Killing Babies for Dreams

First Report from Washington State on Euthanasia

Imported Article from OneNewsNow entitled, "Problems accompany legal euthanasia":

Assisted suicide has been legal for a year in Washington, and the state health department has issued its first report.

During the first year, 63 people requested and received lethal prescriptions to kill themselves. 47 have since died, while 36 are confirmed to have used the poison to accomplish it. Although 79 percent suffered from cancer, few cited pain as the reason for seeking end of life treatment as the main concern was the cost for alternate treatment.

"What is and has been the reality of this [is] that when you transform assisted suicide into a medical treatment, it makes it just like every other medical treatment, except it's lots cheaper. And people begin to see it as a benefit for the family," comments Rita Marker, attorney and president of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide (ITF).

Many of the patients had insurance, but Marker says that means nothing. It does, however, serve as a reminder of an Oregon cancer victim whose treatment was rejected by her insurance. She was told, though, that they would cover her drugs for assisted suicide. The report shows there are too many unknowns, and the possibility of murder is an example.

"After that individual got the prescription, we don't know if once they got it home they put it into the medicine cabinet and then decided, 'I don't think I'll take this' and then whether someone else thinking maybe it would be a good idea for them to take it, mixed it into their food," the ITF president poses. "There's no way of knowing."

There is an open chance for elder abuse, but no way to track it or prosecute those responsible since the law requires prosecutors to treat the death as natural.

(source for the following) ....Elder abuse takes many forms, but the ultimate elder abuse is the act of killing a vulnerable dependent person. This ultimate abuse will appear as merciful but will often be cold, calculated killing, just like the many studies are beginning to show is true today.

Link to articles concerning elder abuse:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-486031/Drugged-oblivion-The-shocking-truth-elderly-treated-care-homes.html

http://www.justicenewsflash.com/2009/01/07/72-yearold-minnesota-man-starves-death-nursing-home-family-files-lawsuit_20090107555.html

http://www.bellinghamherald.com:80/102/story/744497.html

http://www.wyff4.com:80/news/18433023/detail.html

 ============================================================

Washington State "Death with Dignity" Statistics are Consistent with Elder Abuse; No Recourse for Elders.

 ....According to the report, lethal prescriptions intended to kill people were dispensed to 63 individuals. The majority were 65 years old or older, and educated. Nearly half had private insurance. These factors are consistent with their being individuals with money. Older people with money are prime targets of abuse. See Met Life Study on Elder abuse at: http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/mmi-study-broken-trust-elders-family-finances.pdf

According to the report, 23% took this step due a concern about being a "burden." This is a marker of possible abuse because the person was pressured to feel that way.

Washington's Act is, regardless, coercive: An heir who will benefit from the death, is allowed to help the person sign up for the lethal dose; there is no requirement of consent at the time of death. See: Margaret Dore, "Death with Dignity: What do we Tell our Clients?," Washington State Bar News, July 2009. http://wsba.org/media/publications/barnews/jul-09+deathwithdignity.htm .

After the death, even prosecutors are required to treat the death (voluntary or not) as "Natural." http://www.doh.wa.gov/dwda/forms/MEsAndCoroners.pdf. Elders abused by the Act have no recourse.

Ramirez -- Abortion Cartoon (Joe Biden -- the "Good" Catholic)

Pam & Tim Tebow in Focus On The Family Commerical (Audio Fixed)

HotAir documents a couple of the crazy responses to it, here's one:

Tebow: Hey Mom! Tried to kill you from the womb and failed. How about a blind side tackle? Violence against Moms FTW!

Live Action Does It Again: "That’s Not a Baby Growing Inside of You" ~ Planned Parenthood

(HotAir h/t)

Live Action has a new series of videos that launches today called the Rosa Acuna Project. Their new effort aims to expose manipulation by Planned Parenthood counselors intended to pressure women into having abortions, or at the very least, provide dishonest information to support false rationalizations for the procedure. In this clip from the Appleton, Wisconsin clinic, a counselor tells the woman that what’s growing inside her uterus isn’t a baby at all, or “anything like that” — and the doctor agrees:

 

Zo Nation -- MachoSauce Talks About the Beginning of Life

MSNBC's 'Doctor Nancy' Admits She Finds Pro-Life Democrats 'Infuriating'

(NewsBusters h/t... read more)

Democrats Have Always Had It in Their Mind To Strip the Bill of Stupak's Amendment

(Hot Air h/t)

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), the Democrats’ chief deputy whip in the House, said that she and other pro-choice lawmakers would work to strip the amendment included in the House health bill that bars federal funding from going to subsidize abortions.

“I am confident that when it comes back from the conference committee that that language won’t be there,” Wasserman Schultz said during an appearance on MSNBC. “And I think we’re all going to be working very hard, particularly the pro-choice members, to make sure that’s the case.”

Former Planned Parenthood Clinic Director, Abby Johnson on Mike Huckabee's Show

(Denny Burk h/t)

Important Pro-Life Update -- Portion of Health-Care Bill Allowed Up-or-Down Vote (Stupak)

Two ways to look at this. I am very happy and glad that there is such pro-life Democrat out in the real world standing for such an important issue. On the other hand conservatives, while we support such a position, do not allow this to become the issue we want passed and then allow such a nonsensical health-care initiative to pass. As conservatarians we should fight against such a takeover of health-care period. In fact, such "battles" can be fabricated in order to make the opposition "feel" like they may have won something... don't allow such "feeling" of victory in one small battle to overtake the larger battle at hand.

Pelosi Caves to Stupak
(HotAir import)

How desperate has Nancy Pelosi become for enough votes to pass her ObamaCare proposal this weekend? She has reversed course and given Bart Stupak (D-MI) a floor vote on his amendment to ban federal abortion funding in the bill. Pelosi had attempted to use another amendment to undermine Stupak’s support and get enough votes to keep from a humiliating loss:

House Democratic leaders will allow an up-or-down vote on an amendment blocking any money in its healthcare overhaul from funding abortions, risking the votes of members who support abortion rights.

Anti-abortion Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) had told a bleary-eyed Rules committee panel that a deal struck earlier in the day to move forward on the issue was off.

“There was some compromise language from different proposals that we thought would be satisfactory, our understanding was that we had an agreement. Two hours later it was not an agreement,” Stupak said as the clock neared 1 a.m. Saturday.

That sounds like bad news, in one sense. Stupak’s coalition of pro-life Democrats could have kept Pelosi’s bill from passing. Indeed, Stupak had threatened to work with Republicans on a motion to recommit, which would have killed the bill. If Stupak gets his vote, he may wind up supporting the bill even if he loses and the bill remains with its current language. Even if Stupak remains firm, members of his coalition may split after an up-or-down vote.

However, Stupak will almost certainly get the entire Republican caucus to support him, and perhaps more Democrats than the 40 Stupak already has. If the amendment passes, Pelosi may have an entirely different problem:

Liberals on the committee threatened to vote against the final healthcare bill if it included Stupak’s language, warning that it would be a return to the days of back-alley abortions.

“I forsee a return to the dark ages,” said Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.). “I’m 73, I’ve seen these dark things, they use these coat hangers and die.”

That’s a remarkable statement — since we don’t use federal funds now to pay for abortions. Stupak’s amendment just maintains the status quo; it doesn’t actually change anything. The coat-hanger argument has always been a red herring anyway, but in this instance it’s especially dishonest … unless Hastings et al see this bill as a complete government takeover of the health-care system, which it will definitely produce sooner or later.

If Pelosi loses the progressives over the ban on abortion funding, what would she have left? The Blue Dogs won’t rescue this bill, not after this week’s elections and the nosedive in polling for ObamaCare, and especially not after the latest unemployment numbers.

Pass the popcorn. This should be interesting, and still scary enough to keep pulse rates high.

Planned Parenthood Leader Resigns After Watching Ultrasound of Abortion Procedure (Plus: Personhood Movement -- WND)

Personhood Movement Explodes In 32 States

A pro-life movement seeking to guarantee basic human rights to unborn babies is exploding in 32 states – and leaders say it could be just the key to nullifying abortion provisions in President Obama's health-care "reform."

While abortion was not specifically mentioned in earlier bills under consideration, H.R.3962, unveiled by Nancy Pelosi this week, does in fact state abortion is to be covered. Concerns are mounting that whatever the final form of the legislation, the procedure will become more accessible, requiring health insurance companies to fund abortions.

Gualberto Garcia Jones is director of Personhood Colorado and a legal analyst for Personhood USA, a grassroots Christian organization that seeks to legally define every unborn baby as a "person" protected by God-given and constitutionally protected rights, including the right to life. His organization was set up to support personhood efforts across America through legislation and constitutional amendments.

"We're trying to end abortion right now," Garcia Jones told WND. "All of our laws that we're promoting are direct challenges to Roe v. Wade. If we can get a challenge up to the Supreme Court, then that's the ideal thing. That's what we're trying to do."

The personhood approach within the pro-life movement was sparked by a statement in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that opened the doors for legal abortion in the U.S.

Justice Harry Blackmun wrote in the majority opinion for Roe v. Wade, "The appellee and certain amici [pro-lifers] argue that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."

According to the movement, if every unborn baby is defined as a person, each baby will be legally guaranteed the same right to life as all Americans. ....

Michigan Democrat Firm On Taxpayer Money NOT Being Used Towards Abortions (Right On!)

Very rarely do I get to write or post (import) any stories like this... so I am happy that a Democrat from the state I was born in is "life Oriented" when it comes to other peoples money (tax monies).

Mich. Democrat: Pelosi 'not happy with me'
By Bob Cusack - 10/27/09
from ~ The Hill

Rep. Bart Stupak said Speaker Pelosi is not pleased with his effort to change abortion-related provisions in the healthcare bill being crafted by the House.

During an interview on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" show, Stupak (D-Mich.) said he is undeterred in trying to ensure that taxpayer dollars do not pay for abortions. Stupak, who opposes abortion rights, acknowledged that some in his party are upset with his public campaign to change the bill.

"The Speaker is not happy with me," Stupak said....

Abortion Kills More Black Americans Than the Seven Leading Causes of Death Combined, Says CDC Data

(Tank2 h/t-import)
Friday, October 23, 2009

Should See My: "Margaret Sanger and the Racist History of Planned Parenthood (Black Genocide)"

(CNSNews.com) – Abortion kills more black Americans than the seven leading causes of death combined, according to data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for 2005, the latest year for which the abortion numbers are available.

Abortion killed at least 203,991 blacks in the 36 states and two citie More..s (New York City and the District of Columbia) that reported abortions by race in 2005, according to the CDC. During that same year, according to the CDC, a total of 198,385 blacks nationwide died from heart disease, cancer, strokes, accidents, diabetes, homicide, and chronic lower respiratory diseases combined. These were the seven leading causes of death for black Americans that year.

A total of 49 jurisdictions reported their abortion numbers for 2005 to the CDC. These included all 50 states--except California, Louisiana, and New Hampshire--and New York City and the District of Columbia. Of these 49 jurisdiction, only 36 states plus New York City and the District of Columbia reported the number of abortions by race.

Of these 36 states, Georgia reported the largest number of abortions--18,325--among African Americans. Idaho and Montana reported the fewest, 16 and 17 respectively.

Among the large states not reporting abortions by race--and thus where the number of blacks killed by abortions is not included in the national total of 203,991--are California, Florida, Illinois and the rest of New York state outside of New York City.
According to the CDC, the total of 203,991 blacks killed by abortion in 2005 also does not include those aborted by "private physicians’ procedures.”

Every year since 1969, the CDC has amassed abortion data by state or area of occurrence, requesting information each year from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City. The CDC attempts to collect data on abortions by the age, race and marital status of the women who undergo them as well as the type of abortion procedure.



However, the “CDC is not a regulatory agency,” Senior Press Officer Karen Hunter told CNSNews.com. “So while we are required by Congress to collect this information, states are not required to provide any data to the CDC, including abortion surveillance.”

In 2005, a total of 820,151 legal abortions were performed in the 49 jurisdication that reported abortions to the CDC, according to the “Abortion Surveillance” report, which is published in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, or MMWR, for Nov. 28, 2008. (Scroll up to top of report)

The report states, “Approximately 1 in 5 U.S. pregnancies have ended in abortion,” and also notes some limitations on the data: “The overall number, ratio, and rate of abortions are conservative estimates; the total numbers of legal induced abortions provided by central health agencies and reported to the CDC for 2005 were probably lower than the numbers actually performed.”

In Table 9 of the report, it states that there were 203,991 blacks killed by abortion, which comprises 35.5 percent of all abortions reported for that year.

Rev. Clenard H. Childress, Jr., founder of BlackGenocide.org, told CNSNews.com that according to numbers gleaned from statistics provided by the Guttmacher Institute, a pro-abortion group, 1,784 blacks are aborted each day. Also, he notes on his Web site that three out of five African-American women will obtain an abortion.

Childress said the information and sources on his Web site have never been challenged by abortion-access supporters. “This is because they can see that themselves, and they know them probably to be far worse than we’re reporting. The facts come from the pro-abort/pro-choice community,” he said.

“You want to go to a reliable source where people can’t dismiss what you’re saying,” Childress said.

“Yet the Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, Urban League, and the National Action Committee of Al Sharpton fail abysmally to report not only the decimation but the health ramifications which are questionably very pertinent and provable,” said Childress.

“It would be one thing if we were talking about something hypothetically, but these are actual empirical proofs. … We simply want the health issues of abortion to be discussed,” Childress added.

Susan Cohen, director of government affairs at the Guttmacher Institute, said that black women are not inordinately targeted.

It is the high number of unintended pregnancies among black women that explains the disproportionate number of black abortions, she stated in a policy analysis, “Abortion and Women of Color: The Bigger Picture (2008),” which was provided to CNSNews.com by Guttmacher Institute spokeswoman Rebecca Wind.

While acknowledging that the abortion rate for blacks in the United States is “almost 5 times that for white women,” Cohen concluded in her analysis, “these higher unintended pregnancy rates (among African American women) reflect the particular difficulties that many women in minority communities face in accessing high-quality contraceptive services and in using their chosen method of birth control consistently and effectively over long periods of time."

“Because black women experience so many more unintended pregnancies than any other group—sharply disproportionate to their numbers in the general population—they are more likely to seek out and obtain abortion services than any other group,” said Cohen.

When asked to comment on this report, Dr. Freda Bush, an obstetrician and gynecologist in private practice in Jackson, Miss., told CNSNews.com that she found the explanation for the high rate of black abortions “disingenuous.”

“I would just like for them to explain why there’s such a significant proportion of their clinics that are located in minority communities,” said Bush, who is black. “So if you’ll notice, I did not mention that as a factor when I talked to you [earlier], so I was not accusing them of anything.

“I was just pointing out the fact that we have more, but since they brought it up, I would like for them to explain where their clinics are located, and why their clinics are located in that area,” she added.

“I would also like for an explanation of why their founder, Margaret Sanger, who was a known eugenist, also had a Negro project, and an explanation if that was not directed at the ‘undesirables,’” said Bush. “So, I’m not accusing them of anything. I would just like an explanation for the practices that they have continued.”

Dr. Alveda King, niece of slain civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., is a pro-life activist. In August 2007 she told a meeting of Priests for Life that abortionists “plant their killing centers in minority neighborhoods and prey upon women who think they have no hope.”

“The great irony,” she said, “is that abortion has done what the Klan only dreamed of.

Hispanic Pro-lifer Assaulted in Fresno, California

(Language Warning, Liberal Democrat on the Loose)

Does Pro-Life Mean Anti-Death Penalty?

This is a killer taking an innocent life and going to death row for it:


This is a doctor taking an innocent life (which screams from pain, but because it is in the womb you cannot hear the screams through the amniotic fluid -- ultra-sound abortion -- CAUTION.

Extended Racism at Planned Parenthood (You May Have Heard One, But There Are More)

Planned Parenthood Racism Investigation by UCLA Law Student
(Pro-Life Guy h/t)

See My post As Well: "Margaret Sanger and the Racist History of Planned Parenthood (Black Genocide)"

Abortion Pro-life Story of God

Tips On How To Answer Common Pro-Choice "Mantras"

Don't Like Abortion, Don't Have One


Its Just Part of My Body


If You Don't Adopt, You Can't Be Pro-Life


Overpopulation Demands Abortion

She Votes Pro-Life On These Issues... Nice

A silver lining that shows that on some matters she falls on the right side of what the Constitution calls for. I had heard Medved bring up a few of these cases that made me go "hmmmm."

Sotomayor: Gov't Can Be Pro-Life

Judge Sonia Sotomayor is sparking fears among pro-abortion advocates on the left who fear that she may be a closeted pro-life advocate, according to The Los Angeles Times.

They have seen no evidence that she supports upholding Roe Vs. Wade, and Sotomayor has never ruled on abortion or taken a public position in favor of pro-abortion rights.

In her only abortion-related decision, according to the Times, she did not come down the way abortion-rights groups would have liked. In 2002, Sotomayor, raised a Catholic, rejected a challenge to President Bush's "Mexico City policy," which required foreign groups receiving U.S. funds to pledge that they did not support or promote abortion. Republican presidents have adopted the policy in executive orders, while Democrats, including President Obama, have repealed it.

Sotomayor spoke for a three-judge panel that upheld the policy as constitutional. The government "is free to favor the antiabortion position over the pro-choice position and can do so with public funds," she said.

"I simply don't know Judge Sotomayor's view on Roe vs. Wade. I will be very concerned if the question is not asked and answered during the Senate hearings," Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, told the Times.

Despite efforts to get clarification, Northup said, "So far, no one has been able to give us an assurance of her views."….

Raise Your Compassion Level