Prolonged Eye Contact

UPDATE: Violence-inciting comments disappear from LifeSiteNews

clinicdefense:

I was a bit amazed yesterday at how quickly word spread of the comments on a LifeSiteNews article on the firebomb left at a Wisconsin Planned Parenthood. 

Obviously, as word spread in the pro-choice community, the anti-choice folks caught wind.  Some of the comments, essentially the most openly criminal, have disappeared from the site. Either lifesite took luke-warm action (many comments still exist, included below) or the worst of the commenters, Isaiah541, decided to to try and cover up his/her attempts to incite violence in the anti-choice community. 

Below is various screen shots of remaining comments (not nearly as inflamitory as the deleted comments) as well as screen captures showing the official comment count of the story at “29” and the actual comment count in the comment section at “21” indicating that comments have been removed or deleted. 

Keep in mind LifeSite has any pro-choice comments deleted within hours of their appearance on the site. LifeSite heavily moderates their comments and they knowingly let the now deleted comments stay posted on their site, visibile to  the several people who viewed the page. The story was shared on facebook over 360 times, imagine if each of those shares had a minimum of 50 friends? Easily over 18000 people could have read comments that encouraged violence against abortion care facilities and providers. 

I fear for escorts, volunteers, patients, staff, and physicians at facilities around the country (and now more and more abroad in countries where abortion was previously not contested) if the current culture of violence against abortion care goes unchecked and unnoticed. 

To see original post: Disturbing Trend…

Below is image showing the official comment count associated with this article. 

Now, look at the actual count of comments that are visible. Comments have been either removed from the site or deleted by the author. The count is 21. 

Now, a sample of the remaining posts. While they are in no way as incriminating as the original posts, they still suggest that it might be OK to use violence to prevent women from obtaining abortion care. 

This last one upsets me, especially when you read the responses One of the commenters shared a story of a female family member who had an abortion under coercion (an unwanted, forced pregnancy choice is a tragedy. Coercion in any form is a tragedy). How is it I, an evil pro-choicer, can feel more sympathy and empathy for than woman than a “loving” anti-choicer?

AGAIN: If you ever witness any sort of comment or discussion where violence against clinics and clinic staff is being encouraged, please take a screen shot and submit an FBI tip. Print a copy of your screen shot or submit it to our blog for a permanent record. 

HOW TO TAKE A SCREEN SHOT        {}       FBI TIP LINE

(via bebinn)

GYT for Peace of Mind

fuckyeahsexeducation:

thesexuneducated:

myplannedparenthood:

Did you know? April is STD Awareness Month and Planned Parenthoods around the country are holding free testing specials (including us). We’re sharing a few reasons why you might want to get tested - after all, peace of mind is just one of them.

Take advantage of this opportunity! 

This is good news! Apparently my PP isn’t doing this but check out yours to see if it is!

(Source: feroniaproject.org)

I’m literally so happy I’m crying.

thisgingersnapsback:

OKAY SO. I’m back from my very first Planned Parenthood journey, and I have to say, I’m a great mixture of emotions. Ranging from overjoyed and happy and thrilled and grateful to angry and bitter and frightened and downright pissed—very varying degrees of emotions, but don’t worry, I’ll unpack them.

First of all, I want to kick myself for not going to Planned Parenthood sooner. I had NO idea the help I would find, and I’m still just sitting here with an overwhelming sense of gratitude because this place was literally one of the best things to happen in my life.

I’m getting the ParaGard, because it’s the only IUD they offer anywhere nearby (that I can afford!) but it wont be in for a few months, so I was immediately distraught by the fact that I will STILL have to continue buying my monthly Nuva Ring for $70 because my health insurance apparently hates anything to do with my vagina. (Seriously, OBGYN costs skyrocketed, along with my birth control, when we switched insurances. Wtf?) BUT, instead of being forced to pay this continual fee until I could get the IUD, I was instead asked, “Do you want three Nuva Rings?”

I was at a loss for words.

“What, like, free?” I stuttered out. The receptionist nodded, and I nodded back numbly. I mean sure, there’s plenty of men and women who have benefited from this wonderful organization before, so what I’m saying is probably nothing new, but I was just so shocked. That’s $70 a MONTH I am saving! That’s gas! That’s saving back for the apartment! That’s food!

I wasn’t charged a DIME for my visit—since they base it on income, and I make $200/wk, they adjusted everything. I had a breast exam, which I’ve never had before, and was taught how to perform one on myself. They did a minor pelvic exam since I’d been complaining about some pain, and they gave me a boatload of condoms (I don’t use them myself, but I’d like to keep a stock to give out to teens who might not be in the position to buy them themselves) PLUS they hooked me up with Ella—a Plan B pill, just in case, which would save me $50 in case of an emergency.

By the end of my visit, I was in tears, and the nurses were very kind. One even gave me a hug. I was crying because I was overwhelmed with how happy I was, because what they had done for me meant the WORLD to me. Expecting to pay WAAAAAAAAAAAAY more than I did, and getting $210 in free birth control, I donated $20, and would like to go back and donate more when I can.

I’m pissed though, that people want to take away these resources from men and women. I am SO pissed, and horrified. Because of my pain, they insisted on doing other tests (STDs—I’m not at risk, but they had to because of the pain and exam, so whatevs) and those still didn’t cost me anything—so for people who DO need the tests, they’re free… and PEOPLE WANT TO TAKE THIS AWAY. The clinic I went to didn’t even perform abortions, simply referrals, and I only saw one pamphlet on the wall about abortion, compared to the dozens of others about pregnancies and how to have a healthy pregnancy, etc. I mean, not that I doubted what I’ve heard in the past, but it was all a reaffirming of the facts I’d been given, now put into real-life experiences.

I got a free pelvic exam, a free breast exam—I got my birth control, and I got precautionary “just in case” methods. Planned Parenthood is a beautiful place, and I want to punch absolutely everyone who hates them for the 3% of what they do in the face!

DON’T GET ME WRONG, I totally understand people who can’t get access to these things—transportation, distance, location, etc. It’s just, for those it helps, and for those who are able to benefit from it, holy FUCK is it awesome.

But if you DO go and you have an AWESOME experience like me, I do request that you make some kind of donation. These places deserve it. And just, goddd.

I’m such a jumbled mix of emotions I can’t sit still, and I’m still crying over how happy I am. OH. And best of all? I probably wont have to pay a dime for my ParaGard when the time comes!

THANK YOU SO MUCH PLANNED PARENTHOOD.

stfuprolife:

teerreeffiiiccc submitted:

http://gianna-and-faith-prolifegirls.tumblr.com/post/19795756114

You may not know this but in 2008, PP performed over 300,000 abortions! Not only is the graph totally true and not at all a lie in anyway, whatever you say is wrong because I have god on my side.

I wish that infograph had actual sources.  But I won’t argue it because there’s no point.  I don’t care how many abortions Planned Parenthood performed (3% of all of its services).  There’s nothing wrong with safe abortions.  Beyonce is on my side and that’s all that matters. :)

I’m not really sure what they think they’re proving with a pie chart like this. Anyway, from a PolitiFact article, on a slightly different antichoice claim, they examine similar information and why it’s basically useless:

[…]

All stated that roughly 98 percent of Planned Parenthood’s services to pregnant women consist of abortion. They derived their information from a March 2011 fact sheet from Planned Parenthood. That fact sheet says the group performed 332,278 abortions in 2009, referred 977 patients to other agencies for adoptions, and provided prenatal care to 7,021 patients.

[…]

But there are problems with that calculation.

First, it assumes that pregnant women only go to Planned Parenthood for one of those three options.

Planned Parenthood representatives say that interpretation overstates the ratio of abortions among its pregnant clients. It ignores other statistics, such as the 1,158,924 pregnancy tests the group provided, and the fact that those 332,278 abortions were just 3 percent of the 11,383,900 total procedures that Planned Parenthood health centers provided that year to its 3 million patients.

Thirty five percent of its services consisted of providing contraception and another 35 percent consisted of testing for sexually transmitted diseases and treatment.

The fact sheet stats also don’t reflect the fact that only a tiny proportion of Planned Parenthood centers around the country provide prenatal care - just 63 out of more than 800, said Tait Sye, a spokesman for the organization. Those that don’t offer prenatal care refer pregnant women to other health care providers for those services, and Planned Parenthood doesn’t keep track of those referrals. And the 7,021 figure for prenatal clients that was used in the calculations doesn’t include pregnant women who went to Planned Parenthood for prenatal care and were sent to outside obstetricians.

[…]

The most important part, of course, is that only a small percentage of Planned Parenthood clinics have the equipment available on site to provide prenatal care and they don’t keep track of the thousands of people they referral to other clinics. So these numbers aren’t truthful and they’re not giving the whole picture.

And in terms of adoption services, it can’t really be seen as being the fault of an organization that people go to adoption agencies for such services instead of a health clinic. They provide the services their patients need and want, they can’t force them to come to PP for adoption information to increase their numbers to your liking. 

If these are the types of things you want to insinuate about PP are you also concerned about all the ob/gyns who predominantly offer prenatal care that aren’t meeting a particular quota of your liking for adoption and abortion referrals? No? Interesting. How about examining adoption agencies to see how many pregnant people they give abortion referrals to? That’s what I figured.

What the above pie chart does is make it look like these three services (abortion, adoption, and prenatal care) are the only thing PP offers and that abortion is the majority of what they do. But actually those three types of services are only a small percentage of their services, the majority of which are preventative:

(Abortion: 3.0%, Adoption referrals fall under “Other Services” 0.6%, and Prenatal Services make up only a small percentage of “Other Women’s Services” 10.4%)

And lastly, 300,000 PP abortions is next to nothing compared to the total number of abortions (1.21 million), let alone annual live births (~4.1 million) in the United States. Honestly, keep your fear mongering pie charts to yourself because 300,000 people getting safe medical care in a sterile, professional environment is not something I’m ashamed of.

P.S. You know what else is larger than the 300,000 abortions you’re crowing over? 584,000. That’s the number of unintended pregnancies PP helped prevent in 2010.

I was having a really hard time finding Planned Parenthood, but then I noticed a bunch of angry people standing around holding signs.

thisgingersnapsback:

Thanks, anti-choice!

I’d be lost in New Albany without ya!

This ^^ reminds me of this:

Any requests?

I’m making a static page of facts and statistics for the blog so they’ll be easily accessible both to me and my followers. So far I’m addressing: 

Planned Parenthood’s services and countering antichoice myths about them, birth control costs, abstinence-only sex education doesn’t work, the truth behind the contraception mandate and the Affordable Care Act, unintended pregnancy, safety of legal versus illegal abortion, safety of pregnancy/maternal mortality rate, the truth behind: Live Action/Lila Rose/Abby Johnson/Priscilla Coleman/The Silent Scream/David Reardon/Obama and “infanticide”, reasons for getting abortions, who gets abortions, other important demographic data about abortion, abortion procedures (both legal and illegal), state restrictions and laws, court cases in regards to reproductive rights, reproductive rights and human rights, incidence of abortion and other trends, number of abortion providers, antichoice terrorism and violence, PASS, abortion and breast cancer, the effects of antichoice protesters on abortion patients, the adoption and foster care systems, embryonic and fetal development, fetal pain/consciousness/”brain waves”, fetal homicide laws/UVVA, reproductive coercion and birth control sabotage, Margaret Sanger, “black genocide” theories and why they’re racist, CPCs and deception, studies about viewing ultrasounds and products of conception and how they don’t change minds, the history of abortion, abortion in animals/nature, where to find reputable information for research/legislation/fact checking.

Is there anything else people want to know about? Any myths or antichoice memes you want addressed? Anything you need facts about?

It’s happened again, guys. Another pro-life blog has posted and Elie Wiesel quote.

prochoicegeneration:

itsnotachoiceitsachild:

“I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”

—

- Elie Wiesel, Holocaust Survivor

We have dealt with this asshat-ery before at PCG.  Elie Wiesel, who you have correctly identified as a Holocaust survivor, said this when asked specifically about abortion and the raging debate about reproductive health care:

What should be done is to give back the human proportion to the abortion issue, and when we see it as such we may be able to have much more understanding for the woman who chooses it. Women who choose abortion are consistently labeled killers, and I personally have been compared to Hitler and called a great murderer.

A woman who feels she cannot go on, and with pain and despair she decides that she has to give up her child, is this woman a killer? Really really. But look, you cannot let these words hurt you. You have to be strong not to pay any attention because those who do that call you a Hitler and relate it to the Holocaust prove that they do not know what the Holocaust was.

Did you see those bolded parts?  The man who actually went through the Holocaust says that anyone who makes the comparison to abortion immediately reveals their ignorance.  He also said that, because he is pro-choice, he has been “compared to Hitler and called a great murderer.”  Take a second to think about the fact that pro-life people have actually compared Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust survivor, to Hitlerbecause of this misguided and ignorant comparison.  What does it say about your stance that a Holocaust survivor and well renowned intellectual has both come out to strike down the comparison and been compared to the man who was responsible for the genocide of his people?  Elie Wiesel is an amazing person.  Do not misappropriate his words to fit your cause.  Take this as an invitation to re-examine the pro-life crowd.

—Maria

Yeah, I’m thoroughly disgusted every single time this is done. And they refuse to accept how despicable these comparisons are. Usually it goes something like this:

[My sarcasm might be TRIGGERING]

Prochoice: Abortion is first and foremost about the right to privacy and bodily integrity. Without the right to make decisions about one’s life, body, and reproduction, one cannot say they are truly free.

Antichoice: NOPE. HITLER!!!! Abortionists are just like Joseph Mengele! Abortion clinics are like gas chambers! Pro-aborts are NAZIS!!! Seriously, you’re just like Hitler. He said the Jews weren’t people and now you’re saying that about zygotes!

Holocaust Survivor: Well actually, that’s a disgusting comparison that completely ignores the significant differences between my entire family (and the 11 million people murdered in the Holocaust) and non-sentient, non-autonomous embryos. You’re being racist and offensive and essentially proving you know nothing about the trauma inflicted on my people under Hitler. Please stop. 

Antichoice: SHUT UP!!! You don’t know what you’re talking about! I’m helping you, can’t you see?! You’re just like Hitler, you know! This is exactly the kind of thing Hitler and the Nazis would have said! What do you know anyway? If you can’t see how Planned Parenthood is EXACTLY like Auschwitz than you obviously weren’t paying attention.

Me:

A message on critical thinking for “Pro-lifers”

ghost-plot:

I just saw the quote from Margaret Sanger about how she said the most merciful thing a (large) family can do is to kill the an infant again. You can’t use this as an argument.

Here’s a lesson on why: Your Pope was a Hitler Youth. Your Pope was deeply involved in an organization that rounded up millions of people based on race, religion, sexual orientation, disabilities, and anything else they didn’t like with the sole purpose of killing them.

Now stop for a second. What are you about to say? What are you thinking? Are you thinking, “But that was years ago!” or, “He didn’t have a choice!” Because you’re right. It was years ago and he didn’t have a choice.

So you acknowledge the fact that context is important. Why isn’t it important for Margaret Sanger? You acknowledge that choice is important for the Pope, why isn’t it important for women today? You’re thinking that we can’t use a person’s past against them, the same is true for Margaret Sanger (and Planned Parenthood.)

Margaret anger said that in the 20;s, about large miner families where many of the children died painful and slow deaths before their first birthday. Context is alwaysimportant, don’t pretend it’s not.

Stop lying. Stop manipulating. And stop thinking that people are too stupid to find out some facts, because they’re not.

Yeah, this always rubs me the wrong way. 1) it’s the genetic fallacy and 2) Sanger was a product of her time and no one on our side is trying to claim she was something she wasn’t. She said plenty of really blatantly bad things, so why take other things out of context that actually aren’t that wrong? It makes you look underhanded. Like the merciful quote. How many of you antichoicers have actually read the quote in context and know what she was actually saying?

From a past post: [cis-centric]

She was being facetious not prescriptive. How about you actually look at the original source in context before talking about something you know nothing about? Was Margaret Sanger perfect? Hardly. She did and said a lot of things which were and still are unacceptable. But she was also a product of her time. Even people we like and hold in high esteem, such as Gandhi, have held racist attitudes. Further, if you bothered to read this chapter from her book you’d know she was talking about how in the early 1900s excessively large families increased the morality rate for subsequent children, by quite a bit actually. This was due to a lack of resources and/or the health toll on the woman of enduring multiple pregnancies which, of course, affects the health of the newborn. This is far from a heartless passage in the book. In fact she’s expressing worry and horror about what impoverished women and their families were facing during that time period.

[…]

The outrage upon the woman does not end there, however. Excessive childbearing is now recognized by the medical profession as one of the most prolific causes of ill health in women. There are in America hundreds of thousands of women, in good health when they married, who have within a few years become physical wrecks, incapable of mothering their children, incapable of enjoying life.

“Every physician,” writes Dr. Wm. J. Robinson in Birth Control or The Limitation of Offspring,” knows that too frequent childbirth, nursing and the sleepless nights that are required in bringing up a child exhaust the vitality of thousands of mothers, make them prematurely old, or turn them into chronic invalids.”

[…]

If its effects upon the mother and the wage-earning father were not enough to condemn the large family as an institution, its effects upon the child would make the case against it conclusive. In the United States, some 300,000 children under one year of age die each twelve months. Approximately ninety per cent of these deaths are directly or indirectly due to malnutrition, to other diseased conditions resulting from poverty, or, to excessive childbearing by the mother.

The direct relationship between the size of the wage-earner’s family and the death of children less than one year old has been revealed by a number of studies of the infant death-rate. One of the clearest of these was that made by Arthur Geissler among miners and cited by Dr. Alfred Ploetz before the First International Eugenic Congress. ² Taking 26,000 births from unselected marriages, and omitting families having one and two children, Geissler got this result:

[chart from link goes here but won’t format on tumblr]

Thus we see that the second and third children have a very good chance to live through the first year. Children arriving later have less and less chance, until the twelfth has hardly any chance at all to live twelve months. This does not complete the case, however, for those who care to go farther into the subject will find that many of those who live for a year die before they reach the age of five. Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the, sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts. The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it. The same factors which create the terrible infant mortality rate, and which swell the death rate of children between the ages of one and five, operate even more extensively to lower the health rate of the surviving members. Moreover, the overcrowded homes of large families reared in poverty further contribute to this condition. Lack of medical attention is still another factor, so that the child who must struggle for health in competition with other members of a closely packed family has still great difficulties to meet after its poor constitution and malnutrition have been accounted for.

[…]

(Sanger, Women and the New Race, 1920).

A fact sheet from Planned Parenthood that explains many of her quotes which are often taken out of context can be found HERE. [The quote in question is on page 4].

And another fact sheet that gives some background and context on her and her work can be found HERE.