The Abortion Issue in 2008
January 24th, 2008 at 09:22am Mark Noonan
Its going to have a larger effect on the outcome, I think, than a lot of people realise:
Washington DC, Jan 22, 2008 (CNA).- The pro-abortion-rights organization and reproductive health provider Planned Parenthood is planning a major effort to elect abortion supporters to Congress and the White House in the 2008 elections, the Wall Street Journal reports.
The organization’s $10 million “One Million Strong” campaign aims to persuade one million voters to vote for abortion-rights candidates.
The group had avoided electoral politics until recently. It endorsed a presidential candidate for the first time in 2004, when it supported Democratic Senator John Kerry. It also supported some Democratic gubernatorial candidates in 2006. “To keep our doors open,” said Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, “it’s clear that we need to step into the electoral arena.”
Two of the oldest judges on the Supreme Court are abortion supporters. A Republican victor in 2008 could replace them with justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that mandated legalized abortion nationwide. Five of the nine sitting Supreme Court justices are considered to be Roe v. Wade supporters.
In 2008, it very likely is this equation: Elect a Republican, end Roe. And with the end of Roe will come the ability to slowly do away with abortion completely. Not all at once, and not just in a few years - but eventually, God willing, we can end this barbarism and badge of shame upon our nation. Pro-life people realise this, but even more so - it seems - the pro-abortion people realise it. And thus an alleged non-profit like Planned Parenthood (America’s largest abortion provider) is entering the fray - apparantly unworried about any risk to its non-profit status (probably figuring that a Democrat in the White House will keep any legal dogs away - while a GOPer in the White House probably wouldn’t waste time going after PP).
This could become crucial because it will likely come down to just a few States deciding who gets 270 electoral votes - and Democrat, but pro-life, Pennsylvania is just one of the States which might be swayed by the abortion stakes in 2008 (Kerry won PA by about 145,000 votes out of 5.7 million cast…75,000 votes the other way, and it would have gone Republican…PP wants to prevent that from happening). As I’ve been saying, we’re in for a wild political ride in 2008 - and a very nasty campaign. The fact of abortion fanatics at PP getting into the fray just further confirms my prognosis.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Life Issues
45 Comments
1. Amanda | January 24th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Just to be clear, the part of Planned Parenthood that endorsed John Kerry - and is leading the One Million Strong campaign - is actually a political group, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. They’re allowed to do stuff like that without risking the loss of non-profit status, because they’re a 501(c)(4), not a 501(c)(3).
I know your posts on this group are tainted because of your views on abortion, but still… a little research, please.
2. Diana Powe | January 24th, 2008 at 10:23 am
Amanda,
Please stop confusing Mark’s political posturing on the abortion issue with facts. Planned Parenthood is evil! Didn’t you get the memo? They’re the head of the comic book “abortion industry” that “victimizes” pregnant women who have been reduced in their role as moral agents by being pregnant. That’s why, in Mark’s universe, the murder, as he styles it, of unborn children isn’t of the same moral weight as the murder of born children.
3. Aitch | January 24th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Way to go out on a limb there with your predictions. Really, what kind of prognosis is that? Is this the sum of your political expertise - “we’re in for a wild political ride in 2008″?
After prognosticating that Republicans would gain seats in the 2006 elections and that the San Diego Chargers would win Superbowl XLII, I guess you have just whistled past too many grave yards (whatever that means). And you’ve now come up with a one size fits all prognosis. I guess anytime something of import(in your mind) happens in the world of politics you can make post after post about how right you are about a “wild political ride”. You will have been so confirmed.
4. Retired Spook | January 24th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Aitch,
I don’t know how old you are, but I’ve voted in every election (Presidential and mid-term) as well as every primary except one since 1966. This promises to be one of, if not the wildest political ride in my lifetime. Can you remember a presidential year when, after the first 6 primaries/caucuses, there was no clear-cut leader on either side? I can’t.
5. js | January 24th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Not true Amanda. They are registered as both, and a PAC and a 527.
“Because Planned Parenthood’s overall structure includes a 501(c)(4) entity, a 501(c)(3) entity, a federally regulated PAC and a 527 organization, it is difficult to determine which pots of money paid for which ads.”
I’d like to see an audit of them all.
If the D recieves any funding from the C exemption, its a violation.
And then, if C recieves any funding from the D, its also a violation (benefits anures for private individual).
The same with the PAC and 527. You cant just mix and mingle the funds.
Id bet they would lose entitlements on most of them!!
6. Diana Powe | January 24th, 2008 at 11:23 am
js,
Quoting without attribution is meaningless, by the way.
7. majoriot | January 24th, 2008 at 11:32 am
God willing?
Looks like God’s (free) will is already in action.
It is a HUMAN decision.
8. js | January 24th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Really DP.
From your mind, everything is meaningless, by the way. Your personal attribute.
9. Diana Powe | January 24th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
js,
So, are you embarrassed by the source you quoted? You still haven’t named it.
10. js | January 24th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Oh no Dp.
Anyone can Google it. Just put the keywords into the search cue and then put the submit button.
Is that too difficult for you?
11. js | January 24th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Oh, Im sorry, you must be search engine disadvantaged.
Here is the link.
http://www.google.com/
I dont expect you would try to enter the frey without being prepared, would you?
12. Diana Powe | January 24th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
js,
That’s got to be a couple of the silliest things I’ve ever read. So, if it’s all a matter of search engines, why do Matt and Mark routinely link to those sources that they quote? As I said, I can only imagine that you’re embarrassed by your source.
13. Reg Dwight | January 24th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Aitch,
I don’t know how old you are, but I’ve voted in every election (Presidential and mid-term) as well as every primary except one since 1966. This promises to be one of, if not the wildest political ride in my lifetime. Can you remember a presidential year when, after the first 6 primaries/caucuses, there was no clear-cut leader on either side? I can’t.
Spook:
Come on man, 2008 is like a three day pass to the Frankfurt PX compared to 1968. Now that was an election. A sitting president forced not to run because of his sorry ass war. Insurgents from one party trying to topple the Vice President’s run for the WH. A Presidential candidate gunned down after winning a huge primary. Riots at the convention. The GOP turning to a loser former VP who couldn’t win the governorship of California.
Please, Spook, if you’ve indeed voted since ’66 you know that the ’68 campaign was a virtual Second American Civil war. 2008? What do we have? Got a white woman bickering at a black man. Got one guy hated because of his religion. Got another old man hated by his party because of his stand on tax cuts, immigration and campaign finance reform. Got a preacher who lost tons of weight and has Chuck Norris as a backer. Got a mayor that cannot go two minutes without mentioning he was covered in the dust at the WTC. This is your idea of the wildest political ride in your lifetime?
Give me a break. You must have lived in Switzerland all your life.
14. js | January 24th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
what i find to be funny is that Planned parenthood 501C3 corp has a political action arm that is a 501c4 corp that violates the 501c3 status
how does that work!!
they should actually lose both!!
On thier web site, they pretty well admint to it too
“The Planned Parenthood Action Fund is an independent, nonpartisan, not-for-profit organization formed as the advocacy and political arm of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.”
Which, if formed as the advocacy and political arm of the PPFA which is a 501c3 corp, is a direct violation of the spirit of the law.
In essence, it would mean that any 501c3 can establish itself as an independent 501c4 and play both sides of the game. Tsk tsk. Shame on you!! Its a violation of public trust.
15. js | January 24th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
DP,
Your conclusion that one has anything to do with the other is the only thing thats “silly” here sweety.
16. Magnum Serpentine | January 24th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Mark
The polls say otherwise. Abortion is at the bottom of the list on what citizens are concerned about. The Economy is what is on most people’s minds, not Abortion. Even Fundamentalist feel the Economy is more important than abortion.
17. OhioOrrin | January 24th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
overturn Roe = states rights.
some will, some won’t.
then we can debate what effect privacy no longer being inferred in the constitution may have beyond abortion including: medical histories, gun ownership lists, etc.
think it thru…
18. Jeremiah | January 24th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Looks like God’s (free) will is already in action.
It is a HUMAN decision.
majoriot,
Yep, it is a human decision, but it’s not God’s Will.
Only man in his foolish, sinful thinking would choose to murder his children.
God don’t murder people.
–Jeremiah–
19. SteaM | January 24th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
God’s will? This has nothing to do with God.
Sex is something that is ingrained in our nature as animals. As a species we have made it this far partly because we strive to procreate. These days there are enough humans on this planet that abortions aren’t going to hurt anything in the big picture.
Does it effect you if someone decides to have an abortion? No, it apparently hurts your feelings but that gives you no right to force it on someone. Accidents happen especially when it is part of our survival instinct to have sex and procreate.
If God didn’t want us to have such strong sexual urges that make it so easy to have unwanted pregnancies he would’ve made having sex about as fun as having to clean a toilet at a bar on new years eve at the end of the night when it has puke, piss, and excrement all over it.
20. js | January 24th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Thats pretty brutal SteaM.
I guess human life really doesnt have any value in your book.
21. Jeremiah | January 24th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
God’s will? This has nothing to do with God.
SteaM,
Maybe not now, but just give it time, it will. It may take another 40 years for you to realize it, but whenever you leave this life, it will be no fairy-tale anymore.
–Jeremiah–
22. SteaM | January 24th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Jeremiah,
I disgaree with you on that one. If you are speaking of the act of dieing and going to heaven to be judged before God. Because I don’t believe in heaven in that sense. I believe that you are “judged” every second of every day while you are alive. “Heaven” or “hell” is where we exist at any time or any second in your life while you live. Not something that happens when you die. When you die your body goes back into the natural cycle and feeds animals, insects, bacterias, etc, other living beings, in other words. Your body then becomes “energy” or “calories” for other living creatures. Same as when anything dies.
However, I do not want you to change your viewpoint. That’s not what I wish on you in this regard. If you believe in “heaven” in the sense that you stated above then I support you in that you have the right to believe that as long as it doesn’t intrude on my rights to disagree and think another way.
Kinda like telling someone that they cannot choose to have an abortion based on your personal religious beliefs even if it goes against theres.
js,
Sorry. It may be harsh but I made my point.
Please don’t assume that I do no care about other humans and all animals and other living beings and nature in general. God’s creation, if you want to call it that, is something I care about a lot. I am very saddened by the way humans treat God’s creation and with no remorse.
23. Mark Noonan | January 24th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Magnum,
We’re talking about trying to sway blocs of 100,000 voters or less - and there are people deeply committed, pro and con, who could decide the election, even though their particular issue is barely registering nationally.
Really, think for a moment - if it wasn’t important, then why would the abortionists be spending so much money?
24. Mark Noonan | January 24th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Amanda,
Yeah, and I’m sure that PP is just oh, so careful that funds from one side never slop over to the other side…
25. Mark Noonan | January 24th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
SteaM,
Why be sad about the way fertilizer treats other fertilizer? Especially since no matter how well the fertilizer treats the Earth, it will die in the by and by?
26. js | January 24th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
consider Gods will;
GEMARA. R. Ashi propounded: What if one caused his blind or sleeping son to pass through, (3) or if he caused his grandson by his son or daughter to pass through? — One at least of these you may solve. For it has been taught: [Any men … that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall he put to death … And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people;] because he hath given of his seed unto Molech. Why is this stated? — Because it is said, there shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire. From this I know it only of his son or daughter. Whence do I know that it applies to his son’s son or daughter’s son too? From the verse, [And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man] when he giveth of his seed unto Molech [and kill him not: Then I will … cut him off.]
— Babylonian Talmud
The fire of molech is sacrifice. The sentence is death. Does God value the life of the chilren?
Mark 9:42 “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.”
Absolutely, but what is a child? Did God mean a breathing child, and not a fetus in the womb?
Mt 1:18 - Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
She was found with child. In the womb. God doesnt see the difference between a fetus and a child because they are one and the same.
27. SteaM | January 24th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Besides, just have an abortion and if you feel like its a sin then just pray a couple of times for fogiveness and you’re good.
Right?
OR, you could educate your kids from a young age about why they should be careful if they have sex. Then tell them why and give them condoms in case sex happens. Because sex happens. It’s in our nature.
28. Jeremiah | January 24th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
OT but…
From 1970 to the present, studies have came back consistent–The average lifespan is 70 yrs.
So that tells you, all the hype about science being the “cure all” for what ails people, and helping to increase life expectancy.
38 yrs, and no youth formula! You hear some really absurd things about children being a burden to their mothers, a “danger” to their mothers and other such rhetoric…Listen, my Grandma had 17 children…17!!!!. Unfortunately, two didn’t make it, they were stillborn!!! And somehow, Grandma and Grandpa together, managed to raise 15.
At the age of 56, Grandma was on her way to church in Ohio, and the car stalled on the train track, she never made it. It was God’s time to take her home. Dad was devastated, so two years later, at 17 he joined the service. He got to see the world, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland, a whole bunch of places.
You know something, at that early of an age for Dad to lose the influence of Grandma in his life, he was led into a lot of things while away from home. When he came back home from the service, he realized something wasn’t right, and he remembered back to what Grandma taught him….to go to church, and serve the Lord.
What is the moral of this story? Choose Life. Don’t give up. When things are the worst, that’s when the Lord wants us to look up, keep our head held high, and know that we will get through this…together.
–Jeremiah–
29. Retired Spook | January 24th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Reg, no need to get nasty and condescending about it. I was on active duty in the Navy in 1968, and, quite frankly, wasn’t paying a lot of attention to politics. That was the first presidential election I voted in. You are correct, though, that was a pretty wild year, in a different, chaotic sort of way. Totally different atmosphere today.
30. Magnum Serpentine | January 24th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Ahhh but I am talking about hundred million or more citizens who don’t see Abortion as being an important issue and would rather see something done about the Economy and Iraq than Abortion. The polls speak volumes. Abortion comes in below 10% and rates near the bottom on all list of important topics. Economy ranks almost universally at the top.
31. plainjane | January 24th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
With every Repug candidate except the Huckster pro choice, (I’m not buying the Mitt’s recent conversion.) I would have thought same sex marriage would be the Repugs wedge issue. To my knowledge they all have wives, many of them two or three, but there is no indication any of them are gay. Therefore NRC gay bashing should be in this season.
32. Amanda | January 24th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
“Amanda,
Yeah, and I’m sure that PP is just oh, so careful that funds from one side never slop over to the other side…”
Actually, Mark, that could never happen. Why? Because it’s illegal.
33. js | January 24th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
I would think that even lending the logo from a 501c3 to a 501c4/Pac or 527 would be crossing the line.
Its got cash value.
Then, you got each others web site playing on the theme “the arm” of the 501c3 corp, which is literally, an admission of guilt.
501 C (3) Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office
Bottom line, for a 501 c 3 to have a political arm, self admitted, for the purpose of political action, violates the law.
34. Mark Noonan | January 25th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Amanda,
Illegal, yes, but only spottily enforced - there is no upside for trial lawyers to get into that. I should have said it doesn’t happen because of that, rather than it being illegal - so I’m sure I’ll hear that for the longest time…my bad; next time, use better phrasing.
35. AAR | January 25th, 2008 at 12:20 am
js,
Diana wants links so she can misdirect the reader’s attention away from the information and facts themselves, by instead, attacking and trying to cast doubt on the source (messenger) which reported the information!
You could quote a respected publication like the Washington Post or Wall Street Journal regarding a science article and Liberals are likely to claim the information is “invalid” and “can’t be believed” because the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal aren’t “scientific” journals.
Typical propagandist trick!!!
AAR
36. AAR | January 25th, 2008 at 12:30 am
AAR
37. js | January 25th, 2008 at 7:28 am
35. AAR | January 25th, 2008 at 12:20 am
js,
Diana wants
—————————-
That pretty well sums it up.
I really dont care what Diana wants, lol. If she isnt capable of dealling with just basic information that anyone can find in a very short time, then OH WELL.
I think Diana just wants to manipulate people for the illusion of power that she seems to get from it.
Real power is knowledge. Obviously, she doesnt have it.
38. SteaM | January 25th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Diana wants to manipulate people for the illusion of power?
What the hell? hahahaha
So, this woman takes the time to come here and be civil and respectful and presents factual information that sometimes proves you guys wrong and so you attack her and say she is doing it for some evil manipulative ego trip?
Riiiiigggghhhttt.
My guess is that you don’t believe that but really you are presenting that as a defense mechanism because simply you are unable or unwilling to give a link for your source. Probably because it will prove her to be correct and you to be incorrect. Which might shake your foundation a little and make you think with a more open mind. This would inevitably lead you to change some things in regards to the way you think and see the world around you. It may even shake you so hard that you leave your political party or even abandon some of your fundamental and radical evangelical outlooks.
39. AAR | January 25th, 2008 at 11:45 am
“…this woman takes the time to come here…” and dump more of the same old Liberal misinformation, disinformation, and “believable lies” we hear every day from the Liberal propagandists!!!
Go try to “be civil and respectful” on the nutty left-wing fringe websites and blogs while posting Conservative views and opinions. See how long those sites tolerate the intrusion!
All you Republican and Conservative readers should do some reading about propaganda techniques and methods if you want to understand Diana and the other Liberals’ real purpose for posting here!
Learn and understand the enemy’s strategy and tactics so you know when you are being manipulated and played for a sucker and a fool!!!
AAR
40. AAR | January 25th, 2008 at 11:55 am
My guess is that you don’t believe that but really you are presenting that as a defense mechanism because simply you are unable or unwilling to give a link for your source.
I don’t care to search back through all of Diana’s attempts to discredit the messenger, but here’s a couple of examples of the type of reply Diana throws out when she can’t deny the information and facts, and chooses instead to attack the one reporting it…
“I suggest you go looking for information from non-biased sources…”
“Ahh, yes the Space and Science Research Center which doesn’t have…”
Don’t be duped! Diana uses every possible propaganda trick in the book to push her Liberal views!!!
AAR
41. Diana Powe | January 25th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I hardly consider my motives to be worthy of debate, especially considering that their scope can only be inferred from reading the comments that I’ve posted and the arguments that I’ve presented. However, it is genuinely interesting that the inference that AAR makes is that I’m an enemy. I would be intrigued to know what precisely I am an enemy of since it would seem that I could hardly be an enemy of AAR personally as he or she and I have no personal contact or connection. So, if I’m an enemy of something larger, what exactly is that?
42. Jeremiah | January 25th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
It may even shake you so hard that you leave your political party or even abandon some of your fundamental and radical evangelical outlooks.
She may shake, but that’s about all she’ll do. She’ll never move anything!!!
Christ is the solid rock !!! All other ground is sinking sand !!!
–Jeremiah–
43. SteaM | January 25th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Jeremiah,
Don’t feel like you have to abandon your beliefs or faith for any reason. You have the right to them and no one can take that away.
I only speak from experience as a former born-again Southern Baptist turned atheist.
44. Jeremiah | January 25th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Don’t feel like you have to abandon your beliefs or faith for any reason. You have the right to them and no one can take that away.
Under no circumstances would I abandon faith in my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. What a tragic mistake that would be, because if it weren’t for Him I wouldn’t have the right to express my opinions here today. I am thankful to Him, and to Him only.
I only speak from experience as a former born-again Southern Baptist turned atheist.
I’m sorry to hear that you’ve rejected the truth. Most usually, when people reject the truth, it is because they never really made a commitment in their heart to serve the Lord to begin with…and, they were under the burden of their convictions, and thusly, was exposing the darkness of their misdeeds for what they truly were. So, instead of seeking the truth, and yearning to be like Christ, they chose to follow the pathway of sin. Thus, remaining in slavery to their own selfish desires.
God’s Word says–For him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
Know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
–Jeremiah–
45. AAR | January 25th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Diana,
Liberals and Liberalism are America’s real enemy — slowly destroying America from within — just as a cancer destroys a living body!
Liberals and their Liberal agenda will ultimately destroy this nation if they and it are not stopped!
You are a Liberal Propagandist preaching the religion of Liberalism!!!
AAR