Speaking of court decisions. . .
Posted by Joshua Claybourn on 22 January 2005 | 14 responses
Today marks the the 32nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). I have a feeling that Eric will have much more eloquent thoughts to say about it than I, but I think it’s worth noting that I oppose the decision on two grounds. First, the decision strays much too far from the text and history of the Constitution. Secondly, it flies in the face of universal human rights inherent in justice. People involved with punditry can get tired of the endless focus on abortion. But for those, like me, who see the act as the taking of an innocent human life, there can be little else that precedes it in significance.
14 Responses to “Speaking of court decisions. . .”
Amen Josh.
I never tire of making the case. The holocaust we have allowed to occur within our own borders far exceeds all others in human history.
And even though it *may* have begun ideaolically, I think that it is far from it today.
God Bless.
I followed lifesteward’s link. He takes some anecdotes and comes to the conclusion that every single abortion provider is doing what they do for profit. I clicked on the wrong button and accidentally commented on his site. Here’s what I said…
I read both the Nathanson piece and the link to the one by Whitten. She’s VERY popular with the pro-life movement if you google her name. She worked at a clinic. I worked at Planned Parenthood of Greater Kansas City. I can also tell you that not one thing that she claims applies to every abortion provider because of what she says she saw and did ever happened at PPGKC. Not one. The claim that the pro-life movement loves to spread about abortion providers being a money grubbing profit machine industry is so full of it that it isn’t funny. Planned Parenthood is a not-for-profit. Remember? And since I worked directly for the CFO and saw the books constantly and was part of the deliberations on the budget I can definitely tell you just as authoritatively that what is being claimed is false. You want to know the biggest worry in our budget meetings? How little could we get away with charging the poor women who came to us and still meet the bills.
So it’s their anecdotes versus my anecdotes and the people who worked with me and never saw any of the things that Whitten and the people like her say they saw in their experience. I know what I saw and what I didn’t see and I’m not working hard to denigrate the other side so I can make their activities illegal.
Jim, I appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue. It is certianly fair enough to say that I’ve never seen the books of a PP organization. I’d be happy to peruse them if anyone would like to share. But let’s also be honest: being “not-for-profit” doesn’t mean no one makes money: it means not paying taxing, not having share-holders, and not issuing dividends.
Let me be clear: I’m sure there are plenty of idealogists working in abortion clinics who believe what they are doing is correct. I certainly have a disagreement with them, as they do with me. I am unabashedly and unashamedly working to make their activities illegal, you can’t shame me one bit with that. I have never concluded anything about “every abortion clinic” except they should be closed and their activities terminated.
If you read my posts, I target Planned Parenthood as an evil money-mongering organization, not “every abortion clinic”. The national organization gets government funding. Tons of it:
Read
this,
this,
this,
this,
and this.
Now, all of these are obviously pro-life oriented, but let’s be honest, how many aboritonists are going to draw attention to this? None because they are on the government gravy train.
Planned Parenthood is a huge organization. It has a lot of political influence, and political influence arises from and requires MONEY. The national organization is most definitely in this for the money.
I will post this at LifeSteward as well.
Let Us Mourn – 32 years of Death
In the United States, over 45 million pre-born boys and girls have been killed since the Jan. 22, 1973 Supreme Court Decision that legalized abortion. Each year, nearly 20,000 abortions are performed after the 21st week of pregnancy. Our most…
Of course your intent is to imply that government money is funding abortions, but according to PP’s annual report, of their 2.8 million clients, they only performed 244,000 abortions. You’re of course welcome to think that’s 244,000 too many, but that means the majority of their clients receive contraception, HIV tests, pregnancy tests, breast exams, sterilization procedures, and the like, which are undoubtedly the activities funded by the government. Is it legitimate to say that if an organization receives a government grant for a specific activity, every other activity the organization engages in must meet with your approval? That would be the end of university research support.
Yes, PP does more than fund abortions. But how would you feel if the government began funding Christian crisis pregnancy centers? CPCs provide all sorts of health services for their clients in addition to sharing the Christian faith and promoting the pro-life agenda.
Why are the “undoubtedly” the things they spend their government money on? And yes, I certainly agree that 244,000 abortions is 244,000 too many. I think that as long as they perform any abortions, they should receive no government funds. It doesn’t matter if that is the majority of their “clients” or not. As for receiving contraception, there are many of us who consider “emergency contraception” as an equivelant of abortion.
lifesteward,
Many of your side of this debate also think that the state should have the right to outlaw all contraceptives. They had that right and argued that they should be able to keep it as recently as the early ’60s. Where are YOU willing to draw the line or do you believe in a line at all?
Remember that I said that I worked at Planned Parenthood? The overwhelming majority of what was done had nothing to do with abortion. There were 8 clinics running 6 days a week. At one of those for less than half a day twice a week abortions were available. A couple of high school kids decided that the pro-life side was right when assigned the subject as a debate. They felt so strongly about it that they firebombed a clinic that had nothing to do with abortion. Well, they certainly had an effect on the operations of PP. They forced them to raise the amount charged to poor women for non-abortion care. Wow.
“But how would you feel if the government began funding Christian crisis pregnancy centers?” The difference, Eric, is that there is absolutely no secular basis for what they do.
Dollar$ are fungible. Planned Parenthood makes tons of money off their contraceptive business even to the “poor” who cannot afford “market” prices. The dollars they get from governments allow them to use taxpayer monies for their killing side. Remove the public monies and their killing side would diminish greatly.
“Dollar$ are fungible. Planned Parenthood makes tons of money off their contraceptive business even to the “poor” who cannot afford “market” prices.”
The previous quote is an outright falsehood. PP charges the needy women less than they pay for contraceptive supplies. They do NOT make tons of money off of them. I worked directly for the CFO of PPGKC. I was the data processing department which included helping with the budget spreadsheets and accounting software. A number of budget discussions were about how little we could get away with charging and how much could be done for free for those who had nothing to spend. I’ve always been disgusted by those who know nothing spreading falsehoods.
The difference, Eric, is that there is absolutely no secular basis for what they do.
Who is “they”? If you mean CPCs, I just said that they provide many of the same non-abortion health services that PP does. So from a public funding perspective, both organizations provide both unobjectionable and objectionable services (and in roughly the same proportions).
Jim,
You seem like a reasonably intelligent fellow, so you can’t possibly think I’ll rise to some childish bait about kids bombing an abortion clinic. Your side, my side, our side, their side: the only side worthy of debate is the side of the unborn. They cannot fight for themselves, it’s unfortunate and a little unbelievable that we have to defend them against these forces.
I’m not against contraception. I do not advocate violence. I am against abortion and any who practice it, without reservation. So you must understand, it does not matter that the “over-whelming majority” of the work done in the particular clinic you did computer stuff for was non-abortion. That’s like saying “An over-whelming majority of the time Tim McVeigh was a stand-up guy”. The question is did abortion occur? Does it still occur there today? Do they receive any government funds at all?
I applaud your efforts to provide services to “needy” women. If you can offer contraceptives, conception counseling, or even abstinence education, so that the unplanned pregnancy never occurs then you are all right by me. However, the minute you turn on the vaccuum we have a problem.