Posted on 03/03/2005 7:06:40 AM PST by St. Johann Tetzel
Contraception: Newest effort to defeat pro-lifers
By Jill Stanek
Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Abortion Federation and pro-abortion politicians all make money directly or indirectly from abortion, and that is why they push it. But abortion comprises only one-third of their financial portfolio. They make another third by selling contraceptives, pregnancy tests and sexually transmitted disease testing and treatment.
Posted: March 2, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
The final third comes from the government, which pays them to promote the illicit sexual behavior via "sexual education" that generates business for the aforementioned two-thirds of their operation.
Never forget that everything abortion activists do is to make money from promiscuous sex, and they have developed a clever triangular scheme toward that end. They have carved out their market niche through selling all aspects of illicit sexual behavior – first by promoting it, and then by preventing or reversing its consequences.
But their marketing strategies of the past 30 years have finally started to fail – the "pro-choice" sound bites; the rigid, vicious fights against any attempts to tamper with abortion in any way; and turning to judicial tyrants to get their way when the people try to subdue them.
The 2004 election was the last straw, forcing them in recent months to dramatically shift their strategies. They have determined to appear sensitive about abortion and to focus less on that and more on contraception.
Their two new talking points are:
Pro-aborts have repeated those two points in the press in recent weeks like cloned parrots.
NARAL even placed an ad in the conservative Weekly Standard last month on talking point No. 1. Note NARAL goes so far as to call us the "Right-To-Life Movement," glaring evidence it has switched tactics to appear more thoughtful and less barbaric to the American people. (NARAL also came out neutral on the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act – a huge concession.)
Point No. 1 is a win-win for pro-aborts. It makes them appear rational on the topic of abortion while at the same time promoting sex ed and contraceptives – both moneymakers for them. And when contraceptives fail, they know they will still make money from abortion without having to push it so rabidly.
Pro-lifers can counter this point by demonstrating the great success of abstinence training and the upsides of chaste living.
We cannot budge on the counterfeit "abstinence plus" training the other side is hawking, which says it's great to teach abstinence, but kids should also be given "tools" if they cannot control themselves. This is ridiculous.
To correlate, I don't know one wife who would pack a condom in her husband's suitcase saying, "I expect you'll be faithful while away on business, but just in case ..." In other words, let's not advise our children any differently than we advise ourselves.
And I also don't know one teen boy who has gotten so drunk he made a pass at his own mother. In other words, we all have the wherewithal to resist sexual urges if we really want to.
Point No. 2 is smart, too. Because the American public no longer considers the pro-life view on abortion extremist, pro-aborts must figure out another way to make us appear fanatical. They have settled on the topic of contraception.
The contraceptive mentality is so engrained in American minds that to consider reverting to the day when sex was practiced solely within the confines of marriage – with each act carrying with it the potential blessing of children – is simply crazy to them.
Pro-aborts know this is a wedge issue for pro-lifers. The natural family planning mentality is foreign to most Protestants and prehistoric to many Catholics.
I am one Protestant who has come to believe that contraception is wrong, based on my analysis of Scripture. But I remember thinking what a bizarre concept this was when my Catholic pro-life friends first brought it to my attention.
Pro-lifers must get on top of these latest attempts by pro-aborts to pigeonhole and divide us and come up with counteroffensives.
Pro-life groups and churches must take greater responsibility for abstinence training and not leave that up to the pregnancy help centers. We must also continue to dialogue about the issue of contraception and make up our minds not let the other side divide us on that.
Jill Stanek fought to stop "live-birth abortion" after witnessing one as a registered nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. In 2002, President Bush asked Jill to attend his signing of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. In January 2003, World Magazine named Jill one of the 30 most prominent pro-life leaders of the past 30 years.
No, the court has upheld that definition as it was given in sworn testimony by a geneticist in Blountville, TN and in other cases where embryologists have testified. Also, prior to the Roe, 1973, decision, a federal district court upheld the same recognition. I can tell you don't like facts when they don't fit your predisposed perspective and you certainly have a very closed mind, so I'll cease addressing you ... wouldn't want to upset your delicate belief structure or cause you to mischaracterize further.
That is a meaningless question. "Objective", by definition, means that it is observable by anyone.
You are inadvertently siding with the likes of the ACLU.
Nope. On this point, I deliberately side with the ACLU.
They want all religion to be relinquished to "private" expression.
Do you think "the private sphere" is irrelevent? I don't. Not everything is, or should be, the purview of the state.
Freedom of religion in our nation was always a freedom of communities
Nonsense. "Communities" do not have rights; individuals do.
In that case, it isn't a "miscarriage", but rather a premature birth.
Incidentally, as soon as the fertilization occurs, there is no longer an egg, so continuing to use the specious phrase 'fertilized egg' can be seen as an effort to misdirect, at the very least. Call the single cell what it is scientifically, the ZYGOTE age of a new individual life begun at conception.
Check your Hebrew definitions, Malakhi.
Define "living human being".
Courts do not adjudicate scientific fact. Science does not determine what constitutes human life.
You've completed your circle so you must feel quite smug. But alas, the realities are quite the opposite to your assertion. Nice try however.
The burden of deconstructing the plain meaning of living human being is up to those who would deny the presumption.
I think that's a false distinction. Most immoral behavior harms others or at least has the potential to harm others; that's why it's immoral.
We have enough trouble sorting out what does, and what does not damage others, without adding questions of what is moral or not to the criminal law arena.
Illogical. To claim whether it matters whether something damages others or not is intrinsically a moral claim; by involving it, you've already added a "question of what is moral or not to the criminal law arena".
To me, the only behavior that ought to be sanctioned by criminal law is immoral behavior. (A law that punishes moral behavior is an evil law. Gun control laws, for example, are generally evil because owning a gun is not an immoral act, and actually can be a moral act if you need to protect yourself or your family.)
Then the only questions left are (1) what behaviors are immoral; (2) do enough people agree that these behaviors are immoral to make it possible to sanction them legally; and (3) can such a law actually be enforced at a cost (whether monetary or otherwise) that would justify the benefit of reducing the immoral behavior by however much that behavior would actually be reduced.
When you suggest the hackneyed claim that Catholicism is defined by disagreement with Scripture, you might recall that the Reformation occurred in the 16th century long, long centuries after Christ. Except through Roman Catholicism, "reformed" Christians have no organizational connection to Jesus Christ for a period of nearly 1500 years. We preserved the Bible and passed it along to you folks who believe you are personally authorized to divine its meaning. Jesus Christ named Peter and gave him the keys of His kingdom to bind and loose in heaven what Peter (and his successors) would bind and loose on earth. It was in all the bibles. If that is unacceptable to you, take it up with Jesus Christ.
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=1355033%2C63 I challenge you to substantiate or withdraw the libel against the Roman Catholic Church contained in your second to last paragraph accusing the Church itself of "practicing the atrocity of abortion within their religious institutions in order to hide rampant sexual abuse and immorality." I may have been unjust in criticizing the ludicrous Jack Chick. That accusation of yours smacks more of the similarly notorious concoction of lies published as "The Tales of Maria Monk."
I would suggest, at a minimum, that this nation was not founded by "sola Scriptura" Christians alone. History books will reveal the presence among the Founding Fathers of Catholics and of those with beliefs other than Christian. They were a remarkable group of men and not merely a remarkable group of "sola Scriptura" men.
That having been said, there certainly has been hypocrisy and sexual sin and, far worse, abortion (surgical and pharmaceutical) practiced by Catholics and by Protestants as well. I suspect from the balance of your post that you are pro-life and Protestant (or whatever description you happen to prefer). Catholics are not going to win this war alone. Neither are Protestants. We all need God's help to win. It will be more difficult for us without you and for you without us. With Him, all things are possible no matter how badly I or you may behave.
LOL! Apparently, I'm not the one incapable of coping with contrary opinions.
Mucous production, fever, pain, etc are all normal bodily functions. They are not in themselves disease processes (e.g. in the case of a cold, the disease is the infection of the upper respiratory tract; mucous production, pain , etc is simply a natural response by the body, working in its normal manner).
Blowing your nose every minute while experiencing a sinus headache is inconvenient, certainly, but you've rejected human convenience as an acceptable reason to modify the normal operation of the body.
The definition of "zygote" is: "The cell formed by the union of two gametes, especially a fertilized ovum before cleavage."
In other words, a zygote is a fertilized egg.
Correlation, not causation. People who practice NFP tend to be devout Catholics, who tend to divorce at a lower rate than the general population.
But most people here don't want to question contraceptive orthodoxy, and can't imagine life without their pills and devices. A herd of independent thinkers. Wouldn't want to do anything different, or even imagine anything different.
I've imagined it. It's not a world I'd want to live in.
And he clearly does so for no other reason than the realization that to accept and state those inescapable conclusions of his argument would cause him to be laughed off as a nut. So much for the pose of lonely heroic defender of Truth.
You are going to allow me to define "living human being"?
What if you don't like my definition? Would you have one of your own to proffer?
Our Constitution prevents the majority from outlawing certain things, no matter how unpopular or immoral. Under your system, the majority could ban criticism of the government as "immoral."
Of course there is such a thing as "a societal mindset". I'm pleased that PJ-Comix goes to the trouble of examining it every so often and bringing the ripest examples to us for dissection.
On the other hand, the state does not make recommendations as to how bank robbers should rob banks and the Church is not likely to give advice on better ways to fornicate or practice adultery or lavender abominations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.