Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?
Exposing Hate Crimes, Abortion Rights and Violence In America
The Growing Majority--Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?
New York Times Shows "Dead Baby" Pictures--Out of the Closet, into the Mainstream
Abortion Cause Breast Cancer?
Deaths from Bacterial Infection Linked to Abortion Pill (RU-486)
President Jimmy Carter Condemns Abortion
The Washington Times reported on November 4, 2005 that President Jimmy Carter has condemned all abortions. President Carter chastised his party for its intolerance of candidates and nominees who oppose abortion.
Victim of Botched Abortion OUT
Reaching Out to Women Harmed By Abortion: Care Net and the National Silent No More Awareness Campaign
Pro-Lifer Stabbed; Media Silent
Is abortion an act of violence against mothers and their children? If we call ourselves "pro-choice," do we enable and support those who commit hate crimes against unborn human beings and their mothers?
If abortion is a violent act, should abortion be a matter of "choice?" Is anyone entitled to a choice which will involve a violent act against another human being?
If you have an open mind, read the evidence at Hate Crimes, Abortion and Violence In America. Decide for yourself.
"Rusty Forceps"--Health Dept. Reports: Abortion Clinics Unsafe, Unsanitary, Unlicensed!
Violence, Abortion, Exploited Women and the Mob: An Open Letter to the Media
Mark Crutcher has written a book called Lime 5: Exploited by Choice. It is an inside look at abortion clinics. Next to the Bible, it may rank among the scariest books ever written! It focuses on all of the other, forgotten victims of the violence of abortion - the mothers who have been killed, raped while under anesthesia, torn uteruses, left sterile, etc. Also the nurses (also abused and raped), the "doctors" who are in jail for murder and rape, and the families who must care for the mothers who are in comas as a result of botched abortions, etc.All of this goes to show that the evil and violence is not only against the babies, but anyone connected with abortion.
Sexual Assaults in Oregon - Page 87 of Lime 5 [Abortionist John Roe 38] was investigated by the Oregon Board of Medical Examiners in 1994, after a 41-year-old woman and her 20-year-old daughter alleged that he tried to sexually stimulate them during examinations in 1990 and 1993. "The Oregonian" reported that 21 additional women contacted them to report similar incidents (Sources: The Oregonian 9/22/94, 5/27/95, 5/31/95, 6/1/95)
"Margaret's" Death - Page 25 of Lime 5: On June 2, 1989, Margaret went to have an abortion performed by [abortionist John Roe 295]. After she was dismissed, she started experiencing pain and bleeding, and called the facility about her symptoms.They did not advise her to seek medical care. Two days later, she sought medical treatment on her own and was told that she had a perforated uterus and retained fetal tissue. A D&C was performed to complete the abortion and, due to infection, a hysterectomy was also necessary. Unfortunately, despite all efforts to save her life, Margaret died of the complications of her abortion, leaving behind her husband and a one-year-old son. (Source: Richmond City (VA) Circuit Court Case No. LU441; Virginia Death Certificate No. 89-020384)
Henry Hyde - Member of the United States Congress . . ." I recently completed reading Lime 5 and can tell you that I remain shocked and angered by the disturbing information it contains. I found much of the data so incredible that if it were not so well documented I would be unable to believe it's true."
Fr. Frank Pavone - National Director, Priests for Life . . ."I have spoken in all 50 states of this country on abortion. There is not a place I go where I do not mention Lime 5. Nor is there a resource more urgent for everyone to read. I have taken Lime 5 on my international television shows, I have taken a copy to the White House, and I have taken a copy to Rome where I will work at the central pro-life offices in theVatican. This book destroys the myth that legal abortion means safe abortion."
Lime 5 by Mark Crutcher is available from http://www.ldi.org/ or through the inter-library loan program at your public library.
Hate Crimes and Violence Committed By Pro-Choice Supporters
The conviction of peaceful, non-violent Christians under RICO (NOW vs. Scheidler) was unbelievable and unjust! These Christians are quite simply being persecuted, not prosecuted. Even the author of RICO has stated that it was never intended to apply to non-profit organizations that do not make money, such as pro-life groups.
The abortion clinics and their supporters are the ones who should justly be charged with RICO suits, for conspiring together to commit violence against 36 million babies and their mothers. Abortionists commit violence for money through elective abortions for nonmedical reasons, destroying healthy babies and healthy mothers. Evidence abounds on the violence that abortionists have inflicted on mothers, physically as well as emotionally.
Money also motivates abortion groups to commit hate crimes and violence against pro-lifers. Click here for Educational Links documenting hate crimes, medical facts on abortion, abortion-related deaths, abortion and breast cancer, abortion and ectopic pregnancies, abortion and infertility, abortion and complications. Abortion is still performed illegally (by unlicensed clinics and doctors) in the U.S.. Legal or not, abortion is still unsafe for mothers and children. See also an outside link about "Breast cancer: Its link to abortion and the birth control pill," published by One More Soul.
The abuse of power perverts justice and tramples on free speech and liberty for all Americans. Think about the injustice of it: Martin Luther King could have been convicted under RICO, had it been law at the time, because other people committed violence. Peaceful (but "law-breaking") Quakers, who hid slaves in the underground railroad, could have been convicted of RICO, simply because others (like John Brown) committed acts of violence. Ironically, young Bill Clinton could also have been convicted for his leadership role in protests against the Vietnam War, had RICO been in effect.
Due to the current twisted misuse of RICO, the free speech of ordinary Americans, whether pro-life or pro-choice, has been curtailed. Is it now illegal to try to shut down a business through the use of a planned, publicized boycott or picket? Watch out, both liberal and conservative non-violent, grass-roots activists! Won't this unjust law apply equally to boycotters of a grocery store employing illegal aliens, animal rights activists freeing animals in a lab, and a non-violent sit-in at a chemical company adding toxic waste to fertilizer? Those industries with enough financial clout can surely strike terror into the heart of many potential protesters, effectively shutting out any public outcry or action against injustice.
I call on the leaders of our country, sworn to protect the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, to immediately enact emergency legislation to reign in the illegal actions of lower courts, the Supreme Court and the Attorney General, that pervert the Constitution of the United States. The author of RICO, G. Robert Blakely, has stated that "If you look at this case and say it's about abortion, you're missing the point. Everybody who loves the First Amendment has got to sleep uneasily tonight."
It's open season on Christians, who have increasingly found their rights violated and their freedom to speak in jeopardy. Hate crimes--such as church bombings, assault, bomb threats--against Christians and especially Christian pro-lifers, have become common. If you have been the victim of a hate crime, don't keep silent! Report it to the police, the government, the press. If no one else will listen, go directly to the people, and post it on the Internet! (For documented information about hate crimes committed against peaceful, Christian pro-lifers, see Abortion-Related Violence and Alleged Violence: An Investigative Report by Life Research Institute, 4279 Armand Drive, Concord, CA 94521, 1995. Also see our Educational Links.
In order to protect the First Amendment, Congress should immediately amend RICO, explicitly stating that the racketeering law should not be used to persecute non-profit or political groups. If you wish, you may copy this letter, send it to others, or publish it. Thank you for listening.
What's in a name? Do labels clarify, or trivialize issues? The media insists on using the term "anti-abortion." However, "anti-abortion" does not begin to describe the many other bio-ethical issues involved, such as the need for protecting the disabled, elderly, and children with handicaps. Pro-lifers are also concerned for the recent dramatic increase in the killing of small children, infanticide. When one segment of human life loses legal protection, it is bound to cause a degradation and cheapening of all human life, at every stage of development. Abortion violence can only cause more violence. This point has become painfully evident to parents (even if it is not obvious to the media elite and politicians), due to the recent increase in violence committed by children against other children, and schoolyard shootings at government-run institutions.
What's in a name? I believe people should be called only what they wish to be called, instead of labels which only serve to show a publication's bias.The media receives information packets from those who support the abortion violence money machine, including Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and others. These packets instruct the media to always use the terms "pro-choice," to decribe anyone who does not speak out against abortion. Has "choice" come to be associated with an attitude that nothing is wrong, that no one has a right to say that someone shouldn't hurt someone else? I don't think we want to go there, as a society. If we remove the protection from one group of humans (unborn children and their mothers have no protection), sooner or later, lawlessness will increase in other areas. In fact, that has already occurred. Eventually, all of us will be at risk. ("Don't ask for whom the bell tolls...)
Pro-lifers are pro-choice for mothers. A choice is not a choice without complete, accurate information. Mothers should have the right to know about their abortion doctor's record and any health violations. Most abortion facilities are regulated loosely or not at all. Some have been closed down, due to health violations--for disgusting, filthy practices such as reusing instruments without sterilization. Is this the so-called "expected standard of care?" Others continue to operate despite violations. Veterinarians at animal shelters are scrutinized more carefully than abortionists. See "Rusty Forceps"--Health Dept. Reports: Abortion Clinics Unsafe, Unsanitary, Unlicensed!
Some abortionists no longer have malpractice insurance, because of botched abortions and lawsuits (These abortionists are often the same doctors who secretly performed illegal abortions before Roe vs. Wade. How have they somehow become "respectable" now?) What about the patient's right to know, for both the mother and the baby? In this country, you can find someone to kill a baby at any stage of development, up to the very moment of birth. You can kill a baby in the third trimester to "protect" the woman's mental (not just physical!) health. In other words, well, just because you feel like it.
At the same time in this country, legitimate doctors are performing delicate surgery on tiny, unborn patients to correct abnormailites and repair injuries. It's time we faced the facts, stopped using euphemisms, and gave people a choice based on the truth.
Why do those who are called pro-choice by the media, who claim to speak for women, support abortionists who have been brought up on charges for maiming and killing their patients? What is pro-choice about that? Did those helpless babies have a choice? Did those women really have all the information that they needed to make an informed choice, before the doctor perforated their uterus, caused sterility, or destroyed their child--for some, the only child they would ever have? Were those women told that years later they might suffer flashbacks, depression, sadness, guilt, and perhaps even suicide? Did the abortionist tell the woman that some studies have shown a clear link between abortion and breast cancer? Did those women realize that abortion would not change the medical fact that their bodies had experienced pregnancy?
Abortion only changed the outcome of their pregnancy, delivering a dead baby instead of a live baby.
Pro-lifers believe that unborn children should have a choice, in the decision involving their own dismemberment. The unborn have a separate genetic code--human, of course-- from their mother, from the moment of conception. Of course, they can't speak up in their own defense. However, they are still created in the image of God ("endowed by their Creator..."), and protected according to our Constitution. The Supreme Court does not have the power to change the law. In comparison, the Supreme Court decisions prior to the Civil War may have allowed inhumanity to man, but did not change the laws of God or our Constitutional freedoms.
Pro-lifers insist that mothers of unborn children should be told the truth, so that they can make a real choice. Mothers should have the choice to hear the truth about human development. An unborn child is not just a blob of tissue at six weeks--in fact, the baby has a regular heartbeat (it actually began beating on and off as early as the eighteenth day). Mothers should be allowed to hear that at six weeks the brain waves of their unborn baby can be measured with special instruments.
Why is it that when a woman wants a baby, the doctor calls it a baby, but an unwanted child--same developmental stage-- is just "a blob of tissue?" Is that a matter of choice--choosing to tell or believe a lie? Certainly not, in matters of life and death! We would not tolerate such lies from anyone but an abortionist! How can what we want or don't want alter reality and truth?
If a baby is wanted, the doctor and mother listen joyfully to the hearbeat, and perhaps view the baby sucking his thumb, through a live action ultrasound. If a mother does not want a baby, the baby (at the same stage of development) is called "a blob of tissue." If the abortionist releases any facts to the mother, it is to simply tell the mother the size of the baby, but no information about the developmental stages, heart beat and brain wave activity. As if the size of a human being can affect the value of human life. If an ultrasound is performed, most abortionists will turn the screen away so the mother can't see. Why? The abortionist does not want the mother to learn anything that might change her "choice" to go through with the abortion--the abortionist's money machine.
I think the abortion debate will be clarified by facts, not labels. It is not a choice if it is based on lies and deception. The term "choice" needs to return to reality. Just don't call a pro-lifer "anti-abortion."
CBS insider Bernard Goldberg writes, "Reporters pride themselves on their skepticism. Yet many uncritically pass along the views of liberal activists in a way they would never do with conservatives. The homeless lobby tells the media there are five million homeless, and ten minutes later it's on the evening news. Why is it that the media elites aren't nearly as cozy with the anti-affirmative action or pro-life lobbies?"--Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News, Regnery Publishing, 2002
Many media outlets only quote the most extreme sources in stories regarding abortion. These so-called sources, who had NO audience until the media gave them a podium, do not represent the views of any legitimate pro-lifer. Those who claim to be pro-life, and yet advocate violence, only serve to promote the pro-death agenda of those who support abortion violence and the exploitation of women by the abortion industry.
Perhaps many reporters simply do not have access to information about legitimate pro-life sources. Perhaps many reporters simply use the so-called "pro-life" sources which the pro-choice leadership recommends in their press packets..This may make it easy to write a story. However, narrowing sources to only a few of the most extreme only tends to distort the issues--I am certain you would not want to do that. (For more on media bias, read http://secure.mediaresearch.org/specialreports/news/sr19980722.html .)
Abortion Violence Exploits And Hurts Women
A legitimate pro-lifer is concerned for all human life, at every stage of development--from the time of conception, when a complete human genetic code is present, to the time when old age or disability may make a human being seem "useless" to our paganistic, utilitarian society. True pro-lifers are concerned for unborn children, their mothers--and yes, they are also concerned for the abortion doctors and clinic workers. For instance, you can contact Norma McCorvey (the former Jane Roe from Roe Vs. Wade) for information about pro-lifers who showed her love and concern. Or read her book, "Won By Love."
Abortion violence exploits and hurts everyone who is associated with it. You can corroborate this with evidence in Mark Crutcher's book, Lime Five: Exploited by Choice. "Young women are being raped, sexually assaulted, mutilated and killed inside American abortion clinics."
The video, Suction Curettage: Dilation and Evacuation, describes one form of abortion. Christi's Choice video is a true story about Christi Stile, who at eighteen years old was left in a permanent vegetative state following a "safe and legal" abortion. Also consider that media sources can contact big-name former abortionists like Bernard Nathanson. (The previous resources can be obtained through Life Dynamics Incorporated, P.O. Box 2226, Denton, Texas, 76202; http://www.lifedynamics.com/ ;940-380-8800. Additional resources are also available through Heritage House '76, 919 S. Main St., Snowflake, Arizona, 85937; 1-800-858-3040.)
Violence Committed by Advocates of Choice
By far, the majority of violence in the Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life debate has been instigated by the Pro-Choice side. (See links, below.) This includes violence committed by abortionists against unborn children, as well as their mothers. Abortion may be legal (if you discount the Constitution), but it is far from safe, in spite of pro-choice efforts to distort and lie about the number of women maimed and killed each year by abortionists. In addition, pro-choicers also commit violence against pro-lifers, generally with impunity.
What about violence committed against pro-choicers? Sadly, a few individuals, of various religions--or no religion at all--and diverse backgrounds and agendas, apparently endorse violence against abortion providers. Some of the violence may have been committed by a family member of a woman injured by abortion. Others who commit violence may be insane, paid by terrorists, or perhaps hired guns. Such individuals are not pro-lifers, do NOT speak for any legitimate pro-lifer groups, and are not endorsed by any reputable, bona-fide pro-life organization. It is libelous not to make this point clear. Some may feel that it is an obvious point; unfortunately, that is no longer the case. Americans have been inundated with so many stories about supposedly violent pro-lifers, that many, if not most, now believe the lie that pro-life equals violence.
"While three abortionist shootings drew more than 1,100
stories in three major newspapers and Associated Press, seven cases
of abortion-advocate violence or harassment got only six stories, and
six examples of abortionists responsible for the death or
disfigurement of women drew only 53 stories.
The same approach occurred with the violence done to women by malpracticing abortionists who killed women in their care. Three editorials, two in The New York Times and one in the Los Angeles Times, bemoaned botched abortions. But all three focused not on the abortions, but on the failure of state medical authorities to appropriately remove and discipline incompetent physicians. None of these stories drew even a small fraction of the attention given to the anti-abortion shootings..."--Roe Warriors: The Media's Pro-Abortion Bias. (Updated and Revised), By Tim Graham, and Clay Waters, Media Research Center, http://secure.mediaresearch.org/specialreports/news/sr19980722.html
Pro-Choice Mafia--Laundering Money in an Under-Regulated Industry
In other cases, clinic bombings and violence may have been committed by pro-CHOICE forces themselves (in order to stigmatize the pro-life movement), or even by pro-choice mafia. Columnist Jack Anderson also tied mobsters and unions to abortion clinics when he stated that "A Federal grand jury testified that some mobsters have used fraud, extortion, arson, assault, and other strong-arm tactics against [abortion] Medicaid practitioners in order to collect kickbacks and for protection against competition." Anderson said that some abortion mills had been paying several thousand dollars per month ("protection money") under threats of mob reprisal.
The A.C.T. Medical Center at 5714 West Division Street in Chicago, an abortion facility licensed by the Illinois Secretary of State, is under investigation by Federal prosecutors. Authorities charge that Anthony Centracchio, the owner of the abortion facility, used it as a mafia front for criminal activities such as money laundering, gambling, bribery, and extortion.
World Magazine asked, "In a politically protected business, Mr. Centracchio found a safe and profitable cover for his alleged criminal empire. Was he the only one? The new administration could answer that question, if it has the will to prove that no one-not even an abortionist-is truly untouchable." (World Magazine, April 4th, 2001 Issue)
Another interesting fact, worthy of investigation: attempted shootings of abortionists and other instances of violence often occur close to the election, not just close to Veteran's Day. Coincidence? Or is it possible that some radical pro-choice forces, perhaps with ties to the mob, might benefit from discrediting pro-lifers--and by extension, pro-life politicians--around election time?
Wanted: An Unbiased, Well-Informed Media
I really think you would not want to be known as biased journalists. Please balance out your stories with mainstream sources, and don't rush to judgment. Don't just assume that a pro-lifer murdered an abortionist--that may make a story easy to write, but it is bad journalism. There are many other possibilities.
An additional source: "Abortion-Related Violence and Alleged Violence: An Investigative Report by Life Research Institute, 4279 Armand Drive, Concord, Ca. 94521. The report is not copyrighted. The report states, among many other interesting statistics: "There have been more bombings of religious facilities than all types of medical facilities combined."
More sources and facts:
1. The pro-life Concerned Women for America have nearly three times the membership as NOW. Do you quote CWA spokespersons as often as you quote NOW?
2. There is a nationwide pro-life organization called Victims of Choice. These are women who suffer from breast cancer, botched abortions, sterility, post-abortion syndrome, etc. Don't you think they have some stories to tell?
3. Two-thirds to three-fourths of pro-life activists are women.
4. Nationwide polls of the public show that women are more pro-life than men. Pro-choice men, naturally, are often single, in promiscuous relationships, and want an easy way out of responsibility.
5. There is also a nationwide pro-life organization called Women Exploited By Abortion.
6. Also consider the nationwide pro-life organization for women
victimized by "choice," called Project Rachel.
For information on post-abortion trauma,
Visit -- http://www.healinghearts.org/
For additional information through the Elliot Institute,
Visit -- http://www.afterabortion.org/
If you are concerned about fair, accurate reporting, you will investigate these sources. Click here for more Links
Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them."--Ephesians 5:11
Where do you want to go--eternally?
<A href="http:// www.myaffiliateprogram.com/u/cpstore/b.asp?id=1107">< br> <img src="http://www.myaffiliateprogram.com/u/cpstore/ showban.asp?id=1107&img=IDvsEV.gif" border=0>& amp;LT;/a>
All information on this web site is Copyright (c) 1998 - 2005 Hate Crimes, Abortion and Violence in America Project. Use only with permission. We do not accept donations, private or public. We are dedicated to providing the public with facts regarding abortion violence, hate crimes, and bio-ethical issues. This web site is written and managed by volunteers who support Constitutional protections for human life and oppose violence against human life. Please note: We will not knowingly endorse or include links to any web site which appears to advocate violence against abortion providers in any way. Please view our Guidelines and our FAQ (Frequent Abortion Questions). Due to limited, all-volunteer staff, we cannot answer every e-mail. However, we do read our mail and we appreciate your comments and suggestions to improve this web site. E-mail us at: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org (To contact us, remove "NOSPAM" from the e-mail address.).
Christian Book Distributors offers a huge selection of bargain-priced homeschool and educational resources and books. Portions of your purchases help support this web site. Thank you!