Archive for February, 2015
The pro-life movement said goodbye to Brother Paul O’Donnell, who was laid to rest today.
Br. Paul O’Donnell, died February 20, 2015 at the age of 55,
His obituary reads:
Br. Paul was a dedicated, nationally recognized leader within the right-to-life movement, advocating for the human rights and dignity of the unborn, handicapped, elderly, and a heart for serving the spiritually and bodily poor. He was a co-founder and president of Pro-Life Action Ministries, founding board member of Human Life Alliance and chairman of the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network.
Br. Paul O’Donnell had a heart for unborn children but also for those targeted for infanticide and euthanasia.
One of his last posts to his Facebook page reads, “All Pro-Life organizations need to fight Euthanasia with the same zeal as we fight to save the pre-born child in the womb! Let us promote the whole Gospel of Life and not just some of it.”
Before leaving this world, Br Paul tweeted this prophetic statement, “Lent begins today.May we return to the Lord with our whole heart, mind & soul. Let us proclaim & defend the Gospel of Life! Lord Have Mercy!”
And retweeted this, “If You Want to Stand Against Racism, Stand Against Planned Parenthood.”
When pro-life activist Lynn Mills posted this vintage news clipping of Br. Paul counseling a woman outside Planned Parenthood last year- he replied, “I am so grateful to God for all the little ones saved from death’s door.”
You later see Lynn revisit the page after he died, writing a simple, “Good-bye good friend”
This loving message was left on Br. Paul’s obit page, and sums up his life well, “Tears may fall here, but there is rejoicing in Heaven. Courage and kindness in the same package. He touched many lives that will remain un-noted until the day of Judgement.”
Tributes are also pouring in on social media to this loving advocate for life:
The image of a dress has gone viral after a Tumblr page asked, “Guys please help me – is this dress white and gold, or blue and black?”
The dress is really Blue and Black.
While the hashtag #thedress is trending, abortion giant Planned Parenthood has decided to cash in on the event with their version of a condom dress:
And then tweeted this:
Of course, when it comes to killing babies inside the womb with abortion, Planned Parenthood knows their colors very very well:
It’s a complicated issue that needs lots of discussion, says Lauren Dobson-Hughes, the president of Planned Parenthood in Ottawa, about sexting issues.
“A young, usually girl, her photo has been shared without her consent and it has gone around the school and she’s being shamed and bullied and very unhappy because of it. Our stance is she’s done nothing wrong. The people who have shared her photo without her consent are the ones we need to talk to,” the Planned Parenthood representative tells News1130.
Dobson says it’s time for parents to accept that sexting is sometimes a fact of teenage life so it’s time to educate kids on the dangers and pit falls of it.
According to STOPP,
while Planned Parenthood makes an effort on its website to warn girls about the perils of sexting, a Planned Parenthood executive goes on record saying the young girl has done nothing wrong when she shares a sexual picture with someone.
It is only when someone else causes a girl shame or bullies her by forwarding the pictures that a problem exists. She makes no mention of bully-proofing young girls by teaching them that their bodies are private and that the consequences of sharing your body or sharing pictures with anyone are dire for a young girl.
“Sometimes people are a little nervous when they hear sexting. And they want to say ‘don’t do it, don’t do it’ and that is one of the options. And definitely that’s one of the options. But sometimes youth are going to do it. So how can we help them understand the risks and how can they take measures to protect themselves,” said the Planned Parenthood representative.
Planned Parenthood claims they are the sexting expert, so great at it that schools use them to speak on it, “Schools invite is in. They want us to come in and talk about it [sexting] because they don’t know how to,” she stated.
You see- they are correct because when it comes to “sexting” Planned Parenthood is an expert. Why- they have a system in place to talk “sex” to your kids:
Planned Parenthood can now access your kids by cell phone w/o your knowledge or permission. Just imagine if you found some adult was texting your kids about sex, they would go to jail….but…Planned Parenthood will go to the bank instead !
Planned Parenthood also plans to follow up with teens who text them, asking if they’d like to use Planned Parenthood’s birth control selection app, which also directs them to – you guessed it- Planned Parenthood.
In New York, Planned Parenthood partnered with See3 to launch a campaign for what they describe as “at-risk teens.” – Minorities….
And here is the hook- Planned Parenthood can direct teens and minorities to come into their centers where they will sell them abortions:
Dubbed “Now U Know,” this campaign was designed to get teens in the New York City area to enter into a conversation with local Planned Parenthood affiliates about their sexual health, access to sexual health care and services offered at Planned Parenthood clinics.
Comforting to know that the city wants kids to get connected to abortion giant Planned Parenthood.
A few years ago, American Life League exposed just “what” Planned Parenthood teaches your children – warning- sexually graphic:
So, who really benefits from the duplicitous “sex-positive” messages our kids are getting from Planned Parenthood and its partners in crime, STOPP asks?
Well, of course, Planned Parenthood and the schools and other entities and institutions that partner with it to bring graphic “sex-positive” messages to our children do—to the tune of millions of dollars.
Who else benefits? Child molesters, who are enjoying the perfect storm created by Planned Parenthood, SIECUS, and all their friends who are grooming children for abuse with their lurid sex instruction. Following closely in the footsteps of serial child molester Alfred Kinsey, Planned Parenthood sex instruction is bringing to fruition the horrific child molestation culture that was set in motion by Kinsey’s “research,” they explain.
From the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette:
A proposal to set up a memo of understanding with Planned Parenthood for sex education of middle school students won approval tonight from the board of Pittsburgh Public Schools.
The 6-1 vote came after board member Mark Brentley Sr. raised opposition, criticizing the history of Planned Parenthood, questioning what its role would be in the schools and saying it would put students at risk. Only Mr. Brentley voted in opposition. Members Terry Kennedy and Sherry Hazuda were absent.
Board president Thomas Sumpter said that history included eugenics, but he said board members needed to consider whether it was offering a good program for students today.
Dara Ware Allen, assistant superintendent for student support services, said she has reviewed all 24 modules — 12 for grade 7 and 12 for grade 8 — and said they addressed helping students to identify risky behavior, setting personal boundaries and practicing skills to avoid risky behavior.
She said that abortion is not part of the curriculum, that the curriculum emphasizes abstinence and that it is in keeping with the district’s program. Parents can opt their children out of the program, which would be taught alongside the classroom teacher.
Ms. Allen said Planned Parenthood is seeking a grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for the program. It is expected the organization will know whether it got the grant in July.
I was curious when I read about the grant and I wonder if if has anything to do with this (here)
Planned Parenthood has been a recipient of HHS grants many times before:
Family Planning Grants:
There are many more, including Navigator grants to promote ObamaCare.
ObamaCare architect, Jonathan Gruber has been removed from the Massachusetts Health Connector Board after calling the American people stupid.
The MIT economist professor was involved in the construction of ObamaCare visiting the White House on several occasions and has also made several controversial statements linking abortion to eugenics, the reduction of welfare, crime, and black births.
A look at the White House visitor logs reveals that Gruber was a regular at the Obama White House.
( Details on Subject Titles here)
While apologizing for his insulting statements to the American people Gruber was also grilled on controversial eugenics like statements he made on abortion, referring to the poor as “marginal children” and calling for “positive selection.”
In Gruber’s 1998 paper, “Abortion legalization and child living circumstances who was the marginal child,” he concludes that the legalization of abortion saved the government fourteen billion dollars in welfare payments.
In 2006, Gruber authored another paper with Phillip B. Levine, Elizabeth Oltmans Ananat, and Douglas Staiger called, Abortion and Selection, where they again use terms like “marginal child” and “positive selection through abortion.”
“Two earlier papers investigated the implications of such positive selection through abortion for the quality of cohorts born after abortion legalization. Gruber, Levine and Staiger (GLS, 1999) found that the legalization of abortion led to significant improvements in the circumstances of children born into cohorts where abortion was legal. Such cohorts of children lived in households with lower rates of single motherhood, welfare receipt and poverty, and experienced lower infant mortality than nearby cohorts of children. Donohue and Levitt (DL, 2001) focused on a relevant outcome for children at older ages and young adults, crime.1 They found that increased use of abortion in the 1970s resulted in lower crime rates among the cohorts born in that era when those cohorts were in their late teens and early 20s,” the paper reads.
Abortions decrease birth rates in Non-White women:
In a 1999 paper published by the American Journal of Public Health Phillip B. Levine, Douglas Staigei; (both co-authors with Gruber on his paper) along with Thomas J. Kane and David J. Zimnmerman, entitled, Roe v Wade and American Fertility, the group points out that when abortions are made legal, fertility rates drop with a reduction in births of teens and non-White women to be the largest.
“Estimates show that births to non-White women in repeal states (vs states with no law change) fell by 12% just following repeal, more than 3 times the effect on White women’s fertility,” that paper states.
The group also concluded that there was an important connection between the fall of birth rates in states where abortion was accessible vs. states where it was not, “The results indicate that travel between states to obtain abortions was important. Births in repeal states fell by almost 11% relative to births in nonrepeal states more than 750 miles away but only by 4.5% relative to births in states less than 250 miles away and those in states between 250 and 750 miles away,” the authors write.
Interestingly, the paper thanks Jonathan Gruber for providing research assistance, “We thank Jonathan Gruber for comments and Eileen Aguila, David Autor, and Tara Gustafson for outstanding research assistance.”
Abortion decreases welfare
Back to his paper, Abortion and Selection, Gruber repeats the oft heard eugenics reason for abortion, that it reduces welfare.
Gruber and his fellow authors sandwiched their analysis this way, “We found consistent evidence that changes in cohort composition that occurred in the 1970s that can be attributed to greater abortion access led to improved cohort outcomes, particularly in the form of higher rates of college graduation, lower rates of single motherhood, and lower rates of welfare receipt.”
Abortion reduces crime
Gruber and the other authors also conclude among other things that the there is a link between increased abortion access and a reduction of crime.
According to Life News, in Harvard University’s Quarterly Journal of Economics, Donahue and Levitt concluded that “Legalized abortion contributed significantly to recent crime reductions. … Legalized abortion appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime.” The authors noted, “Crime began to fall roughly 18 years after abortion legalization,” and that the social benefit of this decrease in crime is about $30 billion annually.
Donohue and Levitt wrote that, since 1991 ― 18 years after Roe v. Wade legalized abortion ― murder rates have fallen faster than at any time since the end of Prohibition in 1933. They added that the five states that legalized abortion earlier than 1973 [New York, California, Washington, Hawaii and Alaska] also experienced earlier declines in crime. Finally, they found that states with especially high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s had equally dramatic crime reductions in the 1990s, Life News reported.
Levitt went on to co-author the 2005 bestseller Freakonomics, in which he reiterated his thesis that the legalization of abortion is responsible for half of the recent drop in violent crime.
Gruber and the others acknowledged Levitt and Donahue’s findings, “Finally, we reconsidered the analysis of abortion and crime originally conducted by Donohue and Levitt to incorporate our updated methodological framework. The results of this analysis support the association between abortion and crime, but suggest that it is difficult to associate their finding with selection as opposed to the direct effect of cohort size.”
Unwanted children are disadvantaged
Gruber’s group finally concludes that “unwanted children” will grow up “disadvantaged” writing, “Most importantly, taken together with earlier results (Gruber, et al., 1999), our findings suggest that the improved living circumstances experienced by the average child born after the legalization of abortion had a lasting impact on the lifelong prospects of these children. Children who were “born unwanted” prior to the legalization of abortion not only grew up in more disadvantaged households, but they also grew up to be more disadvantaged as adults…Overall, our results provide further evidence that abortion is associated with differential selection and its impact is persistent.”
So, if Gruber and his friends can conclude that the fertility rates among “Non-White” women drop substantially when abortion is legal and then claim that a reduction in crime also follows legalized abortion- what subtle messages are they implying?
Since it’s inception, we know that abortion has been a tool for the eugenics movement and we also know clearly – just who- that movement seeks to target.
I may not be an MIT economist, but, I can do the math here – and so can you.
Getting your facts messed up is a bad thing- but- when you point out someone’s mistakes- make sure you are not doing the same thing yourself:
For context- I give you this tweet by the pro-abortion RH Reality blog.
Dr. Julie Madsen was testifying in opposition to an Idaho bill, which would prevent doctors from prescribing abortion medication via telemedicine.
Dr. Madsen said at the hearing that she’d had some colonoscopy patients swallow small devices to let doctors examine their colons.
Then Rep. Vito Barbieri, R-Dalton Gardens, who supported the bill asked, “Can this same procedure then be done in a pregnancy? Swallowing a camera and helping the doctor determine what the situation is?”
Dr. Julie Madsen replied that would be anatomically impossible because swallowed pills do not end up in the vagina.
Rep. Barbieri replied, “fascinating.”
After his statements went viral, Rep. Barbieri, told KTVB he wasn’t being serious when he asked a doctor whether a woman could swallow a small camera for a gynecological exam.
Vito Barbieri clarified his statement, “So all I was doing was asking a rhetorical question, and I probably should have had a little bit more sarcastic or rhetorical tone to my inflection, but I was merely trying to illicit the response that I got, which is they’re not comparable, obviously,” he said. “You’re not going to take a tablet to determine the condition of the woman’s pregnancy.”
Following the statements the pro-abortion RH Reality wrote this , The Stomach’s Not Connected to the Uterus—But Some Kids (and Lawmakers) Might Really Think It Is which said, “And on Monday, Idaho lawmaker Vito Barbieri appeared during a hearing to not know whether the uterus is connected to the stomach—a question he brought up while attempting to restrict reproductive rights in his home state.”
Tweeting (displayed in the image above), “What happens when people who never had sex education start making reproductive health laws?”
Okay – I will admit that his question was rather ignorant and no doubt with that type of fodder the abortion movement will pounce.
But, it would appear that the abortion industry and their advocates can mock others while denying basic biology themselves, without scrutiny.
Abortion advocates who love to lecture others about errors deny #1) the humanity of the unborn child #2) that the child is a separate person from the woman
To which I replied: “What happens when ppl who don’t understand basic biology make #abortion laws? Baby = separate person.”