Kirsten Gillibrand Compares Pro Life Beliefs To Racism

This woman is really confused… to say the least. Since pro-life positions affect mainly minority women (since they get the most abortions), how does wanting MORE black babies equal racism. She also seems to pigeonhole the issue as a religious one. As I have noted MANY times before, there are many well-known atheists who are pro-life. Likewise, there is a group of feminist pro-lifers called: FEMINISTS FOR LIFE

More on feminists who are pro-life:

“They [the women] are never allowed to look at the ultrasound because we knew that if they so much as heard the heart beat, they wouldn’t \want to have an abortion.” – Abortion doctor quoted in New Dimensions magazine, 1990

Invariably, the feminist position on abortion is portrayed as the “pro-woman” position—mostly because feminist leaders have convinced their followers that this procedure is essential to women’s liberty. As Gloria Feldt, former president of Planned Parenthood, said, “‘abortion’ became a symbol of our independence, because reproductive freedom is fundamental to a woman’s aspirations.”

This is also known as the “pro-choice” position. But how do feminists feel about women who don’t choose abortion—and, more importantly, the women who assist them in making that choice?

Don’t be fooled by the deceptive labels and euphemisms. When it comes to “reproductive rights,” feminists have a very specific agenda—one that involves a lot more abortions, but not necessarily more choice.

At Temple University in Philadelphia, Serrin Foster, president of Feminists for Life of America, faced a tough crowd. As Crisis magazine described the scene, “The 40 or so students gathered to hear Foster are mostly women. Not even the pro-lifers are smiling. The student who introduced her asked those with differing opinions to be respectful. It set an ominous tone. Would they start chanting soon? Blowing whistles? Would they get violent?”

But then, somehow, Foster performed a miracle. She threw the cover off “the dirty little secret of women’s studies departments” — America’s earliest feminists were anti-abortion. In the words of coura­geous suffragette Susan B. Anthony, abortion was “child murder,” and “no matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death; but oh, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime!”

Foster then asked the crowd, “If women were fighting for the right not to be considered property, what gives them the right to consider their baby property?”

It was something to think about. From that moment on, even students who had showed up to protest couldn’t help but nod in agreement.

That night, Foster raised a point that feminists dare not discuss: before the women’s movement was hijacked by leftists in the 1960s, abortion was never viewed as a good thing for women. In fact, the prac­tice was unthinkable to individuals like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the mastermind behind the historic Seneca Falls Convention and mother of seven chil­dren. (If Stanton applied for a teaching position in a women’s studies department today, she would be labeled a “Jesus freak” and promptly dismissed.)

“When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit,” Stanton wrote to her friend Julia Ward Howe in 1873.

She wasn’t the only one.

Victoria Woodhull, the first female stockbroker on Wall Street, also became the first woman to run for President in 1870. An early suffragette with a flair for the outrageous, Woodhull epitomized the modern feminist slogan “well-behaved women rarely make history.” (She was repeatedly arrested for her polit­ical activities.) And she too hated abortion.

“A human life is a human life and equally to be held sacred whether it be a day or a century old,” Woodhull wrote. “Wives…to prevent becoming mothers…deliberately murder [children] while yet in their wombs. Can there be a more demoralized condition than this? “

Alice Paul, who authored the original Equal Rights Amendment, was willing to face arrests, harassment, and physical assaults in-order-to win the right to vote. Later, when 1960s feminists began advocating the repeal of abortion laws, Paul asked, “How can one protect and help women by killing them as babies?” She considered abortion “the ulti­mate exploitation of women.”

Who are the modern descendents of Anthony, Stanton, Woodhull, and Paul? They can be found at Feminists for Life of America, whose founder, Pat Goltz, was kicked out of NOW for her anti-abortion views. On its website, FFL issues a challenge: “If you believe in the strength of women and the poten­tial for every human life…If you refuse to choose between women and children…If you reject violence and exploitation, join us in challenging the status quo. There is a better way.”

FFL reaches out to women facing crisis pregnan­cies and opposes any legislation that might make it harder for them to keep their children—much of which has been proposed by Republicans, proving that FFL hardly deserves the “right- wing” label assigned to it by pro-abortion feminists. In 1996, FFL attempted to dissuade President Clinton from signing a Republican-backed welfare reform bill that elimi­nated additional assistance for babies born to girls under 18. Their rationale? If a pregnant girl couldn’t afford to raise her child, she would have no choice but to abort.

FFL also pressures universities to provide special resources for pregnant and parenting students, a move opposed by many conservatives on the principle that pregnant women aren’t entitled to handouts. But FFL refuses to compromise its mission: to make moth­erhood a viable option for women facing unwanted pregnancies.

FFL is not actively involved in efforts to outlaw abortion. Instead, the group is interested in “system­atically eliminating the root causes that drive women to abortion — primarily lack of practical resources and support — through holistic, woman-centered solutions.”

This is a truly “pro-choice” position—the one that groups like NOW and NARAL claim to uphold. But evidently a lot of feminists do not believe that women deserve better than abortion.

“Who are the Feminists for Life? In a word, dangerous,” began an article in the online magazine Nerve.

“Feminists for what?” the author gasped. “Not a typo: Feminists for Life. As in, against abortion.” The horror!

As the article explained, the women of FFL “aren’t really feminists—a feminist could not force another woman to bear a child.”

Feminist hysteria over FFL indicates that the only “choice” they deem acceptable is the decision to terminate a pregnancy. The way FFL was treated by the Lilith Fair, a feminist music festival organized by singer Sarah McLachlan in the late 90’s, proved that different views on abortion will not be tolerated.

“Women are everywhere. Walking in groups, laughing and talking. Sitting on the grass. Playing the guitar. Reading pamphlets on women’s issues picked up from booths in the Village area,” a reporter described Lilith Fair’s stop in my hometown of Cleveland, Ohio. “There is also a woman with a gag in her mouth standing in front of one of the booths, wearing a T-shirt reading, ‘Peace begins in the womb, Sarah.'”

That woman was Marilyn Kopp, the director of Ohio Feminists for Life. Lilith Fair, despite its stated mission of “raising consciousness of women’s issues,” denied booth space to any group that did not wholeheartedly support abortion as the ultimate cata­lyst of gender equality.

Naturally, Lilith Fair’s feminist organizers were outraged that FFL had the gall to show up at their concert.

“This isn’t a democracy. This is a tyranny,” fumed singer Sheryl  Crow, justifying Lilith’s ban on pro-life groups.

However, some ordinary concertgoers were unimpressed with the notion of tyranny in the name of women’s advancement.

“As Kopp’s friend Denise Mackura stands gagged in front of the NOW booth, a group of teenage girls walk up to her. When they find out what’s going on, they’re shocked,” reporter Laura Demarco wrote. “They see the situation as a violation of civil rights, not a defense of women’s rights. ‘This is wrong,’ says Casey Patton, 17.”

The sight of FFL members standing in front of NOW’s booth with gags in their mouths spoke volumes about the authoritarian nature of the modern feminist movement. As DeMarco observed, “It’s hard to miss the hypocrisy of feminists censoring other women like this… they patronizingly assume women aren’t smart enough to hear all sides on an issue and decide for themselves.”

The prospect of women deciding for themselves is terribly threatening to the feminist establishment—which might also explain their fanatical opposition to Crisis Pregnancy Centers.

Ashley Herzog, FEMINISM VS. WOMEN (Xulon Press, 2008), 85-91.

“My” Body, Not Governments

I came across this on a friend’s Facebook, and wanted a simple anatomy lesson as a response:

(I colorized the above a bit) Here is my response (click pics for links):

#SCIENCE

  • Different genetic code.
  • Different blood type.
  • Different gender.
  • Different race.
  • Fetus can die and mother live; mother can die and “fetus” live.
  • Fetus can feel pain when mother does not, vice versa.

Humans do not have:

  • 2-heads
  • 4 arms and legs
  • 2-beating hearts
  • Multiple blood types
  • 2-brains/waves

Take note as well that if THAT BODY even “j-walks,” the government can ticket that body (woman) for not following government rules. There are all sorts of legal restrictions on SAID BODY.

ETC — even atheists and non-Republicans get it:

Human From Conception – Kathy Ireland

This video is from the late 90’s via POLITICALLY INCORRECT… and is a centerpiece to a great presentation by Scott Klusendorf (“The Case for the Pro-Life Position (Part 1) ~ Winning the Argument“). I looked for this years back but gave up. After some short talk with Larry Elder, I decided to give it another shot… walla, GODTUBE had it (longer file.

She was also (a few years later) was on the HUCKABEE SHOW and explained this again.

Great stuff!

CNN’s Moral Insanity!

A CNN panel falsely claimed that abortion is moral and human life doesn’t begin at conception. Dennis Prager explains why this argument directly violates science and reason. MOONBATTERY notes:

In the video below, a moonbat proclaims with a straight face that an unborn baby is not a human being. That is conventional insanity, of the type treated at psychiatric hospitals.

Meanwhile, the supremely odious Chris Cuomo desperately clings to the argument that it doesn’t matter if babies are human beings so long as they are not legally regarded as persons. If only they had realized this during the Nuremberg Trials, some Nazis might have escaped the rope.

Craziest of all is the underlying liberal belief that abortion is moral….

The Abortion Enthusiasts… Who Are They?

(MOONBATTERY hat-tip) Abortion is the ultimate sacrament in the liberal religion. Even to acknowledge the prolife point of view — let alone agree with it — is considered beyond the pale. How can something so awful have such intense proponents? Dave Morrison finds that the most vehement abortion enthusiasts are often childless middle-aged women who, rather than face the horror of their mistakes, attempt to cast their errors as virtue:

A Christian Abortionist Argues Against Himself (Mike Adams)

  • “He kills people for a living… by his own standard.” — Dr. Mike Adams 

(Via the DAILY WIRE) On Thursday, February 21, the University of North Carolina-Wilmington hosted a debate on abortion, which was organized by the College Democrats and College Republicans, among others:

The DAILY WIRE article notes the reason they posted the above debate:

  • The hour and a half-long debate also featured a Q&A in which the two professionals took questions from the crowd. At the 1:19:42 mark, a man asks Adams about the commonly discussed “rape exception” as it pertains to abortion.

Yep, good stuff.

This debate “TRIGGERED” 😤 (joking) in my memory a short conversation between Dr. Mike Adams and myself and a good book by him, “Letters to a Young Progressive: How to Avoid Wasting Your Life Protesting Things You Don’t Understand.” I complained about a lack of (none in fact) footnotes to reference his quotes and some of his positions in it. (The part I wish to note is at the 11:50 to 12:10 mark above.) This is not a “take-down” of professor Adams at all. We probably agree 99% on the varied topics of politics and faith. It is however, a call to better scolorshipo of anyone writing a book, even if they intend it to be a quick read.

Just some feedback on your most recent book. Obviously it is geared for a “postmodern” audience. I had to put it down due to the lack of footnotes/references.I put down all books without them. I love your work, but the work reminded of Sean Hannity’s non-referenced screeds. Sorry to be so harsh… but no footnotes? Do your students get it that easy?

At any rate, I did reference it in response to a local “columnist”

Dr. Adams makes a point about the direction of his book, linked above:

The footnotes were removed to make it resemble an email conversation. Emails don’t have footnotes. Come on.

To which I simply respond,

My emails do. At any rate, maybe the softcover will include them? I will then buy it and read it. Much thought your way. By-the-by, you up at Summit right now? If they ever talk about getting a speaker who combines choices and worldviews, keep me in mind. I am a “retired” ex-con.

The response by Dr. Adams was a funny quip that I laughed at then over Facebook and would laugh at if we were sharing some beers and time together as brothers in Christ. Here was his last point (where I chose to leave it):

Oh, yes, Sean. Will have the editor put them back in just so you’ll read it.

I merely responded: “Hahaha, yes.” My most recent note to Professor Adams was this (remember, I am picking up a conversation from May, 2013):

I just watched your wonderful take down of illogical positions by Dr. Parker. But I wish to note your point about “footnotes” in Parker’s book, and our discussion from 2013 — archived above.

Here is the convo from today, Dr. Adams:

That is why I did not use my book to establish when life begins. Your “point” is thus irrelevant.

My last response is,

All I am saying is that (as an example), is, on pages 31-33* (and others) when you separate out quotes [or] definitions, that the poli-sci person or someone grabbing the book from the sociology section of the book store could further their understanding FROM your book. Obviously this is a dead horse, but I encourage you in future endeavors to at least add some for context and reference for the bibliophile, thus encouraging even the millennial reader to further their reading scope. Blessings to you and yours Dr. Adams, from, “Still a Huge Fan and Supporter of all You Write and Do.”

Dr. Adams may be emotional that some yahoo he doesn’t know is telling him how to write a book. But I would encourage all who write books should include some power to their own references, thus separating out opinion versus factual claims.

  • * Pages 31-33

Even in theology if a person quotes Scripture, they don’t merely say “Matthew,” or, “Deuteronomy,” — they note chapter and verse.

#1 Killer Of Blacks

I haven’t been able to find this on YouTube… it disappeared and was an integral part of a post of mine. So I decided to upload it here. This is from an excellent documentary entitled, “Maafa 21: Black Genocide In 21st Century America.” But yet, The black community still worships at the feet of Moloch… the Democrat Party. This is part of a post on mine on Margaret Sanger: “Margaret Sanger and the Racist History of Planned Parenthood (Black Genocide)

Answering An Abortion Meme

I wanted to post a meme here I saw on a friends site (of a differing political persuasion than I) with some conversation in the mix as well. (Note: the woman on the strain starts out the comments, FYI… and my friend [a male] responds.) I also wish to say his Facebook is full of these memes… none of which are really defensible. All he would revert to is name calling. At any rate, “enjoy.”

And here is the convo:

My response to this is thus:


Firstly, the meme doesn’t make any sense… so commenting on it as if it portrays anything in reality (the top 1% getting rich) is laughable.

An article in New Scientist speaks to the declining birth rates in the West and why rich people who own companies NEED workers that often time illegal immigration provides for cheap:

So, as the West (to lesser extent America) cannot replace it’s working class, or, if everyone goes to college and thinks a degree should offer them a white-collar job… companies (typically owned by the rich) have to find cheap labor. And why pay legal immigrants “x” when illegal immigrantx get paid “b” and save the rich money?

Also, if anyone was getting rich it is the abortion doctors. For instance, Carol Everett opened up multiple abortion clinics with he goal of becoming wealthy. I read here book many moons ago and the abortion industry is a money maker.

We opened and the first month we did 45; 65; 85, and the last month I was there, with two clinics functioning in the Dallas area, we did over 500 abortions a month in that clinic. I was compensated at the rate of $25.00 per case, plus one-third of the clinic’s, so you can imagine what my motivation was. I sold abortions. I had made $150,000; was on target in 1983 to make about $260,000; and when we opened our five clinics, I would have been taking home about a million dollars a year. I expected to make more than that after we were really functioning….

Take note another recent under-cover video showing the greed involved in the abortion industry and the money to be made:

Dr. Mary Gatter, president of Planned Parenthood’s Medical Director’s Council and current medical director of Planned Parenthood of Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley in California, has been caught on tape haggling over price for the procurement of intact fetal body parts in a second video released today by The Center for Medical Progress.

In the video, Gatter makes it very clear that compensation for tissue is always done. She hesitates to throw out a “lowball” figure to the buyers posing as representatives of a fetal tissue procurement organization, but begins at $75 per specimen, only to agree to up to $150 later in the video.  While Gatter claims she doesn’t want it to appear that they’re “selling tissue,” “there are costs associated with the use of our space.”  Gatter even goes so far as to pause during negotiations to say that she would check to see what other California affiliates are being compensated so that “if they’re getting substantially more [than $100 per specimen], then we can discuss it then.”

“The money is not the important thing for me,” Gatter continues, “but it has to be big enough that it makes it worthwhile for me.” She later comes back to her point that if the compensation isn’t near what other affiliates are getting, “we can bump it up,” then laughs, “I want a Lamborghini.”

And yes, years ago 20/20 did a special and found out fetal tissue was a real thing and put together this list (this was years ago, see my “Baby Parts [Still] For Sale ~ Democrats Dehumanizing Human Life“):

Opening Lines
A Division of Consultants & Diagnostic Pathology,
Inc. P.O. Box 508, West Frankfort,
IL 62896
Fee for Services Schedule

> greater than

< same or less than

  • Unprocessed Specimen (> 8 weeks) $ 70
  • Unprocessed Specimen (< 8 weeks) $ 50
  • Livers (< 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $150
  • Livers (> 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $125
  • Spleens (< 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Spleens (> 8 weeks) $ 50
  • Pancreas (< 8 weeks) $100
  • Pancreas (> 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Thymus (< 8 weeks) $100
  • Thymus (> 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Intestines & Mesentery $ 50
  • Mesentery (< 8 weeks) $125
  • Mesentery (> 8 weeks) $100
  • Kidney-with/without adrenal (< 8 weeks) $125
  • Kidney-with/without adrenal (> 8 weeks) $100
  • Limbs (at least 2) $150
  • Brain (< 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $999
  • Brain (> 8 weeks) 30% discount if significantly fragmented $150
  • Pituitary Gland (> 8 weeks) $300
  • Bone Marrow (< 8 weeks) $350
  • Bone Marrow (> 8 weeks) $250
  • Ears (< 8 weeks) $ 75
  • Ears (> 8 weeks) $ 50
  • Eyes (< 8 weeks) 40% discount for single eye $ 75
  • Eyes (> 8 weeks) 40% discount for single eye $ 50
  • Skin (> 12 weeks) $100
  • Lungs & Heart Block $150
  • Intact Embryonic Cadaver (< 8 weeks) $400
  • Intact Embryonic Cadaver (> 8 weeks) $600
  • Intact Calvarium $125
  • Intact Trunk (with/without limbs) $500
  • Gonads $550
  • Cord Blood (Snap Frozen LN2) $125
  • Spinal Column $150
  • Spinal Cord $325

Another point I wish to make is in the conversation portion. No one “villainizes women,” and, in fact, any pro-life ministry I have ever had contact with dotes over the women who have had abortions. In fact, Norma McCorvey (“Roe” in Roe v Wade) wrote a book called “Won By Love,” where she shares the experience of befriending a pro-life woman from a pro-life office that opened up next to the abortion clinic she worked at.

Now, I view doctors that perform partial-birth abortions… or that deliver babies and leave them in utility closets to die of exposure and malnutrition the same way I view doctors who cut off breasts of completely healthy 16-year old girls. With disdain. Shortly after Bill Clinton made partial birth abortion legal with a swipe of his pen, they numbered almost 4,000 a year.

Most were between 5-to-6-months old. Surprise that women support the perceived rhetoric in the conversation from Facebook (excerpted above)… W O M E N by-and-large know that the abortion of a 20-week baby is murder. However, some women still do it… in 2015, there were over 8,296 of these abortions. almost all for financial or familial reasoning.

“I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don’t know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus.”

Faye Wattleton, former president of U.S. Planned Parenthood

 

Again, Almost none were performed for a real physical, life threatening reason. Most were done for elective reasons. For example, the gentleman that invented this late-term abortive technique noted:

Before being banned in 2003 [legalized under Obama again], the partial-birth procedure was a preferred method for performing abortions after 20 weeks (see picture on right at this stage of pregnancy). This procedure gained prominence in the early 1990s through Dr. Martin Haskell, who is credited with inventing it. In a 1993 interview with American Medical News, Haskell said:

I’ll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range…. In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective….

Richard Feynman once quipped, “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.” With all the rhetoric and pressure a women feels entering into this choice… and the Planned Parentood counselor often sells an abortion by telling the girl or woman it is a bunch of cells, of blob of tissue. That is why women who view a 4D ultrasound of their baby almost always change their minds. (I will add to the end of this strain my opener to my large post dealing with the founder of Planned ParenthoodJump To It Below.)

And yes, babies are left out to die in utility closets when abortions go wrong. In fact, this is one of the times Obama chose not to vote absent and voted for a bill to allow doctors to legally leave born children to die:

In a twisted scenario where one bad decision led to even worse results, the parents had been convinced to abort their child after seeing ultra-sounds that showed troubling birth defects. After the abortion, the child was placed in a bed under blankets until the family could return to recover the body. But upon returning and removing the blankets, family members saw the child and realized the ultrasounds had been wrong—the child had been born healthy. Moreover, the child was still alive.

However, the child had been bleeding profusely, and although the hospital immediately began working to save the child’s fleeting life, in the end nothing could be done to save it.

Had this terrible situation arisen in Illinois when Barack Obama was a state senator, it would have been illegal for doctors or nurses to try to save the child once it was discovered alive. For as an Illinois state senator, Obama “voted four times against legislation to protect and care for infants accidentally born alive during late-term abortions.” As Erik Erickson has said: “Obama did not think that a child who was alive and outside the mother’s womb should be considered a child for the purposes of giving the child equal protection rights if it was the mother and doctor’s intention that the child be killed.”

In other words, where death was intended no life could be salvaged.

Thus, it came as no surprise that a House Judiciary Report from 2000 said physicians at one prominent hospital in Chicago had been aborting “healthy infants and infants with non-fatal deformities [and although] many of these babies… lived for hours after birth, no efforts [were] made to determine if any of them could have survived with appropriate medical assistance.”

In one specific example from an Illinois hospital, an aborted baby “left to die on the counter of the soiled utility room wrapped in a disposable towel, was accidentally thrown in the garbage.” Later, when hospital staff realize what had happened and begin looking for the child, they “were going through the trash [and] the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor.”

So, since the Left like “survivor” stories as somehow more legit than ethical and cultural musings, and since a majority of women are pro-life in some form*, this should REALLY BOLSTER these women’s testimony:

This woman has an incredible will-power and despite having cerebral palsy, as a result of the attempted abortion, she has run the Boston Marathon and even the London Marathon! I’m sure we will be hearing more of her in the future.

Mrs. Melissa Ohden who survived a saline infusion abortion testified at a House Judiciary Committee hearing about Planned Parenthood’s medical procedures. Planned Parenthood has been under fire after videos were released showing how the mega abortion provider sold fetal tissue to researchers. Founder of the Abortion Survivor’s Network, Mrs. Ohden gave this moving testimony in 2015.

To see some late term abortions and other information, see my post HERE.

* If politicians really want to show that they trust American women, then they should follow the advice of the overwhelming majority of us and restrict abortion in meaningful ways.

This means supporting the president’s action to ban funding of abortion internationally, which is supported by 83 percent of women, and same percentage of all Americans.

This means limiting abortion substantially through legislation. Nationwide, 77 percent of women support limiting abortion to – at most – the first trimester. That is slightly higher than the percentage of all Americans – 74 percent. Laws restricting abortion should be embraced, not resisted.

And 61 percent of women think it is important, or an immediate priority, for our government to restrict abortion in this way, a slightly higher percentage than the 59 percent of all Americans who hold this position.

Not surprisingly, the majority of American women (59 percent) say abortion is morally wrong, the same percentage of all Americans who agree.

And a majority of women (51 percent) believe that abortion causes more harm than good in the long run; 50 percent of all Americans agree.

There’s another thing too. Though abortion advocates use the term “pro-choice” as shorthand for pro-abortion, the polling shows that many – often most – people who identify as pro-choice actually support substantial restrictions on abortion


Organizations That Help


Before we start this topic, I must say that this treatise is not taking into account the emotional strain that many women encounter before and after an abortion. This is a political, philosophical, and historical dealing with the founding of Planned Parenthood, specifically, Margaret Sanger. I would be remiss and foolish however not to think once this hits “cyber-space” that a confused or hurting young woman might happen to come across this blog. To her I wish to leave behind some links where she can get information or counseling whether in question to “should I get an abortion,” or to look for help for the emotional pain of losing a child to choice. So here are some links to organizations that will help either before or after this “choice” is made:

AFTER ABORTION This is the web’s most complete source of information on the aftereffects of abortion and post-abortion healing. We have over 500 hundred links to thousands of printed pages of original research, testimonies, articles, and resources. Most of these are drawn from articles and books published by the Elliot Institute, one of the nation’s leading authorities on post-abortion issues.

PATH (Healing After Abortion) Few people anticipate the agony an individual may go through following an abortion. The physical and emotional stress can be devastating, and often surfaces months or even years after the event. PATH offers hope and healing. Our method is personal, compassionate and non-judgemental. If you are suffering, please be assured that our trained volunteer facilitators will help you find a peace of heart. We will help you face your guilt, anger, isolation and sadness, and help you reconnect with yourself, others, and God.

“How is this possible?” you may wonder. It is possible because we have been there. Eighty percent of our volunteer facilitators have experienced abortion too. But we have discovered that even this experience can be healed. We do not promise to wave a magic wand to take away all of your painful memories, but we do firmly believe that if you trust us and God to walk you through our program, healing will begin.

CRISIS PREGNANCY CENTER The mission of the CPC is to minister to women. Our ministry focuses on the woman and her needs, offering her acceptance, compassion, accurate information and assistance in bringing her baby to term. We are here to help our clients make an informed decision so that they will, hopefully, choose an alternative to abortion.

The CPC does not refer a client for abortion. (The client is informed of this on the Request for Services form that she signs when she first comes into the center.) We never try to intimidate or control clients. We do not show bloody videos or use scare tactics. Our staff is trained to offer documented information/education and to provide the services offered by the CPC.

There is a myth to the effect that pro-life people care only about the baby and not the woman. If the community views our message as focusing only on the baby, clients will not feel safe about coming to the CPC and talking, especially if they are considering an abortion or have already experienced one. Our goal is to break down that myth by educating the community to know that our client is the woman. We realize that in order to help a child, we must help the child’s mother. She is the only one who can nourish and care for her pre-born child. When we place our focus on helping the woman, she becomes able to reject the ideology that frames the abortion issue in terms of mother versus child. When we place our focus on loving the woman, God can touch her with hope and empower her to choose life.

The final decision about abortion belongs to the client; however, we want our client to know that our door is always open to her. The client needs to know that she can return to the Center in the future even if she should choose to abort. We are here to help her should she experience regret and need help with Post Abortion Stress.

For the guysNATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE – To improve the well-being of children by increasing the proportion of children growing up with an involved, responsible, and committed father.

Fact Checking WaPo, CNN, and NYTs On Trump’s SOTU

In a good bit today on the Glenn Beck Radio Program, a New York Times story that “fact-checked” the State of the Union Speech was itself run through the grinder. I include a short Stephanie Ruhle (MSNBC) audio clip, and then Brian Stelter (CNN) gets “fact-checked himself. Good clip to link in a response to a Leftist. Glenn and Stu (Steve Burguiere) are in their zone here. The segment that followed this section can be see HERE.

See also an excellent article at THE FEDERALIST entitled, “The State Of American ‘Fact-Checking’ Is Completely Useless“.

In another great segment Glenn Beck and Stu (Steve Burguiere) discuss where the New York Times and the Washington Post’s fudging their quotes and intended meanings. NATIONAL REVIEW has an excellent rebuttal to this in their article entitled, “Trump Was Right about New York’s Abortion Law”. In it we read:

  • The text of the law bears out rather than contradicts Trump’s comment. So long as the abortionist is willing to say that an abortion is necessary to protect the pregnant woman’s health — including emotional health — the abortion can take place at any time before or after 24 weeks. Two decades ago, during a debate over similar legislation, late-term abortionist Warren Hern explained that he would always testify that an abortion he wished to perform would avert adverse health consequences (Frank Murray, “Daschle Ban May Not Ban Anything; Abortionists Could Use Own Judgment,” Washington Times, May 15, 1997).

Good stuff Glenn and Stu!