Wednesday, 29 February 2012

Planned Parenthood: addicting children to sex!!!

According to Wikipedia, the American Life League (ALL) is one of the largest pro-life organizations in the United States. The organization opposes abortion under any circumstance, contraception, embryonic stem cell research, and euthanasia. The organization's official web site states that [ALL] is a 501(c)(3) organization co-founded in 1979 by Judie Brown and nine other dedicated pro-life Americans. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life education organization in the United States.

With that introduction, I move on to note that ALL has an axe to grind with Planned Parenthood. From the ALL web site: Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) is the nation’s largest operator of abortion facilities in the United States and has admitted to committing over 4,000,000 post-implantation abortion procedures since it first started doing them in New York state in 1970.

While this sky-is-falling rhetoric is enough to incense any God-fearing pro-lifer into fire-bombing the nearest PP office, I note from About.Com: Only 3% of Planned Parenthood's services are abortion services. The other 97% includes testing and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, contraception, cancer screening and prevention, and pregnancy testing and prenatal services.

However, if I think ALL is over-emphasizing PP's involvement in abortion, I find that ALL does take exception to everything PP does. Why? Because it relates to sex. And how does the ALL view sex?

The sexual drive in human beings was created by God to fulfill two interrelated purposes—to bring a close union between a married man and woman engaging in intimate sexual behavior (the "unitive" purpose of sex), and to provide a means to propagate the race (the "procreative" purpose of sex). To be true to the natural law that guides all human action, any act of sexual intercourse must occur within marriage and be open to both the unitive and procreative purposes. (from the page on PP)

From there ALL clearly states that it is immoral for Planned Parenthood to facilitate sexual intercourse outside of marriage. Likewise, it is immoral for PP to promote and distribute products, such as those listed above [contraceptives, etc. and IUDs], as well as condoms, which artificially attempt to render procreation impossible, even to those who are married. From here, ALL goes on to say that PP is promoting "secular humanism", a non-theistic philosophy which rejects the supernatural and thus rejects God and admits to no objective moral code.

When it comes to sex (I am so tempted to write "come" with a U), ALL pulls out all the stops.

Planned Parenthood promotes a type of sex-education for children that denies the very truth and meaning of human sexuality. Such perverted education breaks down natural inhibitions. As a result, there is an increased demand for artificial birth control and abortion. A long-term effect of such education is that it tends to create citizens who will support PP’s agenda.

Merde de taureau
If you've read any of my previous postings, you will know that nothing infuriates me more than people who attempt to support their political, religious or moral agenda by issuing statements of supposed fact with no corroborating evidence. Yep, they give no concrete evidence, no statistics, nothing which could be confirmed by a university sanctioned analytic methodology of double blind testing with a statistically significant cross-section of the population. Nope, I have a direct link to the Almighty Himself and I know what He wants. How odd. My God just told me you don't know what you're talking about. (I think he meant you're full of s**t, but He's a polite god.)

Such perverted [sex] education breaks down natural inhibitions. As a result, there is an increased demand for artificial birth control and abortion.

In my blog posting Abortion: My final word on unwanted pregnancy, I point out the following which may seem counter-intuitive to some but which clearly demonstrates that what you believe to be right may not be the right way of achieving your goal.

Huffington Post - Feb 24/2009
"Pro-Life" Movement Admits Pro-Abortion Stance by Cristina Page
Sometimes referred to as "The Pro-life Paradox," researchers and women's health advocates in recent years have drawn attention to the disparities between the mission statements of so-called "anti-abortion" groups and the effects of their policies. For example, the countries considered the most "pro-choice," where contraception is widely available and abortion is legal, and often free of charge, are those that also have the lowest abortion rates in the world. The countries with the highest rates of abortion are those that have adopted the policies of the so-called "anti-abortion" movement and have banned abortion and opposed efforts to make contraception more widely available.

I am "pro-choice" and "anti-abortion"
I'm repeating myself bla bla bla but will do so here one more time. What does an abortion represent? An unwanted pregnancy. How to stop a pregnancy from being unwanted? Only get pregnant when you want. If every pregnancy was a "wanted" pregnancy, there would be no abortions. Why would anybody abort what they wanted? This is so freakin' obvious, I have no idea why we are even discussing this. Two plus two equals four, right? But oh no, somebody has to come along and throw a monkey wrench into the whole shebang by then saying the only way, yes the only acceptable method of not getting pregnant is to not have sex. *stunned silence* Yeah, right. Like that is going to happen. And yeah like me as a man, I'm going to vote for that? Never mind fluoride, the authorities should be putting Depo-Provera in the water. (Wikipedia: Chemical castration)

Sex is bad! bad! bad!
Sex is a wonderful, beautiful thing. For a lack of a better way of expressing it, I will say that it is truly a gift from God. But we collectively are so confused about it, so embarrassed by it and so afraid of it that we avoid it like the plague in the hopes we will never have to deal with this most personal of issues.

The following video, published by the ALL, portrays Planned Parenthood in the most negative of lights. The narrator starts off by saying that PP is "obsessed with sex". (Hmmm, is my plumber "obsessed" with plumbing?) Here are few lines to whet your appetite for watching this most unbelievable of videos.

What is truly shocking is how these perverts are allowed unfettered access to our children

Just as the goal of a drug deal is to make drug addicts, Planned Parenthood’s goal is to make sex addicts. And they follow the same business model. For instance, Planned Parenthood’s gateway drug is masturbation.

Uploaded by AmericanLifeLeague on Feb 27, 2012
Hooking Kids on Sex II
Planned Parenthood exposes children to sexual material in order to seed a generation of sex addicts, who will become future customers for the abortion giant. This report exposes Planned Parenthood's sex-education programs, using images from Planned Parenthood's own websites, social networks, and events.

Final Word
How do you spell double U tee eff? It's at this point I put one elbow on my computer desk, lean over and put my forehead in the palm of my head. Oh... my... gawd... Over the past few years, I have heard right-wing people in criticizing Barack Obama make comparisons to Nazi Germany, trying through hyperbole (I think they actually believe this to be a valid comparison) to make things out worse than they are. But just imagine what would happen if Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann or even the president of ALL, Judie Brown, somehow came to power. We would all be knocked back to the dark ages. We would be burning people at the stake, using blood-letting as a home remedy and putting chastity belts on girls. Am I exaggerating? Planned Parenthood gone. Legal abortions gone. Sex Education gone. Free condoms gone. Sex gone. It would truly be George Orwell's 1984 with its dystopian double speak and mind control. Your dalliances would be secretive, shameful, and under risk of discovery. ... No wait, that's right now!

Ladies and gentlemen, we are so in trouble. But do we know it? Instead of opening the door and bringing into the sunshine what is a normal, God-given part of our human existence, there are those who want to padlock the door then nail it shut to never ever deal with the issues hidden behind it. Perverted? I'll tell you who's perverted.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go take a cold shower before I commit a "thoughtcrime" and end up having to take a hit of my gateway drug.


Wikipedia: American Life League
The American Life League (ALL) is one of the largest pro-life organizations in the United States. The organization opposes abortion under any circumstance, contraception, embryonic stem cell research, and euthanasia. Its current president is co-founder Judie Brown and its headquarters are in Stafford, Virginia

In the mid-1990s, the American Life League boycotted the Walt Disney Company over the film Priest, in which a Roman Catholic priest deals with a variety of issues including his own homosexuality. Subsequently, ALL charged that Disney had concealed subliminal sexual messages in the animated films The Lion King, The Little Mermaid, and Aladdin. Disney denied all claims made by American Life League.

official web site: American Life League
American Life League is a 501(c)(3) organization co-founded in 1979 by Judie Brown and nine other dedicated pro-life Americans. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life education organization in the United States. ALL is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. It is rooted in pro-life integrity that stands up for every innocent human being whose life is threatened by what Pope John Paul II called "the culture of death." That ranges from the single cell human embryo to the elderly, the infirm and others at risk of having their life terminated by acts of euthanasia. The pro-life position notes that neither abortion nor euthanasia can ever be medically necessary or morally permitted.

Wikipedia: Judie Brown
Judith Ann Limbourne "Judie" Brown (born March 4, 1944, Los Angeles, California) is the president and co-founder of the American Life League, reportedly the largest Catholic pro-life organization in the United States. It was founded in 1979.

The Washington Post Sep 1/1995
Disney's Loin King? Group Sees Dirt in the Dust By Leef Smith, Washington Post Staff Writer
You say you've watched "The Lion King" 50 times with your children and never caught the "sex" scene?
The most recent example, it says, involves Simba, star of Disney's "Lion King." Forlorn over the death of his father, the young lion flops dejectedly on the ground near the edge of a cliff. The result, offended viewers say, is a cloud of dust particles that swirls and swoops to form the word "sex," and then quickly fades away.
ALL says it first learned about the "Lion King" scene in July when a New York woman called to say that her 4-year-old son caught the message. The group -- which began a boycott of Disney films in April to protest the movie "Priest," saying that it misrepresented the Catholic Church -- claims the company has a long history of sneaking "sexual messages" into its animated films.

In particular, ALL has denounced a scene in "Aladdin" in which it says a voice whispers, "Good teenagers, take off your clothes." The Disney script reads: "Scat! Good Tiger. Take off and go."

Even more troubling, the group says, is a scene in "The Little Mermaid" in which the minister at Ariel's wedding allegedly gets an erection. Disney says the critics are seeing the minister's knee.

About.Com: Reproductive Rights and Issues
A great divide exists in this country, fueled by the debate over reproductive rights, contraception and prevention. Many thoughtful and passionate arguments have been put forth by pro-life and pro-choice advocates, and legislation has shifted back and forth over the years. Yet neither has seen a firm resolution to the ongoing conflict over Roe v. Wade.

About.Com: What does Planned Parenthood do? What are their services? Do they do mammograms? by Linda Lowen
Only 3% of Planned Parenthood's services are abortion services. The other 97% includes testing and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, contraception, cancer screening and prevention, and pregnancy testing and prenatal services.

38% - Testing of and treatment for Sexually Transmitted Diseases/Infections (STDs/STIs)
33.5% - Contraception (including reversible and permanent)
14.5% - Cancer screening and prevention
10.4% - Other women's health services
3% - Abortion services
0.6% - Other health services

About.Com: Planned Parenthood / Susan G. Komen Funding Flap - Controversy and Repercussions by Linda Lowen
Many blamed Komen's policy change on one woman -- a recent addition to Komen's management team, pro-life advocate Karen Handel. Opponents noted that during a failed gubernatorial run in Georgia, Handel had made clear her intent to defund Planned Parenthood if elected and had continued to purse that agenda in her new position at Komen.

It took less than a week for controversial Komen Vice President Karen Handel to step down from her post at a breast cancer charity organization that could do no wrong until it attempted to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. What a difference a week makes. Gone is the universal goodwill toward Komen, gone is the grassroots support of millions of women who have been touched by breast cancer, either in their own lives or in the lives of those they love, and gone is the brand that made pink ribbons ubiquitous in our culture. What arose out of the debacle are three key points:
  1. much of the nation still doesn't understand what Planned Parenthood does
  2. the politics of how decision are made are frequently masked
  3. the power of social media cannot be underestimated as a tool of political activism


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Monday, 20 February 2012

Abortion: Condoms don't work. Okay, how 'bout a baggie?

Reprinted from September 7, 2011

I shake my head. I'm startled by what I've just read. Condoms don't work. At all? What!?! Game over; pack up your bags. We're all going home to get the ol' vasa deferentia cut which will hopefully make a vast difference in the success rate of our contraceptives. On September 4, 2011, the web site The Digital Journal published what it labelled an opt-ed piece entitled "The ugly truth about condoms and 'safe sex'" by one Alexander Baron. Mr. Baron, the author, starts his article by making the statement, "The shocking truth about condoms though is that they don’t work." It's at this point I furrowed my brow trying to discern if our supposed expert was pulling my leg.

Mr. Baron goes on to refer to a web site Center for Young Women's Health which has a chart showing the failure rate of condoms as a contraceptive is 14%. Just to confirm I consulted the Wikipedia article on condoms which took me to the web site Contraceptive Technology which confirmed the numbers fairly closely setting the failure rate at 15%.

While Mr. Baron points out that this means condoms are 86% successful he wonders if any of us would be willing to get in an airplane if we were told that 86% of the time the plane does not crash. Well, to be quite frank, I might not be so inclined to catch a flight to my favourite holiday destination if I thought there was a 14% chance I might not either get there or get home again. One point for Mr. Baron.

Having covered the condom as a contraceptive, the author goes on to speculate about the efficiency of the condom in preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Syphilis? Gonorrhea? How about HIV? AIDS? You have a fourteen percent chance of contracting one of these diseases while using a condom. Is anybody still in the mood for love?

However using a condom can give a person a false sense of security. And here Mr. Baron turns to road safety for a comparison saying that campaigners in his native Great Britain were telling everyone for years how dangerous it was to ride a motorcycle without a helmet. He cites a woman who came off her bike at 40mph and claimed to have been saved by her helmet. Mr. Baron responds, "No, dummy, if you hadn't been wearing a helmet, you wouldn't have been riding so fast." Ah, the author thinks the helmet gave the woman a false sense of security and so inspired her to drive faster than she normally would.

Finally, Mr. Baron turns to the Catholic News Agency for the 2001 article "Surprise: Study Finds Condoms Don't Work" by Mary Beth Bonacci. Ms. Bonacci writes:

On July 20, a report was issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. A scientific panel co-sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), developed the report. It was based on a yearlong study in which 28 researchers reviewed 138 peer-reviewed, published studies on the heterosexual transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STD).

Their findings were stunning. Basically, it boils down to this: There is no evidence to indicate that condoms prevent the heterosexual transmission of most sexually transmitted diseases. None.

Mary Beth Bonacci concludes the article by saying, "Save sex for marriage. Marry an uninfected partner. And remain faithful. That, my friends, is safe sex."

Safe Sex: Conclusion
Where do I start? Has anybody concluded that Alexander Baron is Catholic? I looked at this and said to myself that the specious argumentation leads us once again straight back to abstinence. I can't disagree with the idea that if I don't stick my penis in a vagina, a woman isn't going to get pregnant or I'm not going to get an STD or worse, AIDS. But that's distilling the problem down to pure logic and does not in any way take into account the bigger picture of the statistics associated with human behaviour across the globe in a multitude of social environments. It certainly doesn't take into account that as our state of horniness goes up; our capacity to rationalise might just creep up too.

In my blog Rick Perry and Sex Education: Abstinence works!, I followed the above logic by pointing out that if we all drove safely, we wouldn't need safety belts. However the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that 10,000 lives are saved every year due to safety belts. (Wikipedia: Seat belt legislation) Maybe Alexander Baron would say that because of safety belts, we all have a false sense of security and are driving recklessly. Even if that's true, you're not going to find me driving around not wearing one. That would be, ah, reckless!

By the way, I found this 2001 report "Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention" referenced by Mary Beth Bonacci and it does not say condoms are useless. At worst, it says the researchers don't have enough information to make an accurate unbiased assessment one way or another since the studies at hand were not originally done properly to support such a conclusion. However it does indicate that the researchers found statistical benefits to the use of condoms in the prevention of the spreading of disease. Mary Beth Bonacci is stacking the deck in favour of her Catholic perspective on condoms.

14% failure rate
Mr. Baron is leading us all astray. The statistics he cites and the corroborating stats I found show a 14% and 15% failure rate respectively for "typical use" as opposed to "perfect use". Typical? Perfect? The sources define these two terms as meaning:

Typical Use:
When contraception is not used every time, or it is not used according to instructions every time.

Perfect Use:
When contraception is used every time, and it is used according to instructions every time.

So, typical use means the person in question is not following procedures all the time or perfectly. Consequently, a certain rate of failure is added. When the person does follow procedures "perfectly", the rate of failure drops to 3% and 2% respectively. What? That's quite an area of improvement. Instead of saying that condoms are useless, it would seem that better education about their use could move the success rate from 86% to 97% or 98%.

Ah but Mr. Baron leaves out an even more startling statistic. Each of the above sources of stats clearly indicates that if no condom is used at all, the rate of failure is 85%. Hey, don't do anything at all and your chances of pregnancy or disease are, well, pretty much guaranteed. At 85%, if somebody didn't get pregnant or contract a disease, I'd say that is luck pure and simple.

Final Word
Alexander Baron has to be Catholic. Either that or he's an idiot. Anybody who argues to do nothing including the doing nothing of abstinence is arguing against human nature. Yes, logically my penis not being in another human being means no pregnancy and no disease. But put a couple of drinks in me with a partner who is ready, willing and able and I'm going to be telling the Pope to take a hike. I was going to tell the Pope to go **** himself but I've been given to understand he's celibate.

From my blog Abortion: My final word on unwanted pregnancy:

[The Guttmacher Report] specifically concluded that making contraception available to low income women reduces the number of abortions by nearly 40%. When birth control isn't available unintended pregnancy increases by 2 million and the number of abortions spikes by more than 800,000 each year. Researchers noted that providing contraception saves taxpayers 4 times as much as not providing it.

Some 91% of Americans favor contraception and so were startled to discover that groups which claim to be against abortion oppose the very strategy that results in significant declines in abortion. Instead, in a further shock, they support policies that researchers show lead to sharp increases in unintended pregnancy and abortion rate.

I sit here absolutely stunned. Instead of making seat belts mandatory, Alexander Baron, Mary Beth Bonacci and even GOP candidate Rick Perry persist with the idea that if you drive safely, you won't need a safety belt. Instead of improving education about condoms to get their failure rate from 14% (typical use) to 3% (perfect use), they say condoms are useless suggesting we shouldn't use them at all which means a failure rate of 86%.

That's it. Alexander Baron is a Catholic and an idiot.


DigitalJournal - Sep 4/2011
Op-Ed: The ugly truth about condoms and ‘safe sex’ by Alexander Baron
Condoms are back in the news again, this time for a novel reason; one campaigning organisation is calling for them to be made compulsory for porn stars. The shocking truth about condoms though is that they don’t work.

Wikipedia: Condom
A condom is a barrier device most commonly used during sexual intercourse to reduce the probability of pregnancy and spreading sexually transmitted diseases (STDs—such as gonorrhea, syphilis, and HIV).

However, according to a study in the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Journal of the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association condoms have a breakage rate of 2.3% and a slippage rate of 1.3% which "may translate into a high risk for individuals who are very sexually active." With proper knowledge and application technique—and use at every act of intercourse—women whose partners use male condoms experience a 2% per-year pregnancy rate with perfect use and a 15% per-year pregnancy rate with typical use.

Summary Table of Contraceptive Efficacy
Percentage of women experiencing an unintended pregnancy during the first year of typical use and the first year of perfect use of contraception and the percentage continuing use at the end of the first year. United States.

Typical Use
Among typical couples who initiate use of a method (not necessarily for the first time), the percentage who experience an accidental pregnancy during the first year if they do not stop use for any other reason. Estimates of the probability of pregnancy during the first year of typical use for spermicides, withdrawal, periodic abstinence, the diaphragm, the male condom, the pill, and Depo-Provera are taken from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth corrected for underreporting of abortion; see the text for the derivation of estimates for the other methods.

Perfect Use
Among couples who initiate use of a method (not necessarily for the first time) and who use it perfectly (both consistently and correctly), the percentage who experience an accidental pregnancy during the first year if they do not stop use for any other reason. See the text for the derivation of the estimate for each method.

Center for Young Women's Health: Success and Failure Rates of Contraceptives
Typical use of male condom: 14 out of a hundred women become pregnant
Perfect use of male condom: 3 out of a hundred women become pregnant

Typical Use:
When contraception is not used every time, or it is not used according to instructions every time.
Perfect Use:
When contraception is used every time, and it is used according to instructions every time.

Wikipedia: Vasectomy
Vasectomy is a surgical procedure for male sterilization and/or permanent birth control. During the procedure, the vasa deferentia of a man are severed, and then tied/sealed in a manner such to prevent sperm from entering into the seminal stream (ejaculate). Vasectomies are usually performed in a physician's office or medical clinic.

DigitalJournal: Bio of Alexander Baron
Semi-retired, writing mostly music stuff at the moment for an on-line database. Researching and writing are about the only things I've ever been any good at. Apart from chess, but at 55 I'm too old to play games.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services
July 20, 2001
Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention
Recently, a number of Federal agencies sponsored a workshop to answer the following question: "What is the scientific evidence on the effectiveness of latex male condom-use to prevent STD transmission during vaginal intercourse?" This workshop was attended by 180 persons, and the data from numerous peer-reviewed published studies were discussed. Following the workshop, a panel of 28 experts worked to develop this report.

In general, the Panel found the published epidemiology literature to be inadequate to definitively answer the question posed to the workshop participants.
The published data documenting effectiveness of the male condom were strongest for HIV.
four epidemiological studies of gonorrhea indicated that the latex male condom could reduce the risk of gonorrhea for men.

my blog: Abortion: My final word on unwanted pregnancy

my blog Rick Perry and Sex Education: Abstinence works!


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Sunday, 19 February 2012

Billy Joel: She's Always A Woman

She can kill with a smile
She can wound with her eyes
She can ruin your faith with her casual lies
And she only reveals what she wants you to see
She hides like a child,
But she's always a woman to me

She can lead you to love
She can take you or leave you
She can ask for the truth
But she'll never believe you
And she'll take what you give her, as long as it's free
Yeah, she steals like a thief
But she's always a woman to me

Oh--she takes care of herself
She can wait if she wants
She's ahead of her time
Oh--and she never gives out
And she never gives in
She just changes her mind

And she'll promise you more
Than the Garden of Eden
Then she'll carelessly cut you
And laugh while you're bleedin'
But she'll bring out the best
And the worst you can be
Blame it all on yourself
Cause she's always a woman to me


Oh--she takes care of herself
She can wait if she wants
She's ahead of her time
Oh--and she never gives out
And she never gives in
She just changes her mind

She is frequently kind
And she's suddenly cruel
She can do as she pleases
She's nobody's fool
And she can't be convicted
She's earned her degree
And the most she will do
Is throw shadows at you
But she's always a woman to me


Wikipedia: She's Always a Woman
"She's Always a Woman" is a song from Billy Joel's 1977 album The Stranger. It is a love song about a modern woman, with whom he falls in love for her quirks as well as her flaws. The single peaked at #17 in the U.S. and in 1986 peaked at #53 in the UK when released as a double A-side single with Just the Way You Are. On May 2, 2010 the song re-entered the UK chart at #29. The song is played in compound time signatures of 6/8 9/8 and 12/8. it was "impossible" for the two songs to have been written independently. However, the verdict was overturned a few months later. The song was ranked #366 on Rolling Stone's list of the 500 Greatest Songs of All Time. In a British TV special shown in December 2011, it was voted "The Nation's Favourite Bee Gees Song" by ITV viewers. A Muzak version of this song was playing at the World Trade Center plaza moments before it was eventually destroyed.

Origin and meaning
The song was released in 1977, following several other hits from Billy Joel's successful album The Stranger including "Just the Way You Are", "Movin' Out" and "Only the Good Die Young". Musically, Joel has said that he was influenced by Gordon Lightfoot and his mellow acoustic guitar ballads. Lyrically, many people consider the words to be misogynistic or sarcastic. It is a ballad, a love song that Joel wrote for his then wife, Elizabeth. Elizabeth had taken over management of Joel's career, and was able to put his financial affairs in order after Joel had signed some bad deals and contracts. She was a tough and savvy negotiator who could "wound with her eyes" or "steal like a thief", but would "never give in". Because of her tough-as-nails negotiating style, many business adversaries thought she was "unfeminine," but to Joel, she was always a woman. The two eventually divorced in 1982.

Wikipedia: The Stranger (album)
The Stranger is the fifth studio album by musician Billy Joel, released in 1977 (see 1977 in music). While his four previous albums had been moderate chart successes, this was his breakthrough album, and is generally regarded by critics as his magnum opus, spending six weeks at #2 in the U.S. album charts. It remains Joel's best-selling non-compilation album to date and was ranked number 67 on Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time.

Wikipedia: Billy Joel
William Martin "Billy" Joel (born May 9, 1949) is an American musician and pianist, singer-songwriter, and classical composer. Since releasing his first hit song, "Piano Man", in 1973, Joel has become the sixth best-selling recording artist and the third best-selling solo artist in the United States, according to the RIAA.

SongFacts: She's Always A Woman by Billy Joel
The true history behind this song will explain the meaning. Billy Joel was on the verge of financial ruin when his wife stepped in and sorted out his finances. In doing this she had to be a stern businesswoman and show a very "hard" side to the people she was dealing with. Despite the way they saw her, Joel still saw the softer side, therefore "she's always a woman" to him. So it is not meant to knock her personality; its a beautiful love song in which he says that despite all these "flaws" that other people see, he sees a side that nobody else knows. I guess it can very easily be interpreted as a song about a narcissist but thats not the intention with which it was written.
- Cindy, Cape Town, South Africa

I think this song is about a girl who wants everyone to believe she's all tough and mean but the guy knows that really she's harmless and a "woman".
- Allison, Albany, NY

It's people's perfections that make us like them, it's their imperfections that make us love them.
- Erik, Los Angeles, CA

The key to this song's meaning is revealed in the lyric, "the most she will do is throw shadows at you." Joel is singing about New York City. All the lyrics fit this context, "She's ahead of her time," "...she'll carelessly cut you/And laugh while you're bleedin'," "...she'll bring out the best/And the worst you can be," and so on. He is comparing the city he loves to his ideal of a woman.
- Richard, San Francisco, CA

This song is sweet. This man loves or is strongly attracted to this woman, despite her personality traits. I always liked the song because of it, and think to myself hopefully someday I'll find a man who will love me despite my personality flaws. The woman in the song was interesting to me, I thought she was a made up character. I think it's sweet how Billy Joel wrote this about his ex-wife but the romance died because he didn't want to sing about anymore, not to mention feeling nothing. This is also the same woman he wrote the song, 'Just The way you Love'. Sad.
- Michaela, brooklyn, NY


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Abortion: Rick Perry and Sex Education: Abstinence works!

Reprinted from September 1, 2011

Don't have sex. It's so obvious. It's so logical. Why are we even talking? Don't have sex and you don't get pregnant. Don't have sex and you don't get an STD. Don't have sex and you don't get AIDS. What's not to get about this?

Drive safely and you won't have an accident. Follow the posted speed limit and not only will you not get a speeding ticket, you won't have an accident. Keep your hands on the wheel and your attention focused on driving without talking on a cellphone or texting or reading or eating your lunch and you won't have an accident. Heck, who needs a seat belt? If we all follow the rules, we won't need traffic cops or radar traps. Why are we even talking?

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published that 33,808 people died in traffic accidents in the United States in 2009. The published stats going back 16 years show a total of 661,403 deaths or an average of 41,338 per year. It seems that 2009 was a good year.

Drive safely and you won't have an accident? How's that one workin' out for ya?

According to UNAIDS.Org, there are 33 million on the planet currently living with HIV (2009). The same report estimates that in 2009, 1.8 million died from AIDS.

In the United States, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reports that 18,000 people die each year from AIDS.

The CDC reports for 2009 more than 1.2 million cases of chlamydia, 301,174 reported cases of gonorrhea and 13,997 reported cases of syphilis. CDC estimates that undiagnosed and untreated STDs cause at least 24,000 women in the U.S. each year to become infertile.

827,609 legal induced abortions were reported to CDC in 2007 although the Guttmacher Institute reports 1.2 million in 2008. (CDC reporting is voluntary while the institute actively gets the numbers.) Statistics Canada reports 96,815 induced abortions were performed in Canada in 2005.

Theory versus Reality
In theory, if we all drove safely, there would be no accidents. In theory, if we all followed the speed limit, there would be no speeding tickets hence no need for traffic cops. The reality is so far from the theory that anybody would laugh if we suggested retiring our traffic cops and letting the citizenry police themselves. It would seem that the word freedom means the freedom to make mistakes or to deliberately do what's not right or to thumb your nose at the rules because nobody's going to tell you what to do.

Anti-abortionists actually increase the number of abortions
Christina Page, author of a 2006 book about the pro-life movement and its war on sex, wrote in the Huffington Post on February 24, 2009:

A new report released today by the Guttmacher Institute found that increasing access to contraception is the most effective approach to reducing unwanted pregnancy rates and the need for abortion. That report specifically concluded that making contraception available to low income women reduces the number of abortions by nearly 40%. When birth control isn't available unintended pregnancy increases by 2 million and the number of abortions spikes by more than 800,000 each year. Researchers noted that providing contraception saves taxpayers 4 times as much as not providing it.

Time: Healthland - Aug 31/2011
Gov. Rick Perry's Weird Science: Teen Pregnancy Aside, "Abstinence Works" By Meredith Melnick
Texas has the highest teen birth rate and the fourth highest teen pregnancy rate in the U.S., according to the Guttmacher Institute. So when Gov. Perry turned down $4.4 million in federal funding for pregnancy prevention programs and decided to continue with state-funded abstinence-only education in October 2010, a reporter from the Texas Tribune asked him why. Specifically, why, in the face of rising teen pregnancy rates, would the governor stick with a method that didn't seem to be working?

"Abstinence works," Perry replied to a roomful of laughter. The reporter pressed on, asking for data to back up the assertion that abstinence education leads to lower teen pregnancy rates. Flustered, Perry said that he knew abstinence worked from his "own personal life."

Uploaded by thecentristword on Aug 15, 2011
Rick Perry Struggles to answer Question on Abstinence
Rick Perry Struggles to answer Question on Abstinence - what seems to be a rather simple question turns into a bit of a confusing mess. Give this guy the nuclear button? I wouldn't suggest it.

Final Word
I think that Rick Perry is absolutely right: abstinence does work. And to support Mr. Perry in his promotion of abstinence, I would propose that all voters plan to abstain from voting for him.

I sit here literally stunned by the level of stupidity, incompetence and outright blindness to reality that comes from the faith-based movements. Rita Mae Brown said, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Abstinence in theory seems logical. However a truly great visionary will see that while theory is a start, it is only a start and the implementation of a theory leads one to discover the flaws in the original theory.

Theory: If we all abstain from sex, nobody gets pregnant. Reality: People are not going to stop having sex. Theory: We all drive safely, there will be no accidents. Reality: Do I really have to fill this one in?

Sarah Palin is intellectually challenged. Michele Bachmann is cerebrally deficient. And Rick Perry? Hey, nice suit! Mr. Perry blindly persists in a course of action dictated by his whimsical interpretation of the Bible and his own limited experience in life. I am reminded of a blogger at Open Salon called Cranky Cuss who has written in his bio:

My motto: The conventional wisdom has too much convention, not enough wisdom.

Corollary: Even Einstein was wrong sometimes, and you're not Einstein.

Yes, Einstein. That is a reminder about this election season of just how little Einstein we'll get and how much Forrest Gump. Then again, Forrest demonstrated a very down to earth practical approach to life and its problems. When I look at Rick Perry, I begin to think Forrest was a genius.


Wikipedia: Abstinence
Abstinence is a voluntary restraint from indulging in bodily activities that are widely experienced as giving pleasure. Most frequently, the term refers to sexual abstinence, or abstention from alcohol or food. The practice can arise from religious prohibitions or practical considerations. Abstinence may also refer to drugs. For example you can abstain from smoking. Abstinence has diverse forms. Commonly it refers to a temporary or partial abstinence from food, as in fasting. In the twelve-step program of Overeaters Anonymous abstinence is the term for refraining from compulsive eating, akin in meaning to sobriety for alcoholics. Because the regimen is intended to be a conscious act, freely chosen to enhance life, abstinence is sometimes distinguished from the psychological mechanism of repression. The latter is an unconscious state, having unhealthy consequences. Freud termed the channeling of sexual energies into other more culturally or socially acceptable activities, "sublimation".

Wikipedia: Sexual abstinence
Sexual abstinence is the practice of refraining from some or all aspects of sexual activity for medical, psychological, legal, social or religious reasons.

Huffington Post - Feb 24/2009
"Pro-Life" Movement Admits Pro-Abortion Stance by Christina Page
Sometimes referred to as "The Pro-life Paradox," researchers and women's health advocates in recent years have drawn attention to the disparities between the mission statements of so-called "anti-abortion" groups and the effects of their policies. For example, the countries considered the most "pro-choice," where contraception is widely available and abortion is legal, and often free of charge, are those that also have the lowest abortion rates in the world. The countries with the highest rates of abortion are those that have adopted the policies of the so-called "anti-abortion" movement and have banned abortion and opposed efforts to make contraception more widely available.

Guttmacher Institute - Feb 24/2009
1.94 million unintended pregnancies and 810,000 abortions prevented each year
By providing millions of young and low-income women access to voluntary contraceptive services, the national family planning program prevents 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, including almost 400,000 teen pregnancies, each year. These pregnancies would result in 860,000 unintended births, 810,000 abortions and 270,000 miscarriages, according to a new Guttmacher Institute report.

How the Pro-Choice Movement Saved America: Freedom, Politics and the War on Sex
by Christina Page
Paperback: 256 pages
Publisher: Basic Books (December 26, 2006)
The abortion issue is a cover for a fundamentalist "anti-contraception" and "anti-sex movement," argues this vigorous broadside. In a well-researched and pointed critique of prolife excesses, NARAL official Page (The Smart Girl's Guide to College) details the multifaceted opposition the Christian right has mounted to a broad range of reproductive rights. Prolife groups, she notes, have fraudulently conflated contraceptives with devices or substances that cause abortion, championed pharmacists who refuse to sell contraceptives, and organized to block over-the-counter sale of "Plan B" emergency contraceptive pills. Attacking both feminism and premarital sex, she contends, they vilify working moms and push ineffective abstinence-only sex-ed curricula, and have even opposed a vaccine against the HPV virus, a major cause of cervical cancer, claiming it would promote promiscuity. The irony, she argues, is that prolifers' effort to restrict access to contraception actually increases the number of abortions. Against what she believes is the fundamentalists' dour procreationist ideology and animus toward sexual pleasure itself, Page celebrates the blessings conferred by contraceptives in liberating women, and their families, in our modern "pro-choice world," claiming that "regular sex brings people as much happiness as a $50,000-a-year raise." If sometimes a tad facile, her defense of the sexual revolution in upbeat—even patriotic—terms makes this a spirited, thought-provoking addition to the culture wars. (review by Publishers Weekly - Dec 19/2005)

Wikipedia: Seat belt legislation
Studies of accident outcomes suggest that fatality rates among car occupants are reduced by between 30 and 50 per cent if seat belts are worn. The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that death risks for a driver wearing a lap-shoulder seat belt are reducing by 48 per cent. The same study indicated that in 2007, an estimated 15 147 lives were saved by seat belts in the United States and that, if seat belt use were increased to 100 per cent an additional 5024 lives would have been saved. An earlier statistical analysis by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) claimed that seat belts save over 10,000 lives every year in the US.

Freakonomics - April 2/2010
Life (and Death) in the Fast Lane by Eric A. Morris
According to a recent paper by Lee S. Friedman, Donald Hedeker, and Elihu D. Richter, the lifting of the federal 55 mph speed limit in 1995 was responsible for 12,545 deaths between 1995 and 2005. That’s about 45 percent more American fatalities than we have suffered in 9/11, Iraq and Afghanistan put together.


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Saturday, 18 February 2012

Abortion: Catholic school disciplines pro-choice student

Picture courtesy of Jodi Lundmark, TBNewsWatch
Reprinted from March 13, 2011

The port city of Thunder Bay, Ontario, population 110,000, sitting at the top of the Great Lakes system on Lake Superior, would not be, at first glance, a hotbed of civil disobedience. However, on Thursday, March 10, 2011, Alexandria Szeglet, a 15 year old Grade 10 student at St. Patrick High School, found herself embroiled in a controversy over a strip of green tape with the word "choice" written on it. The Thunder Bay Source, a local weekly newspaper in the city tells the story.

Several years ago, another student, Alexandra Calnan, started a pro-life student group at this Catholic high school. This 19 year old is now a student at Lakehead University having graduated from high school in 2009. Every year, this group organises an event, a "Day of Silent Solidarity" at the high school during which students wear a red piece of tape with the word "life" written on it and do not talk for a full day to display their belief in the injustice of abortion. This event raises money to support the group's activities which include attending right-to-life events and the group’s Project Mommy, which furnishes care packages to young mothers at the school.

Szeglet, apparently wanting to state her disagreement with the anti-abortionists, showed up at school with about 25 pieces of green tape with the word "choice" written on it which she distributed to fellow students. She was subsequently told to take off the tape or go to the school office. The office said that what she was doing was not an approved scheduled event and as such, she had to remove the tape. She refused and was sent home.

At this point, the story becomes somewhat unclear but it seems other students followed this act of defiance. A representative of the school board has said 15 students were sent home and two or three were given two-day suspensions but the local weekly newspaper, the Thunder Bay Source, has written that calls to its newsroom were claiming that as many as 35 were given two-day suspensions and another hundred were sent home.

The Source quoted John De Faveri, Director of Education of the Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board, as saying that "the students who were sent home for the day were not removed from school for wearing the sticker, but for not taking it off." Supposedly, students who were issued two-day suspensions after they refused to remove the stickers and swore at school staff. "On the issue, pro-life is part of the Catholic stand. The pro-choice students were not appropriate in the context of a Catholic school."

The Source went on to report de Faveri as explaining that the school has a process for the approval of any student initiatives, including the alteration of the school uniform or an event. The pro-life group had apparently gone through this process and did receive approval for both their Day for Silent Solidarity and the wearing of the red tape with the word "life" written on it, but de Faveri could not say whether the green-tape initiative would have also been approved. He did underline, however, that while opposing views are accepted, there is a process. The school does have a code of conduct and students must comply with authority.

Media Coverage
Thunder Bay's weekly newspaper The Thunder Bay Source published two articles on this incident and The National Post picked it up. However, Thunder Bay's daily newspaper The Chronicle Journal was silent on this issue.

The Thunder Bay Source - Mar 10/2011
Students sent home By Jodi Lundmark

The Thunder Bay Source - Mar 11/2011
Pro-life Support By Jodi Lundmark

The two articles published online at "Students sent home" and "Pro-life Support" are followed by dozens and dozens of comments covering numerous issues raised by this incident:
  • Does the school have the right to enforce a dress code?
  • Is a piece of tape in violation of the dress code?
  • Is this really about the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate?
  • Should Catholic Separate Schools continue to be funded?
  • Should the issue of abortion have ever been allowed in the school in the first place?
  • Freedom of speech vs. freedom of the Catholic school to dictate what it feels is right.

The following is a comment from Alexandria Szeglet's aunt (see comments in the article: "Students sent home")
Kerri says:
Alexandria is my niece and we are very proud of her ability to speak her own mind. This demonstration was done peacefully and without malice unlike some of the pro life demonstrations that have happened in the past. I am born and raised a Catholic woman, am well educated. Having attended a Catholic school myself, I am appalled at the ridiculousness of this situation and the stand that the school and school board have taken on this subject when Alex simply held true to her beliefs. Isn't that what we teach our children? To have independence, a mind of their own and to be secure in all the decisions they make?
Ask yourself this question: Would you want to be the person to explain who your child's dad was if you were a victim of rape or incest? OR What if your life was in mortal danger? PRO CHOICE means just that...a woman's choice. It's not a form of birth control nor is it a decision any woman would want to make. I know in my heart and in my wonderful niece's heart that she is intelligent enough to know what is right or wrong for her own self. We are proud of her if every sense and we will continue to support her throughout her life. It's a shame that the world is still stuck in the dark ages and that a woman still does not have the right to choose...This is a touchy subject that someone thought was ok for high schoolers to demonstrate...with the advent of Facebook and social media, what did they think would happen when people caught wind of today's events?

Another comment (my emphasis in bold)
kt says:
I'd just like to point out that Catholics are also against sex before marriage, yet St. Patricks has rooms for young mothers in the basement, which is practically saying that their okay with these young mothers going against the Catholic beliefs, and they support them.
but yet, these students cant even have a choice about abortion?
i find it funny that one of the reasons some students were sent home is because the green tape isnt part of uniform, yet the students can wear colourful scarves, and such little things like that, as long as the crest is showing. some students had "choice" written on their hands, or arms, which isnt bothering the uniform at all, yet they were still sent home, or told to wash it off. so clearly, they were sent home because of their opinion.

Reactions elsewhere:

Facebook: Catholics for Choice
Under an entry about this incident, a Kevin Saldanha writes, "Catholic schools in Ontario are PUBLIC and funded by tax dollars. However, their curriculum has to be approved by the area Bishops and that is a source of major conflict."

blog: Sandwalk
by Larry Moran, Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Toronto
Ontario has two schools systems—both publicly funded. The "public schools" are open to all comers but the "Roman Catholic" ("Separate") school system isn't. I support the One School System Network.

blog: The Friendly Atheist
by Hemant Mehta
This was a respectful way to show dissent and the school put a stop to it because they didn’t ask for permission beforehand. What exactly are they teaching the kids? To keep quiet when they have a differing opinion? Alexandria wasn’t displaying any sort of hatred against the pro-life students. She wasn’t bullying them. She wasn’t saying they were evil or sinners or wicked. She wasn’t putting others down. She deserves to be commended. She’s the type of student any other school would be lucky to have.

Reddit: from a graduate of St. Patrick's high school
With regards to this specific event there is no argument that the school violated any rules, as they did not. The official reason for sending the students home was that they had not requested permission to wear the tape prior to the event, and as such the tape constituted a uniform violation. Those wearing red tape were not reprimanded because it had been requested prior to the actual day. However that shouldn’t stop people from expressing their opinions on this if they think it is unjust.

Reaction: Finding My Feminism
The blogger Not Guilty describes herself as: I'm a liberal feminist atheist with my law degree. I am pro-choice, pro-socialized medicine, and I am intolerant of intolerance. In her article "Crushing Free Speech but not Spirit" (Mar 11/2011-Unfortunately now taken down), she takes exception to the actions of the school. Unlike the above reactions which remained merely in print, this blogger pro-actively wrote to the "Director of the offending school board", John De Faveri ( and to the Ontario Minister of Education, Leona Dombrowsky ( This blogger published her letters in full in her blog posting. She ends with:

Please write your own letters to both the School Board and the Ministry. If you believe that the Catholic School Boards should be de-funded, say so. We must press these issues.

I would also like to say how proud I am of the student who started this. She will grow into the most amazing woman if at 16 she was already to accept suspension for her support of women's rights. Rock on sister!

Final Word
Pro-life or pro-choice? The issue is very much a religious one more than political one and does this sort of thing have a place in a school at all? I'm sure we will always wonder if the school board would have approved of a green-tape pro-choice initiative; after all it is a Catholic school board. Of course, should the board have allowed the pro-life group in the first place?

My opinion?

History explains it, but modern times call for something else. We need to abolish the Catholic Separate Schools and work with a single public education system. Any religious group has the right to do what they want privately, but as a multi-cultural country, we should be providing for everyone in an all-inclusive manner. Separate schools are a thing of the past. They really never should have been allowed in the first place and we certainly can't afford such a luxury now.

Pro-life? Do what you want personally for yourself, but don't jam your beliefs down everybody else's throats. Religious fundamentalists pursue an unrealistic approach to abortion which has always failed and will always fail. Ah, I can hear you saying, "Pro-abortion". Not in the least. While I vote for abortion, I pursue every possible avenue to ensure that nobody faces the life-altering situation of an unwanted pregnancy. What does that mean? Sex education, handing out condoms, making birth control available, and of course, abstinence. But unlike the pro-lifers who blindly and slavishly follow only abstinence, my aim is to stop unwanted pregnancies in any way possible. My goal is not just to permit abortions, my goal is to ensure that nobody arrives at such a critical decision. An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure. See my blog Abortion: My final word on unwanted pregnancy. I repeat: if nobody had an "unwanted pregnancy", there would be no abortions. At all. Never. We would all achieve the same goal.

The St. Patrick High School invited this on themselves. I don't believe anybody should have been allowed to bring into the school such an obvious hot-button topic. This was asking for trouble and they got it. But since they did, I return to the statements of John De Faveri, Director of Education of the Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board:

"the students who were sent home for the day were not removed from school for wearing the sticker, but for not taking it off."

I'm sorry, that's splitting hairs.

"On the issue, pro-life is part of the Catholic stand. The pro-choice students were not appropriate in the context of a Catholic school."

The answer to the question as to whether the green-tape initiative would have ever been pre-approved is an emphatic "no".


my blog: The Halton Catholic School Board: a "gay" anachronism

Wikipedia: The Thunder Bay Source
Dougall Media publishes a free weekly community newspaper, Thunder Bay's Source, which is delivered to 44,500 households in Thunder Bay each Friday. The paper covers local news, including city council, education, health care and the local political scene, as well as weekly entertainment and sports features. It also hosts a selection of local columnists, including outdoor writer Mick Bohonis and former CBC Radio personality Fred Jones.

It was formerly known as Thunder Bay Post, a name that was discontinued in October 2003. Prior to that it was known as Lakehead Living.

The paper's editorial staff also contributes to the news website, which also has material contributed from the company's radio and television newsrooms.

Wikipedia: St. Partick's High School (Thunder Bay)
St. Patrick High School is a Catholic high school located in the south end of Thunder Bay, Ontario. It is part of the Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board, and its amenities include a chapel, custom-built music rooms, newly renovated auditorium (as of 2010), two gyms, a fully functional cafeteria, and wheelchair accessibility. The schools offers courses in French immersion. Unlike schools in the public system, students at St. Patrick are required to wear uniforms.

Wikipedia: Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board
The Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board oversees all Catholic schools in the Thunder Bay CMA and the townships of Gorham and Ware in Ontario, Canada. It administers education at 13 elementary schools, 2 senior elementary, and 2 secondary schools.

The Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board
Director's Office: Senior Administration

The Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board
Catholic Education Myths & Realities
[Two Adobe PDF documents]
Challenges to Catholic Education: A Letter to Parents/Guardian - May 29, 2007 (Adobe PDF)
Recently, some groups in the province have been advocating amalgamating school boards as a way of saving money. Their assumption that amalgamations lower costs is incorrect.
Catholic Education: Myths & Realities - April 2007 (Adobe PDF)
Over the 160-year history of Catholic education in Ontario there have been groups and individuals who have called for the elimination of publicly funded Catholic schools. These attacks on our system have taken many forms, including books, articles, pamphlets, media advertisements, Letters to the editor and recently an email petition campaign. Whatever the motivation of these groups and individuals, their arguments and the rationale for their position are similar and are often filled with myths and inaccuracies.

Wikipedia: Thunder Bay
Thunder Bay (2006 census population 109,140), formerly the twin cities of Fort William and Port Arthur, is a city in and the seat of Thunder Bay District, Ontario, Canada. It is the most populous municipality in Northwestern Ontario, and the second most populous in Northern Ontario after Greater Sudbury. The census metropolitan area of Thunder Bay has a population of 122,907, and consists of the city of Thunder Bay, the municipalities of Oliver Paipoonge and Neebing, the townships of Shuniah, Conmee, O'Connor and Gillies and the Fort William First Nation.


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Friday, 17 February 2012

The Face of Anti-Abortionists: Neal Horsley

Reprinted from November 6, 2010

Once in a while I read something which is so unusual, so bizarre that as my eyes scan the page, my jaw is literally open in that classic position of astonishment represented by the expression "jaw dropping". Although my intellect comprehends the information it is receiving, the emotional side of me cannot accept the veracity of the statements; it has to be a joke; somebody is pulling my leg.

In my blog Anti-Abortionists: Murder by proxy I discuss the radical campaign of intimidation used by some pro-lifers of publicising contact information for doctors performing abortions. Even though what these doctors is doing is legal, these people are so dead against it, they have radicalised their protest by distributing "wanted posters" containing name, full address, car licence plates, descriptions of the person with pictures, work information and of course a list of their sins sometimes accompanied by images of dead foetuses. The point? There are apparently enough crazies out there who take it upon themselves to do the work of God by killing these abortion doctors. The wanted posters are a means of enlisting these crazies to do the Lord's work.

Dr. George Tiller killed on May 31, 2009 by Scott Roeder.

Dr. David Gunn killed on March 10, 1993 by Michael F. Griffen. Dr. Gunn had been the subject of a wanted poster campaign.

Dr. Barnett Slepian killed on October 23, 1998 by James Charles Kopp

In Canada, there have been apparently 4 attempted murders.

Note that there is more information about clinics being bombed or set on fire; intimidating doctors and staff at clinics; hassling people going to the clinics; holding protests around clinics in order to disrupt their business, etc.

This technique of intimidation, the wanted posters seems to have been used during the 1990's however according to a report by the MSNBC journalist Rachel Maddow, more wanted posters have turned up as of late. Who is behind this?

While nobody knows for sure - the current batch of wanted posters are not signed - there is a name connected to this style of intimidation: Neal Horsley. This gentleman is best known for his web site The Nuremberg Files in which he publishes information about doctors performing abortions. He has gone so far as to strikeout those names that have been killed.

He doesn't stop there though; he also publishes information about the women who are seeking abortions. He claims that he is seeking to shame them into not having an abortion. The question is whether he is also seeking to promote violence against them too.

He is also against homosexuality.

Mr. Horsley's activities include:
  • having sex with animals when he was a youth. (Yes! He actually admitted to this!)
  • having at least 1 homosexual affair
  • having 2 extra-marital affairs which resulted in pregnancies
  • selling drugs and apparently served 2 1/2 years in prison for it
  • arrested for uttering death threats against Elton John
  • is running in 2010 for governor of Georgia (his web site) on a platform to secede from the rest of the United States so as to have a country which outlaws abortion and homosexuality. He has said he would kill his own son who is the U.S. military if his son was sent to stop him.

Domestic Terrorism
Abortion is legal. The majority has spoken; let's move on.

However, we're not moving on. Ring wing radical elements of the conservative end of the spectrum especially the religious fundamentalists believe they are right and the rest of us are wrong. They seek not compromise; they seek the imposition of their ideology on everyone. This is not democracy; this is imperialism.

I would like to think that reasonableness will prevail. However it strikes me that a radicalised religious fundamentalist believes the attainment of their agenda is so important that the end justifies the means. Once you cross that line, you have opened the door to not respecting the law. Once you've gone that far, you are saying you would do anything to get your way.

There are some truly scary people out there.


Wikipedia: Anti-abortion violence
Anti-abortion violence is violence committed against individuals and organizations that provide abortion. Incidents of violence have included destruction of property, in the form of vandalism; crimes against people, including kidnapping, stalking, assault, attempted murder, and murder; and crimes affecting both people and property, including arson and bombings.

Wikipedia: Neal Horsley
Otis O'Neal Horsley, Jr. (born 1944) is a militant anti-abortionist known for producing a website which provided the home addresses of abortion providers in the United States, for admitting on Fox News television to practising bestiality in his youth, and for being arrested on charges of terroristic threats against singer Elton John.

The Village Voice - May 10, 2005
Jackass Had Sex: Right-winger condemns 'beast fornicators,' but loves his mule

The Nuremberg Files

List of doctors killed

xs4all: sub-site of The Nuremberg Files
Lists the names of doctors, clinic owners & workers, judges and lawyers, politicians, law enforcement and spouses and relatives all related in some way to abortion. I notice that even John Walsh of the TV show America's Most Wanted appears on one of the lists


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Thursday, 16 February 2012

Anti-Abortionists: Murder by proxy

Reprinted from November 5, 2010

Pick somebody you don't like. Find out their name, full address, other bits of contact information including their car, licence plate, where they work, possibly the date and times of their work schedule. Write it all up as a "wanted poster", sort of like in the Wild West. Carefully describe what horrible things this person supposedly does so there can be no doubt in anybody's mind that this person is evil incarnate. Distribute the poster as far and wide as possible then stand back and wait for the results.

Rachel Maddow
Ms. Maddow, a journalist for MSNBC who has her own news show at 9pm spoke in October of a new wave of wanted posters being distributed by anti-abortionists. Targeting doctors who work in legitimate clinics where abortion is permitted by law, these pro-life people have discovered a method of getting their way without soiling their hands.

On October 25, 26 and 27, she narrated a three part show on Dr. George Tiller, a so called "abortion doctor" who was murdered by an anti-abortion extremist on May 31, 2009. The anti-abortionists maintained a campaign against this doctor until a man who thought of himself as a "redeemer", took it upon himself to "save the babies" by killing an abortion doctor.

The Technique
By developing a campaign of hatred against an individual; by developing a portrait of this individual as somebody who embodies malevolence, you can subliminally or quite obviously send out the message for somebody who may be unstable, amoral or just as evil themselves, to commit murder all the while providing the potential killer with an excellent justification for doing the crime. It is recruiting the malleable to do your bidding.

This technique is working quite successfully in other areas of the world where suicide bombers carry out the will of God. Killing what is considered evil is not murder; it is justifiable homicide. I am certain that many in Western society associate the idea of such self-sacrifice for the greater cause as part of the Muslim faith however in this case; it is very much a Christian movement which is supposed carrying out the will of God.

Freedom of Speech
We all believe in the freedom of speech. But with freedom comes responsibility and at what point do we collectively feel that someone has abused that freedom? In my blog Freedom of Speech: Freedom to say "anything"? I discuss that while this freedom can be a great part of our society, there are those who push the envelope by promoting hatred whether it be based on sex, race or politics. (check out my examples) Some people are using this freedom as the soapbox for their convoluted, illogical and vile justifications for the most ghastly of views. Freedom of speech protects them and allows to say what they will but what if that freedom actually persuades someone else to commit murder?

Hal Turner
Mr. Turner is a shock jock radio host and a white supremacist that has a history of threatening public figures. In 2005, disagreeing with the handling of a court case against Matt Hale (another white supremacist who is now in jail), Turner published the names and addresses of the presiding judges on his web site with the suggestion they should be assassinated. In 2008, he once again encouraged violence against a school superintendent who had set up a curriculum supporting gays and lesbians.

On June 2, 2009, in response to a 3 judge panel upholding a handgun ban in Chicago, Turner wrote on his blog:

"Let me be the first to say this plainly: These judges deserve to be killed. Their blood will replenish the tree of liberty. A small price to pay to assure freedom for millions."

Turner then published information on how to find the judges.

Mr. Turner was arrested on June 3, 2009 on charges of inciting his website's readers to take up arms against the officials. There have been 3 trials. The first trial ended with the jury being deadlocked, the 2nd was declared a mistrial but the 3rd trial found him guilty on August 13, 2010 of threatening the 3 judges. He faces up to 10 years in prison.

Hal Turner, in his defence, stated that he did not say that he himself would kill the judges; he merely said that they deserve to be killed.

South Park
In April 2010, an episode of South Park was aired that contained a supposed image of Mohammed. A radical Islamic group headquarters in New York issued a warning on their web site, "We have to warn Matt (Stone) and Trey (Parker) that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show." The site posted a graphic photo of the late Dutch filmmaker Van Gogh, who was killed in 2004 by an Islamic militant over a movie he made that accused Islam of condoning violence against women. It also posted a link a news article with details of a mansion in Colorado that Parker and Stone apparently own, suggesting they know where to find the South Park creators.

The head of the New York group said the post was not a threat. "How is that a threat? Showing a case study right there of what happened to another individual who conducted himself in a very similar manner? It's just evidence."

As a result, Comedy Central apparently blacked out the image of Mohammed in the episode for any subsequent airing. Eventually though, the entire New York group was arrested and the web site was shut down.

Technically speaking...
I tell everybody in the world you're a bad person. You do bad things. You deserve to die for your sins. Now, all I have to do is sit back and wait. Okay, I didn't pull the trigger; somebody else did. I get what I want but I didn't do anything.

Or did I?

“It's better to get something worthwhile done using deception than to fail to get something worthwhile done using truth.”
- Carlos Castaneda quotes (Peruvian born American best-selling Author and Writer, 1925-1998)

Final Word
Abortion is such a hot button topic. You are either for it or against it; there is absolutely no middle ground. However, despite the legality of abortion, some anti-abortionists feel justified, not by the laws of the land but by the will of God to carry out the greater good even if this means committing murder. Although society through its own government's legislation has declared abortion acceptable; they are very much ready to rebel, go against the government and society itself in order to complete their supreme God given mission of supposed mercy.

Excuse me while I head down to the post office to look at the wanted posters. I may have ticked somebody off and I don't know it.


YouTube: Rachel Maddow
MSNBC: Rachel Maddow Warns of Revitalized Anti-Abortion Extremism

YouTube: Rachel Maddow: Anti-Abortion Extremists Soliciting Murder

YouTube: The Young Turks
Wanted Signs For Abortion Doctors Inciting Violence

The Raw Story - Oct 27/2010
Abortion docs say ‘wanted’ posters are bait for their murder

my blog: Abortion: My final word on unwanted pregnancies

my blog: Abortion: If we make it illegal, the problem will go away Top 10 Anti-Abortion Myths

my blog: The Face of Anti-Abortionists: Neal Horsley


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter

Wednesday, 15 February 2012

Abortion: My final word on unwanted pregnancy

Reprinted from September 24, 2010

A while back, I wrote an article Abortion: If we make it illegal, the problem will go away which was inspired by a CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) news report on childbirth in Africa and the enormous risks faced by women in situations where health care was poor or nonexistent and sanitation left much to be desired. That article generated some responses and I thought the moment had arrived to address some of those comments and the pro-life arguments therein. Let me donate my $0.02 to this issue; my final word.

First of all, in going back and forth with certain people, obviously pro-life, in reading some forums and following the debates both for and against abortion, it occurred to me that no amount of arguing is clearly going to define the winner. You are either for abortion or you are against it. You can't argue the point; there is nothing to be gained by debating the issue. Each side just plainly believes what they believe and I doubt either side is going to be swayed by the other side. Yes, both sides will come to the table with their talking points, their examples both personal and general but at the end of the day, each side will continue to believe what they believe.

Abortion is murder or it's not. Nuff said. Yes, I've heard the arguments about the development of the foetus prior to X number of weeks, aborting before the 2nd trimester, no life before the heart starts beating, whatever. No amount of medical explanations about consciousness, scientific rationalizations about the formation of life is going to sway anybody. Abortion is murder or it's not. Accept one side or you're accepting the other.

But why? I have sometimes been surprised at the ferociousness with which some people hold their pro-life beliefs. They may be in no way personally touched by abortion but they are ready to vote, campaign, stand out on the streets with signs and sometimes go so far as to bomb clinics and even kill doctors. Where does this all come from?

In my entry on abortion, I spoke of how reports claimed that every year in Africa, 25,000 women die from botched abortions. You must remember that in 90% of the African countries, abortion is illegal. A few weeks after publication, I found this comment to my entry:

Feynman and Coulter's Love Child said...
As a purely ethical matter, am I supposed to feel bad when a murderer, in the course of murdering, dies?
Because it just ain't there.

Sounds fair to me. Ted Bundy who confessed to over 30 murders was executed by the electric chair in 1989. Timothy McVeigh, responsible for the Oklahoma bombing which killed 168 people was executed in 2001. Yes, let's get those murderers; they deserve to die!

My mother was born in 1929, the 2nd of 2 daughters. My grandfather and grandmother faced the stock market crash of 1929 and the subsequent depression. In 1937, my grandmother unexpectedly and inadvertently became pregnant. Don't forget that this was the time of a one income family; my grandfather worked and my grandmother was a stay at home mom. The family could not financially support a third child so my grandparents elected to have an abortion. Could you even get a legal abortion in Canada in 1937?

My grandmother died as a result of the procedure. I don't know if it was a legal abortion or an illegal one but according to my aunt, my mother's sister, the incident was hushed up so I would assume it was probably illegal. My mother was left without a mother at the age of 8. My aunt, her sister was 10. My grandfather lost his wife. I lost the opportunity to ever know my grandmother.

But as Feynman and Coulter's Love Child pointed out, we shouldn't feel bad when a murderer dies in the course of murdering. Hmmm, I never thought about my grandmother as being a murderer. Then again, maybe my grandfather, whom I did know when I was young, convinced my grandmother to have an abortion so maybe he was really the murderer.

My wife described with a touch of compassion that no woman makes the decision to have an abortion lightly and no woman walks away from an abortion unaffected. Making the decision to not continue with a pregnancy and carrying out that decision is something one will carry around with them for life. What if? Ah, to reflect on that question What if? Nevertheless, there seem to be compelling reasons why a woman would decide to not have a child, reasons which would compel her risk her own life. I repeat she would risk her own life! Just imagine that 25,000 women die each year in Africa due to botched abortions.

It seems easy to stand from afar and label abortion as murder. I think it's a little more complicated than that. It seems easy to say that those women who die from a botched abortion deserve to die in the same way a murderer deserves to die. Except maybe when the person is somebody you know. Feynman and Coulter's Love Child total lack of compassion for all those unknowns who have died over the years... well, I feel so sad. Such coldness is unworthy of any human being.

Is abortion risky?
In my original article, I talked specifically about Africa where health care and sanitation leave much to be desired. Under these circumstances, probably any medical procedure may turn out to be risky. But here in the Western world where medical care may be top notch, an abortion is not at all risky and can be done, is done successfully with no complications at all. The difference is the quality of the health care.

I come back to looking at the phenomenon on a global scale. Western world, good health care, abortion no problem. Third world, poor health care, big danger.

In the CBC report, a journalist spoke with a representative from Canada working for one of the aid agencies. The rep demonstrated a simple plastic sheet, a sheet which was sanitary and she went on to explain that the agency had a program to distribute these sheets so that woman would have something to lie down on when giving birth. It was amazing to realize that there were areas so primitive, that there was literally no medical care at all and the process of giving birth sometimes was nothing more than lying down on the dirt floor of a hut. Apparently having a woman lie on one of these sanitary sheets would substantially decrease the risk of infection and even death during childbirth.

So, is abortion risky? I guess it depends where you are and what access you have to top notch medical care. Good care, safe abortion; poor care, well a risky abortion. Let me come back to the principal point of this article and the first one I wrote: If a woman didn't have an "unwanted" pregnancy, she wouldn't need an abortion.

If we make fire trucks illegal, all fires will stop
In my original article I made the above statement meaning that if we make the process of having an abortion illegal, "unwanted" pregnancies will stop. Of course, they don't and no matter what the legal status is about abortions, there continue to be approximately 42 million abortions each year across the planet.

So, let me stop you. Think about this for a sec: why? Why are there 42 million abortions? What is the cause, the reason, the motivation which would inspire a woman to possibly risk her life to have this operation? Either these women are unconcerned about risking their lives or they do not imagine the operation is potentially risky. Of course, with Western medical facilities being as good as they are having an abortion might be as risky as having a root canal.

I come back to the one thing I see everybody missing in all these debates. People get stuck on the question of is it murder or not and completely ignore the underlying problem.

An abortion represents an unwanted pregnancy.
Why is it I never see anybody tackle this issue from this perspective? It seems to me that everybody is focusing on the abortion rather than looking at the problem from a preventative angle. If a woman is considering an abortion, I'm sorry; the horse is already out of the barn. Why can't we back up a bit and ask ourselves why are we discussing an issue which is preventable? Why are we debating abortion? Why in heavens name was the situation allowed to get so far out of control that we have arrived at this last and most controversial step?

Unfortunately, since many in the pro-life camp are of a religious persuasion, we end up discussing the various actions which may prevent an "unwanted" pregnancy. It seems however that the only method on the table is usually abstinence. I said in the other article that 42 million abortions per year indicate to me that abstinence isn't working and will probably never work.

The Catholic Church
So, what about contraception? What about prophylactics? What about the pill? These would be precisely the "preventative" measures I'm talking about. Well, let's start with the obvious policy of the Catholic Church and the Pope. Rule of the game: no condoms and no pills. Now just picture this if you will. The Catholic Church professes to be pro-life and anti-abortion yet dismisses 2 means of preventing unwanted pregnancies. I find this to be a curious disconnect with reality. I would then go on to say how unconscionable I find this position.

In March 2009, the Pope visited Africa and during his trip he reaffirmed the church's ban on the use of condoms. ... At that moment, 22 million people were infected with HIV in Africa; there were 11.4 orphans because of AIDS; 1.5 million had died of AIDS in Africa in 2007 and 25 million had died in the past 20 years.

After I read this, I have to confess my jaw hit the floor. Yes, if people practised abstinence, we could say these numbers would not be so high. But since the numbers are that high, I have to conclude that abstinence isn't working. For me, the question is then what else could be done? And so, we return to the question of preventative measures, measures which the Catholic Church bans.

Subsequent to the news articles about the Pope's visit, I read articles which described the difficulties of promoting the use of condoms in Africa because there were cultural impediments to their use, namely, a strong prudery about anything sexual. You could not promote anything relating to sex because people were too embarrassed to talk about sex. In fact, one article by a group of French doctors concurred with the Pope's ban on condoms precisely for this cultural reason.

I was stunned; stunned by the illogical rationale being used to justify a policy. This was tantamount to saying you are against seat belts in cars and say it's up to the individuals to not get into accidents. Of course, I hope the reader sees the absurdity of banning seat belts; by now, it is well known how beneficial seat belts are in saving lives. For me, a preventative measure is important to not necessarily solving a problem, but by avoiding the problem altogether. If the use of a condom would stop even 1% of the cases of AIDS being transmitted, imagine that out of the 25 million people who have died over the past 20 years from AIDS in Africa, we could have saved 250,000 lives. That's just 1%! Heck, if I aimed for 0.1%; that would represent 25,000 people!!!

Unconscionable? I'm sorry; I like most people look to a leader for leadership but when I am confronted with a leader enforcing a policy which is so obviously in conflict with reality; I must question the leadership of the person in question; I must question the person, the policy and the rationale which supports a social structure which is so patently not achieving the laudable goals of peace, love and understanding.

Under the presidency of George W. Bush, part of the right wing religious fundamentalism in America, one saw a support for programs promoting abstinence in schools. Some of these programs offered "chastity rings" whereby the wearer of the ring signed some sort of pledge to not have sex. All very well and good but what about the 1.3 million abortions performed each year in the United States (over 70,000 in Canada)? I agree that abstinence works quite well for preventing unwanted pregnancies and hence avoiding an abortion; but my question is just how effective is this? Of course, I hear the argument that better promotion and acceptance of abstinence will in the end win the day but how long will that take? How many unwanted pregnancies, how many abortions will we see before this "glorious ideal" of everybody being abstinent? I come back to my seat belt analogy. Someday, we may all drive responsibly and no seat belts will be necessary. Maybe. Possibly. But in the meantime, how many people are going to be hurt, maimed or killed? Would anybody want to go back to the days where cars didn't have safety belts? That would seem pretty insane.

Show the Truth
This pro-life Christian group promotes its anti-abortion message by showing in public graphic images of aborted foetuses.

Show the Truth
Is a non-denominational mission dedicated to showing the truth of abortion to the Canadian public. Show the Truth is committed to peaceful and legal means of pro-life education, through displaying large photographs of abortion and distributing literature.
Why show the graphic images?
Throughout history, images have been instrumental in social reform. People working against slavery, child labour, discrimination against African Americans, and in the aftermath of the Holocaust used pictures of the injustices to raise public awareness. Most Canadians are familiar with disturbing images shown to the general public: one example is the widespread use of pictures showing the effects of smoking on the lungs. Images are powerful and legitimate tools for awakening people and arousing them to action.

Are children negatively affected by these images?
We have studied this concern extensively and have come to the following conclusions. Very small children do not comprehend the graphic nature of the signs. Young, preschool and school age children look and ask, “What happened to the baby?” An honest answer from a loving parent will put the child at ease. Preteens and young teenagers take an interest in the signs and ask for more information. Read more...

What about women who have had abortions?
Post-abortive women and those who counsel them agree that women need to know the truth about abortion. It is necessary that the woman comes to terms with the reality that abortion killed her child. This ends the stage of denial so the healing process can begin. Some women attribute the beginning of their rehabilitation to an encounter with a film or an image showing an abortion. Many women who have had abortions have told us that they would not have had an abortion if they had known the truth.

How can I get involved?
You can invite us to your community, or come and join us on our missions. STT is a non-profit volunteer organization, run entirely on donations. People of all ages and backgrounds and families are welcome; the only requirement is genuine dedication to showing the truth about abortion. STT members participate in a rich spiritual life, with prayers before and after each presentation, and daily Masses and prayer services while on tour. The work can be demanding, but all participants agree that it is well worth it. It is a great joy to be part of such a project; we are changing the world by awakening the public to this great injustice in our midst. It is time to act! Innocent children threatened in the womb need us! Will you respond to their “Silent Scream”? As Christ said, “Whatever you do unto the least of these, my brethren, you do unto Me.” Read more...

"Bottom line: if you can't handle the pictures, how can you condone the act?" - Trish Boyko, Uxbridge

Shock Tactic
I find this shock tactic an interesting way of supposedly hitting home the message that abortion is the murder of a child. I guess if I can't handle an image of my colonoscopy, I shouldn't have one. I guess if I can't stomach an image of open heart surgery, well, I better make sure I remain healthy. Gosh, if I can't stomach the image of a cow being butchered at the slaughterhouse, I should immediately become a vegetarian.

In fact, a number of pro-life web sites identify themselves with wonderful, cute cuddly pictures of healthy, happy babies. The message is that an abortion is stopping all this love and joy from taking place.

This 2005 non-fiction book by University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and New York Times journalist Stephen J. Dubner analyzes several commonly held "truths". I refer here to a chapter devoted to abortion.

During the 90's crime rates dropped and everybody was attributing this to better crime prevention. Levitt proved a correlation between the drop in crime and the legalization of abortion in the U.S. in the 1970s. Apparently, many abortions were occurring in lower income, possibly single parent families; families who were more susceptible to producing children who eventually ended up involved in crime.

Hmmm, pro-life groups show pictures of cuddly babies all smiley and happy. Anybody show pictures of those same babies grown up taking drugs, shooting each other and engaged in criminal activity?

Hmmm, cuddly babies all smiley and happy. I repeat: even if abortion is illegal, women still seek abortions; in some cases, they are willing to risk their lives to have that abortion. Why? Do they possibly know that the end result is not going to be that cuddly baby all smiley and happy?

Are you willing to do your part?
If it is all love and joy, why then would a woman consider having an abortion? Have you addressed the issue which would lead the woman to considering an abortion? Have you done enough to ensure that this woman is not having an "unwanted" pregnancy?

Answer: no.

A banana and a condom
I see this group, as other groups; commit a great deal of time and effort into protesting abortion and attempting to dissuade those who are actually at the door of the abortion clinic. How many of those people would be willing to take a banana and a condom down to their local high school and explain to the students how a basic, over the counter remedy would reduce the chances of an unwanted pregnancy to just about zilch? Just picture this: no more unwanted pregnancies, no more abortions, no more abortion clinics. Excuse me, but isn't this what everybody would like to see?

Oops, I forgot. We are all supposed to abstain. No condom is necessary.

Hmmm, as Dr. Phil likes to say, "How's that workin' for ya?"

Why am I even wasting my breath? The reality of the situation and the possible solutions seem so self-evident, discussing the issue seems to me to be completely stupid. The Pope bans condoms. I read 25 million people have died because of AIDS in Africa over the past 20 years. The United States sees 1.3 million abortions per year, 70,000 in Canada, 42 million worldwide and anybody, I mean anybody has the gall to suggest abstinence? Protesters spend hours standing around on streets showing graphic images of dead foetuses but refuse to go to their local high school with a banana and a condom.

Are you people nuts?

I remember once way back when seat belts were first made mandatory. A friend was spouting off about how nobody was going to tell him what to do; besides, they were unnecessary.

I slammed on the brakes.

The car skidded to a halt; my friend slide forward on the seat but managed to get his arm up so it slammed into the dashboard not his head.

"What the hell did you do that for?" exclaimed my friend. I grinned at him. "Unnecessary? If you were wearing your seat belt; you wouldn't have hit the dashboard." He was ready to slug me but I made my point.

Everybody is completely stuck on abortion and nobody wants to talk about "unwanted" pregnancy. I repeat and I guess I'll have to repeat this until I'm blue in the face: Nobody aborts a pregnancy they want; one only aborts an unwanted pregnancy. Stop all unwanted pregnancies; you stop all abortions.

Integrated Catholic Life
I left a comment with a link to my original abortion article and received this response.

Deacon Mike Bickerstaff
July 2, 2010 • 3:56 pm

Hi William,

You write on your blog: >>In a nutshell, I am pro-choice and anti-abortion. I am for the woman having the choice but would sincerely hope that we all arrive someday at a point where there is no need for a woman to even have to choose an abortion.<<

Well, you know, try that argument with any other killing of innocent human life... e.g., "I'm personally against drive-by shootings, but I am for the shooter having the choice..." or "I'm personally against homicide committed in the course of a bank robbery, but I am in favor of the robber having the choice..."

That people commit evil acts in the face of laws prohibiting those evil acts is not a valid reason for opposing the law.

There is no difference in human dignity between a born mother who intends to kill her unborn child and the unborn child. Your argument sacrifices the innocent baby in favor of the guilty mother. The pro-life position is that both lives are worth saving. To accept the intentional murder of the baby to save the possible accidental death of the mother is contrary to moral law.

Deacon Mike

I am sure Deacon Mike is a very nice man. Unfortunately, he completely missed my point in the original article and continues like all pro-lifers to address the entire issue of unwanted pregnancies by only looking at the moment of abortion. If a pregnancy was a "wanted" pregnancy, it would not be aborted. Ever. You only abort an unwanted pregnancy. Address the issue of a pregnancy being unwanted and you've solved the abortion issue.
  • Avoid an unwanted pregnancy:
    abstinence, of course
    contraception (condom, pill): just don't get pregnant in the first place
    vasectomy: don't get pregnant!!!
  • Ensure the woman is getting pregnant when she wants to!!! No accidents.

Who am I to judge?
Why does a woman choose to have an abortion? Her reasons are probably numerous: economic hardship, difficult family situation, emotional trauma, who knows? Whatever the case, she's the one deciding that the end result is not going to be that cuddly baby all smiley and happy.

But at the end of the day, it's her body; it's her decision. It's not my body.

Goddamn it! If you really hate abortion so much...
Ah, my frustration is showing. If you really hated abortion so much; you would do anything to prevent an unwanted pregnancy. If you really cared about people; you would do anything in your power to ensure a woman would never end up in a situation so difficult, she would even consider having an abortion. If you really understood where babies come from - and excuse me if I'm being blunt - you would know this only happens when a man's penis ejaculates inside a woman's vagina and you would look at all measures... and I mean ALL measures to guarantee that such a transfer of spermatozoa did not take place.

Shocked? Think I've gone too far; that I'm some kind of nut bar radical? Look in the mirror. You say you want to stop abortions but refuse to see the exact causal relationship.

  • Women become pregnant because of men. Anybody consider giving men a vasectomy?
  • Women become pregnant because of men. Anybody consider making them responsible? How come they get to walk away scot-free?
  • Women become pregnant because of sex. If abstinence isn't working, what else can one do? I don't care if pro-lifers say that sex is only for pro-creation. Sex can also be fun and a lot of people obviously know that or they wouldn't be "doing it".

And more importantly, do I get vote on what the woman does? Should I get a vote? After all, it's not my body.

My Final Word
Let me be perfectly clear: It is my opinion that abortion should be legal and should be an option made available to every woman. It is up to the woman to make the choice, not me. It is her body; it is her choice.

BUT and I add here a big emphatic but.

An abortion represents an "unwanted" pregnancy. The entire debate between the pro-choice and pro-life camps is about whether abortion is murder and whether abortion should be permitted, should be legal, should be supported as a legitimate way of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. Okay fine; enough already! Can we move on folks?

The point to my articles is just this: If a woman didn't pregnant, she wouldn't need an abortion. Ah, but I should be more precise. If a woman "wanted" to be pregnant, she wouldn't want an abortion. Yes, abortion is an issue; I'll let everybody else waste their time and effort arguing their stance to the other camp until they're blue in the face. I want to move upstream and deal with the issue BEFORE the pregnancy occurs. I want to be preventative. Yes, curative is good; curative is important but what can we collectively do to prevent us from even getting to an abortion?

Do the pro-lifers truly care about life? I'm sorry, I don't think so. You call my grandmother a murderer and say she deserved to die. You leave 2 little girls without a mother; you deprive me of my grandmother. You would have forced her to have the baby then walk away to leave the entire family to fend for themselves amongst the economic hardships of the great depression. Compassionate? You remain fixated on abortion but refuse to pick up a banana. You enforce policies that match your ideology then sit back and look at millions die from AIDS and say, "Too bad."

You want to ban fire trucks assuming that all fires will stop. You want to ban abortions assuming that all unwanted pregnancies will stop.

Ladies and gentlemen, I originally stated that I would like to see abortions stop. But abortions will only stop the day we no longer have "unwanted" pregnancies. And how to achieve the goal of no pregnancy being "unwanted"? Standing outside an abortion clinic showing the graphic image of an aborted foetus strikes me as being a very narrow minded, very myopic method of stopping an abortion. If you looked at every means at your disposal to ensure no pregnancy was unwanted including a banana, there is a good chance we could all be a tad closer to having no abortions at all. Women deserve to become pregnant when they want to, not when a man wants to or when a man inadvertently does so.

So, as my final word: pick up that banana, get out there and try to make this a better world. If for no other reason, you will at least not slip on the peel!

To all pro-lifers: The statistics are in and they clearly state that an once of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
The following information clearly supports my article. By preventing unwanted pregnancies (through contraception), you can significantly reduce abortions. And this is what we all want, right?

Guttmacher Institute:


By providing millions of young and low-income women access to voluntary contraceptive services, the national family planning program prevents 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, including almost 400,000 teen pregnancies, each year. These pregnancies would result in 860,000 unintended births, 810,000 abortions and 270,000 miscarriages, according to a new Guttmacher Institute report.

Absent publicly funded family planning services, the U.S. abortion rate would be nearly two-thirds higher than it currently is, and nearly twice as high among poor women.

Cristina Page: "Pro-Life" Movement Admits Pro-Abortion Stance

[The Guttmacher Report] specifically concluded that making contraception available to low income women reduces the number of abortions by nearly 40%. When birth control isn't available unintended pregnancy increases by 2 million and the number of abortions spikes by more than 800,000 each year. Researchers noted that providing contraception saves taxpayers 4 times as much as not providing it.

Some 91% of Americans favor contraception and so were startled to discover that groups which claim to be against abortion oppose the very strategy that results in significant declines in abortion. Instead, in a further shock, they support policies that researchers show lead to sharp increases in unintended pregnancy and abortion rate. Many ordinary self-described "pro-life" Americans were confused by news of the seemingly incomprehensible, yet universally-held, position of groups that have, for decades, promoted themselves as opponents of abortion.


my blog: Abortion: If we make it illegal, the problem will go away

Ship of Fools: forum on abortion

Show the Truth (pro-life group)

Wikipedia: Freakonomics
Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything is a 2005 non-fiction book by University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and New York Times journalist Stephen J. Dubner. The book has been described as melding pop culture with economics, but has also been described as "amateur sociology". By late 2009, it had sold over 4 million copies worldwide.

Wikipedia: Legalized abortion and crime effect
The effect of legalized abortion on crime (sometimes referred to as the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis) is the theory that legal abortion reduces crime. Proponents of the theory generally argue that since unwanted children are more likely to become criminals and that an inverse correlation is observed between the availability of abortion and subsequent crime. Not only that, but children born under these conditions are usually less fortunate as enough preparation was not put in place for their birth and upbringing. In particular, it is argued that the legalization of abortion in the United States, largely due to the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, has reduced crime in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Opponents generally reject these statistics, and argue that abortion has negative effects on society or decrease in crime is brought about in other ways.

my blog: Spousal Support: Where are the men?
It's interesting how the entire question of abortion is centered on the woman. As I said, she got pregnant by a man. Where are these men? A pregnancy involves 2 things: an egg and a sperm.


Site Map - William Quincy BelleFollow me on Twitter