Lynn v. Sekulow

Lynn v. Sekulow


A Pro-Abortion President

posted by Jay Sekulow

Barry, it’s clear that this President is working quickly to overturn many of the policies of his predecessor.  But, what is most troubling in the flurry of Executive Orders issued by President Obama in the hours of his new presidency, is the repeal of what’s become known as the “Mexico City Policy.”
 
This Executive Order ending that policy can only be described as pro-abortion.  President Obama repealed a policy that correctly barred the use of federal funds by non-governmental agencies abroad for abortion counseling and abortions.  He delayed this troublesome action by one day, so it would not coincide with the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion.
 
Regardless of the timing, his pro-abortion action is a slap in the face to the millions of Americans who believe abortion is the taking of innocent human life.  In our analysis of the importance of the Mexico City Policy, it’s clear that the policy “is absolutely crucial to preventing American taxpayer dollars for the performance and promotion of abortion and abortion-related activities (such as biomedical research and sterilization) in foreign nations.”  The Mexico City Policy does not interfere with family planning or put a halt to the pursuit of reproductive rights for women.  It does, though, ensure that federal funds are not used to promote a practice that many Americans find repugnant and that many foreign nations still oppose.
 
What’s next for President Obama?  Signing into law the Freedom of Choice Act?  Based on today’s action, you’ve got to believe that President Obama is committed to enacting legislation like the Freedom of Choice Act, a measure that would further strip away protections for the unborn by repealing informed consent and parental notification laws – even repealing the ban on partial-birth abortion, an absolutely horrendous practice.
 
The fact is that President Obama has showed his hand early and is on his way to becoming a very pro-abortion president.  With the Mexico City Policy repealed, Americans can count on even more of their tax dollars being used to promote abortion.  And, that is a tragedy.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(89)
post a comment
Sarah in Colorado

posted January 23, 2009 at 7:09 pm


“his pro-abortion action is a slap in the face to the millions of Americans who believe abortion is the taking of innocent human life”
I think you’re being overly dramatic, this ruling will not effect your life at all. Essentially this is only going to upset the minority of Americans that do not believe in the scientific opinion and US laws surrounding abortion. And big deal, they will be upset, life goes on. There will never be any pleasing of the religious right on the abortion issue, because their view isn’t shared by US law or the vast majority of Americans.



report abuse
 

Cal

posted January 23, 2009 at 8:03 pm


Such drama. The majority of Americans support pro-choice policies. It is a political issue where the positions of each of the major political parties are well defined. Enough with the fake posturing and swooning which is cleralt just a front to raise money from the extreme right wing.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted January 23, 2009 at 8:38 pm


Cal it’s not just to raise money. The anti-choice crowd is really a male dominated religion attempting to keep power out of the hands of women and turn them into government controlled breeding pigs. You know, the way they evangelicals did in Nazi Germany a few decades back. Very similar deal here and the same people from the EXACT same religion. And isn’t it hilarious that the right wingnuts want the government completely our of THEIR lives but want it in everyone else’s bedroom and tapping OTHER people’s phones? Look at the way propagandists like Jay Sekulow distort the language to support the archaic views too. NO ONE is pro-abortion. These people won’t identify the sides correctly. It’s pro-choice verses anti-freedom. That’s what it is and calling it anything else is a distortion of language to promote a lie. The same sophistry Christianity has been using since its inception.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 23, 2009 at 10:27 pm


What do you do when someone is getting hysterical? Slap them in the face! Personally, in this case, I’d favor the “Airplane” example over the “Airport” example. So far, so good.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 23, 2009 at 11:07 pm


A tragedy indeed!!! So are the previous posts. It is not about pleasing “The religious right”. It’s about all life having value.
Heart breaking



report abuse
 

In defense of the unborn

posted January 23, 2009 at 11:30 pm


Imagine the torture of terrorist is cause for a great concern when millions of tortured babies are not considered. Boy we are in big time trouble.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted January 24, 2009 at 9:58 am


In defense of the unborn wishes to torture American women by forcing them to be government controlled breeding pigs. Abortion isn’t torture. Our government did torture though and until Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush administration is hung by the neck until they are dead there will be no justice.



report abuse
 

Mary-Lee

posted January 24, 2009 at 10:08 am


So what if some citizen’s tax dollars are used to pay for abortions? In just the past eight years, my tax dollars were use to pay for wars, torture, tax breaks for the wealthy, abstinence only education, and a whole lot of other things that I personally do not support.
We elect our representatives to make our voices heard in Washington. But we citizens do not get the privilege of micro-managing the ways our money is spent. That’s how our democracy works, folks! Deal with it.



report abuse
 

FortyFour

posted January 24, 2009 at 10:43 am


Mary-Lee,
Your response warranted a factual response from me. First, let’s cut through some of the myths in your post. Your tax dollars never supported “tax breaks for the wealthy.” Think about that statement. Bush’s tax breaks cut everyone’s tax rates…you had a tax cut, they had a tax cut as well. How can your tax dollars supports a tax cut for anyone? Just because someone gets a tax cut, that doesn’t mean you or I pay for it. Considering the fact that studies that somewhere around 70 percent of federal taxes are paid by those in the top fifth of wage earners, your argument is hollow.
As for funding war, you could have a point, but the US Constitution indicates that one of the responsibilities of the federal government is to provide for national defense. In other words, they are obligated to defend us, and at times that includes going to war. I am sure that the conscientious objectors among us aren’t fond of their tax dollars supporting a war of any stripe, but the law of the land dictates that at some point our dollars will support defensive endeavors.
As for funding abstinence education, please keep in mind that all public education curricula is currently under the jurisdiction of state and local education agencies. So while there may have been a stated federal policy and federal funding associated with the implementation of the education, ultimately, state and locals were responsible for what was in their respective curricula.
Finally, as to the funding of abortions, that is a completely different ball game. This not funding something that government is currently in the business of doing, or something that is Constitutionally-mandated. This is a policy preference of our President. He has chosen that US tax dollars should support the provision of abortions overseas. What this means is that those who are morally opposed to the practice of abortion will now have their dollars used to support that practice. This is not on the same plane as war, as noted above, this is merely doing something to placate a political base at the cost of violating the conscience of those opposed to abortion.
The “deal with it” language at the end is a nice, classy touch by the way.



report abuse
 

Feminist

posted January 24, 2009 at 12:46 pm


There have been several posts here that have referred to abortion,
some seem express that not to support abortion must mean that you are chauvinistic, anti-freedom, or even totalitarian.
Believe it or not, I’m a feminist who refuses to support abortion.
Let me explain myself
Leaving aside the whole “do the unborn have the right to life?” issue(on which we will not come to a conclusion, but will end up bickering), I am going to argue a different point.
I cannot defend abortion, knowing up close it affects towards women.
Abortion de-feminizes women, it takes away their dignity as mothers, and it locks them in fear and guilt. Fear that someone, may discover their abortion, and guilt that they were involved in killing of their child. (Here, I would like to point out that, whether or not the unborn foetus has the human right to life, abortion is never a positive solution to an unwanted pregnancy.) This fear and guilt, otherwise called Post-Abortion Syndrome, may take 10s of years to manifest itself, mainly because women who are victims(I refuse to retract the word) of abortion are not allowed to express these emotions. It is rare enough that someone should come out into the open with such disclosures, but when the do confide in friends or family; they are told to be strong, that it was the right choice for them to make, or simply told to pull themselves together, to get over it. Sadly, this kind of attitude will only encourage abortion victims(again no apology for the word) to bury their emotions deeper, because no one really wants to hear about the horrors of abortion. It’s an awful situation in which women can find themselves trapped for years What these women need is someone who is willing to listen to listen to them, some one who will not condemn them, nor will defend the abortion they underwent (I say this because an abortion is not positive, and saying it is will only further anger and/or alienate these women).
No. They need someone who will say nothing and just listen. Someone who can enable them to show their frustration, their tears, and their grief, which is hidden deep down.
An abortion is a loss.
(I am not arguing whether the foetus is human or not, I’m explaining from my own experience, what an abortion can do to a woman. any replies to this post should focus only on women please!)
This loss, like any other should be grieved no matter their importance.
The problem is that no one wants to hear that abortion is a loss, beacause our media and our society tell us “it’s no big deal” or even “abortion is a positive option”
I become angry every time I hear some one belittle the consequences of an abortion.
“It’s no big deal, you go in, you get it done, and it’s over with”
“An abortion will relieve you”
And on and on…
LIES! An abortion changes you, for LIFE. It marks you as much as would deciding to become a mother. And refusing to accept this change in your life, is refusing to acknowledge a part of yourself, and this part is the most essential part of our female nature. This is why I said at the beginning, Abortion de-feminizes us.
Before anyone ridicules my post or insults me for what personal experience I have shared in it, I hope that some people will realize that their is more to abortion than meets the eye. We are not told the whole truth by our media, for whom the issue is too sensitive.
Please, if any one who reads this is, or knows any one who is considering an abortion, do not only think of financial or economic reasons. you must consider what I’ve said, and make your choice in full knowledge of this post-abortion syndrome which I have only in part disclosed.
Thank you for taking the time to read this
Michelle



report abuse
 

Kim

posted January 24, 2009 at 1:29 pm


Feminist…I appreciate your directness and applaud you bringing to light another valid issue relating to abortion. I have spoken with many women regarding abortion and it goes FAR beyond the initial “procedure”. These women are plagued with guilt, regret, sorrow, fear, anxiety, depression, and so on. I think legislation should be imposed to create a more informed patient, and I have already sent my request to the goverment for this to be done. So many of these women say they didn’t realize what would happen to them, how they would be impacted, or realize what would actually happen before, during, and after the actual events associated with the “procedure”.
It’s not just the child that is impacted, but those closely associated with abortion- patient, father, and family/friends. It’s much like standing by a pond and throwing a rock in it. Long after the rock hits the bottom of the lake, the ripples of affect can be seen over a wider distance than the small entry point of the rock. I think we should have choice as God has given us all choice, but let’s be fair in making totally informed patients. It’s obvious we can’t stop the rollercoaster of abortions in a day. People will continue to find a way to do it now that it is so prevelant.
Many of these women who still suffer, would have made different choices had they had all of the facts-unbiased facts from both sides for and against abortion. We are doing an injustice to them by keeping them from vital information and then pushing them into a state of denial to appease everyone else. Pre-abortion, they need the truth, and post abortion-they need healing, love, and acceptance.



report abuse
 

Nicholas

posted January 24, 2009 at 5:18 pm


Go Obama! I recall during the campaign his reply to the abortion question something along the lines of “It’s above my pay scale”. That’s kind of how I feel about it. I’d be loathe to think I had the right to make that kind of decision for someone else especially as a male. I believe it’s a private and unfortunate decision and would hope anyone having an abortion could receive all the support and counseling needed. Probably availiable at the same site.
Sure there are consequences for behavior. The first behavior is unprotected sex whose consequence could be an abortion whose consequence could be guilt, shame etc.



report abuse
 

Lauren

posted January 24, 2009 at 5:58 pm


“Abortion de-feminizes women, it takes away their dignity as mothers, and it locks them in fear and guilt.”
This statement is far from an absolute statement and in fact speaks to a particular cultural narrative—particularly in the United States— that defines the pro life movement: that motherhood IS womanhood. This idea of womanhood is one of a multitude that exists and is not superior to any others.
As for this post-abortion syndrome… When we make choices sometimes we regret that choice. There are women who regret giving their children up for adoption as their are women who regret having a child all together. Please do not paint a broad brush to all women. If women need care and a shoulder to cry on, by all means help them…but they do not represent every woman that has had an abortion.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 24, 2009 at 7:17 pm


Outlawing abortion or contraception in the name of feminism is absurd.
Forty-four’s post is wrong in so many ways I don’t know where to begin, and feel it would be pointless anyway.



report abuse
 

Scott M.

posted January 24, 2009 at 9:51 pm


I’m glad he did it. I want a pro-choice president! I always, always, always want abortion to be safe and legal. My daughter may have need of it some day.
Thank you President Obama!



report abuse
 

Julie

posted January 24, 2009 at 11:56 pm


The Executive Orders that repealed the “Mexico City Policy” will not increase abortions and our tax money will not be used for abortions:
Obama’s Mexico City repeal: A pro-life policy?
http://blog.beliefnet.com/pontifications/2009/01/obamas-mexico-city-repeal-a-pr.html



report abuse
 

RJohnson

posted January 25, 2009 at 11:04 am


I find the appeals of those who show concern about unborn children convincing. I would find it more convincing, however, if they also supported policies that would improve the economic situation of single women facing pregnancies, or that would improve pre-natal and post-natal care for women bearing these children in poverty.
The trouble for me has always been that so many on the right to life side of the ledger have been among the first to support cutting programs that have been shown to not only decrease abortions but also have been shown to increase the survival rate of children once they are born.
Do these pro-life advocates really love money more than children?



report abuse
 

Lowell

posted January 25, 2009 at 9:28 pm


Jay, despite your most fervent desires, as a civilized nation we no longer permit the chaining of barefoot, pregnant women in the kitchen to be treated as breeding cattle, slaves, and property.



report abuse
 

Gwyddion9

posted January 25, 2009 at 10:18 pm


Mr. Sekulow,
You state in your article:
“Regardless of the timing, his pro-abortion action is a slap in the face to the millions of Americans who believe abortion is the taking of innocent human life. “
Yet for many millions of Americans who believe in the right for a woman to chose for herself, the last 8 years of the Bush Administration, with the addition of bedding with the
RR, has been a slap in our face. I’m sure that never entered your thoughts or the thoughts of the RR, after all, in their mind, it’s the only viable answer. The self-appointed Religious Right, never was …Right.
One of the main reasons I voted for Obama, besides believing in his vision, was to reduce the power of the Republican Party and especially the RR, who sought to insinuate themselves and their religious beliefs into as much of society and laws as possible.
To me, the Republican Party and the RR are only concerned about how they can accumulate power at everyone else’s expense.
Former President Bush (I love saying that) signed many Executive Orders at the prompting of the RR. It’s time to un-do the insanity, restore our Constitutional Rights, which were crushed under the Bush Administration, and re-establish an equality of religions and faiths in this country rather than being so heavily tipped in the favor of the RR.
Another point I wish to make. Making the choice to have an Abortion is never an easy one for the woman in question. It is a life altering consequence. The choice follows the woman all their lives. I’ve known some women who made this choice. It was not easy nor was it something they did at the drop of the hat. It was a very hard decision for them.
In spite of this decision, they were still glad that they had the ability to make this choice for themselves.



report abuse
 

MaryTeacher

posted January 26, 2009 at 2:47 am


“The trouble for me has always been that so many on the right to life side of the ledger have been among the first to support cutting programs that have been shown to not only decrease abortions but also have been shown to increase the survival rate of children once they are born.”
Vague and unsubstantiated, Johnson. I know I’ve never done that. Thank you, Feminist, for your honesty.
Look, people, when Jay said that it is slap in the face, that’s exactly what it is. Why? Because people who are pro-life are not looking to turn women into “government controlled breeding-pigs” and all the other cynical bull you are trying to blame us for. We honestly believe that ABORTION IS MURDER. Period. MURDER IS WRONG. Period. And the fact that my government expects me, a regular law-abiding citizen, to give my well-earned money to fund something I consider morally wrong is not fair to me. Those of you who are pro-choice, consider this scenario: Something which you believe is morally wrong(with all your heart, something that disgusts you, angers you, whether it be the killing of people of a different race or incestuous relationships) is now becoming legal. Furthermore, you discover that now your tax money is going to a group who funds this atrocity. How would you feel?
So, Sarah in Colorado who thinks this ruling will not effect my life at all. You couldn’t be more wrong. And what is the “scientific opinion, Sarah?” You mean like the fact that at five weeks a baby has a heartbeat? As to your opinion that “there will never be any pleasing of the religious right on the abortion issue, because their view isn’t shared by US law or the vast majority of Americans”, well, just because something is legal doesn’t make it right. Slavery was legal and so was segregation.



report abuse
 

Lost Left Coaster

posted January 26, 2009 at 10:05 am


MaryTeacher, I understand exactly what you’re saying. I just spent eight years funding the Bush Administration with my tax dollars, and it was horrifying. My tax dollars went to buy the bombs and bullets that plunged Iraq into chaos with a war that has taken hundreds of thousands of lives.
Even under Obama, though, and even if the war in Iraq ends in the next 18 months, as he promises, my tax dollars will still be going towards things that I consider, from the bottom of my heart, to be immoral. For example, the US still maintains a stockpile of nuclear weapons, and my tax dollars goes towards the maintenance and readiness of those horrifying weapons that have no legitimate place on earth.
With that said, I am pro-choice and appreciate that US foreign aid will no longer be chained to religious dogma on abortion.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 26, 2009 at 10:49 am


People can argue from now until forever about our tax dollars supporting abortions in our nation (which, btw, I am 100% against), and never come to an agreement.
However, why should I pay for abortions internationally?….It’s terrible.



report abuse
 

RJohnson

posted January 26, 2009 at 11:52 am


RJohnson: “The trouble for me has always been that so many on the right to life side of the ledger have been among the first to support cutting programs that have been shown to not only decrease abortions but also have been shown to increase the survival rate of children once they are born.”
MaryTeacher: “Vague and unsubstantiated, Johnson. I know I’ve never done that.”
Excellent! Then I trust you are supporting President Obama’s efforts to increase funding for SCHIP and other programs designed to address childrens’ health issues?
As I said in my statement, many on the RTL side of the issue have indeed come down against spending so much as a red cent to help women in poverty. And yet, economic conditions are given as one of the most frequent reasons behind women considering and having abortions. Several recent studies by both pro-life and pro-choice groups have shown that in states that have increased social spending for pre-natal and post-natal care, comprehensive sex education and increased access to condoms, birth control pills and other methods of preventing pregnancy the teen pregnancy rate has dropped right along with the abortion rate.
Yet many (and yes, perhaps not you, MaryTeacher) pro-lifers scoff at spending money for these efforts. It leaves me wondering, once again, if they value money more than human life.



report abuse
 

undefined

posted January 26, 2009 at 3:31 pm


Mary Teacher you say abortion is murder, if you believe that’s true since there’s no statute of limitation on murder then we should begin rounding up and trying every woman who had an abortion anyone who she told that she was getting an abortion anyone who aided her with money, travel, etc. to get the abortion because they all failed to prevent a murder and were complicit in the crime. Well that’ll reduce the population and the tax base quite a bit don’t you think. Those who want to outlaw abortion are just interested in punishing women for having sex and getting pregnant because they were careless and didn’t use contraception or it failed. If all embryo’s are human beings and a lab that stores frozen embryo’s has a power failure and no backup generator are they guilty of mass murder through negligent homicide? If not then you Pro-life stance is so much BS.



report abuse
 

NICU Nurse

posted January 26, 2009 at 7:08 pm


RJohnson: Where do you get your information? The reality is that a large majority of abortions in the US are NOT done by poverty stricken single women. The large majority are performed on middle class women that do not want to have a child born with a “defect”. I have cared for many children that have “defects” that these women consider “uncompatable” with life and they will go on to live happy full-filling lives.
You keep bringing up this bit about poverty. My “right wing” (as you have labeled us) friends and I absolutely support funding for SCHIP and other programs that help those that truly need it, as well as more comprehensive sex education programs. But no, I do not support my tax dollars going to the demise of unborn children for whatever reason (except in the event that having the child would kill the mother).



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 27, 2009 at 2:29 am


I come to the conclusion that if you happen to actually witness a abortion or have seen a aborted fetus, you might see something familiar we were all at one one point were at this same stage. The visual might make more of an impact than merely reading and bloging about it on websites. A opinion is one thing seeing mutilated fetus is another. See for your self , see if the visual image challenges your stance if it does not , so be it, but I still challenge to look it up.



report abuse
 

Ray B

posted January 27, 2009 at 6:16 pm


I think Forty Four has gotten it right!!!!



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 27, 2009 at 8:43 pm


First of all, our taxes WILL pay for those overseas abortions. Secondly, those of us who oppose abortion, strongly support programs to support unwed mothers, women who are pregnant with an unplanned pregnancy. We support foster programs that help these women who chose to allow her child to live, then allow that child to be placed in a home that will love and care for that child. Also, most abortions are torturous to the fetus, the child being murdered. And, though I feel sorry for the woman who is raped, or otherwise finds herself with an unexpected pregnancy, I do not believe it is HER right to end that life. She has the right to choose for herself, but not for the life inside her. Just like it is not anyone’s right to end anyone’s life. Anyone who believes otherwise needs to consider what will await them at the end of their life, when they are old, feeble, and need to be cared for. They better hope by then it is not legal to kill anyone who is a burden on anyone.



report abuse
 

Doug Indeap

posted January 27, 2009 at 11:46 pm


What a breath of fresh air! Obama’s removal of the “gag rule” now allows aid agencies to do their jobs and actually aid those seeking help by informing them of all the options available to them. Good riddens to the perverse fraud practiced by aid agencies “helping” poor pregnant women by withholding vital information and options from them. With the end of this shameful practice, the people of the United States can once again be proud of the honest aid their government offers those in need.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted January 28, 2009 at 10:12 am


A fetus CANNOT have rights that supersede those of a woman. Rights must be considered as a whole rights cannot conflict with rights. Case closed. Abortion will never be made illegal in this country so you people who want to turn American women into government controlled breeding pigs might as well find something else to whine about. No one is listening to people who think demons cause diseases instead of natural causes and diseases are cured by authority (Luke 9) instead of human knowledge which the Bible disparages completely. Your religious beliefs are as dangerous as your fascist politics.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 28, 2009 at 12:48 pm


In respons to “Boris” 1-23-09-
Boris- Your comments puzzle me………I guess to sum it up you might want to get some basic info on Planned Parenthood. The founder of that oganization, Magaret Sanger (forgive spelling if wrong!)had strong ties with the Nazis in her ideology and beliefs-this is NOT hidden “conspiracy” stuff. You can find this info easily when reading about her beliefs. If you have a distaste for the Nazis (as you seem to indicate) as I do, I wonder if you really know who’s side you are on? with respect-Tom



report abuse
 

Mary

posted January 30, 2009 at 2:25 pm


Renewing Mexico City Policy is hypocritical in that the Democrats objected to killing of innocent folks in Iraq. Now we are in the business of killing innocent babies around the world. Oh, excuse me, even killing innocent babies is a legal right or choice of women here in America. I find it amazing how blind we are to 45+ million killed in the name of choice or right.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 30, 2009 at 10:04 pm


I come to the conclusion that if you happen to actually witness a abortion or have seen a aborted fetus, you might see something familiar we were all at one one point were at this same stage. The visual might make more of an impact than merely reading and bloging about it on websites. A opinion is one thing seeing mutilated fetus is another. See for your self , see if the visual image challenges your stance if it does not , so be it, but I still challenge to look it up.
This is the education that every woman child needs before they enter into abortion. Then have your choice. If you still must do it, let it be on your head and concious. I agree totally so many women/children go into this completely blind. It is a completely different thing to actually see your child dead as opposed to standing on what you think or self righteous concepts for the sake of arguement in the name of “choice”.
Sign,
held my infant after death, have you? I’m pro-life and anti abortion firmly as a result. Let those who have walked it actually speak up.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 30, 2009 at 11:00 pm


The ad opens with an ultrasound of a fetus set to violin music and a black background.
Its caption reads, “The child’s future is a broken home.” It then changes to, “He will be abandoned by his father. His single mother will struggle to raise him.”
As the music crescendos, a baby can be clearly seen on the ultrasound.
“Despite the hardships he will endure, this child will become…” the caption continues. A photo of Obama and his family gradually appear with the caption, “The first African-American president.”
A final photo Obama ends the ad with the caption, “Life. Imagine the Potential.”



report abuse
 

Boris

posted January 31, 2009 at 1:30 am


Your Name,
First of all you might NOT want to get YOUR information from Christian propagandists. Margaret Sanger founded an organization, which eventually became Planned Parenthood, but she’s been dead since 1966, which is BEFORE Roe verses Wade. Second Sanger was an atheist who had no ties with any Nazis. The Nazis and Hitler especially claimed to have abolished atheism in Germany: “We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.” -Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933 [This statement clearly refutes modern Christians who claim Hitler as favoring atheism. Hitler wanted to form a society in which ALL people worshipped Jesus and considered any questioning of such to be heresy. The Holocaust was like a modern inquisition, killing all who did not accept Jesus. Though more Jews were killed then any other it should be noted that MANY ARYAN pagans and atheists were murdered for their non-belief in Christ.]
The Nazis were and remain today a 100 per cent purely Christian organization. Nazism is merely Christianity in its political form, what it becomes when Christians like Hitler and Mussolini seize power. Trying to tie an atheist in with Nazi Christians therefore is ludicrous and dishonest.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted January 31, 2009 at 10:30 am


In response to the blog under Feminist: I want to take this opportunity to tell you how you can, finally, rid yourself of the guilt and shame associated with abortion. Cry out to our savior, Jesus Christ. He offers forgiveness, comfort and absolute love.It truly is the only way to completely be free from the awful realization of what has happened. You can be free- it costs nothing. It is the only way. I’m praying that you will find this peace in your life. Abortion truly IS one dead, and one wounded.



report abuse
 

Autumn16

posted January 31, 2009 at 12:24 pm


For the record; Obama is not “Pro-Abortion” as the inflamatory title of this blog implies. He is “Pro-Choice”. There is a BIG difference. At least get the facts straight!



report abuse
 

CommGuy

posted February 1, 2009 at 8:01 am


Autumn16…Can you really be Pro-Choice without being Pro-Abortion? Let’s review the “choices”.
1. Bear the child
2. Abort the child
Declaring someone to be Pro-Choice can only suggest they believe abortion should be an option.
Is that a fact or not?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 1, 2009 at 7:12 pm


I am not “pro kill child” either, but I am only “pro choice” to kill child on demand.
Without using a semantics word game, what is the difference?



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 2, 2009 at 10:13 am


Many more women would die if abortion became illegal. Prior to the beginning of the 19th century, there were no abortion laws in existence. In 1869 Pope Pius IX declared that ensoulement occurs at conception. As a result the laws in the 19th century did not allow any termination of pregnancy. These laws form the basis of the restrictive legislation on abortion that still exist in many developing countries. Between 1950 and 1985 almost all developed countries liberalized their abortion laws for reasons of human rights and safety. Where abortion is still illegal this is often due to old colonial laws and not always an expression of the opinion of the local population.
Sadly, some people, especially religious ideologues, don’t understand that making abortion illegal doesn’t make abortion less common.
In countries where abortion is illegal, 186 women die every day due to complications from unsafe, i.e. illegal, abortions.
A recent global study conducted by Johns Hopkins Hospital showed that the abortion rate is exactly the same in developed countries where abortion is legal and in undeveloped countries where it is banned. In the United States, the death rate from abortion is 0.6 per 100,000 procedures, making it as safe as an injection of penicillin. The death rate is literally hundreds of times higher where abortion is illegal.
Ever since Roe vs. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court, anti-choice groups have been chipping away at the law, trying to get that decision overturned. They forget that criminalizing abortion will do nothing to reduce the number of abortions; it will only increase the number of women who die from the procedure. There indeed is a difference between public health and ideology.
The whole idea that Christians call themselves “pro-life” when they are trying to overturn laws that would lead to the death of millions of pregnant women is ludicrous. This is exactly the agenda of the religious right. What they really want is for abortion to become a dangerous procedure so that women in the United States will be at a great risk and many will suffer and die. The carnage that would be caused if the fundamentalist Christians got their way is EXACTLY what they are hoping for. This is about a male dominated – anti-feminist religion keeping power out of the hands of women.



report abuse
 

Nicholas

posted February 2, 2009 at 11:36 am


How about: We are pro choice We choose to bear the child. Get it?



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 2, 2009 at 2:18 pm


“This is about a male dominated – anti-feminist religion keeping power out of the hands of women.”
WRONG!!!



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 3, 2009 at 9:20 am


Wayne you anti-choice people are BUSTED. How humiliating is it to know that the rest of us have you pegged and know your true fascist motivations?



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 3, 2009 at 11:22 am


Boris,
I don’t mean to be rude….but when it comes to our motivations for being anti-abortion, you have no idea what you are talking about. You talk about Christians spreading their propaganda when in fact you do the same by trying to make people believe your unsubstantiated claims with your ceaseless and senseless lies.
How humiliating is it to know that the rest of us have your lies pegged?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 3, 2009 at 5:21 pm


Boris-1-31-09 a few things-first you are mistaken on Sanger’s beliefs.second your information on Hitler reflects your total ignorance on what Jesus taught (again no disrespect in your ignorance)-If you are a “true” believer in Jesus or a “true Christian” it is easy to see that Hitler was very sick and probably (in my opinion) a demonically possed man. Another thing-while Hitler may have wanted to win over the so-called Christian Institutions of the time, clearly he did so to gain favor and power-not because he himself actually believed or practiced the teachings of the Jesus in the New Testament. Another interesting fact-just an aside- the so called Arean race(blue eyes blond hair etc) that Hitler tried to promote- he himself had brown eyes and brown hair,I find this interesting in the light of the “perfect race” that he was supposed to be the “perfect” example of.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 3, 2009 at 8:07 pm


Okay Wayne, name ‘em and claim ‘em. If you are going to accuse me of making unsubstantiated claims and ceaseless and senseless lies, then let’s see what it is EXACTLY that you are talking about. Do what I do when I refute people on a blog or Email: paste their false claims and then thoroughly debunk and then ridicule and mock them. I don’t believe you are up to the challenge. I think you know I will cut and paste whatever you write and then publicly ridicule and mock it. Come to Papa.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 3, 2009 at 8:08 pm


Your Name,
Not so fast there, Your Name, whoever you are. If I’m mistaken about Sanger’s beliefs then you need to tell me exactly why and how this is. Otherwise in telling me I’m mistaken you’ve said nothing. So my statements about Sanger stand.
As far as what the gospels may seem to claim Jesus taught, I’ve read it all very, very carefully in its original Greek. I do not believe that such a person as Jesus Christ ever existed. I discussed Hitler’s Christianity with Dr. Michael Brown when I was the guest on his show last Sept. 17. Pardon me for the plug but you may still be able to listen to that show in his archives. If not I’d be glad to Email it to you. I would have to admit, as I did on the show, that Adolph Hitler is certainly not my idea of a Christian either. He did roast millions of people who disagreed with him though – something Jesus supposedly does also.
A few facts bout Hitler and his regime seem to be widely unknown. I blame this on Christian historical revisionists who have tried to hide Hitler’s Christianity by rewriting history. First, Hitler was a Catholic who attended Protestant seminary for three years. He was a literal Bible believer who demanded that Christian creationism be taught as science in the German public schools (you don’t get any more fundamentalist Christian than that) and evolution rejected as a bourgeois Western philosophy as it was in Stalinist Russia. The absurd Christian claim that a belief in evolution led the political philosophies in Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany is as false and ridiculous as any lie ever told and explicitly denied by history. Creationism was finally removed from Germany’s science textbooks in 1961. The only other country that was teaching creationism by then was South Africa. Not a ringing endorsement for the teaching of creationism is it? Hitler’s evangelical accomplices not only murdered 6 million Jews but rounded up 5 million other non-Christians and executed them simply because they did not believe in Jesus. One more thing. The founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther was a raging anti-Semite and the role model for Hitler. You can look up Luther’s anti-Semitic quotes on the Internet and you can’t tell Luther from Hitler. Brother Adolph was just doing what Christians have been doing for 2000 years. He was just bet



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 4, 2009 at 11:03 am


Even if Luther’s behavior resembles Hitler’s, does this make bad behavior any less sinful?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 4, 2009 at 11:03 am


Boris-I could get into Sanger’s beliiefs but it is obvious to me that we would be splitting hairs as you did when iI first responded to your blog you said Sanger “eventually” founded an organization….” etc. She was the one who was the root of what is now “Planned Parenthoo” as you have correctly said. It is clear to me that if you have read the entire New Testament in Greek or any other language you have missed the main point of it: God IS Love. Love that transends anything you or I could ever be on our own without Him. There are many “evils” on this earth, most bought on by the human race itself because it is now and has been since it’s fall-hopelesly lost-Without God and His Love “we can do nothing” as Jesus has told us. You seem to have so much hate and anger, and I am not pointing a finger at you to say-”Your a $%@$#@$#@^$#@!” that is NOT my intention,but you and I do NOT have ALL the answers to the “whys” of everything and I am convinced that if we did get them we would not be able to comprehend them in our present existance. One thing I do truly believe we ALL are lost eternally WITHOUT Him. I am gald that I know my Savior-I do not have ALL- the answers but I know He does and will show me what I need to know when I need to know it IF I am willing to hear. We could deabate issues all day long and come to a better understanding of nothing-perhaps-but we will ALL have to stand in front of Him-wheather we belive in Him or not-then it may be to late to debate anything.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 4, 2009 at 6:31 pm


Your Name
Martin Luther was an evil, despicable, dishonest, superstitious, anti-Semitic moron. He founded Protestantism, YOUR religion. Any defense for this?
You “could get into Sanger’s beliefs” but like I said until you do you’ve said nothing to refute what I said about her. So until this happens my statements stand and remain unchallenged. That’s not splitting hairs.
You can say that I’ve missed the point of the New Testament but I respond by saying it is you who doesn’t understand it. You can say the point of the NT is that God is love but I don’t believe that there is a God nor do I believe that a person such Jesus Christ ever existed; and I don’t believe the Gospel writers and whoever wrote the letters attributed to the Apostle Paul or the Apocalypse did either. Like most intelligent I do not believe in an afterlife or that the deity you believe in will follow me to my grave and punish me because I didn’t buy into the dogmas and doctrines of a particular religion.
Whatever hate and anger you detect is directed at religion not at people. Love the Christian hate the Christianity I always say.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 4, 2009 at 11:52 pm


Boris-I did adress your comments about Sanger as I said she was at the root of what became Planned Parenthood as you your self have said in so many words. My other, and most likly, last comment to you would be concerning Jesus and His claim of being God’s Son along with the existance of God Himself……..Good Luck with your convictions….if your wrong, you won’t be needing them.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 5, 2009 at 11:00 am


Your Name
You DID NOT address my comments about Margaret Sanger. You said I was mistaken about her beliefs and you are wrong. As far as Jesus claiming to be God, you are wrong about that too. The authors of the Bible put their own words, the words of Buddha, Mithras, Adonis, Dionysus, and other dying and resurrecting demigods and of few Greek philosophers on the lips of a mythical figure. The Jesus of the Gospels never claims to be God. If you read ancient Greek you would know this. My convictions are not like yours because they aren’t religious. I know what it would take to change my mind about what I currently think. You, on the other hand, refuse to change your convictions even in the face of massive amounts of proof that they are bogus as a three-dollar bill.



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 5, 2009 at 1:56 pm


Boris,
Sorry it took so long to reply…I’ve been too busy for the internet lately. Anyway, here goes:
“How humiliating is it to know that the rest of us have you pegged and know your true fascist motivations?”
Again, my motivations, in spite of your previous tries, are in no way proveable to you.
“This is about a male dominated – anti-feminist religion keeping power out of the hands of women”
What about the many Christians who voted for Hillary Clinton? I didn’t, but many did. What about Galatians 3:27-28? If you want to know what Christianity desires, ask a follower…and don’t take scriptures out of context, which you are prone to do…and don’t just assume what they believe.
If you would ask pro-choicers, you would find a different answer. Again, your claim is unsubstantiated. If men were able to bear children, I would still feel the same way about abortion. So, again, your claim is a lie.
There is no need for you to even try to prove otherwise, because it is impossible.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 5, 2009 at 2:24 pm


Wayne,
The Christians who voted for Hillary Clinton were not fundamentalist Bible believing Christians, they were more mainstream Christians. These people would not qualify as Christians according to your own view of them because they accept modern science like evolution for example. You fundies love to lump yourself in with the majority of people who claim to be Christians but who are really deists based on what they believe, to claim strength in numbers. But fundamentalist Bible believers represent less than half of one per cent of the world’s population.
If men had to have babies there would be NO questions about abortion. NO government is going to tell MEN what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Men run the world Wayne. Wake up.



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 5, 2009 at 2:29 pm


Boris says–The Jesus of the Gospels never claims to be God. If you read ancient Greek you would know this.–
Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the exact words, “I am God.” That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus’ words in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” At first glance, this might not seem to be a claim to be God. However, look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement, “We are not stoning you for any of these, replied the Jews, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God” (John 10:33). The Jews understood Jesus’ statement to be a claim to be God. In the following verses, Jesus never corrects the Jews by saying, “I did not claim to be God.” That indicates Jesus was truly saying He was God by declaring, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am!” Again, in response, the Jews take up stones in an attempt to stone Jesus (John 8:59). Why would the Jews want to stone Jesus if He hadn’t said something they believed to be blasphemous, namely, a claim to be God?
Thomas the disciple declared concerning Jesus, “Lord and my God” (John 20:28).Jesus does not correct him.
The ultimate expression of this claim is in Matthew 25, where Jesus describes the coming judgment of Messiah, seated on his “throne of glory”—a phrase that to his disciples would indicate a throne of heavenly glory.* Here the Son of Man judges in his own name and by his own authority, with the ability to condemn the wicked to hell (25:41). This is a power only God has. For Jesus to claim it is a claim to be God, for he many times referred to himself as the Son of Man.
John 14:9…he that hath seen me hasth seen the Father…
So, while Jesus never said the exact words “I am God”, he still definetly made the claim.
Hmmmm….I guess that’s more lies told by Boris



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 5, 2009 at 2:43 pm


Wayne you are reading the English translation of words originally written in ancient Greek. These words were distorted for the express purpose of fooling people, people like you. It is no wonder therefore, that only people who read English Bibles believe in an afterlife. This belief is ONLY implied in English translations which is why fundies insist on using their KJV’s only. They even claim the old Greek manuscripts are inferior to their English translation. As far as Jesus claiming to be God, what we have is one mythical fu igure claiming to be another mythical figure. I could not care any less.



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 5, 2009 at 2:45 pm


I said “Hmmmm….I guess that’s more lies told by Boris”
I get excited, but that is no excuse for the tone. I apologize, Boris, not for what was said, but for the tone in which it was said.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 5, 2009 at 10:54 pm


Borris-I hate to say this but with the intent-while I am not a “greek Scholar” I would say that I haave read enough the greek and understand enough of it to say with out a doubt athe claims about Jesus fo Himself in the New Testamet are even more convinving in the original language-either you are a complete phony or you are blind- not only to the greek rendering of Jesus’s own words but sadly to the truth of them………



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 6, 2009 at 1:54 am


Your Name what can you tell me about neuter plural nouns in Koine Greek?
What proof do you have that there even was a Jesus to say those words? The Bible?



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 6, 2009 at 10:06 am


Boris,
You said, “As far as Jesus claiming to be God, what we have is one mythical figure claiming to be another mythical figure. I could not care any less.”
That’s irrelevant. You had challenged me to post what you said and refute it, and you said the the Jesus of the New Testament never claims to be God.
So, now prove to us that ALL of the scriptures I gave you concerning Jesus’ claim to be God are distorted. Why don’t you give us the correct translation?
You said, “It is no wonder therefore, that only people who read English Bibles believe in an afterlife.”
Incorrect again…Dr. Spiro Sodhiates is a Greek Scholar who believes in an afterlife. Greek Scholars Dr. W. F. Arndt, Dr. J. Gresham Machen, and Dr. Robert Dick Wilson (formerly of Princeton University) also believed in an afterlife. By they way, they also believed in the Bible’s interpretation of an afterlife.



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:00 pm


Boris your an idiot! You don’t see men cutting them selves open to bleed once a month you piece of crap. All your arguments about abortion and your reasonings for it is to cover up the fact that its the same thing as youthanasia which is probably something you would oppose. We all should burn in hell for killing little babys. Sorry, for sucking little babys brains out with a vacuum. Boris you do realize that if a pregnant woman is murdered its a double homicide, but if a doctor does it it’s a double standered



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:02 pm


By the way boris I won’t apoligize like Wayne. I don’t care if yout feelings get hurt!!!!!!



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:19 pm


Are we supposed to be impressed with fact that you can read greek Boris?



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 6, 2009 at 12:21 pm


Watch out BORIS IS A BABY MURDERER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 6, 2009 at 7:12 pm


Should our criminal laws allow double standards?



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 6, 2009 at 9:20 pm


Musicman
I have your double standard right here. If I were to call you the names that you called me, in print on this site I would be banned. I’m an atheist, I make superb and so far unchallengeable arguments and often they are censored and erased. Not for profanity or the kind of verbal insults you hurl but because I knock over Christian arguments like bowling pins. But whoever moderates this site is going to let your rude and uncalled for name calling stand. Basically I’m winning with the cards stacked against me, on an uneven playing field, with crooked refs while being booed loudly by disagreeable and unknowledgeable fans like you. Hurray for me!
Now as far as something being wrong with any of my arguments I’ll tell you the same thing I tell the rest of the Christian blowhards: Name’ em and claim ‘em. Until you say EXACTLY where I am wrong, my statements stand. I’m glad you’re so agitated. That is always my intent. Thanks for helping me measure my fantastic success.



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 7, 2009 at 7:33 am


What ever Walt Disney under dog storey you atheist/liberals have to tell your selves to feel zero guilt for your actions. I think I did “name’ em and claim’ em” Boris with the double homicide argument. You can twist and smoosh everything to lean your way but the fact is, I should’nt call you names because I’m not the one you have to answer to in the end, and because you are going in so blindly, I feel more SORRY for you. God Bless Borris!



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 7, 2009 at 7:44 am


Yourname. No our criminal laws should not allow double standards, they just stopped double standards with Gov. Blago, not allowing it with the tax evading liberals!



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 7, 2009 at 7:48 am


Hey Boris, I’m Still not crying for the things I called you :(



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 7, 2009 at 9:42 am


Musicman
Your imaginary sky wizard isn’t going to follow me to my grave and judge and torture me because I didn’t buy into the absurd dogmas and doctrines of your particular religion. Your God doesn’t exist, Jesus Christ NEVER existed and there is no such thing as an afterlife. What ever Walt Disney under dog story you fundy wackos have to tell yourself yo believe this crap is a retarded fantasy.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 7, 2009 at 10:06 am


Musicman,
Sadly, narrow-minded people like you religious ideologues, don’t understand that making abortion illegal doesn’t make abortion less common. In countries where abortion is illegal, 186 women die every day due to complications from unsafe, i.e. illegal, abortions. A recent global study conducted by Johns Hopkins Hospital showed that the abortion rate is exactly the same in developed countries where abortion is legal and in undeveloped countries where it is banned. So obviously the anti-choice crowd wants to make abortions more dangerous because making them illegal will NOT make them less frequent. When your religious ideology conflicts with public safety it becomes dangerous and must be eliminated through education. This is why we atheists recognize the need to bring and end to religious faith before people like you bring an end to the world fighting and killing each other over whose retarded fairy tales to believe.
Abortion has been performed for thousands of years, and in every society that has been studied. It was legal in the United States from the time the earliest settlers arrived. At the time the Constitution was adopted, abortions before “quickening” were openly advertised and commonly performed.
A fetus does not have a right to be in the womb of any woman, but is only in there by her permission. This permission may be revoked by the woman at any time. Rights are not permissions; permissions are not rights. This permission is given by the woman, because it is her body — and not the fetus’s body, and certainly not the government’s body.
To give a fetus “rights” superior to a pregnant woman is to eradicate the woman’s right to her body. The principle here is: any right that contradicts the right of another cannot be a right, as rights form an integrated whole. Contrary to the opinion of anti-lifers (falsely called “pro-lifers” as they are against the life of the actual human being involved) a woman is not a breeding pig.



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 7, 2009 at 12:19 pm


Boris I bet you don’t mind getting gifts at “Christs’ mass”, I mean Christmas. Sorry I better say it wrong so you can sleep better at night.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 7, 2009 at 3:33 pm


Does a pro choice President celebrate Christ Mass or Christmas?



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 7, 2009 at 4:33 pm


Your Name, Yes I would say so, but why would an atheist celebrate something they don’t believe in. Please don’t twist my words. Judas believed in Jesus, but was led down the wrong path. Correct?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 10, 2009 at 10:46 am


Any twisting of words was not intended other than to appreciate your understanding of the terms origin.
Is President Obama one to recognize Christ while ignoring Christ’s message?



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 10, 2009 at 7:59 pm


Yourname, Sorry I misunderstood what you were saying. I was getting all worked up over Boris.



report abuse
 

Boris

posted February 10, 2009 at 9:10 pm


Musicman,
My ancestors and relatives are Jewish so I don’t get Christmas gifts. They celebrated equally goofy holidays. How do you think Judas believing in Jesus proves anything? Robin believes in batman too. Now, what exactly are you all worked up about?



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 11, 2009 at 11:06 am


Did either Christ or Batman believe in killing?



report abuse
 

Wayne

posted February 11, 2009 at 11:34 am


Musicman,
BTW, I didn’t apologize for what I said to Boris…I apologized for the tone. Peter told us in 1 Peter 3:8 tells us to be courteous. Christians should always be ready to tell the truth, however we should do it in love. Your posts are rude and abnoxious. How do we expect to win anyone over like that? Jesus called the religionists hypocrites, but he spoke in love to the non-religious sinners.
Where is the Biblical permission to call people idiots?



report abuse
 

Musicman

posted February 11, 2009 at 1:29 pm


Your right Wayne, I understand what you are saying. One of my many flaws is that I get too upset by nieve people which I know is wrong.



report abuse
 

Barbara Paulus

posted February 12, 2009 at 5:58 pm


I am in total agreeemt with you Jay and i researched him and found out he talks out of both sides of his mouth- claime christianity and then in written speech form on his site makes fun of the bible and it si also in video and does not get the bible quotes correct and this is scarey in the speech he backs roe- versus wade and is for stem cell research- you have my permission to use the following- he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
Heaven’s Littlest Jewels
My children, I gave you heaven’s littlest jewels to nurture and protect yet you are killing them before they are out of the womb. I have gathered them to me. All of heaven in grieving and wants to know why.
Nurture and protect them as I have nurtured and protected you! Response to stem cell and abortions. Grieve heaven or please man – your choice.
Except you enter as a child and through the blood -you will not enter heaven!



report abuse
 

Barbara Paulus

posted February 12, 2009 at 6:00 pm


Heaven’s Littlest Jewels
My children, I gave you heaven’s littlest jewels to nurture and protect yet you are killing them before they are out of the womb. I have gathered them to me. All of heaven in grieving and wants to know why.
Nurture and protect them as I have nurtured and protected you! Response to stem cell and abortions. Grieve heaven or please man – your choice.
Except you enter as a child and through the blood -you will not enter heaven!
total agree ment- before election found out he was saying one thing to public and doing another wolf alert it is ok to use the above



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted February 14, 2009 at 3:19 pm


Will this wolf ever be satiated?



report abuse
 

N. Lindzee Lindholm

posted October 29, 2009 at 7:47 pm


I find the repealing of the Mexico City policy repugnant. Enough of taxpayer dollars already goes to funding the to-be-found fraudulent Planned Parenthood, let alone this. Let the voice of the people be heard and allow the millions of Americans who disagree with abortion to have the right not to fund acts that pro-lifers call murder.



report abuse
 

Your Name

posted October 29, 2009 at 10:59 pm


The problem with that is, it is the pro-lifers calling abortion murder and not the law. Since the law says it is legal, then it becomes a personal, medical, matter. Why not plan for the pregnancies we know will occur? Planning makes many adoptions possible too, not only abortions.



report abuse
 

protiguous

posted May 27, 2010 at 6:12 pm


Abortion is murder, plain and simple.



report abuse
 

buy umbrella

posted August 11, 2010 at 9:26 pm


Good writing, and I very much agree with your thoughts and insights. Hope that more could write such a good word, I said, to continue coming to visit, thank you for sharing.i love buy umbrella very much .



report abuse
 

abortion is crime

posted November 14, 2010 at 4:02 pm


David Kinsella – Killing girls -” /?d=1CYG7T9V ” on megaupload



report abuse
 

Not as good as YOU, apparently

posted November 15, 2010 at 2:35 pm


“Abortion is murder, plain and simple.”
Only to anti-choice, anti-women folk like yourself. Otherwise, you’d be in favor of reliable birth control for every female.
A rough parallel to your ‘thought’ is that all sex is rape, always. (And of course, the raped MUST carry their fetus to term, by edict of a (ahem) government (whom the ‘right’ selectively says they want less of).



report abuse
 



Previous Posts

Another Blog To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting LynnvSekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow: Faith and Justice  Happy Reading!

posted 11:26:38am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Another blog to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Lynn V. Sekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow's Faith and Justice Happy Reading!!!

posted 10:36:04am Jul. 06, 2012 | read full post »

More to Come
Barry,   It's hard to believe that we've been debating these constitutional issues for more than two years now in this space.  I have tremendous respect for you and wish you all the best in your new endeavors.   My friend, I'm sure we will continue to square off in other forums - on n

posted 4:52:22pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Thanks for the Memories
Well Jay, the time has come for me to say goodbye. Note to people who are really happy about this: I'm not leaving the planet, just this blog.As I noted in a personal email, after much thought, I have decided to end my participation and contribution to Lynn v. Sekulow and will be doing some blogging

posted 12:24:43pm Nov. 21, 2010 | read full post »

President Obama: Does He Get It?
Barry,   I would not use that label to identify the President.  I will say, however, that President Obama continues to embrace and promote pro-abortion policies that many Americans strongly disagree with.   Take the outcome of the election - an unmistakable repudiation of the Preside

posted 11:46:49am Nov. 05, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.