Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood

Manger at PP

Posted by Mary Lu on Tuesday, December 25th, 2007

Manger at PPMy daughter passed by the clinic early Christmas morning and saw something inside the fence of the vacant lot at Planned Parenthood. She drove around to see it better and saw it was a manger.

Manger at PPShe took pictures of it and I will try to put the pictures on here. After church we all took a ride out there. Two statues, a wooden shelter with words on it and an empty manger sits in the field and faces the clinic.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 25th, 2007 at 4:10 pm and is filed under Faith and Prayer, Planned Parenthood, The Front Lines. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

84 Responses to “Manger at PP”

  1. Evelyn says:


    December 25th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
  2. Net says:

    Oh, I'm eager to see the photograph. I hope you're able to publish it!

    December 26th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
  3. Read says:

    Why is this amazing? Isn't it obvious that someone simply placed it there?

    December 26th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
  4. Jerry K. says:

    I saw it today, Tuesday the 26th. It is inside the fenced area. It is a manger scene with out the baby Jesus in the cradle. The sign on one side says:
    No Christ
    On the other side of the sign it says:
    a check mark and poor
    a check mark and shunned
    a check mark and young
    and then something else that I could not quite make out.
    It was a amazing site indeed after looking at that empty lot for so long. And of course Read someone placed it there but it does not make it any less of a wonderful site. I could not get a picture but if someone has it, please post as it is a site to be seen.

    December 26th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
  5. Jerry K. says:

    I must follow up my last comment with the fact that unless Dominicks authorized this display it is/was still trespassing, so we still need to take that into consideration. This was possibly a illegal activity and not right in the eyes of the authority. So my saying this was a wonderful site to see must also take this into account.
    I had to make this statement to clear my conscious concerning my not mentioning this on my previous post.

    December 26th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
  6. Evelyn says:

    Once again……Hallehujah!!!! Praise God. And praise the ambassordors who helped him. I hope I am ready to say "Here I am Lord…..ask me!" Thank you to all those involved.

    Illegal???? Maybe Dominicks placed the empty manger there!!!!! Think about that one!!!!!!

    December 27th, 2007 at 12:56 am
  7. Sylvia says:

    Hmmm…but anyone removing the display, other than Dominick's, would also be trespassing.

    December 27th, 2007 at 1:43 am
  8. Dan the Methodist says:

    What a selfless gesture.
    Could it be that ole St. Nick made a stop at PP.
    Coal just doesn't have the same effect it used to.
    How does it go?? Something about naughty or nice…

    What happened to the open Wednesday thread? Are we getting psyched about the ZBA hearing on the 7th????
    How are we going to spread the word and receive the national coverage for shutting down a PP, a member of the axis of death.
    What about Breast Cancer and research that indicates abortion raises your risk of breast cancer by 50%? If you had an increase like that for global warming, smoking, cancer, allergies, obesity, Erectile dysfunction, or even malaria, I would hear the report on every radio station, newspaper or nightly news. Sadly this has to do with Abortion, the sacrement for the religion of Liberalism. Something so dear and precious to a twisted, currupted, irresponsible and eutopian driven self empowered devinity that it is without question, the #1 issue to allow abortion without regulation, restriction or control. Abortion leads to Breast Cancer and when will we talk about that? When will I hear the report on the news?
    My point is that we have mounted terrific pressure on the government to close planned parenthood (cross fingers), but we also have to wage war to be heard so that we can persuade those on the fence with logic, compassion and responsibility. That means having a comprehensive campagn to spread the good news that WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT IT ANY MORE!! We do not accept Abortion as an answer to irresponsible behavior. We do not accept the complicit exclusion we get from newspapers, news programs and news radio. (exceptions are few, however the newspapers have small informational updates on backpages.) We do NOT accept a religion that is godless, eutopian, and that has infused the acceptance and proceedure of Abortion on the USA resulting in the geniside of 50 MILLION in 35 Years.
    Can I get an AMEN????

    December 27th, 2007 at 6:13 am
  9. Mary Lu says:

    ITS GONE! The entire set up, roof, statues and manger is all gone! There is only something white out there.

    December 27th, 2007 at 8:26 am
  10. Diane says:

    at least there is evidence that it WAS there.

    December 27th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
  11. Paul2 says:

    AMEN!! Dan the Methodist

    December 27th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
  12. Dan the Methodist says:

    Thanks Paul2, I started typing and I just started thinking, We're not going to take it anymore!!!
    Yesterday, they decided to talk about Chicago Bear Lance Briggs and what one writer called an, "Open Pants Policy and I called in. I got through the screener not mentioning abortion, the high voltage word, and was eager to vent my frustrations as they spoke of irresponsibility. When I got on I rolled, I said, I think this society has an open pants policy, 50 million abortions in 35 years is a definate indicator of that and this is a perfect example of why men and women need to be responsible. I also added that had this college student gotten pregnant by a $10 an hour conveinience store clerk, she would have got an abortion. With that, there was no bantor, I got on rolled it out and was cut off. There was no addressing the abortion at ALL. It was quickly steered back to a sterile conversation about Briggs.
    I am trying!

    December 28th, 2007 at 6:38 am
  13. Mary Lu says:

    God bless you Dan. Don't ever give up trying. NONE of us will.
    I want to say "AMEN" to your previous comment too. I was just in shock after seeing the manger gone. It was there and gone too quick. It was a refreshing sight and, like your comments ro the newspeople, it was just removed. Like it didn't matter. Well, I want you to know that your voice DOES matter. As does all of ours working towards a better more moral life here.
    There is a great man that once lived. His name was Charles Foucauld (sp?) He livied with the indigenous people in Tunisia (?) as a missionary. ALL BY HIMSELF. Had you heard of him? It was in the 1900's so it is not some sort unrelating time. He worked tirelessly and peacefully to help these people and NEVER EVER–after years—won them to Christ. Not ONE. And then he was murdered by them! I think of his perseverence and determination and most importantly his CALM, PATIENT, LOVE!!! WOW Seems too impossible for us!
    We pray for each other. I will pray for your continued determination. In some small ways, we are being "put to death" for what we are doing. At leasty figurativlely speaking. And because of this, I KNOW God will be successful in our efforts here, in this cause, and whenever we try to right a wrong. Everytime our voice is cut off, given a 3-minute-or-any-limit, efforts thrown away, misunderstood, or invalidated we are dying to ourselvves, making us more humble to the Lord. He doesn't turn a blind eye to it. These painful efforts are the stuff of his victory in all, this!! Why?
    #1–To see he is in charge of the situation–not ANY of us. #2 To make us more determined and faithful to him.
    As we pray for each other remember, there are many people who have fought similar battles who are now gone–like Charles Foucauld. They are being rewarded for their efforts in ways "eyes have not seen and ears have not heard" This awaits us as well. Know that these that have gone before us ARE praying for you as well. Why wouldn't they? They are your friends. They have been through it all too and are helpng us. Ask them for help. Not that we pray TO these deceased. We only pray to God. We pray that they can continue to encourage us with thier lives as witnesses to the Truth so that we can also be witnesses to the Truth in our words and actions.
    Dear Jesus, look compassionatly on our brother Dan and give him comfort in his efforts and peace knowing that he is serving you in the least of your lttle ones, the unborn. AMEN!

    December 28th, 2007 at 9:13 am
  14. Elizabeth says:

    "What about Breast Cancer and research that indicates abortion raises your risk of breast cancer by 50%?"

    There is no such "research." See:
    for some actual science.

    By the way, seeing your organization's yard-signs desecrating my hometown of Aurora during a visit over the holidays inspired me to make a generous year-end contribution to Planned Parenthood/Chicago Area. Cheers!

    December 29th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
  15. Drake says:


    If you think the number of signs you saw over Christmas was a lot, you should have seen the thousands of them that were up back in October! As people cleaned up their yards at the end of the fall, many came down.

    As to your donation, PP rakes in millions of tax dollars and has many wealthy benefactors. Their executives make mid-six figure salaries and their top performers (i.e. most prolific abortionsists) make even more. To subsidize them with your hard earned money just to make a political statement is a waste. How about contributing to something that actually HELPS people instead of kills them?


    December 29th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
  16. Evelyn says:


    The Breast Cancer report you directed us to is dated May, 2003.

    And I am sure all those volunteers at PP appreciate your very generous donation.

    God bless.

    December 29th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
  17. Paul2 says:

    Elizabeth, I am trying to find a pro-abort willing to blog openly and honestly about their experience. Problem is they all feel shame deep inside and they hide their misgivings from others. May I ask if you are a consumer of PP's goods?

    December 29th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
  18. Sylvia says:

    The link between breast cancer and abortion is well known, and has been known since 1957. See history of research . The media only presents what suits its agenda. Abortion is politically correct. The abortion-breast cancer link is not. If they were to publish those studies, women may decide, if not for their babies' sakes, then for their own, that abortion is too dangerous. Planned Parenthood would lose hundreds of millions of dollars. Also, lawsuits would abound. Remember what happened to the cigarette industry when the suppressed research was made known.
    Finally, there was an outstanding study published this fall which found that the best predictor of breast cancer was…abortion. The study excluded the US and focused on other countries with better records. (The US is negligent when it comes to record-keeping of abortions.) This avoided the problems of self-reporting cited by Elizabeth's link. What was unique about this research was that the researcher was able to not just analyze, but sucessfully predict breast cancer trends in its studied populations based on past abortion figures. Being able to predict future occurrences supports one's conclusions as to causation. For information on this latest research, go here, or to the research itself.

    December 29th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
  19. Read says:

    Paul2 says (December 29th, 2007 at 7:59 pm):
    Elizabeth, I am trying to find a pro-abort willing to blog openly and honestly about their experience. Problem is they all feel shame deep inside and they hide their misgivings from others. May I ask if you are a consumer of PP's goods?


    I think it's a huge falacy to state that anyone is "pro-abort." That's a huge leap from pro-choice. And, although I'm not Elizabeth, I've been a "consumer of PP's goods." What is it you'd like to know?

    December 29th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
  20. Paul2 says:

    I would like to think it was a fallacy that anyone is pro-abort, but unfortunately every abortionist or clinic out their making money on this evil is likely actually pro-abort.

    Have you ever been party to an abortion?

    December 30th, 2007 at 12:58 am
  21. Read says:

    Paul2 says (December 30th, 2007 at 12:58 am):
    I would like to think it was a fallacy that anyone is pro-abort, but unfortunately every abortionist or clinic out their making money on this evil is likely actually pro-abort.

    Have you ever been party to an abortion?


    First of all, are you asking because you sincerely have questions or is this going to be one of those "you're evil because you don't believe the same thing I do" battles? The way your question was phrased makes me suspect that is the case, however, I hope I'm wrong. If so, I'm more than willing to engage in a civil dialogue.

    Second, are you asking if I've had an abortion, known someone who had an abortion or am/was a medical professional who assisted/performed an abortion?

    December 30th, 2007 at 9:17 am
  22. Mary Lu says:

    We welcome your discussion here. I will never say you are evil. Because you are not. And anyone who says you are evil is not showing Christian charity. Period.

    December 30th, 2007 at 10:02 am
  23. Paul2 says:

    Let me clarify. What I stated is that people who make money on the evil of abortion are likely pro-abort. And I stand by my statement that abortion is evil. I did not say, and in no way intended to say that you are evil. And what I meant by party to an abortion is have you had any of your children aborted or been directly involved in performing abortions on someone elses children.

    December 30th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
  24. Read says:

    Paul2 ~ It's clear that we are going to have a language barrier here. Yes, I've had an abortion. However, I do not believe one aborts "children." I have two biological children and one adopted child (all really young adults at this time). And, I'm sorry we disagree, but I do not believe that abortion is "evil." There are times when I believe it to be the best option available when NO OPTION is a particularly good one.

    December 30th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
  25. Paul2 says:

    Lets try to find common ground. To me a baby is a child from the point of conception. When does a baby become a child in your eyes.

    December 30th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
  26. Net says:

    Thanks for posting the photos … how terrific that someone placed a manger there … I love gutsy people for life.

    Did anyone see Meet the Press this morning, Dec. 30? Tim Russert was interviewing Mike Huckabee and this was Mike's response to what should happen to physicians who aborted babies if abortion became illegal.

    "I think if a doctor knowingly took the life of an unborn child for money, and that's why he was doing it, yeah, I think you would, you would find some way to sanction that doctor. I don't know that you'd put him in prison, but there's something to me untoward about a person who has committed himself to healing people and to making people alive who would take money to take an innocent life and to make that life dead. There's something that just doesn't ring true about the purpose of medical practice when the first rule of the Hippocratic Oath is "First, do no harm." Well, if you take the life and suction out the pieces of an unborn child for no reason than its inconvenience to the mother, I don't think you've lived up to your Hippocratic Oath of doing no harm."

    Have you ever heard anyone running for the presidency of the United States speak this strongly for life? I invite anyone who would like to learn more about Mike Huckabee to go to

    Although there are some pro-lifers that speak against Mike (Rush Limbaugh is one!), keep in mind many of them make their livings in part off of radio/websites/published works complaining about pro-choice America and if Huckabee was in office and eliminated abortion, well, they wouldn't have their same jobs anymore.

    December 30th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
  27. Read says:

    Paul2 ~ I don't think a baby becomes a child until sometime after the toddler stage….although I think that's probably just arguing semantics. I believe what you're asking, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, is when do I believe it's a baby. I guess my answer to that is I simply don't know for sure. I don't believe it to be a baby at the blastocyt stage. However, I certainly would consider it to be a baby at the point you have brainwave functioning……(somewhere in the mid-late second trimester). Having said that (and before I get a herd of folks jumping all over me), I personally don't approve of abortion any time other than the first trimester unless, of course, we're talking about a serious risk to the health of the mother.

    December 30th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
  28. Paul2 says:

    Are you stating that you consider the baby to have life once it has brainwaves?

    December 30th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
  29. Paul2 says:

    I did a "google" search on "fetal developement brain waves" and everything I am finding is that a babies brain wave can be detected at approximately 40 days using modern technology "EEG's". That is less than half-way through the first trimester. Where are you getting your information from? Once we can agree on facts and terminology, then we can try and tackle putting a definition on "evil".

    And thanks for posting.

    December 31st, 2007 at 12:16 am
  30. Paul2 says:

    Dan the Methodist,
    May the peace and joy of Jesus Christ follow you through your challenges and adventures in the pro-life movement.

    December 31st, 2007 at 12:41 am
  31. Chris says:

    I've met people who had no problem killing other people (which is illegal), and definitely had no problem knowing they were killing their own babies (which is legal).

    Now, even if abortion were not evil, that sort of attitude would be because it is maliciousness without cause.

    I haven't read anything to make me believe anyone here is evil, but I'm not sure "Christian charity" would preclude saying someone is evil if they are, in fact, evil.

    December 31st, 2007 at 3:00 am
  32. Read says:

    Paul2 says:
    I did a "google" search on "fetal developement brain waves" and everything I am finding is that a babies brain wave can be detected at approximately 40 days using modern technology "EEG's". That is less than half-way through the first trimester. Where are you getting your information from? Once we can agree on facts and terminology, then we can try and tackle putting a definition on "evil".

    Are you stating that you consider the baby to have life once it has brainwaves?


    No, not just "brain waves," but upper level cortical functioning. Pick up a copy of "The Ethical Brain", by Michael Gazzaniga. He was a Dubya appointee to the National Science Counsel. His book covers in-depth what brainwave function in fetuses actually compares to. According to him (and again, Dubya appointee, so he's probably not an Evil Liberal Academic) the human fetus at 13 weeks' gestation has brainwave activity comparable to that of a sea slug. Now, given that sea slugs don't think, it's fair to say that at neither 43 days' gestation or 13 weeks' gestation could a fetus possibly be considered to have a functioning, thinking brain. Upper cortex functioning, I believe, starts at about 6 months gestation.

    I can see this conversation is about to turn ugly (see Chris' post above). If you'd like to continue this via e-mail or an on-line chat I'd be happy to do so.

    December 31st, 2007 at 8:59 am
  33. Read says:

    Sorry, I gave incorrect info above. Michael Gazzaniga was a Dubya appointee to the President's Council on Bio-Ethics — not the National Science Counsel. I apologize for the error.

    December 31st, 2007 at 9:02 am
  34. Renee says:

    I was wondering if brain wave function is then how one would define "human"? For instance, is there a level of brain wave function, that should a brain damaged person fall below, they would cease to be human? Or does the brain wave function "test" if you will, only apply to pre-born humans to define if they are alive, or real, or human enough to make it immoral to terminate their brain wave function. It is interesting to me that the beginning of life and end of life issues can be so similar with concerns for the ethical treatment of living humans with either developing or degenerating brain function.

    I am not trying to be snide, in case it comes across that way in writing. I can see that this approach to the difficulty with abortion has been well thought out and I want to understand if this applies to all humans, or only pre-born ones.

    December 31st, 2007 at 10:18 am
  35. Read says:

    Renee ~ If you are asking my opinion, I'd say it applies to all humans. That's how many end of life decisions are made…..I suppose Terry Schiavo would be a perfect example of that.

    December 31st, 2007 at 10:23 am
  36. Mary Lu says:

    Chris says:
    "…I haven't read anything to make me believe anyone here is evil, but I'm not sure "Christian charity" would preclude saying someone is evil if they are, in fact, evil."

    No one is evil. Only actions are evil and are based on moral ground. This moral ground is not an opinion but based on natural law. So an evil action is an immoral action. However for this evil/immmoral action
    to be so, the person two things are essential: the person needs to be aware of its evilness and fully consent to it. In other words, if a girl is told that the life within her is only a "blob of tissue" and not told the true fact of the life that she carries and that abortion is murder, she is not aware of its evilness.

    However, those in the abortion industry who ARE aware that it is truely life at conception are committing the evil/immoral act. Our education in the truth of life and of abortion extends to these staff members of PP and other abortuaries. As unbelievable as it may seem to us who understand, many nurses, other staff and even doctors do not understand. I know it may seem almost unbelievablethey to go through extensive schooling and not "know" better, but often times higher education teaches evil as good and good as evil. So NOBODY CAN JUDGE any clients, or workers of PP or any abortuary. So to call SOMEONE evil is not Christian charity because it is passing judgement. You don't know their state of mind, or understanding. Christian charity is loving everyone no matter what the circumstances and educating them in a loving manner.

    BUT word of caution to those in the healthcare industry: GOD KNOWS YOU. He knows your thoughts and what immoral/evil actions you are and not "aware" of. He knows you THROUGH AND THROUGH. So you cannot say, when you meet him (and we ALL will one day), that "I was not 'aware' abortion was evil" if you really DID know. No one can hide anything from Him.

    December 31st, 2007 at 12:31 pm
  37. Read says:

    Paul 2 ~ I'm not interested in getting to a religious debate as I simply don't believe in the same things as MaryLu. I respect her right to believe whatever she likes, however, I disagree. Again, if you're interested in continuing this conversation off board in a civil manner, exchanging ideas, I'm happy to do so. However, I'm not going to get caught in an endless cycle of emotional banter with those who are unwilling and/or unable to examine all sides of an issue.

    December 31st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
  38. Mary Lu says:


    The last note I wrote was to "Chris." I was addressing the fact that we cannot call you, or me, or Chris, or anyone, "evil". If I offended you by the religious stuff, I was referring to the comment Chris made. I do not want you ever to be called evil. You are a good person and don't deserve that.

    If you don't feel that the religious part is meant for you that is OK with me. But, as I do not judge you, please don't judge me as being "unwilling" or "unable" to examine all the sides of the issue in a "civil" only because I mentioned religion. I am still able to listen and discuss.

    Read, you seem to be a very strong, vibrant person. I admire that. I wish I was more like you. Perhaps it was your beliefs that helped shape your strengths so I would like to hear about them and how they came about.

    December 31st, 2007 at 2:12 pm
  39. Paul2 says:

    It is completely your decision who you choose to dialogue with. Now back to our dailogue which by the way I find quite enjoyable and we have found our first point of agreement on the babies brain. We agree that at 40 days post conception the baby's brain generates enough brainwave activity to be detected by an EEG.

    Can you help me understand what Dr. Gozzaniga means when he states that the brainwave activity of a 13 week old baby is equivalent to that of a slug, what exactly is he measuring? Is he trying to guage when life begins by measuring the amount of amps generated by the baby's brainwaves? And what criteria do you use to guage that the upper cortex of the baby's brain becomes "functional"? Is it the size at that point or the amount of electrical activity at that point or something else that I am completely missing?

    December 31st, 2007 at 2:14 pm
  40. Read says:

    Mary Lu ~ My apologies if it wasn't meant for me. I suppose I can be a bit overly sensitive in this regard.

    Paul2 ~ I suppose if I'm going to cite people and statistics it's only fair to give you a source. A lot of the info I'm referencing can be found at I did do a Google search (per your earlier post), but was only able to come up with sources from ProLife websites. If you have a cite which is scientific in nature with sources I can research, I would be more than happy to do so.

    As to your question, regarding size of the upper cortex, I don't see that as the issue. I think it has more to do with the development of the medula and pons. As to when life beings, we could go round and round here I'm sure. I think "life" begins before conception. The sperm and the egg are both alive and a blastocyt is certainly "alive." I guess I see the question being when do we as humans become individuals. I don't think that occurs UNTIL we get higher brain activity. I believe this also to be the case when it comes to end of life issues. When does the body become a shell and not an individual? I believe I lost my individuality once that upper brain functioning ceases to exist and would not wish to be kept alive via artificial means.

    As to the reference of brainwaves equivalent to that of a slug, I believe we are simply measuring electrical activity….primarily what the brain stem is capable of producing. However, I hardly qualify as a scientist and reading the actual published papers would probably yield more accurate information.

    December 31st, 2007 at 2:35 pm
  41. Read says:

    If interested, the link to Dr. Gozzaniga's book is:

    December 31st, 2007 at 2:37 pm
  42. Paul2 says:

    I am surprised any scientist ,or you, would even use that analogy between a twelve week old baby and a slug. You actually show a disdain for twelve week old babies when you say things like that to imply somehow that a twelve or thirteen week old baby has no more value then a slug. That analogy has no scientific or other useful value to rational debate about the value of a baby's life. Why do you feel it necessary to diminsih the value of a 12 week old baby by comparing it to a slug?

    December 31st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
  43. Sylvia says:

    Words (semantics) ARE important. A "child" is generally a term for an immature human being. Hence, the term "being with child" to refer to pregnancy. "Baby" likewise refers to an immature human or other animal. Other developmental distinctions exist in Biology. There are "zygotes", "embryos", "fetuses", and "neonates"–and they all can be applied to human beings at various stages. BTW, "fetus" is merely Latin for "young one". "Young" what? Obviously, human beings will only give rise to other human beings. So it must be that a young human being is killed through abortion.
    Stages of development do not differentiate what is "human" or not, just as a "child" is no less "human" than an "adult" or an "elderly" person. Brain development continues to change throughout life. The brain, in fact, is still largely a mystery to scientists. People suffering brain injuries or missing parts of their brains have astounded scientists with their capabilities, so comparing a prenatal human to a sea slug is unfair.
    We can argue the beginning of "life": birth, rational thought, measurable brain waves, heart beat, genetic identity, etc. But in the end, there is one reality: that human life begins at the creation of the soul with the creation of the human body. Whether or not you believe in the soul or the God who creates the soul does not change reality. Reality exists apart from belief. Science tries to discover, analyze, and describe reality. Science asserted when it grew in knowledge of egg and sperm, and even later, of DNA, that life begins at conception (joining of egg and sperm). Only recently has science tried to redefine the beginning of human life, solely to excuse abortion. The textbooks were rewritten. Find an old Embryology or Biology textbook, and if it refers to the beginning of life, it will be when sperm and egg join.
    Certainly, for other animals, scientists believe life still begins at conception. If I were to destroy the egg of an eagle, I would be tried, convicted, jailed, and/or fined for killing an eagle, though it was but an “embryo” or “fetus”. Science and the courts defined what was in that egg to have been “life”. Yet I can kill a human being in the womb with the blessing of doctors and the court system. See the dichotomy?
    Finally, on a less scientific note, try asking a woman whose pregnancy ended through miscarriage (even a very early one) if she had lost a baby. Sometimes the heart feels what the head cannot understand.

    December 31st, 2007 at 4:00 pm
  44. Chris says:

    MaryLu: Simply put, the idea that there is no such thing as an evil PERSON, just evil actions, is not biblical (since we are, after all, talking about what is and is not Christian). Go to bible gateway, scan for the words "evil" and "men" in the version of your choice.

    It goes on to state how we are to react to them as a church. So how might we do that if we can't call evil people evil?

    Even if the myriad of biblical examples allows you to shrug them off as interpretation, then I'd ask that you not define Christianity for everyone else based on your interpretation. "I don't believe it's Christian to call people evil" might work better.

    No one has called Read evil, I think she is a reasonable and good person (not that my opinion really matters). I've already stated what I think of abortion, which is another matter altogether.

    December 31st, 2007 at 6:27 pm
  45. Read says:

    Paul2 says:
    I am surprised any scientist ,or you, would even use that analogy between a twelve week old baby and a slug. You actually show a disdain for twelve week old babies when you say things like that to imply somehow that a twelve or thirteen week old baby has no more value then a slug. That analogy has no scientific or other useful value to rational debate about the value of a baby's life. Why do you feel it necessary to diminsih the value of a 12 week old baby by comparing it to a slug?


    Number 1, it wasn't MY comparison. It was written by a well educated scientist — someone far more intelligent than I. Number 2, he didn't equate a slug to a 12 week old baby — he equated the electromagnetic impulses to that of a 13 week old FETUS — not baby — FETUS — HUGE CONCEPTUAL & SCIENTIFIC DIFFERENCE. I was clearly under the mistaken impression you actually wanted to have a dialogue. I apologize. Clearly, MY mistake.

    Sylvia ~ "Whether or not you believe in the soul or the God who creates the soul does not change reality. Reality exists apart from belief." Sorry, I completely disagree. A "belief" can exist apart from reality. I respect your right to believe in any deity/religion you choose — that is certainly your right in this country. I would appreciate your respect in allowing me NOT to believe as well.

    December 31st, 2007 at 7:19 pm
  46. Read says:

    Sylvia says: If I were to destroy the egg of an eagle, I would be tried, convicted, jailed, and/or fined for killing an eagle, though it was but an “embryo” or “fetus”. Science and the courts defined what was in that egg to have been “life”.


    Actually, that's not true (and while science may not be my area of expertise, legal matters are). The statute DOES NOT define an eagle egg as an eagle and the penalties are different for killing an eagle vs. destroying its egg. Don't take my word for it as I'm happy to provide you with the actual citation. You can read the statute for yourself at 444 U.S. 51, 53.

    December 31st, 2007 at 7:34 pm
  47. Sylvia says:

    Your eagle citation is incorrect. Your citation refers to an appellate case involving property rights and artifacts that contain eagle parts that existed prior to the laws protecting eagles. The statutes relevant to eagle protection are explained here. According to the statutes, it appears degree of willfulness is the only factor differentiating penalties. Eagle and egg are considered the same.
    As for beliefs, believe as you wish. When you die you will know the Truth.

    December 31st, 2007 at 8:18 pm
  48. Paul2 says:

    The intention of comparing it to a slug is just a dig on the value of a thirteen week old baby's life. I am not naive enough to be believe he chose that "slug" analogy carefully in an attempt to degrade the value of the life of a thirteen week old human being. He could just as easily say the brain of an adult human gives off the same electric current level as a large sea anemenoe…but what is the scientific value of his comaprison. There is none.

    You had stated yourself that this was the source of your own opinions about fetal brain developement so I assumed you were trying to stand behind the things you were posting in his name. I apologize if I mistakenly assumed that the "well educated" doctor's characterization was your own opinion.

    At the start of the conversation I had mentioned to you that most people who have had abortions are unable to talk openly about them. Even though you invited the dialogue in the beginning your last couple of responses have been to attack. First MaryLu and now me. It is an emotional topic but wether you call the life a blob, a fetus, a baby, or a child, it is still human life at twelve weeks of developement. The scientific evidence that a twelve week old "fetus" is a human being is overwhelming. At this point they have developed fingers, toes, eyes nose mouth and nervous systems and yes "brain waves". Wether or not they have a "higher" brain function occuring in a specific part of their brains seems to be an attempt to stretch the reality to fit into your mold, rather that this is a human life.

    Look at my previous post carefully. I never attacked you. I was just looking for you to acknowledge the doctor's analogy as having no scientific benefit to our discussion. And to understand that it was just a cheap shot at degrading the value of the life of a thirteen week old human being.

    Yours for peace, Paul2

    December 31st, 2007 at 8:36 pm
  49. AB Laura says:

    It's apparent that you came to a pro-life site to express your thoughts regarding abortion as a person who has had experience in this matter. I've had countless converstations with other pro-choicers as yourself, and came to the conclusion that the conversation will go round and round in circles arguing the semantics of when a "child" is a "child", etc. The point is mute. The real point, is that you came to a pro-life site. As much as you may not realize this, you have a deep-seeded sense of guilt or pain from your abortion experience that has brought you here. Every one of us here cares deeply about you, and would be willing to help you out in any way we can. However, the best healer, is Jesus Christ. You will find comfort, healing and strength through Him. Even if you don't believe in Him now, someday, when you really need to fill the void left in your life, remember Him…He will be there for you.

    God bless you, you are in my prayers.

    December 31st, 2007 at 9:05 pm
  50. Read says:

    Paul2 ~ Do you truly not see the difference in the brain development of a 12-week fetus and a 12-week baby? Not only is there significant brain development but there is significant body development.
    Surely we can agree on that? A 12-week fetus is about the size of a kidney bean whereas the average 12-week baby is approximately 10#'s — give or take a pound or two in either direction.

    I have no idea how he came up with the "slug" analogy. I didn't do his research nor do I know enough about science to attempt to know. However, this man is pro-life so I don't think he was do it for a "dig."

    Not once did I say that a 12-week fetus isn't human. A sperm and an egg are human. Of course, it's human. There's no debate there. I did not attack you.

    To AB Laura ~ You cannot make generalization about people on the pro-choice side any more than I can make generalizations about ALL people on the pro-life side. There is no deep seeded sense of guilt or shame on my part. I came here to see what your thought processes are because I disagree. However, I'm not so blinded by my own opinions that I'm unwilling or unable to take those of others into consideration. I can't say I KNOW what you feel and believe any more than you KNOW what I feel or believe.

    I have intentionally gone out of my way to keep the personal attacks and nastiness out of it. I have my own viewpoint as to God and abortion, however, I know that "most" of you would view it as an attack/slam/etc. and I have, thus, kept it to myself.

    And believe it or not, there really is no void in my life. I'm a pretty happy person both professionally and emotionally. I have a wonderful family and great friends. Truthfully, there's not really anything more I could ask for.

    Regardless of our differences, I wish all of you a happy new year.

    December 31st, 2007 at 9:30 pm
  51. Tara says:

    Read –

    For us it doesn't matter if a child is 12 weeks in utero or 12 weeks after birth. We are still talking about a human being.

    In Biology – we learn that at fertilization, we have created a new human being. Why? Because at fertilization, an individual has been created with it's own DNA that is different from the mother and the father. Hence the creation of a new human being. The process of developing in the womb is no different then continuing development after birth to death. It is all on the same timeline. We are just at different stages.

    By 6-8 weeks in utero a baby has developed its heart, lungs, stomach, appendix, kidneys, brain, bladdar, intestines and has all 10 toes and 10 fingers. We are not talking about a blob of tissue.

    By the way the term fetus means unborn child and/or infant depending on its useage.

    Using your thought process, when someone develops Dementia or Altimerzes, which limits one's mental capacity, does this make him or her any less a person? How about someone who has Downs or Cerebal Palsey?

    I don't know whether you are a Christian or not, but God is really clear about the value of the unborn. And where most of us are coming from is that point of view. And there is nothing wrong with that. How I live my life and act (or try to) comes from a Biblical worldview, and I do not apologize for that. We all know that abortion kills a life. Abortion stops a beating heart.

    However, until 1973 our Constitution protected the unborn. I highly doubt that our Founders had any intention of our Constitution to be used to protect the killing of our unborn children. Of all our freedoms that the Constition gives us, LIFE is the most important!! Without Life, you cannot have Liberty or Persue Happiness.

    I hope you have a Happy New Year, and I am glad that you are willing to talk.

    December 31st, 2007 at 10:07 pm
  52. Paul2 says:

    It is a common practice among abortion supporters to try to keep people from ever thinking of the 12 week old human life with any kind of human identity so they go to great pains to call this life a fetus, or a blob, or anything that can dehumanize it.
    That being said I think we have found more common ground. Neither one of us understands or can speak to any scientific value in that "dooctor's" analogy and we both believe a twelve week old human life is more precious then a slug.

    Now on to the next point of agreement. And we are on a roll here. I do see that at twelve weeks of life the human brain is very small and it gets larger as we grow through adolesence.

    In one of your previous posts you stated that it wasn't until we have "higher" functioning brains that we get our individuality. I have a question for you in that regard. We all have unique DNA from the point of conception, doesn't that suggest the presence of individuality to you?.

    December 31st, 2007 at 10:20 pm
  53. Paul2 says:

    Hello Tara. Merry Christmas and Happy new Year

    December 31st, 2007 at 10:30 pm
  54. Tara says:


    Hello. Merry Christmas to you to. Your conversation with Read has been very interesting. I'm glad that those with a different opinion than us come here. I only wish that PP would alow for this kind of discussion on their board. But they don't.

    I hope all is well with you and your family, and that God blesses all of you in this wonderful New Year.

    This is the day the Lord hath made. Let us be glad and rejoice in it.


    January 1st, 2008 at 11:29 am
  55. Dan the Methodist says:

    Happy NEW YEAR!!

    Happy New Year Paul, Tara, Matt, Mary Lu, Read, Net, and EVERYONE

    January 2nd, 2008 at 6:37 am
  56. Mike says:

    MORE on Jill Stanek's Blog…


    January 2nd, 2008 at 5:18 pm
  57. Elizabeth says:

    "To subsidize them with your hard earned money just to make a political statement is a waste. How about contributing to something that actually HELPS people instead of kills them?"

    Planned Parenthood may very well have saved my life. When I was a poor grad student, I received my health services from PP, including a very affordable Pap Smear that revealed pre-cancerous cells on my cervix. PP helps millions of women every day in exactly that way.

    Sylvia, the Patrick Carroll article you cited is more non-science published by an organization with an agenda. Enjoy your blinders. Just don't expect reasonable people with an interest in true research to wear them as well.


    January 4th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
  58. Tara says:


    There are other places you could have gone for a pap smear. PP isn't the only affordable clinic.

    The National Cancer Institute you cited is backed and works with PP, and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation gives to PP. They are not a unbiased source. But PCers can't let there be a link bc it would destroy the abortion industry. What woman would want to undergo a procedure that could lead them to getting breasdt cancer. Not exactly good PR.

    And when PC doctors find something that show any negative findings about abortion whether physical or emotional they try to trash them and try to discredit them. Instead, if PCers really cared about women's health, then they would embrace these studies so to protect girls. But PCers can't do that, bc it's not about women's health, it's about allowing unborn children to be killed for money.

    Here is a list of Medical Groups that agree with the abortion/breast cancer link:

    National Physicians Center for Family Resources
    Catholic Medical Association
    Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
    The Polycarp Research Institute
    Ehtics and Medics
    MaterCare International
    Breast Care Center-EAMC
    Association of American Physicians and Surgeons – they believe that women should be told of the potentail risk.
    Here is a link – check it out.

    Dr. Janet Daling is a cancer researcher at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the University of Washington. Dr. Daling is self-described as 'pro-choice'. On 2 November 1994 Dr. Daling and fellow researchers published an article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (pp. 1584-1592) concerning induced abortion and breast cancer risk for premenopausal women. Some key findings:

    Women under age 18 who had an induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 150%.

    Women of age 30 and above who aborted a first pregnancy increase their breast cancer risk by 110%.

    Overall, women who have an induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 50%.

    The Journal of the National Medical Association is a publication by black medical professionals concerned with black health problems. In the December 1993 issue JNMA published the results of a Howard University study. Key finding:

    Black women of age 50 and above who had at least 1 induced abortion have an increased breast cancer risk of 370%.
    Here is another study of abortion and breat cancer:
    Here is one from New Zealand:

    January 4th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
  59. Sylvia says:

    Please explain what makes the Carroll study "non-science".

    January 4th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
  60. Paul2 says:

    I enjoy your posts.

    January 4th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
  61. Sylvia says:

    Thanks. : )

    January 5th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
  62. Student says:


    You made the statement "But PCers can't do that, bc it's not about women's health, it's about allowing unborn children to be killed for money."

    If you honestly believe what you said, would you please tell me what you believe motivates "PCers" to do this? The vast majority of the PC community makes no money by being PC so what could possibly be their motivation?

    January 6th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
  63. Tara says:

    Student -

    I made that statement bc of PCers staunch support of organizations like Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics. PP is the largest abortion provider in the country and they charge roughly $300-$500 per abortion. By supporting them with donations PCers are engaged in the solicitation and are indirectly participating in the killing of unborn children for profit.

    I have found very few PCers who are willing to acknoweldge studies that contridict their understanding that unborn children are not human beings. PCers might say the preborn are "potential life" but that is about as close to acknowledging the humanity of the unborn. Over and over again I'm told that bc an unborn child is not human, to pay to have an abortionist to "get rid of the pregnancy or potential life" is not a big deal. So if money is being made for a service rendered so what.

    It is that attitude that I find disturbing and very troubling.

    January 6th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
  64. Dan the Methodist says:

    Right on Tara, RIGHT ON!!!


    January 6th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
  65. Student says:

    Tara, thanks for your comments but they were nonresponsive to my question. You stated: "But PCers can't do that, bc it's not about women's health, it's about allowing unborn children to be killed for money."

    My question is, what is the motivation of the PC community that IS NOT making any money? What motivates them to be PC if, in fact, they do not profit by same?

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:34 am
  66. Ramir San Diego says:

    Student (if you really are one),

    It sounds like you are PC (pls corrct me if I'm wrong) so I'd like to know what motivates YOU to defend the abortionists, their God-forsaken profession and their ilk?

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:03 am
  67. Paul2 says:

    I would guess one of the reasons is that they want to continue having sex on desire w/o consequence or responsibility for the creation of a human life.

    January 7th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
  68. Sylvia says:

    What motivates PCers? Abortion, like other sins, has its root in pride. "You can't tell me what to do", "MY body, MY choice", "It's a WOMAN's decision", etc., say one thing: We want to be like God. It's called "Original Sin". It's why we're here, to borrow from a prayer, "Mourning and weeping in this valley of tears". When we sin, we push away love and consideration for others and for God. We want to control our lives, do what we want to do, when we want to do it….in other words, make ourselves God. Abortion is just one of the more extreme forms of sin that takes the life of another human being.
    Justifying sin, legalizing it, getting others to join in it, makes it feel better, less sinful. The attitude,"Everybody's doing it, so it must be OK," weakens our resolve to fight the temptations that we know deep down inside are wrong. The Devil is a clever liar. But the Truth is still there and nags at our consciences. Look at how many women (and men) later regret their abortions and are tormented by their decisions.
    If you are PC, stop and take an honest look at abortion. Somewhere deep down you will be unsettled by it. You have to be. That's God calling. Listen.

    January 7th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
  69. Sandy says:

    Thank you for putting into words so beautifully the Truth about abortion and its consequences. I so enjoy your posts.

    January 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
  70. Erin says:


    I would add to Sylvia's excellent point that PC-ers like to hide behind a banner of "tolerance." With the exception of a few activists, most people who are PC will respond to questions about abortion with a non-committal "well, personally I would never have one, but I can't force that opinion on someone else." That is why PC-ers in general can't produce the kind of rally numbers that Pl-ers can (at least as I've seen in Aurora). Because most of them are hiding behind the "choice" in order to be "tolerant"; they don't really like abortion or have a favorable opinion of it.

    January 7th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
  71. Student says:

    I'd just like to point out the fallacy of Tara's argument that PCers are "in it for the money."

    Ramir: I am most definitely a student, but it's irrelevant to me whether or not you believe it. Why the personal slight?

    Sylvia: I'm not religious so the concept of a "god" or "sin" doesn't really play a part in my thought processes.

    Erin: I believe you don't get the #s showing up at the Aurora meetings for several reasons. Most people today take the Roe decision for granted and cannot fathom a day when birth control could be denied (I think they're foolish, but I do see that as a primary motivating factor). Second, because the law is already in place people just don't see a need to attend the meetings. I believe when all is said and done PP will still be there. The Aurora tax payers will be out a fair amount of money in legal fees with, ultimately, no positive results for the PL community other than to annoy their neighbors. You are correct when you say that PCers believe in choice and in not making choices for others. However, we live in a free country and you are certainly free to protest and attempt to get the government to see your way. It's my opinion that it will gain you nothing, but I would fight for your right to speak based on my values, regardless of our differing opinions.

    January 7th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
  72. Erin says:


    Correction: we are not talking about birth control, we are talking about abortion. We are not protesting pharmacies or health centers, we are protesting abortion clinics. And, in fact, birth control has always been readily available at non-profit health centers here in Aurora. We are talking about abortion.

    Certainly, PC-ers would take Roe-v-Wade for granted, but PP based the reason for their breech of ethics on a huge need in Aurora that had to be met regardless of the protests of a "vocal minority of anti-choice extremists". Aurora was so pathetically under-represented in abortion/women's health care, that the ends would justify the means. If that was the case, why were there not at least as many people in favor of the clinic (people who were in fact clamoring for it according to PP) speaking at the meetings and attending the protests, as their were PL-ers (that "vocal minority)?

    Although I agree that we can protect each others right to protest differing opinions, opinions do not represent Truth. Truth is absolute. If it's a "baby" when you want it, then it's a "baby" even when you don't, even when you are in denial about the pregnancy. This is bigger than a simple disagreement. It's about protecting a human being unable to defend him/herself.

    January 7th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
  73. Student says:

    I am in no way trying to deny you the right to your opinion. However, neither one of us gets to be the de facto decider of truth. I'm guessing that you believe in God and see that belief as an absolute truth. I do not. This is why we are a national of laws and, at least as of now, Roe is the law. You obviously have every right to protest that law and attempt to overturn it.

    As to the birth control issue please allow me to ask a question. If PP stated that as of right now they wouldn't perform another abortion, would you still object to their remaining in Aurora?

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
  74. Erin says:


    If the national PP organization would no longer perform abortions, they can go wherever they want. I don't care. There is a PP Express in Naperville. I didn't even know that they were there and I never once protested that facility because they do not perform abortions.

    I do use birth control (that I carefully research to make sure it does not impact implantation). I know many PL-ers who stick to NFP and do not believe in artificial contraceptives, and I respect them. I have never seen them protest at other local health centers (like the VNA) that are in no way associated with the abortion industry, but do distribute contraceptives.

    Why do you believe it would be otherwise?

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
  75. Student says:

    I thought it would be otherwise because I've seen on this site the call to protest the Naperville facility and I know for a fact that they do not perform abortions. I am sorry if I misjudged you in that.

    What is VNA?

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
  76. Student says:

    I appreciate the way you have been able to engage in a meaningful discussion without getting ugly. I've seen far too much of that lately from PCers and PLers alike. I have some other questions I'd like to ask for a paper I'm doing, however, I would prefer to do it via private e-mail. I have a new quarter starting tomorrow and have some reading to do to prepare tonight. If you are interested in continuing this, please feel free to contact me at If you prefer not to do so I certainly understand. Thanks for your time this evening.

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
  77. Erin says:

    The VNA is the "Visiting Nurses Association". It is a non-profit medical facility that has care for men, women, and children. They do STD testing, mammograms, paps, everything that PP does except abortion and abortion counseling. They also do everything else that you need in a medical clinic, like flu shots and throat cultures and a million other things that PP would never think of doing. My sister-in-law took her son there for all of his vaccinations and well-baby visits when her husband was out of work. They just opened up a brand new building that I often pass while I am out and about. Their website is

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
  78. Erin says:

    I'd be happy to talk to you, but the email address didn't work. Mine is I hope to hear from you–let's see if we can't make each other think really hard! But, you know, I'm not anyone who would necessarily make a good source for a paper–just a concerned citizen, really.


    January 7th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
  79. Student says:

    I have no idea why the e-mail address didn't work for you, however, I sent you a personal e-mail and hopefully that will work. Again, many thanks!

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
  80. Paul2 says:

    Thank you for open-mindedness and caring

    January 9th, 2008 at 12:46 am
  81. Tara says:


    Thank you for your conversation. It is refreshing to see converstation instead of shouting, and swearing. The only way to understand one another is by talking to, not at.

    Sorry for not responding sooner to your question:

    My question is, what is the motivation of the PC community that IS NOT making any money? What motivates them to be PC if, in fact, they do not profit by same?

    I think part of it is a responsiblity issue. We live in a culture that blames everyone else for decisions we make, and live in an I society. As long as I don't hurt or bother anyone who cares what I do. I want to have sex and if I get pregnant so what I can get an abortion and get rid of the problem. There lies one of the issues. We are not talking about whether one should change jobs. We are literally deciding whether a Human Being – an unborn child is going to live or die.

    But you said something to Erin that I think is one of the issues at the heart of this issue. You said you do not believe in absolute truths. This is very much part of Realitivism. This worldview allows for all actions and behaviors to be justified. With this point of view, nothing is wrong or downright evil. It allows for all actions and/or viewpoints to be seen as correct.

    There are aboslute truths. It is absolutely wrong to kill innocent people, to steal, rape, commit incest, to produce child pronogrophy, and the list goes on and on. There are no justifications that can be made. So to say that abortion doesn't hurt anyone is a lie. It kills an innocent person, who is the most vulnerable of us all. And in the end it hurts the girl/woman who choose it.

    So even if the PC community isn't making money directly it is supporting entities that do. Women Study classes in colleges do not teach that the founding mothers of Feminism were Pro-Life. They do not teach that abortion split the women's movement. They do not teach that they manipulated and lied about statistics and used Norma McCorvey to get Roe passed. They do not teach that PP was founded by a Nazi Eugenist whose goal was to "control" minority populations. She believed Blacks, Hispanics, Asians were chaft and animals who needed to be controlled. Read Margret Sanger's papers. It should make anyone's blood boil, but PP gives out the Maggie Awards every year. Even PC scholars agree that Roe v Wade is bad law.

    But the PC Community will not allow for anyone who challenges the status quo. When former abortionists talk about the fact abortion is all about money and not about women's health, when there are about 20 different studies that show some links between breast cancer and abortion, when studies show abortion emotionally and physically harms women, the PC Community rips them apart. Instead of debating and discussing they go on attack mode. They try to discredit the scientists.

    So my question to you is – What is the PC Community afraid of? What does it get from supporting abortion? Why does a innocent unborn child have to die in order for a woman to be empowered? Why can't the PC Community love them both? And the argument that in one situation a child is wanted and in another is isn't does not hold up.

    I hope that we can continue our discussion.

    January 9th, 2008 at 10:27 am
  82. s. fane says:

    If anyone is interested there was a save today! A teenaged couple drove into to PP lot and after consideration turned their car around and drove out. Randy M. was there with his sign. Two prayer partners in parking lot. (They,the mom and dad, gave us the thumbs up and Mom looked joyful and relieved!) Pray that they continue in their resolve. They did not take literature so also pray that they are able to hook up with help along the way! Also thanks to the intercession and intervention of Connie and Christine (hope I got spelling right–like Christ correct?) via the Holy Spirit there were two saves during the day of the last rally. Connie brings angels with her wherever she goes; fortunately she left her angels with us and that young teenaged couple today. Catholics ask St. Therese's intercession because just as I was mentioning her their car rolled past. I was jumping up and down. The staff inside must have even gotten a chuckle. Mary Vilim got literature out to 3 or 4 women. The turn-out for side-walk counselors was phenomenal today. Praise God!

    Thank you Jesus.

    January 10th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
  83. Paul2 says:

    That is awesome. I had the pleasure of praying while Connie and Christine provided sidewalk counseling last Saturday and they are VERY good…and getting better each time I see them :) You go girls!

    January 10th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
  84. c1ac90ec1ccb says:



    May 11th, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Pregnant? Need help? Hurt by abortion? Call 1-800-848-LOVE, 24 hours.