What web does Planned Parenthood (PP) weave, its victims to deceive?
What is the deceit? Who are the victims? How is it funded? Why?
The web begins to spin in public elementary schools. It seems silly to help first graders plan parenthood, so perhaps something else is going on. “Obstacles that make young people uncomfortable about themselves, their bodies and their relationships should be removed.” Would that be parents? (“Manifesto” of PP, April 2001, CITIZEN, 7-01, p. 17)
More spinning. “Society may frown on sex play between children, but we have to remember that society disapproves of a great many sexual acts that take place, and there are two sides to the story.” (Girls and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy, a member of Kinsey‘s research staff, 1981, p. 48 and 52)
More spinning. “If [your parents] seem to fear your sexuality . . . you may feel you have to tune out their voice entirely.” (Changing Bodies, Changing Lives by Ruth Bell, 1980)
More spinning. “. . . Boys and girls who start having intercourse when they’re adolescents, expecting to get married later on, will find that it’s a big help in finding out whether they are really congenial or not . . . it’s like taking a car out for a test run before you buy it.” (Boys and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy, 1981, p. 117. This and the two books above have been used by PP.)
Pause spinning. Did you note when these textbooks were written? Do you realize that as early as 1970, PP encouraged homosexuality as a way to reduce U.S. fertility? So, should we be surprised that PP shared their key to the schoolhouse door with LGBT advocates? Should we be surprised by the boldness of GLSEN, Dan Savage’s “It Gets Better” program, and same-sex marriage proponents teaming up with PP in public schools?
More spinning. Working hard to preserve “reproductive freedom,” PP disconnects procreation from sex. In PP’s Young Woman’s Guide to Sexuality, girls learn “we are all sexual” and “sexual expression is one of our basic human needs, like water, food, and shelter.” But, as Dr. Miriam Grossman asks, does PP mention that a girl is born with all the eggs she’ll ever have, and that when she turns thirty, her eggs do, too?
More spinning… and spinning. Oh, my! Our kids are sexually active! (Does PP feign surprise?) We can’t let children have children. And, HIV/AIDS isn’t just for homosexuals anymore. PP stands “ready to serve”. Contraceptives all around! Sixth grade girls practice putting condoms over the finger of sixth grade boys. By freshman year, girls are on The Pill. But, even after lessons on how to have sex without getting caught, pregnancy happens.
More spinning. “These girls are much too young,” laments PP. “They have college, careers and marriage ahead. Let’s help them out of a difficult situation… by postponing their parenthood.” In 2009, PP in the U.S. performed 332,278 surgical or RU-486 “home” abortions. How many were on minor girls? I’m not sure. Parents aren’t always sure, either, because not every state requires parental notification. Alternatives to abortion? PP, last I knew, performed 134 abortions for every 1 adoption referral.
Certainly, the spinning stops here. But, no. Once a girl or young woman agrees to let PP help them and consents to an abortion, she may be asked if she’d like to have “some good come out of a difficult situation.” Fetal tissue “banks” stand ready to receive human embryos and, if a young woman is a certain number of weeks along in her pregnancy, she may choose to “donate.” Human tissue “banks” don’t pay abortion clinics for the “products of conception.” However, money may exchange hands for “handling, transportation, and/or storage.” (WORLD, 8-13-11)
The web is tight. Well financed. Government is complicit in the deception and entrapment of our children. PP is tax-payer funded. SIECUS is tax-payer funded. The California Teacher’s Association which supports the LGBT-friendly textbook is tax-payer funded. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) which funds grants to fetal tissue distributors (WORLD, 8-13-11) is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); and, yes, is tax-payer funded.
The web is spun. The child deceived and caught as prey. The spinning continues night and day. “Once I had an abortion, what did it matter?” a 40-something woman told me. Her life, for many years, was a blur of promiscuity, alcohol, drugs, and two more abortions. Until, one day, she heard the words, “The Spirit of the Lord . . . sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound” (Isaiah 61:1).
The web will be spun as long as the culture allows it. But, one life at a time can be kept from the snare. And, even after becoming prey, a single, precious life can be set free. Free to begin again. To heal. To better navigate the journey. To warn others away from the web.
The Failure of Sex Education is a short booklet written by L. Bartlett
for parents, educators, and church workers who want to protect children
from PP’s web. Available from Lutherans For Life or CPH
Read Full Post »
We Want Free Chocolate
Posted in Biblical manhood & womanhood, Commentaries of others, Life issues, tagged abortion, birth control, contraceptives, health care, Hobby Lobby, Karee Santos, pro-choice, reproductive rights on July 18, 2014| 3 Comments »
The Supreme Court decision in Hobby Lobby allowing corporations not to pay for abortifacient contraceptives on conscience grounds infuriated many. Some activists responded by rearranging the goods on Hobby Lobby shelves to spell out slogans such as “Pro-Choice” and “All Women Deserve Birth Control” in order to demonstrate their
mature femininity fitness as sexual partners political savvyanger. The battle cry seemed to be “we want our non-procreative sex and we want it for free!”“There is this new attitude that ‘if my pleasure is something I deem good, then you should pay into it and enable me as well,'” commented one of my friends on Facebook. With utterly inescapable logic, she concluded that, based on this reasoning, the government should subsidize her daily ration of dark chocolate as well. The argument is as follows:
1. Many people want dark chocolate.
2. Eating dark chocolate every day has proven health benefits, such as decreasing the risk of high blood pressure and heart disease.
3. Decreased risk of high blood pressure and heart disease leads to lower medical costs to be borne by individuals and the healthcare system.
4. The government should therefore provide dark chocolate for free.
The social, medical, and economic benefits of such a scheme are clear. Politicians would be wise to start a political party based on these principles, or at least incorporate these ideas into the plank of an already-existing party platform. Not only would chocolate-for-free garner even more popular support than contraception-for-free, it would also encounter less opposition. Consider this:
1. Chocolate appeals to men, women, and children of all ages, whereas contraception would only arguably be beneficial for men and women of child-bearing age.
2. Chocolate does not contain synthetic hormones that may raise the risk of cancer and harm the environment by polluting our streams.
3. Chocolate does not cause a small but real risk of increased blood pressure, blood clots, heart attack, and stroke.
4. No one (as far as I know) has a religious objection to eating chocolate or providing free chocolate to others.
So I say, forget free sex. We want free chocolate. Are you with me?
Karee Santos is a happily married mother of six. She blogs in English at Can We Cana? and in Spanish at Comencemos en Caná. This article was originally published at Can We Cana?
The Supreme Court decision in Hobby Lobby allowing corporations not to pay for abortifacient contraceptives on conscience grounds infuriated many. Some activists responded by rearranging the goods on Hobby Lobby shelves to spell out slogans such as “Pro-Choice” and “All Women Deserve Birth Control” in order to demonstrate their mature femininity fitness as sexual partners political savvy anger. (For more equally emotional responses, click here.) The battle cry seemed to be “We want our non-procreative sex and we want it for free!”
“There is this new attitude that ‘if my pleasure is something I deem good, then you should pay into it and enable me as well,'” commented one of my friends on Facebook. With utterly inescapable logic, she concluded that, based on this reasoning, the government should subsidize her daily ration of dark chocolate as well. The argument is as follows:
– See more at: http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/why_we_all_deserve_free_yummy_dark_chocolate#sthash.GHEbMBzN.dpuf
The Supreme Court decision in Hobby Lobby allowing corporations not to pay for abortifacient contraceptives on conscience grounds infuriated many. Some activists responded by rearranging the goods on Hobby Lobby shelves to spell out slogans such as “Pro-Choice” and “All Women Deserve Birth Control” in order to demonstrate their mature femininity fitness as sexual partners political savvy anger. (For more equally emotional responses, click here.) The battle cry seemed to be “We want our non-procreative sex and we want it for free!”
“There is this new attitude that ‘if my pleasure is something I deem good, then you should pay into it and enable me as well,'” commented one of my friends on Facebook. With utterly inescapable logic, she concluded that, based on this reasoning, the government should subsidize her daily ration of dark chocolate as well. The argument is as follows:
– See more at: http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/why_we_all_deserve_free_yummy_dark_chocolate#sthash.GHEbMBzN.dpuf
Read Full Post »