I’m Scheming Unborn Baby, and I approve this message
This is an article from the Daily Signal, and it shows the kinds of devious, mean tactics that those awful pro-lifers will stoop to, in order to stop the intentional killing of unborn children.
Look how awful:
A pro-life group say it has convinced more than 300 companies to stop donating to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.
The organization, Life Decisions International, tracks corporate sponsors of Planned Parenthood in an effort to encourage them to stop donating.
In an interview with The Daily Signal, Doug Scott, president of Life Decisions International, said his group is “primarily an educational organization.”
Its aim, Scott said, is to educate companies and CEOs about Planned Parenthood’s “real agenda.”
Using Planned Parenthood’s own annual reports, newsletters and IRS documents, Life Decisions International determines which companies contribute funds. It adds the findings to a list of such donors, and encourages pro-lifers to use the list to boycott them.
Discussions with each company are “kept completely confidential to spare them the backlash from pro-abortion people,” Scott said.
Tom Strobhar, chairman of Life Decisions International, told The Daily Signal that more than 300 companies “no longer give to Planned Parenthood” because of his organization.
Naughty! Anyway, let me think about the people I know of who are doing pro-life work. I know two people who are professional pro-life debaters, who debate university professors, etc. at open-to-the-public events at major universities. Another person I have heard of has a project where pregnant women can get a free ultrasound to help them to decide what to do with their babies. Another person sets up booths at her local university to answer questions from pro-life students. Another person who comments here regularly and is an expert in Christian apologetics regularly engages with pro-abortion activists while protesting outside of abortion clinics. We also have people who sneak into clinics and capture the words of pro-abortion people on video. And of course I know that politically, the big push right now is to de-fund abortion providers – cut off their taxpayer funding, especially. Dastardly pro-lifers!
Here’s a recent story about wicked pro-lifers using their trickses to defeat abortion greed:
Oklahoma Republican Gov. Mary Fallin ordered the Oklahoma Health Care Authority to terminate contracts with two Planned Parenthood affiliates Thursday, citing billing problems.
Fallin said she made the decision because of problems with the two affiliates overcharging Oklahoma residents for services by 20 percent and 14 percent. She pointed out that there are about 120 other health care options for Oklahoma residents.
[…]Fallin asked for a state review of Planned Parenthood earlier this year which revealed the overbilling. There was not, however, misuse of Medicaid funds. “These results are alarming,” Fallin wrote in the letter to Gomez. “These errors result in overbilling to the Oklahoma taxpayer. The lack of attention to the requirements imposed on a responsible provider is a continuing problem for these Planned Parenthood affiliates.”
Why, they even have popularly-elected governors helping them! Sneaky, mischievous, under-handed villains! Working within the law to end abortion? It’s inconceivable! (It’s inconceivable to the anti-reality secular left, I mean).
And there was actually a good article on The Stream explaining why this is so, by John Zmirak, so let’s link to that. I recommend that everyone who wants to know why pro-lifers are so busy using these cognitive / fiscal methods to address the abortion issue read that article, especially if your name is “Child of Ra” or if you attended college to obtain a non-STEM degree.
To neighbors, it looked like a “moonshine shack,” a little yellow wooden hut, with overgrown weeds and no indoor plumbing, banged together by its owner, Robert Lewis Dear Jr.
And whenever Dear came to stay in his shack in the woods, the neighbors in Anderson Acres, a community of about seven houses along a steep, gravel road here, kept their kids inside.
“He was the kind of person you had to watch out for,” one neighbor said. “He was a very weird individual. It’s hard to explain, but he had a weird look in his eye most of the time.”
Dear, 57, the man in custody in connection with Friday’s shooting at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, appears to have been a malcontent who drifted from place to place. In the past couple of years, in addition to the shack, he also lived in a mobile home in another town in North Carolina and a camper in Colorado, which he shared with a woman who moved with him from the East Coast.
Some who knew him found him to be unremarkable, while others said that he seemed to be delusional and aggressive. He had a history of run-ins with neighbors and police, including arrests for alleged cruelty to animals and allegedly being a “peeping Tom.” He was not convicted in either case.
“It’s just too devastating; it’s just something you can’t fathom happening,” Pamela Ross, who was married to Dear nearly 20 years ago, said in a brief interview Saturday. She declined to comment further.
Dear’s problems with the law date to 1997, when his then-wife reported to police that Dear had assaulted her, according to reports filed with the sheriff’s office in Colleton County, S.C., where Dear lived at the time. She declined to file charges against him but told police she reported the incident because she “wanted something on record.”
Colleton County police released reports of at least seven other episodes in which Dear, who described himself to police as a self-employed art dealer, had disputes or physical altercations with neighbors or other residents.
Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood officials have confirmed none of the people killed in the shooting or 9 victims who were injured were Planned Parenthood abortion clinic staff or patients and authorities have released no motive for the shooter as to whether or not he actually targeted Planned Parenthood.
[…]“We don’t have any information on this individual’s mentality, or his ideas or ideology,” Colorado Springs police Lt. Catherine Buckley said, according to the Associated Press.
Life News quotes Buzz Feed: (no link)
Public records reviewed by BuzzFeed News indicate a Robert Lewis Dear Jr. has faced as many as nine criminal charges in North and South Carolina, including two misdemeanors for cruelty to animals (for which he was found not guilty during a bench trial) and for being a peeping tom (which was dismissed at a preliminary hearing).
There are also voting records of a Robert Lewis Dear Jr. living in Hartsel, Colorado, as recently as 2014. The town lies in the middle of the state and is just over one hour’s drive from Colorado Springs.
Planned Parenthood says no motive is known:
Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains issued a statement responding to the shooting, saying it doesn’t know if Planned Parenthood was the target of the attack.
“We don’t yet know the full circumstances and motives behind this criminal action, and we don’t yet know if Planned Parenthood was in fact the target of this attack,” Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains President Vicki Cowart said in a statement. “We share the concerns of many Americans that extremists are creating a poisonous environment that feeds domestic terrorism in this country.”
“While the investigation into the shooting at the Planned Parenthood center continues, regardless of what the motive is determined to be, we strongly condemn this violence. As the target of domestic terrorism inspired by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the staff of the Family Research Council empathize with all the victims of this violence. All of us at the Family Research Council join with the pro-life movement in praying for the injured officers and victims of these deplorable acts.”
“Only through peaceful means –not violence— can we truly become a nation that once again values all human life, born and unborn,” concluded Perkins.
Dear appears to have no association with the pro-life movement and those who know him say he is an awkward man who never discussed religion or abortion.
That’s what we know as on Saturday night. Meanwhile, Obama is using the shooting to push for disarming law-abiding citizens, so that criminals have an easier time robbing, raping and murdering them. And Hillary Clinton is fundraising off the shooting, claiming that the abortion industry is under attack from a great and powerful and scary pro-life lobby.
Canada Election 2015: Socialists in red, Communists in Orange, Conservatives in blue
Here is an article written by a Canadian named Mike Schouten in Life News.
He wrote this prior to the Canadian federal election:
The de facto position of Thomas Mulcair and Stephen Harper is, in principle, no different. When questioned directly by Trudeau last Friday, Harper said the same as he has been saying for years, “My position for 10 years has been I don’t intend to re-open this debate.”
As yet, all three leaders have a realistic shot at making 24 Sussex their home after the October 19 election. And all three continue to treat pre-born children as a political liability.
Messrs. Harper, Mulcair and Trudeau are without excuse. If elected, it is their duty to enact laws for the benefit of all Canadians. Their complete disregard for the human rights of any children in the womb effectually means that they are complicit in the deaths of 100,000 members of the human family every year.
In effect Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair and Justin Trudeau all support sex-selective abortion. They care less about the fact that girls are targeted for abortion much more frequently than boys. Their refusal to act is a sign that they endorse this misogynistic practice in Canada.
All three leaders also support late-term abortion. They show no regard for the reality that every year thousands of babies lose their lives by being aborted in the latter stages of pregnancy, after the stage when children of the same age are born, survive outside of the womb, and live productive lives as Canadian citizens.
Now, I can understand why Schouten is frustrated. But what he is saying above is going to have one of two effects on pro-life voters. Either pro-lifers will stay home and not vote, since there are no differences between the parties on the abortion issue, or they will waste their vote on a third-party candidate who cannot win.
During Harper’s tenure as prime minister, abortion was never expanded, because Harper never made pushing leftward on social issues a priority. In fact, one could argue that his tax credits for married couples encouraged people to marry, which tends to push down the number of abortions. Married couples are better equipped to welcome into the world an unborn child, because there are two people, not just one. But Schouten did not foresee that things could actually get worse under a Liberal or NDP prime minister. He just didn’t understand how radical the pro-abortion left really is compared to the center-right.
Then what happened?
Here is an article from Life Site News explaining what happened when Harper lost to the Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau, who also happens to be an extremist on abortion:
Canada’s new health minister promises to “equalize” access to abortion, especially for women living in rural areas, but won’t give specifics. However, the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada has supplied LifeSiteNews a long shopping list for addressing the “problem.”
The ARCC wants more surgical time for abortions in rural hospitals, elimination of conscientious objection by pro-life doctors, screening out of pro-life ob-gyns at medical school, full funding for pharmaceutical abortion through so-called “emergency contraceptives,” and withholding of federal funding to New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island if these provinces don’t remove remaining restrictions on abortions.
Canada’s new health minister, Jane Philpott, made her comments in a written response to a query from the CBC, stating, “We know that abortion services remain patchy in parts of the country, and that rural women in particular face barriers to access. Our government will examine ways to better equalize access for all Canadian women.”
Responded the WeNeedALaw organization: “We could translate Minister Philpott’s statement like this: ‘It is completely unacceptable that pre-born children are killed with greater ease in Canada’s urban centres than in rural communities.’”
“Seriously? Of all the problems an aging demographic poses for our top-notch health care system the first thing the Liberals want to do is make it easier for pre-born babies to be dismembered, decapitated and disembowelled?” they asked.
The CBC identified the what they deemed the most obvious culprit in limiting access: successive Prince Edward Island governments who have tried to balance pro-life and pro-abortion interests by funding abortions while sending the women out-of-province to have them.
But P.E.I. pro-lifer Randy Anchikoski also told LifeSiteNews the abortion issue is a distraction from the province’s real problems. “We have a big debt and aging population with all sorts of medical problems they face such as heart ailments and cancer. We have fewer women of childbearing age every year. From which part of our health budget is the money for an abortion clinic supposed to come?”
New Brunswick also restricts abortions, still insisting that they be done in hospitals, but it dropped a second regulation that they be approved by two doctors as medically necessary late last year.
Joyce Arthur, the executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, has put the two recalcitrant provinces at the top of her list of measures to “equalize” abortion access across Canada, calling on the federal government to, “arbitrate to resolve access/funding issues, and if the provinces still don’t comply, withhold federal transfer payments.”
As far as the problems allegedly facing rural women wanting abortions, pro-life leaders say this a familiar theme the pro-abortion forces use to push for measures such as pharmaceutical abortions and so-called “web cam” abortions.
[…]As well, the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada wants medical schools to “screen out anti-choice medical students before they enter the Family Planning program or Obstetrics/Gynecology specialty” because their “inability to fulfill job requirements should make them ineligible.”
[…]Arthur’s wish list also includes a bonus system to attract abortion-doing doctors to rural areas, and the elimination of conscientious objection by pro-life doctors and nurses, requiring doctors at least to refer patients requiring abortions.
You might remember that I blogged about a Canadian pro-lifer a month ago who predicted that ALL of this was going to happen if Trudeau won. I told her how her predictions had come true, and in response she told me about the words of an American pro-lifer who we often feature on this blog who says this about Schouten’s problem:
Let me state it plainly: If you are pro-life and intend on casting a “conscience vote” for a third party candidate, you might as well be voting for the “pro-choice party.” It will have the same ultimate impact on the safety of the unborn. Voting pro-life principles isn’t always voting for a pro-life candidate; a principled vote might mean voting for the viable option that will either advance the pro-life cause better or hurt it the least.
If you sleep more comfortably at night because you’ve voted your principles, then I believe your conscience is well-intended, though misinformed. You’ve chosen to make a moral statement instead of choosing to have a moral impact.
As one pundit put it, it’s better to have a second class fireman than a first class arsonist. There is no victory or honor in voting for the first-class fireman who had no chance of winning when, in the end, your “conscience vote” actually allowed the arsonist get elected.
American pro-lifers know that Democrats are always looking to overturn the many state-level restrictions on abortion… there is always a reason to keep the left out of power, even if the right drags their feet on social issues. The left can always make things worse than they are. It’s never a good idea to tell pro-life voters anything that will cause them to stay home on election day. They need to get out there and vote for the most pro-life party – no two parties are exactly equal on the abortion issue.
If you want to read more about how pro-lifers ought to vote, you can read this article by Scott Klusendorf of the Life Training Institute. And you can read about the pro-life strategy of the clever Canadian pro-lifer who predicted all of these things here. It’s called “Save the Storks”.
WINTERY KNIGHT 