The Audacity of ….well, let’s just keep it at that, shall we?

Today, the White House issued a tweet that provided the observant reader a couple of very troubling insights into this administration. I present the tweet – quickly (but not quickly enough) deleted for the consideration of the reader….

White House celebrates Mother's Day with an abortion pitch - savor the irony

How is this disturbing? How is it not? Let the Citizen elaborate….

Continue reading

Abstinence–the Choice of a New Generation

Condoms have been a staple in public high schools – and, increasingly, in middle schools – for some time now. Health class – a staple of school – usually includes at least one unit of instruction on how to properly use prophylactics. The curriculum includes comprehensive instruction in different methods of birth control, how to identify sexually transmitted diseases, and – in an alarming number of schools – frank discussions on sexual activity. Children as young as elementary school age are exposed to books that introduce them to masturbation, sexual acts, and pictures of sex organs. In this comprehensive treatment of all things sexual there is one glaring exception – abstinence.

Abstinence is choosing not to engage in sexual activity. Because of it’s very nature, abstinence is 100% effective against unwanted pregnancies and STDs. Despite it’s obvious health benefits – especially in children and young adults – it is reviled by most ‘professionals’ as impractical. Why? Because children can’t be taught self-control? Or is the motive more sinister and selfish?

Many advocates of what is called ‘comprehensive’ sex education are the products of the ‘me generation’ – that group of people who are late-coming baby boomers and their immediate offspring. In short, my generation. We tend to be fairly self-centered, narcissistic, engaging in socially conscious activities only if they are trendy, non-judgmental, and require little effort or personal expense. Walk-a-thons are ideal; you have fun, get a little exercise with like-minded socially progressive people, they tend to cost little out of your pocket as you hit up friends and co-workers, and they are over in a few hours. Government programs are great – only about half of Americans end up paying for them anyways, and your tax money has to go somewhere, right?  Taking the easy way out is the mantra of this generation – and it’s destroying our children.

Because we believe that anything should go, we assume that it is acceptable to teach 3rd graders about masturbation and homosexuality. A book called ‘It’s Perfectly Normal’ has been advertised to schools for several years now. I provide a link here but I warn you that these pages contain very disturbing material. With children as young as 8 or 9 being exposed to this type of material, is it any wonder that so many engage in sexual activity? We provide pictures, we encourage children to ‘explore’, and we actually provide them with items that we tell them will prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. This is like putting a bottle of vodka in front of an alcoholic and telling him to use restraint. Good luck.

The medical journal Contraception reported on a study performed in Spain. According to the research, from 1997 to 2007, “the overall use of contraceptive methods increased from 49.1 percent to 79.9 percent.” In that same timeframe, the elective abortion rate increased from 5.52 to 11.49 per 1000 women.

George Mason University researchers studied STDs over four decades and found a ‘verifiable’ link between subsidized sex ed, subsidized contraception, abortions, and STDs.

For organizations like Planned Parenthood, comprehensive sex ed is good for business. Abstinence is nowhere near as profitable. But abstinence doesn’t work! No kid except the religious nutjobs are going to really abstain – right? No, wrong, actually.

Efficacy of a Theory-Based Abstinence-Only Intervention Over 24 Months” was a study that demonstrates that abstinence can be an effective method. Two years after instruction, children who participated in an abstinence only curriculum were 1/3 less likely to have sex then the students who participated in the ‘comprehensive’ curriculum described earlier. The Heritage Foundation issued a report where they illustrate that twelve out of sixteen abstinence programs reported statistically significant results. Finally, a graphic created from data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control demonstrates something that the progressive educator would find unbelievable….significantly greater percentages of teens and young adults are abstaining.

261-FF-download

The Citizen is a veteran teacher. Young people actually want structure, they want boundaries. Comprehensive sex education sends them a message that sex is socially acceptable – in fact, the easy access to contraception, STD screening, and other ‘services’ seem to encourage children to indulge in reckless behavior. Besides, when that condom fails, there’s always abortion.

There are no problems that can’t be fixed by a quick visit to Planned Parenthood.

Except a child’s innocence. Planned Parenthood and ‘comprehensive’ sex education can’t give that back, can it?

Murder by the Numbers…

Earlier this week, Harry Reid announced that he would use every means at his disposal to block any Continuing Resolution or spending bill that contained ideological language – and specifically mentioned the attempt to de-fund Planned Parenthood. His argument – and that of other supporters of Planned Parenthood – is that most of their services have nothing to do with abortion. A little simple math proves that this is far from the truth.

Planned Parenthood released their 2009 ‘Service Report’ recently  – and it paints a fairly grim picture.

They claim that abortions make up ‘3 percent’ of their services – but that 3% is 332,278 aborted children. They did 977 adoption referrals and treated some 7,021 ‘prenatal clients.’If we do some math, we discover that for every adoption referral PP made, they aborted 340 unborn children.  For every woman they assisted to carry a child to term, they aborted 47.

What about the other 97% of Planned Parenthood services? 35% was contraception – including 1,537,180 doses of ‘emergency contraception’. What’s that? That would be the ‘morning after’ or ‘plan b’ pill, a method that according to Catholic teaching is abortion. According to the Catechism, life begins at the instant of conception. Ideologically, plan b is not much different to a Catholic in communion with the Holy See as a conventional surgical abortion. Of the spectrum of contraceptive services Planned Parenthood provided in 2009, fully one quarter were ‘plan b’ interventions.

If emergency contraception is considered to be a method of abortion by Catholics – and it is – then abortion makes up considerably more than the 3% claimed by Planned Parenthood.  If every dose of plan b resulted in the termination of life, the total number of abortions as defined by the Magisterium would be 1,869,456. Planned Parenthood claimed they treated some 11 million clients  – this means that about 1 in 10 used Planned Parenthood to abort an unwanted child.

The American Life League estimates that the ‘3%’ of surgical abortions Planned Parenthood performs account for some 40% of their income. Dawn Johnson, a former PP exec, stated that abortions were encouraged as a means to ‘offset’ less profitable services like STD treatment.

Mr. Reid is concerned about ‘ideology’. Well, so is the Citizen. He is embracing an ideology that advocates the business of eliminating undesirable life. When this is done to humans living outside of the womb, we call it genocide.

Mr. Reid calls it healthcare.

And he criticizes my ideological failings?

Who Do You Serve, Senators?

The Senate defeated, 44-56, HR1, the bill that would have allowed the government to continue spending money. Part of  the continuing resolution (CR)  was an amendment that defunded Planned Parenthood. All Democratic senators voted against the CR and three Republicans sided with the nays. While one can argue that this was moot – Mr. Obama had already stated that he would veto this CR because it cut Planned Parenthood’s funding – a line has been drawn on this debate. Mike Lee, Jim DeMint, and Rand Paul joined the pro-abortion camp with their vote on this issue – a decision that may haunt all three.

Kentucky is lukewarm at best in terms of supporting abortion, requiring waiting periods, parental notification, and limits on state aid for abortion. Three days ago (March 7, 2011), the Utah State House passed three laws advancing the cause of life in that state. One requires more frequent inspections of clinics, another provides stronger conscience clause protections for doctors and nurses, and the third allows insurance companies to ‘opt out’ of paying for abortion procedures. While these bills face challenges in the Senate, the victories indicate that Utah supports the pro-life cause. Finally, South Carolina has strong limits on abortion that are being scrutinized by a number of states interesting in curbing the excesses of Planned Parenthood and substandard clinics.

Senate Majority leader Harry Reid joined the president with a staunch and absolute resolution to kill this CR.  When the Citizen thinks of Nevada and abortion, I recall Algis Martell. Martell was an abortionists in the mid-90’s who actually performed abortions on women who weren’t even pregnant – and charged handsomely for the procedures. Even today, Nevada abortion clinics enjoy very strong support from their state and federal legislators.

This leads to an important question. Do the interests of NARAL and Planned Parenthood outweigh the interests of the nation as a whole? The CR passed the House with a vote of 235 to 189. It funded to the government, and also restored the Mexico City policy, ended abortion funding in the District of Columbia, and cut funding the UNFPA (a UN agency that may have paid to support ‘one child family‘ abortions in China).  Adding amendments to spending bills is a tactic that the democratic party is adept at – their largesse in tacking earmarks on vital spending bills these past 4 years is legendary. At least Mr. Pence and the republican majority in the House didn’t pad their pockets with pork with their amendments.  Indeed, the terms of the amendment listed above are altruistic, representing the values of the authors of the amendment, those who voted in support of it – and more importantly – reflecting the values of their constituents. And isn’t that the ultimate responsibility of our legislators – to represent those who have entrusted them with their office?

Mr. Obama has strong ties with the abortion industry. In fact, he just added William Daley, a staunch supporter of abortion, and a so-called ‘pro-choice Catholic’ (there is no such thing, Mr. Daley) to his team as his new Chief of Staff. The Obamas invited Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood, to the White House to celebrate International Women’s Day. And the list of former PP and NARAL employees who have positions in the Executive Branch is lengthy. Mr. Obama is perfectly content to allow the United States to suffer to support his pro-abortion position.

Harry Reid enjoys a 100% approval rating from NARAL – he too would rather serve the interests of the abortion industry. Why? Well, they surely helped get him re-elected. His ardent support of the PPACA and his opposition to the Hyde Amendment made him popular with the pro-abortion base in Nevada. Reid defeated the ardently pro-life Sharon Angle by some 6%; some of his victory due to his manipulation of the Hispanic vote, but a strong effort by Planned Parenthood helped tip the scales as well. Mr. Reid knows that he needs to keep his masters happy…even if the nation suffers.

In the end, the CR HR1 failed – and if Mr. Obama was to keep his promise – it was doomed to fail. It does provide the Catholic and pro-life voter some insight. We see who is willing to fight for the legislation that reflects the will of the majority of voters – who are prolife. We see that the amendments they add are not the self-serving pork barrel earmarks that have long been the hallmark of liberals. Three months ago, Reid defended nearly 10 billion dollars in earmarks in a lame duck spending bill. And now – when a bill that would have kept government services running for all Americans could have been passed – Mr. Reid and his democratic majority in the Senate decided that their pro-abortion special interest sponsors were more important.

I believe that the prolife movement helped change the face of state and national government lat November. I believe that in the next presidential election cycle, the lines will be drawn even more clearly. As a Catholic, I believe that abortion is wrong. I believe that my tax dollars should not support abortion or any organization that will use my money to perform abortions as part of their ‘services.’ We can support agencies and organizations that provide services to the needy without taking life. I believe that doctors and nurses should be able to exercise their conscience. I believe that if Planned Parenthood wants to perform abortions, they can raise money from private donors…just like Birthright, CareNet, and countless other agencies. Or – if abortion is so important to these doctors – they can waive their fees and perform abortions for free or out of their own pocket.

I believe that when it comes down to serving the needs of the nation and the needs of a special interest with a couple of billion dollars in the bank….it should be a ‘no-brainer.’

So, take a look at how your senators voted on this bill. Who did they serve with this vote?

You?

Or NARAL?

Selling Abortion, Part II

Perhaps it is coincidence that the Citizen began to address this issue recently. Perhaps not. God is always speaking to us, I just happened to be listening at the moment.

In the first essay in this series, we explored the attempts of social scientists to use polling methods to advance their pro-abortion agenda. This week, a couple of articles of interest emerged. The first was a Gutmacher Institute report that the decline in the number of abortions performed in the United States is leveling off. This means that our success in reducing abortion is stalling as Planned Parenthood and NARAL are rallying their troops. How is this possible? The second article illustrates a possible cause.

Lila Rose and Live Action launched a sting operation against an abortion clinic in New Jersey. The ‘sting operation’ revealed a PP employee explaining – at great length – how a ‘pimp’ can arrange for an underage prostitute to get an abortion. Live Action recorded the conversations and provided edited – and unedited – footage. That’s right, you can see the raw footage.

Planned Parenthood responded with the following:

“We have a zero tolerance policy for this kind of behavior, and the employee in the video was immediately suspended from her duties this morning and was terminated this evening,”

While they were making this statement, the same organization was targeting Live Action as using misleading tactics and maliciously edited footage. Members of PP have actually claimed that the actions of the staff were part of an attempt to ‘sting’ the undercover investigators. Others have theorized that the staff members were ‘playing along’. Why?

If Planned Parenthood has a policy against this, why would they play along with a pimp soliciting an illegal abortion? They wouldn’t. The statement cited above would have been the best – and only reasonable – response.

Planned Parenthood has – or should have – a serious image problem. Their founder has some insights on the philosophy of Planned Parenthood:

Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”
Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.

“Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need … We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”
Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review.

“Eugenics is … the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.
Margaret Sanger. “The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda.” Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5

A question for the gentle reader. Is the advice of the PP case manager who spent a half hour advising the pimp how he can arrange the illegal abortion actually contrary to the stated goals of the founder of this organization?

Or rather is it keeping with the vision of Margaret Sanger?

The humanist, pro-abortion blogosphere is already launching vicious attacks on this footage and crying for a full criminal investigation against Live Action. Planned Parenthood New Jersey has announced it wants to triple the number of clinics in the state. When backed into a corner, counter-attacking…no matter how low the blow… is an option.

Live Action has provided access to the full and unedited video footage. They are prepared to stand by their actions. It seems Planned Parenthood has done what liberal groups usually do – they throw someone under the bus and try to turn the tables.

A burning question remains; If Live Action was able to record one situation where a PP worker was willing to break the law, how many undocumented situations identical to this one occur every day in PP clinics throughout the nation?

Just asking.