kinds of things abortion apologists claim. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, founder of NARAL, published all sorts of statistics justifying abortion; many pro-aborts fall back on them to this day… years after he admitted making them up.

          • fiona64

            I’m sure that if you had something intelligent to contribute, you would have done so by now, LittleDudeBro.

          • somebigguy

            Again, fiona64, you prove my point exactly. Fact, truth, common sense– in a word, reality– are irrelevant in your world.

            It is a shame. Life could be so much more. The truth would set you free. But first, you must want freedom.

          • fiona64

            You’re funny, sweetie I posted facts that disprove your assertions, and you just double down on the dumb. Keep on keepin’ on, though; you are just demonstrating the complete lack of scientific comprehension with which the anti-choice side is rife.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I agree with your second statistic. If people stopped breeding right now, all the planet’s problems will be solved. Once the problems are solved, people can start breeding again in a BETTER world.

            So what is your problem with it again?

          • somebigguy

            Priceless, Suba. Simply priceless.

          • Suba gunawardana

            I take it you have no argument?

          • somebigguy

            You really don’t understand. No pregnancy, no humanity– no problems.

          • Suba gunawardana

            No humanity would be the perfect situation, which will never be achieved as long as the selfishness of religion prevails.

            The second best solution is a significant reduction of human population, which CAN be achieved if all humans stopped breeding for a limited time. Again, cannot be achieved while religion exists.

          • fiona64

            You have a very rich fantasy life, I’ll give you that.

          • fiona64

            Of course he doesn’t. His whole premise is “Make dem wimmens breed” … and he’s angry that women are not obeying his mandate.

          • goatini

            Nathanson was NOT the “founder of NARAL”, except in his delusions of grandeur. Nathanson was only one of 12 on the initial Planning Committee that was convened for only 7 months in 1969. That’s IT. He wasn’t even elected to the Board of Directors. He never served in any other capacity, ever. I realize that the specious claim that he was in any way, whatsoever, the “founder of NARAL” is quite useful propaganda for the radical misogynist fetus fetishists, but it’s absolutely and completely false.

          • somebigguy

            Nathanson knew abortion as few persons ever have– including, I’m quite certain, you.

            Like George Tiller, he admitted to having slaughtered some 60,000 human beings– about the same number who died from the immediate effects of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki. Think of that. It cost around two billion dollars in wartime America to develop the bomb that killed those persons; in cost a relative pittance– a few thousands of dollars– to educate Tiller and Nathanson to perform the abortions that had the same lethality.

            Obviously, abortion is a far cheaper and efficient destroyer of humanity. It goes without saying that abortion is, by far, the number one preventable cause of death. Every year, roughly as many human beings are killed by abortion as died from the ravages of World War II… that lasted six years. As a matter of fact, abortion has killed far more human beings than have died throughout all the wars of history combined.

            And you try slandering me, calling me a misogynist when half those murdered by you and your anti-human ilk are female?

          • kitler

            Females that you would enslave to their biology once they are of reproductive age.

            You are a slaver, no better than the men who raped and forced female slaves to give birth in the 1800s you sicko.

          • somebigguy

            And you are a killer, no better than the murders who kill others simply because they have a weapon.

          • Suba gunawardana

            You still haven’t addressed my question. Do you consider it murder to kill a human under any circumstance?

          • goatini

            Safe, legal pregnancy termination is LEGAL. It is an inalienable civil, human and Constitutional right of all female US citizens. Innocent females who avail themselves of their civil rights have committed no crime.

          • somebigguy

            There is no right to kill in the US Constitution; after all, there is no such right in the natural moral law upon which it is based. Quite the opposite: a right to life.

          • goatini

            Zygotes, blastocysts, embryos and zygotes are NOT persons, NOT citizens, and have NO rights.

            Innocent female US citizens ARE persons, ARE citizens, and have the SAME rights as YOU.

            No “killing” occurs in a safe, legal pregnancy termination, which, may I remind you, is LEGAL.

          • Suba gunawardana

            What “natural moral law”? Laws are made BY people FOR people

          • goatini

            The same “natural moral law” that required females to be chattel property livestock under Church-approved male ownership.

          • fiona64

            The US Constitution does not cite a “right to life.” Honest to god, is civics not taught anymore?

          • feminista

            Citation needed to back up your accusation that I am a killer.

          • goatini

            Same here. One would think that someone SO concerned with alleged “slander” would provide such a citation promptly.

          • fiona64

            Please provide your evidence that Feminista is a “killer.”

          • feminista

            Still waiting for that citation numbnuts

          • somebigguy

            Citation for what? My comment was deleted; yours wasn’t. Obviously, tolerance and diversity don’t extend to defenders of human life on RH “Reality”?

          • vulgarism

            You said that I was a killer.

            Id appreciate some evidence of that.

          • somebigguy

            And you said I am “a slaver, no better than the men who raped and forced female slaves to give birth in the 1800s you sicko.”

            Where’s your citation?

          • vulgarism

            You want to force women to give birth like livestock. Just like a slaver.

          • goatini

            The heroic martyr to the cause of women’s equality, the late Dr George Tiller, “slaughtered” no one. Dr Tiller compassionately performed legal medical services for his grateful patients – patients who carried very much wanted pregnancies, that were heartbreakingly compromised by the most tragic of fetal diagnoses. Many times, the patient’s life was also compromised by the complications of the fetal diagnosis. Dr Tiller SAVED lives – ACTUAL lives. He helped patients survive. He helped patients to successfully maintain their fertility in these tragic scenarios, so that they could later bring to term a successful, healthy pregnancy.

            Safe, legal pregnancy termination is, may I remind you, LEGAL. It is one of the cornerstones of reproductive justice and equal rights for female citizens. Reproductive justice frees females to be able to access the same opportunities as males have ALWAYS been able to access. Unlike you, I am old enough to have been a job applicant in the days of the gender segregated classified ads; old enough to have been rejected for management trainee positions in the “Help Wanted – Male” classified ads due ONLY to my gender; old enough to have been legally asked in a job interview if I was married, if I had children, if I was pregnant, and if I planned to be pregnant in the near future; and old enough to have been rejected for leadership opportunities and positions because “you might get pregnant”. A female’s entire higher education and subsequent career opportunities were severely limited, due ONLY to the fact that they could not control their personal destinies. I was there, and I can assure you that females are NOT going back to that degraded status, in which a random event of fertilization destroyed academic and professional careers, and/or the training and hope to achieve same. These are FACTS.

            Your offensive and invalid comparison of the mortal toll of the atomic bomb – actual living, breathing, born persons – to safe, legal pregnancy termination is just as offensive and invalid as the similar comparisons that radical misogynist fetus fetishists make to the Holocaust. As the child of a survivor, I feel justified in telling you that BOTH of these specious analogies are heartily offensive to the ACTUAL victims of these horrific events, and to their surviving families who mourn the loss of their ACTUAL presence in the ACTUAL world.

            The “slanderer” here would be YOU in your vicious allegation that I am “anti-human” and a “murderer”. And the dictionary definition of “misogynist” quite accurately describes YOU: “a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women”. Zygotes, blastocysts, embryos and fetuses are NOT persons, NOT citizens, NOT “women” (or “men”, for that matter), and have NO rights. You have ZERO respect for actual living, breathing female US citizens and their inalienable civil, human and Constitutional rights to privacy and bodily autonomy – the SAME rights that you and every other MALE citizen are endowed with at birth, and the SAME rights that you and every other MALE citizen would fight civil war against the enemy in the streets to protect, were they under just a fraction of the assault that WOMEN’S rights are.

            And now, provide your source of incontrovertible confirmation of this “murdered by you” slanderous allegation you made against me. Please, be extremely specific in your proof and source. I would expect no less from an individual that is so very offended at what YOU perceive to be “slander”.

          • somebigguy

            “Safe, legal pregnancy termination is, may I remind you, LEGAL.”

            Slavery once was legal in the US, too, but that didn’t make it right. It was a violation of natural law, the rights that belong to all human beings.

          • Suba gunawardana

            If you realize slavery is wrong, how can you condone forced pregnancy & forced childbirth, which are also slavery?

          • goatini

            You support gestational slavery.

          • feminista

            And slaveowners raped female slaves and forced them to give birth…just like you.

          • somebigguy

            Gee, is that the best you can do?

          • feminista

            Would you force a raped female slave to give birth, sbg?

          • goatini

            Oh, he most assuredly would. I’m 100% sure that he’s a supporter of rapists’ rights to select, by deadly violent force, the mother of their child.

          • fiona64

            Slaves were persons. Embryos? Are not, nor have they ever been.

          • Rainbow Walker

            First of all they aren’t “human beings”. They are fetuses. Second according to the Guttmacher Institute, since 1973, roughly 50 million legal induced abortions have been performed in the
            United States. About 1.25 million a year.

            [http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html]

            While the casualties of WWII were between 50-80 million. The difference between those that died in that war and the lump of cells evacuated: Those people felt pain and trauma, the cells could not.

            Meanwhile we have over 400 million unwanted children and growing. And you want to add to that suffering. You proved
            goatini’s statements correct. You are a misogynist and a real child abuser and murderer. And you don’t know history. Religion has killed more people than any single cause.

          • somebigguy

            A human fetus is a human being. Bio 101. Only an abortion devotee would believe otherwise.

            Roughly 50 million persons died during WWII, combatant and non-combatants, due to the effects of war. That is roughly the number of abortions performed annually around the globe.

          • feminista

            Are human beings mindless and brainless?

          • somebigguy

            Some are. A human embryo has no brain. Yet it is human, nonetheless. Just as human as you, just as alive as you.

          • feminista

            A tumor is human. Is it homicide to kill a tumor?

          • somebigguy

            It’s not a human BEING.

            (All of you are getting REALLY desperate.)

          • goatini

            And a human BEING is, um, BEING. As in, born. As in, WOMEN are human BEINGS.

            “Human” is a species.

          • feminista

            What is a human being? Can you define it?

          • goatini

            Not a person, not a citizen, has no rights.

          • somebigguy

            Again, keep repeating.

          • goatini

            I’ll keep repeating facts just as long as you keep posting BS.

          • goatini

            Zygotes, blastocysts, embryos and fetuses are NOT persons. Only a fetus fetishist would believe otherwise.

          • somebigguy

            Keep telling yourself that, goatini. It makes killing them so much easier!

          • goatini

            Provide your source of incontrovertible confirmation of this “killing them” slanderous allegation you made against me. Please, be extremely specific in your proof and source. I would expect no less from an individual that is so very offended at what YOU perceive to be “slander”.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Doesn’t matter if they are human. Why should any “human” be allowed to occupy your body without your consent?

          • Rainbow Walker

            So obsessed with a lump of cells and ignoring the suffering of millions of real children. I hope we find a cure for scrupulosity.

          • Rainbow Walker

            A fetus isn’t a human being. A human being is a member of homo-sapiens who is cognitive and psychologically developed. A fetus is a developing mammal or other viviparous vertebrate after the embryonic stage and before birth. Yes please take bio 101. You might learn something. Only a child abusing fetus worshiper would believe a fetus is a human being.

            The number of abortions around the globe in 2008 was 43.8 million.[http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_IAW.html]

            The number of casualties of WWII was between 50 and 80 million.
            [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties]

            At least those cells aborted couldn’t feel pain. But then again you don’t give a shit.

          • somebigguy

            “A human being is a member of homo-sapiens who is cognitive and psychologically developed.”

            Is a newborn baby cognitively and psychologically developed? Is a toddler? What about an Alzheimer’s patient? Again, as a moral relativist, you are defining for yourself who is human and who is not. Very unscientific.

          • goatini

            ALREADY BORN:
            1. Newborn baby
            2. Toddler
            3. Alzheimer’s patient

          • somebigguy

            And since when is birth the moment when one becomes human? Ah, ever since abortion proponents had to defend homicide!

          • Suba gunawardana

            Are you claiming that killing a human is always, without exception, homicide?

          • somebigguy

            I think it depends on whether the definition is legal or not.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Do YOU consider it absolutely wrong to kill a human under any circumstances?

          • somebigguy

            Only in self defense.

          • feminista

            Abortion is self defense from an invasive embryo.

          • somebigguy

            No it’s not. It’s killing an innocent human being.

          • feminista

            If it was innocent it would not harm the woman. Pregnancy harms women. It is invasive and birth is torture

          • somebigguy

            Ludicrous.

            A human embryo has no intention to harm. Pregnancy is a natural condition. Birth is not torture. You are projecting your own fears and biases on nature and biology. Again, if that’s all you have to defend killing children you don’t want, you have no argument.

          • feminista

            Cancer has no intention to harm either. Neither does the sleepwalker rapist. So, I guess you can’t defend yourself from either.

            And “its natural” is not an argument. Its a fallacy. Natural does not equal good.

          • goatini

            Now you’re getting it. A fetus cannot be “guilty” – NOR can a fetus be “innocent”. It’s a fetus. Not a person.

            On the other hand, a WOMAN is a person. And a woman who avails herself of her Constitutional rights to reproductive justice is innocent.

            Hope this clears things up for you.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Disease and rape are abundant in nature. Should we embrace these things?

          • fiona64

            Pregnancy is a natural condition.

            So is cancer.

            Birth is not torture.

            Says a guy who has never experienced it.

            My wanted pregnancy nearly killed me 28 years ago. I honestly wish that you could experience for just two hours the hyperemesis gravidarum that I had for 40 weeks, so that you would just STFU about how childbearing is all fairy farts and chocolate ice cream.

            Should my tubal ligation fail (they can, and do), there will be an abortion so fast that your stupid, misogynistic head will fly right off. I will not experience that kind of risk ever again. Period.

          • goatini

            Sorry, but fetuses, by necessity, cannot be “innocent”. Innocence requires sentience in order to be present.

            A fetus that threatens the life of the pregnant woman is no more “guilty” than its capacity to be “innocent”. As in, ZERO.

          • Suba gunawardana

            When a human being invades your body, you have a legal right to get rid of them, no matter how “innocent” they may be.

          • fiona64

            Again with the “innocent” bullshit WRT embryos. Embryos are not conscious; they have no conscience. Therefore, they lack the capacity for either guilt or innocence.

            I’ll bet you’re pro-death-penalty, though, aren’t you? A good many innocent persons have died because of the death penalty, and posthumous exoneration doesn’t do them much good.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Does self defense include protecting yourself from rape, or not?

          • fiona64

            Killing in self-defense is still homicide. You need to stop getting your definitions from TV.

          • fiona64

            Actually, homicide is more nuanced than that (not that nuance is Dudebro’s strong suit). It means that a person has died of unnatural causes. Suicide, manslaughter and murder are all homicides.

          • Suba gunawardana

            Oops I meant “murder” :)

          • goatini

            “Human” is a species. Persons are born and have rights endowed upon them as citizens at birth.

          • fiona64

            Human is a species; birth determines personhood and rights.

            I’m sorry you’re too stupid to understand what homicide means.

            But thanks for being another lunkheaded anti-choice male who thinks he has the right to force women to assume medical risks that will never affect him.

          • Rainbow Walker

            “Is a newborn baby cognitively and psychologically developed? Is a toddler?”

            Yes. It is able to feel and is aware of its surroundings. So is an Alzheimer’s patient. A fetus is not. You don’t understand science. Read a book once in a while that isn’t the bybull and you might learn something.

            And philosophy is meaningless. The law doesn’t see fetuses or toddlers as juridical persons. In order to qualify for this fiction we created [and the rights it brings and responsibilities it imposes]
            a set of criterion must be met.

            An entity must be aware, be able to actuate those rights and bear their responsibility. A fetus and a toddler cannot. That’s why neither are juridical persons. Why can we terminate a fetus and not a toddler? A fetus inhabits a juridical person. A toddler does not. Therefore there is no overwhelming state interest in allowing them to be terminated or harmed. But there is overwhelming state interest to allow abortions. The woman is a juridical person and she has a right to privacy and to be secure in her person. And the state should not be telling us what to do with our bodies. If we can stop abortion, why then can we not sterilize you? Or
            lobotomize you? I think you need one. Fortunately for you the law prohibits me from ordering one.

          • fiona64

            Is an infant still attached via the umbilicus? Is a toddler? Is an Alzheimer’s patient?

          • fiona64

            A human fetus is a human being

            It’s a potential human being. And the majority of abortions take place during the embryonic phase anyway.

          • somebigguy

            In fact, you have it exactly backward. It is the rejection of religion that has killed far, far more. Like Hitler, Stalin and Mao– who between themselves killed many tens of millions of human beings– most abortion promoters are, like you, virulently hostile to religion.

            Abortion promoters, as moral relativists, find the very idea of God– that is, an objective standard of truth– repugnant precisely because it threatens their view of reality, a construct in which they themselves determine what is true and what is false, what is right and what is wrong… and who shall live and who shall die.

          • feminista

            If god = objective morality, then slavery and genocide are morally acceptable.

          • somebigguy

            Wrong. Slavery and genocide become evils. That’s why abortion is evil.

          • feminista

            The bible promotes genocide and never speaks against slavery.

          • goatini

            Gestational slavery is evil, and considered by the UN to be torture.

          • goatini

            As Fuehrer of the German people and Chancellor of the Reich, I can thank God at this moment that he has so wonderfully blessed us in our hard struggle for what is our right, and beg Him that we and all other nations may find the right way, so that not only the German people but all Europe may once more be granted the blessing of peace.

            -Adolf Hitler, before the Reichstag, 06 Oct. 1939

          • Rainbow Walker

            Here we go with that argument again. Religion has been the basis of all wars. Furthermore it has killed more outside of war. Witch hangings, killing homosexuals, barring medical treatment [like
            abortion] based on religion, manipulating the law and a host of other evils.

            BTW Hitler was one of yours and any kind of dogma is recognized as religion, e.g. Stalinism, communism.

            God is the objective standard of truth? The greatest killer and ab*rtionist of all time? You have a warped sense of reality,
            but then all believers do. Believers decide what is true and false based on mythology, not reality and science. That why they decide who lives and dies. Homosexuals, children [whom they abuse], non-believers, etc. It promotes killing, slavery and subjugation. It’s this departure from reality that is dangerous.

            While mental illness is genetic, the mentally ill are drawn to dogmas, like religion. Being deleterious to psychological function it promotes irrational based on mythology. It also gives great excuses for their disorders.

          • fiona64

            It is the rejection of religion that has killed far, far more. Like Hitler

            … who was a devout Catholic.

            Stalin

            … who was devoutly Greek Orthodox.

            Mao

            … who was reared a Buddhist.

            Do you really want to keep demonstrating your ignorance in this fashion, or are you going to select a different method?

            BTW, abortion was well-known and practiced during Biblical times. And here’s everything Jesus ever said about it: ” “

          • Suba gunawardana

            “And you try slandering me, calling me a misogynist when half those murdered by you and your anti-human ilk are female?”

            So the NON-misogynistic thing to do would be to force those unwanted girls into birth; let them be raped daily by the religious nuts who “adopt” them; then force them to be breeding machines against their will?

          • somebigguy

            What planet do you live on?

          • feminista

            We are all from the planet of Teegeeack

          • fiona64

            Like George Tiller, he admitted to having slaughtered some 60,000 human beings

            Citation needed to show this exact quote. From either individual. Thanks in advance.

            It goes without saying that abortion is, by far, the number one preventable cause of death.

            No, actually; in order for a person to die, they have to have been *born.* Do you know what the number one preventable cause of death is amongst pregnant women? Murder. http://www.webmd.com/baby/news/20010320/number-1-cause-of-death-in-pregnant-women-murder

            And you try slandering me, calling me a misogynist

            Truth is an absolute defense against charges of slander (BTW, since we’re writing, I think you mean libel). Your misogyny is apparent in every post.

          • feminista

            Nathanson switched sides for the money you think?

          • goatini

            Most assuredly. He set the template for those who followed, such as notorious grifter Scabby Johnson.

          • lady_black

            She’s correct.

          • Suba gunawardana

            To force unwanted children to life and abandon them in a hostile world is to knowingly promote child abuse.

          • goatini

            //And it’s ridiculous to assert that abortion kills fewer women than birth//

            ANY safe, legal pregnancy termination is 13x safer than ANY full-term pregnancy. FACT.

      • http://www.scientificabortionlaws.com/ Russell Crawford

        The fact is that before Roe there was a decrease in life and after Roe there was an increase in life. That is a fact.

      • Suba gunawardana

        Just how does abortion harm women & children again?

      • goatini

        More like, so-called “crisis pregnancy centers” help themselves to fresh new inventory for the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption crime syndicate, at the expense of innocent women with unwanted pregnancies, exploiting them as human livestock to sell their issue on the open market to the highest bidder for 5 figures.

        Or, if the inventory is not so desirable and marketable, the so-called “crisis pregnancy centers” have a special track, in which sufficient piety and “religious” brainwashing must be demonstrated to obtain paltry amounts of diapers and booties. Factual example including photo of the target clientele:

        http://www.awomanschoice.org/Necoles-Place.html

        And safe, legal pregnancy termination most emphatically does NOT “harm women”, nor does it “kill children”, as all children have already been born. It even keeps mothers alive so they can be there for their ACTUAL children:

        http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/opinion/27kristof.html

  • kitler

    Welcome to RHRC BTW.

    Weird that your comments always go straight to moderation.

  • kitler

    Lindsay, youre making me laugh on SPL. your last comment is great. Lulz