This Is "Pro-Life"
Anti-abortion extremists behaving badly
-
Submission from deeplysuperficialperson, who penned that last reply.
As for the statistics, those numbers were definitely pulled out of some activist’s butt. They’re laughably low: according to Guttmacher, in the U.S. there were 6.4 million pregnancies in 2001 (that was the most recent data I could find), 49% of which were unintended. That works out to 8,592 unplanned pregnancies per day in the United States alone. The study also says that 42% of those unplanned pregnancies ended in abortion, which works out to 3,609 abortions per day. (Feel free to check my math here; I’m more of a words person than a numbers person.) So not only are the numbers wrong, the ratio of unintended pregnancies to births is also WAY off—in reality only 44% ended in births, not 80%. All this may have changed in the last ten years, but I doubt the numbers changed enough to make trustinglovemistaken’s facts anywhere in the vicinity of accurate.
But what should we expect from a movement that thinks giving up things like coffee and soda until abortion ends is a helpful thing to do?
-
More from the “Stop Abortion, Kill Sluts” Facebook group. Apparently my giving them the benefit of the doubt was wrong.
This page needs to be reported. It goes against the Facebook ToS and it’s just awful.
The admin is sitting there gloating about how it won’t be deleted. Please prove her wrong. One of these groups has already been deleted.
So, this is a good cause, according to the person running it and killing abortion doctors is also a really awesome idea.
Look at them being so pro-life.
It’s shit like this that makes me think that when I graduate from med school, my parents are going to have to buy me a bullet proof vest as a graduation gift.
If you have a Facebook please report this page for threat of violence.
Love,
Rabble
So pro-life it hurts. Reported.
-
A psychotic, threatening letter from a Christian pro-lifer to abortion providers in Pennsylvania, on cute and colorful stationery no less (Click image to read)
This should be on Passive Aggressive Notes.
TL;DR:
“You’re going to die and I might be the one to kill you but I’ll pray for you!”
How much do you want to bet that the police are NOT looking into this?
Love,
Rabble
(PS: What level do you think this person falls under?)
My favorite line is “not any more threatening than how you offer abortion to unsuspecting clients.” As though women walk in thinking the place is a Burger King, but SURPRISE, it’s an abortion clinic.
-
A Molotov cocktail was chucked through the window of a Madera, CA, Planned Parenthood medical center on Sept. 2nd, in the first incident of violence this particular office has seen during its 20 years of existence. (Thankfully, nobody was injured.) The area experienced similar vandalism one week prior when broken windows and signs bearing hate speech were discovered at a local mosque. A group calling themselves the American Nationalist Brotherhood (ANB) has claimed responsibility for both attacks, and the FBI is investigating.
Sheriff of Madera John Anderson rightly denounced these vile, anti-American hate crimes as terrorism and promised to show no mercy in punishing the responsible individuals to the fullest extent of the law … haha, just kidding. In the most laughably offensive, insulting, pandering statement I’ve ever read, Anderson basically pleads with the terrorists to set up a lunch with him so we can all hug it out: “The fact that there have been numerous messages directed at several organizations makes it difficult to interpret ANB’s true message. I would like for ANB or a representative to contact me directly by whatever means is most comfortable. … I promise to listen to ANB’s message. This is the groundwork needed for us to have dialogue.”
For realsies?! You can’t “interpret ANB’s true message”? Um, they’re racist, anti-choice, right-wing terrorists who hate Muslims and women. What’s the big mystery?
Let’s get one thing straight: anti-choice violence is not just “arson” and “vandalism.” It’s terrorism. And the terrorists don’t need to participate in a sugary “dialogue” so we can “understand” them, they need to be put in prison. Jeez, is he going to give them a back rub and feed them chocolate-dipped fruit, too?
I wish I could say this reaction is an anomaly. Anti-choice violence is straight-up terrorism against American citizens in the name of religious extremism. But because the terrorists are typically white, the religion is Christianity, and the victims are women and practitioners who help them, nobody seems to give a tiny rat’s ass. Law enforcement officers offer up piddly statements, and news coverage, if it exists at all, is usually brief and local. This incident garnered only a few tiny blips: the Associated Press story was 79 words. 79!
Since 1977, there have been 6263 reported occurrences of violence committed against reproductive health centers and providers. (Granted, many weren’t severe enough to warrant a news story, but hundreds definitely were.) How many of those did you hear about? What would headlines say if bombs were thrown at a subway station, or a post office, or the Pentagon? How vehemently would Fox News shriek about our nation’s beeline to hell? Seriously, what’s it going to take to start calling this what it is?
During a time when America mourned the anniversary of the most heinous terrorist attack our country has ever experienced, anti-choice extremists were busy blaming abortion for terrorism, as well as inflicting some of their own. The irony is not lost on me.
(via change.org)I live in California and this is the first I’ve heard about this.
And I wonder, how many CPCs have been bombed? How many vandalized? How many of their workers need to live in constant fear of being the next target? The next victim? How many legislators felt it necessary to set up “bubble zones” around the area to protect the people who visit CPCs from hate-fueled protests and violent activists? How many of their workers have been killed for providing their services?
Another moment when “pro-life” is wildly inaccurate without the use of sarcastic quotation marks.
(Source: gordon-crisp)
-
(via mighty2save)
Who is “they?” The women themselves? The doctors? Using a gun for an abortion would clearly cause great damage to the woman…so yes, I should hope that would bother everyone more than using medical methods to abort. Or were you imagining this more along the lines of the fetus being shot after it’s removed from the mother’s body? In other words, shot after it’s already dead?
Logic: who needs it?
You know who really bothered me that time he used a gun? Scott Roeder.
I’m pretty sure the seven murdered abortion providers in the United States were bothered when the Pro-Life movement decided to use guns. The only side using guns is the pro-life side…which is totally rational and makes complete sense because women aren’t alive and abortion providers aren’t alive either…just the fetus.
Abort73.com I’ve missed you…what a reliable source you are.
Love,
Rabble
Yes, I’m pretty sure it would bother me if doctors started shooting guns inside women’s uteruses—because it could harm the woman.
Add this to the ever-growing list of “pro-life” advertising fails.
-
Classy, Stanek. Real classy.
(via @kushielsmoon)
-
On Monday Lifenews.com published an (unsurprisingly biased) article about a Florida woman who was taken to the hospital via ambulance from a Planned Parenthood clinic. The anti-abortion “reporter” made two giant leaps to unsubstantiated conclusions: that the woman had probably been having an abortion, and that the abortion was probably “botched.” This despite the author’s admission that he had no evidence to support these claims.
Ever the beacon of responsible journalism, yesterday Foxnews.com covered the story, adding no new information and linking to the LifeNews piece.
Maybe this lack of journalistic integrity shouldn’t come as a surprise, but I was under the impression that Fox News, as a quasi-mainstream news outlet, had marginally higher reporting standards (i.e. facts=good, speculation=bad) than the “news” arms of right-wing advocacy organizations. I guess at this point there is truly no difference between the two.
-
This conversation with a deranged anti is a long but worthwhile read. Highlights include astonishing ignorance about ectopic pregnancy, a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution and the charming invocation of the term “Mongoloidism” in reference to Down syndrome.
From Ramblings from This Side of Sanity: A Conversation with a Pro-Life (Anti-Choice) Activist
-
Jill Stanek admits that she thinks lying to pregnant women to prevent abortions is totally justified and definitely not a sin.
From RH Reality Check: Lying to save lives
-
Another one for the “pro-life” hall of fame: an Arizona nun was excommunicated and demoted from her hospital administrator position for the crime of saving a pregnant woman’s life via abortion.
Sister Margaret McBride was part of an emergency ethics committee meeting called to discuss saving a pregnant woman with pulmonary hypertension. The Sister agreed with the committee’s decision to allow the 11-week fetus to be aborted in order to prevent the patient’s “nearly certain” death.
She was automatically excommunicated and moved to another position at the hospital.
Evidently the church would rather both the woman AND the fetus had died. “Pro-life” indeed.
From IrishCentral: Irish nun excommunicated after abortion to save mother decision
