Archive for the AHA Category

Pro-life e-book analyzes recent debate with AHA

Posted in AHA, Incrementalist with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 2, 2015 by saynsumthn

It began with a debate between the strategy of immediatism vs. incrementalism in ending abortion.

AHA Debate prolife Gregg Cunningham 953565359761892780_n1

It was held this past April in Tulsa between pro-lifer Gregg Cunningham of the Center for Bioethical Reform and T. Russell Hunter a founder of the abolitionist group Abolish Human Abortion (AHA).

After a series of articles about the debate a group of pro-life leaders have decided to publish an e-book detailing their thoughts addressing issues brought up during the debate.

Abolition of reason prolife AHA 2015-06-01_1719-e1433197400874

Abolition of Reason: Pro-life apologists deconstruct ‘Immediatist’ ideology” was written by pro-life blogger Jill Stanek, Steve Hays of Triablogue, Scott Klusendorf of Life Training Institute, Dr. Michael New of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Jonathon Van Maren of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, and Clinton Wilcox also of LTI.

Pro-lifers are in their rights to analyze the debate and they are not alone.

Russell Hunter has vowed that Abolitionists will produce their own response, calling the various posts “misinformation and distractions“:

AHA when Jill finishes digging

Jill Stanek opens the e-book by writing the prologue, where she analyzes Hunter’s readiness for the debate, “Hunter came ill-prepared to support his actual premise, that pro-life incrementalism hasn’t and doesn’t work, and Cunningham quickly disproved Hunter’s claim that immediatism is buttressed by historical figures like William Wilberforce, Abraham Lincoln, and Martin Luther King, Jr. None of the aforementioned were immediatists in practice. They were incrementalists.

Klusendorf addresses the tone of the aftermath and the way that AHA supporters launched personal attacks following the debate, writing:

    an AHA supporter named Toby immediately attributed to her [Jill Stanek] the worst possible motives and all-but damned her to Hell. “Instead of dealing with incrementalism or immediatism on Biblical terms, she chooses to make an idol out of the abortion fight. Her career is more important to her than her soul…

Toby Idol

Adding, “That’s not the language of someone eager to engage his critics with thoughtful responses.
It’s the rhetoric of a spiritual weirdo with a severe prophet complex. What he can’t secure with a syllogism, he’ll pick up with a spiritual power play. Indeed, one high-up AHA rep requested that I publicly repent for not posting his link announcing the pending debate. That my Facebook page is mine to post or not post as I please apparently never crossed his mind. The arrogance of such a request is mind-blowing.”

Van Maren summarized Hunter’s actions after the debate this way, “Hunter took to Facebook immediately to first half-apologize for his performance, but then quickly become snarky and sarcastic again as his supporters assured him that he was, of course, the visionary they all knew him to be.”

ICAS then apology 32402386_491352267_n

Adding, “The most mind-boggling post surely goes to the “International Coalition of Abolitionist Societies,” who actually posted a fake apology for Gregg Cunningham being “a jerk” and for his so-called “ad hominem attacks.” I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a stunning display of immaturity and sour grapes, with the exception of the out-and-out character assassination that the “abolitionists” across social media, in a series of adolescent temper tantrums, have launched against Cunningham, all the while accusing any and all respondents of “slander.”

(Note, as pictured above, the ICAS was eventually edited and an apology was issued after pro-lifers criticized the poor sportsmanship of the post.)

But, I also noticed the poor way that AHA responded – addressing it privately with many of their members. After all, it was AHA who repeatedly requested the debate to begin with.

Capture

Jill Stanek T RUssell AHA wants debate

After repeated criticism of the pro-life movement, I noticed how quickly Russell retreated to a martyr complex when the criticism was directed at him:

11204995_10155456228645364_5836244860771468483_n

Capture

T RUssell debate good

Back to the e-book.

Hayes addresses the difference between what he describes as the “right message” vs. the “cost of innocent lives.”

With respect to AHA,” Hayes states.

“nothing is easier than to take an “uncompromising” stand when it has no chance of happening. In that respect, AHA is like Republicans who are rhetorically pro-life, rhetorically uncompromising. There’s no price to pay. No real-world consequences. It’s just self-congratulatory talk.”

Adding this observation, “On the one hand they set the bar very high. On the other hand, they slide under the bar. The measure of progress isn’t consciousness-raising, but the abolition of abortion. By their own oft-repeated sloganeering, that’s the only “fruit” that counts. The total abolition of abortion. AHA confuses leaves with fruit. Thus far, AHA is a leafy, but fruitless tree. Lots of leaves, no fruit.”

T Russell Hunter Univ Memphis AHA 2014

Stanek fires back at Hunter for his relentless accusations that that all pro-lifers wish to do is to “regulate” not end abortion, writing, “It is slander of the worst kind for Hunter to claim the end game for pro-lifers is that abortion be “safe, early, and painless.” He knows perfectly well why we pursue incremental efforts.”

Wilcox agrees, “Pro-life people want the immediate end to abortion. Incremental legislation is our strategic method for getting there. Planned Parenthood knows this. Pro-choice writers like Katha Pollitt know this (it plays a major theme in her recent book Pro: Reclaiming Abortion Rights ). The only people who don’t seem to get that are the self-proclaimed “abolitionists.”

Klusendorf piles on, “Hunter never once said how his policy of immediatism plays out in the real world. How, exactly, does it work to insist on the immediate abolition of abortion? Got the votes for that? Here is where Hunter’s argument is truly self-sealing. He states that if only all incrementalists would become immediatists, we could take the ax to the root and win.

“So there you have it. When you can’t explain how your strategy actually works in the real world, you just fault your opponents for your failure to execute. This reminds me of faith healers who blame the victim for “not having enough faith” when he doesn’t immediately recover from a systemic illness….”

Stanek fires back again, “Hunter knew when he launched AHA in 2011 immediatism would take “a long time,” and there would be “a long period in which it was impracticable.” But he had no safety net prepared for the children from whom he would go on to rashly attempt to remove protections. He had no immediate and workable plan in place to save the children he was pulling the rug out from under.

“To this day, four years later, AHA has no cohesive, wide-ranging plan to save these kids.”

Aha uses Life Issues Image

Wilcox points out the hypocrisy of AHA’s criticism of the pro-life movement writing, “Hunter, while decrying the fact that pro-life organizations fundraise, hypocritically uses the fruits of those organizations’ labor.

Case in point….Wilcox states that, “AHA uses images of abortion victims that Cunningham’s group has spent millions of dollars to acquire over the years. CBR was the first pro-life organization to compile an archive of broadcast quality video and still photographs.”

TR July 5 2014 Plan B PLM

And then Wilcox addresses accusations by AHA that somehow the pro-life movement fundraising is bad by pointing out that AHA leader, “Don Cooper who holds himself out as AHA’s Executive Director, also fundraises. Cooper’s organization, named Abolitionists Northwest, made $101,159 in 2013 – $96,645 of which came from “[c]ontributions, gifts, grants, and similar.” A point I detail here.

Van Maren questions Hunter’s recollection of history, “Although I was well aware of Abolish Human Abortion’s selective historical cherry picking and theologically immature underpinnings, I thought Hunter would put up a better fight,” he states.

“An honest analysis of history shows us that there are no social reform movements that have ever managed to do away with an injustice in one fell swoop. Hunter’s so-called “strategy,” to play it fast and loose with the word, has no basis in historical fact and is, for the most part, based on his misunderstanding and in many places misrepresentation of the historical record.

Perhaps the most compelling point in the e-book is the chapter written by Dr. Michael New who details how incrementalism does, in fact, save lives, documentation Hunter was completely ignorant of during the debate.

New’s summary reads, “one of the most important reasons why pro-lifers should continue to support incremental pro-life laws is that these laws are effective. Academic research has been published in an impressive range of political science journals, economics journals, and public health journals. These studies have analyzed different types of incremental pro-life laws. They have analyzed data from different states and different time periods. There is a very strong consensus among scholars that incremental pro-life laws have stopped abortions and saved literally thousands of innocent human lives.”

You can read and download the e-book here.

Is Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) an Organization?

Posted in AHA with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 20, 2015 by saynsumthn

Following a series of posts from pro-life blogger Jill Stanik regarding a recent debate between a member of Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) and a leader in the Pro-life Movement on the best strategy for ending abortion, some issues were raised regarding the use of fundraising by pro-life groups.

aha-mocks-plm-donations-10526627_10152566853668556_137094906_n

In her latest post entitled, “Immediatist vs. Incrementalist” debate analysis, Part VII: So fundraising is wrong?, posted to Jill Stanek’s website but written by Clinton Wilcox of the Life Training Institute,the claim is made that Abolish Human Abortion is incorporated, has a for-profit arm through which it sells t-shirts and other wares, and rents office space.

Those who are following this back and forth know that AHA and to a large degree T. Russell Hunter, has been critical of the way pro-life organizations fundraise and pro-lifers had attempted to prove that AHA was being hypocritical, after having done the same themselves.

Jill’s latest blog seemed to strike a nerve, you can read it here and follow the discussion on Facebook after Jill posted this and some other information about AHA’s organization.

Capture4-e1431898617524

In response, T. Russell Hunter made several statements defending AHA which you can read at Jill Stanek’s Facebook page here:

Here Russell says that his grassroots coalition does not have a full blown legal name:

TR  replies to donation Jill Blog May 18 2015 3

(NOTE: After publishing it was corretly pointed out to me that I misquoted Russell above as not having a full blown legal name – instead of “full blown legal and game.” my error.)

Brian Wagnon also weighed in:

Brian Wagnon Jill AHA

A bone of contention seemed to arise when I posted images of Abolish Human Abortion documents that showed they earned $101,000 in 2013, but I will address that particular document later in this blog.

Abolish Human Abortion CN post

Russell, posting as Thomas Hunter, quickly responded accusing me of “knowing this story” – what story?

aha-response-to-jill-tr

Since Russell and then privately Toby Harmon implied that I knew this history of how AHA attempted to form their organization, collected donations, said they were tax exempt, filed for a C3, etc., and then dropped the entire process, I decided to get the full story from their perspective.

Don Cooper 75_1379799650_o

I messaged AHA leader, Don Cooper, about the issue, since he is the one everyone seems to point to regarding all the AHA paperwork. Cooper sent me a detailed timeline and gave me full permission to share EVERYTHING he wrote. I will break this down for you from his perspective and from his notes but in the interest of space, I have edited it down slightly, although all the dates and actual events are included, I have only removed certain non essential comments. If you would like to read the entire timeline in full from Cooper, feel free to request it from him.

FOR THE RECORD: Saynsumthn is not publishing this because I think it was wrong to say that AHA was being hypocritical, but, because it is good to get everything on the table and allow individuals to judge for themselves whether AHA supporters are justified in their criticism of the pro-life movement regarding fundraising.

I am grateful to Cooper for his openness regarding salaries and expenditures and he wanted me to know that he gave me as much detail as he could to the best of his recollection.

It is possible I have some dates slightly off. I did my best to stay objective about everything. It is also possible that my history of “AHA” is not complete but I am pretty sure I got 99.9% of the relevant stuff here, ” Don Cooper told Saynsumthn.

Toby Harmon of Abolish Human Abortion also messaged me with his account and has given me permission to publish his statements publicly, so here it goes.

Toby Harmon

Harmon told me, “Nobody is saying that Don Cooper filled out all of that paperwork on his own without permission from quote/unquote AHA leadership. We are saying that at one time we decided to go the organizational route, filled out paperwork to become a 501C3 and about as it was getting approved as a 501C3 we woke up and said no – we’re not going to do this and we cancelled the whole thing.”

Harmon continued, “Now Don [Cooper] still fundraises for his local society…but that is not fundraising for AHA. That doesn’t mean AHA is an organizational model.”

But, not just Cooper’s Society, I have located other Abolitionist Societies with donate buttons currently on their pages like this one in Chicago:

AHA Chicago DONATE247102208_1428917370_n

And this one in Sumner County:

Abolitionist Society Sumner COunty donate

The Abolitionist Society of El Paso says that they are not a 501c3 organization, but clearly asks for donations online:
Abolitionist Society El Paso donate

But, asking for donations and raising support by the Abolitionist Societies is approved by AHA as seen in this post:

10002823_677888848936450_1728044419_n

Just, not acceptable for pro-lifers as seen here:

TR IF PL Asks for money

In any event, it is clear from the above statements that Abolish Human Abortion did attempt to form an organization and get a 501C3 which they now say they have backed away from.

Don Cooper has helped me lay out how it transpired:

Timeline of World Life and Abolish Human Abortion (AHA)

According to Cooper’s best recollection the Abolish Human Abortion movement was officially founded in February of 2011. At that time, Don still worked for the Center for Bioethical Reform (CBR). He left CBR in May of 2012.

My research shows that AHA’s first Facebook post was April of 2011.

A post of the group’s blog that same month explained the AHA position thus far:

    We have two great objects: We aim to effect the total abolition of human abortion in our culture and put an end to the objectification of women. Our primary target is not women who have had abortions. It is the prevalent misinformation about abortion within our culture which encouraged and allowed them to do so. We are pro-education. We are pro-women We are pro-children We are pro-adoption We will not rest until we have effected its abolition.

July of 2011 post, “Meeting in progress. Looks like 30+. nice.”

During this time, AHA was not opposed to support from Catholics or pro-life people.

This September 2011 post brags that they received a “boost” from pro-life leader Bryan Kemper.

AHA Boost from Bryan Kemper

Another post encourages supporters to “like” a pro-life Facebook page:

Prolife rocks

According to Cooper, by May of 2012, he and Todd Bullis began World Life.

WOrldLIfe AHA

World Life is a DBA while the organization’s official name is: The Pro-Life Advocate Network (PLAN),” Cooper stated.

Prolife Advocate Network AHA Don COoper

Prolife Advocate Netwrok Salaries Don Cooper

In July of 2012 Cooper says that World Life completed and submitted the application to the IRS for 501C3 non-profit status.

Cooper said that World Life’s first big project was “Pro-Life Book” which was intended to be a tool to help activate and support Christians to get into the fight.

At the time, I recall many pro-lifers joining Pro-life Book as an alternative to YouTube which was known to censor pro-life vids.

Cooper said that by May/June of 2012 the supporters who had been supporting him as a pro-life worker at CBR began supporting him by giving to World Life, mostly friends and family, Cooper said.

In the summer and fall of 2012 – Todd Bullis began interacting with abolitionists in Norman, OK, according to Cooper, and by November 2012 – they attend the first “AHA” (abolitionist) conference held in Norman, OK., where Don said that he became fully convinced that incrementalism is wrong and immediatism was correct.

Cooper says that although he considered himself an Abolitionist he still did work with pro-life groups like Created Equal and that by December of 2012 AHA and WorldLife worked together, even handing out literature at a Jumbtron event in San Francisco with Created Equal.

CREATING AN AHA ORGANIZATION:

Abolish Human Abortion was actively asking for donations and support as confirmed by these screen grabs.

I attempted to locate some of these on the Facebook page, but could not find them. I am not saying they were scrubbed, just that I was unable to locate them.

Secure Donations Aha

By July of 2012, it was suggested by a supporter that Abolish Human Abortion obtain a 501C3, to which they replied in this Facebook comment:

Abolitionist Societies 501C3

    “Already on all of that and so much more. We just haven’t spent a whol lot of time trying to raise money or seek funders. Necessary stuff, we know …but we want to spread an ideology rightly, and always asking, “what will make most people happy/ bring in the most support” is a poor way to launch an actual movement.

    “But, so you know, there are a number of Abolitionist Organizations now being established and they are in the process of seeking 501(C)3 and 501(C)4 statuses”.

aha-apology-for-not-having-donate-button Jan 2013

_____________________________________________________________________

In a video uploaded by AHA in November of 2012 Russell Hunter describes AHA as an ideology and not an organization.

Yes you’re sitting in a building, yes we have an office, we have a store, we have a Facebook page, we have a – a whole lot of things – a blog – all that kind of stuff,” Russell says.

Cooper had this to say about the creation of an Abolish Human Abortion Organization:

    February 2013 – April 2013: While there is concern about the dangers or creating an organization that could hinder the movement, there is a consensus that the time is right for the movement to have an organizational tool in the background, a 501C3 organization that would be used to fund larger projects, providing materials to Abolitionist Societies in need, a restoration of the abolitionist periodical called “The Liberator”, and for the few people who would be working full-time on such projects. The idea is proposed to have a “monthly subscription” to the Liberator which would help provide funds for the above items.

In May of 2013, Abolish Human Abortion posts this on their Facebook page:

Abolish Human ABortion tax deductibel donation

    God has blessed this movement in unimaginable ways and we are confident that He will continue to do so through the giving of faithful abolitionists around the world. If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to AHA (of any size), please follow this link, or click the Support Abolition button across the top of our page: https://dlq4.donatelinq.net/qv10/Donation.aspx…

Abolish Human Abortion Separate Org from AHA Gear Baselian Group

Adding this in the comments:

    AHA has now become a separate organizational entity from AHAgear which is owned and operated as an LLC by The Basileian Group. AHAgear is officially licensed by the International Coalition of Abolitionist Societies to use and sell abolitionist gear and resources featuring the abolitionist AHA symbol. But others can use it by permission of ICAS who holds the trademark.”

This screen grab, also from May shows more:

AHA getting organized

Cooper said that they had, “long discussions” about what to name the abolitionist C3 organization, “Because “Abolish Human Abortion” has been the name of the movement, there is a hesitancy to use this name for the organization,” Cooper said.

    However after many discussions and lots of prayer, it is decided that really the name of the movement is the “abolitionist movement” and that the organization name could be “Abolish Human Abortion”. It is also recommended by some that since “Abolish Human Abortion” is already a recognized name with history, and that many people already think of it as an organization, that it would make sense to use that inertia in getting the organization going,” Cooper said.

Cooper explained that by June of 2013 World Life’s 501C3 status has not yet been granted by the IRS but was still pending, and according to officials is many months behind.

At this point Cooper said that. “It is then suggested and agreed on that rather than submit a new 501C3 application, we will rename the organization “World Life” to “Abolish Human Abortion”. This would allow us to not have to submit a new application for C3 status which would take longer.”

Cooper said that he saw the decision as, “a sort of official marrying of World Life and AHA. AHA gives its name to World Life and World Life is willing to change the name. The board members agree to this and the name change is submitted to the state of Washington and to the IRS.

In June of 2013 the Liberator subscription idea and C3 organization is announced at the “Wake Up Church” conference in Norman, OK.

The following screen grabs from AHA’s website back up what Cooper says. The pages where these appeared on their websites or online have been removed as best as I can tell:

aha-donate- monthly supporters

aha-make-secure-donation-here

10148836_677878282270840_1025636016_o

According to Cooper, the AHA wanted the message to be that, “the priority of the abolitionist should be to support financially the work locally in their own community. That each abolitionist should be doing all they can in a daily and consistent manner in their own city. Then after that they should consider if they want to donate to the C3 in support of the organization goals which included the Liberator subscription.”

He said that some abolitionist liked the idea while others opposed it adamantly.

“Some are adamantly opposed to have a C3 status organization as they saw it as a compromise with the government possibly restricting abolitionists. With that the plan continued, “ he explained.

In July-August 2013 Don said that he, Russell and Toby talked about how to promote The Liberator subscription idea and some abolitionists sign up to subscribe to The Liberator. But that by September their efforts seemed slow and eventually stalled. He said that by this point there were about 50-70 subscribers who are giving on average about $30 per month.

The support to produce The Liberator is not sufficient to do so. And it seems that the efforts to build that support is interrupting other work that needs to be done,” Cooper said.

According to Cooper, by November 2013 AHA members again discuss whether they should continue their pursuit of the organization tool as the IRS continues to stall in granting the C3 status, and they feel they are falling into that dark hole of government stalling.

Then, by December 2013, as best as Cooper can recall, he says that Russell Hunter announced that he is convinced that the organization model is detrimental to the abolitionist movement and that Toby felt the same way.

This might explain this post around the same time- condemning pro-lifers who have a 501C3:

AHA not C3 Dec 2013

Here is Cooper’s recollection:

    “Russell announces to the other leaders that if we maintain “Abolish Human Abortion” as an organization, that he could not with a clear conscience remain part of the organization. He would remain an abolitionist but not a part of the organization. The other leaders agree that they do not see pursuing the furtherance of the organization as a good thing.”

Cooper told me that he was reluctant to accept this conclusion but eventually realized that this is what must be done for the betterment of the movement.

This may explain a document I located online where Abolish Human Abortion, in 2014, appears to have changed to Abolitionists Northwest with $101,159 in “total revenue” by year end 2013.

Abolish Human Abortion organization AHA prolife 990 Don Cooper 11047269_877076432351023_395663653_n

101159 Abolish Human Abortion Abolitionists Northwest 990

Don Cooper signed the document as Abolish Human Abortion’s “executive director”.

Cooper explained that, at the time, they did have staff which received salaries.

At the end of 2013 Russell sent this end of the year message denouncing how typical 501C3 organizations try to raise money at this time of the year and he says that AHA is not a 501C3:

Russell speaking for AHA which is not an organization according to them, makes this year-end fundraising appeal asking AHA supporters not to write a check to AHA, but to send support to local abolitionist groups.

    “But, we would like to make a year end fundraising appeal, but not for ourselves,” Hunter states.

    “We are not asking you to write an end-of-the-year check to AHA. But, we would like to take the time to ask you to look around within the Abolitionist movement, take stock of the people that you’ve been getting to know, from Facebook or e-mail or YouTube, and watching as they do the work of abolitionism, and, ask yourself if someone you know has a need…who may have needs and God may have blessed you with the ability to help them this Holiday season,” Hunter states.

HOW WAS THE MONEY SPENT?

During the year 2013 Russell and Toby received a small amount of financial support through the abolitionists who had voluntarily signed up as monthly subscribers to the Liberator,” Cooper said.

Cooper was very forthright with me in explaining how the funds he collected in the documents listed above were spent. Although, he does not break down every penny, he seemed willing to release salary information paid to AHA staff during that time.

The list below explains how the salaries break down and Cooper said he has verified this with his accountant:

    Russell Hunter
    2013-Gross Pay=$13,652.10
    2013-Employer Taxes=$1,359.43
    2013-Total Cost=$15,011.53
    Note “Employer Taxes” is what the organization is required to pay to the government. The Gross Pay is before the employee taxes of course

    Toby Harmon
    2013-Gross Pay=$5,469
    2013-Employer Taxes=$560.57
    2013-Total Cost=$6,029.57

    AHA DOnald Cooper 990 2013

    Cooper wrote this explanation to me regarding his personal salary, “My gross pay for 2013 is on the 990 and it was $40K.”

Cooper explains the money they collected further:

    “The year-end total of donations for 2013 is just over $101K. This is the combined donation of the new abolitionist donors and the supporters that Don had when World Life had begun. All of this support was used to help support full-time and part time staff people: Don Cooper, Russell Hunter, Toby Harmon, Sarah Cleveland, and an accountant. Other expenses were for the Jumbotron in San Francisco which World Life/AHA funded all other expenses except the Jumbotron rental. There was also three different conferences in 2013 (two in Norman and one in Portland, OR). Website and Internet expenses also part of that cost. There were also some donations to other non-profits who helped directly or indirectly put on the Jumbotron project (Created Equal, Abort73, Life Legal Defense Foundation).”

AHA 990 2013

Cooper said that by January 2014 – February 2014 when the consensus was made to abandon the organization model, he decided that he did not want to abandon the C3 he started as “World Life”, and he began the process to change the name again.

Upon the counsel of the attorney hired to deal with IRS delay, it is decided that the name change should not be submitted until after the C3 status is granted,” Cooper said.

According to Cooper he also discussed, “with Russell and Toby about how to handle cancelling the merchant account handling the abolitionist donations. It is decided that Toby and Russell will handle letting the abolitionist supporters know what is going on then we will cancel merchant account. It is decided to do this all in an orderly and linear manner to not create problems with the merchant account and cause problems with IRS, bank or state of Washington where organization is registered.”

    Cooper then lays out this timeline regarding the name Abolish Human Abortion:

    April 2014 – Merchant account is cancelled.

    May 2014 – Name change paperwork is submitted to state of Washington. “Abolitionists Northwest” is the new name of the organization Don is keeping. The name “World Life” remains as the primary DBA for the organization. This group continues to help fund Don Cooper as a full –time abolitionist but also fund projects and materials such as signs and literature for public outreaches. Don’s work as an abolitionist continues both locally in the Portland area and nationally helping other abolitionists and abolitionist societies to do the work of abolition. Don’s annual income through World Life for 2014 was just over $20K. World Life’s total annual gifts for 2014 were just over $60K.

    June 2014 – State of Washington recognizes the name change to “Abolitionists Northwest”. After this, the name change to the IRS was submitted.

    June/July 2014 – Name change from IRS official.

At this time, Cooper said that “Abolitionists Northwest”/”World Life” continues to operate today with Don Cooper as President. Todd Bullis is a member of the board of directors and the organization is unashamed to call itself an abolitionist organization.

Cooper told me that, although he does not oppose fundraising he does not make it a priority.

The only fundraising activity that Todd and I did was to travel to Orlando together and speak to some friends there who had in the past made major gifts to pro-life work. As you know, Todd has had his business a long time and that is his source of income along what his wife earns. Todd does support Toby and Russ the best he can but I am not sure how much that is,” he explained.

“The closest thing to fundraising that Russ and I did is described above. We attempted to make a few videos to explain the need and how people could help. We posted a donation page on the World Life website. I believe it was on the AHA site and FB page too. A link to the monthly donation page.”

You have seen with this blog why Russell and others within AHA make the claim they are not an organization, at least under the name, “Abolish Human Abortion.”

The name INTERNATIONAL COALITION OF ABOLITIONIST SOCIETIES, INC., however is listed as a Domestic Not For Profit Corporation by the Oklahoma Secretary of State, as Jill’s blog pointed out.

International Coalition of Abolitionist Societies Corp

ICAS has also trademarked the logo for AHA:

AHA trademark

As for how T. Russell Hunter raises his support, I have no clue despite this statement he posted to Jill’s Facebook page, “I would totally let you look at all my finances Alexandra. How do I do that? Perhaps Carole is already on the job. Maybe she can track my financials down and write a blog about them in hopes of keeping people from reading Abolishhumanabortion.com or getting involved with the work of abolition in their local area.”

Russell Hunter raises support AHA jill's blog

( NOTE: Prior to publishing this blog I sent a private message to Russell on Facebook asking if he wanted to explain how he raised support – since he was grilled about that online. He never replied. Then, hours after publishing, I came across Hunter’s response – posted on Facebook here, where, Russell, posting as Thomas Hunter, wrote:

    “As for how my wife and I managed to pay our mortgage, feed ourselves and our kids, we adopt what is known as the “George Muller Plan” and rely on the Spirit of God acting through His people to support us as missionaries living in a culture of death. I am also able to withdraw funds from my investments in the AHAgear store but cannot take a full salary for the design work or writing or advertising etc work done on behalf of the gear store. If I did that, or Toby or Matt did that, AHAgear would not be able to afford to print 24 page pamphlets and sell them for a quarter a piece and see them distributed to hundreds of thousands of people all over the world every year.”

In closing, Cooper posted this on Jill’s Facebook page, “We [AHA] are not saying that giving the money that God has given you to steward is a bad thing. We are not saying that receiving charitable gifts is a bad thing in and of itself. But it is the abuses of that which are bad. If someone asking for the money is being a bad steward of it or if someone giving the money is doing so and believing that is all they need to do when God would have them do so much more, then that is bad. And truth be told, I think many of us who have worked in the PLM and in particular in fundraising activities, like I know I have, know that this goes on.”

It was my impression that Don and Toby wanted to review this blog post before it published, but upon further investigation I see that they did not make a formal request to that end. So, in full disclosure, I want to go on record that I have not allowed them to proof this post ahead of time. I have, however, dealt very fairly with them regarding this issue by allowing them their say on this blog. They are free to post comments below to make corrections.

I believe that I am first a Christian and as such I should go the extra mile for my brothers and sisters. I have been extremely saddened and sometimes disgusted by the inaccuracies I have read posted by people claiming to be Abolish Human Abortion – abolitionists- with regard to history within the pro-life movement that I have personally witnessed.

It is my personal view, that while AHA members demand that we check our facts with them, they are not doing the same thing in many cases.

I want to thank Don Cooper for being cordial enough to respond to this request for clarification.

The issue of fundraising was originally brought up by AHA people and I would expect that it will continue to be.

I, for one, do not have any issues one way or the other whether it is AHA or pro-life groups. People are free to investigate the groups they contribute to and to give as they feel led by the Lord to do so. To me, it is not the business of T. Russell Hunter or AHA supporters to question everyone’s motives.

And, that, for what it is worth, is my opinion.

The blog is entitled, Is Abolish Human Abortion an organization?

Saynsumthn is not taking a position against what others have documented, given the documentation was accurate. This post is intended to show brotherly charity that we should show one to another by allowing AHA to clarify their position but does not render them out of the range of criticism on this topic from my point of view.

As they say on Fox News, we report – you decide.

Feel free to weigh in by leaving your comments below.

Man threatens to shoot abortion protesters – becomes physical as wife exits clinic

Posted in AHA, pro-choice violence with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on May 6, 2015 by saynsumthn

A man who drove his wife to A Woman’s Choice abortion clinic in Raleigh, North Carolina has attacked a group, which refers to themselves as abolitionists against abortion, after he perceived they were accusing his wife of having an abortion.

Abolitionists claim they hold to the tenants outlined by Abolish Human Abortion (AHA), and do not want to be linked in any way to the pro-life movement because they favor incremental strategies to end abortion.

In the first video of the man, who drove his wife to the abortion clinic, he initially speaks with the abolitionists calmly, explaining that he knows what the clinic does, but that his wife was not there for an abortion.

I’m here for the service of what my wife needs for her body…I want you to come to my neighborhood with this stuff here,” he says.

He accuses the group of judging everyone that is going to that clinic.

Man video part 1

I’m a minister just like you,” he tells the group as he demands a scripture that would justify their position.

The protesters explain that he is patronizing an abortion clinic.

They then pull up scriptures on their phone when he responds, “I will punch you in your damn face if you’re calling me ignorant.”

It goes downhill from there as the man becomes more and more agitated.

According to a second video uploaded about the incident the self proclaimed “minister” entering the abortion clinic calls the protesters “mother fuc*****”” and goes into a rant about there not being one black person out there among the protesters.

May 2015 abortion violence

That’s the reason while all this sh** going around in the country man,” he lectured the abolitionists.

He then walks away.

The anti-abortion group did not back down and told the man that they were at the abortion clinic to “stand up for your African American baby you are here to murder today.”

The abortion bound man replied, “Race got nothing to do with it man.”

The man then moves quickly back towards the protesters as they explain that they do not want black babies to die.

Black man abortion clinic

Man, fu** the Black babies,” he says as he makes a fist and moves into a demonstrator, who reminds the man that he was the one who first brought up race.

Members of the abolitionist group kept on questioning the angry man – even as he walked away a second time, “What kind of church do you minister at sir,” they asked.

The expletives and anger just spewed out of the man’s mouth.

You should be ashamed of yourself sir,” one of the protesters says in the video.

Then, demonstrators continue to question the man about his church, his pastor, and what God would think of him.

The man turns for a third time, “When Jesus come back – He going to talk to me,” he said.

The demonstrators then began to quote scripture to the man as he started his way back towards them again.

Prochoice man knock out

He gets his camera out of his car, points it at the abolitionists and says he wants to “get this knock out on my phone.”

Make sure you get it mother f-er cause I’m going to hit your ass too,” he says to a protester.

He then goes on another rant about not seeing any Black people in the anti-abortion group.

Just wait about two more minutes,” he said as he walks away again, and then heads back.

prochoice threatens to shoot ant abortion

If I go get my gun out this mother f-er, I’m gonna shoot every one of you all.” he threatens.

He then approaches the protesters again asking if he looks like he needs an abortion and they explain that the place he is patronizing is an abortion clinic.

Wife abortion

“Does it look like my wife needs an abortion?”

Man gets aggressive

He then becomes extremely aggressive and what comes to my mind is why the abortion clinic has not called the police yet?

Ok…by this time I am yelling at the video – stop answering the man back. If he walks away- let him go. But…no….

This is an abortion clinic sir,” they tell the man as he walks away.

Here we go again – the man turns back toward the protesters.


“Turn your other cheek
,” he says in an even more agitated tone.

More aggressive turn your other cheeck

He then calls the protesters names….

Calls them names

Yo, this how you get killed so when you ass be eight feet under just get another one out here (referring to the protesters),” he says.

WOrls like it is

“Cause that’s the reason why the world is like it is right now it’s because of people like you,” and he ….walks away.

Then one of the demonstrators calls out to him again.

“You’ll need to get it together bro, that you sit’n up here judging something that you don’t even know what my wife went in there for.”

He seems to fly off the handle every time they insinuate that his wife is there for an abortion.

As a woman comes up behind him – he seems to get outraged at the group filming the altercation.

He then tries to destroy one of the cameras…and it gets very ugly from here….

Man gets violent

That was the wrong thing to do,” you hear a protester say calmly.

Man grabs camera

Man Grans camera 2

And the attack takes place as the angry man appears to lunge at and attack one of the abolitionists.

Man tackles

You can hear a woman yell, “Get off of him – get off of my husband.”

So apparently, the women who exited the abortion clinic was the angry man’s wife and she rushes to her husband’s defense.

Abolitionist tackles angry prochoice man

The protesters keep saying, “Calm down.”

The videos uploaded by Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) Raleigh reads, “Conversation with a professing “minister” outside the abortion mill in Raleigh. This “minister” threatens violence and harm upon the Christians who are there to bring forth the gospel of Jesus Christ to all who are seeking to do harm and violence upon their unborn children, or support the murder of God’s image-bearers. He then assaults John, at which time he was restrained and told to calm down, as his wife kicks me in the face 6 times, rips off my shirt, undershirt, and GoPro.”

A third video picked up another angle.

At the point the physical altercation begins and the man’s wife walks out – you can hear him – yelling something like, “Get it on camera.”

Get off that camera

This video angle appears to show the man’s wife tearing the shirt off the abolitionist who is on the ground trying to control the husband who attacked him as the man’s wife kicks the abolitionist protester in the head several times.

Wife kicks abolitionist

Wife kicks abolitionist 2

_______________________________________________________

The couple then says they didn’t do anything and are calling the police.

Your momma should have aborted your ass,” the wife yells.

The pair then walks to their car and leaves.

The police arrived and the abolitionists say that a warrant has been issued for the couple’s arrest.

After the Pro-life vs. Abolish Human Abortion debate

Posted in AHA, Jill Stanek with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on May 5, 2015 by saynsumthn

In March of 2014, Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) spokesperson, T Russell Hunter sent out a plea for a pro-life leader to engage AHA in a debate.

Jill Stanek T RUssell AHA wants debate

At the time, T. Russell Hunter stated in part:

I am looking for someone in the Pro-Life Movement to engage me in a public forum and friendly debate regarding the morality and effectuality of fighting abortion by pragmatically focusing on the passage of 20 week (fetal pain) abortion bans. I would argue for the abolitionist position–that all people who are opposed to abortion ought to unify around abolishing all forms of intentional prenatal destruction regardless of the age of the human being in question–and my opponent could argue for the pro life establishment’s position that we should focus our time and energy on regulating abortion while it remains legal and seek incremental gains against it.

    After repeated requests, Gregg Cunningham took the AHA challenge and the official debate took place the end of April 2015.

    After the debate, the analyzing began.

    On the International Coalition of Abolitionists Societies which sponsored the event, the chest pounding was loud as they tried to say that Gregg conceded the debate:

    GC COnceded the debate

    Then this post appeared on the event page:

    ICAS after debate b4 apology

    Shortly after several pro-lifers called them out, to their credit ICAS issued this apology:

    ICAS will edit

    And ICAS edited the post to read this:

    ICAS After apology

    Kudos for both an apology and an edit in the post above.

    The debater himself, T Russell Hunter believed that he won- defending himself on Jill Stanek’s blog saying that Gregg “mauled himself.”

    Capture

    T RUssell debate good

    T Russell did better

    And so did others with AHA:

    Thomas Hunter Debate

    Toby debate

    After the debate, pro-life bloggers and leaders weighed in. I have not reviewed all the AHA support pages but I would imagine there are a number of reviews posted by their supporters as well.

    Scott Klusendorf with Life Training Institute published his analyses here claiming that Gregg Cunningham won hands down:

    Scott Klus AHA Debate

    Scott ends with this statement, “At the end of the day, Hunter picked a fight with a pit bull and got chewed up in his own yard. This was a public-relations disaster for AHA and served to solidify its brand as being more about attacking pro-lifers than stopping abortion. If Hunter wants to fix that, he better stop grinding his ax against pro-lifers—immediately.”

    Jonathon Van Maren with the Canadian Center for Bio-Ethical Reform published his response here, where he wrote, “The exchange was fiery and extraordinarily lopsided. Since Hunter had months to prepare, I was genuinely surprised at the out-and-out mauling that he received. I knew Gregg Cunningham was a talented debater. Although I was well aware of Abolish Human Abortion’s selective historical cherry picking and theologically immature underpinnings, I thought Hunter would put up a better fight.”

    Saynsumthn even weighed in to a part of the debate here.

    Russell AHA Scott Jill

    On April 28, 2015, Blogger Jill Stanek published her debate prologue here.

    Stanek was pretty blunt:

    Jill Stanek prologue aha

    Stanek has written a series of posts she entitled, ““Immediatist vs Incrementalist” debate analysis”

    Part 1
    Part 11
    Part 111

    Stanek may not be done yet.

    In response to Stanek’s “series” Abolish Human Abortion and their leaders have let loose posting several times about Stanek since the debate:

    AHA Jil RH Reality

    AHA Jill Stanek TX PP

    CHange Org hates AHA Jill April 2015

    Toby on Jill after April Debate 2015

    TR Jill Answers pl questions

    TR on Jill April 2015 keyboard clinics

    11204995_10155456228645364_5836244860771468483_n

    AHA Jill Stanek Gregg destroyed

    Troy Buccini Jill Stanek AHA

    To be continued….

Responding to AHA’s claim pro-lifers focus on “abortion hurts women”

Posted in AHA, Pro-life History with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 30, 2015 by saynsumthn

This past weekend a debate between pro-life advocate Gregg Cunningham vs. Abolish Human Abortion advocate T. Russell Hunter took place in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

11164806_881842688548413_8953565359761892780_n

____________________________

The purpose was for each one to defend their view on abortion strategy: Incrementalism vs. Immediatism.

I am not going to address the entire debate in this blog post.

For those interested, pro-life blogger, Jill Stanek has analyzed the debate in a series of blog posts here which I recommend.

The purpose of this blog post is to address two statements made by Hunter.

Gregg Russell prolife vs AHA abortion Debate

During the debate, Hunter makes claims that pro-life strategy of working towards complete abolition of abortion and accepting gradual or incremental methods to save every baby possible along the way is sin.

Then Hunter implies that pro-life people do not call the sinner to repent for abortion. This is one of the statement’s I wish to address here.

Hunter says, “You notice the difference between an immediatist and an incrementalist, in that an immediatists says abortion is sin turn to God and goes out daily and to that work.” (Note: The last three words of Hunter’s statement are hard to make out from the audio, but I think I caught them correctly, please notify me if I am incorrect.)

TR Debate AHA

Hunter ran through his points so quickly that I believe that they are worth reviewing. Let’s pause there for a moment and analyze what Hunter is implying.

The comments begin at 58:29 of the debate video – here if you want to hear them.

First the statement, “an immediatists says abortion is sin turn to God” is intentionally designed to imply that anyone who claims the name “pro-life” and supports “incremental” strategies does not believe that abortion is sin or proclaim that society needs to turn to God.

This is an utterly ignorant and rather insulting statement.

The pro-life movement is made up of a large number of Bible believing Christian people. I would be in that group.

I understand the ignorance of a person who only recently joined the fight to end abortion while claiming to be a Christian for many years. But, just because Hunter and many of his followers have decided to responded to the Biblical mandate to “rescue those being led to the slaughter” does not mean history on this movement began with them.

As much as Hunter would like to re-write the history of the pro-life movement he did not live it as many many pro-lifers did and can now testify as first hand witnesses.

But to the point at hand, there is ample evidence past and present that the call to repentance was and is given within the pro-life community.

This 2001 letter to the editor is just one example:

US Repent 2001 abortion

_______________________________________________

The 1980’s rescues were also public calls for not only the church to repent from abortion apathy, but also for society to do the same. No AHA meme, statement, or fancy design can erase that history.

225488_174509399274400_7414355_n

___________________________________

Moving on…

The second part of Hunter’s statement which I’d like to address is as follows:

    Incrementalists say things like abortion hurts women. It does. But the focus is on, it hurts women not abortion kills babies, even though they recognize that abortion kills babies.”

Again- that is a preposterous statement.

Abortion Hurts Women Debate

The very images collected by the pro-life community, which Hunter now uses in all his effective social media memes, is proof that the focus is on the fact that abortion kills babies.

In addition, I have also documented that pure legislation to defend the preborn and outlaw all abortions was put forth via Human Life Amendments during the early days. That documentation can be found here.

Having said that, there is nothing wrong with saying that abortion hurts women. Hunter, for all his protesting, admits it in fact does. Is not truth- truth?

I will give Hunter the benefit of the doubt on this topic because again, the AHA leader chose to get into this fierce fight after abortion had been legal for a number of years, so he is rather ignorant of historical battles, ideas, and lies that the pro-life community has had to dismantle for the past 42 years.

Those who are new to the abortion battle may not realize that the abortion lobby made major inroads by painting illegal abortion as “unsafe” causing women to die.

It is simple logic to counter the lie that helped legalize abortion with the truth, which is that women still die from abortion and legalization does not necessarily make abortions safe.

Keep abortion safe and legal

The lies:

NARAL Pin

    Millions of women died from illegal abortions.

    If you make abortions illegal, women will die.

Case in point, during the debate to liberalize abortion in New York, the issue of unsafe abortions swayed one representative to change his vote on the floor, opening the door to abortion on demand in that state.

NY Constance Cook

Assemblywoman Constance E. Cook stood to the floor during that 1970 debate to push the lie of unsafe abortion, stating, “I submit that we have abortion on demand in the state of New York right now. Any woman that wants an abortion can get one–if she has $25, she has it done here, under the most abominable circumstances,” and that prohibition only drives abortion underground.”

This clip from the film “Choice at Risk” gives a historical glimpse :

Repealing Abortion Laws (4:18) from Dorothy Fadiman on Vimeo.

The deciding vote was cast by Democrat Assemblyman, George Michaels, who told the LA Times that for years he had been told by local party leaders not to vote for the repeal of the abortion ban, and he pledged not to. For two years he had followed the party line.

ASSY George Michaels cast vote to legalize abortion

    I would vote no, hoping the bill would pass,” he said. “I was not doing the right thing.”

    In April, 1970, the night before he left for Albany, Michaels spent an evening with his daughter-in-law, Sarah.

    Sarah asked him what would happen when the abortion bill came up for a vote again. There was a chance it would pass, he told her.

    What if it doesn’t?” she asked.

    Maybe next year,” he said.

    Michaels says he has never been able to forget what his son’s young wife told him next:

    In the meantime, thousands of women will be mutilated and die because of that stupid Legislature.

    Boy, that rocked me,” Michaels says. “That rocked me.”

The National Abortion Rights Action League, NARAL, also lied about women dying from illegal abortions. One of their early founders, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who later repented of his pro-abortion actions and views, described what they did early on:

Bernard Nathanson

    “We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal, enlightened, sophisticated one,” recalls the movement’s co-founder. “Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60 percent of Americans were in favor of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority. We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000, but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000.”

McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Robert P. George breaks it down further when he writes this about the NARAL founder:

    Nathanson and his friends lied—relentlessly and spectacularly—about the number of women who died each year from illegal abortions. Their pitch to voters, lawmakers, and judges was that women are going to seek abortion in roughly equal numbers whether it is lawful or not. The only effect of outlawing it, they claimed, is to limit pregnant women to unqualified and often uncaring practitioners, “back alley butchers.” So, Nathanson and others insisted, laws against abortion are worse than futile: they do not save fetal lives; they only cost women’s lives.

abortion-rally-1970s

For clarification, stats show that, in the year prior to Roe, the CDC disputed the lie that thousands of women died from illegal abortion as shown in this table from their surveillance report on abortion.

cdc-illegal-abortion-deaths

So, to summarize, just because Hunter says that the pro-life movement does not focus on “abortion kills babies” does not make it so.

When the pro-life community documents that abortion is not safe for women it does not automatically mean they do not focus on the fact that abortion kills babies. For many of us, we are able to articulate multiple facts.

In addition, because AHA leaders claim that pro-lifers do not call abortion sin, does not make the claim true either as I stated above.

However, in my personal study of scripture, I do not see every effort to dialogue or convey truth being preceded by the command “repent.”

King Solomon, himself was conflicted when he was forced to determine who the mother of a baby brought before him was. He did not tell the two women squabbling to repent of their actions. Instead the wise King appealed to the heart of the true mother:

The NIV version of the events in I Kings is detailed below:

    The king said, “This one says, ‘My son is alive and your son is dead,’ while that one says, ‘No! Your son is dead and mine is alive.’”

    Then the king said, “Bring me a sword.” So they brought a sword for the king. 25 He then gave an order: “Cut the living child in two and give half to one and half to the other.”

    The woman whose son was alive was deeply moved out of love for her son and said to the king, “Please, my lord, give her the living baby! Don’t kill him!”

    But the other said, “Neither I nor you shall have him. Cut him in two!”

    Then the king gave his ruling: “Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is his mother.”

In the story above, the true mother, the one who cared for and loved the baby, was willing to compromise to save her child’s life.

Think about that for a while, as you ponder the debate !

Immediate vs strategic abolition of abortion debate within a debate

Posted in AHA, Pro-Life with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 26, 2015 by saynsumthn

Yesterday Greg Cunningham from the Center for Bioethical Reform debated T. Russell Hunter from Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) on the difference between incremental strategies used by the pro-life movement which also seeks to ban all abortions or simply calling for an immediate end to abortion used by those who take the philosophy of AHA.

11164806_881842688548413_8953565359761892780_n

_________________________________________________________

I monitored the chat during the debate which was interesting in and of itself. It was run by AHA and they banned two people – one a pro-life person and the other a member of AHA.

The screen grabs below are not necessarily in order and as much as I tried to grab all of it – it was impossible to do. It appeared to me that out of the 150 or so people who tuned in – most were already involved with Abolish Human Abortion, at least by the comments on the chat.

Below are some interesting grabs I took:

COmments 9

COmments 4

COmments 12COmments 16

COmments 18

COmments 19

COmments 20

COmments 21

COmments 23

Comments 37 JPG

Comments 50

Comments 52

Comment - Greg didnlt talk about sin

Comment 44

COmment Ax to root

Commentsc43

Greg TR

My Argument

My COmments told to repent

My COmments 2

My COmments told to repent 2

question 4

Question 20

Question 25

Question 26

____________________________________________________________________

John Kirkland a pro-lifer was banned for his “lies” according to the AHA moderator on the chat while in my opinion, Chris Nunez, was allowed to lie about the pro-life movement without any rebuke:

COmments 27

question  5

question 1  6

question 1  7

question 1 2

question 1 3

question 1 4

question 1 5

question 1 7

question 1 8

Cooments 4

Comments 49

question 7

question 9

John Banned 2

______________________________________________________________________

Abolish Human Abortion supporter Stephen Wetzel was also banned :

Commengts 40

comments 42

AHA Banned

John Banned who decided 2

John Banned so were AHA Ppl

Responses when Gregg brought up the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

AHA When Gregg brought up Pain Capable and blacks feeling pain 2

AHA When Gregg brought up Pain Capable and blacks feeling pain

Students supporting abortion hold offensive signs mocking Jesus and praising Satan

Posted in Abortion and Satanism, AHA, Satanists with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 21, 2015 by saynsumthn

This school semester, groups of Abolitionist Societies participating in their Project Front Lines campaign are confronting High Schools students to educate them on the reality of abortion.

During their campaign in 2014, parents contacted the news media saying that they were upset that the group, Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) was holding the graphic abortion signs outside Norman High School, in Norman, Ok.

Some parents went to the school and held up sheets to block the abortion images and then accused members of AHA of being, “pretty Westboro Baptist like.”

2014 parents angry AHA abortion

This year, it appears the students were ready for AHA’s campaign.

A group of pictures posted on Facebook today by T Russell Hunter, who took part in this year’s campaign, showed pro-abortion students holding some shocking signs.

I contacted Hunter and asked his permission to post them on my blog.

22415_880407875358561_6029725793109287102_n

The image above shows a home school abortion opponent speaking with an abortion supporter holding a sign that reads: SATAN!

As a person who has been in the pro-life movement for many years, I am often rarely shocked.

But, seeing the signs these students held outside Norman High School were beyond shocking – they were vile and offensive, especially this one mocking Jesus:

10385398_10153125786746832_7238865664721624966_n

Hunter and I dialogued online about the sickening messages these students wrote on their signs and tragically, Hunter correctly summarized it as, “the state of our culture put on display.”

11156411_10153125786921832_7726626356646606422_n

According to a post on the Abolish Human Abortion Facebook Page:

    These students came out to tell us that we were wrong to stand up for pre-born human beings outside of their school. We didn’t hold any signs depicting victims of abortion today (we just held pictures of ultrasounds, prenatal photographs, etc, and passed out pamphlets), but they told us that our pictures of pre-born human beings were pornographic and not welcome at their school where innocent children might see them.

Sadly, AHA Supporters who were at the school said that some of the teachers actually stood with these students.

11167661_10153125786576832_4196264613843640432_n

If the parents in 2014 were shocked enough to speak out about the message that AHA displayed, I hope they speak out about this as well, but, somehow I doubt they will.

Tragically this is the result of a culture that allows the exaltation of sexual promiscuity and the ultimate devaluing of life.

I am beyond disgusted !