“I’m from Australia and I’d really like some insight into why there is this visceral hatred of Palin from left liberals – it’s complete bizarre”

The title of this post was a comment left on someone else’s Facebook post on Sarah Palin.  Here’s one response I liked:

As one female caller to a talk radio show said the other day, “She is smart, she is athletic, she loves the outdoors, she hunts, she fishes, she raises kids, she is on TV, she has been a governor of a state, she writes books, she blogs, AND she is pretty. What’s not to hate?”

Here was my answer:
‎90% of people abort Down Syndrome children, but she gave birth to hers. Her pro-life position makes Liberals absolutely hate her. You could agree with radical feminists on literally every issue possible except unrestricted abortion and they will hate you with a passion. Seriously.
On a different Palin post on my FB page, someone noted this:
 SP [Sarah Palin] is a stupid moron.
How eloquent, and how right off the the mainstream media script.
Update: Turns out she writes like most CEOS, and better than the expert who was hoping she’d come off as illiterate.

All that matters to radical feminists is that you are pro-unrestricted abortion

Despite the facts that Anthony Weiner is a major liar, texted R- and X-rated comments and pictures of himself to many women even though he is married and his wife is expecting, exercises spectacularly bad judgment (did it occur to him that any political enemy could fake an identity to bribe or embarrass him?), “feminists” still support him completely because he has a 100% rating from NARAL (the pro-abortion group).

Here’s one of many examples from Liberal feminists blow off Weiner sex scandal – Jill Stanek.

In situations like these, I think feminists are in a bit of a hard place. As women, we’re sort of grossed out and annoyed by the fact that he would send anyone a (hopefully solicited) picture of his junk, but ultimately, I think we realize that it’s just another part of the role that patriarchy has created for men….

There is the bigger issue at hand, here…. Anthony Weiner is a progressive beacon in a House of Representatives full of a bunch of Tea Party wackos – we need him there.

Weiner has a 100% pro-choice rating from NARAL, a history of voting for women’s issues, LGBT issues, and just progressive politics in general. Again, progressives and women need Rep. Weiner in the House.

Just like with Bill Clinton, Weiner can violate every standard that real feminists would consider foundational and still have the support of the radical feminists — as long as you are pro-legalized abortion with zero restrictions (including partial-birth abortion and parental notification).

I hope that most women will rise up and tell these “feminists” (who support legal gender-selection abortions, nearly all of which kill females for the sole reason of being female) that the pro-aborts don’t speak for them.

Echo chambers?

I sometimes hear critics refer to conservative blogs as echo chambers, as if we just say the same things to each other to reinforce our views.  That is a wildly ironic claim.

The worldview I was brought up in was indeed that of Christian parents and a Christian church, but neither trafficked in apologetics and neither were conservative. I thoroughly rejected it all.  The denomination I grew up in (Disciples of Christ) is such that I wouldn’t send my dogs to it now.  It is a mockery of authentic Christianity — pro-abortion, pro-square circles (oops, I mean “same-sex marriage”), anti-Jesus is the only way to salvation, anti-authority of scripture, etc. — your basic apostate denomination.

The media I was raised around was wildly liberal — your basic Big 3 of ABC, NBC and CBS plus liberal newspapers.  I didn’t know any better, and bought the lie that journalists were some sort of noble, unbiased group that could be trusted.

My entertainment and reading were purely secular, where God was either mocked or ignored.  I consumed massive amounts of TV that was designed to push a liberal agenda.

My parents are wonderful and intelligent people, but they grew up in the Great Depression (one of them was literally in Grapes of Wrath Oklahoma).  Therefore, they tend to think we need government to save us and have been life-long Democrats.

My education was completely secular, including rabidly pro-Darwinian science teachers. Ironically, as pagan as I was, even in 9th grade I realized something was amiss when the biology teacher was so visibly hostile to religion.  He was obviously pushing an ideology and not just science.  From elementary school through college, once again God was either mocked or ignored.

I was nominally pro-choice when I was younger, intuitively realizing that killing unborn human beings was wrong but that there might be larger downside to making abortion illegal (for example, I initially bought the “back alley butchers” lie).

In my late 20′s I came across massive amounts of evidence and logic for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, the accuracy of the Bible, etc.  God opened my eyes to his truth and I became a Christian.

I came across the facts about abortion and realized that every pro-choice canard could be annihilated.  I take on any pro-choice arguments I come across when teaching pro-life reasoning.  I learned about Intelligent Design and realized the great hoax that Darwinian evolution is.

Facts and logic brought me to where I am, not my broader environment.  My beliefs are the opposite of what my environment would have led me to.  These views make me less popular by the day with a world that holds the Christian worldview in contempt.  That’s part of the deal, as Jesus so accurately warned us.

So is my Christian / conservative blog an echo chamber?  Heh.  I’ll be glad to mock that sentiment until my fingertips are raw.  Yes, I have a well-defined commenting policy, but to say it is an echo chamber is a concession speech.  I am a conservative Christian in spite of every brainwashing attempt the world has thrown at me, and I am glad to defend that worldview.

I came out of the echo chamber, not into it.  Woo-hoo!

1 John 2:15-16 Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.

—–

Additional thoughts from an old post:

I had interesting discussion I had with a liberal over the holidays.  I just let him ramble with his pro-liberal, pro-Obama, anti-business rant for a while.

Instead of pointing out the flaws in his facts and logic, which history demonstrates he would have ignored, I just asked a simple question: How much conservative media do you view or listen to?

His answer?   ”None.”  It spoke volumes, and he knew it.

I calmly pointed out that I consume plenty of liberal media: My Yahoo feed is from Reuters and I update it many times each day, I read the very liberal Houston Chronicle, etc.

Does that make me right?  No, but it proved beyond all doubt that only one of us takes the time to listen to both sides.

That response saved me a lot of time and frustration.  I hope it planted a seed with him as well.  If he has any intellectual honesty he’ll realize that if he only consumes liberal media then his views are likely to mirror their output.  Brainwashing and indoctrination, anyone?  Any critical thinking going on?

 

Would you have killed Stephen Hawking?

An interesting thread came up in the comments section about Stephen Hawking:

Neil, I’m interested in reading your take on what you think of Stephen Hawking’s opinion on God?  “Stephen Hawking says afterlife is a fairy story.”

My reply:

I think Stephen Hawking’s comments are morbidly and eternally ironic. He’s the one crafting a fairy tale. He thinks the universe came into being from nothing and that an explosion was responsible for the spectacularly complex and fine-tuned universe he’s dedicated his life to trying to explain. He thinks life arose from non-life and evolved to all we see today. And he thinks that by crafting this fairy tale he can comfort himself that he won’t have to give an account of his life to his creator. He is a sad, sad man, and not because of his disability. I hope he repents and trust in Jesus before he dies. Eternity is a might long time, even for a really smart physicist.

Also, Hawking may be good at physics but he is lousy at philosophy and logic — examples here and here.

Then the commenter replied with this:

Neil, you criticize Stephen Hawking for claiming the universe came into being from nothing. Please explain how your God came into being.

My reply:

God is eternally existent, so it is illogical to ask how an eternally existent being came into being. Please see the Kalaam Cosmological argument. It is a perfectly logical and coherent explanation for a “first cause.”

Then he asked this interesting question:

Do you sometimes wish Stephen Hawking’s mother had had an abortion while she was pregnant with him?

My reply:

Of course I’m glad Hawking’s mother didn’t have an abortion. I wouldn’t wish an abortion on any of my ideological enemies. Why would you ask that question? Do you wish that the mothers of your ideological enemies had killed them? Do you wish they would be killed now that they are outside of the womb?

Sadly, the pro-legalized abortionists cheer when disabilities are discovered in utero so that the (potentially) disabled people can be killed in the womb (see former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders’ comments about how Down Syndrome cases were “reduced.”). But we don’t kill disabled people outside the womb (yet). We rightfully give them parking spaces, wheelchair ramps, Special Olympics, etc.

Over 90% of people would have killed Hawking, just like over 90% kill those with Down Syndrome. Would you have wanted to abort Hawking if you knew about his physical issues? I wouldn’t have.

What would you have recommended to Hawking’s mother if his physical problems would have been discovered in utero — whether or not you knew that he would become a famous physicist?  I’d vote for life in either case.

Always remember

It is a scientific fact that the unborn are unique, living human beings from conception.  Abortion kills those human beings and is therefore immoral except to save the life of the mother.

Abortion is a sin but forgiveness and healing can be found in Jesus.


Image of the week

Assassinations of unwanted human beings approved by our Nobel Peace Prize-winning President.  From Draw for Truth via Jill Stanek.


Always remember

It is a scientific fact that the unborn are unique, living human beings from conception.  Abortion kills those human beings and is therefore immoral except to save the life of the mother.

Abortion is a sin but forgiveness and healing can be found in Jesus.


Good news from the House: “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” passes

Hopefully it can pass the Senate and get past Obama’s veto.  This will save lives and not force pro-lifers to fund abortions.  (I thought pro-legalized abortionists were pro-choice?  Why don’t they want pro-lifers to have the choice of whether to pay to kill the unborn?)

See House Republicans unanimously support No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act « Wintery Knight.

The White House strongly opposes the bill. In a policy statement, the administration wrote that the bill “intrudes on women’s reproductive freedom and access to health care; increases the tax burden on many Americans; unnecessarily restricts the private insurance choices that consumers have today; and restricts the District of Columbia’s use of local funds, which undermines home rule.”

“Reproductive freedom” is one of those deadly inaccurate sound bites.  Here’s a scientific fact for the President: If someone wants an abortion, they have already reproduced.

How odd that he cares about the tax burdens, especially when this is the equation: More dead babies = less taxes.  I’m all for low taxes, but not by killing unwanted human beings.  His moral schizophrenia never fails to disappoint.

Life News reports that the public supports banning funding for abortions:

A majority of Americans object to the use of taxpayer money for funding abortion, according to numerous polls — including a survey CNN conducted in early April showing Americans oppose public funding of abortion by a margin of 61% to 35%.

That’s a pretty big majority.  Hopefully the Democratic Senators will realize they’ll be handing their opponents a gift if they vote against it.

And also notes that cutting off funding makes a big difference in the number of abortions:

Congressman Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican who is the lead sponsor of the bill, informed the House that a study by the Guttmacher Institute, the pro-abortion former research apparatus of Planned Parenthood, released a study noting that one-quarter of women who otherwise would have had abortions chose to give birth when taxpayer dollars were not available to pay for abortions of their children.

And I think that some behaviors may change if they know the government won’t pay for abortions.

From the “I am not making this up category” . . .

Planned Parenthood aggressively fights against the right of parents to know if their teenage daughter is having a dangerous medical procedure to kill their grandchild.  But they required attendees at a teen rally to get permission from their parents.  See Pro-life teen flash mob surprises California Planned Parenthood teen rally – Jill Stanek.

As an ironic aside, while CA has no law providing that parents be notified before their minor daughters abort, and while PP invariably fights such legislation wherever it is introduced, PP did insist parents sign a permission form before their children could participate in its rally day.

P.S. A group of pro-life teens nearly matched the number of the pro-choice kids.

Abortions are bad for the mothers, too

It should go without saying that abortion is unsafe for the unborn, but it is bad for the mothers as well.  See The Case Against Abortion: Abortion Risks, which outlines serious risks such as breast cancer, uterine damage, complications in future pregnancies and death.

The foundational arguments against abortion are not rooted in its potential danger to women. Abortion is immoral and unjust because it kills a living human being. The safety of a particular activity does not make it right or wrong. The impact it has on other people does. With that said, there are two reasons why we survey the medical risks of abortion. First, some women (and men) are not particularly concerned about the violence abortion does to their offspring; far fewer are unconcerned about the violence abortion might do to themselves. A greater understanding of the medical risks may dissuade them from ending their child’s life. Second, the abortion industry’s consistent reluctance to provide women with information that portrays abortion in anything less than a positive light is strong indication that they may care more about money and politics than they do about a woman’s health. If they didn’t have a vested interest in her “choice,” why do they lobby so hard against having to more thoroughly disclose to women what abortion is and does?


Always remember

It is a scientific fact that the unborn are unique, living human beings from conception.  Abortion kills those human beings and is therefore immoral except to save the life of the mother.

Abortion is a sin but forgiveness and healing can be found in Jesus.


Which is more racist?

A. Aborting blacks at a rate three times that of whites

B. Pointing out that the abortion rate for blacks is three times that of whites

See Mom sues pro-life group for using daughter’s photo in “racist, defamatory” NYC billboard – Jill Stanek

A pro-life group that erected a billboard to spotlight the documented genocide being committed against preborn black children is being sued as “racist.”

I’d say “A.” The racism lies with those Margaret Sanger-inspired Planned Parenthood types who target black communities.

Good strategies to de-fund Planned Parenthood

See the latest from Unborn Scheming Baby in Republicans move to defund Planned Parenthood at the state level.  Here’s one example:

Minnesota Republicans introduced SF 1224, a bill that does not mention Planned Parenthood by name, but which prohibits state grant funds from being given to any organization that provides abortions or refers patients for abortion.

If passed, the bill would remove state funds from all of the 24 clinics that Planned Parenthood operates in Minnesota.

Every bit helps.  Less $$ to Planned Parenthood will result in less abortions.  Don’t believe the nonsense about the public funding only supporting the condoms / pap smears side of PP.  If the government sends you money it ultimately gets spent any way you like.

Also see Planned Parenthood overview for how, in addition to being the top destroyer of human life in the country, they systematically hide statutory rape and sex trafficking (when not teaching your kids to ignore your perspectives on human sexuality).

Lying about lying

See Leonard Pitts’ attempt to broad-brush conservatives as the reigning liars in our political scene.  His lead argument: A misstatement made by Sen. Kyle that was corrected the same day (I’m not defending Kyle, just analyzing Pitts’ larger theme, his lame defense of Planned Parenthood and his sloppy journalism).

Let’s examine some of his points and also consider the things Pitts leaves out of his analysis.  I realize columnists can only include so much information, but these would obviously not fit in with his theme.  And either he is a woefully uninformed journalist or highly deceptive.

  • Why does Pitts list cancer screenings as the first item Planned Parenthood provides, especially while omitting that their CEO falsely claimed that Planned Parenthood provides mammograms and that a loss of Federal funding would end these.?  Note that some politicians repeated this lie.  How many CEOs don’t know what services their organization provides?  Was this incompetence or a deliberate lie about a highly emotional, most-favored-disease issue to sustain public funding for her organization?  Why hasn’t she or the mainstream media, such as Pitts, highlighted and corrected this error?
  • If abortion only accounts for 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services, why don’t they stop them or get rid of them?  I mean, if such a tiny part of their business is causing all this fuss, there are some very simple solutions.
  • Does Pitts not know that while abortions themselves are only counted as 3%, many of the 97% of the other services are associated with the abortions?  It is an accounting game to minimize the portion of abortions.
  • Why didn’t Pitts note that 97% of pregnant women who go inside Planned Parenthood come out not pregnant?
  • Planned Parenthood has been caught countless times, both on audio and on video, hiding statutory rape.  That alone should result in them being not only being de-funded but put out of business.  Businesses who commit serial felonies don’t get to point to other (alleged) good things they do to avoid responsibility.  They have been caught many times hiding sex trafficking, which includes victims of human trafficking.
  • Margaret Sanger, PP’s founder, was a racist eugenicist.
  • Planned Parenthood targets minorities and is the largest provider of abortions in the U.S.  Abortion rates for blacks are 3x that of whites and the rate for HIspanics is 2x that of whites.  Margaret’s dream lives on.  But in Pitts’ mind, he thinks conservatives are the racists.
  • Pitts used Sarah Palin’s “death panels” line as an example of lying, but she has been proved right.  Of course, they aren’t called death panels, but that was never her claim.
  • Too bad Pitts didn’t read Things Planned Parenthood’s ‘Truth Team’ Forgot to Mention with more facts about PP (Hat tip: John)
  • Will Pitts’ next column be about why Democrats are much more likely to be tax cheats?   He’d have more facts for that.

More about consciousness

A commenter on the Consciousness and abortion–two simple arguments to remember post made this claim without substantiation in an effort to discredit the reasoning in the post.

Since sleeping is considered one of the three states of consciousness . . .

Even <em>if</em> that was true in the sense that someone, somewhere held that view, he was in conflict with basic dictionary definitions:

1. aware of one’s own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc.
2. fully aware of or sensitive to something (often followed by of ): conscious of one’s own faults; He wasn’t conscious of the gossip about his past.
3. having the mental faculties fully active: He was conscious during the operation.

Not to mention this from the World English dictionary:

1.    a. alert and awake; not sleeping or comatose
b. aware of one’s surroundings, one’s own thoughts and motivations, etc.

This was also a golden example of how poor the “personhood” argument is:

So if sleeping is the metric you want to use to demonstrate consciousness, then fetuses are not conscious before around 7 months; and if consciousness is one of the indicators of personhood, then fetuses are not persons before around 7 months; and if fetuses are not persons before around 7 months, there is no obstacle to abortion prior to that time?

It is interesting how the “personhood” crowd is left using terms like “around” for determining when something goes from [allegedly] morally good / morally neutral medical procedure to capital murder.  The burden of proof is on them to establish a clear line or err way on the side of life.  It is like saying, “The person was cut open around the time of death.”  Uh, was that the cause of death or was it after the death (i.e., an autopsy)?  Either could be true with vagaries like “around.”

The “ethicist” Peter Singer thinks the line is months after birth, but he doesn’t define it with precision.

If your ideology can’t define a clear line about when you can and cannot destroy innocent but unwanted human beings, you might want to rethink it. 

Why does our society destroy 90% of those with Down Syndrome?

Updated with a great video at the bottom, courtesy of Marie

See Life Training Institute Blog: Down Syndrome, Fear, and a Young Man’s Hat.

My friend and founder of Cobb Pregnancy Services Ogden Tabb told me how after his daughter Alison was born with DS and he and his wife became pregnant with their third child the doctor was recommending amniocentesis. When Ogden asked him why the doctor answered, “So you can decide whether you wish to abort the child or not if it has Down syndrome.” He looked across the room at his daughter Alison and said, “So if my next child is like that beautiful, healthy, loving little girl over there you are offering me the option of killing it?” That was all the inspiration he needed to start what has become one of the greatest pregnancy centers in the country.

I previously wrote about prenatal testing for Down Syndrome and one of our World Vision sponsor children who has it .  I’m glad she was conceived in Honduras and not the U.S., or she’d probably be long dead.sindy.jpg

This topic reminds me of a piece I did on Moral Schizophrenia:

I can’t help but think about the bizarre extremes our society goes to when it comes to the disabled. Consider all the positive and noble things done for the disabled:

  • Handicapped parking spaces, accessibility to buildings, etc.
  • Celebration of their accomplishments in events like the Special Olympics
  • Countless technological aids to help them use computers and work
  • Fund raisers and ministries to find cures and to provide care and encouragement

Yet what is society’s general attitude towards unborn humans who may be disabled when born? The current climate is that it is OK, and often preferable, to kill them before they are born. For example, abortion occurs roughly 90% of the time in pregnancies where Down Syndrome is diagnosed. Some babies are even aborted for correctable problems like club feet or cleft palates.

Jocylen Elder, former Surgeon General of the U.S. said abortion “has had an important and positive public-health effect” because it reduced “the number of children afflicted with severe defects.” She pointed out that “the number of Down Syndrome infants in Washington state in 1976 was 64 percent lower than it would have been without legal abortion.” She meant this as a victory of sorts, but what message does this send to the disabled and their families?

Of course we don’t wish medical problems on anyone. There is always an element of tragedy when they occur. Yet what about all the joy and life lessons they bring? And disabled people are less likely to commit suicide, so they aren’t necessarily less happy. We may rationalize that we are “helping” them, but who are we really trying to help?

Parting thoughts:

  • How long will it be until insurance companies pressure people to abortpotentially disabled humans?
  • If autism could be detected in utero as Down Syndrome is, how many fewer autistic people would be with us?
  • I know several people who were encouraged by their doctors to have abortions because problems were suspected. Yet the children in question are alive and healthy!

Consciousness and abortion–two simple arguments to remember

One of the common pro-legalized abortion arguments is that the unborn don’t have consciousness, so they do not have a right to life.  Here’s a good response by Christopher Kaczor (Hat tip: Life Training Institute <== a superior pro-life training organization.  Check ‘em out.):

Requiring actual consciousness renders us non-persons whenever we sleep. Requiring immediately attainable consciousness excludes those in surgery. Requiring the basic neural brain structures for consciousness (but not consciousness itself) excludes those whose brains are temporarily damaged. On the other hand, if potentiality for consciousness makes a being a person, then those sleeping, in surgery, or temporarily comatose are persons, but so also would be the normal human embryo, fetus, and newborn.

Also note this great response (it is either a paraphrase or a direct quote from Roxanne):

To legally remove someone from life support who is not conscious you must demonstrate that there is little or no hope of recovery and that you are acting in that person’s best interests, as they would so act if they were conscious. Abortion fails on both counts.

Bad news for teachers’ unions and racists in Washington D.C.: House reinstates voucher program and advances desegration

See House GOP desegregates DC school system. | RedState.  Turns out the Democrats aren’t as pro-choice as they claim.  Pro-choice to destroy innocent human life?  No problem for them.  Pro-choice for minorities to attend better schools?  Eek!  Can’t have that.

The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program — which provides low-income District students with federal money to attend private schools — is a top priority of Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). The program was closed to new entrants by Democrats in 2009, but Boehner has sought to revive and expand the program. The House passed a Boehner-authored bill last month — the SOAR Act — to reauthorize the program for five more years, and that bill will be included in the final spending deal and signed into law by Obama.

. . .  The [Obama] administration was surprisingly unequivocal in its opposition to “the creation or expansion of private school voucher programs that are authorized by this bill,” probably because poor minority kids don’t contribute to Democratic slush funds to the extent that the NEA does.  Killing the DC voucher program has been a priority for Democrats since they took full control of the government in 2009 . . .

Planned Parenthood overview

A terrific brochure: The Truth About Planned Parenthood.  Please read and share!

Here are some facts about Planned Parenthood, any one of which should render them ineligible for any government funding.

1. They crush and dismember innocent but unwanted human beings for a living.  That is their primary revenue source.  Abortion is not health care.

2. They have been caught countless times, both on audio and on video, hiding statutory rape.  That alone should result in them being not only being de-funded but put out of business.  Businesses who commit serial felonies don’t get to point to other (alleged) good things they do to avoid responsibility.

See Planned Parenthood Never Told Parents of Abortion on Raped 12-Year-Old for an example.  They will kill your grandchild, perform an incredibly serious surgery on your daughter and protect her rapist — for a fee.  Oh, and using your taxes.  It is so sad that false teachers support them and claim Jesus’ support for it.  Such blasphemy!

3. They have been caught many times hiding sex trafficking, which includes victims of human trafficking.

4. Their CEO falsely claimed that Planned Parenthood provides mammograms and that a loss of Federal funding would end these.  How many CEOs don’t know what services their organization provides?  Was this incompetence or a deliberate lie about a highly emotional, most-favored-disease issue to sustain public funding for her organization?  Why hasn’t she or the mainstream media highlighted and corrected this error?

5. Planned Parenthood is not the only provider of these non-abortion services.  If taxpayer funding of PP ended these services could easily be provided elsewhere – preferably somewhere that doesn’t kill humans beings, hide statutory rape, hide sex traffickers / human traffickers, etc.

6. According to PP’s research arm, 54% of abortions are performed on women who were on birth control.  Their business model is not working to prevent pregnancies, it is working to generate abortions.  That statistic exposes the lie that more birth control distribution will reduce abortions.  PP wants to reduce abortions in the same way McDonald’s wants to sell less hamburgers.

7. Margaret Sanger, PP’s founder, was a racist eugenicist.  Some of her quotes are here.

8. Planned Parenthood targets minorities and is the largest provider of abortions in the U.S.  Abortion rates for blacks are 3x that of whites and the rate for HIspanics is 2x that of whites.  Margaret’s dream lives on.

9. They aggressively promote their worldview to teens, encouraging them to ignore their parents and their religion, via their public school lessons and their youth website, Teenwire. They put up billboards telling kids that “Getting it on is free.”  They discourage parents from viewing it, of course. You can find lots of valuable advice [sarcasm intended], like the tidbit from a 14-year-old girl who said that kids shouldn’t have sex until they are mature enough to know how to use a condom and their official advice that, “Hooking up is only one way to get close to someone.” They regularly promote anal sex as a good way to avoid pregnancy (technically true, though it won’t prevent disease transmission and is not advice most people want their kids to hear).

It follows the same philosophy they use in the classroom, which is to steer kids away from parental authority and to make decisions about sexuality on their own. They don’t offer any limits to children, other than telling them that the kids should decide when they are “ready.” They encourage them to experiment with sex and their sexual orientation.

Most of the offenses are too perverse to list on this blog, but here is a sample of how they encourage kids to ignore their parents and their religion (from the Canada site; the link to the original post from Dawn Eden’s site is broken):

Maybe your religion or parents are influencing your decision. Take control. Remind yourself that what you do is always a choice. You choose whether to follow the values of your religion. You choose whether to be honest with your parents. They may not be easy choices, and others may not agree with the choices you make. But they are still YOUR choices and they should be based on what’s important to you.

10. Planned Parent used to claim that “An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.” At least that was their view in this 1964 advertisement. Did they learn anything about science in the few years after that when they changed their minds? Of course not. Science couldn’t be more clear: A new human being is created at conception.  Planned Parenthood is about making money off abortions and about advancing their perverse ideology with your money.

Do not miss this video, but don’t let your kids watch it, either:

11. PP has not accounted for millions of dollars given to them.

12. If PP’s supporters care so much for these non-abortion services, why don’t they open their own wallets and give?  There are more crisis pregnancy centers than abortion clinics, and nearly all run with no government funding (the center where I’m a volunteer and board member refuses any government funds).  It doesn’t seem very pro-choice to force people to fund the array of perversions, immorality and broken laws we see with Planned Parenthood.

13. PP doesn’t pay these salaries based on how many condoms they give away, they get it from performing 329,455 abortions. (P.S. they are the 1%.)

President Cecile Richards $353,819
Chief Operating Officer Maryana Iskander $288,886
Chief Financial Officer Maria Acosta $263,443
VP of Medical Affairs Vanessa Cullins $257,115
VP of General Counsel Barbara Otten $251,379
VP of Public Policy Laurie Rubiner $248,438
VP of Operations Karen Ruffatto $247,932
VP of Affiliates Lisa David $245,322

14.  PP encourages gender-selection abortions.

15.  PP encourages Medicaid fraud.  More here and here.

16. PP encourages their employees to lie about breaking laws but will not protect them.

17. They aggressively promote filth to youth – they assume that every relationship will involve sex and that you will go from one sex relationship to another.  They pretend that people will actually follow their advice (Yeah, sure, people will always use condoms for oral sex.  Because gays would never rebel and break any safe sex rules!)

18. Planned Parenthood lies about its botched abortions.  Apparently and organization that kills unwanted human beings and perverts the minds of kids for a living doesn’t mind lying to help their business.

Our investigation exposes not only how unsafe Planned Parenthood clinics can be for women, but also how dishonest and untrustworthy Planned Parenthood is to the very women it claims to defend,” says Rose. “How shameful that two months after their clinic botched an abortion that took the life of 24-year old Tonya Reaves and her pre-born baby, Planned Parenthood lies to the public and pretends nothing happened. When it comes to the lethal dangers of its billion-dollar abortion business, no lie is too audacious for Planned Parenthood.

19. They would rather go back on their word and destroy a breast cancer charity than part ways amicably.

20. They try to deceive people by saying that only 3% of their business is abortion-related.  But 10% of the clients get abortion, and each one gets lots of services.  And even if 0.000001% of their business was from killing unwanted human beings they should be shut down.  A full analysis is here.

21. Former Planned Parenthood worker: ‘It was a money-grubbing, evil, very sad, sad place to work’ – Your tax dollars at work.

Marianne Anderson is a nurse who assisted Planned Parenthood abortionists by partially sedating women who paid extra for that luxury.  She told The Criterion newspaper that she saw many women pressured into abortions they did not want, including minor girls.

“One young girl came in with her mom,” Anderson told the paper.  “She was about 16. Her mom had made the appointment. That’s not supposed to be how it works. It’s supposed to only be the patient who makes the appointment. I checked her in, and she thought she was there for a prenatal checkup. The mom was pushing it. She blindsided her own daughter.”

Another time, said Anderson, “This guy brought in a Korean girl. I had no doubt in my mind this girl was a sex slave. This guy would not leave her side. They could barely communicate. He wanted to make all the arrangements.  During the ultrasound, she told one of the nurses that there were lots of girls in the house, and that the man hits them. She never came back for the abortion. I always wondered what happened to her. One of my co-workers said, ‘You’re better off to just let it go.’”

When women cried during the abortion procedure, Anderson said, abortionist Michael King would shame them. “These girls would start crying on the table, and Dr. King would say, ‘Now you chose to be here. Sit still. I don’t have time for this.’”

“One doctor, when he was in the POC [products of conception] room, would talk to the aborted baby while looking for all the parts. ‘Come on, little arm, I know you’re here! Now you stop hiding from me!’ It just made me sick to my stomach,” Anderson said. “The sound the suction machine made when it turned on still haunts me.”

Anderson told The Criterion she started working at the facility because she believed that as long as women were having abortions, they should be safe about it.

But Anderson quickly abandoned her illusions of safety once she began work at Planned Parenthood.  “I started feeling uneasy working there when people came from national in New York City to teach us the conscious sedation process,” Anderson told the paper.  “It was disgusting. These two ladies had this chant they would do: ‘Abortion all the time!’ I thought, ‘I’ve got to get out of here.’ That was about six to eight months after I started.”

Anderson said the overall experience of working for Planned Parenthood was “absolutely miserable.”

“It was a money-grubbing, evil, very sad, sad place to work,” she said. “I was always getting in trouble for talking too long to the girls, asking if they were sure they wanted to do this.”

22.  They market bondage, discipline/domination, sadism and masochism to teens.