Killing Babies for Dreams

Pro-Choice Mom Shocked at School's Secrecy In Aborting Daughters Baby -- Parental Rights Watch

Our Journey As A Country Over The Past Year

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."

 ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Judge Andrew Napolitano on Presedential Abortion Executive Order -- To Top It Off, The Order Isn't Even Signed Yet

A White House official told Fox, Obama will not sign the Executive Order Tuesday and has set no specific date to do so. Stupak predicted Obama would sign the order later this week. The White House said only that Obama would sign the order “soon.”

"I'm With Stupid"

"Repeal the baby-killer" ~ Rep. Randy Neugebauer Speaks To His Strong Statement

Yesterday, Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX) issued a video statement after Democrats demanded an apology for his outburst on the House floor of “it’s a baby-killer!” when Bart Stupak announced his support for ObamaCare. Initially, the media reported that Neugebauer called Stupak a baby-killer, but Neugebauer said that he was referring to the bill. In the video, Neugebauer didn’t apologize for his passionate defense of life, but promised to channel it perhaps differently as he pursues remedies to the damage ObamaCare will do....

...(read more)...

A Near Death Experience With RU-486 -- Tweeted

This woman almost got 86'ed!

The copycat who stopped live tweeting her abortion.

We learned together Jackson was grossly uninformed about the medical abortion process.

For nine days Jackson tweeted about recurring headaches, nausea, vomiting, bleeding, pelvic pain, backaches, and cramping so bothersome she went through an entire bottle of 20 Tylenol with codeine in a week and had to ask for more (which she was apparently denied, tweeting Feb. 27, "This is definitely the most pain so far. It's distracting & makes me unhappy… Ibuprofin is a joke, ya'll").

Maybe coming out of codeine la-la land caused Jackson to realize tweeting the painful details of her abortion did not bode well for her RU-486 promotion campaign, because it was on that day she stopped, also noting with aggravation that I was blogging what she wrote.

[....]

Meanwhile, a copycat named Next Thursday, inspired by Jackson, decided to begin tweeting her RU-486 abortion on Feb. 25.

Next Thursday wanted to abort because "[t]his pregnancy was unexpected. We cannot afford another child, we do not have room for another child, and my body is not ready to experience pregnancy again so soon after our last child."

Next Thursday had three children, the youngest being 9 months old and still breast-feeding.

(I read "breast-feeding" and winced. Among many things for which RU-486, aka mifepristone, has not been tested is breast-feeding. The labeling indicates, "It is not known whether mifepristone is excreted in human milk. Many hormones with a similar chemical structure, however, are excreted in breast milk. Since the effects of mifepristone on infants are unknown, breast-feeding women should consult with their health care provider to decide if they should discard their breast milk for a few days following administration of the medications." Was Next Thursday told that?) ...

...(read more)...

Here are a few of the posted Tweets in Jill Stanek's column:

 [....]

This is where she quit Tweeting. Jill hopes she is all right.

Tweating Abortions

I do not know what to say in regards to where our culture is taking us, other than this is a prime example of man's nature on display.

This 27-year old and her boyfriend think they have life and death figured out (Genesis 2:9), that they have "life" in the palm of their hand (Prov 14:12; 21:2). We see that these views come from her rejection of God specifically as NewsBusters points out:

...During the interview, Phillips tossed softball questions at blogger Angie Jackson, who is known on Twitter as "antitheistangie," or "Angie the Anti-Theist" on her blog (Phillips didn't mention her guest's political or philosophical outlook during the entire segment). After playing a clip of Jackson from YouTube.com, Phillips first asked, "So, Angie- you know, did it take a while to come to a comfort zone, that you wanted to do this? Tell me how you eventually decided, this is how I'm going to do it and I'm going to let everybody see it happen."

Once the "anti-theist" blogger gave her initial answer, Phillips played another clip of her guest from YouTube, where the blogger flatly admitted, "Yes, it had the potential for that embryo to become a fetus, to become a person....But it was more likely to kill me, and you're not going to shame me....I do not feel sorry that I saved my life. I do not feel sorry that I stayed here for myself, for my boyfriend, for my kid that I've already got."...

It is sad to see this 27-year old and her boyfriend beleiveing that they have an understanding of life and death apart from God in their grasp (Genesis 2:9), and that they think they have understanding beyond their current situation (Proverbs 14:12; 21:2). Romans 8:5-8 speaks to this well:

Those who think they can do it on their own end up obsessed with measuring their own moral muscle but never get around to exercising it in real life. Those who trust God's action in them find that God's Spirit is in them—living and breathing God! Obsession with self in these matters is a dead end; attention to God leads us out into the open, into a spacious, free life. Focusing on the self is the opposite of focusing on God. Anyone completely absorbed in self ignores God, ends up thinking more about self than God. That person ignores who God is and what he is doing. And God isn't pleased at being ignored.

God does not like to be ignored for he is a Jealous God in our midst, whether we see Him or make our own will a god (Deuteronomy 6:15). There will be a time of Reckoning for not only Angie's callousness, but also all those who do not clothe themselves in the finished work of Christ on the Cross (Revelations 19:7-8). Jill Stanek points out that this whole process even caught Angie off gurd who thought that "her abortion would... [be a simple]... '4 hour bleed-out'," not realizing that some girls have died because of this process of interrupting the natural process and change of a woman's bodily functions. Changing nature is often times painful and/or deadly, as Jill points out:

...For 9 days, from Feb. 19-27, Jackson tweeted about such severe cramps she had difficulty walking across the room. She went through 17 Vicodin in 6 days and at a point soon after requesting a prescription for another 20.

Jackson tweeted nausea, vomiting, backaches, headaches and bleeding. 5 days into her abortion experience, Angie commented on another blog, "Honestly I had no idea this would go on so long. I thought the entire abortion would take a few hours, as I'd read in a few stories...."

Before I post Jill's continuing article at World Net Daily, I want to answer some of Angie's comments or questions below, and this comes from a previous post. Angie asks after mentioning she missed her normal period why no one yells at her for bleeding during her normal periods. She misses the point that Kathy Ireland points out to Bill Maher:

Kathy Ireland, many years ago, was on Bill Mahers Politically Incorrect and the discussion that ensued shows the frailty of the liberal/relativistic position:

Bill Maher: Kathy, why do you oppose a women’s right to choose?

Kathy Ireland: Bill, when my husband was going to medical school I underwent a transformation. Because I used to be in favor of abortion. But I noticed when I was reading through some of his medical teaching books, that according to a law in science known as the law of biogenesis, every living thing reproduces after it own kind. That means dog produce dogs, cats produce cats, humans produce humans. If we want to know what something is we simply ask what are its parents. If we know what the parents are, we know what the thing in question is. And I reasoned from that because human parents can only produce human offspring, unborn human fetuses could be nothing but human beings, because the law of biogenesis rules out every other alternative. And I concluded therefore that because human fetuses were part of our family, we should not harm them without justification.

In October 2002, Kathy Ireland made a compelling argument against abortion on the Fox News Channel's Hannity and Colmes political debate show. Alan Colmes described Ireland's opinions as religious, but Ireland said that her views on abortion do not stem from faith. She asserted that even atheists could realize that abortion is wrong. Kathy told Alan that her belief is founded in science and technology, which she says, "has come a long way since Roe vs. Wade."

Ireland also defended her values as being pro-women, stating, "We need to support these women who are in crisis pregnancy situations." She claimed that because scientific evidence proves that abortion is murder, "I have no choice but to defend the most vulnerable among us."

I also wanted to let this "potentiality" speak for herself:

Here are some of the Tweets Jill had in her WND article showing more insights from Angie

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

What Is The #1 Killer of Black People? (AIDs? Heart Disease? Violence?)

"But Is It Life?" -- Planned Parenthood, Sean James, and Al Joyner Get It Wrong (Maafa21 Video Trailer at the Bottom)

"We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population."

~ Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood ~

Conversations from the Pit

One of the best articles by Prager. It is amazing how this is working its way out almost daily in our little confined work area we all the “pit.” We have a glowing example of many years of work by the left-leaning establishment that is often called “higher education,” which has turned out a zombie of non-thought who would rather use the seven words below in Dennis Prager’s article, or extreme cases (mentally ill or deformed babied in utero for showing why abortion is good, or a bad foster care story -- when there are more stories in the positive typically than the negative) to make a point.

Even at my friends site you will often here a horror story about a child not having health-care and then the label, “Bush doesn’t care about the children.” These are non-statements. There is no critical thinking involved.

When talking about abortion, for instance in our “pit,” I hear some story and then I merely respond, “that’s fine, but that doesn’t deal with whether the ‘fetus’ is a life or not.” Then I hear some grand tail about a women’s choice, and I respond, “that’s great, but that doesn’t deal with the issue of whether the ‘fetus’ is a life or not.” That is the question. Then the “you’ll never know what it is like” line comes out, referring to me being a man, ergo, I cannot have as valid an input on the matter, to which I responded/respond with examples of people who do have the personal capability to respond. Like Norma McCorvey, who was “Jane Roe” in Roe v. Wade (1973), she wrote a book that is pictured here (as well as a DVD).

I brought up Gianna Jessen, who was herself a survivor of an abortion, her story (and book, as well as) are very compelling, and often, when young university minds are being steeped in feminist philosophies, rarely is there ever time taken to study or reflect on the other side of the issue, as I was told after I asked a this question, “so at 24-years old you have looked at both sides of the issue and all the evidence and arguments and have concluded that you are right and there is no evidence left to compel you,” the response was “yep!”

A great 40-minute video can be found here. This presentation is rational, well thought out, and rarely responded to by the Left.

Another personage that I typically bring up is Bernard Nathanson, who

as a younger man, he had been strongly pro-choice, and he performed an abortion on a woman who had become pregnant by him. He later gained national attention by then becoming one of the founding members of the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, now known as NARAL Pro-Choice America. He worked with Betty Friedan and others for the legalization of abortion in the United States. Their efforts essentially succeeded with the Roe v Wade decision. He was also for a time the director of the Center for Reproductive and Sexual Health (CRASH), New York's largest abortion clinic. Nathanson has written that he was responsible for over 75,000 abortions throughout his pro-choice career.

He likewise wrote a book. Is he someone who would have some valuable input on the matter? Of course, his sex has nothing to do with it… unless you’re sexist. Dr. Nathanson is best known for his “Silent Scream” video (it is very dated), where a baby is shown being aborted via ultrasound images. What the video details is as the abortion procedure gets under way, the baby starts to literally scream, except there is no air to carry the cries of agony and pain. The entire video is linked above, but I will show the poignant part here. CAUTION, this is GRAPHIC, as it is ending a perfectly viable life... unless you are pro-choice, then this is just like any other operation -- like removing your appendix, or tonsils:

I doubt the person in conversation with me has done much in the way of reading and contemplating this issue much beyond what she deems to be liberating feminist theory rebuffing the patriarchy. People who are protecting their emotional belief very rarely go out and pick up a book like Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice, by Francis Beckwith. Which is too bad.

I mentioned Kathy Ireland and her appearance on Bill Maher’s show, Politically Incorrect, where she responded to a question (from a debate a few years back):

I am thrilled Cheryl to hear you want to do away with 97-percent of abortions. But unfortunately, a vast majority of secularized America – mainly the left – would be thrown into fits over such a question. It gets to the root of their view self-destructing.

Kathy Ireland, many years ago, was on Bill Mahers Politically Incorrect and the discussion that ensued shows the frailty of the liberal/relativistic position:

Bill Maher: Kathy, why do you oppose a women’s right to choose

Kathy Ireland: Bill, when my husband was going to medical school I underwent a transformation. Because I used to be in favor of abortion. But I noticed when I was reading through some of his medical teaching books, that according to a law in science known as the law of biogenesis, every living thing reproduces after it own kind. That means dog produce dogs, cats produce cats, humans produce humans. If we want to know what something is we simply ask what are its parents. If we know what the parents are, we know what the thing in question is. And I reasoned from that because human parents can only produce human offspring, unborn human fetuses could be nothing but human beings, because the law of biogenesis rules out every other alternative. And I concluded therefore that because human fetuses were part of our family, we should not harm them without justification.

Bill Maher: Well Kathy, that’s just your opinion!

In October 2002, Kathy Ireland made a compelling argument against abortion on the Fox News Channel's Hannity and Colmes political debate show. Alan Colmes described Ireland's opinions as religious, but Ireland said that her views on abortion do not stem from faith. She asserted that even atheists could realize that abortion is wrong. Kathy told Alan that her belief is founded in science and technology, which she says, "has come a long way since Roe vs. Wade."

Ireland also defended her values as being pro-women, stating, "We need to support these women who are in crisis pregnancy situations." She claimed that because scientific evidence proves that abortion is murder, "I have no choice but to defend the most vulnerable among us."

Cheryl, you may enjoy one of my favorite speakers on the subject. He gave this 40-minute speech at Gordon College; it may enlighten and embolden your view.

MachoSauce Interviews the Person on the Street -- New Years Rant

Sebelius Praises Abortion Accounting Trick in Senate Bill

The federal government will legally compel you to contribute funds exclusively designated to pay for abortion into the new government-run system.

Backlash for the Dems -- Abortion Issue Still a Sticky Point? Will It Bring the Bill To An End? (its like a cliffhanger movie from the 40's)

Report: Stupak working with GOP to kill ObamaCare after Nelson’s sellout; Update: “Unacceptable”

by Allahpundit

So strange have the bedfellows become that this story is breaking almost at the same time that this one is. Pro-life and pro-choice, united at last!

Question: Will the nutroots regard Stupak as a traitor for working with the evil GOP or an unwitting hero in trying to block a bill they regard as a sellout to corporate America?

An aide to Rep. Bart Stupak (D. Mich.) coordinated opposition to a Senate compromise on the place of abortion in health care legislation this morning with the Republican Senate leadership, the Conference Catholic Bishops, and other anti-abortion groups, according to a chain of frantic emails obtained this morning by POLITICO.

The emails show that Stupak — who has so far remained silent on language accepted by Senator Ben Nelson (D. Neb.) and faces intense pressure from the White House to accept it — is already working behind the scenes to oppose the compromise…

Stupak is the leader of a group of pro-life Democrats who say they’ll oppose the sweeping legislation if it uses government money to pay for abortion, while McConnell is firmly committed to killing the legislation. The fact that the two have made common cause against the Senates health care compromise will likely further infuriate Stupak’s Democratic colleagues in the House, and demonstrates his willingness to stop any bill that doesn’t pass his test.

I’m assuming the leaker here was someone who’s supporting the bill and eager to shatter Stupak’s pro-life blockade in the House, although I can’t imagine how they would have gotten hold of the e-mails. Or was this actually leaked by Stupak himself as an early warning to Pelosi that he’ll need to be bought off too like his pal Ben Nelson was? (If so, how does “further infuriating” his own side, including possibly members of his own anti-abortion coalition, by secretly coordinating with the GOP strengthen his hand?) Here again is Stephen Spruiell’s calculus of Democratic votes in the House; remember, Pelosi can only afford to lose two net yes votes after passing her own bill, 220-215. The strategy, I assume, will be to appease House progressives by dropping Stupak’s abortion language while using the lack of a public option in the final bill to woo Dems in Stupak’s anti-abortion coalition. Even if she loses 20 votes among House liberals who say they can’t vote for a bill without a public plan, potentially she’ll gain back 20 among weak pro-life Blue Dogs for whom a bill without a public plan is a real treat. Hoyer thinks it’s feasible, but whether he said that because he believes it or simply because he wanted to keep the pressure on while Nelson was deliberating is anyone’s guess.

Exit question: Can anyone explain to me why Bayh and Lincoln and Pryor and the rest of the Blue Dogs in the Senate who represent the 60th vote aren’t now demanding a Medicaid buyout for their state like Nelson got? Big Ben might have sold out America on abortion but at least he has something to show his constituents. The rest of them are voting for an increasingly toxic bill and getting jack in return. Is there some subtle strategic point to this that I’m missing or are they simply the royal schmucks we suspect them of being? ...[more]...

Neb.'s Nelson sees backlash on health reform plan

By MARGERY A. BECK

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) - It was the concern of Nebraska's Republican governor over expanded Medicaid costs in the proposed Senate health care overhaul bill that led to a compromise to cover his state's estimated $45 million share over a decade, U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson said Sunday.

Gov. Dave Heineman "contacted me and he said this is another unfunded federal mandate and it's going to stress the state budget, and I agreed with him," the Nebraska Democrat said. "I said to the leader and others that this is something that has to be fixed. I didn't participate in the way it was fixed."

But Heineman expressed anything but gratitude, saying he had nothing to do with the compromise and calling the overhaul bill "bad news for Nebraska and bad news for America."

"Nebraskans did not ask for a special deal, only a fair deal," Heineman said in a statement Sunday.

That criticism is only a taste of what Nelson has received since announcing Saturday that he would become the 60th vote needed to advance the landmark legislation.

Despite the perks Nelson managed to garner for Nebraska in finally agreeing to support the overhaul bill, the backlash from those who wanted Nelson to hold a hard line against the measure was immediate.

Abortion foes howled in protest. Nebraska Right to Life, which has long endorsed Nelson, issued a scathing statement that dubbed Nelson a traitor. The state's Catholic bishops followed Sunday with a statement that they were "extremely disappointed" in him.

The chairman of Nebraska's Republican Party declared Nelson's decision to be the end of his political career in Nebraska, and within hours of Nelson's announcement, the state GOP launched a Web site, , to collect funds to oust the Democrat in the 2012 election.http://www.givebentheboot.com

Nebraska's Republican Sen. Mike Johanns said he was "stunned and incredibly disappointed," and called the compromise's abortion language a "watered-down accounting gimmick that leads to Nebraska taxpayers subsidizing abortions in other states."  ...[more]...

Catholic Nurse Forced to Participate in Abortion -- Liberal Tyranny Disguised as Egalitarianism

 This is just another example of the tyranny of the left. They make promises that if "A" is passed "B" won't happen. Hypocrites! The sadness in this woman's heart must be horrible. I hope the The Alliance Defense Fund sues for not just change of policy but for a crap-load of money as well!

(HotAir import)

This is certainly not an unusual case, or else we wouldn’t have federal statutes to prevent it. In New York, a Catholic nurse was forced to participate in abortion, despite the fact that her supervisors knew of her moral objection to it. When she initially refused, they threatened her job.

The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Catholic nurse who was forced to participate in an abortion, despite voicing her moral objections.

Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo, a nurse at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, was instructed to assist in a late second-trimester abortion for a woman 22 weeks into her pregnancy. The hospital had known of the nurse’s religious objections to abortion since she was hired in 2004.

Cenzon-DeCarlo reminded her supervisors of her religious objections, but was told that if she did not participate, she would be charged with “insubordination and patient abandonment,” which could result in disciplinary action and the possible loss of her job and nursing license

Hospital officials told Cenzon-DeCarlo that the situation was an “emergency,” although evidence suggests that this was not the case. The hospital itself labeled the case as a “Category II,” meaning that the operation needed to take place within six hours. This would have allowed enough time to find another nurse without moral objections to assisting in the abortion, her lawyers said.

Matt Bowman, legal counsel for the ADF, explained that the hospital could not legally have required the nurse to participate in the abortion even if the case had been a “Category I,” meaning that the patient required “immediate surgical intervention for life or limb threatening conditions.” Federal statutes prohibit recipients of federal health funds from requiring employees to perform abortions, Bowman told CNA.

However, the evidence in the case suggested that the patient was not even at the “Category II” level, as the hospital had claimed. When the woman was brought into the room, Cenzon-DeCarlo observed no indications that the case was a medical emergency.

The woman’s blood pressure was not at a crisis level, and standard procedures for patients in crisis had not been taken. Yet the nurse was still required to aid in the abortion.

When CNA contacted Mount Sinai, officials refused to comment or explain why the nurse was asked to participate in the abortion. Officials stated that they would not comment because a lawsuit is pending.

Now, the ADF has filed a lawsuit against Mount Sinai for violating Cenzon-DeCarlo’s rights of conscience.

… Earlier this month, President Obama promised that a “robust conscience clause” would be forthcoming, but critics are skeptical after his earlier decision to repeal conscience provisions put in place by the Bush administration.

...[read more]...

Jimmy Z - China, CO2 & Population Control Pt 1

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:

 

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.”

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. ....

More Democratic Lies -- Will the Unborn Have a Public Option (Good Stuff)

(B & R h/t)