Jump directly to the content

Abortion Clinics Closing at Record Rate

(UPDATED) Reasons vary, but the trend is clear.
|


...

CT has examined the new pro-life surge in-depth.

-----

(BP) For Abby Johnson, the closing of a single Planned Parenthood center demonstrated her dramatic reversal from abortion clinic director to leading pro-life advocate.

But for pro-lifers ...

Read More

Displaying 1–5 of 155 comments.

1 2 3 4 5  …  31 no previous pagenext page

audrey ruth

January 14, 2014  10:44pm

THANK GOD for this. Margaret Sanger’s Eugenic theories were put into place to shrink the urban population of the poor, the unwanted and the minority races - her racist theories were used to 'justify' abortion, and ultimately led to the establishment of "planned" parenthood. Abby Johnson's book unPlanned gives insight on this. She became enthused about abortion (partly because she'd had at least one herself) during her college days and saw PP as a viable way to help women. As the years went by and she 'graduated' from a volunteer to a "clinic" worker to the manager of a "clinic", she began to see the awful truth. I recommend her book to anyone who wants to know the truth from the inside out. Also: Blood Money: Getting Rich Off a Woman's Right to Choose, by Carol Everett (who owned a chain of "clinics" at one time) AND The Hand of God, by Dr. Bernard Nathanson, atheist and co-founder of NARAL who did a 180 when he saw the living baby in the womb via ultrasound.

Report Abuse

James Cowles

November 15, 2013  8:34am

I don't understand why pro-life folks consider this such good news. The first paragraph of the article says that the reason abortion clinics are closing is because of anti-abortion legislation. But if the only way to decrease the rate of abortions is by using the blunt instrument of the law to bludgeon women into carrying their pregnancy to term, that tells me 3 things, none of which I should think would be considered good from a pro-life standpoint: (1) the pent-up demand for abortion has become so great -- or at least, not diminished -- so that (2) the technique of moral suasion has to be abandoned and (3) replaced by the police power of the state. Women have to be coerced into doing that which they would not do, absent such coercion. If the demand for cigarettes & tobacco had remained so intense that the only way to induce people not to smoke was to make smoking illegal & criminalize the practice of same, I doubt that anti-smoking folks would be celebrating.

Report Abuse

Robin McCown

October 17, 2013  5:39pm

Contrary to popular belief, the best way to prevent abortions is NOT by closing Planned Parenthoods or outlawing abortions. The best way to prevent abortions is to make birth control cheap and easily available to ALL women. This fact has been proven in many studies. Here is one: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/06/4/gr060407.html

Report Abuse

James Cowles

October 16, 2013  12:24pm

@ Wayne Despres: "The fact that we do not have the means by which to measure entities like consciousness, intellect, emotion and aesthetic feelings ... doesn't prove the non-existence of spiritual entities." All that is true from a purely theoretical standpoint. But if you examine the context of the discussion, you will find that I was referring to "spirit" within the context of what can be used as a legal basis for prohibiting / restricting abortion. In constitutional law, this is known as a "rational basis" test. The government certainly does have a compelling interest in protecting life. To pursue this interest, it may restrict abortion in many ways, e.g., qualifications of clinic staff, sterile conditions, etc. But to prohibit / restrict abortion itself -- which SCOTUS in "Roe", "Casey", et al. has ruled is a right -- there must be a "rational basis", which means that the restrictions must be religiously neutral AND scientifically based. Spirit is neither, at least at present.

Report Abuse

Wayne Despres

September 27, 2013  3:14pm

James: The fact that we do not have the means by which to measure entities like consciousness, intellect, emotion and aesthetic feelings such as love and joy, doesn't prove the non-existence of spiritual entities. Nor is it proof that such entities are not “spirit.” Also, we don't call such entities as consciousness, will, intellect, heart and love "spirit" simply because we can't measure them and so we kind of made up a different name for them. We call them "spirit" because they aren't material - they are "spirit." Two distinct characteristics altogether. Further, you made a huge assumption - that regardless what will be discovered in the future, that which we have defined as "spirit" will always be shown to be material. How do you know that? Still, are you saying that such “non-physical” entities are the equivalent of glandular secretions like insulin, bile, testosterone, etc?

Report Abuse

Displaying 1–5 of 155 comments.

1 2 3 4 5  …  31 no previous pagenext page