Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood

Live blog from the ZBA hearing tonight

Posted by Eric and Matt on Monday, January 7th, 2008

Tonight: The next Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) hearing begins at 7:00 p.m. at Aurora City Hall (map). Wear your "Planned Parenthood LIES to You"—or pick one up when you get there.

If you can't be at the hearing, tune in here for live blogging starting about 6:45 p.m.

The ZBA will rule on three important motions tonight. First is the city's Motion to Dismiss—they want the ZBA to refuse to hear our appeal on the grounds that it's untimely and out of their jurisdiction. If the ZBA grants this motion, the hearings are over and we'll have to take our case to state.

If the ZBA denies the Motion to Dismiss, they will go on to rule on two motions from our side: A Motion for Subpoenas (which would allow us to interview key officials) and a Motion to Stay the Certificate of Occupancy (which would withdraw Planned Parenthood's occupancy permit, and require them to shut down). Exciting stuff!

Check out these brief videos for a taste of what tonight's hearing should be like:

6:55 p.m. The ZBA members are seated, and I see about 50 pro-lifers in the gallery so far. More Planned Parenthood supporters than before—all of seven. Still awaiting the arrival of our attorneys, who are fighting through traffic from Chicago. [ERIC]

The Zoning Board of Appeals

7:05 p.m. Peter Breen and Tom Brejcha have arrived. Commissioner Truax has opened the meeting and the roll has been called. City attorney Alayne Weingartz is accompanied today by outside counsel Lance Malina, who argued before federal judge Charles Norgle back in Septemer that the City should be allowed to conclude what he called a "zoning investigation" without issuing an occupancy permit to Planned Parenthood. My guess is he's here to contradict our contention that his words before Judge Norgle show the city was still making zoning determinations on through September. [ERIC]

Commissioner Truax reviews the previous decisions of the ZBA and then asks for the attorneys to comment on the Motion to Dismiss that they will rule on today. Weingartz introduces Malina and then summarizes her motion: the ZBA is not the proper body before whom we should make this appeal, and our October 2 filling is months—not days—after the last zoning decision was made.

Weingartz is arguing that only decisions by the zoning administrator (Ed Sieben) can be appealed, not decisions by anyone else in the city (such as, I suppose she means, Mayor Weisner's decision to issue the occupancy permit on October 1).

Weingartz also insists that what we're really asking is for the ZBA to overturn the November 2006 Planning and Development Committee's decision to approve the final plan. She ignores, of course, that that final plan was approved in the belief that a for-profit medical office building was coming in, not a not-for-profit health service like Planned Parenthood. [ERIC]

Matt and Eric blogging

7:10 p.m. Chris Wilson, counsel for PP and Gemini started off by stating that his clients agreed with Alayne and the city's position. He said it has been a difficult process, but that there had been investigation of this matter and no impropriety was found.

He reminds the ZBA that the important date in this matter is October, 2006, when the original, and he claims only, zoning decision was made. Since the time for appeal has elapsed, the ZBA has no authority to deal with this matter.

He closes his comments by alleging that what our attorneys are upset with is not the zoning of the property, but the "constitutionally protected activities" that take place on the PP premises. He joins the city in asking that the case be dismissed on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. [Matt]

7:15 p.m. Brejcha starts out with clarity: "Mr. Wilson is wrong." He says this has nothing to do with Roe v. Wade, but with zoning . "Because they perform abortions they believe they're somehow immune or exempt from zoning laws that apply to every other building or citizen."

"Gemini is not in that facility now, another entity is in that facility. Gemini concedes that it concealed its identity." The assumption was that multiple tenants would occupy the building, and decisions were made on that basis.

Alayne Weingartz interrupts Brejcha to object to his speaking about zoning violations, since they are in a brief only filed today—he should only address the Motion to Dismiss. PP attorney Chris Wilson concurs. Brejcha responds that he's addressing Weingartz's contention that no zoning decisions have been made since late 2006.

Brjecha emphasizes that the City was making zoning decisions—about what the zoning category is, what kinds of medical procedures could be performed, etc. right on into October. [ERIC]

7:25 p.m. Brejcha continued by arguing that a BB district requires a change to the zoning code before a non-profit medical service could occupy this property. This is NOT a tertiary detail as the Weingartz and the ZBA are continually arguing.

PP got money from the state that will cost the state $2mil. over a few years. This makes it a significant zoning issue. This is not an insignificant detail.

The attorneys

Weingartz once again complains that this material was only handed to her this evening and should not be discussed. Ms. Truax agrees that this does not have to do with the issue at hand.

Brejcha brings it back to the core issue: the original zoning was for a for profit use. PP is a non-profit use.

Surrounding neighbors had the right to have notice and a hearing. Since it's BB, it was absolutely prohibited for them to be there unless, with the permission of the city council, they changed the city zoning code.

He continued that it's a matter of Aurora ordinances, it's a matter of Illinois law. This is the reason this board exists.
There was improper zoning which required hearings or a change in the zoning code. [MATT]

Brejcha: "To dismiss this appeal now, with all deference, would be an abdication of the responsibilty invested in this board." He goes on to quote Justice Brandeis: "The best disinfectant is sunlight." The ZBA should allow this appeal to go forward and investigate the zoning decisions made, when and why they were made, and whether the laws were upheld.

There should be no hasty decision, like the hasty October 1 decision to issue the occupancy permit, but a full airing of our objections, "raised in good faith", to the process surrounding Gemini/Planned Parenthood. [ERIC]

7:30 p.m. Now Truax asks the City and Planned Parenthood to respond. Weingartz insists that the City admits nothing, and no matter how many times Brejcha says they have, that doesn't make it so. Chris Wilson remarks that this has not been a hasty process, with more than 1700 pages filed and hours of hearings, etc. Nor has Gemini ever admitted they deceived the City. He urges the ZBA "not to take jurisdiction where there is none."

The ZBA adjourns to executive session to deliberate and make a decision.

8:05 p.m. Commissioner Truax resumes the hearing and asks Commissioner Cole to present the motion the ZBA will vote on.

Cole moves that the ZBA grant the city's motion to dismiss our appeal for timeliness (no zoning determination by the zoning administrator was made within the time required for an appeal, and deny the city's motion to refer the matter to the building official.

The ZBA votes unanimously in favor of this motion. They've shut us down. They adjourn, to applause from the cadre of Planned Parenthood supporters.

Summary: The ZBA shut down our appeal today. They agreed with Alayne Weingartz that only decisions by the zoning administrator can be appealed to them, and that therefore we were many months too late with our appeal.

What this means for us: We're taking our case to state court. Stay tuned!

This entry was posted on Monday, January 7th, 2008 at 12:11 pm and is filed under Legal and Political, News, Planned Parenthood. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

258 Responses to “Live blog from the ZBA hearing tonight”

  1. AB Laura says:

    Watch that Alayne!!! "her side" brings up non-issues to get an expected response in order to create confusion…(she's kinda good at that)

    Good thing our attorney's are smarter!!!

    (keep praying for ZBA board!)

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
  2. Steve says:

    Great coverage, Eric. There are hundreds of people checking this blog every few minutes. Thank you!

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
  3. Cathy says:

    My prayer: "HIS will be done!" God Bless you for your faithfulness to this issue.

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
  4. Kristen says:

    Steve Trombly admitted he deceived the city in his infamous quote. I hope the ZBA remembers that!

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
  5. AB Laura says:

    Excellent prayer, Cathy!
    :)

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
  6. AB Laura says:

    "The best disinfectant is sunlight."
    Love it!

    (blood sucking vampires don't like the sunlight)

    January 7th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
  7. Evelyn says:

    Psalm 7 is a request for justice….vs. 14 thru 16 states…"He who is pregnant with evil and conceives trouble gives birth to disillusionment. He who digs a hole and scoops it out falls into the pit he has made. The trouble he causes recoils on himself; his violence comes down on his own head".

    Praise God for his word shall never go void. Eric, our continual prayers are with you and yours this evening.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
  8. G Guest says:

    that's it?

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
  9. Cathy says:

    I'm still trying to figure out how we could appeal something in a "timely manner" when the truth wasn't known in a timely manner. Hmmm, kind of a Catch-22 isn't it? Well… on to the state court.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
  10. Brian says:

    That's disappointing. If we had no idea that Gemini was actually a non-profit within the time the decision was made (and that lack of knowledge was because of them lying in their applications), how can they hold the statute of limitations against us?

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:14 pm
  11. AB Laura says:

    Better if it goes to state court anyway, IMO….it's just going round & round in circles Aurora & it's making me dizzy!

    The state courts know the law & will make Aurora enforce it!

    God bless you all! You're doing a great job.

    I don't hear the "fat lady" singing yet!

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
  12. Cathy says:

    I agree Laura! Maybe it's time that Aurora be held accountable in a higher court – but they would be anyway, sooner or later, wouldn't they? Hmmm.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
  13. Melinda Dillon says:

    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA LAHOO-ZA-HERS!!!!!!! You guys are gonna get shut down everywhere you go. Yeah Planned Parenthood!!!!!!

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
  14. AB Laura says:

    Cathy,
    I'm excited!

    Aurora is a joke. You know, one of those you don't laugh at when you hear the punch line?

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:18 pm
  15. Steve says:

    God is our strenth and salvation. No matter what happens in our state court or anywhere else, we will overcome. This is a cause worth fighting! People, we are fighting for human life. We are not clay. We will prevail. Prey for PP supporters; that God will reveal truth to them.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
  16. Flick says:

    But, but, Melinda! They are killing thousands of baybees there, every day except Sunday! Mammas are killing their baybees! If we don't stop them, evil Satan will be our King!

    Maybe we need better lawyers?

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
  17. AB Laura says:

    and Mondays, Flick.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
  18. Linda says:

    Well said, Steve! Poor Melinda thinks this is about us! This is the Lord's battle and the results are in HIS Hands! The farther this goes, the more people will see what He can do!!!!
    We are soldiers in His army and are proud to keep up the fight!

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
  19. Renee says:

    It's no suprise that an appointed board is going to try to cover the city's behind on this one. I am suprised it took this long. It has always been inevitable that this would go to court, and now we can get on with it.

    Looks like two of the seven PP supporers are out looking for a little amusement, eh?

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
  20. Melinda Dillon says:

    Nothing fails like prayer…and Families Against Planned Parenthood.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
  21. Evelyn says:

    Phil 4:4 "Rejoice in the Lord always, I will say it again: Rejoice!"

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
  22. Renee says:

    Cecile Richards herself said she hasn't seen a protest like this one before. That is not a failure. The word is getting out about what PP stands for, and even if this actual battle is lost, the opposition to PP is growing. It's just a matter of time.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
  23. Melinda Dillon says:

    Ooooo, you keep on a a-prayiin' and a-protestin' Abortion ain't going anywhere.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
  24. Linda says:

    Melinda this isn't a failure. We prayed for His will to be done! Apparently, His plan is bigger than ours! It's sad that you think prayer fails! Maybe this is happening for YOU to see what answered prayer is! There's nothing better!!!!!!!!!!!

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
  25. jasper says:

    This is a joke.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
  26. Cathy says:

    Melinda… I've just added you to my prayer list. Every morning when I say my Rosary, you will be included in my intentions. God bless you, and may His Spirit enlighten you.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
  27. Steve says:

    Yes Renee. There are many, many battles to be fought in this great war. The Melinda Dillons of our times have not seen truth. Pray that this person finds Christ this very evening! It IS just a matter of time. I've read the Book. In the end, we win.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
  28. Melinda Dillon says:

    Cathy: check out this link:

    http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/NonSequitur02_0910.jpg

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
  29. AB Laura says:

    Steve,
    AMEN! Isn't so cool that we know the end of the story? Either way, God will prevail!

    (BTW pc'ers…that's "our Heavenly Father"…not Gemini!

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
  30. Cathy says:

    Ahh… what an interesting response. :-)
    Good night Melinda. May you come to know the truth some day. May angels wrap their wings around you and keep you warm, and may God lay a gentle hand on your heart, and may all the anger you feel seep away and leave you open to His word.

    January 7th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
  31. Steve says:

    Good night, Melinda.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
  32. Becca says:

    I have a few questions. What is going on with the parental notification issue? And, should we go back to the city council meetings and let them know how we feel about the travisity that was the ZBA tonight. I am not sure but, I feel like the ZBA was a little "over their heads" tonight. They wanted out of this whole thing. And, the city attorney gave them an easy out. Which for me begs the question…. who is trying to cover their tracks? Who knew what? We may never truly know but, be assured God does.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
  33. Roger says:

    Becca – End of February to the GO committee.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
  34. Alex says:

    Only a brilliant blogger would post a link to a weekday newspaper cartoon to make a point.

    And here I was using "words".

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:13 pm
  35. Melinda Dillon says:

    I am a former born-again xian. I "knew" his love and years later realized it was all make believe. Good luck, Fundies. It's been over thirty years and you guys have been played by everyone in government to their own ends and where has it gotten you? Four thousand baybees will be "slaughtered" tomorrow. But, keep up the good work. At least it keeps you off the streets and out of trouble.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
  36. AB Laura says:

    Melinda,
    You're an attention-seeker. Did you get your fill?

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
  37. Steve says:

    But Melinda, it isn't keeping us off the streets. Have you been to New York and Oakhurst?

    And, I am heartened that you are talking about your faith again. I am encouraged to pray all the more for your conversion. Seriously. Good night.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
  38. Linda says:

    Melinda,
    I feel so sad about whatever happened to cause you to turn your back on the Lord. Sometimes our view of Him is changed because of the actions of people around us. Remember, He is God and we are all sinners. Don't let your hurt cause you to miss out on His Love! Turn back to Him. He is waiting for you right where you left Him and His arms are wide open waiting to welcome you home. I too will pray for you and I mean what I say, (not like your cartoon.) Also, you used the correct word for the death of 4,000 babies – it is slaughter!

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
  39. Ocean says:

    The militant "christian" religionists who are both against contraception as well as abortion get shut down…again. YES! Victory for Planned Parenthood and all of us who support free choice! And failure for the biblical american compulsory pregnancy agenda. As the McDonald's ad goes, "I'm LOVIN it."

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
  40. Melinda Dillon says:

    Hey Linda, thanks for Christian Cliches #s4 and 5:

    4. "SALVATION IS OBVIOUSLY A VERY SORE SUBJECT FOR YOU – YOU ARE SO FULL OF HATE AND CONTEMPT"

    Your arguments against born again fundamentalism make sense. I'll have to change the focus of our discussion.

    ——————————————————————————–

    5. "SOMEONE IN THE CHURCH MUST HAVE CAUSED YOU A GREAT DEAL OF HURT FOR YOU TO FEEL THIS WAY"

    You couldn't have possibly left Christianity just because you studied the Bible and you think you found inconsistencies and errors in it.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
  41. AB Laura says:

    Ocean blathered,
    "the biblical american compulsory pregnancy agenda"

    huh?
    ..and
    WOW!

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
  42. Ocean says:

    From: Linda
    Remember, He is God and we are all sinners. Don't let your hurt cause you to miss out on His Love! Turn back to Him. He is waiting for you right where you left Him and His arms are wide open waiting to welcome you home.
    ************

    Why would I or anyone else who kicked the spiritual toxic waste pit of "christian" fundamentalism OUT of our life want to "turn back" to it. Some of us, myself included, prefer FREEDOM over slavery.

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
  43. Ocean says:

    Ocean blathered,
    "the biblical american compulsory pregnancy agenda"

    huh?
    ..and
    WOW!

    *************

    It's an accurate description of the mindset of so-called "christians" with the agenda of making both contraception AND abortion illegal. Does that help?

    January 7th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
  44. MargoCupps says:

    I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well. Psalm 139:14. This is my prayer for the hurting: Lord, so often these people feel unlovable. Yet Your Word declares that they are the work of Your hands. You have said that they are wonderfully made. I pray that they will choose Your truth over their feelings. I pray that they will choose to believe You treasure them.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
  45. AB Laura says:

    Ocean,
    Yes, it helped, but it's quite a stereotypical stretch, don't you think?

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
  46. Melinda Dillon says:

    Ab Laura,

    So, you would like to see contraception available to all those who would like it and the ability for any woman to choose to abort unwanted pregnancies? Cool.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
  47. Vita says:

    Why would any moral human being want this in their community or anywhere on Gods earth?

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
  48. Dan the Methodist says:

    Here is the editorial I sent to some local papers after the failed ZBA of Aurora rendered themselves impotant, which I am praying all of Melinda's partners have done so she doesn't have to deal with the aftermath.

    By the way it is comming up on the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and 50,000,000 Killed Lives.

    The City of Mights!
    An effective way to describe Aurora, IL.
    The City's future generation both living and unborn, what they might have been?
    What our young adults and children might have learned about responsibility, instead they will be allowed to file for sexual bankruptcy as many times as they feel with the ease of Abortion in Aurora?
    What Aurora's City institutional infrastructure might have been if those entrusted with writing and enforcing Zoning Permits and Occupancies would stand up and follow the Ordinances of the City of Aurora?
    If The Aurora Zoning Board of Appeals had the cahones to buck up to the pressure and function as they were designed, we might be optimistic about government at the local level?
    What if we banded together of Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Methodists, Lutherans, Baptists, etc, etc, to stand up for what is right according to our teachings with respect for life. In a world where we all have to be different for marketing and obedience, what might the world be like? Might the City of Mights again be the City of Lights?

    Freedom without responsiblity is Chaos

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
  49. AB Laura says:

    Melinda,
    No, and not cool.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
  50. NewAurora says:

    Ocean, we are all slave to sin. It is only through Jesus Christ, the true God and true Man, that we may come to know the Father because He is our Savior and frees us from that sin. He died on the cross to pay for ALL of our sins and suffered through hell to save us all from ever having to know that. Yes He did it for even you Ocean, and even you Melinda.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
  51. Paul2 says:

    Melinda, Ocean,
    We are only adding to our numbers and our commitment to end the slaughter yis only getting stronger. But thanks for showing your true colors, a lot of PC'ers on this blog may turn against. Unlike you, most don't enjoy basking in the blood and screams of the women and children maimed in the name of "choice". Your days are numbered. It seems to me that the Supreme Court recently overturned your right to deliver babies to their chest and puncture their skulls and suck their brains out. You'll have to deliver them for one another at home and do it for each other to get that kind of rush again.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
  52. Bob D. says:

    It is obviusly the devil trying to mock us. It is easy to regognize. It will mock our prayers, it will try to seep anger and disent, it will try to discourage us in out fight on God's side. It is the temptor, the liar, rejoices at our failures as Christians. It wants more babies sacrificed. We need to pray for PP followers, because is not PP they actually following.

    Our faith is strenghtened and we have more reason to pray harder. More than ever! It is prime time to replace anger with joy, turn dissapointment into hope, submit our will to God's will for the glory of Jesus Christ. By the Grace of God, In Jesus We Trust forever!

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
  53. David G says:

    Watching this process closely, I originally thought Planned Parenthood intentionally deceived officials of the City of Aurora and their constituents. We were all victims of a very clever deception by a lying, deceiving corporation willing to do anything to achieve their evil goals.

    It is NOW VERY CLEAR to me that only the residents of our City were the victims of this obvious deception originated by Planned Parenthood and sustained by our City Officials.

    They cannot have it both ways. Our elected officials and those they manage either knew Gemini was a deception and they conciously supported it; or they didn't know and therefore are incompetent.

    Based upon continued actions by the City, it is certainly obvious to me they knew of the deception and collaborated with PP to deceive the public they serve. If they did NOT know, the City would not defend PP as they are. The City would NOT object to opening the entire process for review. If the City has managed this affair by the rule of law there should be nothing to hide and nothing to fear. But our City officials hide and are fearful.They fight an open review. They will deny us an open review of the process because THEY agreed to participate with PP in the deception of the residents of Aurora and they don't want us to find out. There can be no other explaination.

    Either way, in addition to fighting this issue in the courts, we MUST as citizens work to remove every elected official in our city who allowed this deception to take place and those who continue to defend it.

    These people work for US. They denied us our voice. We were NOT permitted to be heard before PP came to our city and we have been deceived by PP AND our elected officials. They MUST hear us at the next election and all the elections that follow until everyone of them are FIRED!

    As we show our strength on the street, as we show our strength in our prayers, as we show our strength in the courts of law, we must also show our strength in the ballot box.

    I have called my alderman to assure him I will be working very hard to insure this is his last term if this deception of the public is allowed to stand. I have also emailed and called the Mayor with the same message. Perhaps it would help if many more of us did the same. As far as I am concerned, if this deception is allowed to survive, they are ALL guilty in this fraud imposed upon the public, or incompetent for not knowing, not doing enough to stop it, and worse allowing it to maintain. FIRE every one of them. WE have that power!!!

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
  54. Paul2 says:

    Vita,
    Thanks for the post. I agree with you and I am looking for ways I can keep my tax dollars from supporting these killers. It really troubles me.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
  55. Charles says:

    What is absolutely clear to me by these rulings is that the ZBA (in their capacity as Aurora residents – and contracted members) have chosen to punt. In their first ruling, they chose to agree with the motion to dismiss. And by itself, this ruling means that they agree that the zoning decision was only made in 2006. Ok, now comes the motion to transfer to Building Code. This means the building code board of appeals will hear the arguments regarding the number of parking spaces, setbacks etc. No rather than honoring this request – which seems like the right thing to do (and the pro-life attorneys would probably agree to) they chose to deny this request. Why? Simple, with all the heat coming down on these members (who are paid $10 per meeting – the same as the building code board of appeals members) and the large amount of paperwork before them (some 1,700 pages worth) they would rather have the state court sift all this out. (At a huge cost to the pro-lifers and the citizens of Aurora) So in one quick ruling, they chose to keep the heat off the Aurora officials and make a state court decide the matters. They punted. And it’s disgraceful to be an Aurora resident and see this happen in our own community. I look forward to reading the minutes (if there are any minutes of their executive session.)

    In the end, I can’t believe they even took this matter seriously.

    Oh well, it’s off to state court.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
  56. LB says:

    David G —

    Hear, hear on your post. I'm very keen on getting these fools out of office. Payback, as they say, is a b**ch.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
  57. Melinda Dillon says:

    Yo, Pauly, abortion AIN'T A-GOIN' ANYWHERE. Oh, and since there is no god there is no devil. I am responsible for my actions as you are responsible for yours.

    My siggy from another board reads like this:
    Religion teaches the dangerous nonsense that death is not the end.
    If you people would realize that this is it and you are not "going on" to somewhere else for some kind of reward, this world would be a better place.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
  58. Evelyn says:

    David G…..Well spoken and I agree with you wholeheartedly.

    January 7th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
  59. Ocean says:

    From: NewAurora
    Ocean, we are all slave to sin. It is only through Jesus Christ, the true God and true Man, that we may come to know the Father because He is our Savior and frees us from that sin. He died on the cross to pay for ALL of our sins and suffered through hell to save us all from ever having to know that. Yes He did it for even you Ocean, and even you Melinda.
    *************

    Regarding your "we are all slave to sin" fundie slogan, speak for YOURSELF, please. Sin is nothing more than a religious concept, which I am delighted to be free from. I kicked the spiritual maximum-security prison environment of gods, religions and churches out my door over two decades ago, and have been much happier ever since.

    As a young single woman in my twenties in NYC, I visited Planned Parenthood not just once, but several times over the years I lived there. They provided all the answers to my health and reproduction questions, and BC when I needed it. Thank goodness there were no fundie protesters back then to harass and intimidate women from using their excellent services.

    "Christian" religionists just don't like PP because they offer freedom in the ways of sexual and reproductive choice, like NOT getting stuck with unwanted pregnancies because some of us chose to enjoy sex. Fine, they don't have to patronize PP, it's your right not to. But you don't have the right to try and ban everyone else from using their services if we choose to do so. A fact which the ZBA just reminded you of when they voted against you. Victory is sweet.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:05 am
  60. Dan the Methodist says:

    Melinda, what is the point of your life?
    Do you not need a point?
    Drugs, Sex, and Rock and Roll? Good time plastic bannana fun?
    Where do you draw your values from.
    Who do you answer to?
    Are you a Femanist?
    Believe men are the root of all Evil….Wait there is no Evil for you…Ummm root of all bad?
    From where do you draw strength?
    You sound young, how old are you?
    I believe that passion is a good thing, I would just like to find out more about you. Express my opinions and take yours in, but this jabbing isn't doing any of us good. So if you don't want to open up…..I suggest everyone ignore Melinda and her pal Ocean.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:05 am
  61. Dan the Methodist says:

    Hey Ocean, do believe that we should all have the right to claim bankruptcy as many times at any time we want?

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:09 am
  62. Melinda Dillon says:

    Yo, Dan,

    We are born, we live and we die. While we are alive, IMCHO, we should live by the mores of the particular society in which we live and not try to force that template onto any other societies. I draw strength from myself and my family. I am a forty-three year old soccer mom in the burbs of Chicago. I have two great kids and a loving husband. I drive a mini-van, I have a dog, two fish and a canary. I am a law abiding, tax paying voter. I am a bleeding heart liberal feminist. I don't drink or do drugs or smoke. I can't drink coffee because it give me a headache. I cannot stand it when seemingly intelligent nice people get suckered into religion. But, I don't try to change their minds. I just wish they would actually use some critical thinking and actually read the Bible and see that is really is a bunch of hooey written by bronze-age men with no scientific method so they made up some great stories to try and get folks to go along with their rules.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:19 am
  63. David G says:

    Oh … and by the way, it is very important to remember these issues in the upcoming national election. What candidate will you support?

    Ask the candidate or learn of their position on Roe vs. Wade. What kind of judges will they bring to our Supreme Court? Will the candidate work to deny Planned Parenthood Federal funding if elected?

    Please, please, please VOTE!!! Do you think Obama, Durbin, Blagojevich, Weisner and many other elected officials represent US??? THEY NEED TO GO AND WE MUST MAKE THAT HAPPEN WITH OUR BALLOTS!!!!!


    If Planned Parenthood is profitable, why do they receive Federal Funding?

    Why does "freedom to choose" not include freedom to pay?

    It is NOT MY "choice" for anyone to have an abortion so why do I have to pay for it with MY tax dollars?

    If abortion was less affordable to individuals, I believe more babies (and mothers) will be saved.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:23 am
  64. Melinda Dillon says:

    If abortion was less affordable to individuals, I believe more babies (and mothers) will be saved.

    You would be wrong.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:24 am
  65. Ocean says:

    Dan the Methodist says:
    Hey Ocean, do you believe that we should all have the right to claim bankruptcy as many times at any time we want?

    *************

    Last time I checked, freedom isn't even close to bankruptcy, except to "christian" religionists who obviously despise freedom, especially in sexual and reproductive choices. Personally, I think it's morally bankrupt to decide for everyone else that enjoyable sex "must" lead to unwanted pregnancy, birth and motherhood, but that's just me.

    Thanks to PP and the services it provides, women are able to obtain contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancy, which is preferable to abortion, and other health services. Including the possibility of abortion, if the contraception fails. Those who think contraception and abortion are wrong aren't forced to use either option.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:26 am
  66. LB says:

    Melinda –

    If your life is so swell and you don't want to change anyone's opinions, why are you posting on this site? It's obvious you have some sort of axe to grind, what do you care what other people belief in?

    As a feminist who supports abortion, what do you think about the fate of unborn females in China? That's great isn't it, the right to abort is really encouraged there, specifically for females. Also that is the kind of society you desire, a nice atheist one. Of course that is miles away from your lovely life here —- not affecting you at all I'm sure.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:27 am
  67. Dan the Methodist says:

    What college did you go to?
    I can see that you have set your course and don't want to change.
    Is it just a golden rule enviornment in your home?
    I don't drink coffee either, it doesn't work as well when you need that extra kick.
    I have to admit, I am kind of cheap also.
    Do you see human kind as a "virus" on the planet?
    Do you look for guidence from TV, Government, Newspaper, books or radio?
    I am bouncing around a lot…Sorry
    I have an Athiest brother-in-law who gives me the dinasaur question everytime I see him.
    I cannot prove my faith to you in a way that would effect you, but there is a feeling that I have been blessed to experience when I pray. The only way I can explain it is… I am probably boring you, if not reply to above questions, Please.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:32 am
  68. Dan the Methodist says:

    Did anyone else notice that the Aurora Committee of the Whole cancelled the Tuesday, January, 8 meeting on Friday?????
    Coincidence?? or Strategic???

    The next scheduled Meeting or the Comittee of the Whole of Aurora, IL is January 15th

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:40 am
  69. Vita says:

    My grandchildren are at an age where they are just now understanding what abortion means, and what it does to an unborn baby.

    They were both appalled and frightened at the thought of a mother allowing the child growing inside of her to be taken out, and that life terminated.

    My daughter didnt go into details of what actually happens during an abortion, but felt obligated to partially explain why they no longer shop at Dominicks and to explain what is happening in the building next door.
    They asked over and over again, why would a mommy do that? Why does a Dr. let her do that? It was a very sad, very difficult time for all of us.

    As long as I live I will never forget the look in their eyes. It brought back painful memories of when I had to explain to my own children what abortion meant.

    My question is to all those parents who advocate abortion.
    How do you look your own flesh and blood in the eyes and explain to them that it is just fine to end the life of an unborn baby because every woman has the right to do so?

    When I was a child, and if my parents had approached me with such information, I would have been terrified to know that they felt it was o.k. to kill an unborn baby.

    These are truly terrible times for Aurora and the entire country.

    May God have mercy on all of us.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:41 am
  70. Melinda Dillon says:

    What college did you go to? University of South Florida

    I can see that you have set your course and don't want to change. Nope. Very happy with my family and my little free thinkers.

    Is it just a golden rule enviornment in your home?
    Yep. And no painting on the carpet.

    I don't drink coffee either, it doesn't work as well when you need that extra kick. I don't need an extra kick. I just get plenty of sleep and exercise.

    I have to admit, I am kind of cheap also.
    I'm not.

    Do you see human kind as a "virus" on the planet?
    Nope.
    Do you look for guidence from TV, Government, Newspaper, books or radio?
    Nope. If I need an opinion, I ask trusted family and friends.

    I am bouncing around a lot…Sorry
    It's okay.

    I have an Athiest brother-in-law who gives me the dinasaur question everytime I see him.

    I cannot prove my faith to you in a way that would effect you, but there is a feeling that I have been blessed to experience when I pray. The only way I can explain it is… I am probably boring you, if not reply to above questions, Please.

    Honey, I got that same warm feeling when I prayed and went to church. It was like a warm embrace. You make yourself feel that way not some outside source. People of other faiths get that same feeling from their religion. They are all doing it themselves.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:41 am
  71. Melinda Dillon says:

    My question is to all those parents who advocate abortion.
    How do you look your own flesh and blood in the eyes and explain to them that it is just fine to end the life of an unborn baby because every woman has the right to do so?

    I tell them that when a woman has an embryo growing in her body, she can have it removedeffectively killing it. And, if she wants to later, allow another embryo to grow into a born baby. They are fine with that.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:44 am
  72. NewAurora says:

    Seriously Ocean, you need a reality check, however it seems like it won't be coming from me.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:44 am
  73. LB says:

    I tell them that when a woman has an embryo growing in her body, she can have it removedeffectively killing it. And, if she wants to later, allow another embryo to grow into a born baby. They are fine with that.
    ____________________________________________________

    So you are telling them that if you had had a bad day you would have terminated them — after all those kids of yours aren't anything special. They are eminently replaceable as you said. Pretty darn cold.
    I wonder what they will think about you if your life ever become inconvenient for them — after all they could just replace you with another old woman….

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:48 am
  74. Melinda Dillon says:

    LB says: Melinda –
    If your life is so swell and you don't want to change anyone's opinions, why are you posting on this site? It's obvious you have some sort of axe to grind, what do you care what other people belief in?
    As a feminist who supports abortion, what do you think about the fate of unborn females in China? That's great isn't it, the right to abort is really encouraged there, specifically for females. Also that is the kind of society you desire, a nice atheist one. Of course that is miles away from your lovely life here —- not affecting you at all I'm sure.
    )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

    Well, LB, it's like this. Woman are not allowed to choose abortion in China, it is forced on them. I am against forced gestation and forced abortion. I am all for any woman choosing to abort or gestate no matter her financial ability, if she has ten other kids or her age. It's all up to her.

    I am posting on this site because I was happy for Planned Parenthood's victory and want to see what the fundies were whinning about. No real axe to grind. Just killing time until Perez posts more about Brit Brit.

    The country of China is officially atheist but the people are not.

    My life here is lovey, thanks.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:49 am
  75. Dan the Methodist says:

    In response to the Tax Dollars issue.
    In my opinion, Planned Parenthood is an Abortion Clinic 1st and foremost. The do however provide other sevices, which are objectionable to me, because there is no parental consent involved in contraception. If you need a condom, go to any store and buy it over the counter.
    Back to the issue, I believe those tax dollars are "supposed" to be for the education and contraception pieces.
    I know, it gets filtered throughout and gives their lobbying more gunpowder.
    It is a nasty conveluted business structure to scam taxes and get tax dollars. Until someone says it is illegal, it must be legal???

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:50 am
  76. Melinda Dillon says:

    Danster,

    Crisis Pregnancy Centers get tax dollars too. They have been proven to lie to girls about abortion. Your tax dollars are going towards supporting lieing to scared young girls who need the facts and the truth. Not a bunch of BS cooked up by some right to lifer.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:53 am
  77. LB says:

    Melinda–

    I'm not a 'fundie' as you say. I actually a feminist single mother who values life. I've made my way in this world and am proudly bring up a young lady who also values life. She is irreplacable, I guess, unlike your kids.

    On the Aurora Clinic, I think its a bit early to gloat.

    Nice that you are gloating about Brittany too, reveling in other's misfortunes — Lovely.

    – Good night all — even you, Melinda.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:57 am
  78. Dan the Methodist says:

    Melinda, I don't think you aren't a bad person at all.
    Do you think that abortion has been overused???
    Do you think it has been left far too ambiguous?
    What do you think of parental consent?
    How young should our children be exposed to sex education?
    I am not asking to piss you off. These are real questions. Questions I ask myself. I want to have a dialouge with you and others like you.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:58 am
  79. Melinda Dillon says:

    Yo, LB,

    My kids were planned for an wanted. They are irreplacea ble, too. The Aurora Clinic is here to stay. I am sure you guys are very sincere, but you are really wasting your time and energy. But, if it makes you happy, keep on.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:58 am
  80. Dan the Methodist says:

    I will keep going with you Melinda!!!
    I do however have to stand 15 feet away from my house to have a nasty cigarette.
    BRB

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:02 am
  81. Melinda Dillon says:

    Dan the Methodist says: Melinda, I don't think you aren't a bad person at all.
    Right back at ya, Babe.

    Do you think that abortion has been overused???
    Nope. I think any woman has the right to terminate any unwanted pregnancy for any reason.

    Do you think it has been left far too ambiguous?
    No, it's pretty black and white. Either you support women's rights to control their own bodies and the contents therein or you feel others have the right to dictact what happens to her body.

    What do you think of parental consent?
    I don't support it. There should be no barrier to any woman not matter what her age, to getting an abortion.

    How young should our children be exposed to sex education?
    As soon as possilbe in age approprate intervals.

    I am not asking to piss you off. These are real questions. Questions I ask myself. I want to have a dialouge with you and others like you.
    You got it.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:03 am
  82. Melinda Dillon says:

    Dan,

    Don't smoke. Not only does it kill you it also makes you smell bad.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:04 am
  83. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    Please tell us more about yourself. What do you think of Parental Notification laws? It would make my blood boil if PP ever maimed my daughter that way and I was not ever even notified it was going on. Would it bother you if PP maimed one your beautiful soccer playing minor children? Or is your idea of parenting to let thems make their own decisions? One day even your children will likely see you in light of the selfishness that drives the daily choices. May your children find guidance and example of a caring mother in their relationship with their grandmother.

    Question: Could it be that your mother was a pro-life, caring Christian and you are rebelling against her?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:11 am
  84. Dan the Methodist says:

    Yeah, I know.
    Pro-lifers are not perfect people either.
    If your daughter needed sergery, wouldn't you expect to be notified or at least get a call?
    Maybe find out about it in her medical records??
    Hope that the facility is inspected to the same standard as other out patient sergery offices are?
    We are talking about under 18 now.
    What if Godforbid she was abused by a relative and you weren't told about it. The abortion clinic knew it and didn't do anything to alert you or athorities.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:13 am
  85. laura says:

    Concerned says,
    I too want everyone in office to be removed for not fighting for the citizens of Aurora's rights. Does anyone else feel, like me, that everyone on the city council from the Mayor on down absolutely knew what was going on and was probably paid handsomely for their
    silence, otherwise why would they risk their positions in office for something they had to have known was going to stir up such bad publicity, anger, and make themselves and the city of Aurora look like such an unfavorable, deceitful place to live. And for that poor soul Melinda Dillon who herself keeps referring to abortions as the killing of babies, that's an such an admission of guilt. If you let them continue to grow in the womb they become babies. How could anything be simpler to understand than that. Whether you believe in God or not, that is the killing of a person. Don't we have people serving time in jail for the same thing?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:15 am
  86. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    What type of person is your mother? Did she raise you to be pro-life. I think you are the way you are because you are rebelling against your mother and the way you perceived the things she did to you. Have you seen a psychologist about it?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:16 am
  87. Paul2 says:

    Dan,
    The spirit is moving us both to the same ideas. I was posting about parental notification the same time you were. I think her problems stem from anger and rebellion against her mother. I am guessing her mother was a pro-life Christian. I have seen it before.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:19 am
  88. Melinda Dillon says:

    Dan the Methodist says: Yeah, I know.
    Pro-lifers are not perfect people either.

    If your daughter needed sergery, wouldn't you expect to be notified or at least get a call?

    No. Abortion is different than a surgery she needed to save her life. There is a lot more personal baggage for her in an abortion than if she needed her appendix out. I want her to be able to get an abortion if she wanted one without having to jump through hoops.

    Maybe find out about it in her medical records??
    I don't need to find out. If she did have one and didn't tell me about it, I would be hurt because she didn't allow me to drive her there and hold her hand and then take care of her afterward. But, I would be glad she was able to get it done.

    Hope that the facility is inspected to the same standard as other out patient sergery offices are? Well, here in Illinois, they are.

    We are talking about under 18 now. Yes.

    What if Godforbid she was abused by a relative and you weren't told about it. The abortion clinic knew it and didn't do anything to alert you or athorities.
    That would be the price we would pay in order to assure she didn't die.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:19 am
  89. Melinda Dillon says:

    Paul2 says: Melinda,
    What type of person is your mother? Did she raise you to be pro-life. I think you are the way you are because you are rebelling against your mother and the way you perceived the things she did to you. Have you seen a psychologist about it?
    ——————————–

    Paul, my parents are agnostics and raised us sans religion. She is a lovely woman who is pro choice.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:21 am
  90. Dan the Methodist says:

    Melinda,
    I suggest you ignore comments about your mother and other assertions. You have been open and honest with us and I appreceate that. You do have an ax to grind with religion and your perception of rightiousness and I would like to avoid that type of exchange, because the exchange becomes sniping.
    We get no closer to positive change, by doing that we simply repel further apart.
    Aren't there things we can agree on?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:24 am
  91. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    Did you mother discuss abortion with you as a child? Did she ever have any abortions? Are you an only child?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:25 am
  92. Paul2 says:

    Dan the Methodist,
    I beg to differ. Knowing where a person comes from defintely helps us understand who they are now. And if a person is pro-abort and proud of it, then they would have no problem speaking openly about their abortive experiences.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:29 am
  93. Melinda Dillon says:

    Paul2 says: Melinda,
    What type of person is your mother? Did she raise you to be pro-life. I think you are the way you are because you are rebelling against your mother and the way you perceived the things she did to you. Have you seen a psychologist about it?

    Danster, I am sure you are a lovely man and we would probably get along famously. I still have many friends from my Xian days and several of my most beloved relatives are PL. However, on abortion, there is either for or against. I am wholly for. I am for it as a form of birth control for those famous "lazy women" we all hear about. I am for abortion in the case of forgotten BC or misused BC. I am for abortion if the woman just doesn't want to be pregnant. I am for abortion in the case of rape. I am for abortion in the case of fetal deformity.

    I don't have any degrees of acceptance like in the case of rape or incest. I think PLers who would allow abortion in the case of rape or incest are horrible. One one hand, they say that a fetus is a baby and deserving of full protection under the law but then turn around and say women should be allowed to kill those babies if they were conceived from rape or incest. That's like saying it's a-okay to slit your three-year-old's throat if you have a good enough reason.

    It's either a human being from coneption or it's not.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:31 am
  94. Melinda Dillon says:

    Paul2 says: Melinda,
    Did you mother discuss abortion with you as a child? Did she ever have any abortions? Are you an only child?

    Paul, no she did not. No, she had three miscarrages that I found out about much later in life. I have four sisters.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:33 am
  95. Melinda Dillon says:

    Oh, and I have never had an abortion and I lost my virginity at 29. Anything else, Pauly?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:33 am
  96. Dan the Methodist says:

    I think she has been very honest.
    I was only interested with keeping the conversation substinative and open, opposed to snipy and defensive.
    Some who come on here deserve it, I just thought she didn't. No hard feelings

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:35 am
  97. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    Dan asked you "What if Godforbid she was abused by a relative and you weren't told about it. The abortion clinic knew it and didn't do anything to alert you or athorities."
    And you responded "That would be the price we would pay in order to assure she didn't die."

    There are no guarantees she wouldn't die and her chances of survival would likely be better if you had a chance to research in advance and find a doctor without prior malpractice suits against them. I think you are in denial.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:36 am
  98. Dan the Methodist says:

    I am intrigued!!
    Impressed!!!
    And confused???

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:37 am
  99. Dan the Methodist says:

    Do you believe in LOVE?
    What advice would you give your young daughter or young teens as a whole when it comes to sex?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:39 am
  100. Paul2 says:

    None taken Dan the Methodist,
    You ask very poignant questions and I enjoy your posts. Don't be afraid to say anything to me that is on your mind. I love the way you think and I appreciate your telling me if you think I am out-f-line

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:39 am
  101. Cathy says:

    Melinda,

    I'm glad you're having a wonderful, cozy life; I'm glad you can live with the thought that 50,000,000 babies (that's 50 MILLION! – I don't know how anyone can wrap their mind around that number and not shudder) have been prevented from living in the last 35 years because of legalized abortion on demand. I'm glad that you can look your children in the eyes and not feel guilty about the abortion lies you believe. If it helps you sleep at night, more power to you. I hope that someday, if one of your "little free thinkers" comes to you and tells you that she (if you have a daughter), or his girlfriend (if you have a son) had an abortion that you still feel so very comfortable with the beliefs you have now.

    As much as I love my daughter (and still would), I hope she never has an abortion, because every time I looked into her eyes I know I would see the face of her unborn child looking back at me and I would mourn – both for the child, and for my daughter. My mother had a miscarriage when I was four years old (almost 50 years ago), and our family still mourns the loss of that little brother, or sister – even though there were other brothers born who should have "replaced" him or her.

    Do you not see the irony in a legal system that says it's ok to kill your unborn baby if you don't want it, but if I kill a wanted baby still in the mother's womb in an accident, or a shooting, etc. it's murder? Do you not see the irony in a Breast Cancer awareness fund (Susan Komen) that donates $500,000 a year to Planned Parenthood (the single largest provider of abortions), when scientific studies have shown that there is a direct link between abortion and an increased risk of getting breast cancer? Do you not see that since artificial contraception and abortion have been made legal that respect for existing life has spiraled downwards – to the point, that as a woman entering the "golden years" I worry that I may be killed if I get too old or sick to be "useful" or if someone considers me a "burden"? Do you not understand that life in ALL its stages is a precious, glorious miracle that deserves to be protected at all costs?

    I'm guessing that none of that matters to you, or you couldn't express the views you have expressed here tonight. But, as posted earlier – you WILL be prayed for, and I hope someday you will look back at this time in your life with regret that you ever espoused these beliefs, and relief that you espouse them no more.

    God Bless You and Keep You, May His Face Shine Upon You, and may He always hold you in the palm of His Hand.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:39 am
  102. Melinda Dillon says:

    You guys can ask me anything and I will tell the truth. I was an advertising executive for fifteen years before I had my first child. When we moved to Illinois, we decided that I would be a stay at home mother. I have a daughter and a son who are the loves of my life. I married the second man I had sex with and we are going on ten years married. I like going to the theater, films, and museums with my family. I like Dr. Who and Torchwood and pretty much anything on BBC America. I never lose at Trivial Pursuit and I had my forty third birthday on December 29th. Now, I don't know my blood type but as soon as I get that info, I will post it for you, Pauly.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:39 am
  103. Paul2 says:

    My advice is simple and old fashioned
    1) abstinence
    2) Your body is a temple of the Lord and sex is something to be saved for your husband.
    3) Guys just want to get into your pants.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:45 am
  104. Melinda Dillon says:

    Melinda,
    I'm glad you're having a wonderful, cozy life; I'm glad you can live with the thought that 50,000,000 babies (that's 50 MILLION! – I don't know how anyone can wrap their mind around that number and not shudder) have been prevented from living in the last 35 years because of legalized abortion on demand.

    Thanks. I am very happy that 40 million women availed themselves of safe and legal abortions.

    I'm glad that you can look your children in the eyes and not feel guilty about the abortion lies you believe.
    Okay, parse that one for me and get back to me.

    If it helps you sleep at night, more power to you. I hope that someday, if one of your "little free thinkers" comes to you and tells you that she (if you have a daughter), or his girlfriend (if you have a son) had an abortion that you still feel so very comfortable with the beliefs you have now.

    I will be sorry they didn't allow me to make the appointment for them, pay for it and then feed them soup and crackers afterwards.

    As much as I love my daughter (and still would), I hope she never has an abortion, because every time I looked into her eyes I know I would see the face of her unborn child looking back at me and I would mourn – both for the child, and for my daughter.

    I would be happy I still had my daughter, alive and able to see her beautiful face instead of visiting her grave.

    My mother had a miscarriage when I was four years old (almost 50 years ago), and our family still mourns the loss of that little brother, or sister – even though there were other brothers born who should have "replaced" him or her.

    As you should, that was a wanted pregnancy.

    Do you not see the irony in a legal system that says it's ok to kill your unborn baby if you don't want it, but if I kill a wanted baby still in the mother's womb in an accident, or a shooting, etc. it's murder?

    No irony. Wanted pregnancies are protected by law.

    Do you not see the irony in a Breast Cancer awareness fund (Susan Komen) that donates $500,000 a year to Planned Parenthood (the single largest provider of abortions), when scientific studies have shown that there is a direct link between abortion and an increased risk of getting breast cancer?

    Honey, that was disprovedn several years ago.

    Do you not see that since artificial contraception and abortion have been made legal that respect for existing life has spiraled downwards – to the point, that as a woman entering the "golden years" I worry that I may be killed if I get too old or sick to be "useful" or if someone considers me a "burden"?

    Babe, you've seen Soylent Green and Logan's Run too many times.

    Do you not understand that life in ALL its stages is a precious, glorious miracle that deserves to be protected at all costs?

    No, it's not and neither to you.

    I'm guessing that none of that matters to you, or you couldn't express the views you have expressed here tonight. But, as posted earlier – you WILL be prayed for, and I hope someday you will look back at this time in your life with regret that you ever espoused these beliefs, and relief that you espouse them no more.

    Nope. I am very happy with my views. I have no problems with them.

    God Bless You and Keep You, May His Face Shine Upon You, and may He always hold you in the palm of His Hand.

    And may the Flying Spaghgetti Monster touch you with his noodely appendage.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:45 am
  105. Dan the Methodist says:

    Thanks, Paul DITO

    Melinda,
    You obviously chose not to partake in the sexual revelution, Why?
    You seem driven, confident, and grounded in YOUR morals. To me that is attractive. You must have had to abstain somewhat.
    I don't think abortion will ever end. However, the complete embrace of it has denigrated the way women are appreceated, the respect and responsibility our children show parents and each other, in my opinion.
    How do we turn this around?
    So our kids respect each other and show some restrain or responsibility for reproduction. Abortion should not be birth control, in my opinion.
    What is your opinoin?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:50 am
  106. Dan the Methodist says:

    What a typer too!

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:50 am
  107. Melinda Dillon says:

    Paul2 says: My advice is simple and old fashioned
    1) abstinence
    2) Your body is a temple of the Lord and sex is something to be saved for your husband.
    3) Guys just want to get into your pants.
    ————————————

    Teaching abstience doesn't work. See: http://www.siecus.org/media/press/press0141.html

    Your body belongs to you and no one else. Sex is wonderful and as long as you are emotionally ready, enjoy it, but enjoy it safely.

    Your third point is an insult to men.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:51 am
  108. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    Abstnence worked for you. Is that what you teach your
    children?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:53 am
  109. Paul2 says:

    Melinda, I don't get it?????
    You lost your virginity at 29 and you say abstinence doesn't work. What gives? Are you for real?

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:55 am
  110. Dan the Methodist says:

    I can tell you from a man's point of view.
    IT'S TRUE!!!!
    We think about it WAY TOO MUCH!!!
    God forgive me!

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:55 am
  111. Melinda Dillon says:

    Dan the Methodist says: Thanks, Paul DITO
    Melinda,
    You obviously chose not to partake in the sexual revelution, Why?
    You seem driven, confident, and grounded in YOUR morals. To me that is attractive. You must have had to abstain somewhat.
    I don't think abortion will ever end.

    It will not.

    However, the complete embrace of it has denigrated the way women are appreceated, the respect and responsibility our children show parents and each other, in my opinion.

    You are entitled to your opinion.

    How do we turn this around?

    Why? It's only your opinion. It is not supported by fact.

    So our kids respect each other and show some restrain or responsibility for reproduction. How about comprehensive education starting at as early age as possible. Look at Sweden, they have low teen pregnancy rates, low abortion rates and a very healthy standar of living. They start teaching their children about sex at a very young age in school.

    Abortion should not be birth control, in my opinion.
    What is your opinoin?

    Abortion should be available to any woman for any reason she chooses.

    Gerri Santaro is the only dead woman who we have a picture of. I love my daughter with all my heart and the thought of finding her like Gerri Santaro was found makes my blood run cold. I will do everything to make sure she is educated on the subject and if she wanted an abortion, I will do everything to make sure she gets one. I would much rather have a living breathing daughter than a dead one.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:56 am
  112. Melinda Dillon says:

    Paul2 says: Melinda,
    Abstnence worked for you. Is that what you teach your
    children?
    January 8th, 2008 at 1:53 am Paul2 says: Melinda, I don't get it?????
    You lost your virginity at 29 and you say abstinence doesn't work. What gives? Are you for real?
    —————————————–

    I didn't actively not have sex. I would have LOVED to have lots and lots of sex but I was a fat nerd so I didn't get many offers. I lost the weight, had a couple of one night stands with a very lovely Palestinian man and then I met my husband and that was it for me.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:59 am
  113. Melinda Dillon says:

    I will teach my children that sex can be wonderful if you are emotionally ready for it and when they do become sexually active, I will make sure they have protection.

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:00 am
  114. Dan the Methodist says:

    It is very cold in Sweden. Ever hear of shrinkage???
    Ha Ha joke.

    Sweden….. I will steer clear of the Nobel Peace Prize… Socialism…. I am trying to think of something we agree on.

    How do you feel about adolf hitler?

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:02 am
  115. Melinda Dillon says:

    It's been real, guys, but I gotta get some sleep. I am sure you are all very nice and sincere people who are doing what you think is the right thing. I would say "good luck" but I wouldn't mean it. Instead, I will say, Nighty Night!!!

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:03 am
  116. Stephen says:

    Look people, this decision by the ZBA was nothing short of a formality. They basically passed the buck. No final answer was ever expected to be found here, but it was necessary to go through this channel because of the order of appeals. Even if the ZBA had voted in favor of life their ruling would have been appealed by the haters of life. So, next stop, County Circuit Court. No, the fight is not over, and no, The two W's in this city will not walk away unscathed. An important fact to keep in mind is that this board did not address one of the infringements of the zoning code. They only said they were not able to hear an appeal. Not a denial that infringements exist. That my friends equals an open door. Patience people, patience.

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:05 am
  117. Dan the Methodist says:

    Thanks for your unapologetic honesty.
    I accept your opinion, I just cannot make sense of it.

    Have a Happy New Year.

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:05 am
  118. Stephen says:

    Melinda Dillon, your insecurity is all too apparent. May God Bless you and keep you.

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:07 am
  119. Dan the Methodist says:

    Paul2,
    REALLY. I appreceated this post!!!
    I enjoy your thoughtful pieces as well.

    None taken Dan the Methodist,
    You ask very poignant questions and I enjoy your posts. Don't be afraid to say anything to me that is on your mind. I love the way you think and I appreciate your telling me if you think I am out-f-line

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:10 am
  120. Dan the Methodist says:

    REST, for we have more battles to wage!

    Night

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:11 am
  121. Mike says:

    The impact of Aurora's sleeping giant-Fox Valley Villages-will be felt at City Hall like never before. These Aurorans "in name only" are going to be a strong voting block that will not take being pushed around by City Hall bullies. They have no loyalty to old political hacks, they are smart and they have ignored local politics until now!! Planned Parenthood being shoved down their throats is a little wake up call.

    January 8th, 2008 at 2:18 am
  122. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    You say you love your daughter so much but don't care that some stranger could stick a forceps inside her and maim her or make her sterile or even worse kill her. There is something very disingenuine about being willing to abandon a dependent that you profess so much love/care for. In reality it is always better and safer for a minor to have a caring parent overseeing the quality of care she receives throughout such a traumatic and possibly life threatening procedure. Your willingness to abandon your daughter is likely an extension of the same mindset that makes you say abortion should be allowed wherever and whenever, even to the point of killing babies that could survive on their own outside the womb. You should meditate on your willlingness to abandon children in need and ask yourself how a caring mother can hide her head in the sand while babies get slaughtered? Even if it is somebody elses child.

    January 8th, 2008 at 3:02 am
  123. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    In Post 40 you said to Linda:
    ***************************
    5. "SOMEONE IN THE CHURCH MUST HAVE CAUSED YOU A GREAT DEAL OF HURT FOR YOU TO FEEL THIS WAY"

    You couldn't have possibly left Christianity just because you studied the Bible and you think you found inconsistencies and errors in it.
    **************************

    Tell me about the inconsistencies. Maybe I can clear them up for you.

    January 8th, 2008 at 3:38 am
  124. Paul2 says:

    Melinda,
    I have a hypothetical for you that could help me greatly in understanding your position.

    Lets say two adults have consentusl sex. The mother gets pregnant. The father wants the child abut the mother was not planning pregnancy at this time.
    Does the father have any rights. Does the fact that he wants the baby make the baby any more valuable in your eyes?

    January 8th, 2008 at 3:45 am
  125. Paul2 says:

    O my Jesus, you who once said, seek and you shall find, ask and you shall receive, knock and the door shall be opened to you. Behold, I knock, I seek and I ask, for the grace of your Father's Holy Spirit to come down upon His children here on earth. And to give us the strength to perservere through lifes trials.
    And that He may send his holy angels down to visit us always. To comfort us and to protect us. To drive satan and his deceitful murderous legions of disorder far from us, and to guide us into your Sacred Heart.

    Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy Name.
    Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses. As we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Amen For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory Now and forever.

    Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee.
    Blesed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners. Now and at the hour of our death. Amen

    Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the
    Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now, and will be forever. Amen

    O Sacred Heart of Jesus. I place all my trust in Thee.

    January 8th, 2008 at 4:25 am
  126. mk says:

    Melinda Dillon says:

    Nothing fails like prayer…and Families Against Planned Parenthood.

    AND BIRTH CONTROL.

    January 8th, 2008 at 6:50 am
  127. Ocean says:

    NewAurora says:
    Seriously Ocean, you need a reality check, however it seems like it won't be coming from me.
    ****************

    Oooooh, and what kind of "reality check" would that be, exactly? Sounds like you're just ticked that I can make my OWN rules for my life, within the bounds of civil laws of my city, state and country, that is. Well, too bad. Thanks to the first words of the First Amendment, I am free to reject the spiritual toxic waste dump of gods, religions and churches. I simply prefer freedom over slavery, and that freedom includes deciding for MYSELF when to have sex, under what circumstances to have it, and how many children I want. Works well enough for me, and that's all that counts.

    January 8th, 2008 at 8:11 am
  128. Ocean says:

    Paul2 says:
    My advice is simple and old fashioned
    1) abstinence
    2) Your body is a temple of the Lord and sex is something to be saved for your husband.
    3) Guys just want to get into your pants.
    ***********

    1. Abstinence-NO THANKS. I enjoy sex anytime I want, with reliable BC in place. No one gets to decide for me when sex is acceptable or not.

    2. What a revolting thought, and a perfect way to keep women SLAVES. Not a chance. Again, it is MY decision when and under what circumstances to have sex, not yours.

    3. Contrary to what men might BELIEVE, we aren't stupid. We're capable of deciding for ourselves what guys we want to have sex with.

    January 8th, 2008 at 8:18 am
  129. Ocean says:

    Mike says:
    The impact of Aurora's sleeping giant-Fox Valley Villages-will be felt at City Hall like never before. These Aurorans "in name only" are going to be a strong voting block that will not take being pushed around by City Hall bullies. They have no loyalty to old political hacks, they are smart and they have ignored local politics until now!! Planned Parenthood being shoved down their throats is a little wake up call.
    ********

    And WHO is forcing you to patronize PP if you don't wish to use their services? The answer is simple, NO ONE. So the assertion that PP is "being shoved down your throats" is just more nonsense, with no hard evidence to back it up.

    January 8th, 2008 at 8:29 am
  130. B. Matilda says:

    I don't care about abortion. Personally I just want to know the truth; and it appears the City does not want people to know the truth. That is the problem. I believe people have a right to know what is going in around them and to be able to voice their concerns. It is a shame that our government thinks so low of the residents that pay a large amount of taxes.

    January 8th, 2008 at 9:47 am
  131. Ramir San Diego says:

    Soooo…the pro-aborts won this round(with the help of city officials) and they come here to gloat?

    Well, the war goes on…Let's keep the faith folks!

    January 8th, 2008 at 9:53 am
  132. MargoCupps says:

    The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. I Cor. 1:18 Prayer: Jesus, we come to You with gratitude for the cross. Thank You, for loving us enough to endure its shame and pain. May we honor Your sacrifice. May we live to honor You.

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:54 am
  133. Jeff E says:

    Ramir San Diego,

    I don't think the pro-aborts "won" this round. Both sides expected this to go to state court, and now we've finally moved to that phase. Considering that the ZBA is an appointed board (at least that's my understanding), I'm surprised it took this long.

    Now the real case begins in a real court…

    Peace,
    Jeff

    January 8th, 2008 at 11:33 am
  134. Paul2 says:

    Ocean says:
    ************************************
    "And WHO is forcing you to patronize PP if you don't wish to use their services? The answer is simple, NO ONE. So the assertion that PP is "being shoved down your throats" is just more nonsense, with no hard evidence to back it up.
    January 8th, 2008 at 8:29 am "
    ************************************

    Here is you hard eveidence:
    PP lied and deceived their way into our town. PP petitions for "our" tax doolars and use "our" tax money to promote "their" culture death. They stomp on our rights as parents when they enable aborionists to maim our children and leave us no legal recourse to stop them. But we will not abandon our children. And we refuse to just turn the other way while enabling rapists escape justice and remiain free. All of the above are a lot more important to us then seeing to it that your rights to pursue sexual pleasure are protected. The fact that you force all of the above down our throats doesn't matter you. You are a completely self-centered person. With you everything and everybody is just a bug to be squashed. Your love for sex whenever you want is stronger then your love for other people whose lives you disregard and you crush along the way. Well I got news for you. Your ability to seek pleasure through unfettered sex really doesn't matter to us as much as keeping our children safe or keeping rapists off the streets. Does that really surprise you? You must really be wearing blinders.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
  135. Carla says:

    Keep up the good fight, Aurora!! God will prevail! Praying for all of you!!

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
  136. Ramir San Diego says:

    Thanks Jeff, for the clarification…with all the gloating I'm reading, it sounded like the pro-aborts already "won" something…

    AT least now, we can deal with (hopefully) level-headed officials.

    January 8th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
  137. Amy says:

    Thank you to all the PP supporters who engage in discussion. I can not agree with your points but it is only through dialog that we can try and understand each other. Please try not to mock.

    Thank you to all the pro-lifers who are willing to take the time to dialog with the PP supporters. For the most part you have all been very patient. Remember it is a virtue.

    For those of us who are believer the prayer below was given to us for the conversion of the world. I pray it often and I invite anyone who doesn't already to join me.

    God Bless you all

    Fatima Prayer

    " Oh my God I believe, I trust, I love and I adore You. I beg pardon for those who do not believe, do not trust, do not love and do not adore You."

    " Oh my God I believe, I trust, I love and I adore You. I beg pardon for those who do not believe, do not trust, do not love and do not adore You."

    " Oh my God I believe, I trust, I love and I adore You. I beg pardon for those who do not believe, do not trust, do not love and do not adore You."

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
  138. Ocean says:

    Paul2 says:
    You are a completely self-centered person. With you everything and everybody is just a bug to be squashed. Your love for sex whenever you want is stronger then your love for other people whose lives you disregard and you crush along the way. Well I got news for you. Your ability to seek pleasure through unfettered sex really doesn't matter to us as much as keeping our children safe or keeping rapists off the streets. Does that really surprise you? You must really be wearing blinders.
    *************

    In other words, you're just ticked at PP because it provides women with a way to enjoy sex WITHOUT the unwanted burdens of pregnancy and motherhood. Too bad. Not every woman wants children, and no woman should have to be forced to endure a pregnancy she doesn't want simply because "christian" religionists believe women should be punished for enjoying sex. You know, the whole "face consequences for their immoral actions" kind of thing.

    As far as I'M concerned, it is you and they who are truly the selfish ones, because you are demanding that YOUR beliefs be forced onto everyone else. Even the men and women who prefer choice in matters of sex and reproduction. As I said previously, no one is forcing you or anyone else to use PP's service, and you have no right to force anyone NOT to use them. That's probably what sticks in your throat most, your impotence to control the sexual and reproductive choices of others, particularly women. Too bad. The ZBA has spoken, and it was not in your favor, which is a very good thing for those who do value freedom and choice.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
  139. Student says:

    I'd like to apologize for some (not all) of the comments by the PC community that were posted last night. While I share some of their frustration, there is no excuse for some of the things that were said here. It's not fair to engage in some of the same behavior that we abhor in the other side. For that, as a part of the pro-choice community, I apologize.

    January 8th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
  140. Jane says:

    Abortion- Today's Holocaust

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woPX4oZM9hA

    January 8th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
  141. Jane says:

    Perhaps we're taking the wrong approach with words- let's try pictures?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdxWFr_UjqQ

    January 8th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
  142. Jane says:

    Yet another hopeful chance to change some hardened hearts………..with prayers,Jane

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12ObKBqj6O4&feature=related

    January 8th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
  143. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    Can you tell me which comments in particular you abhor offensive or are they too numerous to post?

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
  144. Bob D. says:

    WOW! This is a long blog. Interesting. It looks like a pro-abortion person can believe one thing and do a different thing, preach one thing and practice a totally different one. They want for others what they would not want for themselves or their children. If that is not hypocrisy I don't know what is.

    I agree, with or without God we are responsible for our actions, believers or not we are endowed with free will and can choose our beliefs and actions. But there is surely a consecuence for our choices. Some of them not immediate and too subtle to be grasped, but consecuences anyway. All in due time.

    It looks like God wants this pro-life battle to be longer. Is not coming easy, but this will make victory the most resounding and glorious when it happens, in God's way, "Thy Will be Done". And it surely is God's will because HUMAN LIFE IS SACRED. It is evident Hitler and Stalin did not shared this belief, neither the Hutus did during the Rwanda genocide and certainly don't the people who perform abortions, support abortions and have their own babies killed.

    I cannot infuse people with Faith, Hope and Grace. No one can in and by itself. Only God does that whenever we let Him. In due time.

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
  145. Cathy says:

    Melinda Dillon,

    You've been on my mind all day. You are obviously a very intelligent woman and feel very strongly about your PC views, and while I will never understand those views or accept them, I admire that you were willing to take the heat for what you believe. We PL's could learn a lesson from you on that. We all took our jabs at each other here last night, and we all took some heat for our views. I was reading through these posts trying to see where our common ground is, and I guess it is that we are passionate about our beliefs, whatever they are. We need to be less personal in our arguments though (and I AM most definitely talking about myself as well – probably more so than others; I can be a real snot when I can't get my point across the way I wish I could… it's definitely a character flaw). When we are able to keep our passions under control, and dialogue without being personal I can see that we CAN work towards some other common ground. My problem is that I want us to live in a perfect world, but we don't, and we won't in this life. I will keep working towards getting abortion banned in my piece of the world, and I know you will keep working to keep it in place, and nothing I say will probably make any difference to you adjusting your goal, and I know no persuasive argument in favor of abortion will ever make me believe that it is ever the "right thing to do."

    Melinda, I told you that I was adding you to my prayer list, and I did. I told you that I would include you in my intentions when I pray the Rosary each morning, and I have done that as well. You might sneer a bit, and think of a wise crack to make (or maybe just think it), and that's ok. And, maybe the only thing that will touch either one of us is the noodly appendage of the Spaghetti Monster (I actually thought that was kinda funny). But, if following through with what we believe helps us to get through the days, then that's what we must do, right?

    Take care, Melinda. Love your children with all your might (I can tell you do). I wish only good things for you and your family.

    Cathy

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
  146. Paul2 says:

    I reserve te right to be wrong but I don't "think" Melinda is a real person. Either that or she is really lost and insecure. Just a hunch but I think her whole personna was made up by a PP supporter. There are way too many guys out there who like big women for her to have been a virgin until she was 29 while claiming she would have loved to have lots of sex but couldn't cause she was fat….I find that really hard to believe, especially while claiming she does ot value abstinence

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
  147. Paul2 says:

    You never can be sure who is on the other end of a blog…….

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
  148. Sandy says:

    You may be right – I've been reading through the blog and while her comments may be real, the name kept ringing a bell, so I Googled her – Melinda Dillon is the name of the actress who played Darrin McGavin's wife in "A Christmas Story" ("you'll shoot your eye out"). Might just be a coincidence, but as you said – you never know who is on the other side of an Internet post.

    January 8th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
  149. Dan the Methodist says:

    I am thinking Paul 2 is right about posts on this site.
    I cannot believe that a woman in her 40's has been so sheltered that she doesn't have a conservative cell in her body. Yet she is a virgin?? Possible, yet hard to believe.

    to the comment below (Paul2 had a great response to it)

    "And WHO is forcing you to patronize PP if you don't wish to use their services? The answer is simple, NO ONE. So the assertion that PP is "being shoved down your throats" is just more nonsense, with no hard evidence to back it up.

    Pretend you don't live in a society which is being socialized?? It is OK to pretend you are pro business and pro freedom, but the truth is usually so very far from the that.

    Let us take a look at the new smoking ban in illinois. Why do we have to stop smoking in restaurants?? Cannot the people that work there make up thier own minds about the risks?? Why hasn't there been an ALgore Restaurant built that will not allow smoking, according to non-smokers it would be the most successful ever. Clearly you can see the similarity of the two analagies.
    The realization is that there are many sides and many levels of support for different objectives within our Pro Life Group, yet there is no give or dialouge from the Abort crowd. It is ALL ABORT, ALL THE TIME, FOR ANY REASON, WTHOUT PARENTAL CONSCENT and that is IT. I do not hear dialouge about medial records, about parental concent, about the regulation of such a sudo medical office, increased risk of breast cancer or the genicide of a race from the left. I feel it is an injustice that this matter was not legislated, but instead thrusted upon us by Roe v Wade and every blue bleeding Lib will stand to the death for this cash cow that has taken many of it's young voters lives.

    P.S. Beware of the PP minions who blog here. If they cannot be honest or they cannot seem to make any sense, IGNORE THEM. We are here to shape opinion and sharpen our own, to that end we are doing GREAT!

    January 9th, 2008 at 6:58 am
  150. Student says:

    Paul2,
    I think the comments from the PC side that are offensive speak for themselves, as do several that you have made here as well. IMHO, neither side has behaved particularly well (although I do believe there are a couple of people on the PL side who are sincere in wanting to speak with others and are capable of doing so without sniping — ex. Cathy).

    January 9th, 2008 at 8:40 am
  151. MargoCupps says:

    I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing, therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live. Deuteronomy 30:19 Prayer: We ask You, Father, to guard our choices. Guard our thoughts. Give us wisdom. Let us make choices that will bless the next generation.

    January 9th, 2008 at 10:57 am
  152. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    Some PC people come to PL sites insincere and there purpose is not to dialogue. They use phony personnas and their goal is to get caring people to open and then have their fun crushing them. I just like to call their bluff. I don't misrepresent myself and my posts are sincere.

    January 9th, 2008 at 11:37 am
  153. Student says:

    Paul2,
    I have no way of knowing whether or not you (or anyone else) misreprents themselves. I saw some bad behavior on the part of the PC community and, as a part of that community, I felt the decent thing to do would be to apologize for what "I" believed to be rudeness. I think that behavior gets nowhere.

    Your posts indicate to "me" that you are not sincere in your wish to dialogue. You use flash words which do nothing but anger those that disagree with you (and those flash words can and are used by both sides). They are not useful in a give and take discussion. Your posts indicate to "me" someone who is highly judgmental and looking for a fight. Questioning someone's sanity and whether or not they are a good parent because they do not agree with you is, IMHO, completely out of line. Normally I'd just ignore it and let it go, but you did ask.

    January 9th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
  154. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    I will agree that the comment about seeing a psychoanalyst was out of line. And I have no problem apologizing for that. I was thinking about another woman I know who is PC cause she resents her mother and I was trying to find out why there were so many inconsistencies in Melinda's dialogue. The rest I stand by. Asking the personal questions is how I find inconsistencies and call out the people who are not being genuine.

    January 9th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
  155. Paul2 says:

    PC'ers have a hard road to honestly and openly express the reasons they believe it is o.k to kill their babies (or fetuses if that makes it easier to swallow) and still contend they are a loving, caring person. Every blog I go to they all seem to do the same things. Bash religion (especially Christianity) and try to dehumanize the human life that is growing inside the womb and talk about it as being worthless. They ultimately resort to personal attacks cause they can't logically contend to be a loving, caring person and at the same time dehumanize the most dependent in our society.

    January 9th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
  156. Student says:

    Paul2,
    I have no problem with asking a personal question, however, I take issue with someone calling another a bad parent because they disagree with their particular stance on one issue. You simply have no way of knowing the parenting abilities of anyone else based on a blog entry.

    January 9th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
  157. Paul2 says:

    You are correct. And I was angry when I ran into
    those snipers last night. However I reserve the right to say that someone who kills a baby in the womb is likely a bad parent, at least to the one they abort. Wether they are a bad parent to older children I cannot judge unless they provide further personal information. If they say they are against parental notification then I would call that bad parenting of their adult children, and wether or not that opinion is correct would likely be determined through additional dialogue.

    January 9th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
  158. Paul2 says:

    adult children sounds like an oxymoron. I guess unemancipated minors is a better way to say it

    January 9th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
  159. Dan the Methodist says:

    What is IMHO???

    Go ahead, I am sure it is a question that deserves a few laughs.

    January 9th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
  160. Student says:

    Dan,
    Don't worry….my kids had to teach me the lingo too. IMHO = in my humble opinion

    January 9th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
  161. Tara says:

    Dan the Methodist,

    IMHO stands for In My Humble Opinion.

    By the way, how have you been?

    January 9th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
  162. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    I don't mind criticism. In fact I like it. How can a person ever learn and become a better person unless somebody is willing to show them. Thanks for sharing
    YHO with me. I'd appreciate it if you would let me know if I get out of line again.

    January 9th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
  163. Dan the Methodist says:

    For someone with such passionate convictions, you have not lost your humility Paul2.

    CONGRADULATIONS!!

    It isn't easy.

    Student,

    I have not really learned much about you. Where do you stand? What is your objective? What are you a student of?
    You seem respectful and thoughtful. I don't think that you will praise the works of karl marx or the eugenics program of the nazi's.(hope I spelled correctly) I am not inflexible to the point that i cannot see other points of view, however I am pulled back to my point of view by my faith and values.
    If you want to discuss. We all can do that.

    January 10th, 2008 at 6:42 am
  164. Paula Reichert-McKiban says:

    Obviously, there are a lot af caring Christians on this
    site- Dan the Methodist, you are "walking the walk".
    I blogged one other site on PLAL the other day& am not
    afraid to bring up the subject again. It is easy to view
    PP's sites, Naral's.etc for the sole purpose of "keeping
    your friends close but your enemies closer".Many pro-lifers check these sites just to see what they are doing & telling their pro-aborts.One method viewed frequently, is what I see today. Get on a pro-life blog,
    and disrupt and corrupt. Change the subject.
    Eric (or Matt,John, etc) do not have to let them blog
    in. This is a privilege-not a right.
    IMHO- Melinda is either following pro-abort protocol,
    or she needs additional help that she can get if she calls to speak to someone at PLAL or any pro-life facility. I would be glad to speak w/her on her issues-
    I have been active in pro-life for over 20 yrs. Melinda
    and so many others are not in the Light, so we pray for
    them & others. The Devil uses ordinary people to do his
    dirty work. We need to move on….and get back to being
    God's vessels for saving babies and mothers. We need to
    stay focused . We need to continue to work on closing
    PP's, abortion clinics, etc. We need to continue to fight unfair zoning and unfair laws. Let us not lose
    sight of what God has put in our hearts.
    Deut.30:19 (a Joe favorite): ….."Today, I have given
    you the choice between life & death"…. "Oh, that you
    would choose LIFE, that you & your descendants might live".

    .

    January 10th, 2008 at 11:27 am
  165. Student says:

    Dan,
    To answer your questions….I am moderately PC. I suppose my objective is a study in sociology/psychology and how it applies to the law. I'd like to find ways for people to come together and have been attempting to objectively watch extreme elements on both sides of the issue.

    I do try to be respectful and thoughtful and if I ever make a remark you deem unfair, please feel free to call me on it….although I try very hard to keep those types of remarks to myself. I think it is the only thing that leads to meaningful debate. Your spelling is fine (grin), but I'm not going to get baited into a debate about Marx and/or eugenics. It would be similar to my starting a conversation with you by saying, "So Dan, I doubt you'd think it's a good idea to sell your daughter as a sex slave." C'mon, we're both smarter than that. If that's the best we can do I prefer to remain a silent observer.

    January 10th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
  166. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    I assume moderately PC includes when a womens life is in danger. What other exceptions might that include.
    BTW….your responding when I asked what posts I made bothered you has really helped me. Thank you for your honesty and for your opinion.

    January 10th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
  167. Student says:

    Paul,
    Are you asking what exceptions I personally believe are okay or which I feel should be legal? Are there any exceptions to your PL stance?

    January 10th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
  168. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    Maybe you could tell me both. For me which ones I think are acceptable seems very clear and is not likely to change, it would be to save the mother from severe health risk.
    Which ones I think should be legal will change over time. I am much less tolerant of abortion at any time during pregnancy without enforceable Parental Notification Laws. With predators like PP out there lying their way into our towns. Fighting for unfettered and unrestricted access to our unemancipated minors so they can mutilate them. Enabling rapists to escape justice.

    January 10th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
  169. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    And though I would discourage it, I would allow an exception in the case of rape because there was no consent to intercourse.

    January 11th, 2008 at 4:18 am
  170. Dan the Methodist says:

    Student,
    Clearly I have no reason to go there, although there are some gruesome lessons. I put that in there as a light joke, since my exchange with melinda was nice, though like talking to the Cecile Richards herself.(She leads PP nationally)
    I myself am not looking to slam the door. When Roe v Wade was decided 35 years ago by a court instead of debated in the Congress it was a shock to society and our country. I resent the fact that it was decided at the Supreme Court, but I believe that if Roe V Wade is overturn, as many lawyers left and right contend it should be, the power of the state laws will kick in and can prove to be far more segratory. (Is that a word, or have I been listening to Bush speeches for too long? I believe this imbalance would raise the confrontation between left and right to a new level that would prove to be weakening for our Blessed Country.
    Instead, I would propose we start with things that are legally consistent and have clear support. As we saw here in Aurora, Parental Consent is a great place to start. Next, if they are so trusted as medical proffessionals, why don't medical records and Planned Parenthood mix? If you can ban cigarette smoking in and around public places on top of the taxes that are HEAPED ON THE SALE, why can't we TAX ABORTION and set up buffer zones for building PPs close to schools?
    What are your thoughts and suggestions? I don't know how realistic my suggestions are, but we have to turn this death train around. I will watch for your thoughts and write back tomorrow. LOVE reading this thread!!!

    January 11th, 2008 at 6:41 am
  171. Tara says:

    Dan the Methodist,

    I agree that parental notification/consent laws are very important. I would take it one step further. Since PP and other abortion clinics do surgical procedures, they should be regulated like any other out patient surgury centers. They are not. Since there are medical complications from abortions, clinics should be required to be connected to a hospital. Legislatures in some states are looking at this but PP is leading the way against it saying it is too expensive, and would force them to close. I don't believe that. PP and other abortion clinics just don't want to be held accountable. There is no reason for them to be untouchable.

    January 11th, 2008 at 9:41 am
  172. Student says:

    DAN: Clearly I have no reason to go there, although there are some gruesome lessons. I put that in there as a light joke, since my exchange with melinda was nice, though like talking to the Cecile Richards herself.(She leads PP nationally)

    RESPONSE: Ok, but I am not Melinda. Please don’t lump everyone who is PC together. It would be unfair to say all Republicans are either Ron Paul or Fred Thompson supporters…….there’s a lot of room between the two. The same is true with the PC crowd. There are some who are extremely to the left of the issue and there are others on the right side……again, there’s a whole heck of a lot of room in the middle (I’m pretty sure the same holds true for the PL crowd as well).

    DAN: I myself am not looking to slam the door. When Roe v Wade was decided 35 years ago by a court instead of debated in the Congress it was a shock to society and our country. I resent the fact that it was decided at the Supreme Court, but I believe that if Roe V Wade is overturn, as many lawyers left and right contend it should be, the power of the state laws will kick in and can prove to be far more segratory. (Is that a word, or have I been listening to Bush speeches for too long? I believe this imbalance would raise the confrontation between left and right to a new level that would prove to be weakening for our Blessed Country.

    RESPONSE: I believe the Supreme Court simply did its job. A case was brought before it, in the same way as any other case, and a decision was reached. There have been many cases decided by the Court that didn’t go through debate in congress. Schecter Poultry v U.S. (1933) passed the first minimum wage, maximum work week and banned kids 16 y.o. or younger from working in factories. Tinker v Des Moines (1969) gave students the right to symbolic speech in saying “students do not shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates.” In U.S. v Nixon (1972) the Court ruled that the President is not “above the law.” Mapp v Ohio brought rise to the exclusionary rule. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) gave all citizens the right to an attorney in criminal matters. Brown v. Board of Education (1954) gave us school integration. Loving v. Virginia got rid of anti-miscegenation laws. While the aforementioned cases weren’t debated in Congress, they were decided by the Supreme Court. I assume that we both agree that most, if not all, of these decisions were good ones. I doubt you “resent” the Supreme Court for these decisions. While you may disagree with the decision in Roe (as is certainly your right), the Court certainly had the right to make a decision on a case that was brought before it.

    I don’t believe “segratory” is a word – but I understand your point. As to listening to Bush speeches for too long……SIGH…..it seems all I’ve done lately is listen to political speeches on both sides. They do tend to make up words as they go along, don’t they!?!!

    I don’t think it’s appropriate for the abortion decision to be made at the state level (but I feel this way on a myriad of other issues as well – including education) because of the inherent disparity in the application of the law. For instance, I think we need federal standards for mathematics education. All graduating seniors should be able do……….This would allow all incoming college freshman to be at the same level and doesn’t disenfranchise kids from a state that may have a lower standard.

    DAN: Instead, I would propose we start with things that are legally consistent and have clear support. As we saw here in Aurora, Parental Consent is a great place to start. Next, if they are so trusted as medical proffessionals, why don't medical records and Planned Parenthood mix? If you can ban cigarette smoking in and around public places on top of the taxes that are HEAPED ON THE SALE, why can't we TAX ABORTION and set up buffer zones for building PPs close to schools?
    What are your thoughts and suggestions? I don't know how realistic my suggestions are, but we have to turn this death train around. I will watch for your thoughts and write back tomorrow. LOVE reading this thread!!!

    RESPONSE: Good luck finding “clear support” on this and many other issues. While I don’t doubt that there are many people in favor of parental consent laws, there are many who are not. How do you balance the rights of a pregnant 14 y.o. (feel free to insert any age under 18) who wants to continue a pregnancy with those of her parents who do not want her to continue a pregnancy?

    From my perspective, your smoking argument has several problems. Smoking was banned because it has direct health consequences on other people, causing a conflict in rights. I know you’ll say the same as re abortion, however, I’m simply talking from a legal perspective. You may believe that a fetus has the same rights as they rest of it but at this time, according to U.S. law, they do not. Thus, that argument fails on the merits.

    As to taxing abortion, are you suggesting something along the lines of a sin tax? If so, it seems that this would limit the right to abortion only to the rich, thus disenfranchising the poor and increasing the size of the welfare state.

    I truly don’t know what you’re referring to when you say medical records and PP don’t mix. They have had my medical records for a number of years and I’ve never had a problem. In fact, when I needed to see a specialist for a gynecological issue they very promptly forwarded my records. You’ll have to elaborate more on this if you want me to respond. I’m not trying to be flip, I just really don’t know what you mean.

    There are many people who think PP is a good thing. I realize most, if not all, on this forum do not. What purpose do you believe a buffer zone would serve? I’m a firm believer in giving accurate biological information and I’ve seen nothing from PP that indicates to me that PP does not do this. If you believe otherwise, you’ll have to provide me with more information.

    I'm sorry for the length of this novella…..I hope this addresses your questions.

    January 11th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
  173. Charles says:

    Student,

    You mention the following:


    You may believe that a fetus has the same rights as they rest of it but at this time, according to U.S. law, they do not.

    If that were the case, then why can people be charged with crimes against an unborn child? I would submit that the State has an interest in seeing the unborn child enter this world.

    January 11th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
  174. Jerry Nickels says:

    Charles brings up an excellent point in his response to Student. The rights of unborn children are indeed protected in law in many, if not all states. When an unborn child dies as a result of abuse or criminal behavior the perpetrator is charged with homicide or wrongful death.

    This is the achilles heel of the pc position. Many pc'ers pretend that the unborn child is not a unique and precious life that should be nurtured and protected. As long as it is the mother's choice to end the life of the unborn child that is one thing, but the moment someone else unjustly ends the life of the unborn child that is quite another thing.

    How to explain this inconsistency? When the Supreme Court issued their rulings they did not attempt to define personhood, except to carve out a legal invention that said the privacy rights of a mother trumped abortion statutes on the books of the 50 states. Hence, laws that protect unborn children in the event of unjust aggression remained on the books, but laws that prohibited women from willingly ending the life of the unborn child were negated.

    There has not been an attempt to remove laws that address the rights of unborn in the event of injury and death. The reason for this is that everyone knows that the unborn child has every bit as much the right to life as do the rest of us. To advocate that it is permissible to kill an unborn child is not what we do in a civilized society.

    Where the supreme court went wrong is in the remarkable cessation of common sense that resulted in the illogic of their decision.

    January 11th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
  175. Paul2 says:

    Student rsponse to Dan:
    ********************************************
    RESPONSE: Good luck finding “clear support” on this and many other issues. While I don’t doubt that there are many people in favor of parental consent laws, there are many who are not. How do you balance the rights of a pregnant 14 y.o. (feel free to insert any age under 18) who wants to continue a pregnancy with those of her parents who do not want her to continue a pregnancy?
    *********************************************

    I think you ndon't quite understand what Parental Notification Laws are. They are a "Notification" law and not a consent law. The decision to continue the pregnancy still lies in the hands of the unemancipated minor. With that understanding, does that change your position at all?

    January 11th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
  176. Paul2 says:

    Jerry,
    Thanks for the post. That does clear things up about our government actually DOES currently recognize the infant in the womb as a life of it's own and worthy of protection.

    January 11th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
  177. Dan the Methodist says:

    WOW!!!!
    GREAT PERSPECTIVE!!!
    GREAT DEBATE!!!!
    If we can hold this type of discourse we might actually agree on something!!
    GREAT POSTS ALL!!!
    I will work on a longer post, but It is encouraging to see the debate of issues and ideas without the personal anger clouding things up.
    I did not think it was attainable.
    Thanks to all!!

    January 12th, 2008 at 11:11 am
  178. Dan the Methodist says:

    Student,
    If legislation passed stating that abortions must not be performed without parental conscent, Reviewing and adding to medical records, consistant ispection regulations nationwide and Federal Tax on Abortions with the intent to use these Tax dollars to fund GOVERNMENT (not planned parenthood) education awareness. With the loopole that under rape or inscest, a judge may declare that the minor is of sound state of mind to make her own decision. ("When you play, you pay!" that sort of thing.) How would or could the Supreme Court React?
    How would you react?
    How would we all react???

    I love the discussion!

    January 12th, 2008 at 11:22 am
  179. Dan the Methodist says:

    I also would like to add that the paretnal conscent would be for minors under 18.

    What about a waiting period in the tradition of recieving a fire arm…3 days maybe???

    How about a warning on all Abortion materials, Abortion Clinic advertisment, and at the door or front desk stating that Abortion increases your risk for Breast Cancer?? They do it for Cigarettes and Gambling. Isn't unprotected sex gambling??

    I do not believe I am being hard core with these proposals. Hard core would be to close every clinic and make it abortion illegal.

    January 12th, 2008 at 11:38 am
  180. Dan the Methodist says:

    Student, I have decided to reply to a post on another string, due to the fact we are having a different discussion here.

    "Keeping your pants on is always a good option for those who cherish a choice."
    Thanks for the advice. I'll pass it along to my husband. Given that neither of us want children, do you advocate that we simply cease being intimate with one another?

    I advocate the pursuit of happiness with the consequences that may arise from those decisions. Responsibility is the key.
    Responsibility on a personal level and responsibility on a societal level.
    I believe that sex and abortion are sought out responsibly with out consideration for the consequences on personal and societal levels.

    P.S. Pease pardon my grammer. I did graduate from High School. I am doing my best to convey my thoughts,ideas and perspective. I apologize if it is annoying.

    January 12th, 2008 at 11:57 am
  181. Paul2 says:

    Jery,
    Do you know of any laws protecting children in womb that were in place before RoeVWade?

    January 12th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
  182. Student says:

    Dan,
    I agree COMPLETELY with EVERYTHING you said in post 177. How's that for coming together!?!! I didn't think it possible either.

    While I have much to add to the discussion, today is a very busy day for me. However, I will attempt to address more of your questions this evening or sometime tomorrow. Again, my thanks for the tone of the discussion.

    *************************

    Jerry,
    Re post #174: Not all states offer such protections. However, 37 states have fetal homicide laws. The states include: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.

    Recent debate in the House focuses on fetuses killed by violent acts against pregnant women. The legal approaches to dealing with such attacks involve either civil action through wrongful death laws or by increasing criminal penalties when a crime involves a pregnant woman. Such legal action focuses on the harm done to a pregnant woman and the subsequent loss of her pregnancy, but not on the rights of the fetus.

    January 12th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
  183. Brian says:

    That's not true, Student, at least entirely. The US government passed Staci and Connor's law and recognized that murders of pregnant women constituted double homicide.

    January 12th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
  184. Charles says:

    Student,

    It’s quite obvious that an unborn child cannot bring suit against the person or persons who have willfully caused their death. Therefore, it’s the mother and/or father, who have standing to bring suit— and demand the state to take action, for wrongful death. This is the same as in a “husband and wife” situation when one of the two has been murdered.

    While I with you agree that harm is done to the mother; however, harm is also done to society when a life is taken from the womb—with or without intent.

    January 12th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
  185. Tara says:

    Student –

    This is a serious two questions, and one that those I know that are PC won't answer or dodge. Why is the pro-choice community afraid of the personhood of unborn children.

    I am amazed that when a unborn child is wanted they acknowledge the unborn as a person, but deny the unborn as a person if a woman doesn't want it. What's the difference?

    The second is what is the difference between a viable unborn child and one that has just been born?

    I want to make it clear to you that I am in no way baiting or being nasty. But the more I read PC blogs and posts it seems very contradiciting to me.

    January 12th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
  186. Kristine says:

    Hello to everyone! This is my first time bloging and I hope I am in the right place. I am a 40 year old woman who had an abortion 19 years ago of which I regret. I know that I am forgiven and restored by the Grace of God! However I did live many years with the guilt and condemnation for my choice. I go to PP every Sat and one day during the week with my mother to try and council the girls. We have been very blessed to witness 2 turn arounds, and today a man let us pray with him and said he has decieded to follow Christ and he never wants to visit PP again! Praise God! I really just want to take a moment to tell all of you how important each and every one of you is in this fight. It is all of your prayers that soften the hardned hearts of the woman and men that are there. To all of you men that go out to pray all I can say is WOW what a witness you are for Christ and how touching it is to see you all. I know it can be discouraging week after week but know that even if those girls never talk to any one, the fact that there are people praying for them while they are in there is amazing. We serve an awesome God that never forgets the tears of his people. I have hope that the prayers for peace forgivness and restoration will oneday come to those girls just like it came for me. God Bless you all!

    January 12th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
  187. Student says:

    To Brian (post #183):
    I believe you are referring to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004. This recognizes a "child in utero" as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

    The law applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on Federal properties, against certain Federal officials and employees, and by members of the military. In addition, it covers certain crimes that are defined by statute as federal offenses wherever they occur, no matter who commits them, such as certain crimes of terrorism.

    However, Federal criminal law does not apply to crimes prosecuted by the individual states. The states I listed in post #182 recognize the fetus as a crime victim, at least for purposes of homicide or feticide. The legislation explicitly contained a provision excepting abortion, stating that the bill would not "be construed to permit the prosecution" "of any person for conduct relating to an abortion for which the consent of the pregnant woman was given."

    January 13th, 2008 at 11:43 am
  188. Karen K. says:

    Dear Kristine, Thank you for your wonderful words of testimony, love and encouragement! I am the pro-life chairman for my church in Yorkville and a church in Plano, would you mind if I use your statement here to help encourage our people to be prayer warriors at the Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic? I will wait for your answer. Thank you and God bless you Kristine!

    January 13th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
  189. Brian says:

    Student. It is also called the Lacey and Connor Act in honor of Lacey and Connor Peterson (I confused Staci and Lacey Peterson above) and while I know that it applies only on federal property, your argument was that the law doesn't protect the interests of fetal life, only maternal life. That's quite obviously not true, at least where there is federal jurisdiction.

    January 13th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
  190. Kristine says:

    Karen K
    Yes of course anything that will help and encourage people to pray.
    God Bless

    January 13th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
  191. Paul2 says:

    Anybody who can answer this for me. Lets say I have a 15 year old daughter who geos to PP and gets an abortion without my notification. A year later she is having so much regret that she has attempted suicide along with daily pain and suffering. Why couldn't I then, as her legal guardian, successfully sue PP on behalf of the harm they have caused to my daughther? Why couldn't she sue them herself since it is my understanding that a minor cannot enter into a binding legal contract? Why couldn't I sue the State of Illinois for failing to find a way to implement the Parental Notification Act of 1885 in a reasonable amount of time?

    January 13th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
  192. Student says:

    Brian,
    I don't disagree with what you stated in post #189. If we're talking federal jurisdiction there is fetal protection if we're referring to the commission of a crime. However, the Act still doesn't define fetal life as "personhood" which is wherein the legal problems may arise.

    January 13th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
  193. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    You have really not responded to my last few posts to you. Your last Post to me on the 1/10 was:
    ***********************
    Paul,
    Are you asking what exceptions I personally believe are okay or which I feel should be legal? Are there any exceptions to your PL stance?

    January 10th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
    **************************
    I then rsponded to your question and asked you to to tell me what exceptions you personally believe are o.k. and feel should be legal but you have notresponded.

    Student, since then I have posted a couple other questions to you but you have not responded, maybe cause you are too busy, I'm not sure. Anyway, I'll just quit posting to you till I get a response.

    January 13th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
  194. Brian says:

    Paul, you couldn't sue the state for monetary damages based on sovereign immunity. But I don't get why someone doesn't sue the Illinois courts under a claim of mandamus (basically, a theory that they should do what the law orders them to do). It's a strange thing to have a law on the books that the courts are sitting on (they're supposed to draw up rules for judicial bypass and they won't).

    January 13th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
  195. Tara says:

    Brian,

    That is a very good idea. One could try to sue the Attorney General – in this case – Lisa Madigan for not putting presure to get the law reinstated. She should be fignting for this law in the courts. But bc she is PC she is not willing to do so. However, I like the idea of taking the courts on.

    January 13th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
  196. Paul2 says:

    Brian or Tara,
    What about suing PP if they perform abortion on a minor w/o consent of the legal guardian? How can getting a fourteen year old girl sign a consent form relieve them from damages? I thought the law said a minor cannot enter into a binding legal contract.

    January 13th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
  197. Brian says:

    Paul, my guess is that there would be no negligence in the case where an abortion was done correctly (ie no physical damage to the 14 year old, only lasting psychological damage) so there would be no claim. Abortion law is so convoluted that you can't look to state tort or contract law because of the federal constitutional law's preemptive power.

    January 13th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
  198. Paul2 says:

    Brian, Would we be able to get pain and suffering in a civil court?

    January 13th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
  199. Paul2 says:

    Brian, which federal constitution law are you referring to. Not a woman's right to privacy is it. I can't see how that would apply to a claim for damages.

    January 13th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
  200. Dan the Methodist says:

    Let's make something happen!!!

    January 14th, 2008 at 12:54 am
  201. Tara says:

    Paul2,

    I agree with Brian. Abortion laws are different in each state, and then you have the federal layer to contend with as well. Contract laws are different in each state. But that would be an interesting take. I have a friend that is a lawyer, I will email him and get back to you.

    January 14th, 2008 at 9:46 am
  202. Brian says:

    Honestly, Paul, I don't think any of your claims against PP would stand. Allowing civil suits to cut into the free access to abortion runs counter to the Supreme Court's abortion on demand beliefs.

    January 14th, 2008 at 9:48 am
  203. Mary Lu says:

    Jerry says:
    "The rights of unborn children are indeed protected in law in many, if not all states. When an unborn child dies as a result of abuse or criminal behavior the perpetrator is charged with homicide or wrongful death."

    I am sure you have all heard of the Marine who was brutally murdered and then burned alive–both her and her unborn baby—she was almost nine months pregnant. I heard the SC DA say in the press conference this weekend that the SC st law is this:

    if a pregnant woman is murdered in this state (SC), the fetus is not a second count of murder unless it is proven that the fetus was birthed before the murder took place and also murdered. Then it would be two counts. (paraphrasing)

    The fetus was viable!!!! The woman was murdered (as blood was found splattered all over the room) and then burned.) So was this a woman's right?, pc's? She chose life for her baby. She would not have carried the baby to term, unmarried, working as a soldier, and not obviously had chosen life. It was her choice.

    I hear so much rhetoric from pc's that: "we don't necessarilly support abortion just a woman right to chose abortion or chose life."

    So, choicers, if your opinion could weigh-in on the outcome of one or two counts, will you then agree and support that the fetus should be counted as a second count of murder?

    January 14th, 2008 at 10:49 am
  204. Paul2 says:

    Brian,
    As a legal guardian would I have a chance to win in the State? You are saying that then the feds would overturn it? What part of the Supreme Court RoeVWade decision or what federal law would be used to disqualify damages? I would really like to read it.

    January 14th, 2008 at 11:14 am
  205. Brian says:

    Paul, Casey v. Planned Parenthood says that any state law (including state common law) which puts an undue burden on access to abortion is suspect. If you could get damages for emotional distress from a properly performed abortion, my guess is that that would be considered an undue burden. Again, this is hypothetical, and just my guess, but if you want to read a good book about abortion law, check out Ramesh Ponnuru's Party of Death. It has a chapter on the nullification machine where courts have gutted state efforts to limit abortion.

    January 14th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
  206. Student says:

    Paul,
    I'm sorry I can't be as responsive as you'd like. I work full time, go to school, have a family, do volunteer work and am politically active. Life is VERY full and I don't always have the time to be on here.

    Re your post #175: I do understand the difference between parental notification and parental consent. Dan (post #170) specifically asked about parental consent.

    Re post #169: The logic seems flawed here. How/Why would your beliefs allow you an exception here?

    Re post #168: I specifically decided not to respond to the bulk of this post (see my post #153 for an explanation). It's my personal belief that abortion should be allowed until the point of viability as determined by current law (obviously, this may be subject to change over time as medical science expands).

    ***********

    Dan: I will respond to your posts #178-#180 as soon as time permits. I'm not ignoring you.

    January 14th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
  207. Student says:

    #178 – DAN
    If legislation passed stating that abortions must not be performed without parental conscent, Reviewing and adding to medical records, consistant ispection regulations nationwide and Federal Tax on Abortions with the intent to use these Tax dollars to fund GOVERNMENT (not planned parenthood) education awareness. With the loopole that under rape or inscest, a judge may declare that the minor is of sound state of mind to make her own decision. ("When you play, you pay!" that sort of thing.) How would or could the Supreme Court React?

    RESPONSE: I’m not in favor of parental consent. What happens if you have a teenage girl who insists she wants to continue a pregnancy and her parents want her to abort? Do the teenagers rights trump those of her parents or vice versa? I’m even more strongly against parental consent in the case of rape or incest – especially in the case of incest. If the father were involved, why on earth would you care about getting his consent. His consent is the last thing I care about.

    I don’t want the government handing out tax dollars for their version of sex education. Under the current administration, dollars may only be used for abstinance education. I would much rather accurate, relevant and realistic education be available. It is in this way that the need for abortion will be reduced.

    #179 – DAN: What about a waiting period in the tradition of recieving a fire arm…3 days maybe???

    RESPONSE: Sorry, I’m not in favor of that either. Would you advise a 3-day waiting period for ANY other medical procedure? It also leads to a very slippery slope. Do we want the government to keep track of our medical histories. I, for one, don’t want to live in a 1984 world.

    #179 – DAN: How about a warning on all Abortion materials, Abortion Clinic advertisment, and at the door or front desk stating that Abortion increases your risk for Breast Cancer?? They do it for Cigarettes and Gambling. Isn't unprotected sex gambling??

    RESPONSE: Sorry, but it is a fallacy that abortion increases your risk for breast cancer. Before you jump all over me for that statement, please provide me with any SCIENTIFIC study to back up whatever argument you’re going to make. (References to PL websites and the Catholic church do not count.)

    Your comment about unprotected sex and gambling leads me to believe that you want to punish people for expressing their sexuality (your morality may not be mine). What about couples who do practice safe sex and have a birth control failure – it happens occasionally.

    January 14th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
  208. Ramir San Diego says:

    "it is a fallacy that abortion increases your risk for breast cancer. Before you jump all over me for that statement, please provide me with any SCIENTIFIC study to back up whatever argument you’re going to make. (References to PL websites and the Catholic church do not count.)"
    ———————————–
    What about this study by a UK group of Insurers?

    January 14th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
  209. Student says:

    Ramir,
    I do give you an A for effort but, sorry, for me it's no cigar. The article does not list any of the underlying scientific/medical studies, therefore, one is unable to draw conclusions based upon the facts. I do have access to journals via the university and checked the references on the web page:

    (1) Carroll, P (2002) ‘Pregnancy related risk
    factors in female breast cancer incidence’, Intl
    Congress of Actuaries, Transactions, vol 4, 331–375.

    (2) Carroll Patrick S (2007) ‘The breast cancer
    epidemic: modeling and forecasts based on
    abortion and other risk factors’, Journal of
    American Physicians and Surgeons, Vol 12, No 3,
    Fall, 72–78.

    The first citation doesn't list anything at all on connections between abortion and breast cancer. The second citation was done by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons which is an association of medical doctors, health care professionals, patients and other lay persons dedicated to right wing social agendas. The journal itself IS NOT listed by the National Library of Medicine as a source of medical information, and is classified by the medical watch organization Qwackwatch as “untrustworthy.”

    In contrast, The National Cancer Institute has reviewed studies on the subject and found no relation whatever between abortion and subsequent development of breast cancer. The National Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has reached the same conclusion.

    January 14th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
  210. Dan the Methodist says:

    Student, I only have time to respond to one of your answers.
    I don’t want the government handing out tax dollars for their version of sex education. Under the current administration, dollars may only be used for abstinence education. I would much rather accurate, relevant and realistic education be available. It is in this way that the need for abortion will be reduced.
    I understand what you are saying and your intentions are well placed, however we cannot use intentions alone to judge the success of a program. Results should have a huge say in how a program is judged. Since the time of Roe v Wade there have been 50,000,000 lost lives due to abortion. Women do not hold the esteem they once did as a bearer of children, now they are seen as a sex roulette wheel where men can gamble with their seeds in return for excitement. Women complain that they are only seen as sex objects and I believe Abortion has is a pivotal influence on this behavior.
    Abortion is not an unspoken, last option kind of thing. It is usually the 1st option without the realization of the consequences.
    I believe that sex education should not be a form of advertising and the decision to keep tax payer funded programs limited to abstinence, is OK with me.

    I am sorry, I have to go. This isn't my best post.
    Sorry

    January 15th, 2008 at 6:45 am
  211. Tara says:

    Student,

    The National Cancer Institute isn't unbiased either. They receive support money from Planned Parenthood, and if you go to their website, search for Planned Parenthood, they work with them.

    As a student myself (I'm like you, I'm married, have kids, go to school, and am very politically active), it wouldn't matter who did the study. The bias is from the other side. No one wants to admit there might be one bc it would be bad for the abortion business. If it is proven, then the number of aborions in this country would significantly drop and PP and other abortion facilities would be out of business.

    Sorry for the cut and paste, but for some reason I am having a difficult getting the links to work.

    Here are some studies for you:

    Dr. Janet Daling … a Pro-choicer, Finds Link Between Abortion and Breast Cancer

    Critics who formerly dismissed the possibility of a causal relationship between induced abortion and breast cancer are increasingly on the defensive, largely as a consequence of the findings of a fascinating study.
    This study did manage to be published in the November 2, 1994 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCl).

    The exhaustive work of Dr. Janet Daling and her colleagues at Seattle's Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center examined the possible linkage between abortion and breast cancer. Funded by the National Cancer Institute and directed by a woman who describes herself as "Pro-choice," the study can hardly stand accused of coming at the issue with a pro-life tilt.

    As expected, an accompanying editorial written by Dr. Lynn Rosenberg in the the same JNCI went out of its way to minimize and explain away the evidence which strongly supported the case that an induced abortion places women at a greater risk for breast cancer.

    A number of factors contributed to making Dr. Daling's "Risk of Breast Cancer Among Young Women: Relationship to Induced Abortion" a cross-roads in the debate over whether abortion increases a woman's chance of contracting breast cancer. These significant factors include:

    1. The size of the study (1,806 women — 845 women who had breast cancer were compared with a "control" group of 961 women who did not);

    2. It’s thoroughness — women were interviewed one-on-one in their homes for two hours;

    3. Daling et. al.'s conclusion that a spontaneous abortion — a miscarriage — does not heighten the risk, putting the emphasis back where it belongs, on induced abortion.

    4. The demonstration that the risk of developing breast cancer increased after an induced abortion, regardless of how old the mother was at the time of the abortion, how old the unborn child was, or whether the woman had given birth before.

    What specifically did the Daling study show? Most media reports concentrated on the finding that, on the average, the chance of a woman having breast cancer before she turns 45 increases by 50 percent if she has had an abortion. But this heightened danger was dismissed in the accompanying JNCI editorial as "small in epidemiological terms."

    If breast cancer were rare or abortion infrequent, this editorial counter would carry more weight. There are, however, 182,000 new cases of breast cancer diagnosed every year and 46,000 women die annually.
    Add to this the roughly 1,530,000 abortions per year and this so-called "small" increased risk means a huge number of new cases of breast cancer.

    For example, abortion aside, a woman today has roughly a 10 percent chance of contracting breast cancer in her lifetime.
    But because every year so many women are having an abortion, even if the abortion decision increases the risk by one-half, or 50 percent (from 10 percent to 15 percent), in a few decades the results will be, at a minimum, an additional 40,000 cases of breast cancer every year.

    But the Daling study contained even more frightening results, largely ignored by the media. If a woman had obtained her first abortion after age 30, her risk jumped by 110 percent. And if she had her first abortion before she turned 18, the likelihood of having breast cancer increased by 150 percent.
    Worse yet, if she has a family history (mother, sister, aunt) of breast cancer and had a first abortion after age 30, her risk went up by 270 percent.
    Most ominous of all were the results for women who had had an abortion before age 18 and who also had a family history of breast cancer. Twelve women in the Daling study fit that description. Every one of them had breast cancer!

    Daling's study, however, only followed women into their forties. What about later in life? A path-breaking but vastly underreported study in the December 1993 issue of the Journal of the National Medical Association traced the breast cancer experience of about 1,000 black women (500 with breast cancer, 500 without) as they grew older. "Breast Cancer Risk Factors in African-American Women: The Howard University Tumor Registry Experience" confirmed that the risks of breast cancer increased much more for women who had aborted than for those who had not.

    This fine study found the same overall 50 percent increased risk factor for women under 40 who had aborted. But black women now in their 40s who had aborted experienced a 180 percent increased risk. The risk jumped to a whopping 370 percent for black women over 50 who had aborted.

    We've always known that abortion is lethal to unborn babies; only of late has abortion's dangers to pregnant women become unmistakably clear as well.

    Many press outlets and representatives of the Clinton administration have bent over backwards to hide the stark facts about abortion and breast cancer. However, with more studies "in the pipeline," it is only a matter of time and ongoing pro-life publicity before the truth wins out. In the meantime, thousands of women will die of breast cancer.
    ——————————————————–
    World Conference on Breast Cancer
    Abortion and Breast Cancer
    Positive Response To Latest Developments Presented At World Conference On Breast Cancer
    by Joel Brind, Ph.D.

    It was encouraging and somewhat surprising to have an update of our "Comprehensive review and meta-analysis" on induced abortion and breast cancer accepted for presentation at the July [1997] "World Conference on Breast Cancer" in Kingston, Ontario. The conference was organized by veteran pro-abortion activist Bella Abzug in her capacity as president of Women's Environment and Development Organization.

    The original paper, which I had written in collaboration with colleagues from Penn State College of Medicine in Hershey, was published in the British Medical Association's Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health last October. My presentation in Ontario centered on several additional studies essentially confirming our original finding of 30% increased risk of breast cancer attributable to abortion. Nothing is more an article of faith for radical feminists such as Bella Abzug than that abortion is indispensable to women's equality.

    Therefore I expected that the room would be largely empty — especially given that there were five other concurrent sessions — for such an against-the-grain presentation. But to my surprise, not only was the room full, but the attentive audience included Ms. Abzug herself.

    As readers may recall, our meta-analysis found that 24 out of the 30 epidemiological studies published worldwide since 1957 have confirmed the abortion-breast cancer (ABC) link. More recent publications supporting and challenging the ABC link were discussed in my presentation in Kingston.

    For one, there is the continuing heated debate about the Melbye study from Denmark published in this January's New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). The U.S. National Cancer Institute and others continue to maintain that it disproved the ABC link. The World Conference provided me the opportunity to point out the serious flaws in the Melbye study, as had been done in an article published in National Right to Life News (5/23/97), and in a letter to the editor, which appeared in the June 19 edition of NEJM. Among other egregious flaws, Melbye et al. had misclassified some 60,000 women in the study as not having had any abortions who actually did have legal abortions on record!

    For another, there was the Rookus study on Dutch women published last December in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCI). Readers may remember how the authors of this well-designed study found a 90% risk increase with abortion, but then proceeded to explain it away on the basis of something called "reporting bias".

    This curious argument holds that the ABC link only appears to exist because women with breast cancer are more likely to admit having had abortions than are healthy women. As a result, they say, studies which depend on women reporting their reproductive histories (as most studies do) will show an artificially elevated risk.

    The authors of the Dutch study claimed to have evidence of reporting bias. But as was demonstrated both to readers of NRL News (12/10/96) and readers of the April 12 edition of JNCI, by way of another letter to the editor, it was this so-called evidence which had been artificially manufactured.

    It was the JNCI editorial that accompanied the Dutch study which the journal's editors (who are also high-ranking NCI officials) used to attack our meta-analysis by name. They claimed we had made "a leap beyond the bounds of inference" for inferring a causal link between abortion and breast cancer.

    In our letter rebutting these charges, we pointed out how, rather than relying solely on the statistical link, a causal association was also supported by the biological facts, namely:

    "Estrogens are strong growth promoters of normal and most cancerous breast tissue.
    Most known risk factors for breast cancer are attributable to some form of estrogen overexposure.
    Maternal estradiol (estrogen) rises 20-fold (2,000%) during the first trimester of a normal pregnancy. [Estrogen makes breast tissue grow, including potentially cancerous tissue. If the pregnancy is completed, other hormones cause the breast tissue to differentiate into milk-producing tissue. If pregnancy isn't completed, the excess estrogen leaves the tissue free to grow into abnormal or even cancerous cells.]
    But "pregnancies which abort spontaneously (miscarry) usually generate subnormal amounts of estradiol; no increased risk of breast cancer is seen.
    The incidence of breast cancer is dramatically increased in rats whose pregnancies are aborted."
    Most newsworthy in this regard, as I stated in Kingston, was the fact that in the editors' response to our letter in the JNCI not one of these biological facts was challenged!

    Then there was the intriguing news about the mysterious appearance of the ABC link in Australian women. This evidence had been suppressed for seven years.

    Back in 1988, a study on dietary risk factors for breast cancer in Australian women was published in the American Journal of Epidemiology. However, the study, principally authored by Dr. T.E. Rohan (now in Toronto with the National Cancer Institute of Canada), also listed standard risk factors — including reproductive history and family history. None of these factors had a statistically significant impact on Australian women in the study (except for removal of the ovaries). Abortion was never mentioned in the 1988 paper.

    It was a 1995 paper, principally authored by a French researcher Nadine Andrieu, where the Rohan data on abortion made its first appearance. And it showed a statistically significant 160% breast cancer risk increase among women who had chosen abortion — much stronger even than family history in these Australian women.

    Why were the abortion data suppressed for seven years? Dr Rohan acknowledged, in a phone call I placed to him, that with the politically sensitive status of abortion, he had never even tried to include the results on abortion — the strongest connection he found — in the original 1988 paper.

    "Canada's national newspaper", the Globe and Mail (July 15) called my presentation "one of the most controversial" of the Kingston conference. Indeed, it provoked many questions from the audience, the first from Ms. Abzug herself.

    She wanted to know, if induced abortion increases breast cancer risk, how could Japan, which has had a high abortion rate for decades, have the world's lowest breast cancer rate? The answer which was explained in detail to the Kingston audience (as well as NRL News readers [4/6/95]) is simple.

    Four epidemiological studies on Japanese women have been published since 1957. All show increased risk, with an average risk increase of about 100%. All these studies were scientifically correct: they compared Japanese women who had undergone an abortion to Japanese women who had not — not to women from the U.S. or anywhere else. And in Japan, where breast cancer risk in the absence of abortion is about 2%, abortion doubles it to about 4% — still much lower than the U.S. breast cancer rate.

    Other provocative questions followed from this audience, well represented by breast cancer survivors, most notably concerning survival among women diagnosed with breast cancer while pregnant, and those who got pregnant after treatment for breast cancer. I reported that, contrary to commonly given medical advice, survival was markedly better in both cases among women who chose childbirth instead of abortion. Ironically, the best research in the world on these subgroups of women was performed at the Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto, only 150 miles from where we sat in Kingston.

    As the Globe and Mail article also reported, my world conference presentation "received applause from the audience, which included many pro-choice advocates." Thankfully, some organization concerned with women's health and women's rights has finally taken a good look at the ABC link. After all, abortion is the single most avoidable risk factor for breast cancer, and women everywhere have the right to know that!
    ——————————————————–
    Here is a list ofsome more studies.

    "An epidemiological study of cancer in Japan" Segi, M., I. Fukushima, and M. Kurihara GANN 48(Supp): 1(1957) Reported a higher rate of both spontaneous and induced abortions among breast cancer patients; increased risk ranged from 100% to 400% among the different subgroups in the study.

    "Epidemiology of cancer of the uterine cervix and corpus, breast and ovary in Israel and New York City" Stewart, H.L. and L.J. Dunham J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 37:1-95(1966) More Israeli breast cancer patients had pregnancies which terminated in the first trimester than did the control group.

    "Lactation and reproductive histories of breast-cancer patients in Tokyo, Japan" Yuasa, S. and B. MacMahon Bull. WHO 42:195-204(1970) "There was a significant excess of [cancer] cases reporting one or more abortions."

    "Epidemiological characteristics of cancer of the breast in Taiwan" Lin, T.M., K.P. Chen, and B. MacMahon Cancer 27:1497-1504(1970) Women with one or more abortions had a cancer risk 50% higher than that of women who did not; with two or more abortions, the risk rose to 100% higher.

    "Breast cancer in an area of high parity" Mirra, P. P. Cole, and B. MacMahon Cancer Res. 31:77-83(1971) In a Brazilian study, more breast cancer patients reported having had abortions than did the control group.

    "Breast Cancer in pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women"
    Stavraky, K. and S. Emmons J Natl. Cancer Inst. 53:647-654(1974) Thirty-seven percent of patients who developed breast cancer after menopause had had at least one abortion, while only 27% of women with other cancers reported having had an abortion.

    "Risk factors of breast cancer in Finland" Soini, I.
    Intl. J. Epidemiol. 6:365-373(1977) Rate of breast cancer among women in Finland increased with number of abortions.

    "An epidemiologic study of breast cancer" Choi, N.W., G.R. Howe, A.B. Miller, V. Matthews, R.W. Morgan, L. Munan, J.D. Burch, J. Feather, M. Jain, and A. Kelly Amer J. Epidemiol. 107:510-521(1978) Women whose pregnancies lasted four months or less showed a statistically significant increase in breast cancer.
    "The role of reproductive history in breast cancer causation" Dvoirin, V.V. and A.B. Medvedev Methods and results of studies of breast cancer epidemiology, 53-56. Tallinn, Estonia (in Russian)(1978) Case-control study in the North Caucasus, Soviet Union, found an increased risk in women with three or more induced abortions of 240%. With one or two induced abortions, the increase in risk was 100%.

    "A review of the epidemiology of human breast cancer" Kelsey, J.L. Epidemiol. Rev. 1:74-109(1979) "Pregnancies of less than four to five months duration may be associated with an increased risk."

    "Susceptibility of mammary gland to carcinogenesis: Pregnancy interruption as a risk factor." Russo, J., Russo, I.H. American Journal of Pathology 100:497-512(1980). The breast tissue of rats is similar to that of humans, and this study in rats found that animals who had an induced abortion were at the same risk of breast cancer as animals treated with a chemical typically used to induce cancer in rats. Whether the developmental mechanisms are the same in women requires further study, of course, but this study was cited by the National Women's Health Network as giving a plausible explanation for why there should be a connection.

    "Oral contraceptive use and early abortion as risk factors for breast cancer in young women" Pike, M.C., B.E. Henderson, J.T. Casagrande, I. Rosario, and G.E. Gray Brit. J. Cancer 43:72-76(1981) First trimester abortion of first pregnancies led to increased risk of 140% (2.4 times) among women under 32.

    "Reproductive factors in the aetiology of breast cancer" Brinton, L.A., R. Hoover, and J.F. Fraumeni, Jr. Brit. J. Cancer 47:757-782(1983) Raw numbers in this study nearly duplicate Pike's findings two years earlier.

    "Interrupted pregnancy as one indicator of poor prognosis in T1, T2, No, Mo primary breast cancer" Ownby, H.E., S. Martino, L. D. Roi, L. Howard, J. Russo, S. Brooks, and M.J. Brennan
    Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 3:339-344(1983) Women with one abortion had twice as many recurrences of cancer as those with none; women with two or more abortions had three times as many cases of cancer.

    "Occurrence of breast cancer in relation to diet and reproductive history: a case-control study in Fukuoka, Japan" Hirohata, T., T. Shigematsu, A.M.Y. Nomura Natl. Cancer Inst. Mono. 69:187(1985) After multiple logistic regression analysis, risk among women with any induced abortion was 52% higher than from women who had no abortions.

    "Abortion before first live birth and risk of breast cancer" Hadjimichael, O.C., C.A. Boyle, and J.W. Meigs Brit. J. Cancer 53:281-284(1986) Abortion before first live birth, after adjusting for other known risk factors, increased risk by 250% (3.5 times).

    "General epidemiology of breast cancer in Norther Italy" La Vecchia, C., A. Decarli, F. Parazzini, A. Gentile, E. Negi, G. Cecchetti and S. Franceschi Intl. J. Epidemiol. 16:347-355(1987) Risk among Italian women with one or more legal abortions before first live birth was increased by 42%. Researchers reported "little relation of breast cancer risk with abortions or miscarriages", and this study is cited as one to make the connection inconclusive. Yet it did show a positive increase when only the abortion of a first pregnancy is considered.

    "Risk of breast cancer in relation to reproductive factors in Denmark" Ewertz, M. and S.W. Duffy Brit. J. Cancer 58:99-104(1988) Termination of first pregnancy before 28 weeks increased risk by 43% ; two or more abortions before the first full pregnancy increased the risk by 73%; one induced abortion with no live births increased risk by 285%.

    "Risk factors for breast cancer in Chinese women in Shanghai" Yuan, J.M., M.C. Yu, and R.K. Ross Cancer Res. 48:1949(1988)
    Among Chinese women who developed breast cancer before the age of 40, abortion before first full-term pregnancy led to increased risk of 140%.

    "Breast cancer and pregnancy: the ultimate challenge" Clark, R.M. and T. Chua Clin. Oncol. Royal Coll. Radiol. 1:11-18(1989) Among women who developed cancer while pregnant: those who carried pregnancy to term had a 20% survival rate; women who miscarried received more aggressive treatment and had a 42% survival rate, but every woman who chose abortion died.

    "Early abortion and breast-cancer risk among women under 40" Howe, Holly, R.T. Senie, H. Bzduch, and P. Herzfeld Int. J. Epidemiol. 18:300-304(1989) Abortion of first pregnancy led to increased risk of 90% (1.9 times). Repeated abortions heightened risk by 300%.

    "Risk of cancer of the breast after legal abortion during first trimester: A Swedish register study" Lindefors-Harris, B.M., G. Edlund, O. Meirik, L.E. Rutqvist, and K. Wiklund Brit. Med. J. 299:1430-1432(1989) Women who had an abortion before a live birth had an 88% greater risk of breast cancer than did women who had a live birth before an abortion.

    "Proliferation and DNA ploidy in malignant breast tumors in relation to early oral contraceptive use and early abortions"
    Olsson, H., J. Ranstam, B. Baldetop, S.-B. Ewers, M. Ferno, D. Killander, H. Sigurdsson Cancer 67:1285-1290(1991) Abortion of first pregnancy led to more aggressive tumors.

    "Her-2/neu and INT2 proto-oncogene amplification in malignant breast tumors in relation to reproductive factors and exposure to exogenous hormones" Olsson, H., A. Borg, M. Ferno, J. Ranstam, and H. Sidgurdsson J Natl. Cancer Inst. 83:1483-1487(1991)
    Breast cancers of women who aborted their first pregnancy showed many times the normal rate of INT2, a specific gene associated with breast cancer.

    "Spontaneous and induced abortions and risk of breast cancer"
    Parazzini, F., C. La Vecchia, and E. Negri Int. J. Cancer 48:816-820(1991) Legal abortions in Italy before first birth led to increased risk of 30%. Again, a report cited as showing no relation between abortion and live birth, but actually containing data showing one with abortion of the first pregnancy is considered..

    "Variations in the risk of breast cancer associated with a family history of breast cancer according to age at onset and reproductive factors" Andrieu, Nadine, et. al.J. Clin. Epidemiol. 46:973-980(1993)Researchers found no statistically significant abortion-related increase in breast cancer risk for women in general, but made the statistically significant finding that women with a family history of breast cancer were 280% more likely to get cancer if they had had two or more abortions.

    "Breast cancer risk factors in African-American women: the Howard University Tumor Registry experience," Laing, Amelia, et. al.
    J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 85:931-939(1993) Shows a 50% increase in risk at or near the age of 40, a 180% increase in risk between 40-49, and a 370% increase for women 50 and older.

    "Role of genetic and reproductive factors in breast cancer" Genetic Epidemiol. 11:285(1994). Did show an increase in risk, though not one that could eliminate the possibility of chance.

    "Reproductive and lifestyle risk factors for breast cancer in African-American women" Genetic Epidemiol. 11:285(1994) Done under a National Cancer Institute grant, this was a follow-up to the exploratory research at Howard University of the previous year. The study shows a significantly significant 144% increase in breast cancer risk for women who have had abortions.

    "Does abortion increase breast cancer risk?" J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 85:1987-88(1993) Dr. Janet Daling is quoted as saying, "There is a 50% to 90% increase in risk for women who had an abortion before the age of 18." This large-scale study was done at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and more extensive findings from this study will be out in the Fall of 1994.

    "Risk of breast cancer among young women: relationship to induced abortion," Daling, Jnet. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 86:1584(1994). This study found a 50% increased chance of breast cancer for women under 45, and a higher risk when the first abortion was prior to 18 years of age.

    Information on the studies cited was supplied by Scott Somerville, Esq.–Ed.

    January 15th, 2008 at 9:32 am
  212. Ramir San Diego says:

    Student,

    Unfortunately, I no longer fully trust any of the US institutes' findings either when it comes to anything with "possible" links to abortion. IMO, the person/s involved in the research or their management have already biased views and will not be able to provide an objective result.

    At least, the UK research was done by actuaries who have a more objective view and acknowledges that abortion could be one of the factors increasing breast cancer. The same with their MSM, who report the news and not put any spin on it unlike our liberal media…that's my opinion.

    And I will continue to pray that people realize the moral dilemma of abortion (and the culture of death) and see the Truth before it's too late…and that's my choice.

    January 15th, 2008 at 9:44 am
  213. Student says:

    Dan,
    I agree that "we cannot use intentions alone to judge the success of a program." I'm sure your intentions are good as to abstinance education, however, the facts show that teen pregnancies are on the rise for the first time in 14 years. Source: http://www.cdc.gov/od/oc/media/pressrel/2007/r071205.htm

    It makes as much sense to me as taking away driver education classes in the hope that teenagers won't drive. I have no problem with stressing abstinance, but let's give them the facts as well. Knowledge is always a good thing.

    January 15th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
  214. Charles says:

    Student,

    I think your analogy might be a little misleading. So, perhaps you might like this one a little better: teaching safe(r) sex education in school is like teaching safe(r) drunk driving.

    January 15th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
  215. Tara says:

    Hi all -

    I'm going to change the subject for a moment. Just a reminder that next week is the anniveristy of the horrible decision on Roe v. Wade. Saturday's protest at PP will be held just before that anniversary. Please come if you can, so we can continue to show them that we are not giving up on change and will continue to speak for the most vulnerable of the us, the unborn.

    Jesus said, "whatever you do to the least of these, you do to me."

    January 15th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
  216. Sandy says:

    Tara,
    I'll see you there!
    Sandy

    January 15th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
  217. Student says:

    Charles,
    I completely disagree. Teenagers will, at some point in their lives, have sex. Why not teach them how their bodies work and how to protect themselves properly? The logic of removing sex education and then expecting abortion to disappear is a complete mystery to me. I have a family member who taught her children nothing but abstinance. She is now a grandmother and her daughter isn't old enough to vote. It doesn't work.

    January 15th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
  218. Charles says:

    Student,

    Teenagers will, sadly, at some point in their lives drink – to the same extent as they will have sex. So why should we teach them how to drive while intoxicated? Obviously, the two do not mix. Instead, let’s teach them that driving is only okay when we are not intoxicated. Just as certain activities should happen within the confines of marriage. Why not teach our kids right from wrong?

    January 15th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
  219. Student says:

    Charles,
    Why do you think that teenagers will drink to the same extent that they will have sex? I know several people who were sexually active as teenagers who have never had a drop to drink. Can you explain your logic?

    As to sex education, who is talking about right and wrong? I'm talking about education. Knowledge is never a bad thing. Teach morality all you want at home, but don't keep a school from educating. Not everyone has the same morality. I don't think sex should be limited to the confines of marriage, nor would I advocate waiting until marriage to have sex. Regardless, I'm talking specifically about EDUCATING people as to how their bodies work and how to take care of them.

    January 15th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
  220. Paul2 says:

    Student says:
    *********
    The logic of removing sex education and then expecting abortion to disappear is a complete mystery to me.
    *********

    The logic of how having sex on contraception is going to make abortion go away is complete idiocy. Lets say your contraceptives are 95% effective. That means one out of every tenty times you have sex you will get pregnant. That means you are eventually going to pregnant while on contraceptives. Why deceive people with "sex education" that will likely result in unplannd pregnancys. Just have your partner get a vasectomy instead. With todays medical technology they can get his organ to function again after the vasectomy. Then youn would not have to load your body with excessive levels of hormones too. Win/Win. You get sex and 100% no abortions. But to say your contraceptives are going to prevent pregnancy is naive
    and dangerously ineffective sex education.

    January 15th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
  221. Student says:

    Paul,
    I never claimed it would make it go away completely, however, it will reduce the need dramatically.

    And, not that it's really any of your business, my partner HAS had a vasectomy (and his "organ" functions just fine — thank you very much!). He had it at age 24 and had to fight to get it because he was considered "too young."

    January 16th, 2008 at 8:20 am
  222. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    It sounds like your partner is a very responsible person. Is it a monogomous relationship? Not to pry but I do believe ir are other health issues, both mental and physical, that come into play when someone has multiple partners. I do understand that AO education is not the "best" way to go. I just don't think it's the governments place to decide what else to teach my kids. I educate my kids by bringing them with me to march outside of PP. They are getting exposed to the "grave" consequences of having sex before you "want" children. I teach them about contraception, but not that they should use it. They are being taught that over half of the abrtiions performed are performed on womend who were using contraception. They are being taught that although the FDA has approved these drug, it is not wise for a woman to introduce excessive hormones into their body to disrupt their natural bodily rhythm to try and prevent pregnancy. No parent should trust the public schools or the government to teach their children about these topics. Parents need to take a hands on approach. It is likely the parents who spend the most time educating their children about comprehensive sexual education who are most against it being taught in the schools. The school system is supposed to teach reading, writing and arithetic and not "sex is good" just make sure it is "safe" sex and use contraception. It is a lie and will end up causing great harm to the children who have ot been given as comprehensive an education as I give mine.

    January 16th, 2008 at 11:52 am
  223. Tom says:

    Wow, Are you all so old and out of touch with reality that you forgot what being a teenager is like? They learn about sex from each other way before the schools get around to it.

    The teenagers with religious parents are usually the worst. They learn to be very sneaky and know how to play their parents well.

    C’mon, think back. Did you tell your parents everything that you did? How about the rebellious phase?

    Get real, you kids have you snowed.

    January 16th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
  224. Student says:

    Paul,
    My partner is a very responsible and wonderful man. Yes, we are monogamous. It seems we both agree that AO is not the best way to go and I applaud the fact that you do speak with your children about these issues – too many parents do not. I don’t think it’s the government’s job to teach my children morals either – an education is a different thing (I don’t think schools are teaching “sex is good” and encouraging kids to engage in same). For instance, I would be quite angry if a school advocated a particular method of birth control and/or stated they should be sexually active by “x” age. However, I do think the various methods of birth control (and risk of failure) is part of an education and I certainly want them to know that if they are going to be sexually active they better — at a minimum — have a condom. I’m very open to answering my kids’ questions AND giving my opinions. However, I don’t expect that they will remain celibate until (or if) they get married, nor would I desire them to do so. Having said that, I don’t think people should rush into sexual relationships until they are ready for them. When they are ready, they should have the knowledge to protect themselves and any potential partner from not only pregnancy, but disease as well.

    January 16th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
  225. Paul2 says:

    And a person is not "ready" for a sexual relationship until they can at least understand the implications involved should it result in pregnancy. i don't think grade school kids or for that matter even most high school kids are still dependents and are not ready for that kind of responsibility. Would it make sense to put the greatest emphasis on that fact when teaching them comprehensive sex education? Anything less is dishonest and dangerous to their health.

    January 16th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
  226. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    And a person is not "ready" for a sexual relationship until they can at least understand the implications involved should it result in pregnancy. i don't think grade school kids or for that matter even most high school kids (who are still dependents themselves mind you) are ready for that kind of responsibility. It would make sense to put the greatest emphasis on that fact when teaching them comprehensive sex education? Anything less is dishonest and dangerous to their health.

    January 16th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
  227. Paul2 says:

    Tom,
    I would call myself a religious parent. A large part of my realtionship with my children involves "daily" prayer together. To the contrary I would guess that many if not most non-religious parents fail to spend "daily" time fostering the relationships they have with their children. I am not arguing that children don't go through a rebellious phase, rather I am arguing that they get hurt more often cause their parents aren't making a great enough effort to really know them and share their concerns on a "daily" basis Instead of expecting the public school system to raise your kids for you, try actually getting to know them and the issues they are dealing with on a daily basis.
    My 12 year old girl came home from scholl yesterday and asked me what "masturation" was. I had no trouble talking with her about it. Why would I want her learning "anthing" about masturbation as part of her public school education? The day my girl can get contraceptives from the scholl nurse (and that is what PP is pushing for) without my being notified is the day I take my girl out of the public school system.

    January 16th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
  228. JLM says:

    Tom (comment #223)

    LOL! I was one of those kids. You are absolutely right…boy did I pull the wool over my parent's eyes on SO many occasions!

    The problem, though, is that I wish I would have listened to them in most of those times. I didn't have an open line of communication with them. I was scared to talk to them about just about anything that was out of their "norm". That's why I learned to open up that line of communication very early with my child, and so did my siblings with their children. It's amazaing the difference between this generation of children in our family & their parents (we do check on them because we know all of the tricks!). If you start an open line of communication with them when they are young, keep it open, and nurture it…they actually listen! (well, most of the time, at least!)

    January 16th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
  229. JLM says:

    Paul2,

    I love that idea of prayer time with the family. I always did it as a private thing. Maybe I'll have to change that….thanks!

    January 16th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
  230. Student says:

    Paul,
    I think part of the education is an understanding of ALL of the implications involved in sexuality (feelings, disease and potential pregnancy). You made the statement, "It would make sense to put the greatest emphasis on that fact when teaching them comprehensive sex education?" I'm not sure where you want to place the emphasis. Can you elaborate on that?

    You also made a statement to Tom, "I would guess that many if not most non-religious parents fail to spend "daily" time fostering the relationships they have with their children." Based on what? Many of my friends are non-religious and spend daily time with their children. My partner's daughter is home-schooled by her mother and step-father and they spend SIGNIFICANT time together. I don't think your statement is a fair one.

    January 16th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
  231. Paul2 says:

    Student,
    The emphasis on any sex ed program taught in public school should be teaching them that they are not ready for a sexual relationship until they can at least understand the implications involved should it result in pregnancy. Sure teach them about contraceptives but don't teach them that contraceptives equals "safe" sex. No sex is safe for grade school kids and that is the message the school should be emphasizing. Instead they would teach our children they can have "safe sex"
    Kids too easily interpret that as meaning sex is o.k. and safe as long as it's done with contraception.
    When in actuality over half the women getting abortions were using contraception when they got pregnant.

    Another part of what PP is pushing for is that schools should be able to dispense contraceptives to children without notifying the parents if/when they dispense the drugs. Public school system that institues policies that would tells kids they don't have to tell their parents about sexual activity is really moronic in my opinion. The parent is the legal guardian and responsible for the childs developement. Why would the public school act as an enabler to a child taking contraception without notifying the parents. It is an extremely bad idea for a school to send kids a message that it is o.k. to do things behind their parents backs.

    BTW Student you said:
    "My partner's daughter is home-schooled by *her* mother and step-father and they spend SIGNIFICANT time together."

    I thought you said your partner had a vasectomy at age 24?????????

    January 17th, 2008 at 12:27 am
  232. Paul2 says:

    Student, I said:
    ********************
    BTW Student you said:
    "My partner's daughter is home-schooled by *her* mother and step-father and they spend SIGNIFICANT time together."

    I thought you said your partner had a vasectomy at age 24?????????
    *********************

    Please disregard the above comment from previous post
    I read it again and now I see the "her" in "her mother" is the daughter not the partner. I get it now.

    January 17th, 2008 at 2:39 am
  233. Paul2 says:

    Anyway Student,
    Did you understand my explanation about where the area of emphasis should be in comprehensive sex education to children?

    January 17th, 2008 at 2:40 am
  234. Dan the Methodist says:

    Too All,
    I would have to say that they do a piss poor job of educating on the physical and emotional effects of bankrupcy and or forclosure also. With all this compassion about forclosure rate, weren't the kids taught this in school. Didn't they try and simulate loosing everything? If this is possible, why didn't they do it. If it is not, how can they understand that when they sign a mortgage, they will have to pay???
    Do we have a similar situation in Abortion Education?

    Here is a link, I have to go. It deals with a baby boom and how there isn't enough abortion locations as a reason.
    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5il3MRchwbfmuBgzYUPgNwvcBVK1wD8U6OU100

    January 17th, 2008 at 6:50 am
  235. Student says:

    PAUL: Please disregard the above comment from previous post I read it again and now I see the "her" in "her mother" is the daughter not the partner. I get it now.

    RESPONSE: No, you actually got it right the first time. It's a bit personal but I don't think he'd mind my explaining the situation. My partner had a vasectomy at 24. At 26 he married L. After several years of marriage, L wanted a child. She was artificially inseminated with the help of a sperm bank and gave birth to a daughter. For all practical purposes, my partner is her father (just not biologically) and is very involved in her life. In fact, we frequently vacation with my partner's ex and her new husband.

    PAUL: No sex is safe for grade school kids and that is the message the school should be emphasizing.

    ANSWER: I concur.

    As to contraceptives for high school students, I would much prefer they be available than to have kids go ahead and have sex without them. I don't think they should be readily available (with the exception of condoms) from schools — primarily for legal liability reasons, however, teenagers can go to clinics (and not just PP) to get contraceptives w/o parental knowledge or consent now.

    Re parental consent, I'd still love for someone to address a question I've posted a couple of times. If you have a 15 year old girl who is pregnant and wants to continue the pregnancy but her parents are insistent that she abort, which person's rights trump……those of the parents or those of the pregnant teen?

    January 17th, 2008 at 8:31 am
  236. Paul2 says:

    Student says:
    ***************
    As to contraceptives for high school students, I would much prefer they be available than to have kids go ahead and have sex without them. I don't think they should be readily available (with the exception of condoms) from schools — primarily for legal liability reasons, however, teenagers can go to clinics (and not just PP) to get contraceptives w/o parental knowledge or consent now.
    *****************
    I disagree about high school kids getting birth control from school or clinics without parental notification. In high school most kids are old enough to think they know everything but still not independent enough to realy understand all the consequences of their actions. And I am completely against them giving our children anything to enable
    them to get hurt by believing the "safe sex" fallicy as explasined in my previous post. The legal guardian "deserves" to know if an unemancipated minor is sexually active and the school should be encouraging these minrs that they talk with their parents about sexual activity. It is not in the best health intersets of a minor to keep sexual activity from their
    parent or guardian.

    As far as requiring parental consent. It could be easily argued that parental consent be required for many of the sa reasons stated above. But Parental Notification should be without question enforced as a law immediately. I can tell tell you that if somebody performed an abortion on one of my daughters without my knowing I would seek swift, impassioned justice. I think these issues are all resolved by laws like the one Parental Notification Act of 1996. PP has a predatory agenda of wanting acess to our children to perform abortions on them or give them drugs and teach them that it is o.k. to do these things behind their parents back. And it is absurd that they can do that
    illegally in a society whose fabric is dependent upon parental oversight and parental responsibility for their teens.

    January 17th, 2008 at 11:54 am
  237. Student says:

    In an ideal world, teens would talk with their parents. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world. Teens are going to be sexually active. Even if we disagree about the failure rate of contraceptives, something is always better than nothing.

    The Parental Notification Act is under federal judicial review and has been stayed so, at least at the moment, there is no requirement to notify a parent of an abortion. If your daughter chose to have one, you would have no legal recourse.

    I'd still like to know your feelings an the scenario I've mentioned a couple of times. If a pregnant 14 y.o. wants to continue a pregnancy and her parents are insistent that she abort, who gets to make the final decision? Should the rights of the parents supercede the rights of the pregnant teen?

    January 17th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
  238. Tara says:

    Student,

    Since you have completely ignored me, I just have one question. It has been noted here that you teach on Pro-Abortion websites, is that true?

    January 17th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
  239. Student says:

    Tara says:
    Student,
    Since you have completely ignored me, I just have one question. It has been noted here that you teach on Pro-Abortion websites, is that true?

    ******************

    Who noted that — and where? Your information/source is completely inaccurate. Where did you get that information?

    January 17th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
  240. Student says:

    Tara,
    I'm sorry if you're feeling ignored. Your post #211 went on a long time and I do have other committments to family, work, school, volunteer work and political activities. There is no way I have time to locate and read each and every study you mentioned. I specifically said in an early post that I wasn't interested in anything that came from a pro-life or Catholic Church source. You may consider the Dahling study acceptable, I don't consider it accurate science.

    I apologize if my not responding seemed rude to you, but I didn't see that anything good could come of it. I came here interested in what other people had to say and, although I disagree with most, I have remained respectful.

    January 17th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
  241. Tara says:

    Student,

    I would agree that you have been respectful. And part of understanding one another is to listen even if there is no agreement. That is the true meaning of tolerence and respect. I have found your posts very intresting.

    I did repond to your question of me on another thread, and I don't know if you ever got to read it.

    As far as #211, I normally Never post that way, but I couldn't get the links to work. Very frustrating. I believe that the ones I sighted were not Catholic. I am not Catholic, I'm Presbyterian. The first study I copied was by a PC researcher. It wouldbe like using Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and NOW are unbiased resources. I can respect that.

    But I have issues with the Cancer Institute bc it is linked to Planned Parenthood and so they are unbiased.

    So thank you for responding. I look forward to seeing other posts.

    I have a couple of hours of studing to do before my class tomorrow.

    January 17th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
  242. Student says:

    Tara,
    I'm not sure what the other thread was. If you'll let me know, I will go back and check it.

    Why on earth did you think I teach anywhere? My partner teaches college in the Sciences. Frankly, I wouldn't have the patience to teach anything. Even my own classmates and co-workers can annoy me with the stupid question. *grin*

    January 17th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
  243. Paul2 says:

    Student says:
    **************
    I specifically said in an early post that I wasn't interested in anything that came from a pro-life or Catholic Church source. You may consider the Dahling study acceptable, I don't consider it accurate science.
    *************

    Student, hows that????A scientific study is just that. Wether a scientist is Catholic or agnostic does not enter into into it. You should really open your mind or you will never allow yourself to make informed decisions.

    January 17th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
  244. Student says:

    PAUL: Student, hows that????A scientific study is just that. Wether a scientist is Catholic or agnostic does not enter into into it. You should really open your mind or you will never allow yourself to make informed decisions.

    RESPONSE: I think if you read Tara's post #241 you'll understand what I'm talking about. I didn't say I wasn't interested in anything "scientific." I don't believe you get accurate science with a lot of the pro-life studies and/or Catholic/religious studies — much in the same way Tara doesn't feel she would get accurate information from a study done by NOW, NARAl or Planned Parenthood. I don't think that because she wouldn't consider a study from one of these sources she is "closed minded" or "unable to make informed decisions." She sees these groups as biased, just like I see the sources I mentioned as biased — I think both of our positions are fair assessments.

    Given that I believe I have answered most of your questions, would you take a stab at the question I asked you in post the third paragraph of post #237? I've asked it a couple of times and have yet to receive a response.

    January 18th, 2008 at 8:13 am
  245. Erin says:

    Student:

    If I may address your point in post #237, here are my thoughts (though I cannot speak for Paul2, and he or anyone else may have a better or different argument). Parents have a responsibility to know about and sign off on any medical procedure, particularly a surgery, that will affect their children. This is the thought behind parental consent. However, no parents have the right to force an elective surgery or medical procedure on their minor child. That would be like insisting your fourteen-year-old have a nose-job when she doesn't want one. Whatever else it may be, abortion is surely an elective surgery or medical procedure (I should think we would agree on this, as the PC argument is based on "choice").

    I can see where you might go with your next argument. Giving birth itself could be considered as "elective" since abortion is legally an option. I don't agree with that. Giving birth is in fact the natural consequence of getting pregnant. It is physically what is "supposed" to happen, it is not optional. Pregnancy is not a disease that needs to be cured, it is not a mutation that needs to be stopped. The parts of birth that are optional–like non-emergency, elective c-section–can also not be forced on a child by a parent. Should a child of fourteen request an elective c-section, I would expect that the parents give consent, because there are major repercussions to that elective surgery that a fourteen year old might not comprehend.

    January 18th, 2008 at 10:33 am
  246. Student says:

    Thanks Erin (and I apologize for not getting my stuff to you via e-mail — been a busy week w/school & I haven't gotten my questionaire quite finished — it's on my To-Do List for this weekend) for the response. Actually, no, that's not where my argument goes. I'm just trying to guage whether people are looking for "consent" or "notification." Obviously, they are very different things. I certainly agree with your nose job analogy. Conversely, I don't think a parent should be able to force a child to become a parent hereself. Thus, if the same 14 y.o. chose to have terminate a pregnancy, I believe she should have that option. So I guess I'm just interested in learning more about whether the PL community (and I know you can only speak for yourself — I can only speak for myself as opposed to the entire PC community) is looking for notification or consent.

    Under current law, a minor becomes emancipated when they are a parent. So in other words, if your 14 y.o. daughter gave birth, she would no longer need the consent of her parents to do anything — strictly from a legal perspective. I am currently researching the conflicting rights that occur in such situations.

    Thanks for responding. I do very much appreciate it.

    January 18th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
  247. Erin says:

    Student:

    You are a law student, so you probably know a lot more about this than I do, but I don't think having a child automatically emancipates someone. Here is a quote from the Juvenile Law Center (www.jlc.org):

    "Does becoming a parent automatically lead to emancipation?

    No, becoming a parent does not emancipate a minor for all purposes. If a minor is not able to support herself and does not live independently of her parents, she is not considered emancipated, whether or not she has a child.
    Teenagers do acquire some of the rights of adults when they have a child. For example, teenage parents have the right to custody of their child and to make decisions regarding the child’s upbringing, such as consenting to medical treatment, educational planning, and adoption. Teenage parents maintain these rights regardless of whether they live with their own parents or not, as long as they adequately care for their child. Teenage mothers also have the right to consent to their own health care, except for abortions. 12
    Please refer to the section below on Public Assistance for more on how the requirements for TANF and General Assistance affect emancipation."

    January 18th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
  248. Student says:

    Tara,
    Thanks for the info. Actually, the paper I'm currently working on is about emancipation and minors — how abortion law relates to that is only a minor part of it. The case law I've read to date (and it only pertains to the State of Illinois) is that becoming a parent emancipates a child. However, I'll certainly check out your info.

    Thanks again!

    January 18th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
  249. Student says:

    Sorry Erin….that last post should have been directed to you, not Tara. My bad!

    January 18th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
  250. Dan the Methodist says:

    Student,

    My response to your abstinence analogy.

    You have a point about abstinence only. I do not reject reasonable sex education with parental OK. What I do reject is having planned parenthood doing it in schools. Clearly the largest form of revenue to PP clinics is Abortions and this is the end goal. I do reject the idea that underage kids should be able to get BC without parental notification.(not even going to consent) Abortion without parental notifications is INSANE. I can appreciate all the good intentions, but I cannot allow morality and rationality stink up Aurora. It does not pass the smell test.
    If you were to acknowledge the ABC link with abortion and breast cancer. How could you give money to an organization whose slogan was "A Race for the CURE," when they are contributing to an outfit that increases risk?
    In a similar way I could not support planned parenthood teaching, having access, and conveniencing kids into sex without even making them aware of the true consequences and doing it all without parental involvement up to and including performing outpatient surgery.

    Thanks in advance to your response.
    I hope there is some bridges being built here.

    January 20th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
  251. Cathy says:

    I have a question to our budding lawyers who post here: if my minor daughter goes to PP and has an abortion with my knowledge (let alone my consent!) and there are medical complications resulting from that abortion, I understand that I am legally responsible to be sure she is treated for those complications (and I would want to do that) – but… could I sue the PP facility for the cost of treating those complications, since my minor child IS a minor, and isn't able to enter into a contract with them?

    January 20th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
  252. Student says:

    Cathy ~ If the complications arose due to negligence or some type of medical malpractice, yes. If not, then no. DISCLAIMER: You can pretty much sue anyone for anything — winning/collecting is another matter entirely.

    January 21st, 2008 at 2:48 pm
  253. Student says:

    Dan ~ Perhaps there are some bridges being built…..who woulda thunk it! LOL

    I think we pretty much agree on the sex education issue. From my point of view, it's irrelevant whether or not that education comes from PP, the VNA or a well educated and informed adult. It's the information and education that matters to me. If it would make you feel better that it not be done by PP, I'd have no problem w/that whatsoever.

    Teenagers can get birth control without parental notification and/or consent now — and not just from PP. I know we disagree here, but I believe that access is necessary. There are some parents who would never allow that access who do have teenagers that are sexually active. I want those kids to have some protection. You may believe that birth control is playing Russian Roulette, but using nothing is just suicide.

    I'm afraid we have to agree to disagree as to the link between abortion/breast cancer. I grant you that there seems to be a connection among the group of women who have had an abortion and never a subsequent full term pregnancy. However, for those women who have had an abortion and then a full-term pregnancy there isn't much of a link.

    January 21st, 2008 at 2:59 pm
  254. Dan the Methodist says:

    If they have to put a warning on cigarettes. Don't you think it wise to alert people? The media puts out alerts on how fasting 1 day a month can help with heart disease, but the press doesn't see fit for the masses to digest this information. Good thing big press is looking out for women.
    Comments not directed at you Student, at the press and government. It seems that research and grant money has become a dog and pony show that has little to do with the issues, kind of like our elections.
    I am angry that I have heard little about issues from the presidential race down to our own US Congressional races. It seems to be marketing, because big government likes us to be IGNORANT. Ignorance and big government need each other to exist.

    Sorry, hope you got my point. :)

    January 21st, 2008 at 10:44 pm
  255. Student says:

    Dan, I think I agree with most of what you said. I'm confused as to your statement, "The media puts out alerts on how fasting 1 day a month can help with heart disease, but the press doesn't see fit for the masses to digest this information."

    Aren't the media and the press the same? I'm confused when you say the media puts out the alert and the press doesn't…… To be honest, I haven't heard anything about the fasting claim.

    As to the Presidential race, I agree that we need to hear a lot more on the issues. Frankly, I'm sick of the back-biting, accusations and just plain bad behavior on the part of the candidates — both Democratic and Republican.

    January 22nd, 2008 at 8:48 am
  256. Jerry Vilt says:

    A young woman walked up to the 40 Days for Life vigil
    outside an abortion center in Austin, Texas recently.
    She signed up to join the others in prayer … and
    then immediately sat down on the sidewalk and started
    to cry.

    One of the volunteers stopped praying for a moment to
    approach the young woman, whom she had never met before,
    and asked her if she needed a hug. This volunteer
    assumed that the thought of what was going on inside
    the abortion facility had simply overcome this woman
    and brought her to tears.

    But that wasn't the case. To her surprise, she found
    out this young woman was crying for another reason.

    "I'm pregnant right now and don't want to be," she
    said. "I've already had four abortions.

    She said she didn't have an abortion scheduled. "But
    I keep feeling this huge temptation to just go to an
    abortion clinic, pay my $400 and get it over with.
    I came to the sidewalk to pray, and to be around
    people who are like-minded as I am."

    The young woman told one of the sidewalk counselors
    that she was twelve weeks into her pregnancy. She had
    already been to a pregnancy resource center, but was
    still a mess emotionally.

    She had become a Christian, she said. "But with this
    pregnancy, I just feel so depressed. I'm living in a
    women's shelter, and the last thing I want right now
    is to be pregnant."

    The sidewalk counselor took her to dinner, and they
    sat and talked for hours. "As they developed a long-
    term plan to get this young woman the help she needs,"
    said Elizabeth McClung, the local 40 Days for Life
    coordinator in Austin, "she said something that should
    serve as an encouragement to every single pro-lifer
    who has ever thought about going to pray at an
    abortion facility."

    "If you guys weren't out there praying," this woman
    said, "I would have pulled up to the facility, sat in
    my car for hours on end — and ended up going inside
    for a fifth abortion. Since you were on the sidewalk
    praying, I knew I could find comfort and support
    there, so I went there to cry instead. Thank you for
    being there."

    "Her story is the perfect example as to why we not only
    pray from home and from church, but we also go pray at
    the very places where lives are being hurt and taken,"
    Elizabeth said.

    She is now on a path to healing from her previous
    abortions, finding a job and taking her pregnancy one
    day at a time. And, Elizabeth said, "She is not going
    to have another abortion!"

    Please pray for her, and for all who are desperate to
    break out of that cycle of abortion.

    March 3rd, 2010 at 9:02 am
  257. Jerry Vilt says:

    repeating part of above:

    "Her story is the perfect example as to why we not only
    pray from home and from church, but we also go pray at
    the very places where lives are being hurt and taken,"

    March 3rd, 2010 at 9:05 am
  258. The League at Ground Zero « Pro-Life Hotline says:

    [...] "Live blog from the ZBA hearing tonight" —FVFAPP website, 1-7-08 [...]

    October 16th, 2013 at 3:31 pm

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