I am glad you no longer support Rand Paul: But it should have been because of how poorly he came across in the debate regarding his ridiculous exchange with Governor Christie on his refusal to let our law enforcement obtain phone records to fight terrorism... It is amazing to me how quickly people forget 9-11... I went to Tom Burnet's funeral mass at St. Isidore Church & the look on his widow's face & 2 young daughters is something I will never forget...Planned Parenthood is an emotional issue in which both sides make some valid points...Preventing out law enforcement from protecting us is inexcusable.

If you wanna start a brawl say Abortion and LBGT marriage! Even my fishing buds and I fight over these issues...it gets so loud it scares away the fish!

I strongly support a woman's right to choose as well as LBGT marriage.

I've noticed that all of the Republican candidates for 2016 have come out punching. If there's anything that I respect is a decision by the US Supreme Court. yup...don't have to like all of their decisions but I do respect what they say.

The law is the law.

Candidates re: Abortion - Web Link

Cholo,

Very interesting link. That's for posting that. I'm not opposed to prohibiting abortion after the first 20 weeks. That's half-way through a pregnancy and unless the pregnancy takes a turn for the worse and there are medical reasons to abort it, the woman or teen who knows she's pregnant should make her decision earlier not later.

I agree with Biden's point of viability, which is usually over five months. I worked with a man years ago who claimed he was the most premature baby to survive when he was born at 5 months or 5.5 months. I don't know if his story was true, but he had no birth defects or lasting problems from his early birth.

Roz

American,

One of Rand Paul's campaign issues is supporting the Bill of Rights. The 4th Amendment says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated," Rand objected to searching and collecting telephone records of citizens without proper warrants. I agree with his position on that.

Roz: There is no legal expectation of privacy in phone records, showing numbers called, time on phone, etc. I am not talking about listening to conversations without a warrant signed by a Judge. Law enforcement looks at phone numbers called by expected terrorist & finds patterns showing terrorist cell groups & based on that obtains warrants signed by Judge to listen and stop terrorist crimes. Your guy Rand refuses to allow law enforcement to look at numbers called to learn information needed to obtain warrants. Governor Christie as a former prosecutor in NY after 9-11 realizes how important it is to our safety to obtain numbers called to obtain information to obtain a warrant. Rand Paul is an eye doctor, not an attorney, like Governor Christie & myself. We understand the Bill of Rights. He does not and his ignorance was embarrassing during the debate.

American,

You are preaching to the choir. I am switching my support from Rand Paul to Chris Christie or Carly Fiorina. I'm not even ruling out Donald Trump. I'm keeping an open mind.

Roz

Why should taxpayers be funding abortions -- 99% of which are for the convenience of the mother? If "pro-choice" (aka anti-life) types want to create a non-profit "abortion foundation" that pays for abortions, that's fine. Maybe the Clinton Foundation??

Roz:

Just reading the posts. First of all, no one has a right to regulate what I do with my body, least of all Congress. Anyone that steps over that line does not get my vote.

Abortion foes mislabel their intent, it is NOT a "right to life" but a "right to birth". Where is the moral compass of these people? They selectively use biblical verses to "support" their views. I have not heard or read even one followup (from anyone on that side of the argument) that says these folks are willing to put their money toward helping the unfortunate women involved meet the needs of their children - they make no provision or allowance for feeding, clothing, housing much less educating these children. In fact these are the very same people that want to eliminate Federal programs that help these parents in distress. If not dollars, do they volunteer their time to help kids in the foster system, or any kids for that matter in low income areas? Have they ever stepped out of their box to walk in someone else's shoes? I'm betting not.

Before this incident, I was planning on contacting PP to suggest some mottos and bumper stickers for all.
The Federal government is pretty much suppose to stick to 'protecting and defending the country' from foreign enemies, protecting our borders, and only things the people and states 'can not do' for themselves. Otherwise, individuals and states are free and expected to manage their own affairs. Well, that was the plan. Then many decades after the demise of our founders, instead of patriots, we got politicians, and an ignorant electorate.
Poor 'single' mothers are constantly in the news today. Yet, somehow many continue to have what are apparently 'immaculate conceptions'. Why is poverty breeding poverty?? If they are already 'poor', have two hungry children, and already receiving taxpayer assistance, why do they make the 'choice' to get themselves pregnant. Not only irresponsible, to me, it seems cruel to the other two. To many, it seems an accident, and somehow, taxpayers responsibility??? Our first 200 years, that was definitely NOT the case. I'm a hard-working, middle income real 'fiscal' conservative, who worked to care for myself from a teenager, and took nothing from taxpayers.
Religions or religious superstitions are not suppose to be in any part of our government or government programs. Personally, I would like all on 'welfare' to 'use' contraception. Condoms should be free everywhere...
...much cheaper than 'free lunch through free college' as it is now all too often.
Before the current planned parenthood problem, I was going to propose they distribute free bumper stickers .... CONDOMS PREVENT POVERTY.. .. CONDOMS PREVENT ABORTIONS.. ..And, posters throughout all campus dorms.............
... "NO CONDOMS??? .. NO SEX!!!". That would eliminate Billion of $$ of government debt, and improve "QUALITY" of lives for all. Would not it be better for all children to be 'wanted'?
In the first month after arriving, this Pope said, 'I am open to ideas. The "ONLY" thing I won't consider is abortion." He has seen poverty up close and knows not all births are welcome blessings to those in the ghetto.
He knows what the problem is, but stumbles with 'having sex like RABBITS'.. I thought is was cute, and I really like him. He's open and real. He's coming to have US taxpayers pay for all those 'conceptions' of the already poor in the world. I've always thought condoms should be part of all federal aid and world aid,(like we did for our service men in WWII). The Pope wants to talk climate,(from over-population). I say we should not discuss either, unless and until 'contraception' is on the table and part of the discussion, and agreed to by all. He is on board, only some cowardly bishops are holding up those discussions. I say, no condoms? NO MONEY !!! Several great discussions about poverty and contraception on c-span. Most 'thinking' people know it has to be part of any plans. Breeding poverty in a world of shrinking resources is illogical.

Planned Parenthood does a lot more than just abortions. They provide needed healthcare for women who have no means to get it. When my daughter was out of college she had no health insurance (many years before ACA) even though she was working. She relied on Planned Parenthood for her annual visits and birth control. She was asked to make a contribution if she could afford it. I will always support PP because they care about women's health and affordability.

Yes, resident, I agree, which is why I thought of them first to help with this issue. It's just that with current headlines, I was lamenting how else to get the message out (and before the Pope's discussions). A wide range of groups should be a part of the 'public message'. I think it's an important public message that humanitarians, environmentalists, taxpayers, teachers, religious leaders, doctors, all should be eager to get out. Without a financial backer to print posters & stickers, how else. Some sort of cash-register coin drop, but that is not practical. Use condoms (or ANY contraception) should be of interest to EVERYBODY??? Condoms is just "the short easy" word for stickers and posters....message marketing! What rational thinker would not be for reminders..avoid surprises..BE PREPARED added to the series!! I think this generation lives like they've never heard the message...in the moment, babies are just an after-thought! Avoid UN-wanted pregnancies (in the first place) seems a responsible message to me.

Ideally, a benefactor would help with a public service message on tv, if print is too expensive. Even PP could... 'Avoid abortion, USE CONDOMS' ..(or contraception of your choice. 'Choice'..'contraception of your choice'. But my 'tricky posters like No condoms? NO SEX! would be a good habit starter for conversations on dorm doors.
I'm brainstorming. Population, food shortages, ignorance, fewer, but wanted children. Lots of ways to go. Take it from judgmental hypocrites.

Beverly,

1. You can do whatever you want with your body. The law allows it. Just don't confuse your rights with your responsibilities. As a woman, you also have the responsibility NOT to get pregnant if you can't or won't provide with the child.

2. You use the phrase "unfortunate women involved" -- really? The only unfortunate thing about the situation is that they weren't smart enough or responsible enough not to get pregnant. Despite knowing exactly what's going to happen, you drink, drive and get caught - you get arrested. Despite knowing exactly what's going to happen, you have unprotected sex, get pregnant and now you want the taxpayer to fund an abortion for your convenience?

3. You really should stop throwing around the straw man argument about pro-life supporters not caring about the children of unplanned pregnancies. You wouldn't change your view even if pro-lifers DID agree to pay for everything to which you refer, would you? In addition to funding hundreds of homes/services for unwed mothers, pro-lifers arrange adoptions and provide medical care for thousands of babies/mothers each year. To assume that all the aborted babies would have had horrible lives is just another made-up argument to make Liberals feel better about their anti-life stance.

Beverly, in this country we are a group of free individuals. As a taxpayer, I should not be made to support children other people choose to breed.
That does not mean I'm promoting abortion. I did not choose to have one. That does not mean others should or should not. That is their decision and their responsibility. Neither my business nor should it become my responsibility.
The bible's only fetus/baby mention is "viability". I'll stand with 'viability' in all these discussions. Viability is the ability to 'SURVIVE", which does NOT mean with metal inventions created in recent decades !!! That is NOT viability. That is sheer, costly, mechanics, not medicine. Same applies to death, i.e. when 'the person' can no longer live...keeping a body pumping with a machine,is not living either. If you follow the bible, then when he calls them home, it's time to GO! Can't pick and choose the part you choose to obey. We do NOT put our most beloved pets into mechanical commas.
Actually, the other reference is women are chattel, and a brother taking the wife in death. Medical science is only in this last century. Remember several of our presidents were "BLED" as a medical treatment. When people were writing the bible in earlier centuries, there was NO medical SCIENCE.
I will repeat, if a woman is collecting welfare, because she cannot provide, feed or educate the children she already has, she has a duty to herself, and to those children to not get pregnant until she can provide for any and all she already has. To bring another for her children to share the crumbs should be declared child cruelty. It is not, awh, poor dear....not unless it was an immaculate conception!!!! IF I ruled the world, while on assistance an IUD would be required. Out it would come the day she had a job and could cover those she 'already' had. Taxpayers are suckers to continue paying for ongoing breeding.
Now back to the public service reminder messages. Insert after reading instructions!!! NO JOKE

IF any of you have any 'sisters' you are friendly with, or can email this or communicate with, please share the 'public service' messaging of
CONDOMS PREVENT ABORTIONS ! CONDOMS PREVENT POVERTY ! and
NO CONDOMS????? NO SEX!!!!
Sisters will agree and help get around some blockheaded Bishops and Cardinals.

Condoms,

Condoms are the choice of males, but it is the female who gets pregnant. Diaphragms and birth control pills should be available to all girls and women between puberty and menopause.

Also in many cases the pregnancy isn't the female's choice but either incest (her daddy or her mama's boyfriend) or date rape, or forceful rape. But it is still the female who gets pregnant.

Roz

PS High Schools and even Middle Schools in some areas do or did give out condoms, and the extreme religious right objected to this as "encouraging" teen sex!

Roz, I agree with you on most, except the 'Condoms being choice of men'. Men don't really like them. So no matter the sterile story, or any other excuse from either of them, the woman must 'IMPOWER and PROTECT' herself at all times on all possible issues. Have a supply with her at all times. The No Condoms, No Sex, also covers, "Here 'tis, use it, or no sex". It's her duty to herself to protect herself, or suffer the consequences. She's in control!! Don't women want to set the standards and make the rules??? Can't have it both ways. She says 'there they are (rules or condoms) take them or leave them'...she crosses her legs, says 'next time', or stands up. It will not be considered an immaculate conception, So, it's her choice to stay in control and be prepared. If she already has a child, that would be the 'loving' thing to do.

Yes, don't get me started on extreme (yes), but (not so) religious right! Family Research Council meddlers!!! FRC employee 'Dugger' boy fondling little sister...yup! good one to lecture others on acceptable behavior!!
I would like 'free condoms' everywhere, along with the education/reminder
'No Condom/No Sex' public service. Can't to anything until that part gets started. It really would be easier, and serve many times more people here, and exponential numbers in the world, IF we could the a few "sisters" to start with the Pope, and certain congregational helpers.

I am going to remove all of Dan's comments on the Dr. at Auschwitz. It appears Mr. Dan doesn't know who this person was or what he did.

I'm taking out some of Cholo's posts about it too. I'm going to lock this discussion because it has gone too far.

Roz

I've had a couple of readers email me that they are disappointed I locked the thread. So I reopened it for relevant and courteous replies. Posters must be logged in to comment.

Any offensive comments or personal attacks on other posters or me or any public person, will be removed. If this second chance deteriorates into name calling again, I will lock the thread and throw away the key.

Roz

For the record, here are my comments:


1. Explain to me why tax payers should fund any abortions?

While I believe that any woman that is raped or sexually assaulted should have the ability to terminate a pregnancy, that termination should happen ?immediately?. Not weeks or month s later. In those cases alone, would I support helping the pregnant woman with an abortion ? as a taxpayer.


2. Forget the morals, or bible. Let?s stick to scientific facts ? which are being discovered daily.

When does a ?fetus? feel pain? When does a ?fetus? have a heartbeat? When does it react to touch?

The answers may change your mind on the issue.

Feel pain: 20 weeks
React to touch: 8 weeks
Heart Beats: 5 weeks

? It is my belief that a heart beating is certainly a SIGN of LIFE. You can hear it beating at 6 weeks. Abortion after that time is killing LIFE.

? It is wrong to allow a BABY to live inside the womb for that length of time, and then to perform an abortion.

? If a woman wants an abortion, she certainly knows she had sex. So why not have that abortion asap? Not weeks, months later?

? Perhaps use of the Morning After pill?


I am someone that VALUES woman?s? rights?but the unborn, with beating hearts should also have rights, at least in my world.

Roz Rogoff, please view these videos in their entirety. It might help you better understand why many of us are against abortion. If you can't view them because you fear reality (aka truth) then you should NOT be promoting and provoking issues regarding abortion.

[I removed the links because of requests from four readers who flagged this post.]

Ornithology and Marcia,

I have said repeatedly in my comments above that abortion should be legal in the first 20 weeks only. After 20 weeks it should be illegal. So don't lecture me on what I already support.

The government does not pay for abortions. The money that goes to Planned Parenthood is for health care and birth control, not abortions. These are distortions promoted for political reasons.

Roz

I love this point from the Dogfather, but only because it shows a complete lack of understanding of PP's purported business model:

"2 ? Doesn't that make them Merchants of Spare Baby Parts? No, as follows.
The price is designed to be cost- recovery alone -- they are willing to do it, but not divert money from
their other services in the process. The price reflects the extreme care needed to be taken to isolate
and prepare the tissue samples."

This is clearly not the case because when you are in the business of cost recovery, and you are talking about providing a product or service, YOU DON'T NEGOTIATE! You simply state the price and that is that.

The PP director/Doctor was negotiating prices and even admitted on the video to losing out on negotiating because she offered the first price.

This is NOT cost recovery. This is pushing for profit and it is illegal in their gruesome line of business.

People are either not watching the videos, or they are being willfully ignorant of the circumstances.

Dan,

I should delete your post, but I shall answer it. Planned Parenthood is 501c3, which means it is Not for Profit. They do not make money selling baby parts as you contend. They need to recover costs of preparing samples for research, which helps save future babies.

Roz

A Couple of points to Roz.

A. You wrote:

?Ornithology and Marcia,

I have said repeatedly in my comments above that abortion should be legal in the first 20 weeks only. After 20 weeks it should be illegal. So don't lecture me on what I already support. ?

First of all ? I can?t see anywhere in my original post where I was ?lecturing?. If you think I was, then you may want to review what I posted ? with an open mind to the points addressed, and answer those specific items.

You never answered my 2nd item ? where Science was provided. Do you believe a beating heart at 5-6 weeks is a sign of Life, or not? If you don?t, then I guess I can stop writing anything further. I can only assume You would have to ignore Science if you still choose that anything before 20 weeks is merely tissue to be discarded. Does mere tissue have a beating heart? Feel Pain? You say they are not 'babies'. Ok, given your definition, I assume the term 'baby' is only to be used once 'born'. But, my point is about LIFE. Using my definition of LIFE, would you still think anything before 20 weeks is ok to abort?

Many do not want to discuss the actual science. They prefer to discuss it in a political perspective. That may not be you?but I think you might agree that it is the majority.


B. You wrote:

?The government does not pay for abortions.?

Here is where we will have to agree to disagree. Any organization that takes money from the government can CO-MINGLE accounts.

If XXZ organization were to get $100 from private donations, and also get $100 from the government, do you really think the organization won?t ?rob Peter to pay Paul? within their accounting system? It happens all the time.

But, let?s go with your argument ? that NO government dollars are used for abortions at PP. Let?s ask what those dollars are used for. You say for health care and birth control. How much advertising and TRUE outreach is done by PP to 'push' birth control? Is that a PRIORITY for them? If it were ? then why do we have so many abortions performed by them? Seems to me they have failed the women in this country by not getting them the information and the broth control they need in order to not have to have an abortion. After all ? they get money from the government to do these things, right? If I saw them OUT FRONT in the effort to really stop unwanted pregnancies, I would think we would see a decrease in abortions. The poorer communities in our country have their clinics. Yet?.abortion rises. They have failed women.

P.S to Roz,

I understand your removing the video links that Marcia provided. Anyone could be viewing this exchange and not everyone would, or should want to see what is contained in those videos.


But I also feel that many adults don't want to see what really happens. I understand. Its pretty tough to watch some of it. But, that doesn't make it any less true.


Thanks

@Ornithology,

You said "It is my belief that a heart beating is certainly a SIGN of LIFE. You can hear it beating at 6 weeks. Abortion after that time is killing LIFE."

But it is alive long before that. Abortion at any time is killing a life. Killing a newly fertilized egg, an embryo, is killing a life. Even an unfertilized egg is unique and alive. It is a living thing. Anything that prevents the egg from growing into an embryo, whether by fertilization or parthenogenesis, is also killing a life.

That is the science of it.

Roz,

We all know what PP's LEGAL business status is and what they SAY they do in a official capacity.

But what they are doing BEHIND THE SCENES is demonstrably different than what they are saying publicly.

If you have any doubt, then watch the videos and evaluate for yourself. Speaking of which, have you even watched the videos?

Censor away if you must, but that does not cover up your not understanding the point.

What?s on the video links and why did Roz delete them?

Pictures and videos are often more powerful & persuasive than words.

For example, I never gave much thought about eating meat until someone showed me a video of a slaughterhouse.

What?s the harm in showing the truth?

Roz, Can I assume you did not watch the videos I provided? Tell me why. If you can't, worse yet, deleted them, then you fulfill my complete belief that you, and people like you, do not wish to see the reality, the truth, of what really is going on. How sad.
For decades, I have quietly said, "too bad pro-abortionists weren't aborted. Had they been, we wouldn't be having this discussion today." Think about it.

@ Bob,

My statement wasn't meant to read that is is only after a beating heart that it if 'life'.

My point was to determine where Roz is coming from believing it should be ok before 20 weeks. While there is life throughout the 'process', I wanted to see if a beating heart would make a difference to anyone. Hard to argue a beating heart is not life...even as others do argue it is not.

To many, it appears killing life is ok unless it has been born.

For me, this episode with Planned Parenthood is similar to the former organization called ACORN.

Recall that ACORN was brought down by James O' Keefe (Project Veritas) because of videos he filmed which showed abusive and illegal activities being committed by representatives of ACORN.

Congress stopped funding ACORN and ACORN eventually declared bankruptcy.

The mechanics of the comparison are the same. An organization is publicly proclaiming one mission, but privately performing a different mission.

I personally feel that what Planned Parenthood is doing is an order of magnitude worse then what ACORN did. It's barbaric.

Edit...worse "than".

Roz, If (allegedly) four people object to the videos I provided yet ten people wished to view them, would you still have deleted them?

Bob, do you still wish to see them? Assuming those that protested no longer need or wish to view them, it shouldn't matter to them that I'm posting the videos here again. Afterall, isn't this a form of free speech?

Web Link
Web Link

I clicked on the web link.

I barely watched any of it. But as I was fast-forwarding it, I saw an image of an aborted fetus and I stop watching.

This isn?t the first aborted fetus I?ve seen. But I?ve been unable to get the image out of my head. I am so sad by what I saw, even though I consider myself ?pro-choice.?

Euphemisms like ?pro-choice? mask the horror of what?s happening, of course.

America hides abortion images from the public.

Would public opinion change if abortion images were widespread?

Herman, I do believe that it would. Hence, why I'm so adamant that videos get out there. So adamant that I believe those who seek abortions (and the fathers) should be required to view a video like these prior to making their final decision. If they go forward with the abortion, then they should be required to view their "child" prior to it being thrown away like trash.

I see no comments. I am wondering why.

I have been fighting with Windows 10 for the last two days. I'm trying to get access to my classes to grade assignments so I don't have time to quarrel over this blog.

I did not see the videos. My Publisher, Gina, saw them and said they were not that bad. I don't have time this week to look at them, but I shall try to when I get some free time.

BTW see my blog about the First Amendment for the real meaning of Freedom of Speech, which is almost always misinterpreted. Web Link

Roz

Writing is skill that help to express the ideas expressively.

Roz, Thanks for your comments. However, in departing this blog, I leave you this one last article that, to me, spells it out in full. I truly hope it changes your mind...and the minds of others like you.

Web Link

Roz, Thanks for your comments. However, in departing this blog, I leave you this one last article that, to me, spells it out in full. I truly hope it changes your mind...and the minds of others like you.

Web Link

@ Roz,

I guess you want to move on, but if you do read this...I truly would like to know your answer to my question about the beating heart.


Thanks

Ornithology,

I posted an answer to your question about the beating heart on Tom Cushing's blog about Planned Parenthood. I shall copy it here, but you might want to read his blog too.

Beating heart vs. bleeding heart

I want to answer the question on my blog about a fetus' beating heart. This is again a non-issue. Chickens have beating hearts. Fish have beating hearts. So what! Dogs and cats have beating hearts and sentient brains. Millions of them are killed each year in "shelters" because of pet overpopulation.

The difference between a fetus under 4 months and a living, breathing, animal, is the animal knows what is going on around him or her. They can feel fear and pain when being euthanized (meaning killed).

Fear and pain and sentience are the factors I consider relevant in abortion. If the fetus doesn't feel anything and doesn't know anything, then it is not a human being. After the first 20 weeks, the fetal brain and nervous system develop and that's when I would limit abortions.

If all abortions were made illegal, as they were before the Roe v. Wade decision, then all abortions would be medically risky and unsafe. That is not something I ever want to return to.

Why is it that this unborn, under developed, not-yet-human being is more valuable than the woman or girl carrying it?

Roz