Quoted Text

Who’s playing God on Bellevue abortions?

   In the June 13 article regarding activists urging lawmakers to keep Bellevue hospital open, Marcia Pappas, the president of the National Organization for Women (NOW), stated that “When Catholic hospitals play God, the results are devastating to women’s health.” As a Roman Catholic, I must stand up and tell her she is wrong and far from the real truth.
   Catholic hospitals are not the ones playing God. Those who, through support and/or participation in abortions, artificial contraception, euthanasia, etc., decide who should live and who should die, are the ones playing God. One of the most basic tenets of the Catholic faith is to protect and defend life from conception to natural death. We believe that life should be given and taken away only by God. Once life has been created, we, as human beings, have no right to take it away from someone.
   Attacking Catholic hospitals for upholding one of the faith’s most basic beliefs in pathetic. If the most compelling reason supporters of Bellevue can think of to keep it in business is access to abortions, then perhaps its mission is not as lofty and important to “women’s health” and the community as they would like us to believe.
   ANDREA SALAZAR
   Niskayuna  

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Activists settle in for 2-week protest
Demonstrations affect businesses
BY MICHAEL LAMENDOLA Gazette Reporter

   The Rev. Philip “Flip” Benham of North Carolina stood on the corner of Union and North Jay streets Tuesday afternoon.
   In one hand, he gripped a wellworn Bible; in the other he held a 4-foot-tall sign graphically depicting the aborted remains of 21-weekold fetus.
   Every so often, he would raise his Bible like a sword and steady the sign before him like a shield.
   “I’m not protesting,” Benham said, his deeply lined face red from the sun. “All I can claim is that Jesus is Lord at the gates of hell and this is a manifestation of hell.”
   For Benham, hell occupies a small brick building at 414 Union St., headquarters of Planned Parenthood Mohawk Hudson, the area’s largest provider of abortions. Planned Parenthood performed more than 3,000 abortions in 2006, said spokeswoman Linda Scharf, but added that abortions represent less than 10 percent of the services it provides in 12 counties ranging from Madison and Essex to Washington and Schoharie.
   It also provides HIV pre-testing and counseling, pregnancy tests and testing of sexually transmitted diseases, as well as nutritional counseling. Last year, its centers saw 22,825 patients during 45,434 visits. “We have more pre-natal visits than abortion services,” Scharf said.
   Benham, pastor of Temple Truth, a Free Methodist church in Charlotte, N.C., is among 30 activists from around the country staging a two-week demonstration downtown against Planned Parenthood.
   He also is head of Operation Save America and baptized Norma Mc-Corvey as an adult. McCorvey was known as Jane Roe in the landmark 1973 Roe V. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the United States. In that case, McCorvey successfully challenged a prohibition on abortion. She later regretted that success and now campaigns against abortion.
   The activists plan to make the 400 block of Union Street their ground zero for at least six hours per day every day through next Friday. Their base is the nearby building housing the headquarters of Schenectady County Right to Life. The two-week demonstration is the activists’ most concerted effort in years, said the Rev. Francis McCloskey. They also plan to visit high schools in Albany, Schenectady and Troy next week to present students with anti-abortion literature.
   McCloskey’s organization, “Oh Saratoga!”, is organizing the twoweek protest. In past years, he and others staged one-day protests against local Planned Parenthood centers.
   Anti-abortion activist Beth Lynch of Illion said the one-day protests became so commonplace that people ignored them. Hence, the two-week demonstration this year. “It shows we are here and are a presence that is not going away,” she said.
   When not protesting, they will stay at a nearby Christian campground, McCloskey said.
AGENCY PREPARED
   Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Linda Scharf said the agency is prepared. “This center will stay open,” she said.
   Patients with appointments have been notified about the activists, and Planned Parenthood is providing volunteer escorts for visitors, who have to walk a gauntlet of the activists to reach the front door. Its new facility at 1040 State St., to open Sept. 18, will offer visitors a private entrance, which activists will not be allowed to approach, Scharf said.
   She said the demonstrators have a right to voice their opinions, but they should not try to intimidate other people or impose their views on them.
   “Planned Parenthood has been a trusted partner in the community for more than 70 years,” Scharf said.
   Planned Parenthood also expects to make money on the two-week demonstration, Scharf said. In campaign called “Making lemonade out of lemons,” the organization collects donations from supporters who pay a fee every time a demonstrator appears at a center. In 2006, Planned Parenthood raised $14,948 through the fundraising effort, she said.
   Police barricades prevent activists from approaching within 10 feet of Planned Parenthood’s only entrance, a front door off a public sidewalk. Activists could still address and present literature to visitors walking to and from the clinic, however. Two women paced the barricade, quietly telling visitors: “Turn to God. You don’t believe in God, but he believes in you.” An activist near Planned Parenthood’s parking lot shouted to visitors they were “going to hell” and were “killing babies.”
   The two-week protest is also causing headaches at City Hall. Corporation Counsel L. John Van Norden must deal with complaints from the protesters — who want to get closer to the Planned Parenthood entrance — and nearby store owners who want the protesters to leave.
   “It’s the protesters that were really being difficult,” Van Norden said. “They didn’t like the way the barriers were set up. They were standing in the street one day — somebody’s going to hit them.”
   When he went out to explain where they could safely stand, the response wasn’t quite what he expected.
   “He said, ‘If you were a real man, you’d be out here protecting these babies,’ ” Van Norden related. “I was like, ‘Come on! You don’t know me! For all you know I could be a rabid right-to-lifer. But let’s stick to the subject here.’ ”
   But while the protesters think he’s being too harsh, some local business owners feel he’s being too lenient. One local restaurateur threatened to sue the city if Van Norden wouldn’t stop the protest because it was ruining his business.
   “He called me up screaming, just screaming. ‘People have to drive by these sickening pictures to have lunch,’” Van Norden said. “Emotions run high with this sort of thing.”
   He declined to identify the business. There are several restaurants near Planned Parenthood.
PUBLIC MIXED
   An activist approached Lucinda Maya of Troy after she left Planned Parenthood. She politely dismissed the woman. “In this free country each woman has a right to chose whether or not to continue a pregnancy,” Maya said. “It’s a private matter.”
   Activists lined both sides of the street near Planned Parenthood and stood on several corners Tuesday. Their children played on sidewalks, sometimes interrupting their activities to shout anti-abortion messages. Full-color, graphic posters of aborted fetuses were everywhere.
   One poster was enough for Nicki Sitterly to stop. She approached Benham with the intent of chastising him for promoting abortion. But after she saw the sign was against abortion, she asked: “How can I get involved?”
   Sitterly said she wants to get involved because, “I love my kids and I am against abortion.”
   Lynch said she hoped the posters shock people while McCloskey added: “It’s more important if it’s true rather than shocking.”
   Scharf said the activists’ posters are distortions. They show abortions performed at or after 21 weeks, which account for less than 2 percent of all abortions in the United States, she said.
   The federal Centers for Disease Control received reports in 2003 of 848,163 legal induced abortions from 49 reporting areas. This total represents a 0.7 percent decrease from the 854,122 abortions reported for 2002. More than half (61 percent) of the reported legal induced abortions were performed during the first eight weeks of gestation; 88 percent were performed within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, according to the CDC.
   McCloskey said the two-week event was tied to the 230th anniversary of the American victory at Saratoga. “That was a turning point in the war. We believe this will be a turning point in the process of saving the unborn. It combines the best of everything, patriotism, evangelism and Catholicism.”
   The religious aspect of the event was apparent in other ways. Several activists wore T-shirts that read: “Islam is a false religion. Evolution is a delusion. Liberalism is a false God. Homosexuality is a sin. Feminism is rebellion against God.” Benham called Islam “a religion from the pits of Hell.” Others distributed prayer beads and slips of paper that read “God bless you!” One activist asked Scharf her religion; Scharf did not respond.
   Benham said “the battle is being fought in the streets, and we’re winning.” He said the number of freestanding abortion clinics, which he termed “abortion mills,” has declined from more than 2,000 in 1991 to fewer than 760 today, that abortions have declined 41 percent and that the number of doctors who perform abortions has decreased by 40 percent since 1991.

PETER R. BARBER/GAZETTE PHOTOGRAPHER
Anti-abortion activists attempt to hand pamphlets to passengers in a truck leaving the Planned Parenthood office Wednesday on Union Street in Schenectady.

Quoted Text

Planned Parenthood performed more than 3,000 abortions in 2006, said spokeswoman Linda Scharf, but added that abortions represent less than 10 percent of the services it provides in 12 counties ranging from Madison and Essex to Washington and Schoharie.
   It also provides HIV pre-testing and counseling, pregnancy tests and testing of sexually transmitted diseases, as well as nutritional counseling. Last year, its centers saw 22,825 patients during 45,434 visits. “We have more pre-natal visits than abortion services,” Scharf said.

Quoted Text

He also is head of Operation Save America and baptized Norma Mc-Corvey as an adult. McCorvey was known as Jane Roe in the landmark 1973 Roe V. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the United States. In that case, McCorvey successfully challenged a prohibition on abortion. She later regretted that success and now campaigns against abortion.

Quoted Text

“He said, ‘If you were a real man, you’d be out here protecting these babies,’ ” Van Norden related. “I was like, ‘Come on! You don’t know me! For all you know I could be a rabid right-to-lifer. But let’s stick to the subject here.’ ”

Quoted Text

One local restaurateur threatened to sue the city if Van Norden wouldn’t stop the protest because it was ruining his business.

Quoted Text

“He called me up screaming, just screaming. ‘People have to drive by these sickening pictures to have lunch,’”

Quoted Text

and hope that creep from California doesn't show up

Quoted Text

How to quiet anti-abortion protesters
Carl Strock can be reached at 395-3085 or by e-mail at carlstrock@dailygazette.com.

   I was in front of the Schenectady Planned Parenthood office the other day, on Union Street, hanging out with a group of anti-abortion protesters, and I saw something interesting. I mean, beyond the usual waving of gruesome posters, the chanting of “baby killers” and the reading from the Bible.
   This was the attempted towing of a van belonging to one of the protesters.
   The van was parked across the street in the parking lot of Friendship Baptist Church, where the protesters had been told the previous day they could not park. Apparently one of them didn’t get the messsage, and now — Holy Smokes! — his van was being hooked up to a Holmes and Kugler tow truck!
   Hey, look! First one protester saw it, then another, and then they all went running across the street to try to prevent this outrage, led by Father Francis McCloskey, a Catholic priest and anti-abortion campaigner from the Catskills. They started right in on the truck driver, a portly fellow with no apparent interest in theology. “We’re trying to save babies!” one woman yelled at him as she lectured him on the group’s holy works.
   “And you’re wearing a crucifi x!” Father McCloskey hollered at him with indignation. “That’s an outrage!”
   “Block the truck! Block the truck!” he urged his fellow believers, which they did, milling around in front of it like Chinese students facing down a tank in Tiananmen Square but holding up rosary beads and invoking the name of the Christian Lord.
   And then what happened was, the driver turned around and unleashed on them a storm of profanities, obscenities, imprecations and insults such as no one had previously heard this side of Hades, crucifix or no crucifix. “I don’t give a [blank] about your [blank] babies!” he bellowed at them.
   “Get the [blank] out of my [blank] way, you [blank] [blank] [blank]!” and so on.
   It was hilarious, at least for a heathen like me, but the funniest part was the reaction of the Christians, which is how I was beginning to think of the protesters, with their Bibles and their crosses and their posters declaring what God thinks. They shrunk back and kept more or less quiet. Oh, they grumbled about the injustice of it all, and they remonstrated with the police when the police arrived, but they delivered no more sanctimonious lectures to the tow truck driver. They left him alone.
   In the end, with police mediation, they took up a collection and paid the driver’s $45 charge for coming to the scene and hooking up, and the driver unhooked the van and thereby spared them the additional $100 for a tow.
   I thought I had learned something, and in a spirit of humanitarian sharing I passed it along to the Planned Parenthood folks: If you want to quiet these latter-day crusaders standing at your doorstep hollering “baby killers” at you, don’t be meek and turn-the-other-cheek about it. Give them a hearty blast of Luciferian invective, or else hire a tow truck driver to do it for you, in his off hours, and they’ll quiet down. It seems to have a calming effect on them to be yelled back at.
   But the Planned Parenthood people didn’t take the lesson to heart.
   For the rest of the day they stood on the Union Street sidewalk, meek and mild in their orange safety vests, escorting patients, or clients, into and out of the clinic, while the Christians berated them as murderers and shouted Holy Scripture at them.
   If you’re a regular reader of this column you know I’m skeptical of people who claim to operate with divine direction, but this was not my fight, so I kept quiet myself. I was there only as an observer, not as a coach to one side or the other.
   I did try to talk to one Christian who was especially aggressive, a fellow wearing a Virgin of Guadalupe T-shirt, reading aloud from the Bible to a couple of small children with him, and occasionally yelling across a police barricade at the Planned Parenthood escorts, berating them for allegedly not knowing the difference between a cat and a human being and urging them to “Repent!” among other things.
   He wouldn’t tell me his name or where he was from, which I thought was interesting. He was on a public sidewalk doing his self-righteous best to intimidate other people with his sacred certainties, shouting in their faces, but he preferred to be anonymous.
   Some of the others were more open. They came from Pennsylvania, or Ohio, or Florida, or even California for this two-week antiabortion fest in Schenectady, or else they were local, some of them. The ones I spoke to were all Roman Catholic, though I didn’t speak to many. They held up their postersize photographs of mutilated fetuses for the benefit of passing cars and yelled, “Killing babies here! Planned Parenthood — killing babies — right here!” One elderly fellow I got a kick out of did this in an incongruously cheerful tone, like it was a neighborly greeting for him: Good morning, folks. Killing babies here.
   But in general the tone of the event was nasty and belligerent, and I was glad the police had erected a barrier to keep the Christians at least a few feet from their targets.
   I don’t say anything about abortion one way or another, leaving that to wiser minds, but one thing I did take rueful note of was the use of children in this demonstration — children to hold posters making moral and religious claims when those children could not possibly be expressing independent views but could only be instruments of their parents’ zealotry. To employ children in such a manner I fi nd objectionable. It’s worse than some of things I have seen parents dragged into Family Court for.
WORD WATCH
   On the language front, the Christians took pride in what they called “turnarounds,” referring to young women they have confronted at the entrance to places like Planned Parenthood and convinced not to have abortions. “We’ve had turnarounds,” more than one assured me with what I took to be smugness, though they didn’t have any while I was watching.
   Also, Father McCloskey, in conversation with me, cited George Orwell, famous for satirizing double-talk, when he rejected not only the “anti-abortion” label but also the euphemistic “pro-life” label. He prefers to call himself and his fellow crusaders “mother and child bonders,” which he insisted was more truthful.
   Alas, Orwell is dead, so I couldn’t get a reaction from him.

Quoted Text

Planned Parenthood shouldn’t presume to dictate to hospitals

   Paul Drisgula’s recommendations for the promotion of women’s health services by mandating abortion services in all medical institutions and through all health providers is neither healthy nor ethical [Aug. 26 Gazette].
   To require all physicians to provide abortion services that are at the very least questionable, and ultimately harmful to a woman’s health (physically, emotionally and spiritually), is to ask many health providers to act against their consciences and is immoral. Mr. Drisgula’s statement that “Physicians cannot be constrained by religious restrictions or other artificial limitations when providing necessary services,” misrepresents the role of religion in an individual’s life. The assumption is that religion is simply an application of some externally imposed rule when in fact true religion is a matter of the heart. Mandated abortion services should not be manipulated (artificially imposed) on those health providers who, in good conscience, practice the call to “fi rst do no harm.”
   If Planned Parenthood and its representatives truly have an interest in “a woman’s right to choose her physician and a physician’s right to offer her the care she seeks,” then they must allow women the right to choose physicians and health care providers who respect the lives of the unborn and who hold the same values.
   Women’s health, and in fact human health and well-being, is a primary concern of those who support life from birth to natural death. Women seeking abortions are dealing with far more than the need to end a pregnancy, and many would not receive abortions if they were able to gain the support they needed. Hospitals and other organizations that are committed to providing this support should not be hindered in their goal to promote life-affirming care.
   Mr. Drisgula should not presume to speak for “most of us in this community” in regard to expectations of women’s health services. He certainly does not speak for all who choose life.
   MARY JONES
   Rexford  

Quoted Text

Thanks for warning on abortion protest

   I thank you for your Aug. 30 article about the planned two-week protest in front of Planned Parenthood in Schenectady. No parent should expose their young children to the horrific images the Right to Life groups display.
   Had I driven by with my 4-year-old, she surely would have been terribly upset with what she saw and asked me to explain. Thanks to your article I can avoid the area to protect my child — as will other responsible parents in our community.
   MICHELLE EDWARDS
   Niskayuna

Quoted Text

Counter-protesters decry photos
Residents oppose methods used by demonstrators
BY STEVEN COOK Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Steven Cook at 395-3122 or scook@dailygazette.net

   Blythe Gieseler stood near the Planned Parenthood in Schenectady holding her own sign.
   There were no pictures, just words: “No More Pictures.”
   It was in contrast to the antiabortion protesters she was near, many with signs of graphic pictures of what they said were aborted fetuses, photos that anyone in passing cars could see.
   “I don’t think that the children in Schenectady need to see such disgusting pictures to get a point across,” Gieseler said.
   Gieseler, her husband and another relative held signs reading “Stop Nasty Pictures” and “No More Pictures.”
   She spent much of the day Tuesday at the site, after spending much of the night at her job as a nurse at St. Clare’s Hospital.
   Gieseler drove past the protesters last week with her family. That prompted her 9-year-old step-daughter to ask questions. “She didn’t understand because, of course, I would never tell her about abortion at 9 years old.”
   It also prompted the mother to stage her counter-protest.
   A group of anti-abortion activists has demonstrated outside the clinic at 400 Union St. for the past week. They intend to stay until Friday.
   Their base is the nearby building housing the headquarters of Schenectady County Right to Life. The two-week demonstration is the activists’ most concerted effort in years, Rev. Francis McCloskey has said.
   The photos have been a centerpiece of the anti-abortion protest, large graphic depictions of what the activists said are aborted fetuses.
   Planned Parenthood Mohawk Hudson officials have called the photos distortions. They show abortions performed at or after 21 weeks, which account for less than 2 percent of all abortions in United States.
   Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Linda Scharf said they’ve received support from many people, though calls and other means. She said they respect the right of anyone to free speech, the protesters and the counter-protestors.
   For his part, McCloskey said he didn’t mind the counter-protestors. “People think they’re with us,” he said.
   He responded to their concerns by saying he believes it’s the adults who have more problem with the pictures than the children.
   He said it’s the parents who have to answer the questions. “What happens if the child says ‘well, mom and dad, why aren’t we doing something to save the babies?’”
   “Some people think we’re here to shock them with the pictures,” he said. “We’re here to expose what’s happening.”
   Gieseler described her own feelings on the issue as being against abortion for birth control, but believes it should be available to victims of rape.
   But she said those are conversations she doesn’t want to have yet with her 9-year-old.
   “You can protest without having to be so disgusting and graphic,” she said.

Quoted Text

Abortion photos just showing the ugly truth

   I found the hypocrisy of the people protesting the anti-abortion activists showing photos of aborted unborn children interesting [Sept. 5 Gazette]. If they support abortion, why are they upset at pictures of the result of abortion? Are they afraid to have the world see just what happens as the result of an abortion? Yes, those are babies that were killed in an abortion and, yes, they do look just like that.
   In the letters to the editor on the same day, one mother said she took another route so that her child would not have to see those pictures [Aug. 31 Gazette]. Was she upset that the pictures would frighten the child or was she upset that she would have to explain to the child that people killed unborn children? Parents who object to the pictures should ask themselves how they would explain this to their children. Then maybe they might not be so supportive of abortion.
   CHARLES ROBINSON
   Princetown  

Quoted Text

Abortion images needed to shock desensitized society

   After reading the Aug. 30 Gazette news article regarding the abortion protests in Schenectady, I began wondering about the supposed issue of protecting children from frightening images. This is the first time I’ve heard any concern voiced in a society where demonic images abound. It seems there is a skull on almost every T-shirt, serpent images, demonic-looking tattoos on grown men (who should know better), indecent television programming and, of course, lewd and suggestive conversation from supposed broadcast professionals. Sadly, I’ve only skimmed the surface of an increasingly degenerating society. These truly “nasty” things have been bombarding our sensibilities and children for years now, and I’ve barely heard a peep out of any parent.
   For two weeks, some citizens have been trying to shed light on what I, and many, believe to be a very great evil done to the most defenseless and innocent in our society — the unborn. People are appalled, and well they should be, when animals are prevented from escaping and coldly killed in canned shoots. Here in our country we allow our own kind to be slaughtered in a very similar manner. No matter the size of the person, over 21 weeks, or if the baby’s well-formed leg is the size of a dime, it should horrify this supposedly civilized and well-to-do country.
   As a Christian, I have a responsibility to shed light on evil and, believe me, it is not a pleasant job. I have participated in some abortion protests and the snarling hatred one encounters is not something we look forward to experiencing. There are also many positive comments — in fact, more and more every year. You see, biology tells us when life begins. Ultrasounds and pictures also bear a most faithful witness. We now firmly believe that the only way to stop abortion in America is to show America abortion. This is the ultimate threat to the abortion industry — the truth.
   Two weeks ago marked the 10-year anniversary of Mother Teresa of Calcutta’s passing. Predictably, however, the world chose to concentrate on Princess Diana and the “Crocodile Hunter” [Steve Irwin]. Mother Teresa once warned that if a baby wasn’t safe in the womb, no one could expect to be safe anywhere. She said war would prevail.
   As people yearn for peace in our troubled world today, I am sure it will only begin in the womb.
   MAUREEN A. CALLAHAN
   Waterford  

Quoted Text

Protesters should leave Planned Parenthood be

   I am so angry every time I see bad articles or hear protesters on Planned Parenthood.
   Planned Parenthood is so much more than people know, or want to know about. These people make it sound like a meat market — next, cut, next, etc., That’s not what it’s all about.
   I was 18 years old the first time I ever went there for birth control. They treated me like a person — not a number— and with respect. I worked part-time and went to school. I had no insurance on my own, — yes, under my parents — but I felt like I wanted to do this on my own. A lot of people don’t have insurance and can’t afford to go to high-priced doctors or hospitals.
   I would recommend Planned Parenthood to anyone for anything. If you have questions, they give you honest answers and options. People go there for lots of different reasons, but protesters only see “abortion.”
   So, for all the ignorant people out there, leave Planned Parenthood alone. It’s there to help people who need it. By the way, I’m 51 years old now.
   MONICA HALFACRE
   Schenectady  

Quoted Text

I had no insurance on my own, — yes, under my parents — but I felt like I wanted to do this on my own. A lot of people don’t have insurance and can’t afford to go to high-priced doctors or hospitals.

Quoted Text

The reality is that abortion remains legal

   While I will not impose my own personal feelings involving the “right to life,” I am responding to the Sept. 5 letter by Mary Jones, “Planned Parenthood shouldn’t presume to dictate to hospitals.”
   Health care professionals are required not to pass judgment on individuals who make legal and clear choices regarding their own health care. These choices can include discontinuing life support or terminating a pregnancy.
   Women’s health care services are necessary for our community. We are obliged to honor and respect a woman’s legal right to choose abortion, whether we as a community or health care professionals personally or spiritually agree with it.
   The writer’s comment, “Women seeking abortions are dealing with far more than an end to a pregnancy; and many would not receive abortions if they were able to gain the support they needed,” is a very broad statement. Every individual case involving women’s decisions to abort is vastly different .
   In a perfect world, hospitals would provide free prenatal, as well as labor, delivery and neonatal services. In a perfect world, hospitals would provide free psychological and spiritual services. All of these services are categorized under the term “support,” of which the writer suggests.
   We do not live in this perfect world; therefore, not only is Planned Parenthood a necessary fixture in the community, so are hospitals that offer the services Mr. Drisgula speaks of [Aug. 26 viewpoint].
   Even if the law were changed, women would still make the same choices to terminate their pregnancies — only they would again be seeking alleyways, not hospitals. How safe would that be?
   Mr. Drisgula was the voice for these women.
   LUCIE MCLAUD
   Rotterdam

Quoted from senders

This is not a positive choice for either man or woman.....a 'liberated woman' needs to learn when the choice of 'the pill' is only 98% effective, or that the condom can have holes, or the alcohol/drugs make her a 'less liberated' woman......as for the penis involved,,,responsibility, responsibility responsibility......

bottom line----animals/hormones

what is the % of abortions for rape/incest??

As a liberated woman, can you claim rape if you are inebriated? Does the man carry more responsibility?

Quoted Text

Mother Teresa should have pushed birth control

Maureen Callahan references the words of Mother Teresa in her Sept. 11 letter concerning display of abortion pictures.
As [author and atheist] Christopher Hitchens and others have eloquently pointed out, one wonders how many fewer abortions there would have been, had Mother Teresa and others not spent a lifetime fighting against birth control.
Inevitably, attempting to impose arbitrary and irrational “morality” causes unnecessary suffering.
TOM KELLER
Clifton Park

Quoted Text

Abortion foes should aid disadvantaged moms  
First published: Monday, September 17, 2007

I just finished reading the Sept. 6 article "Upset mom protests anti-abortion rally" a minute ago, and with great interest. I just have a few things to say, questions, rather, that I have always wondered about with regard to abortion opponents.
  
The first is why are they so hell-bent on trying to control other people? Are they so insecure about themselves that they need to live vicariously through the actions of others? Abortion can actually save lives; this paper reported recently that the number of deaths while giving birth has increased recently.

Is it then OK for the mother to die so long as the infant is born? That sounds like deliberate murder to me. What, then, about the child's life growing up without a mother? Should their possible future feelings be ignored in order to maintain a personal vendetta?

The second main question that I have long wondered about is the abortion opponents' responsibility to the children being "saved" from abortion. Since they are responsible for that child's birth, why are they not financially responsible as the parent is? Is the birth of the child worth their life growing up with a mother who was 16 at the time of birth, does not know who the father is, cannot provide for their child, etc.? These abortion opponents never address this issue.

Once I see abortion opponents and church groups begin to provide some form of aid to disadvantaged mothers, then, even though I disagree with their stance, will I begin to take them seriously.

GREG PITTZ Delmar

Quoted Text

Is it then OK for the mother to die so long as the infant is born? That sounds like deliberate murder to me. What, then, about the child's life growing up without a mother? Should their possible future feelings be ignored in order to maintain a personal vendetta?

Quoted Text

Men have turned women into killing machines

Quoted from Tony

Quoted Text

Men have turned women into killing machines

Women allow men to turn themselves into killing machines, I think.

Quoted Text

Planned Parenthood reduces need for abortions  
First published: Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Your layout of the Sept. 6 Capital Region section, Page D1, was very interesting. At the bottom left was coverage of a woman fighting a rally protesting the operation of the Mohawk Hudson Planned Parenthood facility, specifically its approval to end the development of an unwanted child.
  
As usual, the protesters ignored the fact that Planned Parenthood can reduce unwanted pregnancies and thereby reduce the need for abortions.

Particularly, the woman objected to the protesters' display of pictures of aborted fetuses designed to make abortions appear repugnant.

At the bottom right was coverage of a couple who abandoned their three children while out looking for drugs. The children were found in squalid conditions. This is frequently what happens with unwanted children. Fortunately, these three were found and brought to better conditions before they could grow up with drug habits like their parents, leading to a life of violence and crime and, eventually, time in jail, where the public has to support their unwanted lives.

Are the anti-abortionists ready to support all the unwanted babies, many of whom are born with drug addictions? Where are the pictures of the squalid conditions experienced by these children because the abortion opponents would not let their parents terminate the pregnancy or get instructions on how to avoid it in the first place?

At a time when overpopulation is of concern, the anti-abortionists would not let us control unwanted births. Every unwanted child (as well as every wanted one) contributes to global warming. Obviously the abortion opponents have little concern for our future.

DONALD B. AULENBACH
Clifton Park

Quoted Text

Advocacy of abortion as lifesaver stuns mother  
First published: Thursday, September 27, 2007

Is Greg Pittz serious (letter, Sept. 17)? He actually believes abortions save lives? I sat amazed at the absurdity of that statement. He states the number of deaths while giving birth is up. So his logic is to abort just in case you might die during childbirth, because that would save a life?
He assumes that abortion opponents and church groups give no aid to disadvantaged mothers contemplating abortion. Does he live under a rock? There are hundreds of religious and nonreligious organizations that provide free services for these women.
  
My sister counsels and financially helps women in this dilemma. I know a thing or two about pregnancy and childbirth; I've been there and done that twice. I know what it's like to feel a living being move inside of me, and before I could feel it I saw it on an ultrasound 10 weeks into my pregnancy.

I saw with my own eyes the beating of that tiny heart. Why would "Upset Mom" be so upset at pictures of aborted babies being shown at anti-abortion protests? Is reality too much to bear or is it hard to argue your point when the truth is staring you in the face?

KAREN JORDAN
Cohoes

Quoted Text

Study: Abortions are just as common where they are illegal
The Associated Press

   LONDON — Women are just as likely to get an abortion in countries where it is outlawed as they are in countries where it is legal, according to research published today.
   In a study examining abortion trends from 1995 to 2003, experts also found that abortion rates are virtually equal in rich and poor countries and that half of all abortions worldwide are unsafe.
   The study was done by Gilda Sedgh of the Guttmacher Institute in the United States and colleagues from the World Health Organization. It was published in an edition of The Lancet medical journal devoted to maternal health.
   “The legal status of abortion has never dissuaded women and couples who, for whatever reason, seek to end pregnancy,” Beth Fredrick of the International Women’s Health Coalition in the U.S. said in an accompanying commentary.
   Abortion accounts for 13 percent of maternal mortality worldwide. About 70,000 women die every year from unsafe abortions. An additional 5 million women suffer permanent or temporary injury.
   “The continuing high incidence of unsafe abortion in developing countries represents a public health crisis and a human rights atrocity,” Fredrick wrote.
   The number of worldwide abortions has dipped from about 46 million in 1995 to just less than 42 million in 2003.
   But there was no change in the rate of unsafe abortions; nearly half of the procedures are still performed illegally in potentially dangerous conditions.
   “The only way to decrease unsafe abortion is to increase contraception,” said Sharon Camp, president and chief executive officer of the Guttmacher Institute.
   Camp said that more countries are allowing women to have abortions legally, but many women only receive medical attention after a procedure has gone wrong.
   “I don’t think women should have to hurt themselves before they get medical treatment,” she said.
   The vast majority of abortions — 35 million — were in the developing world. Nearly 97 percent of all unsafe abortions were in poor countries.
   Worldwide, one in five pregnancies ends in abortion, and nine out of 10 women will have an abortion before age 45.
   The study defined unsafe abortions as those performed either by people lacking the necessary skills or in an environment that does not conform to minimum medical standards.
   In eastern Europe, there are more abortions than live births: 105 abortions for every 100 live births, the research found. In Western Europe, there are 23 abortions for every 100 live births.
   In North America, there are 33 abortions for every 100 live births, while in Africa, where abortion is illegal in most countries, there are 17 abortions for every 100 live births.
   Improving women’s health, experts said, means improving access to safe abortions. Some experts criticized the restrictions that often come with donor money. Funds from the U.S. government, for example, cannot be used for any health services associated with abortion.
   Because providing safe abortions depends on a working health care system, experts said tackling the problem is difficult.  

Quoted Text

Study: Abortions are just as common where they are illegal

Quoted from Shadow

That would require some thinking on the girls part and I'm not sure that some of the girls have the tools to do it with.

Quoted Text

Time to get rid of global gag rule on contraception
CHRISTINA GLEASON Clifton Park

   The global gag rule blocks women’s access to family-planning services that prevent maternal and child deaths, unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, the spread of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.
   As part of the annual foreign aid bill, the Senate passed a full repeal of the gag rule; the House passed a partial repeal; and now the Senate and the House have worked out a compromise to send to the president.
   I support a full repeal of the global gag rule [aka Mexico City policy].
   In a blatant display of hypocrisy, the president and his anti-choice allies who support the global gag rule are blocking women’s access to the very contraception that is the best way to prevent unintended pregnancy and therefore reduce the need for abortion.
   Even though President Bush has threatened to veto any bill with any pro-choice provision (including the gag rule repeal), Congress needs to send the president the bill and force him to choose between improving women’s health and bowing to pressure from anti-choice groups.  

Quoted Text

unintended pregnancies

Quoted Text

Go back to old way of thinking on abortion

   A recent study by Gilda Sedgh of the Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood) and others from the World Health Organization was reported in the Oct. 12 Gazette article, “Study: Abortions are just as common where they are illegal.”
   The report noted that 20 percent of all pregnancies end in abortion worldwide. Even more alarming was the statement that before the age of 45, nine out of 10 women will have an abortion.
   In the debate over the issue of abortion, it is instructive to see what our feminist “foremothers” said about abortion. In a letter to [American abolitionist, social activist, and poet] Julia Ward, dated Oct. 16, 1878, Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote: “When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.”
   Nine years earlier in July 1869, Susan B. Anthony, wrote: “I deplore the horrible crime of child murder ... No matter what the motive, love of ease or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed ... but oh!, thrice guilty is he who drove her to the desperation which impelled her to the crime.”
   In 1868 [Native American activist, suffragist and abolitionist] Matilda [Electa Joslyn] Gage wrote with similar passion: “The subject lies deeper down into woman’s wrongs than any other ... the crime of abortion is not one in which the guilt lies solely or even chiefly with the woman ... I hesitate to assert that most of this crime of “child murder,” “abortion,” “infanticide,” lies at the door of the male sex.”
   In an article written in 1990, Gloria V. Hefferan, M.D., described abortion as “the ultimate exploitation of women.” Dr. Heffernan said, “It is no surprise that Playboy Foundation money competes with Rockefeller Foundation money to promote the concept of permissive abortion. The rich man’s solution has become the puerile man’s solution and the last vestige of responsibility and commitment has disappeared.”
   Since Roe vs. Wade there has been a paradigm shift in the way Americans view abortion. In a 1963 pamphlet published by Planned Parenthood, now the leading abortion provider in the United States, women were told that “an abortion kills a baby after it has begun. It is dangerous to your life and health. It may make you sterile so that when you want a child you cannot have it.”
   Isn’t it time to listen to our “foremothers”? Time to stop the abuse against women and their unborn children? Time to stop the lies about what choice really means? Time to de-fund Planned Parenthood, that receives millions of our tax dollars annually and promotes and delivers abortion on demand?
   ROSEMARY T. REID
   Fort Johnson  

Quoted Text

George Will World won’t end if court overturns Roe ruling
George Will is a nationally syndicated columnist.

   Almost 35 years have passed since the Supreme Court decided to end America’s argument about abortion. Because of the court’s supposedly therapeutic intervention in the nation’s supposedly inadequate democratic debate about that subject, the issue still generates an irritable irrationality that was largely absent prior to 1973.
   Then, America was operating under a regime of moral federalism. In the absence of ukases from the federal judiciary that generate continentwide eruptions of tension and anger, many states were re-examining their abortion regulations, and many were relaxing them. To sample today’s confusions, consider California.
   There the electorate so strongly supports abortion rights that no right-tolife candidate for governor, U.S. senator or president has won in California since 1988. This is so in spite of the fact that a governor, U.S. senator or president has only slight relevance to the status of Californians’ abortion rights.
   Nevertheless, it is said that if the Republican Party wants to be competitive in California in presidential politics, it must nominate a pro-choice candidate, of which there is only one — Rudy Giuliani. This is almost certainly true. It certainly is irrational because pro-choice Californians have next to nothing to fear — just as pro-life Californians have next to nothing to hope for — from a right-to-life president. The practical consequences of such a president concerning abortion would not differ significantly from Giuliani’s consequences. Here is why.
   Abortion policy is almost entirely in the custody of the U.S. Supreme Court, and will remain so unless or until the court decides to restore moral federalism regarding the issue. On Jan. 20, 2009, when the next president is inaugurated, the court will have one justice in his late 60s (David Souter, 69), four justices in their 70s (Steven Breyer, 70; Anthony Kennedy and Antonin Scalia, 72; Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 75) and one 88-year-old, John Paul Stevens. The two who will be oldest, Ginsburg and Stevens, are strong supporters of a constitutional right to abortion. The three who will be youngest — John Roberts, 53; Samuel Alito, 58; Clarence Thomas, 60 — seem unsympathetic to the court’s abortion jurisprudence.
   The next president probably will have an opportunity to significantly shape the court, which has frequently divided 5-4 on important questions, including abortion issues. But regarding abortion, the reasonable response to this fact from residents of many, perhaps most, states, and especially from Californians, should be a shrug of a question — “So what?”
   Suppose Giuliani or some other Republican becomes president and responds to a court vacancy the way all the Republican candidates promise to, with a nominee similar to Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito. And suppose a case gives the court an opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade. And suppose it does so.
   Pause here a moment. This third supposition is somewhat dubious, because one of the justices who thinks Roe was improperly decided might nevertheless reason, as Chief Justice William Rehnquist finally did concerning the “Miranda rights” of arrested persons — the right, arising from a 1966 ruling, to be notified of their right to counsel and their right to remain silent. Rehnquist repeatedly and strongly argued that the Constitution, properly read, did not require the ruling, which he thought impeded effective police work. But when in 2000 a case gave the court an opportunity to overrule Miranda, Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion in a 7-2 decision upholding it. He wrote:
   “Miranda has become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture. While we have overruled our precedents when subsequent cases have undermined their doctrinal underpinnings, we do not believe that this has happened to the Miranda decision.”
   So, the overturning of Roe might not result from a Republican president’s alteration of the court’s balance. But suppose it did.
   Again, so what? Many, perhaps most, Americans, foggy about the workings of their government, think that overturning Roe would make abortion, one of the nation’s most common surgical procedures, illegal everywhere. All it actually would do is restore abortion as a practice subject to state regulation. But because Californians are content with current abortion law, their legislature probably would adopt it in state law.
   It is not irrational for voters to care deeply about a candidate’s stance regarding abortion because that stance is accurately considered an important signifier of the candidate’s sensibilities and sympathies, and of his or her notion of sound constitutional reasoning. But regarding abortion itself, what a candidate thinks about abortion rights is not especially important.

Quoted Text

Movies begin to take intelligent look at abortion issue
Dan DiNicola CRITIC AT LARGE
Reach Gazette film critic and columnist Dan DiNicola at dandinicola@hotmail.com.

    Abortions are back in the news again, and this time you might even note some progress on the issue. Instead of debating the issue on religious or legal ground, how about discussing it on a human level — that is, with compassionate consideration to the pain, suffering, remorse and, above all, the emotional and spiritual discomfort an abortion inflicts on all those involved?
    How about getting off the soapbox, all you pro-lifers and prochoicers who accuse, attack, insult each other to the point where one wonders whether your views are rooted in maniacal egotism rather than in compassion for human beings faced with horrendously complicated, life-altering decisions?
    At least three movies this year suggest that we can think about the abortion subject without resorting to diatribes or nasty name-calling. For me, they underscore the fact that one can be both pro-choice and pro-life without fear of contradiction. The moral and spiritual common denominator here is the concept of freedom and responsibility.
LIFE-ALTERING DECISION
    A girl or woman is pregnant. For whatever reason, she fears that bearing a child is a no-win situation. If she decides to abort, no one on earth can say with certainty that she is disobeying the word of God, because no earthling can prove God’s existence, not to mention his precise wishes or commands. (Claiming the Bible or Koran is the Word of God is a matter of opinion no one on Earth can verify.) If there is a God and if God’s command dictates a wrong, or sin, or whatever negative term you wish to ascribe to the act of abortion, that is between the woman and God. We may have our opinions, but it is not for us to judge. If you insist that abortion is a sin, we must give her the freedom to “sin,” for without that freedom, she loses her integrity as a moral being.
    On the other hand, based on my beliefs, I have the right to hold that except for rare instances, abortion is wrong. If my conscience dictates that I am disobeying a sacred tenet if I am party to an abortion, I do so only with a severe sense of everlasting guilt, not to mention a fear of divine retribution. I have the right to enact this precept in only one instance, and that is if I am the mother of that fetus. If I encounter another woman who has chosen to have an abortion, I have a duty to respect her freedom, but I may also say that I disagree with her choice.
    Thus, it is possible to hold simultaneously two opposing ideas: Respect a woman’s freedom and disagree with her choice, even to the point of thinking she is in trouble with her maker, but in all cases understanding and feeling that for women and potential fathers, theirs is often a traumatic experience.
THREE FILMS TO CONSIDER
    Maybe think of them as human beings, perhaps as Katherine Heigl’s character in “Knocked Up.” Her little present results from a one-night stand with a slacker, hardly the model of a responsible daddy. She has just been promoted to an anchor desk, and at this critical career juncture, what modern career woman would not think of an abortion? Yet, despite the apparent disconnects with the father, she keeps the child just as she and her slacker dude (Seth Rogen) navigate what may or may not end in a permanent relationship by the time nine months rolls around.
    In the delightful comedy “Juno,” we meet Ellen Page as a 16-yearold high school student who gets pregnant her first time. Her loving father gives her the “freedom” to abort, but something in her sends a signal that this is wrong. Instead, she plans to give her baby to a childless couple played by Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman. What ensues is a tender and uplifting narrative.
    Here’s the catch and the paradox: In both cases, we feel and respect the characters and their decisions, mostly because they have the legal and moral freedom to do otherwise. There is an additional irony here, for it seems to me that even though both movies would not attract Bible-thumping arch-conservatives, the choices support their brand of morality.
    Finally, I cannot say enough about “4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days,” the winner of the Palm D’Or at Cannes. Here, we observe the anguish not of a mother but of her university roommate who aids her with an illegal abortion. This is a movie that both pro-lifers and pro-choice advocates can claim as their own. But once again, women are regarded not as sinners or as feminist heroines, but as human beings faced with life-altering decisions.

Quoted Text

But once again, women are regarded not as sinners or as feminist heroines, but as human beings faced with life-altering decisions.

Quoted Text

Keep cost of birth control affordable for all women

    Re Robert Therriault’s Dec. 8 letter, “Congress’ move on birth control pills the right one”:
    It’s about choice. The gains we have made in the area of women’s rights, and more specifically women’s reproductive rights, empower women and allow them to make their own choices.
    I, too, would encourage women to educate themselves about fertility awareness, not only as a method of birth control but also to help with conception. But this has nothing to do with restricting access to birth control pills. Natural family planning is an excellent choice for some, but certainly not for all.
    Increasing the cost of birth control pills effectively taking away an option for some women, is a huge step backward.
    MICHELLE EDWARDS
    Niskayuna

Quoted Text

And you'd think that the medical profession would come out with a 'sperm control' pill for men wouldn't ya?

Quoted Text

A little education in character wouldn’t hurt

    On Jan. 22, we sadly admit our country has lived with unfettered legal access to abortion for 35 long years.
    Fifteen states have scorned a half-million dollars in federal monies toward abstinence education. The demands of schools to push contraceptives education as the only effective method to prevent teen pregnancies continues. If you do get pregnant, it isn’t a big deal since you can kill the baby — if you feel the need to. Now we have teen idols — Jamie Spears and Nicole Richie — and new movies glorifying unplanned pregnancies and denigrating abortion: Juno, Bella, Knocked Up, etc. The characters who dominate these stories hardly qualify them as family-value propaganda.
    Abortion rights activists have decried these films. Gen-Xers, raised in the wake of the sexual revolution and legalization of abortion, mock these values of their upbringing and the clinical soullessness of their sex education classes. Broken hearts are collateral damage to the sexual revolution.
    Why don’t we now give comprehensive marriage education to the next generation? Everything else has failed. In the game of life, it is time to teach our youth character and skill — sterling character composites including good morals, intelligence, neatness, sportsmanship, sincerity, dependability, a sense of humor, consideration for others, emotional maturity, modesty, industry, courtesy — the list goes on and on.
    This is what our youth need from the parents and the schools.
    JOANNE CLOUGH
    Guilderland

Quoted Text

US abortions at lowest rate since 1974

By DAVID CRARY, Associated Press
Saturday, January 19, 2008

NEW YORK -- The number of abortions in the United States fell to 1.2 million in 2005, down 25 percent from the all-time high of 1.6 million in 1990 and dropping the abortion rate to its lowest level since 1974, according to report issued Thursday.
     
The Guttmacher Institute, which surveyed abortion providers nationwide, said there likely were several reasons for the decline, including more effective use of contraceptives, lower levels of unintended pregnancy and greater difficulty obtaining abortions in some parts of the country.
The institute's president, Sharon Camp, noted that despite the drop, more than one in five pregnancies ended in abortion in 2005.
"Our policymakers at the state and federal levels need to understand that behind virtually every abortion is an unintended pregnancy, so we must redouble our efforts towards prevention, through better access to contraception," Camp said.
The Guttmacher Institute supports abortion rights, yet both sides in the debate on the issue consider its abortion surveys the most comprehensive in the United States because they encompass California, the most populous state. California state agencies do not collect abortion data to contribute to federal surveys.
According to the Guttmacher data, the number of abortions declined by 8 percent between 2000 and 2005, from 1.31 million to 1.21 million -- the lowest total since the 1.18 million abortions tallied in 1976.
The 2005 abortion rate of 19.4 per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44 was the lowest since 1974, when it was 19.3.
Abortion rates were highest in Washington, D.C., New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Florida, Maryland and California. Rates were lowest in largely rural states: Wyoming, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Dakota, Idaho and Utah.
However, the report noted that the rates reflected the state in which the abortion occurred, thus including nonresident women who crossed state lines to get an abortion.
By region, the Northeast had the highest abortion rate, followed by the West, the South and the Midwest.
One pronounced trend in recent years is an increase in early medication abortion -- notably through use of the RU-486 abortion pill. These types of procedures accounted for 13 percent of all abortions in 2005, more than double the level in 2001.
The report said 57 percent of abortion providers now offer medication abortion services, compared with 33 percent in 2001.
"Currently, more than six in 10 abortions occur within the first eight weeks of pregnancy," said Rachel Jones, lead researcher for the survey. "Medication abortion, which provides women with an additional option early in pregnancy, clearly reinforces this very positive trend."

Quoted from bumblethru

Point taken somebody, but males don't have sex to impregnate. They instinctively have sex for just that...sex!

Women on the other hand, instinctively have sex to become impregnated.

Modern society has just led them to believe differently. They are told that it's ok to 'just have sex'.  And it is ok if you have sex as long as you follow government guidelines.
Follow the age appropriate guidelines.
Use the birth control provided to you
We'll teach Johnny in school how to use a condom
If you don't follow the above, the government will help you support the child
And if you fail at all of the above, we will provide an option of abortion to you.

So it is basically....do what ever you want!

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Religious leaders bless new Planned Parenthood site
Event coincides with Roe v. Wade
BY STEVEN COOK Gazette Reporter

    The Rev. Larry Phillips of Emmanuel-Friedens Church emphasized Tuesday that he was Baptist.
    He did so, because he was speaking at the “Blessing of the Building” ceremony at Planned Parenthood’s new 1040 State St. complex. “Yes, there are Baptists among us who believe in a woman’s right to chose,” Phillips said.
    Phillips has volunteered in recent years as an escort for women seeking services at the old Union Street location.
    The new State Street building has a private parking lot, where women seeking services won’t have to walk past people protesting.
    “I can’t tell you what it means for us to be able to stand in this room today,” Phillips added later, “and to know that women and children are no longer recipients of abuse and violence by the protestors.”
    Planned Parenthood Mohawk Hudson held the blessing of the building ceremony Tuesday to coincide with the 35th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that made abortion legal.
    The new 18,571-square-foot offi ce was built after nearly $2 million was raised for the project.
    The campaign was jump started by Roberta Steiner, daughter of the late Evelyn and David Sencer, who donated $300,000 with help from other members of the Sencer family in 2003. The facility is named in Evelyn and David Sencer’s honor.
    Phillips was joined at the blessing ceremony by Rabbi Matt Cutler of Temple Gates of Heaven, and Rev. Bill Levering, pastor at First Reformed Church in Schenectady.
    Cutler sounded a traditional shofar horn “as a way of starting our renewal of commitment to keep reproductive rights in the hands of women, to keep reproductive rights safe and open.”
    Levering spoke of the organization’s frequent protestors, many of whom base their protests in religion.
    Just last September, protestors camped out in front of the Union Street location for a week, carrying graphic signs, and were led by Rev. Francis McCloskey.
    Planned Parenthood chief executive officer Paul Drisgula earlier noted the project was the result of the work of many.
    “This was never about bricks and mortar,” he said, “It’s about people needing services ... and supporters who made all this possible.”

Quoted Text

35 years pass, but not debate
Demonstrations mark 1973 high court ruling affirming right to abortion

By CAROL DeMARE, Staff writer .
First published: Wednesday, January 23, 2008

SCHENECTADY -- To commemorate Tuesday's 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling that affirmed a woman's right to an abortion, clergy blessed this city's new Planned Parenthood clinic in a ceremony dubbed "On Sacred Ground."
"Today is more than about the building and about bricks and mortar," Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Linda Scharf said. "It's a blessing to demonstrate the support of the clergy."
     
Since Jan. 22, 1973, when the high court handed down the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision, two sides of the issue have squared off. Opponents have campaigned to overturn unrestricted abortion laws, while proponents have stood firm for the right to choose.
Tuesday was no different.
Capital Region activists joined voices with their counterparts nationwide to mark the day. In Washington, as every year on the anniversary, the March for Life was held.
In Schenectady, the blessing occurred at the newly constructed 18,000-square-foot building at 1040 State St. that opened in September to replace a facility on Union Street.
"Clergy have long supported Planned Parenthood's mission and believe women are moral decision-makers, and they trust their right to make a personal decision based on their moral beliefs and whether ... we concur ... we still need to respect that decision," Scharf said.
"The clergy were instrumental in getting abortion services legalized in the United States and right here in Schenectady," she added. "I know a member of the clergy who was part of an underground who directed young women to safe abortions before Roe v. Wade."
Kathleen Gallagher of the New York State Catholic Conference called the blessing hypocritical.
"My gut reaction is that it's two-faced," Gallagher said. "For many years abortion proponents have been saying this is not a religious issue, you should keep religion out of this, and now all of a sudden they turn around and decide to bless an abortion clinic to gain respect for a procedure everybody knows is not worthy of respect."
The group also criticized Gov. Eliot Spitzer, noting that although abortions fell nationally to 1.2 million in 2005, the lowest level since 1976, Spitzer has proposed what Gallagher termed radical legislation in New York.
The governor "has acted aggressively to make abortion even more available and common than it already is, while stomping on the rights of religious providers like Catholic hospitals," Gallagher said. "His euphemistically titled 'Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act' would raise abortion to the level of a fundamental right, like the freedom of speech, and would therefore prohibit virtually any restrictions at all."
She warned such a bill would "ensure the easy availability of late-term abortions of fully formed infants, even if there was no threat to a woman's physical health."
In a joint statement, Spitzer, Lt. Gov. David Paterson and first lady Silda Wall Spitzer reaffirmed their "commitment that, despite attacks that seek to infringe upon the protections embodied in Roe v. Wade, women in New York will continue to have the right to make their own reproductive health decisions."
Scharf noted New York was ahead of the curve on abortion. Three years before Roe vs. Wade, under Republican Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller, the state Legislature legalized abortion. The year was 1970, and the action brought women from throughout the country to the state.Despite the national trend of declining abortions, they increased in four local counties from 2005 to 2006 while statewide they dropped, according to the Health Department.
At Planned Parenthood Mohawk Hudson, an affiliate of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Rev. Larry Phillips of Schenectady's Emmanuel-Friedens Church declared the ground "sacred and holy ... where women's voices and stories are welcomed, valued and affirmed; sacred ground where women are treated with dignity, supported in their role as moral decision-makers ... sacred ground where the violent voices of hatred and oppression are quelled."
The minister has been affiliated with Planned Parenthood going back more than 30 years, Scharf said. About three dozen people gathered at the facility, known as the Evelyn & David Sencer Center, to offer prayers during the half-hour ceremony.
The Rev. Abby Norton-Levering led the group in prayers for the center's doctors and staff. "We pray that you will make this a place of safety and give a sense of sanctuary," she said.
Rabbi Matt Cutler of Temple Gates of Heaven blew the shofar as "a renewal of commitment to keep reproductive rights in the hands of women."
The Rev. Bill Levering, senior pastor of First Reformed Church of Schenectady, said the right to privacy is endowed by God.
"There are some decisions that are left to the individual. Even God respects the right of privacy. We make women into children when we say they cannot control their own bodies," Levering said.
Phillips led everyone outside where they laid their hands on the brick and limestone as the minister declared, "This is sacred ground." DeMare can be reached at 454-5431 or by e-mail at cdemare@timesunion.com. Staff writer Jimmy Vielkind contributed to this article.

Quoted Text

More judicial mischief

This morning, at 11:30 a.m. I have a trial in Vinton , Iowa . Donna Holman and I were cited for “Parking for the Purposes of Advertising” at a Hillary Clinton event at Vinton Elementary School .



Townspeople, teachers, and authorities were livid because our Truthvan was otherwise legally parked in a prominent location in front of the elementary school. Yet we did not set the agenda. These same people seemed comfortable enough to have a baby-killer speak inside their school while complaining about the display of abortion outside. They are pro-choice about killing babies but not pro-choice about displaying the babies they kill.

Advertising is not an illegal activity, but we were not advertising, we were communicating a social and a political message at a political event. Missionaries to the Pre-born Iowa are not a business, a commodity, or a service, we are a ministry. We are not advertising a product we are propagating a belief. The website and telephone number on our van is contact information. It also leads those interested to additional information about our message. We do not solicit for money.



A school is not exclusively a school on the day of a scheduled political event. Should the school invite Adolph Hitler to speak they should expect protestors. Not everyone agrees with baby-murder.



Two weeks ago we were cited for “Obscenity” by the Tennessee Highway Patrol as we drove back from the Hillary Holocaust Expose’ in South Carolina .

Is it not strange and hypocritical that abortion holocaust deniers fail to recognize the humanity of the children being butchered yet can find the display of them obscene?  One can find easily find porn shops up and down Tennessee ’s highways but according to our wicked baby-killing courts that is protected speech. The U.S. Supreme Court finds virtual child pornography (life like cartoons) is legal as there is no actual victim. Yet we are penalized for displaying a victim whom the courts do not recognize, a victim to whom the American People turn a blind eye, a deaf ear, and a cold shoulder.



dan holman
Missionaries to the Pre-born, Iowa
P.O. Box 135
Keokuk, Iowa 52632
(319) 524-5587
truthvan@yahoo.com

Donna Holman
Johnson County Jail
P.O. Box 2510
Iowa City, Iowa 52244-2510

To view 22 minutes of video of Donna Holman's unjust arrest see:

Part 1
http://www.dailymotion.com/antiaborticide/video/6863182

Part 2
http://www.dailymotion.com/antiaborticide/video/6863396

Part 3
http://www.dailymotion.com/antiaborticide/video/x433ya_november-1-2006-part-3_politics

Quoted Text

Norma Leah McCorvey (née Nelson born September 22, 1947, in Simmesport, Louisiana) is best known as "Jane Roe" in the landmark Roe v. Wade lawsuit in which a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling recognized abortion as a Constitutional right, overturning individual states' laws against abortion, and who later recanted her previous support of abortion. [1]

Quoted Text

The most accurate of Plato's writings on Socrates is probably the The Apology. It is Plato's account of Socrates's defense at his trial in 399 BC (the word "apology" comes from the Greek word for "defense-speech" and does not mean what we would think of as an apology). It is clear, however, that Plato dressed up Socrates's speech to turn it into a justification for Socrates's life and his death. In it, Plato outlines some of Socrates's most famous philosophical ideas: the necessity of doing what one thinks is right even in the face of universal opposition, and the need to pursue knowledge even when opposed.  


    Socrates wrote nothing because he felt that knowledge was a living, interactive thing. Socrates' method of philosophical inquiry consisted in questioning people on the positions they asserted and working them through questions into a contradiction, thus proving to them that their original assertion was wrong. Socrates himself never takes a position; in The Apology he radically and skeptically claims to know nothing at all except that he knows nothing. Socrates and Plato refer to this method of questioning as elenchus , which means something like "cross-examination" The Socratic elenchus eventually gave rise to dialectic, the idea that truth needs to be pursued by modifying one's position through questioning and conflict with opposing ideas. It is this idea of the truth being pursued, rather than discovered, that characterizes Socratic thought and much of our world view today. The Western notion of dialectic is somewhat Socratic in nature in that it is conceived of as an ongoing process. Although Socrates in The Apology claims to have discovered no other truth than that he knows no truth, the Socrates of Plato's other earlier dialogues is of the opinion that truth is somehow attainable through this process of elenchus .

   The Athenians, with the exception of Plato, thought of Socrates as a Sophist, a designation he seems to have bitterly resented. He was, however, very similar in thought to the Sophists. Like the Sophists, he was unconcerned with physical or metaphysical questions; the issue of primary importance was ethics, living a good life. He appeared to be a sophist because he seems to tear down every ethical position he's confronted with; he never offers alternatives after he's torn down other people's ideas.  


Ancient Greece Glossary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Areté  
    He doesn't seem to be a radical skeptic, though. Scholars generally believe that the Socratic paradox is actually Socratic rather than an invention of Plato. The one positive statement that Socrates seems to have made is a definition of virtue (areté): "virtue is knowledge." If one knows the good, one will always do the good. It follows, then, that anyone who does anything wrong doesn't really know what the good is. This, for Socrates, justifies tearing down people's moral positions, for if they have the wrong ideas about virtue, morality, love, or any other ethical idea, they can't be trusted to do the right thing.  

Quoted from senders

how about shutting your legs until you are finished with school??? :-/

Quoted Text

Abortion clinic improper site for clerical blessing

    The blessing of the ground for the Planned Parenthood clinic in Schenectady, and dubbing it as “sacred and holy” by several of the city’s clergy, was an abomination to that community and our society.
    How can a building that serves to terminate the lives of thousands of unborn children through abortion possibly be sacred and holy? How desperate are those at this facility to resort to mixing religion and politics, when in the past they contended they should always be separate!
    Perhaps the clergy who supported this ridiculous dedication never heard of Mother Teresa of Calcutta, who stated, “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish. Any country that accepts abortion is the poorest of the poor.”
    Or have they ever read, “I am your creator. You were in my care even before you were born.” Isaiah 44:2; and let’s not forget “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.” Jeremiah 1:5.
Each child is sent into this world by God with a unique message to deliver, a new song to sing and a personal act of love to bestow, if allowed to live.
Please hold the hand of the future and support the choice of life. I remain prowoman, pro-child and pro-life!
SYLVIA KRAVIS PHILLIPS
Clifton Park