Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Republicans for Choice Identifies Westcoast Field Director for Electing Pro-abortion Republicans

Michelle has the full story at Life of the Party.

Bottom line: If you are pro-life, voting for the person with the (R) beside their name will not result in a pro-life majority. Voters will need to know more about a candidate's position on the right to life before pro-lifers can be expected to vote for those holding themselves up for elected office.

Be informed. Check AIW and Life of the Party as we get closer to election time.

Monday, April 16, 2007

Washington's Abortion Industry Scores Hat Trick

Not since the passage of Washington's I-120, the most radical abortion law in the United States, if not the world, has the state's abortion industry achieved so much, so quickly, and with so little effort.

In a one week sweep they managed to gain recognition of homosexual "domestic partnerships", mandatory "comprehensive" sex education, and forced participation of pharmacists into the abortion industry.

Adding insult to injury, the state's largest newspaper the Seattle Times depicted the dispute over pharmacists conscience rights as a "political fight disguised as morality" and painted the honest and caring pharmacists who don't want to be part of the state's abortion industry as a "cadre" who were "simply tools in the debate over abortion rights."

Well, right off the bat--most people in Seattle figured out a long time ago that the Seattle Times doesn't know the first think about morality.

Second, the idea that this was a "political fight" is just laughable. The state GOP and Democrat party both supported the governor's heavy-handed demands. Republican attorney general Rob McKenna's representative to the Board of Pharmacy cut off all efforts to help the pharmacists. Luke Esser, the chairman of the state GOP said he supported democrat Gregoire's demands. Calling this sad turn of events a "politcial fight" is a little like calling the rolling of tanks into Hungary in 1956 a border skirmish. The pharmacists were at the mercy of the political powers that be from the very beginning.

Third, in the course of their reporting since the issue erupted in March 2006 the Times did not publish one story to highlight the independent nature of the pharmacists involved. No organized, sustained institutional help ever came to the assistance of the pharmacists. The Washington State Pharmacy Association, the UW School of Pharmacy, the Department of Health, the Board of Pharmacy among others, all supported the abortion industry rather than their professional co-workers.

The Times did nothing to report and inform readers on the financial ties between Planned Parenthood, NARAL, the BOP, the Washington State Pharmacy Association and Barr Laboratories. They did nothing to report on the true nature of Plan B's abortifacient effect or clarify for citizens the Constitution's First Amendment right to conscience. Neither did they bother to expose the lies told by the pushers of Plan B. Now that the state's abortion rate has started to pick-up since the aggressive introduction of Plan B in 1997, the promise by Don Downing of the UW School of Pharmacy that it would reduce the abortion rate seems like a grim joke.

To be sure, the media and the Board of Pharmacy were the real tools in this fight. But the fight ain't over.

Friday, April 13, 2007

Pro-Abortion Senator Patty Murray Named in CWA Lawsuit

CWA Sues FDA Over Unlawful Approval of Morning-After Pill
Coalition of medical professionals and family groups ask court to reverse FDA’s decision

Washington, D.C. — A lawsuit was filed yesterday in Federal Court seeking to overturn the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) unprecedented approval of the morning-after pill, Plan B, as both non-prescription and prescription based on the age of the buyer.

The lawsuit was brought by the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), Concerned Women for America (CWA), Family Research Council (FRC) and Safe Drugs for Women. The suit argues that the FDA committed numerous violations to approve the drug due to extreme political pressure exerted specifically by Senators Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Patty Murray (D-WA).

CWA President Wendy Wright said, “The FDA buckled to pressure to do something it has never done before — make a high dose of a drug available without a prescription when a low dose of the same drug requires a prescription. The agency skirted laws and regulations put in place to ensure drugs are safe and effective, relenting under undue pressure from political operatives.”

The lawsuit makes the case that:
  • The data submitted by Plan B’s owner did not establish that it is safe or effective. The owner did not test the effects of taking a high dose of hormones during puberty. The FDA did not consider the safety effects on women of all ages, missing medical checkups and counseling that is necessary for the conditions in which Plan B is used. It misleads consumers regarding Plan B’s efficacy, leading to unintended pregnancies.
  • The trials to test how well consumers understood the label directions showed that consumers do not understand it well enough to self-medicate with Plan B. Fully one-third of women of all ages did not understand that Plan B cannot be used as a regular form of birth control. The label is misleading and does not provide the legally required disclaimers to delineate what it can and cannot do. This makes Plan B particularly unsafe for young women and girls because they do not understand that Plan B does not replace traditional and more effective birth control, and they may take it too often.
  • The FDA lacks authority to approve the same drug for both over-the-counter (OTC) and prescription-only distribution.
  • The FDA lacks authority to approve distribution based on the buyer’s age.
  • The FDA lacks authority to approve “behind-the-counter”—a drug that is neither fully OTC nor prescription only.
  • The FDA approved Plan B for non-prescription use without conducting the necessary rulemaking required by the Administrative Procedure Act and the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
  • The sudden reversal by FDA and Commissioner von Eschenbach had the distinct appearance of resulting from improper political pressure exerted by Senators Clinton and Murray who made clear that they put “holds” on von Eschenbach’s confirmation until he acted on Plan B.
  • The FDA’s approval ensures that girls will have unsupervised access to Plan B even though FDA has found that Plan B is unsafe for girls without medical supervision, as denoted by the fact it is prescription-only for those under 18.
  • The FDA failed to require Plan B’s owner to comply with the Pediatric Research Equity Act which protects children and adolescents.

This lawsuit seeks to reverse the FDA’s decision, placing Plan B back where it belongs: as prescription-only. Barring that, the suit seeks to require a rulemaking procedure to address the legal questions raised.

Concerned Women for America is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Abortion Industry Advocates Dominate Board of Pharmacy

Today the Washington State Board of Pharmacy voted unanimously to deny pharmacists and by proxy other health care workers their right to conscience guaranteed by the First Amendment to the US Constitution. This rule was pushed by the pro-abortion governor Christine Gregoire, the abortion lobby and the manufacturers of Plan B, Barr Laboratories.

It should be common knowledge by now that the people of Washington have no one to represent them when it comes to their health and safety. Nor do they have anyone protecting their First Amendment rights--especially when the state's abortion industry is involved. Here's just a sampling of the ties between the abortion industry and the Board of Pharmacy.

  • Professor Don Downing is nationally known for educating and training pharmacists and other healthcare providers on Plan B. In addition to teaching, he works to promote Plan B, nation-wide and is compensated for his work with Plan B. He is the director of PEAK Solutions, LLC.
  • Rod Schafer is CEO of the Washington State Pharmacy Association. The Association provides courses to pharmacists and other healthcare providers on Plan B. The Association charges a fee for the courses. In addition, the CEO has traveled and the Association continues to send staff to promote Plan B.
  • New Board of Pharmacy member, Rosemarie Duffy was a member of the Board of Directors for the Planned Parenthood of the Inland Empire from 1998-2000.
  • New Board of Pharmacy member, Vandana Slatter is currently a NARAL Pro-Choice Washington Board Member.
  • Timothy S. Fuller, consultant to the Washington Board of Pharmacy, also has his own company--Fuller and Associates--to work on issues related to Plan B. He works closely with Don Downing, Rod Schafer and population control organizations to push, Plan B, contraceptives and abortion.

Monday, April 09, 2007

Washington Teen Escapes Unwanted Forced Abortion

This sad story about a young woman in Colville, Washington whose boyfriend tried to force her to abort using an illegal a hit man reminds me of this sad story Planned Parenthood of Western Washington relates about their efforts to legalize hit men.

Relevant facts are as follows:
  • Woman is pregnant.
  • Man doesn't want the baby.
  • Man has emotionally rejected woman.
  • Man seeks help in procuring abortion to solve HIS problem.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

True Hell Beats Vanity Hell

This is a story of the abortion establishment at its worst. Of power brought down hard on the body of a woman who, because of illness, ethnicity, and suffocating pressure, could not fight back.

I had never met a woman who had, only a short time before, tried to hang herself.

Which makes me wonder -- to which circle of hell would I consign Big Abortion and Big Pharmacutical?

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

The Code is Broken

In this post -- Resist, Resist, Resist -- we listed some of the phrases pro-abortion Republicans use to chart what they believe is a middle course on abortion and the right to life. The idea, as explained many times by Michelle at Life of the Party, is to be costmetically pro-life but in reality pro-choice. By speaking in code, the strategy is to convince enough pro-life voters that they are just pro-life enough and "better than the other guy".

One of those code phrases, "I'll appoint strict constructionist judges" we belittled as a pie-in-the-sky shifting of resposibility from the candidate to the Supreme Court. It effectively says, "I can't and won't do anything to combat the culture of death if I'm elected."

Thanks to Rudy Giuliani and an article in this week's Weekly Standard we've now got a better understanding of what that phrase means to him and possibly other cosmetically pro-life candidates. Here it is in nutshell:
...[W]ith Roe--a strict constructionist judge could come to either conclusion about Roe v. Wade. He could come to the conclusion that it was incorrectly decided, overturn it, or he could decide well, it's been precedent for so long now, it would be too disruptive to overturn it, so we leave it alone. I would leave that up to a judge.
So there you have it -- restoring the right to life is just one big crap shoot to Mr. Rudy. In the meantime a President Giuliani is increasing funding for abortion, promoting abortion around the world and basically keeping his head in the sand about what it's doing to our country.

Even more strange is his justification for being a totaly weenie about abortion but acting like a big tough guy when it comes to fighting crime:
I think it's a bad thing in government when we start to play judges of morality...

My concern in government was crime. Morality is a concern of families, of churches and religious leaders. My thing is, you break the law, you go to jail. But morality--I have mine, you have yours. I can talk to you about it, but I'm not going to enforce it. As for abortion, I think it's wrong. However, people ultimately have to make that choice. If a woman chooses that, that's her choice, not mine. That's her morality, not mine.
Huh? How does he think those laws became laws? Somewhere along the line someone made a moral decision about what was right and what was wrong. Aren't law breakers applying Rudy's logic of "I have my morality and you have yours" to their particular situation?

Rudy would be a terrible president if only because of his fuzzy thinking.

Former McGavick Staffer Joins Giuliani Campaign

Elliott Bundy has a record of working for pro-abortion Republicans.

As an aide and spokesman to Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski. He's the one who uttered the famous phrase, "We're happy to receive support from Alaska Right to Life in the manner they've chosen to give it," in regard to Alaska Right To Life's non-endorsement endorsement of Murkowski.

For Mike McGavick's ill fated senatorial campaign here.

Now for Rudy Giuliani as a campaign spokesman, "The ultrasound proposal currently under consideration is a good example of a matter best left to the states to decide," Elliott Bundy said about the pro-abortion mayor's views."

So how many people out there still cling to the idea that McGavick was "moderate" on abortion and would have helped stem the tide of pro-abortion legislation?

Monday, April 02, 2007

Seattle Reacts to Post-Abortion Story

Debbie Schneider's Guest Editorial in Friday's Seattle PI brought 65 comments in the "Sound Off" section.

The pro-abortion side trotted out the shop worn arguments -- It's not a baby. It was her "choice." It's her own fault since she didn't have sex ed or take precautions. Abortion is safer than childbirth. Post-abortive women are mentally ill, etc.

There were however some thoughtful comments from people who were sympathetic to Debbie and seemed to have true compassion. One person asked this question:
In regards to depression, does anyone know of any studies that compare rates of depression after abortion to rates of depression after child birth? Maybe post-abortion depression is simply akin to post partem(sp?) depression some women get after child birth.
The recent New Zealand study is one that may touch on that.

There was also this honest comment:
Speaking as someone who is rabidly pro-choice but just as rabidly anti-abortion in my personal life, I want to say thanks to Ms. Schneider. Hearing the views of someone who has gone through it gives me more pause for thought on the subject. I still come down on the side of pro-choice, but I believe the issues you raised are valid and worth discussion.
One man also identified himself as having 5 aborted children. His defense of abortion seemed based on the fact that he needed those 5 abortions at the time and the "Christian right" would have prevented them from happening.

Several post-abortive women also posted.

Valerie Jacobs of Project Rachel of Western Washington posted this comment in response to "WizardMan":
1) Abstinence is the only form of contraception that is 100% effective, even when used 100% appropriately. I have worked with many women who reported becoming pregnant while using various forms. Contraception is marketed and used as though it is a gaurantee of sexual activity without consequences. Teen women are not stupid or lazy for this. They do not need more sex education; they need different sex education.

2) According to Webster's, the definition of "fetus" is "unborn young." The definition of "embryo" is "an animal in the earliest stages of development in the uterus" [Gr. embryon, embryo, fetus, thing newly born.] To say that an embryo is not a human life is like saying a child is not a human life because it is not an adult. There is indeed a heartbeat at 18-24 days. At 43 days the brain coordinates movement. At 8 weeks all organs are functioning. At 9 weeks the unborn child has indivdual, uniquely identifying fingerprints. This is all well within the first trimester. Before the miracle of life became a political football, medical texts clearly stated that "a new human life begins at conception." Perhaps a few pictures would help WizardMan dispel his ignorance of these scientific facts. If he is not too lazy, I suggest he go to his local library.

3) To equate spontaneous abortion with induced abortion is like equating the devastation of an earthquake with exploding a bomb.

4) Shortly after an abortion women may experience either relief or devastating grief, which can include anger and depression (a form of anger directed inward). Until recently, the vast majority of studies took place less than 12 months post-abortion. This is the time frame we often see "relief" and "emotional numbing." When I reviewed the literature 13 years ago, what I found showed on average that 10% of women were affected in some significant way after abortion. Furthermore, I also found that individual studies showed that anywhere from 1% to 90% of women were affected. Much depended on what what was studied, ie depression, suicidality, etc, and when it was studied (how long after the abortion). Studies done further from the abortion event (3-5 years) yielded more and greater negative effects. This delayed result is exactly what is well known and recogized in the field of post traumatic stress disorder. Recently, an excellent long term study was completed by a researcher in New Zealand who describes himself as "pro-choice." Ground breaking in its scope, this study found a significant link between abortion and mental health and dispels the notion that this is due to prior mental health issues. Whatever "medical text" WizardMan is quoting from may have to be amended. Science will always eventually correct itself if it remains free from political bias.

5) WizardMan's last paragraph is so full of distracting, irrelevant and prejudiced characterizations as to be unworthy of response.

6) One final note. I have personally spoken to and worked with over 1500 post-aborted women (and a few men) to help them pick up the pieces of their lives and heal the scars following this "unchoice." Depression is frequent as is loss of trust in themselves and in relationships. Women's stories are often filled with anger toward men like WizardMan who are calloused toward the life their girlfriends carry and who abandon them emotionally with the politically correct response, "Well, it's your choice." In most cases, these relationships break up and the men involved remain oblivious to the emotional devastation left behind. Women often ask me, "Does he ever think of our child? Did he ever suffer as I have over this choice? It is incredibly healing when some of those women discover that, indeed, he did and does.