Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/02/2003 9:56:00 PM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last
To: PaulNYC; tsomer; Mixer; MattinNJ; OceanKing; TomT in NJ; Coleus; agrace; Alberta's Child; ...

2 posted on 01/02/2003 9:59:01 PM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
McCorvey

http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/normamaster.htm

http://priestsforlife.org/clippings/99-07-99mccorveyriograndecatholic.htm

http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/normahomily.htm

http://priestsforlife.org/columns/conversionofnorma.html

http://priestsforlife.org/clippings/95,08-24mccorveymoves.html

Nathanson

http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/nathanson.html

http://priestsforlife.org/media/nathansoninterview.htm

http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/mccorveycanoscheidlerinterview.htm

http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/janerethinkscny95.html

http://priestsforlife.org/speakersmanual/ch5answeringproabort.htm

http://priestsforlife.org/testimony/hill.htm
3 posted on 01/02/2003 10:04:24 PM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Wasn't this posted about 50,000 times already on FR? I have no problem with WND, but I am a little tired of this repetitive marketing campaign. Buy an ad cheapskates!
6 posted on 01/02/2003 10:15:47 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
read later
7 posted on 01/02/2003 10:23:27 PM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
bump
8 posted on 01/02/2003 10:24:59 PM PST by Rocky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
"the doctors and clinic staffers are self-destructing from the long-term effects of their grisly business – or else they are getting out and telling their story. "

This is encouraging.

11 posted on 01/02/2003 10:48:55 PM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls,"

Noting that "repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public,"

I see liberal tactics haven't changed much over the decades, have they?

12 posted on 01/02/2003 10:52:45 PM PST by kstewskis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
All FReepers should take the time to read William Hubbs Rehnquist's dissent in Roe v Wade. Rehnquist got it right in 1973. The full case is available at many URLs. (E.G. http://www.fedworld.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?waisdocid=57675429060+0+0+0&waisaction=retrieve)
13 posted on 01/02/2003 11:01:56 PM PST by AlienCrossfirePlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Sorry that link doesn't work. This is better: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/
14 posted on 01/02/2003 11:08:33 PM PST by AlienCrossfirePlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Bump for your efforts.
21 posted on 01/03/2003 9:58:34 AM PST by wardaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Woe to a nation which worships Moloch!!!
22 posted on 01/03/2003 10:24:59 AM PST by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Sorry yet again! Try this: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=410&invol=113
Legal citation is ROE v. WADE, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). Where 410 is the bound volume number and 113 is the page number. This info is key to finding the case on the SCOTUS official site. However the bound volume is a big download not recommended, for slow connections.
23 posted on 01/03/2003 10:34:30 AM PST by AlienCrossfirePlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus; american colleen; ventana; maryz; ELS; frogandtoad; Askel5; patent; livius; sandyeggo; ...
BUMP! and PING!
24 posted on 01/03/2003 10:42:27 AM PST by Siobhan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Pro-life bump.
28 posted on 01/03/2003 11:10:59 AM PST by k2blader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
I'm glad Nathanson flipped, but I have no idea how he can live with himself. God help him.

Now if Fox News would report this...

29 posted on 01/03/2003 11:13:53 AM PST by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
Dr. Nathanson is coming to speak at our parish this month.
31 posted on 01/03/2003 11:24:38 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Silverback
ping
40 posted on 01/03/2003 3:02:12 PM PST by Vic3O3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
The link between abortion and breast cancer is now undeniable, proven by the vast majority of medical studies.

While this sounds nice, it is completely false to state this.

Fact - a link has been shown in a study of mice. Problem - mice are not that closely related to humans for this to be definitive.
Fact - a link has been shown in a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (the Melbye study) that shows a risk of 1.9 (eg. almost double the risk) for women who have abortions after 18 weeks (late term abortions). However, for women who abort in the 1st trimester, the relative risk is 1.0 (eg., identical to women who have not had abortions.) This study is considered definitive because it covered 1.5 million women in Denmark born between 1935 and 1978 (definitive because it has such a large population sample size, and there is no "response bias" because Denmark, unlike the US, records all abortions.)

What is "response bias"? In the US, it has been found that in some areas of the country (more conservative and religious) that women who have actually had an abortion may not admit it to a stranger who come knocking at the door to do a survey. Thus, since the women who say they have not had an abortion are the "control group", but if in fact within that group there are women who lied and really did have an abortion, then the group is contaminated and the study is deemed flawed.

Note that there are those who consider the Melbye study flawed, in that there were "age adjustments" done, where Melbye compared "women of like ages with women of like ages". Other epidemiologists state that this is the correct procedure and is normally done in other cancer studies.

Understand that I am not posting this as a "pro-choice" (pro-abortion) position defense. I am pointing out that the majority of epidemiologists do not concur that "The link between abortion and breast cancer is now undeniable, proven by the vast majority of medical studies."

47 posted on 01/04/2003 9:09:01 AM PST by dark_lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus
The abortion industry itself is in severe distress and contraction because, after 43 million abortions...

After so many years of killing babies, they have depleted their available supply of pregnant women. One out of three pregancies have been ending in abortion. That means that one out of every six women that should be alive today are not alive because of abortion.

They have been cutting into their own supply. That's 21.5 million women they can not entice to abort.

49 posted on 01/04/2003 11:01:24 AM PST by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Saundra Duffy
A pro-Life ping to you.
51 posted on 01/04/2003 12:17:54 PM PST by Siobhan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson