They said it.
‘You just have to catch the baby’s head. Don’t worry, it’s already dead.’ ”
This is what nuse Fe Esperanza R. Vinoya says her manager told her when she was being ordered to assist in performing abortions.
A group of nurses filed a lawsuit filed at the University of Medicine & Dentistry in New Jersey because they did not want to assist in abortions.
Share on Facebook
Pro-life activist George Grant describes this scene outside an abortion clinic where sidewalk counselors were trying to reach out to abortion minded women:
“Every 30 minutes for the next 2 ½ hours, we watched as a fresh clutch of doe–eyed girls were whisked into the clinic by “pro-choice escorts.” They met the girls at their cars and quickly aimed them up the sidewalk. They snarled at our offers of help and batted away our literature. If a girl displayed the least hint of hesitation, the “escorts” would take her by the arm and rush her toward the door. So much for “choice.”
When, despite their best efforts, a frightened and confused teen slipped their grasp and turned aside to talk to one of the protesters, to read a gospel tract, the “escorts” flew into a frenzied rage. They lunged at the picket line. Taunting, jeering, cursing, and reviling, they tried to recapture their prey. One turned her contorted, wild eyed gaze toward me.
“You pig,” she sputtered. “You damned, chauvinist pig. Let the girl go.”
I looked over my shoulder where the girl was kneeling in the grass, quietly praying with several picketers, utterly incognizant of the efforts of this thrashing, yammering champion for “choice.”
“Why don’t you go home? Mind your own business!” She was right in my face, yelling in my ear, shoving, red-faced, and livid. “You’re traumatizing the girl, you pig.”
She went on and on, clichés repeated like a worn-out record. But all to no avail. The girl was walking away, arm in arm with her newfound friends. She said she was keeping her baby.
Frustrated, the “escorts” retreated to the building. A quick conference ensued with the clinic director, 2 nurses, and a security guard. They were clearly disturbed and kept gesturing in our direction with stabbing fingers and malevolent stares. After a moment of haggling between themselves, they dispatched the guard, presumably to “restore order” to this now thoroughly unpleasant Saturday morning.”
George Grant Grand Illusions: the Legacy of Planned Parenthood (Franklin, Tennessee: Adroit Press, 1988, 1992) 17
Share on FacebookLaurie Bertram Roberts, Mississippi State Pres. of the National Organization of Women, comments on Margaret Sanger’s racism:
“First of all, Margaret Sanger did not work on abortion. She worked on birth control. Context is everything. I will never deny that Margaret Sanger was connected to the eugenics movement, what they (abortion opponents) never bothered to say is that eugenicists also wanted to limit the birth rate of poor white people and disabled people. It wasn’t just Black people; it was a whole lot of people they deem to be unfit.”
Quoted in “Thank God for Stupid Enemies” Speaker for the Dead WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 2014
From Anna Wolf “Using the KKK to Fight Abortion Rights” Jackson Free Press April 16, 2014
Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood. She was also an avowed racist (she spoke at at least one KKK meeting) who did indeed advocate sterilizations of the handicapped and poor.
Share on FacebookFormer clinic worker Jewels Green:
“The pro-abortion movement makes a lot of noise about respecting a woman’s heartfelt and well-considered “choice” to have an abortion—but only if she remains quietly pro-choice and regret-free afterwards. That same woman becomes a “traitor” to her gender, a mindless follower of dogma, or an object of cartoonish ridicule if she admits her abortion was a mistake and now wants to help others avoid the same pain, guilt, sadness, and remorse she—WE—experience as a result of making an irreversible error so grave as killing our children…..
It is sadly (but tellingly) incongruous that pro-abortion supporters equate their cause for the ”right” to murder our unborn children to women’s equality, women’s rights, and caring for women when it seems obvious that women hurting after an abortion are pretty much left to fend for themselves. This is intellectual dishonesty in blind service to keeping the lucrative abortion industry in business at the expense of not only the helpless children killed, but also their customers: the pregnant mothers seeking their grisly services.
It is shameful that the pro-abortion side mocks or ignores our pain, regret, and remorse—and refuses to warn women about these inherent psychological risks.”
Jewels Green “Clinic Mocked Post-Abortion Women Who Are Now Pro-Life” LifeNews.com 10/31/11
Share on FacebookDaniel McConchie, the Vice President of Government Affairs for Americans United for Life, informed LifeNews of a subcommittee meeting where a representative of Planned Parenthood was opposing a law that stated babies born alive after abortions must be given medical care. He sent the transcript.
Chairman Boyd: “So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief. If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
Miss Snow (PP): “Um, well, we believe that any decision is made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician.”
Chairman Davis: “I believe you were in the room when I asked Rep. Pigman what happens in a situation where a baby is alive, breathing on a table, moving. What do your physicians do at that point?”
Miss Snow: “Um, I do not have that information. I am not a physician, I am not an abortion provider. So I do not have that information.”
Chairman Davis: “I understand that you are not a physician, but you represent physicians who do perform this activity. And can you tell me what happens when a baby is alive on a table at that point? What do they do with the baby that is struggling to live?”
Miss Snow: “I don’t know and as I referenced earlier, we don’t know how prevalent this situation even is.”
Chariman Davis: “I don’t know how else I can get an answer Mr. Chairman.”
Rep 3: “Along the same lines you stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?”
Miss Snow: “That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider.”
Rep 3: “I think that at that point the patient would be the child struggling on the table, wouldn’t you agree?”
Miss Snow: “Uh, that’s a very good question. I really don’t know how to answer that…um…I would be glad to have some more conversations with you about this.”
Later:
Rep 4: “What objection could you possibly have to obligate a doctor to transport a child born alive to a hospital where it seems to me they would be most likely to be able to survive?”
Miss Snow: “What about those, and I’m just speaking out here, what about those situations where it is in a rural health care setting, the hospital is 45 minutes or an hour away, that’s the closest trauma center or emergency room. You know there’s just some logistical issues involved that we have some concerns about.”
Steven Ertelt Planned Parenthood Opposes Bill Protecting Babies Born After Botched Abortions LifeNews.com 3/28/13
You may be wondering – the baby survive abortion? Does this happen or is it just a pro-life hypothetical situation? Go here for some examples of babies who survived abortion and been allowed to die.
Share on FacebookA pro-choice author describes explains how most members of the public oppose most abortions:
“The reasons for which the American public at large is most approving of abortion are not the foremost reasons why women have abortions. Women, in the main, do not have abortions because of rape, incest, deformed fetuses, or because their physical life is in danger. But these are the most appropriate reasons in the eyes of the American public. Being poor, too young, unmarried, and not wanting a baby are deemed less valid in public opinion polls. We have a huge disjunction here that needs to be resolved. And the pathetic thing, in terms of public opinion, is that “I don’t want a baby at the moment” isn’t considered the most valid reason at all.”
Patricia Launneborg Abortion: a Positive Decision (New York: Bergin & Garvey, 1992) 33
Share on FacebookA female college professor decided to have an abortion when her baby tested positive for down syndrome.
“I’m not proud of this, but to be honest, I don’t want to cope with a mentally retarded child. My mother did volunteer work in the schools, with MR kids. She’s deeply against abortion. But she’s not against abortion for this. I guess some of her attitudes must’ve rubbed off on me. The thing that entrances me is having a smart child.”
Rayna Rapp Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: the Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America (New York: Routledge, 1999) 225
This doctor writes, after observing her first second trimester procedure at 21 weeks:
“Seeing an arm being pulled through the vaginal canal was shocking. One of the nurses in the room escorted me out when the colour left my face… Not only was it a visceral shock; this was something I had to think deeply about… Confronting a 21-week fetus is very different. It… cannot feel pain or think or have any sense of being, but the reality is, this cannot be called ‘tissue’. It was not something I could be comfortable with.”
“What about us? Staff reactions to D&E”. In: Hern WM, Corrigan B editor. Advances in Planned Parenthood. 15:1980;p. 3–8
She decided to do only earlier abortions.
The article was about the D&E procedure, which is what this abortionist witnessed. In this type of abortion, the baby is dismembered with forceps. See diagram below.
Actually see what a baby looks like after a D&E at 21 weeks
Share on Facebook“I thought there are folks who are pro-choice who do not want to know about what we are doing because it’s very scary to them. And if they start to know what really this is about for women and what we know, it’s going to shake their own simple way of being pro-choice.”
Said by one abortionist at a meeting of abortion providers.
National Abortion Federation Meeting
Transcript tapes: 9415-18, p. 23
Collected by Life Dynamics
They worry that when the average pro-choice person learns more about abortion, and what it does to women and unborn babies, they will be horrified.
Because abortion is a horrifying thing.
Share on FacebookAn American columnist said abortion is needed for the “at risk” population, “poor, black and Indian” whose children are “marked for failure.”
The quote appeared in Tony Bouza “A Mother’s Day Wish: Make Abortion Available to All Women,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, May 8, 1989
Melinda Tankard Reist Giving Sorrow Words: Women’s Stories of Grief after Abortion (Springfield, IL: Acorn Books, 2007) 193
Share on Facebook