Planned Parenthood pulls a NARAL

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

…. by telling lies about a USSC nominee – in this case, Judge Samuel Alito:

“Judge Alito was the lone dissenter in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey when the case was before the Third Circuit, voting to uphold Pennsylvania’s spousal notification requirement. In callous disregard of battered women who would be affected by the statute, Alito wrote separately from the majority to express his support for the law, which would have required Pennsylvania women to notify their husbands prior to obtaining an abortion. The Supreme Court later ruled the spousal notification provision unconstitutional, holding that a state cannot give a man control over his wife, . . .”

Their fabrications and distortions, most notably, the bit about the “callous disregard of battered women”, are explained by Verity at Southern Appeal who writes:

2. The “in callous disregard of battered women,” is an outright lie. The statute at issue provided an exception, providing that notice is not required if: “The woman has reason to believe that the furnishing of notice to her spouse is likely to result in the infliction of bodily injury upon her by her spouse or by another individual.”

Read the whole thing. Way to go, Planned Parenthood – using outright lies to scare women into not supporting this nomination. Here’s a suggestion: why don’t you gals at PP try honesty for a change? It’d be incredibly refreshing.

Related Toldjah So posts:

68 thoughts on “Planned Parenthood pulls a NARAL

  1. “The woman has reason to believe that the furnishing of notice to her spouse is likely to result in the infliction of bodily injury upon her by her spouse or by another individual.”

    Whats a reason to believe? Does the statute put battered women in the place of having to show their battery to a judge? That could still callously disregard them

  2. Sister,

    Lying is the only tactic tha left has. Even their Guru of the moment, George Lackoff, advised them to lie more effectively. PP is dishonest to the core and will break laws to profit from abortions. Without the money from more and more abortions, PP would declare bankruptcy and fold.

  3. do you support having to get permission from your owner, I mean, husband in order to have a medical procedure? Would your support change if that procedure was a tubal ligation? Do you think that along these same lines, it should be required for a husband to notify/get permission from his spouse to have a vasectomy?

  4. WHAT?? This isn’t about an individuals choice to have a procedure done that would prevent them from having a baby. It’s about a *husband’s* right to at least be in the know about when his wife is considering aborting their(not just HER) baby. Do you not believe that a husband has rights regarding the baby after conception?

    Nice to see you parrot the Planned Parenthood/NARAL/NOW “owner” line as it relates to husbands, though. Very telling.

  5. Elendril, yes, as long as it takes two people from opposite sexes to make a baby. You want to address forcing sperm donors to support children born to women who chose to become pregnant on their whim? You want do discuss father’s rights? If you are really brave, lets discuss the baby’s right to life, happiness, and the pursuit of happiness.

  6. Planned Parenthood profits on each and every abortion, and does not provide follow up care even when the mother is bleeding to death.

  7. Historically, the male spouse was the “owner” of his land, his wife, their children, and all their property. I believe that my body is MY body and no marriage contract changes that fact. It is my right to not even tell my husband that I’m pregnant should I so choose. When my husband has the option of carrying the child to term for 8-9 months, then he can have the right to choose as well. It’s already been set in law that a man opposing an abortion can not force his abortion-wanting wife to carry the fetus to term against her wishes.

  8. Elendril,

    Yet, should you have the child, you want you husband to pay support until 18 or the kid graduates college.

    I notice you don’t consider that the baby has a right to live. I wonder if in a similar position what you would say.

  9. First, this is 2005, not 1805. Your comment about “ownership” would have merit if we were back in those times but were’t not. Secondly, you’re right it IS your body and if you choose to share your body with someone else and the result of that is a pregnancy, you BOTH share the responsiblity for that child. Is the husband only responsible for the child once it’s born?

  10. Elendril wrote, “It’s already been set in law that a man opposing an abortion can not force his abortion-wanting wife to carry the fetus to term against her wishes.”

    That wasn’t the issue.. It’s about notification.

    Elendril wrote, “do you support having to get permission from your owner, I mean, husband in order to have a medical procedure?”

    That wasn’t the issue.. It was about notification.

    It was also his interpretation that that law written by the legislature was not unconstitutional. Alito didn’t write the law but didn’t find anything in the law that would make it unconstitutional. Permisson would’ve made it unconstitutional most likely.

  11. I see elendril doesn’t want ot face the inconvient facts about abortion. She selfishly whines about her body, her rights and to hell with the baby and anyone else’s rights. Elendril, thank you for showcasing how bankrupt liberal and abortion fanatics are.

  12. I am legally allowed to have any group of rapidly dividing cells removed from my body. I should not be forced to discuss this medical procedure with anyone other than my doctor.

    PCD, site a source. How do they profit and who died when (and in what country)?

    Sperm donation is a totally separate issue. So would be egg donation. And child support is another separate issue. Cases of rape and incest are also separate issues. Abortion is a complicated issue and I don’t think that any politician should be making decisions that should be left to the woman, her doctor, and anyone else she wishes to include.

    Finally, no, the “baby” does not have a right to live until after it is born. Then it receives all the the constitutional rights afforded to human beings.

  13. “I am legally allowed to have any group of rapidly dividing cells removed from my body. I should not be forced to discuss this medical procedure with anyone other than my doctor. ”

    Those cells don’t just belong to you. Why is the male only called on to have say so in a baby’s future if the woman decides to have it? Why can’t the husband have any say so in whether or not a child HE helped conceive get a chance to live?

  14. Elendril wrote, “I should not be forced to discuss this medical procedure with anyone other than my doctor”

    While I applaud your idealism, in a marriage and during a divorce depositions may be taken and during a divorce trial you may be asked to answer questions and any medical procedure or prescriptions would have to be disclosed or you can possibly be held in contempt. My ex-wife had been diagnosed with depression which became known to the court and she’s been taking drugs for the depression.

    Elendril wrote, “Finally, no, the “baby” does not have a right to live until after it is born. Then it receives all the the constitutional rights afforded to human beings”.

    Q: Would you have difficulty today getting an abortion on the 8.5th month for no medical reason? Why? Does that reason contradict your belief stated above?

  15. Why is the male only called on to have say so in a baby’s future if the woman decides to have it

    Because it is the woman’s body that must sacrifice itself to bring to term and nurture the child. It is the woman’s risk of developing gestational diabetes (which does not always go away post partum). It is the woman who risks her life by facing the condition of preeclampsia and the woman who risks her life and must endure the pain of childbirth. The woman is the one whose life will forever change by having a baby.

  16. If a woman is so worried about that risk then she should take the necessary precautions to make sure that doesn’t happen. Husbands have rights too and I am amazed that you seem to think they only have rights once the woman has made the decision as to whether or not to have the baby. That’s bogus.

  17. Baklava, I personally would have a problem aborting a fetus at 8.5 months and would never do it. In fact, I seriously doubt that I would ever have an abortion if I found myself pregnant. If any pregnant woman asked me for advice, I’d advise against it. However, I do not think it’s right to have Jane Doe’s priest or Joe Schmo’s rabbi, or the local politician tell me that I must keep that pregnancy until its natural end. It is highly unlikely that this scenario would ever occur, unless you’re in South Park, CO and your son is named Cartman.

  18. If a woman is so worried about that risk then she should take the necessary precautions

    *gasp* you mean birth controll?!?!? But that’s like an abortion before the fact. Does the woman need to notify her spouse that she’s taking the pill? What about plan B contraception…it’s not an abortifacient, it prevents implantation, which must occur before a woman is considered to be medically pregnant.

    Husbands have reproductive rights like not being allowed to be sterilized against their will or being forced to impregnate a woman against their will. Women have reproductive rights like not being forced to have or not have offspring or be sterilized against their will. When husbands are able to carry a child to term and give birth to it, we’ll reconsider the laws.

  19. Some of these comments make it pretty plain the degree to which the abortion lobby has driven a wedge between men and women. And y’all are missing the point, which is that PP LIED! Hello!

    Of course, PP is like the lawyer in the old joke, “How do you know your lawyer is lying?” — His lips are moving.

  20. You didn’t answer my question. I didn’t ask what you felt personally… Although I can see how you interpreted my question that way.

    The better way of asking is:
    Would you encounter difficulty today getting an abortion on the 8.5th month for no medical reason? Why? Does that reason contradict your belief stated above?

    Answer is here. The answer here says 24 weeks (6 months) not 8.5 months. Are you to the left of Planned Parenthood?

  21. “*gasp* you mean birth controll?!?!? But that’s like an abortion before the fact.”

    To Catholics maybe but not to me it isn’t.

    “Does the woman need to notify her spouse that she’s taking the pill? What about plan B contraception…it’s not an abortifacient, it prevents implantation, which must occur before a woman is considered to be medically pregnant. ”

    I think if they have discussed the possibility of having a baby then yes, she should let him know.

    “Husbands have reproductive rights like not being allowed to be sterilized against their will or being forced to impregnate a woman against their will.”

    HUH? You really came out of left field on that one. Who said anyone about taking the man’s right away to be sterilized? And just how an you force a man to impregnate a woman against HIS will?

    “Women have reproductive rights like not being forced to have or not have offspring or be sterilized against their will.”

    What’s with the red herrings? The issue is the man’s role in the child’s life after it is conveived. Period.

    “When husbands are able to carry a child to term and give birth to it, we’ll reconsider the laws.”

    BS – this is what p-sses me off so bad about the feminist movement. They seem to think men have no rights whatsoever regarding their children’s lives unless the woman says so! That is so bogus I don’t even know where to start.

  22. I’ve got to go, but I just wanted to say, that I am all for husbands and wives being partners, sharing responsibility, love, and child-rearing decisions with each other. I wish that all husbands and wives could/would talk to each other and make decisions that are acceptable for both of them. In reality, not all relationships are like that. There are some very legitimate reasons for why a woman may not want to tell her husband she is pregnant or wants an abortion. I support a woman’s right to choose and a person’s right to privacy. I do not believe that marriage makes those rights null and void.

  23. Answer is here. The answer here says 24 weeks (6 months) not 8.5 months. Are you to the left of Planned Parenthood?

    Comment by Baklava @ 11/1/2005 – 4:39 pm

    Huh? You asked me if I would have difficulty getting an abortion at 8.5 months and I answered you. If you wrote the question wrong, please don’t complain about the answer.

  24. I have to support Elendril here. To quote Molly Ivin’s if you are against abortion, don’t have one. But, no woman should be forced to endure morning sickness, hemmoroids, swelling, child birth and the possible complications against her will. I’ve had 3 kids. Pregnancy is hard when you really, really want it.

    Father’s do have rights, but it’s a 2-way street. How many father’s walk away from their responsibilities to their children (and Bak, I know this does not pertain to you) leaving women to support them?

    In a perfect world, there would be no unplanned pregnancies. All children would be wanted, loved and supported in stable family units. That’s not the way of this world.

    –Mistress

  25. HUH? You really came out of left field on that one. Who said anyone about taking the man’s right away to be sterilized? And just how an you force a man to impregnate a woman against HIS will?

    You can force men to ejaculate, it medically possible and it’s done to bulls and stallions all the time.

  26. “If a woman is so worried about that risk then she should take the necessary precautions to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

    Something battered women might have trouble doing.

    Get real! That is not what I am talking about here. –ST

  27. “You can force men to ejaculate, it medically possible and it’s done to bulls and stallions all the time. ”

    That is not what we are talking about here and you know it.

  28. The issue is the man’s role in the child’s life after it is conveived. Period.

    And I answered that question above. Here it is again:

    Because it is the woman’s body that must sacrifice itself to bring to term and nurture the child. It is the woman’s risk of developing gestational diabetes (which does not always go away post partum). It is the woman who risks her life by facing the condition of preeclampsia and the woman who risks her life and must endure the pain of childbirth. The woman is the one whose life will forever change by having a baby.

    Comment by Elendril @ 11/1/2005 – 4:20 pm

    The man has no reproductive role during the woman’s gestation. His “job” is done. If he wants a healthy baby, he’ll help keep the woman safe, well fed, happy, etc. but there’s little else he can do. It’s not like he can hold the baby for the second trimester so the woman can have a break. Now if you’re talking being a good husband (or wife), that’s a whole other argument. If you’re talking reproductive rights, that’s not necessarily a relationship issue.

  29. That is not what we are talking about here and you know it.

    Comment by Sister Toldjah @ 11/1/2005 – 4:54 pm

    Yes, that is exactly what I was talking about. Like a bull, it is medically possible to force a man to ejaculate and then impregnate a woman with that man’s unwillingly given sperm sample. It is also rare but possible to rape a man. It is less rare and possible to trick a man into impregnating a woman by that woman sabotaging her contaception or lying about her reproductive status. Any of these things would be an illegal usurption of a man’s reproductive rights.

  30. Webmistress wrote, “But, no woman should be forced to endure morning sickness, hemmoroids, swelling, child birth and the possible complications against her will.”

    Who is saying that a woman should be forced against her will? The ISSUE was Planned Parenthoold LYING about Alito on a NOTIFICATION issue. Notification is not “forcing to endure morning sickness, hemmoroids, swelling, child birth and the possible complications against her will”.

    h.garner wrote, “Something battered women might have trouble doing.”. Simply reading might inform you that this was written in ST’s post:
    The statute at issue provided an exception, providing that notice is not required if: “The woman has reason to believe that the furnishing of notice to her spouse is likely to result in the infliction of bodily injury upon her by her spouse or by another individual.”

  31. You know, I can understand getting a false impression about what someone wrote about or getting confused. But if someone consistently confuses the issue, people correct that person a few times and then someone else comes in and agrees with the person who was confused, I have to say what is the English language coming to?

    Words mean things people…

    Alito is not FOR “forcing” or a woman getting “permission”. He simply used the English language to determine that notification that the legislature passed a law about wasn’t unconstitutional. It even had exceptions for a woman who was fearful of violence.

    While I can UNDERSTAND someone disagreeing with the law and would WELCOME seeing someone like Elendril or Webmistress saying why they disagreed with the law, the conversation has turned the English language on it’s head. Words mean nothing. We are arguing in circles because ST and I keep pointing out to Elendril what the issue WASN’T about.

    Why is this the case Webmistress? Can there be an honest discussion with just disagreements about the law as written and judged by Alito? What basis would he have said it was unconstitutional? Is there room in your mind for someone saying it was constitutional?

  32. You are clearly lucky enough never to have been the victim of an abusive spouse. Otherwise you woldn’t treat this subject so lightly, or, indeed, so deceptively.

    You talk about the “fabrications and distortions” in this release, and then you point out ONE thing that shows your ignorance more than it shows any substantive “fabrication” or “distortion.” I’m still looking for ANY “fabrication,” much less the plural “fabrications and distortions” on either count.

    I understand that you’re determined to be a partisan hack, but try to be human sometimes, too.

  33. Ok. As I understand it, the law as written stated that a wife must notify her husband before having an abortion. The law also provides an avenue for a woman who believes she will be abused if she tries to obtain consent. Correct?

    If this is the law, then no, I don’t agree with it. Say a woman notifies her husband that she is going to have an abortion. The husband obtains a court order to delay it until the procedure is illegal–about 24 weeks in most states, I believe? In those circumstances, she would be forced to have a child against her will.

    I’m going to try and think of an instance where I would find it constitutional, but I have to dash right now.

    –Mistress

  34. “Simply reading might inform you that this was written in ST’s post:”

    Simply reading might inform you that I dealt with taht in an earlier comment. I was more addressing the general issue of ‘takign precautions’ against pregancy, but bringing back the issue of domestic violence.

  35. Elendril: ” There are some very legitimate reasons for why a woman may not want to tell her husband she is pregnant or wants an abortion.”

    ST: Like what?

    Elendril: “I support a woman’s right to choose and a person’s right to privacy. I do not believe that marriage makes those rights null and void.”

    ST: You don’t lose rights when you get married … but when you marry someone you’ve both chosen to commit your lives to each other and that includes being honest about something as sensitive as baby conceived from their love.

  36. Webmistress: “I have to support Elendril here. To quote Molly Ivin’s if you are against abortion, don’t have one.”

    ST: Well I’m the anti-Molly Ivins and I say if you don’t want to risk being pregnant and face up to the consequences of a possible pregnancy then don’t have sex.

    WM: “But, no woman should be forced to endure morning sickness, hemmoroids, swelling, child birth and the possible complications against her will. I’ve had 3 kids. Pregnancy is hard when you really, really want it.”

    ST: Poor pregnant women! Too bad for the child that they’d rather abort him or her rather than giving him a chance at a life simply because they don’t want to go through the inconvienince and pain. Our mothers obviously didn’t have that attitude – thank goodness.

    WB: “Father’s do have rights, but it’s a 2-way street. How many father’s walk away from their responsibilities to their children (and Bak, I know this does not pertain to you) leaving women to support them?”

    ST: I am pro mutual responsibility and despise fathers who deliberately shirk their responsiblity to be a parent. I also know there are women who, for perfectly illogical reasons, don’t want the father to have anything to do with the child.

    WB: “In a perfect world, there would be no unplanned pregnancies. All children would be wanted, loved and supported in stable family units. That’s not the way of this world.”

    ST: There are so many people out there who can’t even have children that would give their lives to be able to adopt one that they would love, support and cherish. It’s a crying shame that some women who carry them choose to abort them in most cases for purposes of convienience when there are plenty of loving families out there who would adore that baby. Why are some women unwilling to endure that pain when they know that there is a tiny child growing inside of them – a child that is just as tiny as they once were?

  37. Webmistress wrote, “The husband obtains a court order to delay it”

    First, I want to thank you for your post. It gives me faith/hope to see someone from the left treating subjects like this seriously and with good foundation.

    Next, I’d like to say, I’ve never heard of someone obtaining a court order like that. That would make national news I’m sure if it happened. That’s not to say that it hasn’t.

  38. Elendril: “And I answered that question above. Here it is again:

    Because it is the woman’s body that must sacrifice itself to bring to term and nurture the child. It is the woman’s risk of developing gestational diabetes (which does not always go away post partum). It is the woman who risks her life by facing the condition of preeclampsia and the woman who risks her life and must endure the pain of childbirth. The woman is the one whose life will forever change by having a baby.

    Comment by Elendril @ 11/1/2005 – 4:20 pm”

    ST: I know what you answered. I was restating the issue.

    Elendril: “The man has no reproductive role during the woman’s gestation. His “job” is done. If he wants a healthy baby, he’ll help keep the woman safe, well fed, happy, etc. but there’s little else he can do. It’s not like he can hold the baby for the second trimester so the woman can have a break.”

    ST: What in the world? Was that even necessary to say? Let’s keep the conversation above board please – I know who carries the baby in their body and who doesn’t. That is not the role I am talking about: I’m talking about the role he plays in deciding whether or not the baby should be carried to term.

    Elendril: “Now if you’re talking being a good husband (or wife), that’s a whole other argument. If you’re talking reproductive rights, that’s not necessarily a relationship issue. ”

    ST: And apparently you think that a woman can be good wife if she goes to the doctor – without talking to her husband first – for an abortion.

  39. Elendril: “Yes, that is exactly what I was talking about. Like a bull, it is medically possible to force a man to ejaculate and then impregnate a woman with that man’s unwillingly given sperm sample. It is also rare but possible to rape a man. It is less rare and possible to trick a man into impregnating a woman by that woman sabotaging her contaception or lying about her reproductive status. Any of these things would be an illegal usurption of a man’s reproductive rights. ”

    ST: That makes no sense in the context of this discussion. I’ve concluded you introduced that as a pure red herring. You don’t have men being forced to have sex with women in this country. You do have women who chose to have abortions without consulting with their husbands though. That is the issue – where you come up with this forcing men to have sex stuff is beyond me and frankly borderlines on the absurd. Just what the heck does any of this have to do with a woman being encouraged to tell their husbands they are contemplating an abortion?

  40. AG: You are clearly lucky enough never to have been the victim of an abusive spouse.”

    ST: How dare you come to this blog and assume things about someone you know next to nothing about. You know very little about me or my life or what I’ve seen and been through!

    AG: “Otherwise you woldn’t treat this subject so lightly, or, indeed, so deceptively.”

    ST: Treating this subject lightly?? We’re talking about a child’s LIFE here, for crying out loud – it doesn’t get much more serious than that. And as far as deception, I note you provided not one example to back it up so I take it that’s just a false accusation you trumped up because you had nothing else to add to this conversation.

    AG: “You talk about the “fabrications and distortions” in this release, and then you point out ONE thing that shows your ignorance more than it shows any substantive “fabrication” or “distortion.” I’m still looking for ANY “fabrication” much less the plural “fabrications and distortions” on either count.”

    ST: Ignorance? Talk about pot kettle! Did you even READ the Southern Appeal post I linked up to? Apparently not because if you did you’d recognize the deceptions. I noted one of them here. Do you favor deceptive advertising when it supports your POV?

    AG: “I understand that you’re determined to be a partisan hack,”

    ST: Oh? Then you truly DO NOT know anything about me. Nice pot shot on your part, though. Ad hominem the best you’ve got? If so, stop wasting my time.

    AG: “but try to be human sometimes, too.”

    ST: LOL – I am VERY human, and enjoy it so much that I wish every little life out there that is conceived could get the chance to enjoy life outside of the womb as I have. Too bad you do NOT share that same feeling! Now who’s inhuman??

  41. Baklava: “Alito is not FOR “forcing” or a woman getting “permission”. He simply used the English language to determine that notification that the legislature passed a law about wasn’t unconstitutional. It even had exceptions for a woman who was fearful of violence.”

    ST: Thank you.

    Christina: Hi – sorry to have missed your comments in all this. Thanks for the link!

  42. Goodbye, AG! Come back when you’re willing to discuss the issue rather than comparing me to a snake and making other ridiculous accusations and assumptions about both my character and my life. For someone so keen on having a good debate, you sure do enjoy loading your posts with ad hominems. Too bad for you. –ST

  43. – Some people might say that the extreme rhetoric and emotional antipithy of each camp toward each other, in the life versus choice battle should be toned down and approached rationally. While I agree with that, personally I think theres not enough personal investment visited on those that can rationalize the taking of a defensless human beings life, no matter what the circumstances. I wish that every woman that had the inclination to follow the path of aborting her unborn child had to face the God/Goddess of her choice and explain to Him/Her the reasons for it. I wish that this singular instance of what in many case’s amounts to legalized murder, would be the most traumatic of times for those that choose to go that way. Not for the punitive aspects, though I’m sure thats the first defensive lever someone who is mindlessly pro-choice would reach for. No, the reason is I want that decision to be anything but easy, anything but a toss off of responsibility. I would want to know the woman will, at the very least, be made to see clearly the magnitude of what she is about to do. Life, no matter how many words you use to twist and turn and evade, is sacrocinct.

    – But to the point. If someone, anyone, including the government, decides that you as a husband do not enjoy all the rights of an equal parent, then my response would be I have no reponsibilities either. You simply can’t have it both ways. This isn’t something that needs to be legislated. It should simply be an absolute given.

    In the means time Roe Vs. Wade is an abomination. there should never have been a Federal ruling in this issue in the first place. Its a States rights issue, pure and simple. The left and/or all pro-choicers are just panicky that if Roe falls we’ll be pushed back to fully criminalizing all forms of abortion. In this one, and only one area, I agree with Clinton. Abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.

    Bigger Bangs

  44. ST: It’s a crying shame that some women who carry them choose to abort them in most cases for purposes of convienience when there are plenty of loving families out there who would adore that baby. Why are some women unwilling to endure that pain when they know that there is a tiny child growing inside of them – a child that is just as tiny as they once were?

    I’m guessing that there are as many different reasons women choose abortion as there are reasons women choose to carry a child to term. I’m also guessing that many, many women do not choose abortion lightly or as a matter of convenience. Either way, for anyone who is even somewhat self-aware, it’s a scary, difficult decision.

    –Mistress

  45. Y’all STILL are ignoring the fact that PP lied about what the opinion actually said!

    Now, if PP is ever so mainstream, why do they have to lie in order to further their mission? Hm?

  46. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court also ruled that the statute would place an undue burden on abused women:

    This information and the District Court’s findings reinforce what common sense would suggest. In well-functioning marriages, spouses discuss important intimate decisions such as whether to bear a child. But there are millions of women in this country who are the victims of regular physical and psychological abuse at the hands of their husbands. Should these women become pregnant, they may have very good reasons for not wishing to inform their husbands of their decision to obtain an abortion. Many may have justifiable fears of physical abuse, but may be no less fearful of the consequences of reporting prior abuse to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Many may have a reasonable fear that notifying their husbands will provoke further instances of child abuse; these women are not exempt from 3209’s notification requirement. Many may fear devastating forms of psychological abuse from their husbands, including verbal harassment, threats of future violence, the destruction of possessions, physical confinement to the home, the withdrawal of financial support, or the disclosure of the abortion to family and friends. These methods of psychological abuse may act as even more of a deterrent to notification than the possibility of physical violence, but women who are the victims of the abuse are not exempt from 3209’s notification requirement. And many women who are pregnant as a result of sexual assaults by their husbands will be unable to avail themselves of the exception for spousal sexual assault [provided in section 3209(b)(3)] because the exception requires that the woman have notified law enforcement authorities within 90 days of the assault, and her husband will be notified of her report once an investigation begins. If anything in this field is certain, it is that victims of spousal sexual assault are extremely reluctant to report the abuse to the government; hence, a great many spousal rape victims will not be exempt from the notification requirement imposed by 3209. The spousal notification requirement is thus likely to prevent a significant number of women from obtaining an abortion….

  47. Personal disclosure: My father, a farmer, and my mother wanted a boy so badly they didn’t have a name picked out for a girl. Also I was born with multiple heart defects and the resulting illness resulted in many tirades beginning with, “You cost me the more money than anyone else in this family….” I’m still glad to be here.

    I enjoyed reading your story on your change in attitude about abortion. I have given myself several chances to change my mind–especially since so many parents regard arranging an abortion for a daughter on the same level as allowing her to sleep late. I’m still pro-life and joined a responsible pro-life group soon after I read about the first abortion doctor being murdered.

  48. I remember Feminazi Rep. Patsy Mink was on C-Span taking calls on her Pro-Abortion legislation. I managed to get through and ask the question my adopted Korean daughter asked, “Ms. Mink, why do you belive that my daughter, Brenda Sung Mee, should have been aborted by her Korean mother?” I told Patsy that Brenda Sung Mee was watching her and waiting for the answer. Mink just stared into the camera and didn’t utter a word, and that is the way that C-Span segment ended, early!

  49. Sister,

    I believe in Robert Heinlein’s theory of Balancing. In my deleted retort to Elendril, I was just placing Elendril in the same jeopardy as she places unborn babies. Although I doubt it would wake Elendril to the injustice of her position, I wanted her to hopefully put herself in that position to think about it.

    I appologize to you for exceeding your bounds of taste and hospitality.

  50. PCD,

    Do you know what a Nazi is? Do you know what the Nazis did in World War II? Are you able to come up with a thought of your own or do you just repeat everything Rush Limbaugh says.

    It’s Conservatives like you and Rush Limbaugh who support policies that make it much more likely that many women will end up getting abortions. Do you ever wonder why the United States has by far the highest abortion rate of any industrialized country?

  51. Sister Toldjah,

    I read your post on your views on abortion. If you care so much about babies, why do you so strongly support the party that wants to cut funding for providing healthcare for poor babies and poor pregnant women?

    LINK

    Did you know the mortality rate for infants whose mothers received little or no prenatal care is almost 10 times that of mothers who received frequent prenatal care, according to figures from the National Center for Health Statistics? Why do you support the party that wants to cut funding for programs that provide money for poor pregnant women to get prenatal care?

    Do you really think that making abortions illegal stops women from having abortions? Did you know that one half of all abortions around the world are performed illegally? Did you know that illegal abortions are one of the leading causes of death for women of child-bearing ages in many countries where abortions are illegal? Did you know that in the country with lowest abortion rate in the world, the Netherlands, abortions are safe, legal, and free?

  52. Brian,

    Thank you for admitting you are losing the argument. Also, thanks for admitting you can’t refute what I say, so you go on an emotional and personal attack. You lost buddy.

    As for abortions, I blame Liberals like you who run from their obligations and want the woman to get rid of the life you 2 so carelessly created.

    You are demonstrating the irresponsibility of your philosophy and lifestyle so eliquantly with your abortion at any time, any method political jihad.

  53. Brian,
    I have a problem with the comment about the United States having the highest abortion rate of any industrialized country. China is an industrialized country and China has aborted far more children than we have. The real sad fact is that in China baby boys have outnumbered baby girls almost 9 to 1 since the establishment of China’s 1 child policy. I saw on 60 minutes a story about women who have kept their one and only child are considered pariahs if that child was a girl.

    I also like how you use one of the smallest countries in the world to talk about how few abortions there are. I would bet that the abortion rate of Luxemburg is even below that, or the principality of Monaco. It would be like comparing Chicago to the city of Harper’s Ferry Iowa. Nice try. – Lorica

    Ohhh and last I looked, abortions are still legal in this country. As far as your comment about poor folk getting reproductive services. Our PP clinic here had a perfect opportunity to show that they were for the little folk when they moved into this area. But did they locate in an area that would be easy for poor people to get to. NOPE!!! They located 2 blocks from upper middle class to wealthy income families in a very posh part of the city of Bettendorf Iowa. Now I would be alot more prone to believe that PP has the best interests of the poorer people and their needs if PP had actually put a clinic in the poorer part of town. Which sadly was not the case.

  54. Lonica,

    Chna is a developing country, not an industrial country. About half of their population is in the agricultural sector.

    The population of a country has nothing to do with how high or low the abortion rate. Abortion rate is based on the percentage, not the total numbers. The Netherlands has the lowest abortion rate, not the fewest abortions.

    I never said abortions weren’t legal in this country.

    Planned Parenthood is not the primary provider and payer of health services to the poor. Medicaid is the primary payer for health services for poor people and Republicans are proposing to cut billions of dollars of funding from Medicaid. This shows the complete hypocrisy of the Republicans that call themselves “pro-life”.

  55. Brian you have absolutely no room to be calling anyone on alleged ‘hypocrisy’ regarding their pro-life stances and supporting Republicans – how about we question YOUR commitment to the unborn? Do you care about them? If so, why do you support abortion and the Democratic party?

    See how silly your question is now? This works BOTH ways.

    YOU are the one who is being hypocritical. I suggest you take that hypocrisy mirror you’ve been shoving in everyone’s faces and look in it yourself first.

  56. Brian made the following inaccurate accusation (part of an on-going pattern), “the party that wants to cut funding for providing healthcare for poor babies and poor pregnant women?”

    The hillarious opinion piece by the Washington Post didn’t help your case. The results are that the federal budget has grown by the Republican Congress (who controls the purse strings) every year since 1994 for health, education and social services.

    Do you ever get tired of making accusations and having people explaining to you that your accusation are wrong?

    What would be the model of conversation that you would rather have? Explain how that would go.

  57. Hey Brian, that 3rd world country known as China, sent a man into space last month. Seems to me that they are not so 3rd world these days. Rate of crude oil use has almost doubled in the last 2 years and there is no slowing in sight. I am glad that half of China is agricultural, that is why their people aren’t starving. When you have over a billion mouths to feed you need alot of farmers. Being born and raised in Iowa I realized that America Needs Farmers, to quote Hayden Fry. And so does China.

    As far as my comments about PP. At no point in time do I say that they are the “largest” provider of reprodutive services to the poor. Sadly what I left out was that they billed this as being needed for the poor.

    And Yes I am well aware of how to figure percentages. The word rate also means frequency. As in the frequency of abortions are few in the Neatherlands which denotes a total over a period of time. Thanks for the english lesson tho. – Lorica

  58. Sister Toldjah,

    You have no understanding of the abortion issue. You don’t understand why women choose to have an abortion. You don’t understand why people are opposed to making abortions illegal. Your comments that at one time you were pro-choice because you thought it was impractical to bring an unwanted baby in the world show you don’t understanding why people are pro-choice. That is not the reason. You don’t understand that because someone opposes making abortion illegal, it doesn’t make them pro-abortion. Did you even read my posts? You obviously didn’t understand it. I don’t know why this is so difficult for you and other conservatives to understand. Making abortions illegal DOES NOT stop women from having abortions. What don’t you understand about this? Please, please look at these statistics on teen pregnancy and abortions.
    LINK

    The United States abortion rate for teenagers is seven times as high as the Netherlands and eight times as high as Germany’s. Germany and the Netherlands do not have Conservative anti-abortion governments. Neither of these countries have Conservative anti-abortion movements. It is because they don’t have Conservative anti-abortion governments that their abortion rates are so much lower than in the United States. You do not understand that women don’t go out and get abortions just because they’re legal. They get abortions because they feel they’re in a situation where they need to end their pregnancy. Conservatives like you support policies that put more women in these situations. If you dispute this, then explain why the abortion rate in the United States is so high compared to other industrial countries that don’t have conservative governments such as the Netherlands and Germany. You will probably evade this just like you evaded all of the points I made in my last post and make statement that you don’t know to be true such as “I support abortion” which is not true. Your much more of a supporter of abortion than I am. Look at the results of the policies you support in the statistics I linked to above. Please don’t try and say the abortion rate is so high in the United States because it’s legal. Abortion is legal in Germany and the Netherlands also.

  59. “You have no understanding of the abortion issue. You don’t understand why women choose to have an abortion. You don’t understand why people are opposed to making abortions illegal. Your comments that at one time you were pro-choice because you thought it was impractical to bring an unwanted baby in the world show you don’t understanding why people are pro-choice. That is not the reason. You don’t understand that because someone opposes making abortion illegal, it doesn’t make them pro-abortion. ”

    So many lies and strawmen there it’s not worth bothering responding to. Brian, I suggest you examine your own position before you start dissecting my clearly consistent one … you aren’t getting anywhere in this conversation when you misrepresent and distort my position and then try to argue against it and tell me I have “no understanding” of the abortion issue. LOL! And YOU do? Where does your ‘deep’ insight come from on abortion? Ever had one?

    Your posts on this are getting sillier by the minute. I really do suggest you abandon this argument because YOUR lack of knowledge about the issue stands out strong and you are starting to embarass yourself.

    Oh, and on those “points” I’m evading – you’ve yet to make your first point because you keep lying about my position in the first place. These points in arguments here are where me and the other conservatives here realize you don’t have much of an idea of what you’re talking about – because you start arguing against positions they (and I) have NOT taken – that’s called a strawman argument, Brian. Stop making up non-existant positions because arguing against strawmen makes you look silly … not to mention the fact that it makes you look like you don’t spend any significant time reading what others post here. Time for a reality check, Brian. You’re just pi–ed because I called you out on your bogus questioning of my commitment to the unborn. I ASSURE you that my record on the unborn is light years ahead of yours. My posts prove it.

  60. Brian wrote, “You have no understanding of the abortion issue”

    How can you possibly know what is in somebody else’s mind? How about just saying you disagree with what someone wrote because…..

    Brian wrote, “You don’t understand why women choose to have an abortion”

    Brian wrote, “Making murder illegal DOES NOT stop people from murdering”. er. oh. I changed a word here or there to show Brian’s logic.
    And you a man understand better than ST?

    Brian wrote, “You will probably evade this ” Because it’s FLAWED THINKING! You can do this with any statistic. Like the murder rate in Japan or the birth to unwed teen rate in Japan. The CULTURES are different. We’ve gotten so liberal and permissive in this country that this stuff is the norm and you are saying the OPPOSITE. You are saying that the U.S. is too conservative.

    You are misnaming and misattributing what conservativism is to us and then asking us to explain ourselves.

    Well. Back the truck up! You’ve gone 1/2 way off the cliff with your reasoning and can’t pull yourself back. We’ve tried to help you but you are fighting us.

  61. Sister Toldjah,

    So far you have yet to respond to a single point or question. All you are doing is evading my questions/comments and attacking me. If your position is so right, why aren’t you willing to respond to any of my specific comments or questions?

    You ask me, “Where does your ‘deep’ insight come from on abortion? Ever had one?”
    My deep insight on abortion comes from facts and evidence, not emotional appeals from anti-abortion activists. Having an abortion has nothing to do with being able to look at results of different policies.

    I did not lie about your positions. I asked you specific questions about specific issues and specific Republican positions. If you do not support the position I questioned you about, you can state you don’t support it. If you do support the position, you can defend it. Instead you just evade all of my questions and comments and accuse me of lying about your position and tell me I “look silly”. I have yet to see you make a single point or respond to even one of my comments or questions.

    Here are some of your evasions:

    I asked you, “why do you so strongly support the party that wants to cut funding for providing healthcare for poor babies and poor pregnant women?”

    You could have either explained why you support the Republicans on this issue or you could have said you do not support the Republicans position and you are against cutting spending on health services for the poor. Instead you just evaded my question.

    I followed up on this question with:

    Did you know the mortality rate for infants whose mothers received little or no prenatal care is almost 10 times that of mothers who received frequent prenatal care, according to figures from the National Center for Health Statistics? Why do you support the party that wants to cut funding for programs that provide money for poor pregnant women to get prenatal care?

    You evaded this question also. You can either say you are against the Republicans cutting funding or you could say why you support their position. Instead you just evaded the question.

    I asked you “Did you know that illegal abortions are one of the leading causes of death for women of child-bearing ages in many countries where abortions are illegal?”

    You have said you are pro-life which really means you want to outlaw abortions. If abortions are outlawed, it means more women will die from illegal abortions. If you are really opposed to outlawing abortion you can state so. If you are in favor of outlawing abortions you could attempt to justify making abortions illegal even though this means that many women would die from illegal abortions. Instead you evaded the issue and did not respond.

    I asked you “Did you know that in the country with lowest abortion rate in the world, the Netherlands, abortions are safe, legal, and free?”.

    The point I was trying to make was that legalizing abortion doesn’t mean women will have more abortions and making it illegal doesn’t mean less women will have abortions. There are many countries where abortion is illegal that have much higher abortion rates than countries where abortion is legal. Like all of my other questions/comments, you evaded it and did not respond.

    I have yet to see you show any knowledge on this issue.

    My views are based on facts and evidence as to which policies are successful and which policies aren’t. Countries in Western Europe such as the Netherlands and Germany have much, much lower rates of abortion than the United States. My position is that if we follow many of the same policies of countries such as the Netherlands, abortion rates and infant mortality will go down. I have yet to see you provide and facts or evidence to show that the anti-abortion position of making abortions illegal will lower abortion rates.

    To repeat my points again so that maybe you will respond:

    Republicans are proposing to cut funding for healthcare for the poor (Medicaid). This would include prenatal care, which reduces infant mortality. Please state whether or not you support the Republicans position on this. You can either defend the Republicans position of cutting Medicaid or you can disagree and say the Democrats position of keeping Medicaid spending the same based on current law.

    If abortions are outlawed, the number of women dying from illegal abortions will greatly increase. Do you support the “pro-life” position of outlawing abortion and seeing more women die from illegal abortions or are you opposed to outlawing abortions.

    Do you think outlawing abortion will reduce the number of women getting abortions? If so, please explain why is it that in the country with the lowest abortion rate, the Netherlands, abortions are safe and legal and other countries where abortions are illegal have much higher rates?

    I tried to make my points as clear as possible. Do you think you can respond to them instead of just accusing me of lying about your position and telling me my posts are getting “sillier by the minute”?

  62. Baklava,

    Once again you showed you have a very poor understanding of the facts. You attribute the high abortion rate to our country being “so liberal and permissive”. The fact is we are very conservative compared to countries such as the Netherlands which have much lower abortion rates and teen-pregnancy rates.

    In the Netherlands, prostitution is legal. Marijuana can be legally purchased in the Netherlands. Abortion is not a controversial issue there.

    In the Netherlands, all children are educated about contraception and contraception is free to everyone. Conservatives are strongly opposed to both of these policies. In many conservative states, contraception is not taught. There are many women in the United States who don’t use contraception. Some of them don’t because they can’t afford it or are not knowledgeable of it.

    Given these facts, if having a “liberal and permissive” society causes a high abortion rate as you say, please explain why the Netherlands is the lowest in the world.

    It seems your views are not based on facts but on what you want to be true. You want to believe that having a liberal and permissive society causes a high abortion rate so that is what you believe. Facts and evidence have nothing to do with your views.

    You said before you became conservative in 1995 as a result of reading and listening to Rush Limbaugh. Given that I have already documented how much of what Rush Limbaugh says is lies or at least not true, how can you justify basing so much of your views on what he says/writes? If you didn’t see this site before that documents many of the lies/distortions in his books and from listening to his show for a few weeks, here it is again:

    http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1895

    How can you take someone that is so dishonest and hateful so seriously?

  63. Brian, I don’t owe you any response. Your question was silly and I called you on it by reversing it on to you. You have continued on attempting to claim some moral high ground where there is none in posts regarding who people support and why.

    I asked you to kindly drop this but apparently you chose to ignore my request. So we’ll close this discussion my way. Any comments about me being a censoring witch can be sent to my email. Thank you.

Comments are closed.