New Ad Claims "The dreams of all of our daughters are at stake…"

By 38 Comments 633 views

….if you don't re-elect President Obama in 2012.

Cue the violins (actually, it's maudlin piano music in the video) and prepare your heartstrings to be painfully strummed:

YouTube Preview Image

Video content (as opposed to “substance”):

Dear President Obama,

I'm a mother of two young daughters: Daisy is six and Caroline is almost ten. My six-year-old would like to be a doctor for dolphins and my ten-year-old dreams of becoming a jet fighter pilot.

Caroline is so committed to her dream that she sets her alarm at 5:00 every morning so she'll be prepared for her military service.

I love that my daughters dream so big and see no limits to their future. Watching their dreams unfold everyday is one of the unique pleasures of being a mom.

It is upsetting to me that in 2012 the use of birth control has become controversial.

See what they did there? Tied together the dreams and future of two young girls (are they both named Julia?) to federally-sponsored birth control. 2 + oranges = orangutans.

I'd love to see a GOP parody ad leading in with the same opener…but instead of “It is upsetting to me that in 2012 the use of birth control has become controversial“, put into place something along the lines of, “It is upsetting to me that in 2012 2nd Amendment rights have become controversial.“; or “It is upsetting to me that in 2012 the desire to keep the traditional definition of marriage is perceived as radically controversial.“; or, “It is upsetting to me that in 2012 being opposed to federally-funded abortion providers has become controversial.“; or…well, we all get the point of the non sequitur.

And what exactly is meant by “the use of birth control” becoming “controversial”?!?! Who is against birth control?

Birth control isn't just for family planning, it's preventative care and treatment, it's medication that most women need and use at some point in their lives. And it is as common in a woman's medicine cabinet as cough medicine.

Okay…so why can't your birth control be paid for like everything else that's common in your cabinet…like the cough medicine, tooth paste, Pepto bismol, alka seltzer, Q-tips, etc.?

Beyond that it's a woman's right to make decisions about her own body and her own life. This is just one reason I'm so passionate about getting you re-elected this year. We need a President who will stand up for women's health and stay focused on jobs and economic recovery. The dreams of all our daughters are at stake. And they're counting on us to fight for them.

Sincerely,

Erin Bilbray-Kohn

Well, there ya go.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List (a woman herself and mother of young girls, no less):

was appalled by the Obama campaign’s implication that her daughters’ success depends on the president being involved in her sex life.

“What mother looks at what she wants for her daughter and think the best thing she can do is do guarantee that she can have a happy sex life and a protected sex life,” Dannenfelser said. “Providing contraception to underage girls arms them for a sex life that will destroy them.

“Men will take advantage of them. Contraception sets you up to be a sexual pawn. Most girls just do not know how men think.”

According to Dannenfelser, this factor is precisely why Susan B. Anthony and other early feminists objected to abortion because it allows a man to get away without having to face any consequences.

Why the heck would a woman want to be with someone who can't shell out the small bucks to buy her female contraceptives? How expensive are condoms for the man, seriously?! How hard is it to find services that are more than happy to hand out free condoms?

“This is not the fundamental freedoms that women fought for, not even close,” Dannenfelser said.

Dannenfelser sees this ad as an effort by the Obama campaign to throw a red herring to distract attention from the president’s hostility to religious freedom and to the Catholic Church in particular.

It is also telling, she said, that the ad omits reference to sterilization and the coverage of abortion drugs.

So this is the Republican “war on women“, huh? Little girls won't be able to succeed in life without Obama in 2012 and a Romney in 2012 will see women taken back to the 50s?

Like the Republican “war against children”, “war against the arts“…”war against education”…the middle class…the poor…war against dogs…(oh, wait…libs had to scratch off that last one)…

Next thing you know, liberals will be defining and (mis)characterizing conservative opposition to President Obama's Health and Human Services mandate as a GOP BAN on contraceptives, sterilizations and abortion-inducing drugs; and will claim Republicans not only want to control a woman's body and right to choose, but also what she does in the bedroom.

jfdghjhthit45

38 Responses to “New Ad Claims "The dreams of all of our daughters are at stake…"”

  1. 1

    Greg

    Women have a fundamental right to control their own bodies and their own reproductive function. Any woman who believes that would do well to look at what republican majorities have done and have attempted to do in state legislatures across much of America since 2010. This isn’t something somebody has made up. It’s a clear agenda, being pursued with great energy.

    The suggestion is simple: If you don’t approve of the freedoms of choice your mothers and grandmothers fought for being gradually taken away from you, vote the zealots out of office. If you do approve you can vote for them, or simply refrain from voting. You still have that choice, at this point.

  2. 2

    retire05

    @Greg:

    True to your progressive indoctrination, Greg, you do not realize that pregnancy is the result of a previously made decision. Don’t want to get pregnant? Buy birth control pills at Target, CVS, Walgreens or Walmart for less than the cost of two beers. Or don’t have sex. Having sex is a personal decision, pregnancy is the result of that decision, and consequently, there comes into play that word that is an antithesis to all you progressives:

    R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y

  3. 3

    Nan G

    Woman can control their own urges, Greg.
    Not that hard.
    If I recall correctly women can train so hard as to actually cause their ovulation to stop!
    And of course women can control who goes between their legs.
    In the case of force women have access to a shot in the ER which will bring on menstration immediately, thus preventing pregnancy.
    Disease is something different.
    I know a rape victim who is taking 3 months’ worth of AZT (?) til she finds out if she got HIV or not.
    If she did, it is AZT for life.

    You know what liberated women called women who took control of their bodies to pursue a career back in the 1920’s, 30’s, 40’s and 50’s?
    Spinsters.
    Liberals are great at name-calling.

  4. 4

    Greg

    @Nan G, #3:

    Woman can control their own urges, Greg.

    If only republicans could control their urges to meddle with women’s private reproductive decisions to the same degree . . .

  5. 5

    johngalt

    @Greg:

    If only republicans could control their urges to meddle with women’s private reproductive decisions to the same degree . . .

    Maybe the left, at the same time, could curb their urge to meddle with private citizen’s wallets and purses, Greg.

  6. 6

    Reverend Oil Guy from Alberta

    I read that Unplanned Parenthood supports the bamster. Fetal life deniers.
    The taxpayer should abort their funding!

  7. 7

    Greg

    New York Times: The Campaign Against Women

    “Whether this pattern of disturbing developments constitutes a war on women is a political argument. That women’s rights and health are casualties of Republican policy is indisputable.”

  8. 8

    Aqua

    @Greg:

    That women’s rights and health are casualties of Republican policy is indisputable.

    Indisputable? So republicans want institutions to have the freedom to decide if they provide contraception based on their religious convictions. They are not banning the use of contraception, just saying they will not cover it in their insurance plans. This is a war on women? When any woman, or man for that matter, can go out and buy contraception any time they want? So unless people of faith toss that faith aside and cave in to the left’s line of reasoning, they are waging war on women?
    I will refer back to what retire05 said in post 2:

    R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y

  9. 9

    johngalt

    @Aqua:

    R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y

    Liberal/progressives prefer to place that on someone else, taking none for themselves. It is called “shifting the blame”. Every action must have a scapegoat. A bag-holder. Someone, or something, must take the fall. And it won’t be a liberal/progressive, or their ideology.

    A girl gets pregnant? It’s not her fault. The decision to have sex wasn’t hers, it was society’s. And as such, society is responsible, meaning we all have to pay for it. Whether that means paying for the abortion, or paying for the hospital bill for the delivery, or paying for the raising of the child if the girl(and/or boy) cannot do so themselves up to a specific income level. And then, when the child gets older, because of circumstances, we pay for their schooling, and their lack of ability to get a job, so we pay for them to get housing assistance, assistance for utilities, assistance for food, and then are lectured to “look the other way”, or “look beyond the act” when the person commits crimes. And then, assuming jail time, we have to pay for that as well. Society is expected to take on the responsibility for that child’s life, all because the girl got pregnant.

    And after the birth? Or even before the pregnancy? Society is directed to take on the responsibility for the girl’s sex life by providing contraception. Why? Again, because it isn’t the girl’s decision to have sex. It’s society’s decision. Because society is what turns out the TV and movie entertainment promoting sex. Society is what plays the songs that glorify sex. Society is what displays the ads for products whose message is strongly attached to sex.

    Funny thing, though. I didn’t make any decisions on the tv programming, movie content, song lyrics, or ad displays. I didn’t get to experience the sex with the girl. I don’t get to share in the joy and/or frustration of raising the child. I don’t get to enjoy that child’s successes, or commiserate with them for their failures. I don’t make any decisions at all about producing the child, having the child, or the child’s life. And yet, I have to pay for it all. Tell me how that is fairness and equality.

  10. 10

    Common Sense

    @Greg: Greg, as usual you are wrong but also a very stupid uninformed idiot of you really believe the crap you just wrote. I have twin daughters who are registered Republicans who are sick of 0-bama and his failure as a President. They are independent, intelligent, and want to find a job when they complete their college next year. They are also smart enough to know that 0-bama is NOT the guy to help them. Secondly, how does killing innocent females protect them??

  11. 12

    ccoffer

    Killing children isn’t “health care”. Neither is screwing strangers. Both are what the vermin of the democrat party wish to enshrine. Leftists hate women as much as they hate everyone else.

    They truly are the scum of this earth.

  12. 13

    Wordsmith

    editor

    @johngalt:

    @Aqua:

    R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y

    Liberal/progressives prefer to place that on someone else, taking none for themselves. It is called “shifting the blame”. Every action must have a scapegoat. A bag-holder. Someone, or something, must take the fall. And it won’t be a liberal/progressive, or their ideology.

    A girl gets pregnant? It’s not her fault. The decision to have sex wasn’t hers, it was society’s. And as such, society is responsible, meaning we all have to pay for it. Whether that means paying for the abortion, or paying for the hospital bill for the delivery, or paying for the raising of the child if the girl(and/or boy) cannot do so themselves up to a specific income level. And then, when the child gets older, because of circumstances, we pay for their schooling, and their lack of ability to get a job, so we pay for them to get housing assistance, assistance for utilities, assistance for food, and then are lectured to “look the other way”, or “look beyond the act” when the person commits crimes. And then, assuming jail time, we have to pay for that as well. Society is expected to take on the responsibility for that child’s life, all because the girl got pregnant.

    This all reminded me of a recent LATimes article about a woman caught in “the cycle of poverty”. Really, when you read it, you just shake your head as it seems to be a primer on how to do everything wrong to make a series of bad choices and remain in poverty for life:

    Caught in the cycle of poverty
    Choices, challenges and chaos keep undermining a woman’s attempt to escape the struggles her mother and grandmother faced. She wants to provide a better life for her children but seems not to know how.
    May 24, 2012|By Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times

    After months searching for work and feeling increasingly discouraged, Natalie Cole caught a break — an offer of a part-time position at a Little Caesars Pizza shop in Compton. The manager scheduled her orientation and told her she had to pass a food safety test.

    She took the test — and failed. But rather than study and take it again, she shrugged it off.

    “I guess I am not working for a reason,” she said.

    PHOTOS: A life spent battling poverty

    Cole isn’t a victim of the struggling economy. She was poor before and is poor now. Hers is a story of entrenched poverty — a whirl of choices, challenges and chaos that keeps undermining her spurts of personal progress.

    Tracking Cole’s life over six months offers a messy and at times disheartening insight into vexing social policy questions: How do you break the cycle of generational poverty? Can or should society do more to change the trajectory of the young and poor?

    Cole, 27, and her four children have moved nearly a dozen times in the last year while living on about $1,000 a month in public cash assistance and food stamps. She wants to provide a better life for her children but seems not to know how.

    “I just know what I know,” she said. “All I can do is raise them…. They are going to make their own path in life.”

    But if Cole doesn’t find a better way, chances are her children won’t finish school, hold steady jobs or stay healthy.

    “Poverty is bad for kids,” said Harvard Kennedy School professor Kathryn Edin, who studies poverty policy. “It just makes everything a struggle.”

    Children who are born into poverty and spend years that way are more likely to be teenage parents and remain poor as adults, according to the Urban Institute.

    “Getting out of poverty takes extraordinary perseverance,” Edin said. “When disadvantage builds over generations, it is going to take generations to unbuild it.”

    Cole, who has high blood pressure and diabetes, worries about the future but focuses mostly on the present as she moves from crisis to crisis.

    Cole was raised by a single mother in Compton who worked off and on as a security guard. In her early teens, Cole started drinking and smoking pot, dropped out of school and got pregnant. At 17, she was raising two children: Peter, now 12, and Destiny, 10.

    Her relationships with their fathers didn’t last. When she was 21, she met Juan Sena. He was kind and calm. The couple had two sons: Gemini, now 4, and Jaylyn, 2.

    Last summer, Sena got laid off from his construction job. He receives some unemployment and earns a little money doing tattoos. Cole sometimes braids hair to earn a few extra dollars. But mostly, they rely on public assistance. Cole has learned not to be embarrassed. “You do what you got to do,” she said. “Everything we do is for our kids.”

    Cole knows she’s made bad decisions — she should have graduated and waited to get pregnant. But she says she can’t undo that now. “I’m not gonna worry about it if I can’t fix it,” she said.

    At a Factory-2-U store in Compton one day, Cole found some socks and underwear in a box of discount clothes. At the checkout counter, she held up Superman pajama pants. “Are these mark-down?” The clerk shook her head.

    “$3.99?” Cole said. “Oh, no. I can’t afford that.”

    When the money runs out, Cole says, she sometimes has resorted to shoplifting — usually diapers or food. She prays not to get caught.

    Cole, who is heavyset and laughs easily, has tattoos of her children’s names and her own nickname — triste, or sad in Spanish. She tells her children to study and stay away from drugs. She warns Destiny that boys are trouble.

    But Peter, sullen and quiet, has already been kicked out of several schools for fighting and was arrested for shooting a BB gun at passing cars. And Destiny, outgoing and affectionate, has trouble keeping up with her classmates.

    “My mother struggled, my grandma struggled and I am struggling,” Cole said. “Hopefully they will see what we went through as a family and it makes them want to be better and go to school and graduate so they don’t have to struggle.”

    ::

    Their struggles often involve housing. Cole and her family have briefly stayed in an old van, in a motel and, for one night, on skid row. “I try not to cry in front of my kids,” she said. “I cried.”

    Late last year, Cole was paying $400 to rent a room in South Los Angeles, where the whole family slept. But the roommate complained about the noise and the mess, and she eventually kicked them out.

    About the same time, Cole started feeling sick. Her legs swelled, her head throbbed and she was tired. She was anxious and depressed. Some days she couldn’t get out of bed.

    She finds life frustrating. She and Sena insist they are good people, but can’t get ahead. They say they don’t do drugs or drink and dote on their children, often taking the youngest two to parks and the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach.

    And Cole has goals: to become a security guard and move into a house of her own. Sena has hopes too — of living where there are lots of parks. “I want to see something else for them,” he said.

    As last Christmas approached, the family was split among relatives and the children were making lists. Cole dreaded the holiday. “How do you tell a 3-year-old you can’t buy them anything?” she said.

    On Christmas Eve, Jaylyn turned pale and struggled to catch his breath. It was an asthma attack.

    “You could tell he was not getting any air,” Cole said. “It looked like he was dying.”

    A friend drove them to St. Francis Medical Center in Lynwood, which sent them by ambulance to Miller Children’s Hospital in Long Beach. Jaylyn was hooked to oxygen and an IV.

    A few days after Christmas, Jaylyn lay listless on his mom’s lap. He started whimpering and coughing.

    “What’s wrong, papi?” Cole asked him. “What’s wrong?”

    When the nurses arrived for a breathing treatment, Cole walked down the hall to the hospital’s family resource center.

    “Do you know anyone who has a place for rent? A back house? Anything?” Cole asked a counselor. “My son is really, really sick. I don’t want him to be moving around and around and end up back here.”

    The counselor promised to try and help.

    Cole’s eyes started tearing up. “I love my kids,” she said. “I just been stressed sometimes.”

    Cole hadn’t seen a doctor in months. She felt weak. It was already 1 p.m. and she hadn’t eaten. She tried not to think about it. “I just focus on my kids,” she said.

    Back in the hospital room, Jaylyn started to nod off. Cole turned off the lights and lay down beside him.

    ::

    The new year started off better. An old roommate told Cole her family could move back into her apartment.

    Corina Bullis, 33, had an infant and a 4-year-old and was a recovering drug addict. She was behind on her rent. Cole’s money would help, and she didn’t want to see her old friend on the streets. “I felt more for the kids than anybody,” Bullis said.

    In Cole’s room, a mattress lay on the floor next to a small bed. A shelf held a television, several stuffed animals and a stack of children’s movies. A prayer was taped to the wall: God in heaven, hear my prayer. Keep me in thy loving care.

    Cole turned on music, grabbed Gemini’s hand and started dancing. She was so happy to be in an apartment where she felt comfortable.

    “I just feel so relieved,” she said. Now she just needed a job.

    As she walked Gemini to a nearby Head Start preschool, he stopped at a patch of yellow flowers. “Mommy, can I pick a flower?” he asked. “Yes, you can get your teacher a flower,” she told him.

    In the classroom, Cole asked the teacher about a janitor’s job. “Do you have a resume?” the teacher asked. Cole shook her head. The teacher urged her to write one. Cole never did.

    At the end of January, Cole missed her period. Another baby would be difficult, but she said, “If I did get pregnant, I gotta deal with it.”

    When she walked by a pregnant neighbor, Cole touched her belly and said she was having one too. “I’m hoping for a girl,” she said.

    Since she was a teenager, Cole had been going to the same federal Women, Infant and Children program office for food coupons and health and nutrition counseling. This morning, she used her coupons to buy tortillas, milk, juice, cereal and fruit.

    Cole asked a nutrition educator if the office was hiring. “I need some kind of income,” she said. “And I may be having another baby.”

    The counselor, Martha Orozco, asked if she had returned to school yet for her GED. “Not yet,” Cole responded. “I am just barely getting stable.”

    Orozco told her to keep trying. “Children are a blessing. You are just gonna have to be stable.”

    “I’m almost there,” Cole said.

    ::

    Cole wasn’t pregnant after all. But she was sick, waking up many mornings with swollen legs or a throbbing headache. And she was out of blood pressure medication. She had to go to the clinic.

    A nurse at the St. John’s Well Child and Family Center in Compton pricked Cole’s finger to check her blood sugar. The results popped up quickly: 357.

    “Oooh. That’s high,” Cole said.

    “Did you take your medication?” asked Annie-Claude Sanchis, a nurse practitioner.

    She hadn’t. Now her diabetes was out of control. “I think it’s just the stress,” Cole told her.

    “I’m concerned when you are so stressed, you can’t come get your medicine,” Sanchis said. “Not good, Natalie. Not good.”

    Sanchis worries about the long-term damage to Cole’s health and to her children’s health. “If the mother is stressed, the kids are stressed too,” she said.

    Sanchis scheduled Cole for a full physical. Cole didn’t go, saying she didn’t want more bad news.

    There was already bad news about her living situation. She and Bullis argued over money and she had to move out. “We don’t fit in that room no more anyway,” she said. “I don’t care.”

    Cole and Sena were ready to look for something better. Cole had gotten a license as a security guard. Peter, her oldest son, had qualified for Supplemental Security Income based on a learning disability, so their monthly income increased slightly.

    Cole’s first job was as a guard at the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival — $11 an hour for two weekends of work.

    To prepare, she started walking, eating better and taking her medication. She didn’t want her health getting in the way. The first weekend went well, but hours into the second, she started throwing up and came home.

    But with the promise of more security guard work, Cole and her family moved into their own apartment in early May. It was across Compton from Gemini’s preschool, so she stopped taking him.

    The rent was double what they’d been paying before: $800. Cole was determined not to fall behind. She believed this was their chance.

    “If I have to sell dinners, collect cans, I am going to make my rent,” she said. “This is our new beginning.”

  13. 14

    ilovebeeswarzone

    YES THEY WILL GO WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE FOR THE NOVEMBER RE-ELECTION,
    AND NOW USE THE WOMANS OF AMERICA TO KEEP THEM ON THEIR SELFISH INTENT,
    SOME OF THEM ARE BEING PAID
    TO SPOUT THEIR BOSS PRETEND INTEREST FOR THEM,
    PLEASE WOMANS OF THIS AMERICA , DON’T FALL IN THEIR TRAP, IT’S TO OBVIOUSLY WRONG TO ADVERTIZE THE EASY WAY TO ABORT, YOU WOULD NOT BE ALIVE NOW HAD YOUR MOTHER DONE IT,
    THINK OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF FOLLOWING THE LEADER IN POWER NOW TO ALLOWED IT TO BE NAMED A RIGHT, WHEN YOU KNOW IT IS A WRONG AS A MOTHER TO BE NOW OR LATER,
    NO MATTER HOW YOU WANT TO NAME IT, YOU WILL ALWAYS WONDER HOW THE HUMAN BEEN YOU DID NOT ALLOWED TO LIVE, WOULD HAVE BECOME, HOW PROUD YOU WOULD BE OF THAT PERSON COMING FROM YOU AND YOUR CHOICE OF SEX ACTIONS WHICH HAD BEEN YOUR ONLY RESPONSIBLE DECISION TO DECIDE ON DOING OR REFUSING TO DO.
    THE GUILT FEELING WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU IF YOU ABORT FREELY
    WITHOUT ANY GOOD SOLID EXCUSE, THE WORD KILL IS THE SAME AS KILL.

  14. 15

    Hard Right

    @Greg:

    The real war on women greg.
    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/05/31/war-on-women-second-video-shows-planned-parenthood-urging-sex-selection-abortion-at-nyc-headquarters/

    Notice it says SECOND video? Another PP employee advocating abortion based on gender- female.

    It amuses me to see the loony left demand “freedom” for women’s bodies while trying to dominate and control every aspect of people’s lives. The left wants to control how we think, how we eat, what we are allowed to say, and in general what rights we have.
    greg, you and you ilk are the opposite of freedom fighters.

  15. 16

    ccoffer

    They aren’t interested in freedom. They seek dead bodies. Human destruction. The ascent of evil.

    Leftists are absolute garbage.

  16. 17

    Wordsmith

    editor

    @Hard Right:

    The real war on women greg.
    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/05/31/war-on-women-second-video-shows-planned-parenthood-urging-sex-selection-abortion-at-nyc-headquarters/

    Er…”gendercide“?!

    President Obama opposes a bill the House will vote on today that would ban sex selective abortions. From ABC News’ Jake Tapper:

    White House deputy press secretary Jamie Smith says in a statement: “The Administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision. The government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way.”

    Why would Obama oppose legislation that doesn’t ban abortion, but bans sex selective abortion? Two reasons. 1) He actually supports the idea of aborting a child based on gender preference, after all, who would want to be “punished with a baby” (insert boy or girl here). Not to mention, President Obama is a supporter of leaving babies who survive abortions to die. 2) He’s pandering to his Planned Parenthood base. Both are disgusting and the fact that he is willing to stand against a bill that would help to protect both girls and boys from discrimination in the womb shows once again Obama isn’t really that “likeable” or overall “good guy.” As usual, the White House communications team has made sure it looks as though Obama doesn’t stand for sex discrimination, but Obama’s actions speak louder than words. Notice how the White House doesn’t make any effort to hit back against gendercide, rather, President Obama opposes a bill that would help end it. Where is the White House solution to ending gendercide?

    Sex-Selective Abortions Are Protected Under Constitution Says MSNBC’s Alex Wagner

  17. 19

    Hard Right

    Nice post, Word.
    It never ceases to amaze me how the left can delude themselves about their motives and the results.
    My brother is essentially a communist. He joined the Green Party because the dems were too moderate.
    He wants all the marxist goodies and laws and to take away the 2nd amend. Yet he calls himself a patriot and me and our parents traitors. Get that? He wants to toss the Constitution in the shredder, but those of us who want to uphold it, WE are the traitors.

    We are seeing the same thing here with abortion, specifically by greg. He actually thinks he’s some kind of advocate for women and freedom. Liberalism IS a mental illness.

  18. 20

    Greg

    However you rationalize your position, it still comes down to the fact that you want to impose your own religiously-based conclusions about when a fertilized egg should have a full range of human rights on people who share neither your religion nor your conclusions. You want to impose your own moral decision on others, and deprive them of their right to make the most private of decisions in accordance with their own chosen counsel, moral precepts, and personal conscience.

    You want to force women who have become pregnant to continue that pregnancy and bear children, regardless of their own feelings about it. Many wish to impose that restriction from the moment of conception. Some who hold that view have clearly stated that they would make no exceptions, even in cases of incest, rape, dire health risks to the mother, or serious fetal malformation.

    While you bitch and moan about intrusive government, you’re apparently ready to have the government intrude into one of the most private decisions imaginable in any woman’s life. Many are ready to have the government mete out severe punishments to any woman or doctor who dare to ignore their dictates.

    This is not liberal conspiracy theory. This is what republicans have been actively working for, and incrementally accomplishing. Read the damn legislation and recently enacted state laws. And then listen to the republican candidate’s openly stated positions.

    If you think a republican vote isn’t a vote against women’s health and reproductive rights, you’re simply not paying attention.

  19. 21

    Hard Right

    Greg, let me set the record straight.
    1) We are not against contraception
    2) The majority of us would allow abortions in the case of rape, incest, or threat to the mother’s life.
    3) I myself see abortion as muder when it destroys a fetus, but not before it is a fetus.
    4) The morning after pill is available to stop pregnancies…. the morning after!
    5) You and you ilk are advocating for murder.
    Lefties like you say you are for a woman’s right to choose, but only if it is to murder the unborn. If they want to be a Conservative, then we see how you “fight for them”.

  20. 22

    Greg

    @Hard Right:

    5) You and you ilk are advocating for murder.

    “You and your ilk” would seem to be on the side of anti-abortion terrorists who have a lengthening record of assassinating women’s healthcare providers and burning and bombing womens’ clinics.

    Last year there were 114 attacks against abortion providers, including three physicals assaults, one bombing, one incident of arson, 27 counts of vandalism and eight burglaries.

    Late last week, a New Orleans women’s clinic was destroyed by arsonists.

    Arsonists attacked two separate women’s healthcare provider offices in Atlanta earlier the same week, after the doctors there voiced concern about pending anti-abortion legislation.

    In Kansas, an anti-abortion group has been terrorizing women by claiming it has patient records of those who recently sought abortion counseling.

    One month prior, a Planned Parenthood clinic in Grand Chute, Wisconsin was bombed. Fortunately the device injured no one, and did only minor damage.

    While you do seem to believe it’s the proper place of government to force women to continue pregnancies that they don’t want to continue, you don’t seem to have much interest in spending a nickel of public money to help care for the resulting children after they’re born–a point at which there should be very little question concerning what fundamental rights they might have.

  21. 23

    ilovebeeswarzone

    GREG
    YOU SAID; would seem to be,
    why do you accuse without proof they are with ; you and your ilk would seem to be on the side
    of anti abortion terrorist.
    why making assuming statements publicly to demean your opponent side,
    at this time, on this CONSERVATIVE BLOG, WHY?

  22. 24

    ccoffer

    “However you rationalize your position, it still comes down to the fact that you want to impose your own religiously-based conclusions “

    Killing people isn’t a “religiously-based” subject, you filthy dungbeetle.

    You seek dead children above all else. You’re an animal.

  23. 25

    Aye

    editor

    @Greg:

    However you rationalize your position, it still comes down to the fact that you want to impose your own religiously-based conclusions about when a fertilized egg should have a full range of human rights on people who share neither your religion nor your conclusions.

    Life begins at conception Greg.

    That’s not a conclusion based on religion. That’s a conclusion based on science. And medicine.

  24. 26

    Hard Right

    Just when I think greg can’t be anymore pathetic, he proves me wrong.
    He ignored 1-4 because he has no answer to them then launches a smear attack because even he knows how weak his position is.
    Greg, please show me where the GOP or any Republican leaders advocate for the crimes you mentioned.
    Unfortunately for you I can back up that leftist leaders are advocating for the murder of the unborn. One need only to look to obama’s votes when he was a Congressman.
    As usual you show yourself to be an irrational, narcissistic hypocrite when you (falsely) accuse us of wanting to use the government to force our agenda on women. Abortion is not an individual right and it is a states rights issue. It is the left that made sure the government could force the view of it being a Constitutional right on others. That is standard practice for your kind.
    Just admit it greg, the left considers children a burden, a punishment, and a way to oppress women. Again, you and your bretheren are only for choice when you approve of the choice. The hatred and even racism spewed at Condi Rice, Sara Palin, and other Conservative women from the left puts the lie to your claims of empowering women.
    I should expect such dispicible behavior from those that gleefully murder the unborn yet insist on protecting convicted murderers from execution solely to feed their egos.

  25. 28

    Greg

    @ilovebeeswarzone, #23:

    YOU SAID; would seem to be,
    why do you accuse without proof they are with ; you and your ilk would seem to be on the side
    of anti abortion terrorist.
    why making assuming statements publicly to demean your opponent side,
    at this time, on this CONSERVATIVE BLOG, WHY?

    Why do people like Hard Right think they can accuse the pro-choice side of “advocating for murder,” without having it pointed out in response that people on their side have been waging an actual terror campaign that has involved posted death lists, arson, bombings, and actual assassinations? Sad to say, all of those things really have happened, and are continuing to happen.

    @Aye, #25:

    Life begins at conception Greg.

    I agree. Life begins at conception. But when does “humanness” begin? Simply being alive doesn’t define humanness. A fish is alive.

    Most pro-choice advocates would suggest that while a fertilized egg might be human by biological definition, the essential qualities that make us a human being are still absent and a long way from being realized. I would suggest that the beginnings of essential humanness correspond with measurable brain activity. When the mind begins to light up, somebody is actually at home. Before that, there’s a developing form.

  26. 29

    Aye

    editor

    @Greg:

    I agree. Life begins at conception. But when does “humanness” begin? Simply being alive doesn’t define humanness. A fish is alive.

    This discussion doesn’t involve fish although the same argument of being alive or not can be made regarding fish or any other living creature.

    Human life begins at conception. Being alive, in and of itself, constitutes “humanness”.

    While those on the pro-abortion side of the argument would like to attempt to redefine when life begins, it’s inarguable and indisputable that life begins at conception.

  27. 30

    ilovebeeswarzone

    GREG
    you are mixing political party allowance with criminals,
    there is no one who can say the criminals are of one side or another,
    it is very unwise to mix the two, because it could be very well coming from a party with less morality,
    and understanding of WOMAN, WHICH LEAN TO YOUR PARTY,
    THE FACT THAT THEY ARE PUSHING THE MUST BE AVAILABLE PILL IS CONCERNING, BECAUSE THE MENTALITY OF VERY YOUNG TODAY HAS NOT EVOLVED BUT REGRESS WITH THOSE LAWS,
    WHICH THROW OUT THE 10 COMMANDS FROM SCHOOL TO BEGIN WITH AND REPLACE IT WITH A MUST TAKE PILL TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE THE FREEDOM TO HAVE SEX, LIKE
    THEIR BODY NEED IT BUT THEIR HEAD ARE NOT PROVIDED BY THE JUDGEMENT THEY NEED TO
    BALANCE AND BE IN CHARGE OF THEIR URGES AND THE ABILITY TO REFUSE TO DO THE ACT OF PROCREATION AT A SUCH YOUNG AGE, THE KNOWLEDGE THEY NEED TO PRE VISUALIZE THE AFTERMAT, THAT IS WHAT I am doing with this male is sacred, and I might have a baby from it, is that what I want can I take care of that new life at my age of just entering the puberty.
    those are the crowd most vulnerable to what they make so eazy to have sex,thinking okay I just want to have fun, well yes have your fun because we are here to help you take away the consequences of your actions, go get lay with as many as you want,
    I say then this is building a youth degenerated before they learn to think straight,
    and just look at millions of felons because they fail the responsability test,
    oh wait, there where never given any test of RESPONSABILITY, THEY DUNNO WHAT IT MEAN.
    WELL THERE IS THE WELFARE TO FEED ME, BECAUSE i’M A FELLON NOT ABLE TO FIND WORK WITH A PGD IN MY POCKET, HOW COME

  28. 31

    Greg

    @Aye, #29:

    While those on the pro-abortion side of the argument would like to attempt to redefine when life begins, it’s inarguable and indisputable that life begins at conception.

    I’m really not sure who it is that has been doing the redefining. In English Common Law and in the early America of the Founding Fathers, it was held that human life actually began at the point in a pregnancy known as “the quickening”.

    The point at which brain activity commences seems like a more scientific defining point.

    I’m not sure where using “the moment of conception” as the defining point originally came in. I suspect it might have come from the thinking of the Catholic Church, but I really don’t know for sure.

  29. 32

    ilovebeeswarzone

    I remember seeing the video at FA ON A POST ABOUT LIFE BEGIN,
    THE NEEDLE IS INSIDE MOVING TO KILL THE FEATUS,
    WHICH IS TRYING TO EVADE THAT NEEDLE, NOT ONLY ONCE WHICH
    COULD BE INTERPRETED AS AN ACCIDENTAL MOVE, BUT MANY TIMES MORE.
    I still choke remembering the vision.
    where is that video?

  30. 33

    James Raider

    @Greg: #28, . . . .

    “I would suggest that the beginnings of essential humanness correspond with measurable brain activity. When the mind begins to light up, somebody is actually at home.”

    So here you’ve delivered the quintessential element in the liberal argument which pretends to rely on the scientific method. It’s a pretence because those who make that statement don’t understand what it is that science is capable of but quote it, . . . and from the scientific corner, scientists are still rooted in their own egos, encumbered by the limited capacities of their tools. If they don’t see it, can’t measure it, can’t touch it, can’t quantify it, . . . . then it doesn’t exist.

    This limits their capacities to fully understand the very universe they attempt to explain. With all their accomplishments, one of the greatest failures is their denial of the Soul. They barely understand the mind, but still have some explanations and endless theories, . . . The Soul? NOTHING. They can’t grasp it, quantify it, measure it, see it – therefore it simply does not exist. At best it is relegated to figments of imaginations – fanciful dreams of ‘believers.’ They in fact spend much effort rationalizing why it can’t exist.

    On the other hand, they can’t explain Consciousness either, but they’re a little more stuck with this one, . . . they can’t deny it exists. They just can’t figure out how to get their inhibited egos wrapped around an explanation they can support with the help of the UN – they just can’t measure it, and those scientific scales can’t measure anything so light, apparently.

    So here’s my point: I’ve been fortunate to have experienced my own unencumbered Soul during what is inappropriately called a near death experience, some years ago. To suggest, as science does in ignorance and without reservation, that there is no consciousness in the fetus until well beyond so called arrival of “brain activity” that can be measured – is uninformed arrogance. The Soul, much more powerful than the mind, enters the new corporeal life, often before even the mother knows that a new life is present. Regardless what science thinks.

    When I was in university, probably from ignorance and an arrogant intellect, I assumed that science was right, and worse, . . . I felt that abortions were not my problem since I wasn’t a woman. Ignorance was bliss. While it may still not be my business and may be inappropriate to dictate to others what to do with their lives, I now have a completely different perspective. Obviously. Nevertheless, I find it profoundly disrespectful to all humanity, and particularly to women, to lie about the reality of life, especially the lives which they are able to gift the world with.

    Lies drenched in ignorance, but repeated with conviction, are still lies.

  31. 34

    Greg

    @James Raider, #33:

    An eloquent and persuasive argument. The problem with it, in my opinion, is that you’re defining ignorance in terms of a spiritual context that not everyone shares. I don’t believe we have a right to impose restrictions on others that are grounded in our own personal spiritual perceptions.

    If I am to have sovereign authority over my own body, I must be willing to allow the same to others–even when I don’t personally approve of their decisions.

  32. 35

    Aqua

    @Greg:

    I don’t believe we have a right to impose restrictions on others that are grounded in our own personal spiritual perceptions.

    In regards to the free contraception coverage that infringes on the rights of religious institutions, no one is saying anything of the sort. We all have free will. If you don’t like what you are paid, change companies. If you don’t like the insurance coverage, change companies or buy your own. You don’t want others to impose their will on you, which isn’t the case in regards to religious institutions. You still have a choice. Conversely, you are definitely imposing your will on religious institutions and the only choice they have is to quit providing insurance (which many are now doing), or quit. You always champion the poor, Catholic institutions actually do a lot for the poor. You’re telling them to do it your way or pack their bags and leave. Exactly who is it that hates the poor again?

  33. 36

    ilovebeeswarzone

    GREG
    WHERE DID JAMES RAIDER SAID, HE WANTED TO IMPOSE HIS OPINION TO OTHER?
    YOU HAVE GOT IT WRONG, IT IS OBAMA WHO IMPOSE HIS OPINION TO OTHER VIA HIS ARMY OF
    ENTITELEMENTS FROM THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF REGULATIONS IMPOSE THRU HIS SIGNATURE
    SINCE HE WAS PROPELLED IN POWER, BY PEOPLE WHO SOLD HIM TO AMERICA AS AN ABLE INTELLIGENT WITH ABILITY TO TAKE ON THE TASKS OF SERVING THE PEOPLE WHICH FAIL MISERABLY,
    NOW YOU DARE TO WANT HIM BACK FOR FOUR MORE YEARS, AND YOU PROSTITUTE YOUR TONGUE TO SELL HIS AGENDA ON ANY FACETS HER TO CONSERVATIVES,
    YOU SHOW THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SWALLOWED LIKE OTHER WHO SEE THE RACIST CARD FROM ANYBODY WHO DON’T AGREE, EVEN IF YOU KNOW HE IS WRONG,
    HEY WHERE IS YOUR LOVE FOR AMERICA IN ALL THIS, REMEMBER YOU DON’T VOTE FOR THE PERSON WHO HAS FAIL AMERICA, TWICE, THAT WOULD MAKE YOU UN AMERICAN AND A DANGER TO HER, A DANGER TO WHO AMERICA IS ABOUT, A DANGER TO WHY ARE YOU AMERICAN,
    A DANGER TO WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO DO AS AN AMERICAN.

  34. 37

    ilovebeeswarzone

    GREG
    by the way, CHRISTIANITY HAS BEEN THE VOICE OF WISDOM IN CENTURY,
    IN AMERICA, they where there to sustain the hard working new AMERICANS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD WHO CAME FOR THE FREEDOM TO LIVE THEIR DREAM TO PRAY FOR STRENGTH TO WORK, STRENGTH TO FIGHT ENEMIES, THE STRENGTH AND WISDOM TO RAISE THEIR CHILDREN TO BE GOOD AND KIND FOR OTHER, THEY SEEK ADVICE FROM WHO REPRESENTED THE SOUL
    WHICH IS THE LIGHT OF A NATION,
    WHAT NAME do you call the one who want to eliminate that, who is the one who want them out of schools, out of public places, out of the souls of the woman, out of the souls of the young in this AMERICA, WHAT NAME BELONG TO THE ONE WHO REPRESENT HIM THE GREAT DECEIVER WHICH HAS BEEN ACTIVE FROM DAY ONE AND IS SURELY ACTIVE NOW,

  35. 38

    James Raider

    @Greg: #34.

    “you’re defining ignorance in terms of a spiritual context that not everyone shares”

    Hmm, perhaps a re-read of #33 would be helpful – the “ignorance,” as you’ll note, is not “in terms of spiritual context,” but rests in the scientific community and the limitations of egos. Egos simply being human.