May 7, 2009 5:19 AM
Judy Blume: celebrate Mother's Day w/donation to Planned Parenthood
Children's Author Judy Blume Seeks Donations to Planned Parenthood Abortion BizHT: Sue
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
May 5, 2009
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Famous children's author Judy Blume is no stranger to controversy, but she's added to herself to a list of people who will be remembered for something more devastating. Blume is lending her name to the solicitation of donations for Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business.
In a new missive ironically celebrating mothers day, Blume suggests sending a donation to the pro-abortion group to honor mothers."Say thanks this Mother's Day with a gift that honors her courage by making a donation to Planned Parenthood in her name. I guarantee you that she'll be pleased. I know I would be,' Blume writes."There is no organization that I know of that supports motherhood and all that it means more than Planned Parenthood. That's why I'm honoring moms everywhere with my gift to Planned Parenthood today," Blume adds.Blume notes how more woman are seeking abortions form Planned Parenthood because of the difficult economy and she urges readers of the email to use that as a reason to support the abortion business."And right now -- with more and more women seeking care from Planned Parenthood health centers -- we need to do all we can to support them. By honoring a mother in your life, you'll be making a gift to millions of mothers and families who seek care from Planned Parenthood. That's a gift any mother will appreciate," she concludes.Planned Parenthood offers to send a card to any donor's mother saying that a person sent a donation to the pro-abortion group in her name.In a pub note that goes along with the fundraising letter, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards thanks Blume for her support."There are very few writers who have helped more young people grow up and grapple with their changing bodies and emotions than Judy Blume," she writes."I count myself among her biggest and most grateful fans -- and am so lucky to call her my friend. I'm honored to relay her message about motherhood to you today," Richards adds.ACTION: Contact Judy Blume with your complaints about her support for Planned Parenthood at Judy Blume, c/o Tashmoo Productions, 1841 Broadway, Suite 711A, New York, N.Y. 10023. You can also email Judy at JudyB@judyblume.com and leave a message on her public guestbook by going here.
Posted in Planned Parenthood, Pro-Life Issues, Social Justice | Permalink
Comments
i thought this was a joke...until i read more. :(
Correct me if i'm wrong, but how does supporting women in choosing to murder thier children a way to honor "Mother's Day" which last time I checked, honors the mothers who actually have children?
*scratches head
I don't get it.
Posted by: kristy in Germany | May 7, 2009 5:39 AM
WHAT?! "Honor your mother by donating to a place that murders babies and takes motherhood away..."
Oh yeah.
I can't even wrap my head around that horrid 'logic'
Posted by: Sandy | May 7, 2009 7:20 AM
I thought the same: how is killing a baby, honoring motherhood. I have already sent a letter to Judy. I used a baby shower thank you note, to give her a little reflection on a celebration that will not take place.
Posted by: trish | May 7, 2009 7:59 AM
Wow....that's all I can say.
Posted by: Debra | May 7, 2009 9:32 AM
Her publisher must love Blume actively working toward reducing her audience, in being both political, and supporting an excercise that actully snuffs out hundreds of thousands of her future readers.
I collect children's books, but my collection number is going to decrease today. I won't support someone who is so backward thinking. Not a good example of a strong, smart woman for my daughter if you ask me.
Posted by: kelly | May 7, 2009 10:50 AM
Have always liked Judy and still continue to like her. Thank goodness for her and Planned Parenthood that many more people agree with them, rather than your distortion of what Planned Parenthood does. I used Planned Parenthood for health care when I did not have insurance. I did not "snuff out any future readers", nor did I "murder babies." Your readers obviously do not know that Planned Parenthood is a reproductive health organization which offers contraceptive (birth control) services; emergency contraception; screening for breast, cervical and testicular cancers; pregnancy testing and pregnancy options counseling; testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases; sexuality education, menopause treatments; vasectomies and tubal ligations. and yes, sometimes abortions. The last option is not something that is forced upon their clients. Please reread what Judy has said.
Posted by: Kathy | May 7, 2009 12:14 PM
Kathy, you may be right about what Planned Parenthood provides, but as for me, I'd rather donate to a cause that does not do "sometimes abortions."
Posted by: Mary | May 7, 2009 12:31 PM
Kathy, you must be kidding. You're kidding, right? Sometimes abortions? But they do other good things so only killing unborn children "sometimes" must be ok then because they do all these other wonderful things. (rolls eyes).
I sent Judy Blume a private email plus I sent something to her guestbook. She posted others' comments but didn't have the guts to post mine. I guess only those who love her and her work need apply.
Personally and because of my strong faith, I do not support contraception. That has nothing to do with me blasting Ms. Blume; however. Supporting any organization that does killing (especially) on the level of PP deserves a good blasting.
Shame on you, Kathy!
Posted by: Sue from Buffalo | May 7, 2009 1:06 PM
Kathy, consider yourself bestowed with a pat on the back from me for not snuffing or murdering any of your children, well done!
But that entry sounded a lot like the round of "not me!" I get when one of my kids needs to own up to a misdeed.
Please indulge me with the opportunity to use PP's own statistics on the number of abortions they provide per year to make my reasoned and logical judgements.
Your estimation of Barbara's readers is uninformed when you assume that we are not fully aware of what PP is and the services they provide are. Some of us just have a harder time looking past the things that we are morally against than others I suppose. In some circles that is called integrity.
Posted by: kelly | May 7, 2009 2:17 PM
I was pro-life when I was in high school and when I first started college.
Over time, I realized abortion has to be a legal option, because some women are not capable of bringing a child into this world safely. They are addicted to drugs, they have no desire to take care of themselves or their growing child, they don't have any reason to take care of this fetus for even the 9 months it takes to put it up for adoption. Or, they are so violent, that assuming they had the baby and decided not to put it up for adoption, they probably would have beaten it to death within a few years.
Until there are no runaways, no children beaten to death or neglected to death, until there are no children in foster homes or orphanages, until that happens, Planned Parenthood must exist, because it helps women who are at least making an attempt. Women making an attempt to not get pregnant or choosing to end a life that they would otherwise end with alcohol, drugs and abuse.
You can make a difference in this world by being a mentor to an existing child. There are so many children that are alive now, and are being neglected. I was one of them. What I wouldn't have given to have someone care about me, encourage me. There were times when I was so sad, so beaten down that I wish my parents had just not had me. I've tried to kill myself over and over.
Be a foster parent, adopt a child, be a mentor to a child.
I don't want abortion to be necessary, but as awful as it is, it is necessary for some women.
The women getting abortions are not women who would be welcoming this child with baby showers and adorable onesies. These are women who are overworked with too many children already, who have been raped, or worse, raped by a family member, they are women who are addicted to drugs and alcohol and know they'd just kill the baby slowly from within with their addictions.
I know I wouldn't have changed my opinion from pro-life to pro-choice withouth seeing what I've seen in the last 15 years.
I know I'm lucky to have had access to birth control when I needed it, to not have gotten pregnant when I was raped and to never have been addicted to drugs.
I've had a pretty good life compared to many women out there, so I can't judge what they need to do, because I'm not living their life.
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 7, 2009 2:21 PM
Danica,
Your post embracing the need for abortion in society relies heavily on the "lowest common denominator" argument. Take the drug addicted, mentally ill woman with absolutely no wits about her and make her all women getting abortions.
Did you know that almost all of PP's abortion providing offices are in Urban black areas? Do you know the history of abortion if the U.S.? If you did your research you would see that the idea of abortion in the US began with the eugenic notion of controlling the numbers of black citizens (Margaret Langer, founder of PP). Today, disproportionately more black women get abortions than any other group of women. So, if you want to make your lowest common denominator argument, start with the poor black woman instead of the drug addicted woman, because it is more factually correct.
Ask yourself why PP puts their nice medical assistance offices in the suburbs, but the abortion clinics in the black neighbourhoods. Do some poking around..you might be surprised by what you find, even after the last 15 years. Your never too old to learn after all ;)
Posted by: Kelly | May 7, 2009 2:46 PM
Uhmmm, Danica? is that supposed to be a good reason for killing the babies? (I can't believe that I even have to say this.)
Why should a child die for the sins of the father?
Or the convenience of the mother?
You aren't the only one to have gone through those things. Oh, the shame of women and the excuses they give for allowing the death of babies.
Posted by: Sue from Buffalo | May 7, 2009 2:52 PM
I'm not surprised to hear that the abortion providing offices are in urban poverty-stricken areas. It's likely that the real estate is inexpensive there, and there is considerably less of the "Not In My Backyard!" protest that you'd find in other neighborhoods.
I do know about Margaret Sanger's original ideas, and I don't care for them.
I have read that over half the conceptions among Black women end in abortion. These women more than any need access the access to birth control that Planned Parenthood provides.
I worked at a drop-in day center for women, where a majority of the women were African-American and all of the women who came to our center were living in poverty. Life in an urban poverty situation is very different from a middle-class life.
The women that I know that have had abortions honestly felt like they were doing what was best for their child; they knew they couldn't stay sober for 9 months or more, they knew they were too mentally unstable to care for a child, or the just saw all the abused and neglected children in their neighborhoods and didn't want their own child to have to live through that.
Unfortunately, I saw many cases of women who gave birth to their children to receive government checks only to neglect them. Those were the children that broke my heart;
the children that sat in the corner in their carriers all day, with no one touching them, talking to them, or holding them.
I'm not saying those children would be better off dead, but until we have mentors for all those moms and all those children we've got to allow for the safe and legal abortion for those who can at least admit that they aren't ready to care for a child.
I'm definitely open to learning new things; I can only base my current opinion on what I've experienced so far in my life.
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 7, 2009 4:12 PM
I'm not surprised to hear that the abortion providing offices are in urban poverty-stricken areas. It's likely that the real estate is inexpensive there, and there is considerably less of the "Not In My Backyard!" protest that you'd find in other neighborhoods.
I do know about Margaret Sanger's original ideas, and I don't care for them.
I have read that over half the conceptions among Black women end in abortion. These women more than any need access the access to birth control that Planned Parenthood provides.
I worked at a drop-in day center for women, where a majority of the women were African-American and all of the women who came to our center were living in poverty. Life in an urban poverty situation is very different from a middle-class life.
The women that I know that have had abortions honestly felt like they were doing what was best for their child; they knew they couldn't stay sober for 9 months or more, they knew they were too mentally unstable to care for a child, or the just saw all the abused and neglected children in their neighborhoods and didn't want their own child to have to live through that.
Unfortunately, I saw many cases of women who gave birth to their children to receive government checks only to neglect them. Those were the children that broke my heart;
the children that sat in the corner in their carriers all day, with no one touching them, talking to them, or holding them.
I'm not saying those children would be better off dead, but until we have mentors for all those moms and all those children we've got to allow for the safe and legal abortion for those who can at least admit that they aren't ready to care for a child.
I'm definitely open to learning new things; I can only base my current opinion on what I've experienced so far in my life.
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 7, 2009 4:17 PM
Perhaps before you start a witch hunt or gather your lynch mob you should do your research. Planned Parenthood offers Family Planning, STD testing as well as educational services. Instead of chastizing them for one of their services why don't you praise them for the othe 97% that they offer? I find it appalling that you have decided to attack her for her efforts to save lives. Do you even know the statistics for STDs? Do you have a clue what Planned Parenthood does for young people. I'm going to chalk your lack of understanding up to age. I doubt that your venture will produce nothing more that rolling eyes.
Posted by: Joules | May 7, 2009 4:38 PM
Danica,
Well, in my personal life experience, my best friends sister passed away after years of anorexia, alcoholism and drug use. The year before she passed away she gave birth the a lovely sprite of a girl, who is now the apple of her grandmother's eye.
I also have another girlfriend who's grandmother was raped, and her mom was the product of the rape. My girlfriend and her 5 sisters are the closest knit family you can imagine. Even their mom looks like one of the sisters. An artist was so touched by these ladies he used them as the subject of a painting.
I come from meager circumstances myself, single mom, barely scraping by, yet I have no bad memories of that time in my life. Strong women do not come from easy situations and by continually casting poor women on the heap of hopelessness and ushering them into the "quick fix", will never make them survivors, it makes them victims...again. No one wants to think too far out of the box for them either. It's just so easy to send them along to the clinic, because, if we were really going to be sincere about it, no one really cares about them. Everyone knows that post-abortion, their lives are no better, no improvement is made, no opportunity suddenly appears for a better life. Abortion only provides them with another excuse to not stand up and be strong women.
The aftermath of abortion is real, and my heart breaks for these women who's lives are a chain of failures. It's telling that the only bone society wants to throw these women is an abortion.
The two instances I mentioned above could have also been considered hopeless too. It's an easy assumption to make, when you don't even want to bother to think about possibility.
You can never convince me that abortion fixes anything for poor women. If that were the case, then these three generations later should have fixed the problem, yet here we are, decades later, still dealing with poor, uneducated (black)women as a societal blight. Shouldn't alarm bells be ringing? As women, maybe it's time to think about alternatives, like encouraging moms to raise their children and use abortion funding to give moms an education, empower them as household leaders and let them earn the sweet gift of success.
Posted by: Kelly | May 7, 2009 5:35 PM
unbelievable........my comment to her guest book will undoubtedly never make to the actual guestbook.
Posted by: julie | May 7, 2009 6:27 PM
The 'argument' that the BABY is better off dead because of the mother is ridiculous. And the same kind of devaluing of life that leads our society down the slippery slope towards deciding who gets to live. What? You're old? hmm. You've had a good run. Better to die now and save the rest of us some money, instead of caring for you.
What? You have cancer? Well. Obviously it's time for you to die. Just go on. It's much to painful to live through chemo and radiation.
NO ONE has the right to say a CHILD should die because the circumstances aren't good enough. Because the mother isn't good enough.
Not even the mother has that right. Abortion is not a 'necessary' evil. It's just evil.
(for the record, I too was pro-choice and in that 'holier than thou' camp of abortion is needed for so many women. Thank God He opened my eyes.)
Posted by: Sandy | May 7, 2009 7:21 PM
Kelly - I'm so glad to hear the inspirational stories you've shared. I'm glad the lives of your friends and family have worked out so well. Some women have the courage and emotional strength to not let the circumstances of conception effect how much they love and care for their child and I commend them. Unfortunately, not all women can move beyond the rape and care for the child as if it had come from a loving union.
And yes, in terms of poverty situations having an abortion doesn't make a woman's situation any better, but it may help it not get worse.
I can only go by what I've known and experienced for myself working with the women I've worked with.
Sandy - I'm happy for you that faith is something that brings joy to your life. However, not everyone believes in God. Even with abortion legal, we have women abandoning babies daily at hospitals, other safe places, and even sadly dumpsters. If abortion became illegal, we would have many more women finding ways to end their pregnancy, or otherwise get rid of the child after it's born.
I do hope someday abortion becomes unnecessary. Until birth control is readily available, until women are able to have the confidence in themselves to not have sex to please the men around them and until men stop raping women abortion will happen, legally or illegally.
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 7, 2009 8:18 PM
Danika, you say that you aren't saying that these children aren't better off dead, but that is exactly what you are saying.
Take your argument further. There are plenty of women who are abusing drugs and alcohol with a toddler in tow. Should we kill those toddlers because their mother's aren't caring for them?
Or should we work to help those women, help those children, and respect life at all levels.
The choice is obvious. A drug addicted woman who has an abortion is still a drug addict. Instead of using abortion as a band aid we should help her to overcome her addiction.
Posted by: Lauren | May 7, 2009 8:49 PM
I think my colander holds more water than Judy's logic.
Melanie S.
Posted by: Melanie | May 7, 2009 8:57 PM
There is so much talk on the need to provide birth control and how that would reduce pregnancies thereby reducing the number of abortions. However, if you are referring to the drug addicted, mentally ill woman that you say are getting pregnant and having the abortions, I truly don't believe that popping a pill and/or carrying a condom with them is going to be the key. Because see in order for the pill to be effective, you need to take it every day at roughly the same time. If you can't take care of yourself on a daily basis, I think it is pretty likely that you won't consistently take a birth control pill.
Posted by: Margaret | May 7, 2009 10:01 PM
I wish people would stop associating PP with abortion. Only about 5% of their services are abortion. They provide so many other services that are in high demand. Everything from cancer screenings, women's health exams, contraceptives, family planning, mother daughter workshops. I really wish people would understand how hard PP works to reduce the number of abortions. Say what you will about it but there are plenty of women out there who take their welfare check, or child support and blow it on themselves. Children are abused and resented and taken for granted on a daily basis. I care as much for the unborn child as I do for the child after birth, and until more is done to protect the children after birth, and more is done in the way of prevention I will remain with my stance that I don't believe it is right and I will never have one, but I'm not going to force that belief and personal decision on somebody else. Stop focusing on the wrong parts of the issue. If more steps were taken to reduce unwanted pregnancy, abortion wouldn't even have to exist.
Posted by: Taylor Ann | May 7, 2009 11:02 PM
Lauren,
I agree with you that abortion is just a band-aid for these women. The much bigger problem is that there are women living in poverty with no help in sight. If poverty is a woman's only problem, she needs help, a mentor of some kind to help her through it. Women suffering from mental illness and drug addiction need treatment. Until we take care of these larger, over-arching issues, there will be a need for legal and safe abortions.
I do feel like the children that are already born and are being actively mistreated by their parents, or neglected by them, or bounced around in foster homes, or living on the streets are a higher priority than unborn children.
The women I've known that have had abortions honestly thought it was the best thing for their child because they knew themselves, and they knew their environment.
Whether abortion is legal or not, it will happen, just as it did before Roe v. Wade.
Once society takes care of the over-arching issues, abortions will not be necessary, nor will they happen.
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 8, 2009 4:09 AM
Take the argument even further than that Lauren! Instead of paying for drug addicted women to have abortions...why don't just kill THEM? After all, they are suffering in their addiction...
Why not start some forced sterilization?
Because it's WRONG. I would think almost anyone would agree to that.
So if those things are wrong, then how can that desire to 'choose' and have rights stop with an unborn PERSON. Every abortion is taking away the right of a person to LIVE.
Posted by: Sandy | May 8, 2009 5:50 AM
Danica, you say you don't care for Margaret Sanger's views, yet what you posted reflects them perfectly. Her whole purpose was reducing the population of the "unfit", starting with the children of the "unfit". She just had a broader definition of "unfit".
There are never just two options (kill the baby in the womb or kill it later in a drug-haze). And complete, free access to feticide will never end abuse and the tragic deaths of children. It simply *adds* to the tragedy--adds more deaths.
Posted by: Margaret | May 8, 2009 8:16 AM
People like Danica, Taylor Ann and the others who may not like killing unborn children for themselves but won't force those views on anyone else (rolls eyes) don't want to see logic. They are wrapped up in their misplaced "compassion" and are embracing cruelty instead.
Let's call it for what it is, huh?
Nobody here argued that it wasn't an unborn human life or even a child. You were just arguing whether or not circumstances warranted killing that child.
How can you be so cruel?
How can you be so inhuman?
You don't really care about these women because you don't care about these children so you're all full of baloney.
Posted by: Sue from Buffalo | May 8, 2009 8:31 AM
Danica,
We've tried the whole "kill the babies to help women" thing. It didn't work. Women are still poor, still abused, and still drug addicted. Children are still abused.
If your support for abortion hinges on it being some sort of social good, you have to admit that it has widely missed that mark.
Abortion skyrocketed after legalization. Any pre-Roe number's you've seen are complete fabrications. Dr. Bernard Nathanson admitted that he lied about the prevelance of abortions, abortion related death, and general support for abortion. The entire abortion industry, and it is most certainly an industry, is built upon lies.
You keep dodging the issue. Why is it ok to kill a preborn human to "help" a woman and society at large, but not ok to kill a born child?
If you suppor abortion because of utilitarian thinking, there is no logical reason to end your support of this killing at birth.
So, I ask you again, why is it ok to kill a fetus, but not a neonate? Same mother, same drug addiction. If you're going to support this, at least be intellectually honest.
Posted by: Lauren | May 8, 2009 9:51 AM
Good Morning,
I knew going into this discussion that I was expressing my feelings to a group of people who did not agree with them.
Just as nothing I say can possibly change your mind, nothing you can say can possibly change mine.
Search the newspapers online and see how many stories of women who have abandoned their babies or killed their children by neglect or abuse. That's _with_ legal abortions available. Making abortion illegal will not reduce the overall number of children being killed.
We need to fix the over-arching problems that cause women to end up being pregnant when they don't want to be.
I am not picking and choosing who is "unfit". I feel like every woman should have full access to all the information in making any decision. I'm not deciding who gets an abortion. I'm sharing with you stories of women I knew who had abortions. They made that decision for themselves.
A woman should be allowed to choose what happens to her body. If she doesn't want something growing inside it, she should be able to have full access to preventing it from being there, and if that fails, then access to remove it.
Lauren, You said I was "dodging the issue." Here's my answer: I feel it the woman takes precedence over the unborn child until that child is viable. Once a child is viable, and is living outside the womb, then that child has the same rights as the woman.
Take care,
Danica
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 8, 2009 1:00 PM
Danica,
Your quote:
A woman should be allowed to choose what happens to her body. If she doesn't want something growing inside it, she should be able to have full access to preventing it from being there, and if that fails, then access to remove it.
My response: There's your problem. It's not a something. It's a someone.
Your quote:
Just as nothing I say can possibly change your mind, nothing you can say can possibly change mine.
My response: You got that right. You are false down to the marrow in your bones.
Your quote:
Once a child is viable, and is living outside the womb, then that child has the same rights as the woman.
My response:
And if anyone...anyone should not be able to live without help once they're out of the womb, your response is to kill them, right? Funny, you had no argument about them being children before I posted.
Deciding on who is a viable human and who isn't. I can imagine what side you would have been concerning slavery back in the 1800's by your answers.
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, right?
Oh, I guess not.
Posted by: Sue from Buffalo | May 8, 2009 1:46 PM
No, Danica, you are still dodging the issue. First you said you support abortion because it saves children from a life of abuse and neglect. I pointed out that there are plenty of neglected infants who could also be "spared" this fate if we allow infanticide.
Then you came back with an argument that the mother's rights outweight the child's. That's not the issue we're addressing. We're talking about abused children.
So again, if we are to support abortion for utilitarian reasons to "save" a child from a life of horror, why don't we also allow killing young children?
You're the one who raised this issue. Please, address it.
Posted by: Lauren | May 8, 2009 3:13 PM
I'm addressing it as best as I can.
You know as well as I do that nothing I come up with will change your mind. Nothing you come up with will change mine.
We are at a standstill.
Posted by: Danica Duensing | May 8, 2009 7:33 PM
We are at a standstill.
Because you are holding two separate worldviews at the same time and do not realize it. I don't think you are intellectually dishonest, I think you are simply blinded to the ultimate discord in your views.
You believe that children should be protected from harm. You believe that a woman who is poor or under the influence of drugs or mental illness should be able to have an abortion to protect the child from harm. Okay, discrepancy #1.
Not only has that child been harmed, she's been killed with no chance of ever showing how far she could have come. You have told this little girl she doesn't deserve a chance to overcome her difficulties and prevail. You've simply decided for her that she is a hopeless case. Because she is not an individual to you, just a side effect of bad family planning.
Although you rightfully denounce eugenics, you are advocating the practice of de facto eugenics. This little girl is not someone of inherent worth, just a problem to solve, the easiest way of which is to kill her.
Posted by: Amy K. | May 8, 2009 9:32 PM
Danica,
If you've addressed this, I missed it: Please tell me why infanticide is not an acceptable means of reducing the number of abused and neglected children.
Posted by: Marisa | May 8, 2009 9:40 PM
No, Danica, we are not at a standstill. You were once pro-life, I was once pro-choice. Obviously arguments and life allowed us to change our views.
I am challenging you to look at your beliefs and take them to their logical conclusions.
Posted by: Lauren | May 8, 2009 10:31 PM
As long as you care nothing about the children, Danica, nothing will change your mind.
Your quote to Lauren:
Lauren, You said I was "dodging the issue." Here's my answer: I feel it the woman takes precedence over the unborn child until that child is viable. Once a child is viable, and is living outside the womb, then that child has the same rights as the woman.
(In the same post, just the paragraph above it, you wrote:)
A woman should be allowed to choose what happens to her body. If she doesn't want something growing inside it, she should be able to have full access to preventing it from being there, and if that fails, then access to remove it.
Do you hear your own words, Danica? At one point you refer to it as a child and at another point you refer to it as "something" or "it."
Somewhere along the line, you have to dig deep and decide what that "something" is. A child or a "growth."
And if that "something" is a child, then you are making that decision of life and death for another human being. Innocent as that human may be.
You've chosen to ignore my posts up to now. Will you choose to ignore this one as well?
Posted by: Sue from Buffalo | May 9, 2009 9:59 AM
I doubt very much that Ms. Blume was referring primarily to abortions when she said that people needed the services of Planned Parenthood more than ever in these difficult economic times. Although some Planned Parenthood branches - not many - do offer abortions as part of a full spectrum of reproductive health services, that is the smallest part of what the organization does and why it is ridiculous for supposedly pro-life people to demonize the organization so inaccurately. Planned Parenthood provides low-cost contraception, gyn. exams and care, screenings for breast and testicular cancer and many, many other desperately needed services.
Posted by: Mariah Boone | May 9, 2009 6:47 PM
Although some Planned Parenthood branches - not many - do offer abortions as part of a full spectrum of reproductive health services, that is the smallest part of what the organization does and why it is ridiculous for supposedly pro-life people to demonize the organization so inaccurately.
Mariah, a third of PP clinics perform abortions. They do a brisk business of just under 300,000 abortions a year.
Posted by: Amy K. | May 9, 2009 11:48 PM
Mariah, abortions are not even close to being the smallest service offered by Planned Parenthood. Look up their numbers for prenatal care, post natal care, and adoption referrals. They are all vastly lower than their abortion numbers.
Also, they skew their data by packaging abortion with an exam and some birth control. Thus, the actual abortion procedure only accounts for 1/3 of that patient's total "package" even though the only reason she came was for the abortion.
Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the country. Please, don't come here and rattle off talking points that have no basis in fact.
Posted by: Mariah | May 10, 2009 9:47 AM
