Miss USA contestant conceived in rape: “I knew God put me here for a purpose”

This article was originally published on The Political Insider:

Valerie Gatto is Miss Pennsylvania and competed in the Miss USA 2014 pageant on June 8th. But she wouldn’t be here today if her mother had followed the conventional wisdom on abortion. You see, Valerie was a product of rape:

Gatto has revealed that her mother was raped at knife-point when she was 19 years old. Valerie says that the perpetrator planned to murder her mother after the sexual assault, but that she was able to escape when he became distracted.

While her mother originally intended to give Valerie up for adoption, she then decided to set aside her plans for law school and raise her daughter.

“I knew God put me here for a purpose, and He’s the reason my mother and I were saved,” Gatto says. “I want to do Him proud and my family proud.”

“I could just sit here and say, ‘Why did this happen,’ and ‘Does my father know I exist,’” Valerie continued. “But God put me here to do great things, and I’m not going to let things from the past stop me.”

Abortion advocates always bring up cases of rape as a reason to abort, and most Americans agree with this exception. But Valerie puts a human face on the children conceived through rape and is a reminder that all life is precious, no matter the circumstances surrounding their being. How many other Valeries have been aborted, and think about what they might have done with their lives and the joy they could have brought to the world.

So the next time someone asks you, “What about cases of rape?” remember Valerie and her inspiring story. As she says, God put us all here for a purpose. It doesn’t matter how you got here, it just matters what you do when you’re here on Earth.

H/T: Lifenews.com

Kids Can't "Choose" Abortion!

LiveActionNews.com had a great analysis last week: Pro-abortion Mom of the Year: “I don’t regret helping my 15-year-old daughter get an abortion”

It's about a post by a feminist state leader who's proud of her 15 year old daughter getting an abortion.  She thinks she has well-equipped her daughter with sex-ed and contraception, and yet somehow this still happened.  I guess because there wasn't enough public school sex ed for the boy.

At one point the mother wrote, "The truth is my daughter was using condoms. Guess what sometimes they fail. Especially, when children who aren’t educated in their use like my child is are the ones placing them on their penis." But earlier in her screed, she had said, "As we sat down all she kept saying was 'I don’t know how this happened' over and over. The truth was in that moment she couldn’t remember having sex the one time with the young man she was seeing."

So, which is it? The girl couldn't remember and didn't understand or she was using condoms that, guess what, fail?

Kristen Hatten makes excellent points about how teaching about contraception, or even how to use them, still doesn't teach emotionally immature hormonal children to actually follow through to use them.

She says it was "likely there was no condom":

How can I say such a thing? Well, because every day across the world about a million girls agree to have sex without a condom because the boy doesn’t want to wear one and the girl wants the boy to like her. (Cue that song from Beauty and the Beast that goes, “Tale as old as time…”)

Inevitably, some of those girls get pregnant. And when their feminist mothers – who made sure they got lots of sex ed and access to birth control - ask, “How on earth did this happen?,” they can’t say, “Well, Mom, you taught me everything about sex except how to handle it like an adult woman because I’m not an adult woman.”

Instead they say, “The condom broke.”

I'd never really thought about it before, but it stands to reason that at least half the time the excuse is "the condom broke," the truth is there was no condom at all.  Especially with girls who should "know better," as this mother said of her daughter, and feel they need to justify their abortions.

You can give kids all the facts and access to condoms and other contraceptives that you want, but they're still KIDS. They aren't mature enough to deal with the realities and emotional aspects of sex and relationships - heck, many women of all ages don't seem to be. Just giving them information without guidance, which liberals often call "judgment," isn't nearly enough.

The mother takes great pains to emphasize how she withheld her own opinions and made sure it was her daughter's choice. But her daughter, and other young girls of that age, just aren't equipped to make and fully understand that decision.

Nowhere is that made more clear than what the daughter says in the end:

Do I regret it? No! Because I know that the spirit I named Mariah will go on to a woman who is ready for her. 

Her immaturity and child's ignorance ring so clear.  Someday she will realize that her BABY (spirit???) Mariah was a unique human being who had only one shot at life in this world and it was HER choice to kill her. I do not begrudge her the pain and heartache when she comes to this realization as she grows and matures and begins to understand her decision as an adult.

When this happens, I hope she gets the healing she needs, instead of burying it and denying it like so many post-abortive women try to do.

If you or someone you know is hurting from abortion, there are many great sources of support available.  Please check out Abortion Recovery, Project Rachel, National Helpline for Abortion Recovery, and Rachel’s Vineyard.

Seeing the Pro-Life Generation in Austin

Last week I went to Austin with Students for Life of America.  SFLA spans more than 750 pro-life groups on high school and university campuses across the country. These students are the pro-life generation. They are more pro-life than any other generation, their parents or grandparents, because they've seen the reality of abortion, whether it be the humanity of the pre-born in the womb via ultrasound, or the bloody pictures of aborted babies, or friends and family who have been harmed by abortion.

But in Austin I saw an even younger pro-life generation. Children, no more than 10 years old, were there smiling and holding pro-life signs full of hope as an abortion battle raged on over a pro-life bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks and increase safety standards for abortions.

It was hard to see these kids amidst the the hatred and vulgarity of the pro-abortion mob. But it was also inspiring to have them there as a reminder of what we are fighting for.  We are fighting for a culture of life for these children. We can still change things for these little ones when they become teenagers and young adults, so that they aren't faced with the same destructive lies about abortion being a quick and easy fix that we dealt with.

That little girl I saw in the line to the gallery clutching her baby doll with an "Abortion Hurts" sticker – I don't ever want her to feel the pain and victimization of abortion. I don't want her think that's her only choice and all she deserves. I want her to love herself and see that there's so much more to her than just her reproductive organs, as the pro-"choice" women reduced themselves to in the Texas Capitol Building.  I want her to respect herself and demand the respect from men that she deserves.  And if she finds herself in an unplanned or troubled pregnancy, I want abortion to be unthinkable because she has all the support and resources she needs to proudly bring life into this world.

That little boy I saw in the rotunda with the red LIFE tape over his mouth – I don't ever want him to become "bro-choice" - supporting abortion for his own selfish sexual desires. I don't want him taking advantage of women and pushing them to get abortions. I want him to grow up loving, supporting, and respecting women.  And if he ever faces a crisis pregnancy, I want him to stand up and do whatever it takes to support and love his child for the rest of his life.

How sad is it that my dreams and wishes for these children will be scoffed at by some and treated as draconian by others.  But standing in the Capitol in Austin last week, I saw that future and the future we are fighting for: A true pro-life generation that abolishes abortion and replaces it with a culture of Life.  I saw the future in Austin. That future starts now.

Obama Stands With Planned Parenthood - Get Rid of Them Both

This video for Planned Parenthood that President Obama has made in his official capacity as President of the United States - the end shows www.whitehouse.gov - saddens, sickens, and angers me.  Of course, it's not a surprise that a man who voted for infanticide would so lovingly embrace the biggest abortion provider in the country, but it should still outrage us and renew our commitment to fight.

In the video Obama says:

“So when some professional politicians casually say that they’ll get rid of Planned Parenthood, don’t forget what they’re really talking about: eliminating the funding for preventive care that millions of women rely on and leaving them to fend for themselves."

No, Mr. President, don't YOU forget what we're really talking about: the elimination of millions of unborn babies from our population and abortion as "preventive care."

President Obama says Planned Parenthood fights for "the woman with a new lease on life because a mammogram caught her cancer in time" - except Planned Parenthoods don't do mammograms, they only refer them - and "the woman who was able to choose when to start a family because she could afford contraception." I thought women weren't able to afford contraception and that's why Obamacare made it "free," but now he's saying Planned Parenthood is doing the job?  Good!  I expect he'll repeal the contraception mandate that violates religious conscience at any moment!

The President finishes with the perfect call to action for conservatives and pro-lifers to defeat him at the polls this November: "I know you’ll never stop fighting to protect the health care and the choices that America’s women deserve and as long as I have the privilege of being your president, neither will I."

By thanking Planned Parenthood and standing by their work, Obama is voicing his support for some very despicable things: the deaths of millions of unborn babies; the sexual exploitation of minors; the cover up of sex abuse perpetrated on children and incest victims; the enabling of sex trafficking; the fraud and abuse of millions in taxpayer dollars; the non-FDA approved administration of abortion drugs that led to the deaths of 4 California women; the acceptance of racist donations; and more.

President Obama alluded to Mitt Romney saying he'd get rid of Planned Parenthood's funding - which amounts to over $360 million dollars from federal, state, and local taxpayers of PP's Billion dollar yearly budget (check out the page labeled 29 of their 2008-09 annual report).  Planned Parenthood takes lives and commits crimes, they do not deserve our hard-earned tax money.  Luckily, so far 9 states have defunded Planned Parenthood of over $60 million, but we need more states and the federal government to kick PP of the dole.  But as long as Obama is president, Planned Parenthood will remain strong, so we need to kick him out as well.

Related Posts:

McDonnell Caves on Ultrasounds, Where Do We Go From Here
If Ultrasounds are Rape, Abortionists Have Been Raping Women for Years!
No, Planned Parenthood, Birth Control is NOT "Basic Health Care"
Debunking the Myth that 99% of Women Are Using Birth Control
Controlling the Birth Control Debate
Susan G. Komen for the WIN: FAIL What Planned Parenthood doesn't want you to know 
How Planned Parenthood Exploits Minors
Planned Parenthood exposed again
Abortion ends in death. Can you live with that?
.

McDonnell Caves on Ultrasounds, Where Do We Go From Here

Truth lost out

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell caved on his support for the S.B. 484 ultrasound bill and even used the language of the lefties like "invasive" and "consent" (see my debunking of the ultrasound-is-rape-charge here) to defend his reversal:

Thus, having looked at the current proposal, I believe there is no need to direct by statute that further invasive ultrasound procedures be done. Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state. No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure.

This statement just opens him up to so many attacks, from all sides.  First, is he admitting that he hadn't already looked at the current proposal that he had previously stated support for??  Good job, gov'na!

Second, his words dangerously echo the liberal idea that ANY law pertaining to abortion isn't the "proper role for the state" and puts the state between a woman and her abortionist.  This is a slippery slope - leading to the question of what IS the proper role of the state in terms of mandating informed consent on abortion.  Obviously pro-choicers would say there is none and McDonnell's words must hearten them; they will be sure to throw them back in his face should the subject come up again.  It will be difficult for him to defend Virginia's informed consent 2001 statute that he helped pass as a delegate (and which he cited in his decision) in light of his new view of the "proper" role of the state. 

Third, he acts as if abortion is just "another medical procedure" - like pro-aborts who compare it to removing tonsils, a mole or a tumor.  Abortion is not just "another medical procedure," it stops a beating heart and ends a life, there are unique and compelling interests that the state - and all people of good conscience - have regarding it.

Where Do We Go From Here

The most frustrating thing is that, once again, hysterically unsupportable lies won the day and pro-lifers like me who fought to spread the truth were betrayed, just like with Komen.  THIS. MUST. END. NOW.  The question is, how do we regroup, learn, and counter the next culture war ambush?  

Apparently hysteria like MILLIONS OF POOR MINORITY WOMEN WILL DIE OF BREAST CANCER IN THE STREETS!!!!11! and REPUBLICANS WANT TO BAN BIRTH CONTROL!!!!11!! and VIRGINIA WANTS TO RAPE WOMEN!!!11! has been affective for radical lefties.  So do we need to be more reactive and hysterical, thinking of the most extreme, ridiculous sound bytes and scream them from the top of our lungs like the left does?  This is difficult for many on the right to do but I do admit to occasionally enjoy the indulgence of fighting fire with fire.

Perhaps along with a little bomb throwing, we need to work on our coordination and anticipation skills.  In hindsight, this kerfuffle was entirely predictable and pro-lifers should have been prepared for it.  Even if we were caught flatfooted, we should have begun hitting back hard last week and providing cover for the VA GOP immediately.  All the pro-life groups and activists should have coordinated and begun a PR strategy to address the media and a campaign to write to VA state reps to encourage their support and defense of the bill as soon as it happened.  Instead - maybe because we thought the rape charges were too ridiculous to be taken seriously - we let it languish, which allowed the lie to fester and spread.  It became a part of the national conversation and local politicians got scared.

Bottom line: we need to get better at this - ALL of us on the right side of the political spectrum do - especially if we want a chance at defeating Obama.

Incompetence and Confusion Abound

(Added 2/23/12) Reading this Washington Post article, "McDonnell, Virginia Republicans back off mandatory invasive ultrasounds," it is shocking how none of the major players knew what was going on or what the bill would entail - from the pro-abortion lobby, to the GOP representatives who sponsored it, to the Governor who said he'd sign it.  Check out the key words I've bolded:

Confusion over the legislation and ultrasounds — and considerable national media attention — preceded the unraveling of the bill. The original measure stated, simply, that a woman needed an ultrasound before an abortion. Many lawmakers did not understand that at the young fetal age abortions usually occur, the invasive vaginal ultrasound would be needed to establish gestational age, as required by the bill.
...
Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel (R-Winchester), who introduced the measure, said she did not realize that the ultrasound would not be external, and she said she still was not certain that would be required under the legislation. But she said she would move to strike her bill because of that uncertainty.
...
“I had no concept about this other issue,’’ she said. “It didn’t come up in the committee, it didn’t come up in the subcommittee. I’m still not sure if it’s right or not right.”
...
McDonnell’s announcement came a day after legislators and governor’s staff members, including Chief of Staff Martin Kent and Secretary of Health Bill Hazel, huddled in his office Tuesday night to hash out a compromise after learning that some ultrasounds could be more invasive than first thought.
...
Tarina Keene, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia, said that after years of lobbying legislators on similar bills, she didn’t know the ultrasound would be a vaginal one until a colleague at the National Women’s Law Center informed her the first week of the session.

Unbelievable!  I can't believe the incompetence and confusion from the representatives who sponsored the bill and the governor who had been outspoken in his support of it.  Shame on them for not researching the issue so they would be prepared for the lying attacks and could counter them, shame on me for assuming they had already done basic research before getting behind an issue!  I suppose I can take some comfort in the fact that the pro-abortion lobby didn't know either and only discovered the trans-vaginal angle about a month ago. It just sucks when the people who are supposed to represent our side do such a horrible job and make us all look bad by association.

This delegate sums up my feelings on this episode of betrayal, and kudos to him for chastising his fellow turncoat Republicans:

“Instead of confronting the misinformation that’s going on here, some Republicans want to back away from this,’’ said Marshall (R-Prince William). “Instead of confronting the public with the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, we — the descendants of those who fought the British empire — are sounding the call for retreat.”

UPDATE 3/7/12: McDonnell signs a modified ultrasound bill.

Related Posts:
If Ultrasounds are Rape, Abortionists Have Been Raping Women for Years!
No, Planned Parenthood, Birth Control is NOT "Basic Health Care"
Debunking the Myth that 99% of Women Are Using Birth Control
Controlling the Birth Control Debate
Susan G. Komen for the WIN: FAIL What Planned Parenthood doesn't want you to know 
.

If Ultrasounds are Rape, Abortionists Have Been Raping Women for Years!

[Update: New post - McDonnell Caves on Ultrasounds, Where Do We Go From Here]

Goodness, it's getting hard to keep up with all the new pro-abortion hysterics, it seems as if a new one comes up every day (Obama is happy, I'm sure)!  From Komen temporarily defunding Planned Parenthood, to Obamacare mandating free contraception, now it's a bill in Virginia that would require ultrasounds be performed to determine the gestational age of an unborn baby to be aborted.

Gestational age is important for determining which abortion procedure to execute - Jill Stanek has some examples in Virginia of  abortionists disciplined for complications arising from their misjudgment of the age of the babies they attempted to kill. The outrage is that pro-choice extremists are trying to say that the ultrasound requirement, because some ultrasounds are trans-vaginal, is "state-sanctioned rape!"  Yep.

As Red State "streiff" blogger notes, trans-vaginal ultrasounds are not specifically required by the bill (S.B. 484), only that an ultrasound "be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community."  In most cases, an abdominal ultrasound will be used. Although trans-vaginal ultrasounds are better for detecting pregnancies between 4 1/2-6 weeks, that is only a short period of time in which they are considered more reliable than abdominal ultrasounds.

Additionally, according to the National Abortion Federation, some women may choose them: "Some patients find TVU [transvaginal ultrasound] more comfortable than TAU [Transabdominal ultrasound] because TVU does not require a distended bladder."  But of course, feminazis don't listen to reason, they just want distract you with the word RAPE!!!  (Google "The Big Lie," by the way, and tell me this is not it.)

RHRealityCheck.com - a rabidly extreme pro-abortion website was among the first to say that an ultrasound is "State-Sanctioned Rape," bizarrely citing this definition of rape from VA law:

§ 18.2-61. Rape.
A. If any person has sexual intercourse with a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in sexual intercourse with any other person and such act is accomplished (i) against the complaining witness's will, by force, threat or intimidation of or against the complaining witness or another person; or (ii) through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness; or (iii) with a child under age 13 as the victim, he or she shall be guilty of rape.

Um, explain to me again how the abortionist is having "sexual intercourse" with his victim against their will in this situation ... ?  (Although that has happened!)  I thought there would be something in there about penetration with an object at the very least!  Pretty much big fail in utilizing legal definitions there, RHRC.  Sounds like they are the ones in need of a reality check.

But that doesn't stop useful idiot Dahlia Lithwick from jumping on the theme of rape in her article in Slate.  Here's a list of all the ways she alludes to trans-vaginal ultrasound as rape:

"bodily intrusion," "forcibly penetrated for no medical reason," "physicians who would merely like to perform their jobs without physically violating their own patients," "physical intrusion by government into the vagina of a pregnant woman," "unwanted penetration with a medical device violates either the undue burden test or the right to bodily autonomy," and "physically invading a woman’s body against her will." 

She finishes off with "One might hope that even the benign act of giving women 'more information' not be allowed to happen by forcing it between her legs." Right, as if she's just fine with the regular trans-abdominal ultrasounds that will result from this law, it's only the trans-vaginal part she has a problem with!  Hey, you know what actually is a state-sanctioned, vaginally penetrative, invasive procedure? An abortion!

Regarding the idea of women not giving "consent," Virginia S.B. 484 says that the ultrasound is "a component of informed consent to an abortion," which means it is consented to if an abortion is consented to - contrary to feminazis trying to say it would be forced without consent and thus rape. Women are told ahead of time that an ultrasound will be involved, so the idea that it is "physically invading a woman’s body against her will" is ridiculous.  Furthermore, ultrasounds are already a part of the abortion process in many cases, but pro-choice radicals won't let that get in the way of a good false rape charge to further their agenda.

The Slate rape-scare screed also cites an American Independent (TAI) article titled "Virginia ultrasound bill at odds with medical standards," which sounds like it's going to tell you that these ultrasounds are medically unnecessary.  TAI turns to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) to find out "when it is appropriate to administer a trans-vaginal ultrasound."  The ACOG helpfully pointed out that abortion was not on their list, but lo and behold, the list includes "to estimate gestational age," which is exactly what the VA bill calls for the ultrasound to do!

TAI also notes that the ACOG has a pamphlet on what to expect in preparation of a first trimester abortion which includes this sentence: "An ultrasound exam may be done to confirm the date of the pregnancy."  But WAIT, how can that be!  I thought the ultrasound bill was at odds with medical standards!  Here the ACOG tells patients to prepare for an ultrasound for the exact reasons the VA bill states!  This means that many women are already getting ultrasounds before abortions - are they being raped against their will by the state, too?

In fact, Commentary says "Ultrasounds Already Part of VA Planned Parenthood Abortion Procedure" – is Slate going to say these women are being "forcibly penetrated for no medical reason?"  Are abortionists who do trans-vaginal ultrasounds already "physically violating their own patients?"  If so, let it be known that the "sacred" big abortion business Planned Parenthood rapes women!

So sorry, pro-aborts, but ultrasounds and determining the gestational age of unborn babies are important - along with the ACOG and Planned Parenthood, your Archbishops of Abortion, the National Abortion Federation (NAF), leaders even say so!  NAF's "A Provider’s Guide to Medical Abortion" page that streiff found says, in the section titled Ultrasound Imaging in Early Pregnancy:

"In the context of medical abortion, ultrasonography can help determine gestational age, assess the outcome of the procedure, and diagnose ectopic pregnancy and other types of abnormal pregnancy."

 NAF says determining gestational age is especially important for women undergoing "medical" abortions, i.e. through medication:

"Clinicians who provide medical abortion must be able to diagnose pregnancy and estimate gestational age. Accurate estimation of gestational age is essential, as the efficacy of the FDA-approved mifepristone/misoprostol regimen and of methotrexate/misoprostol regimens for medical abortion decreases as the pregnancy advances beyond 49 days' gestation.
...medical abortion researchers and many providers in the United States have routinely used ultrasound for gestational dating.."

Thus, again radical pro-choicers' hysterics are proven wrong, unfortunately days after their poisonous headlines are in the public consciousness.  As they say, a lie can run around the world before the truth has time to put on its shoes. Time to fight fire with fire and turn pro-aborts' words against them - if ultrasounds are rape, then abortionists have been raping women for years!

______________________

UPDATE 2/22/12: The truth has finally put on its shoes, but is it too late? (Emphasis below is mine, as always)
LifeNews.com: Planned Parenthood Rape Myth Debunked, 99% Do Ultrasounds:

Abortion advocates in Virginia have come under heavy criticism for equating the ultrasound legislation there would allow women to see before an abortion to rape.  Yet, while abortion backers say having an ultrasound is like getting raped, a 2003 study shows 99% of Planned Parenthood abortion facilities do them beforehand.
...
“Vaginal ultrasound was always performed before the early surgical abortion at 59 (83%) sites, under certain conditions at 11 (16%) sites, and never at one (1%) site,” the study noted.
“Vaginal ultrasound was always performed after early surgical abortion at 18 (26%) sites, under certain conditions at 46 (66%) sites, and never at 6 (8%) sites.”
...
“Vaginal ultrasound was very common before the medical abortion, with 37 (92%) sites reporting that they always performed it,” the study continued. “Vaginal ultrasound was always performed after early medical abortion in 35 (87%) sites, performed under certain conditions in 4 (10%) sites, and never performed in 1 (3%) site.”

The research report’s authors also noted that the frequency of the use of vaginal ultrasounds before abortion is not limited to the abortion centers surveyed, but common practice in the abortion industry.

“Almost all sites offering early medical abortion always performed a vaginal ultrasound before and after the abortion, consistent with common practice in the US,” the study said.
The study also indicated some abortion centers will not actually perform an abortion without first performing a vaginal ultrasound.

Americans United for Life: Abortion Proponents Argue Against Medical Standards of Care:

What happens when abortion providers don’t follow practices of standard medical care?
You get Kermit Gosnell.  Or Steven Brigham and Nicola Riley.  You get unsafe, unsanitary conditions.
You get a “back alley.”
...
A basic component of an ultrasound law is a required standard of care.  A “standard of care” is “a statement of actions consistent with minimum safe professional conduct under specific conditions, as determined by professional peer organizations.”  Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary (20th ed. 2005).  In the ultrasound context, this means that abortion providers are to perform an ultrasound in a professional manner consistent with the way ultrasound is performed across the abortion or obstetrics communities.

But abortion proponents are arguing against including a basic standard of care in ultrasound requirements.

For example, ultrasound bills are currently making their way through the Virginia legislature.  Contained in these bills is a provision that the ultrasound “shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community.”  In other words, abortion providers must follow a basic standard of care.  They shouldn’t conduct the ultrasound haphazardly.  They shouldn’t throw an image of the woman’s gall bladder on the screen and claim that it is “products of conception.”

UPDATE 2/22/12 Part 2: Commentary confirms pretty much EVERYTHING we've been saying ("raping" women is standard medical care):  
Planned Parenthood Says it Won’t Do Abortions Without Ultrasounds

“That’s just the medical standard,” said Adrienne Schreiber, an official at Planned Parenthood’s Washington, D.C., regional office. “To confirm the gestational age of the pregnancy, before any procedure is done, you do an ultrasound.”

According to Schreiber, Planned Parenthood does require women to give signed consent for abortion procedures, including the ultrasound. But if the women won’t consent to the ultrasound, the abortion cannot take place, according to the group’s national standards.

Schreiber said there are several options at that point. If the woman is uncomfortable with a transvaginal ultrasound, which is more invasive, she can wait until the fetus is large enough to opt for a transabdominal ultrasound.

“But if she’s uncomfortable with a transvaginal ultrasound, then she’s not going to be comfortable with an equally invasive abortion procedure,” Schreiber told me.

Americans United for Life Says Attacks on Virginia Ultrasound Law Could Result in Fatal Consequences for Women

Powerful - Lori Ziganto takes on rape and trans-vaginal ultrasounds from personal experience:
Demagoguing Rape, Exploiting Victims: The Degenerate Left Continues to Use and Abuse Women 

As a woman who has experienced both, the equating of a transvaginal ultrasound with rape is beyond despicable. For the women, my arse.

The transvaginal ultrasound that I had when pregnant with my daughter did not cause me violent, bodily harm. It did not put me in fear for my life. It did not cause me to have to still sleep with a light on. The rape did, even to this day — twenty years later. It did not make me have to constantly plan my shopping trips to avoid the dark or suffer the fear and heart racing caused by walking alone through a dark parking lot. To this day. It did not make me introverted and fearful in social situations, convinced that everyone was staring at me. Hello, mad hair twirling!

It did not leave scars on my face and chest, caused by a broken beer bottle used as one of the weapons against me. And while those scars may have faded to the point that only I can see them, the scars that no one can see on the inside are still there. And always will be.
...
They diminish rape, empower rapists and re-victimize those who have been raped — for attempted political points. Demagoguing RAPE. They have truly moved past rock bottom and are scraping the earth’s mantle. Their abuse of women knows no bounds. They know an ultrasound is in no way like rape; in fact, Planned Parenthood uses them themselves before sucking a child from a woman’s womb. But that’s the point, isn’t it? They just don’t want silly little women to see the ultrasounds themselves. They are trying to scare women with cries of ‘it’s just like rape”- an ultrasound –  as a way to push the ‘ball of cells’ lie to women. All so that more women will kill their children completely uninformed. Informed choice my strappy sandal-clad foot. See the actual baby? That doesn’t suit. It’s not good for the blood money bottom line.

UPDATED 2/23/12:  I like that we're finally getting into the "life-saving" language now, much more effective.
National Review: Abortion Advocates Wage a Misinformation Campaign over Virginia Ultrasound Legislation:

There is a breathtaking display of unvarnished bias as abortion advocates and their allies in the national press try to kill legislation in Virginia requiring that an ultrasound be performed prior to a surgical or chemical abortion. Ultrasound laws are currently in effect in 22 states, with five of those states requiring exactly what Virginia is considering. Why? Because, simply put, ultrasound laws save lives.

Performing an ultrasound before an abortion should be a commonsense standard of care for abortion providers. Ultrasound assists an abortion provider in determining gestational age. The farther along in pregnancy that a woman is, the greater the risk that abortion poses. Ultrasound also serves an essential medical purpose by diagnosing ectopic pregnancies which, if left undiagnosed, can result in fallopian rupture and life-threatening bleeding. For example, the FDA has reported that at least two women have died from ruptured ectopic pregnancies following use of the abortion drug RU-486.

However, the abortion lobby doesn’t want women to receive these life-saving exams if the images produced by the ultrasound could sway women away from abortion....

UPDATED 2/25/12: Ramah International, a place that provides healing for regretful post-abortive women, has a section with information for women to consider before making the decision on whether or not to have an abortion. Included are important reasons for requiring ultrasounds before abortions that you may not have even thought of - what if the abortion mill is taking advantage of a woman who is not even pregnant or is about to miscarry:

Confirm your pregnancy with a doctor who doesn't do abortions.

There have been cases where abortion clinics have provided clients with incorrect information in order to obtain their abortion fee. Carol Everett was an abortion clinic owner who used to provide abortion services in Texas. She testified in Congress that she sold abortions to women who were not pregnant but feared they were. For the best medical input on abortion we recommend you speak with a medical professional that has nothing to gain in your abortion decision. Your local pregnancy care center can provide you with that referral.

Get an ultrasound.

You may receive an ultrasound from your local pregnancy care center. This non-diagnostic ultrasound can tell you how many weeks you are into the pregnancy or whether or not your pregnancy is viable. In other words, it could be that you are going to miscarry the baby and won’t need the services of an abortion clinic. This service, provided by a certified sonographer, may aid you in making this important decision.

UPDATE 2/22/12 - New post reacting to collapse of the Virginia Ultrasound bill:

McDonnell Caves on Ultrasounds, Where Do We Go From Here

UPDATE 3/7/12: McDonnell signs a modified ultrasound bill.

UPDATE 3/8/12: Wow, even after the VA GOP modified the bill so as not to require a transvaginal ultrasound - or "rape" as the radical pro-aborts call it - opponents still weren't satisfied and called transabdominal ultrasounds "battery:"

During the final debate on the bill in the Virginia House, Delegate Charniele Herring, Alexandria Democrat, outrageously stated that requiring the external “transabdominal ultrasound is tantamount to battery.”

Seriously? Does that mean that Planned Parenthood of Virginia and physicians’ offices across the state are “battering” women with “unnecessary” procedures? If not, then don’t all women in the state deserve the common-sense standard of care that even Planned Parenthood admits is necessary before abortion?

The hysterics never end.
.

Related Posts:
No, Planned Parenthood, Birth Control is NOT "Basic Health Care"
Debunking the Myth that 99% of Women Are Using Birth Control
Controlling the Birth Control Debate
Susan G. Komen for the WIN: FAIL What Planned Parenthood doesn't want you to know 
How Planned Parenthood Exploits Minors
Planned Parenthood exposed again
Front-Alley Abortions
Blood Money: More Abortonists Butcher Their Customers
Just your friendly neighborhood abortionists
Abortion ends in death. Can you live with that?
.

What Elle Magazine Got Wrong About Feminism And Conservative Women

Interesting article in Elle magazine by Nina Burleigh (who infamously said of Clinton, "I'd be happy to give him [oral sex] just to thank him for keeping abortion legal") called The Best and the Rightest about conservative women, which featured Ashley Sewell (aka TXTrendyChick).  It's a 4 page article, but the paragraph that stuck out most for me was this one:

The young women I interviewed for this article share almost every goal of feminism. They want to be—and in many cases, already believe themselves to be—“empowered”: educationally, financially, sexually. But they resist any effort to put advancing their fellow women front and center. That means opposing everything from gender-based affirmative action, such as government-mandated quotas for female athletes under Title IX, to equal-pay-for-equal-work laws. So on the one hand they may lament that there are only a handful of female CEOs at Fortune 500 companies and only 17 female U.S. Senators—“It does matter,” Sewell says. “A woman’s perspective is different from a man’s.” But on the other hand, they’re not going to take to the ramparts to try to increase the numbers.

To the author, the only way to advance our fellow women is through laws and government mandates like affirmative action, quotas, and wage legislation.  How is that in any way empowering?  It doesn't even occur to her that you can advance women without government help.  Conservative women are not empowered by government handouts.  We want to do things on our own, not have the government give them to us.  Of course we want women to go into whatever field they want and can succeed in, play whatever sport they enjoy, and be paid based on merit, not gender.  But instead of government mandates or forcing public tax dollars on specious programs that are prone to mission creep, we turn to families, churches, and local communities to make this happen; we choose to support charities or volunteering to mentor girls.  It is ridiculous to say we "resist any effort to put advancing [our] fellow women front and center."

We also don't want our success to come at the expense of others, such as when men's sports programs are canceled because there aren't enough women's ones to match them as a result of Title IX.  It shouldn't be a zero sum game, everyone should have the chance to succeed based on desire and merit - not gender, ethnicity, etc.  The fact that women and men are different and have different interests or skills is another important factor that the author misses.  And women shouldn't be advanced just based on the fact that they're women, they have to be the best. 

I don't know what the author means by "take to the ramparts" regarding the lower numbers of women as CEOs and Senators, but it sounds like she wants us to raise hell and shakedown companies to hire based on gender or force laws requiring minimum numbers of women in government.  We're not going to elect women just because they are women, they have to share our values and be the best candidate in the race.

Meanwhile, the author ignores groups like Smart Girl Politics, which I (along with Ashley Sewell and Dana Loesch, who is mentioned in the piece, too) am a member of, a community that encourages conservative women leaders to run for office and gives them the tools, training and support they need to make it happen.  2010 was the "Year of the Conservative Woman" with record numbers running for public office.  A woman just won the Iowa straw poll, and a second woman might be entering the presidential race soon.  These are glaring omissions.

Finally, it is interesting that in her list of "almost every goal of feminism" the author does not refer to abortion, which, ironically, to second and third wave liberal feminists, is the litmus test for bearing the title.  I attribute this to the author trying to get rid of feminism's current connotations as a dirty word along with an attempt to make the conservative women profiled in the article appear hypocritical.  On the other hand, it could be a nod to the fourth wave conservative and pro-life efforts to break the glass ceiling and finally allow diversity of thought in modern feminism.

The new movement of pro-woman, pro-life, embodied by the group Feminists for Life, is an encouraging shift from the radical feminism that has dominated since the 1960's.  We want equal rights with men, but how is abortion an equal right?  Rights do not extend to the destruction of another human, no matter what the law says.

It is important to remember that the abortion on demand version of feminism is a relatively recent development.  The suffragettes, the original "first wave" feminists, opposed abortion (all following quotes from FFL). Elizabeth Cady Stanton explicitly contrasted abortion as antithetical to the rights of women: "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."

She also used the "evil" of abortion to make the case for women's right to vote, with suffrage being the remedy to abortion: "There must be a remedy even for such a crying evil as this. But where shall it be found, at least where begin, if not in the complete enfranchisement and elevation of women?" 

Susan B. Anthony addressed what are now common modern day excuses for abortion and decried men's role in pressuring women to abort, "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!"

Finally, Alice Paul, author of the original 1923 Equal Rights Amendment, powerfully said, "Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women." 

These feminist foremothers knew - as today's pro-life feminists know - that, as opposed to helping women, abortion hurts and degrades women.  This is true feminism and I hope the "Fourth wave" wins out.

So the author of the Elle article is right that conservative women "share almost every goal of feminism," she is just wrong on which aspects of it we truly resist and how we advance women.

Choice: After IVF, Woman aborts one twin because idea of managing two infants "terrified her"

Horrifying NYT article on pregnancy "reduction" - killing at least one but not all of the multiple babies growing in your womb.  I've only gotten through the first couple paragraphs but already the woman featured is a grotesque stereotype of all that is wrong with "choice" in America.  My reaction in black bold:

The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy

As Jenny lay on the obstetrician’s examination table, she was grateful that the ultrasound tech had turned off the overhead screen. She didn’t want to see the two shadows floating inside her. [Typical. She doesn't want to see the truth of the life of her children and face the reality of killing one of them. Another reason why pro-aborts HATE allowing women considering abortion to see ultrasounds] Since making her decision, she had tried hard not to think about them, [Thinking is bad. It might lead to some uncomfortable feelings] though she could often think of little else. She was 45 and pregnant after six years of fertility bills, ovulation injections, donor eggs and disappointment — and yet here she was, 14 weeks into her pregnancy, choosing to extinguish one of two healthy fetuses, [This is just beyond comprehension. Killing a desperately wanted, healthy child that you've spent countless time, energy, and money to have.] almost as if having half an abortion. As the doctor inserted the needle into Jenny’s abdomen, aiming at one of the fetuses, Jenny tried not to flinch, caught between intense relief [Sick] and intense guilt.[Good. Hint: Shame and guilt mean you've done something wrong.]

“Things would have been different if we were 15 years younger or if we hadn’t had children already or if we were more financially secure [These are the same excuses most older women who abort make ... except they didn't spend 6 years TRYING to get pregnant! It is despicably selfish to kill your child because it is inconvenient to you.],” she said later. “If I had conceived these twins naturally, I wouldn’t have reduced this pregnancy, because you feel like if there’s a natural order, then you don’t want to disturb it. [A profound paradox. She is messing with nature, she has already disturbed it.] But we created this child in such an artificial manner — in a test tube, choosing an egg donor, having the embryo placed in me — and somehow, making a decision about how many to carry seemed to be just another choice. [This is a horrific consequence of our scientific advancement - the idea that we are our own Gods, we control nature, both its creation and destruction, because we own it. It's like all the dire slippery slope arguments and science fiction-like warnings are coming true.] The pregnancy was all so consumerish to begin with, [Children are becoming commodities whose values are only determined by the immediate needs and whims of their owners.  It's like going to Costco and buying the jumbo 2 pack of mayo.  You don't need the second one, it will only go bad and that would be messy and inconvenient, so you toss it in the trash. There is no moral difference between mayo and baby - hey, they both come from eggs.] and this became yet another thing we could control.” [And that's what it is all about these days.  The obsessive need for control.  And choice.  And power.  Holding a life in the balance must be the ultimate power trip.]
...
Jenny’s decision to reduce twins to a single fetus was never really in doubt. The idea of managing two infants at this point in her life terrified her. [Maybe she shouldn't have been trying to get pregnant!!!  You'd think after 6 years of trying, she'd have thought this through a little more. And what makes her thing she can manage ONE infant at this point in her life?] She and her husband already had grade-school-age children, and she took pride in being a good mother. She felt that twins would soak up everything she had to give, leaving nothing for her older children. Even the twins would be robbed, because, at best, she could give each one only half of her attention and, she feared, only half of her love. [Another common abortion excuse - as if your love is a zero sum game, there's a limited amount of love to go around and giving one child love, means you're taking away some from another. I'm not a mother yet, but every one I've ever met has said that they love all of their children equally and in different ways. There is always more room in a mother's heart. Also, she is robbing her own kids of their brother or sister.  This is a particularly grievous loss to the surviving twinn] Jenny desperately wanted another child, but not at the risk of becoming a second-rate parent. [WHY?!  Why, why, WHY?! I thought she was 15 years too old, had other children, and wasn't financially secure? What is the reasoning behind her need for another child?!] “This is bad, but it’s not anywhere as bad as neglecting your child or not giving everything you can to the children you have,” [This woman is living in a sick world where death is better than having a busy mother. I guess telling herself that is the only way she can sleep at night.] she told me, referring to the reduction. She and her husband worked out this moral calculation on their own [I also hate that we live in a world where people get to make their own moral calculations about life and death.  Life is life, no matter what, it's not something that's definition should be allowed to vary from person to person.  The woman whose "moral calculation" is that abortion is ok up until the minute of birth - or even after - is not equal or as morally valid as one who knows that life begins at conception.  You get to have your own opinions, but not your own facts.], and they intend to never tell anyone about it. Jenny is certain that no one, not even her closest friends, would understand, and she doesn’t want to be the object of their curiosity or feel the sting of their judgment.  ["Jenny," wherever you are, I hope you feel the sting of my judgment!]

SICK SICK SICK.  My heart weeps for her, her children, and the future.

Abortion ends in death. Can you live with that?

Abortion ends in death. Can you live with that? I couldn’t. -Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood Director

via LifeNews.com: New Abby Johnson Television Ad Takes on Planned Parenthood





I was a Planned Parenthood Director and Employee of the Year.  I used to tell women that abortions removed a mass of tissue, but that’s not true.  I had to account for the body parts of aborted babies.  Yes, Planned Parenthood prevents pregnancies, but they also provide over 320,000 abortions each year.  They won’t protect your child, there’s no money in doing that.  Abortion ends in death. Can you live with that? I couldn’t. 


Meanwhile, there's this sick article: Celebrating the “Sacred Work” of Planned Parenthood on Good Friday

How Planned Parenthood Exploits Minors

How sick to think that Planned Parenthood workers are so eager to facilitate minors exercising their "reproductive freedom" to abort that they don't consider or care that these trafficked and abused children have been stripped of any real reproductive freedom - to choose whether or not to engage in sexual activity - and are being raped and exploited.

To Planned Parenthood, getting a quick buck off of their minor victims is more important than their health or safety.

Big Abortion values "access," (i.e. as many clinics as possible to rake in the dough) above all else and is willing to tolerate abuses so long as their larger goals are met.

They'd rather have dirty, dangerous abortion mills in operation than have these clinics submit to government health inspections and regulations that would put them out of business. They'd rather help exploited child prostitutes get secret abortions than report abuse to authorities and scare other potential predator customers away.

After all, choosing to help women and children would be bad for business and, in the end, Big Abortion is big business. One that the government should not be funding with our tax dollars.

Amplify’d from www.washingtontimes.com

WAGNER: Planned Parenthood: A culture of sexploitation

Group takes federal money while ignoring laws against exploitation of minors

Under the federal anti-trafficking law, any juvenile younger than 18 who is subjected to commercial sexual exploitation is a victim of human trafficking - a victim of modern-day slavery. Under our legal system, no child can consent to engage in prostitution. Similarly, no children who are trapped in a situation of commercial sexual exploitation can give informed consent to undergo an abortion or receive a regime of contraception because of the trauma and manipulation to which they are subjected routinely and constantly. Yet the health care providers in these videos appear all too eager to sign up juvenile victims for both abortions and contraceptives.

To subject a juvenile victim of commercial sexual exploitation to either an abortion or contraception has only one purpose: to sustain her exploitation, and only one beneficiary: the trafficker/pimp. This is why the Live Action videos are so revealing and so shocking. They show health care professionals, employed by a national organization receiving taxpayer funds, who not only do not fulfill their obligation to report to authorities these potential cases of child abuse, but actually are willing to facilitate that abuse. Read more at www.washingtontimes.com

See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/budt1

UPDATE: WAAAAAAAH Most Virginia abortion clinics can't meet new health and safety standards and will have to close!  BOO HOO

What does this say about these clinics?

The Greatest Role of All: Motherhood, Feminism, and Natalie Portman

Last night at the Oscars, Natalie Portman was giving her acceptance speech for Best Actress when she thanked "my beautiful love, Benjamin Millepied who choreographed the film and has now given me the most important role of my life" - motherhood.  It was a beautiful moment, but this Salon writer, Mary Elizabeth Williams, found Portman's words "jarring."  She got the creepy-crawlies at the thought of motherhood.  She doesn't like it when people:

refer[] to motherhood as the most important thing a woman can possibly do ... is motherhood really a greater role than being secretary of state or a justice on the Supreme Court?  Is reproduction automatically the greatest thing Natalie Portman will do with her life? 

Well, I happen to agree that motherhood is Portman's most important role.  But we're not talking about a woman secretary of state or justice, we're talking about an actress.  And because she's an actress, the term "role" is quite literal.  Portman has played many parts in her young career, from Queen Amidala to Anne Boleyn to Nina Sayers in Black Swan for which she won her award for Best Actress in a Lead ROLE.  So, yes, I would say Mother is far more important a role to play than any of these characters.  And good for her for saying so!

But the Slate author just doesn't get it:

Why, at the pinnacle of one's professional career, would a person feel the need to undercut it by announcing that there's something else even more important? Even if you feel that way, why downplay your achievement? 

Wow, really?  She begrudges Portman for having the humility to acknowledge that there are things in this world bigger and more important than - GASP - acting?!

Interestingly enough, the writer quotes Annette Bening as an example of - well, actually, I'm not sure WHY she quotes Bening, something about working mothers but the point isn't clear - but Bening gets to the heart of what the writer doesn't understand.  She says of motherhood, in part:

"a lot of the time your life is not about you ... There's that selflessness you need to find ..."

Seems like Portman has already found that selflessness, while the writer wishes she would simply be selfish and bask in herself and her own glory.

The author goes on to gripe:

when was the last time a male star gave an acceptance speech calling fatherhood his biggest role?

I'm not sure if any man has or hasn't, but someone should have.  Fatherhood is a very important role, especially today when 22% of children live in single mother homes.  In fact, isn't it Hollywood and the Left that are always trying to tell us fathers aren't all that important?

In closing, the author writes:

Motherhood is important. So is work. And you don't have to backhandedly downplay one to be proud of the other.

How does saying her most important role is that of a mother "backhandedly downplay" her role in Black Swan?  She's not insulting her own work, but stating the simple fact that there are more important things in life.

The visceral reaction from people like the Slate writer, upon watching Natalie Portman talk about "the most important role of [her] life," makes complete sense when you consider that it goes against everything strident feminists believe.  Any good thoughts about motherhood or the mere presence of a visibly pregnant woman gives them the heebie jeebies because, to them, motherhood is a choice and their first instinct is that a baby is a parasite to be removed. 

We can't be too complementary of motherhood lest we offend the women who chose to kill their babies.  We can't call it the most important role because that is insensitive to women who don't have or want children.  We can't celebrate the unique role of the mother because that would mean acknowledging the differences between men and women and that these differences can be good.  We can't talk about motherhood and careers at the same time because that means that we value one over the other and both are equally good and valid - especially having a career.


Only a feminist would complain about an actress not being self-centered and narcissistic.  Only a feminist would be offended at the thought of raising the next generation being one's most important role.  Only a feminist would consider being thankful to have a child with the one you love a backhanded slap at your career. 


How sad that this writer chose to throw a feminissy fit over this beautiful moment for Natalie Portman and her family.  I wish Portman well in the greatest role she, or any woman, will ever play.


UPDATE 3/1: KJ Dell'Antonia from Slate gets in on the act, saying Portman was just "spouting the party line" and adds: 

every time a powerful woman downplays her other achievements as inferior to her maternal status, she feeds the doubt that still pursue working mothers at every end of the spectrum: Will she really take her work seriously or will she put her children first? 

Again, this isn't a zero sum game - calling motherhood your most important role does not downplay other achievements, and the choice isn't between either "take work seriously" or "put children first."  Feminists might not believe it, but women CAN do a job well, while prioritizing their children's lives - women are known for their great abilities to multi-task, after all.

But even if it WERE a zero sum game, so what?  The role of mother is more important than any regular "job" and it should be - whoops, can't say that! - might hurt some working mom's feelings or make her doubt herself!  We aren't allowed to say ANYTHING is more important than a career because apparently that is the end all and be all of being a woman, anything else is bending to the will of the powerful and oppressive patriarchy or some such b.s.

Front-Alley Abortions

Pro-choicers like to reminisce about the days of dangerous "back-alley" abortions but have things really changed since then?  They weren't called "back-alley" because they were done in a back alley, it was because illegal abortions were done in regular doctors offices but the women had to sneak in through the back door.  All Roe v. Wade did was legalize these "back-alley" offices and allow them to continue the same abortions but bring in people through the front door.  Legalization didn't make abortion any safer (except maybe for the livelihood of the abortionist), it was medical advances like penicillin that saved women's lives.

Front-alley abortion centers exist today, where heartless abortionists butcher women in dangerous and unsanitary conditions.  There is little to no regulation of abortion mills because holding them to standards that even tattoo parlors and veterinarian offices have to abide by would violate a "woman's right to choose!"  Instead of being so worried that having medical standards in place would shut down abortion centers and reduce "access" to abortion, maybe proaborts should be more concerned that their precious abortion centers are so unsanitary, and unsafe that they would have to close in the first place!

The mantra of "safe, legal, but rare" is a sham - they don't care about safety or reducing abortions, they only care that they're legal, no matter the cost to the women, families and children.

Some front-alley abortion mills in the news:

Judge Allows Louisiana Abortion Facility Not Meeting Safety Standards to Reopen
http://www.lifenews.com/state5461.html

The health department said it found the Hope Medical Group for Women abortion center failed to ensure a physician performed a physical exam of the mother prior to the abortion and failed to properly monitor vital signs of patients under anesthesia. 
 
It also did not have proper procedures in place for administering anesthesia and failed to have properly trained medical professionals administering anesthesia and engaging in other medical procedures related to it.

Abortion Practitioner With Problems Replaces One Who Killed Woman in Maryland
http://www.lifenews.com/state5465.html

Wartanian has a long and sordid history of malpractice suits and wrongful deaths reaching back decades, Newman notes, and he was involved in a 2001 Maryland scandal that led to reforms in the way the Board of Physicians disciplines doctors. But through it all, Wartanian has escaped discipline. 

Operation Rescue has issued a new report detailing Wartanian's legal woes and his history of incompetence that has led to the deaths of at least two babies not destined for abortions.

Suspended Abortion Practitioner Nicola Riley Putting Women at Medical Risk Utah
http://www.lifenews.com/state5485.html

Earlier this month, the Maryland Board of Physicians suspended the medical license of abortion practitioner Nicola I. Riley. Riley was a staff abortion practitioner of embattled abortion business owner Steven Chase Brigham but following the suspension, Riley has returned to her Utah home to do abortions there.
 
Riley was involved in the botched abortion in Elkton, Maryland, that led to the discovery of Brigham's scheme to circumvent late-term abortion laws.

She is accused of aiding and abetting the unlicensed practice of medicine whereby Brigham and his staff begin abortions at his New Jersey centers, which don't meet state health and safety laws to make them eligible to do later-term abortions, then transporting the women to Maryland for completion of the abortion. Brigham has been found to have injured women in two other similar abortions.

See also:
Blood Money: More Abortonists Butcher Their Customers

My Top 5 Must Reads of the Day 6/30/10

1. Why Obamanomics Has Failed WSJ




The president, his friends and advisers talk endlessly about the circumstances they inherited as a way of avoiding responsibility for the 18 months for which they are responsible. But they want new stimulus measures—which is convincing evidence that they too recognize that the earlier measures failed.

EXACTLY! Instead of blaming Bush, get up and do something about it! Kind of like Gov. McDonnell did!



2. In her own hand: Kagan’s manipulation on partial-birth abortion Hot Air
By Ed Morrissey



Note the deletion of the word “not” in the original statement, which originally read (emphasis mine), “This procedure, however, may not be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman, and the doctor should be allowed to make this determination.”

This has to be seen to be believed - Kagan's handwritten notes cross out the word "not" so as to completely change the sentence!



3. Obama Mocked Commissions, Then Established Four CBS




Here's Mr. Obama on September 18, 2008, not long after the economic collapse: "Senator McCain's first answer to this economic crisis was - get ready for it - a commission. That's Washington-speak for 'we'll get back to you later.'"


"Folks, we don't need a commission to spend a few years and a lot of taxpayer money to tell us what's going on in our economy," he continued. "We don't need a commission to tell us gas prices are high or that you can't pay your bills. We don't need a commission to tell us you're losing your jobs. We don't need a commission to study this crisis, we need a President who will solve it - and that's the kind of President I intend to be."

And...today there was a meeting of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform - they'll get back to us later.



4. Blagojevich Should Have Told Obama to Stuff It. Publicly. NBC Chicago




Under the Constitution, the president doesn’t have a right to stack the Senate with his own picks. Filling vacancies is up to the states. This ensures that Congress will be an independent body, unlike the Chicago City Council, where Mayor Daley gets to appoint replacements for jailed aldermen.

Isn't this the third time Obama has gotten involved in attempting to determine who gets a Senate seat? Sestak? Romannoff? Anyone?



5. W.H. quiet on Obama-Blago link Politico




Reconciling the accounts of Balanoff and Craig could come down to the question of what the White House’s definition of “communication” is.

Is that kind of like defining what the meaning of the word "is" is?

More Pro-Choice Violence

Pro-Life Group Wants Justice Department to Investigate Death Threats, Gets Refusal

Abortion Advocate Nearly Runs Over Pro-Life Planned Parenthood Protester

Arkansas Man Faces July Trial for Nearly Hitting Pro-Life Advocates With Car

Abortion Advocate Attacks Pro-Life Group's Office, Tries to Disable Security System

And let's not forget about the SEVENTH instance of Planned Parenthood breaking the law by not reporting the statutory rape of underage girls:

Planned Parenthood Abortion Center Staffer: We Bend the Rules on Sexual Abuse

Related posts:

Pro-"Choice" Violence

The Slippery Slope in Action

The slippery slope is not just theoretical.

As the men quoted in these articles say, as long as euthanasia and the killing of disabled babies is encouraged in policy and law, the devaluation of human life will continue and allow for problems like this to occur. Not only is this an indictment on the culture of death, but also on socialized medicine.


UK Medical Staff Declare Disabled Man Not Worth Saving From Heart Attack

In an incident that pro-life advocates say is the slippery slope that results from legalizing assisted suicide or euthanasia, two medical staffers in England have been arrested for reportedly deciding that the life of a disabled man was not worth saving after he had a heart attack. ...

When the unnamed medics arrived at Baker's home, they found him collapsed on the floor and the phone line was still open and recording their conversations. Baker died after the incident.

A police source told the London Times that the medics were heard discussing how they didn't want to revive Baker saying “words to the effect that he was not worth saving."

They were also heard discussing what to say to authorities and decided to give a story saying Baker had died prior to their arrival at his home.

..."The next time you are tempted to scoff at folk with disabilities who worry that they many people think their lives are not worth living, remember this story," he said. ...

"Friends and colleagues who have disabilities report similar stories of disdain occurring here when seeking medical care, for example, of people on ventilators being pressured to sign DNRs by hospital personnel even though they were not undergoing usually life-threatening procedures," he explains.

"Human exceptionalism demands that each of us be deemed to be of equal objective moral worth. It is an ideal we have never achieved, admittedly. But unless bigotry against people with disabilities is especially shocking when it impacts care in the medical context," Smith added.

British Hospital Allows Down Syndrome Patient to Starve to Death Over 26 Days

In a scandal that is causing a massive outcry, a British hospital has allowed a Down syndrome patient to starve to death over a 26 day period. Martin Ryan, who could not swallow after a stroke, was allowed to lie in a bed and starve to death without receiving any medical care.

...The query found that doctors thought staff nurses were feeding him with a feeding tube in his nose, but by the time anyone realized that had not happened for weeks, Ryan was took weak for a surgery to insert a gastronomy tube in his stomach.

...A report by the Mencap charity following the incident found the British governmental health service has also failed other people with mental difficulties, citing a young woman denied cancer treatment and a young man who died during treatment for a broken leg.

Anthony Ozimic, the political secretary of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, a British pro-life group, told LifeNews.com the British government must be held accountable for what is becoming routine discrimination against the mentally disabled.

"Mencap has identified institutional discrimination within Britain's healthcare services against people with learning disabilities," he said. "Yet lethal institutional discrimination against the disabled and vulnerable is enshrined in law and policy, particularly in the pro-euthanasia Mental Capacity Act which Mencap supported."

"Disabled adults will continue to die because of discriminatory attitudes whilst the Mental Capacity Act and the killing of disabled unborn children, which manifest those attitudes, remain law," Ozimic added.

Related post:

What the culture of abortion on demand has wrought