The New York City Council is considering a law aimed at crisis pregnancy centers that do not provide abortions or refer women to abortion clinics.
The sponsor of the bill, Councilwoman Jessica Lappin, said the measure was aimed at centers she charged were nothing more than anti-choice centers masquerading as health clinics, 1010 WINS Senior Correspondent Stan Brooks reported. [emphasis mine]
Jessica and her fellow pro-abortion council member Christine C. Quinn are annoyed that their friends at Planned Parenthood and NARAL are missing out on the chance to kill off a few more innocent babies. In recent years, there have been 89,000 abortions performed annually in the NYC area. Crisis pregnancy centers have managed to save 38,000 babies over the past 25 years. For you math whizzes out there, the crisis pregnancy centers have managed to save a number of babies equivalent to about 2.5% (assuming the number of abortions 25 years ago was 25% of what it is now and has increased linearly) of the number of babies “harvested” by the ghouls at PP & NARAL.
PP gets virtually all of its revenue from performing abortions, so their margins must be getting pretty thin for them to stoop to this level of evil. PP claims to provide all kinds of “family planning” services, which they may, but a recent study showed that only one pregnancy in 140 was referred for adoption. PP claims that they offer comprehensive pregnancy services, but they all appear to converge on abortion and vanishingly little else. Crisis pregnancy centers, on the other hand, offer many other options including adoption and other assistance for expectant mothers as long as they choose to keep their child.
Before you think “those people in New York are crazy, that could never happen here,” think again.
That’s what I meant.
I would be a lonely voice trying to convince people that even in most of those cases there are alternatives to pregnancy termination. I would be an even lonelier voice trying to convince most people that in all of those cases, killing the baby is wrong – unless by “health of the mother” you mean “the mother will surely die… Read more »
but I do think that reasonable exceptions should be made for mother’s health / rape / incest Let me say this about that – if those were the lawful exceptions to restricted abortion I suspect we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I would be a lonely voice trying to convince people that even in most of those cases there are… Read more »
In my case, I’m not a run of the mill FisCon (or IgnoroCon as it were!) I would guess. I don’t necessarily believe in allowing completely unrestrained access to abortions, but I do think that reasonable exceptions should be made for mother’s health / rape / incest, and I don’t think that endorsing those rare exceptions makes a politician “pro-abortion”.… Read more »
As far as I’m concerned on this issue, we know where each other stands and there’s no sense getting riled up or offended. What I don’t understand is why that attitude is not more common. I’m not telling anyone they have to believe like me and I’d expect the same courtesy. Instead, I keep getting told I’m messing it up… Read more »
#8 Hamous, That’s the way I took it (ignore), but I can only speak for me. Good that you clarified. As far as I’m concerned on this issue, we know where each other stands and there’s no sense getting riled up or offended. It is what it is and I genuinely find “IgnoroCons” to be a funny label. Count me… Read more »
#5 Dude – before someone gets bent out of shape because they think I’m calling them ignorant I should probably clarify that “Ignoro” prefix was not taken from “Ignorant” but from “Ignore”, meaning that they would prefer we ignore issues such as abortion.
They actually think that with today’s edumacation standards that one of their constituents might actually be able to read such a sign?
Better?
That’s a funny term!
Maligning clinics that don’t provide abortions ?
Good point. I’m open to suggestions.
On a more serious note, I think you’re post title is misleading. If I read this right the ordinance only requires signage stating the clinic doesn’t perform abortions. I’m not sure I have a problem with signage that says “we don’t provide abortion services” … if the abortion mills were required to have a sign that says “we don’t provide… Read more »
You better be careful with all this SoCon talk about abortion. There are IgnoroCons running the show now and they don’t like it when you bring up such topics. It annoys them and makes them uncomfortable. They are the ones that rescued the Republican Party from the nether regions. You best just shut up and sit in the corner and… Read more »
That’s what I meant.
I would be a lonely voice trying to convince people that even in most of those cases there are alternatives to pregnancy termination. I would be an even lonelier voice trying to convince most people that in all of those cases, killing the baby is wrong – unless by “health of the mother” you mean “the mother will surely die… Read more »
but I do think that reasonable exceptions should be made for mother’s health / rape / incest Let me say this about that – if those were the lawful exceptions to restricted abortion I suspect we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I would be a lonely voice trying to convince people that even in most of those cases there are… Read more »
In my case, I’m not a run of the mill FisCon (or IgnoroCon as it were!) I would guess. I don’t necessarily believe in allowing completely unrestrained access to abortions, but I do think that reasonable exceptions should be made for mother’s health / rape / incest, and I don’t think that endorsing those rare exceptions makes a politician “pro-abortion”.… Read more »
As far as I’m concerned on this issue, we know where each other stands and there’s no sense getting riled up or offended. What I don’t understand is why that attitude is not more common. I’m not telling anyone they have to believe like me and I’d expect the same courtesy. Instead, I keep getting told I’m messing it up… Read more »
#8 Hamous, That’s the way I took it (ignore), but I can only speak for me. Good that you clarified. As far as I’m concerned on this issue, we know where each other stands and there’s no sense getting riled up or offended. It is what it is and I genuinely find “IgnoroCons” to be a funny label. Count me… Read more »
#5 Dude – before someone gets bent out of shape because they think I’m calling them ignorant I should probably clarify that “Ignoro” prefix was not taken from “Ignorant” but from “Ignore”, meaning that they would prefer we ignore issues such as abortion.
They actually think that with today’s edumacation standards that one of their constituents might actually be able to read such a sign?
Better?
That’s a funny term!
Maligning clinics that don’t provide abortions ?
Good point. I’m open to suggestions.
On a more serious note, I think you’re post title is misleading. If I read this right the ordinance only requires signage stating the clinic doesn’t perform abortions. I’m not sure I have a problem with signage that says “we don’t provide abortion services” … if the abortion mills were required to have a sign that says “we don’t provide… Read more »
You better be careful with all this SoCon talk about abortion. There are IgnoroCons running the show now and they don’t like it when you bring up such topics. It annoys them and makes them uncomfortable. They are the ones that rescued the Republican Party from the nether regions. You best just shut up and sit in the corner and… Read more »