Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Abortion - Breast Cancer News Headlines
Coalition on Abortion - Breast Cancer ^ | November 29,2004 | Karen Malec

Posted on 11/29/2004 11:24:16 AM PST by Lesforlife

From: mail@abortionbreastcancer.com Date: November 29, 2004 11:26:02 AM MST To: "Leslie Hanks" Subject: ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES - "The Corruption of Science by Ideology"

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Newsletter Dear Friends:

An editor of a bioethics journal, Ethics and Medics, has written a scathing editorial criticizing the British journal Lancet in particular and the scientific community in general for allowing ideology to corrupt science. The editorial by Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. follows an article by Associate Professor of Surgery Angela Lanfranchi, MD, FACS in Ethics and Medics last month. Lanfranchi identified serious flaws in a Lancet "collaborative review" of the abortion-breast cancer research by Valerie Beral and her colleagues at Oxford. Here are some of Furton's quotes:

"The published study in the Lancet, purportedly one of the most definitive 'meta-analyses' yet carried out, was seriously flawed. Specifically, it omitted many studies that showed a link between abortion and breast cancer - and as Dr. Lanfranchi showed in our November 2004 issue, Beral and company could give no good reasons for those omissions....

"When a leading scientific journal allows its pages to be used as a political platform, and sets aside objective standards of scientific research, we must begin to wonder whether the spirit of (Jacques) Derrida has infected even scientific discourse....

"Picking conclusions ahead of time, and arrnging the evidence to support them, will only serve to undermine the respect that scientific inquiry deserves....

"The unwillingness of scientists to speak out against the shoddy research that is being advanced by those who deny the abortion-breast cancer link is a very serious breach....

"When the public learns that a causal link between abortion and breast cancer has been downplayed by the scientific community - for reasons that are ideological rather than factual - the feeling of betrayal will be strong...."

Furton's editorial is featured (below) in our "Abortion-Breast Cancer News Headlines."

Many in the news media, including CBS News and the Associated Press (AP), have held up the Lancet's review article as authoritative. Laura Meckler at the AP has no plans to alert women to this editorial because she claims the AP doesn't write about opinion pieces.

There are three problems with this: 1) Meckler has in her possession a factual article by Dr. Lanfranchi which identifies the flaws in the Lancet article; 2) Meckler has not told women that six medical groups recognize a causal relationship and a seventh group called on doctors last year to warn patients of a "highly plausible" relationship; and 3) Women are going to die because many secular journalists are too emotionally entangled with abortion and refuse to tell the truth.

Perhaps this will change when the daughters of journalists develop breast cancer after having had abortions.

CBS News did a program on informed consent legislation in the states on Thanksgiving Day. Its correspondents held up the Lancet review article as authoritative despite having been informed about Furton's editorial on the preceding day. They also cited as authoritative the U.S. National Cancer Institute's statement denying the link in 2003.

Ironically, another segment on the same program revealed that the government isn't a good source of health information because scientists at the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes for Health have a "cozy" relationship with pharmaceutical companies who pay the scientists to moonlight as consultants.

CBS News was basically reporting that government scientists can be bought. It's unfortunate that CBS journalists couldn't connect the dots to the abortion-breast cancer cover up.

CBS News interviewed me, but did not use the interview. If it had been used, then women might have learned too much - that six medical groups recognize the link.

CBS News journalists invited an expert, Jeanette Joyce, to their studio for an interview, but censored her credentials. Jeanette is a mammography educator, registered mammography technologist and mammography lecturer. She's spent many years researching and writing about breast cancer and breast imaging. She is on two boards of directors - the coalition's board and the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute's board.

However, CBS News only gave her first name and identified her as a breast cancer survivor who'd had an abortion. Its correspondent falsely claimed that Jeanette did not want her last name used.

Are there any other circumstances, other than when CBS is discussing the abortion-breast cancer link, that its journalists invite an expert to its studio for an interview, but do not identify that person as an expert? In the wake of the scandal involving Dan Rather's use of forged documents, one might have expected CBS to be up to higher standards of professionalism and integrity.

Action Items:

1) Distribute this document far and wide.

2) Contact CBS News at:

Ben Ferguson fergusonb@cbsnews.com

Cynthia Bowers bowersc@cbsnews.com

3) Contact the Associated Press at:

Laura Meckler lmeckler@ap.org

Sincerely, Karen Malec Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES

"The Corruption of Science by Ideology" http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/E+MDec2004-EFurtonarticle.PDF By Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. Ethics and Medics December 2004

#####

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

Tax-deductible, credit card donations can be made at http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com. Donations can be mailed to: the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, P.O. Box 957133, Hoffman Estates, IL 60195. The IRS recognizes the coalition as a 501(c)3 organization.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Breast Cancer Prevention Institute http://www.BCPInstitute.org

Polycarp Research Institute http://www.polycarp.org

This newsletter can be viewed online at: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/news/041129/index.htm Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer P.O. Box 957133 Hoffman Estates, IL 60195-3051

Toll Free: 877.803.0102 Local Calls: 847.421.4000 Email: response@abortionbreastcancer.com Web Page: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com

To unsubscribe from this newsletter, click the link below: http://pub43.bravenet.com/elist/add.php?action=leave&usernum=3670259665&emailaddress=lesforlife@earthlink.net

From: mail@abortionbreastcancer.com Date: November 29, 2004 11:26:02 AM MST To: "Leslie Hanks" Subject: ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES - "The Corruption of Science by Ideology"

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Newsletter Dear Friends:

An editor of a bioethics journal, Ethics and Medics, has written a scathing editorial criticizing the British journal Lancet in particular and the scientific community in general for allowing ideology to corrupt science. The editorial by Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. follows an article by Associate Professor of Surgery Angela Lanfranchi, MD, FACS in Ethics and Medics last month. Lanfranchi identified serious flaws in a Lancet "collaborative review" of the abortion-breast cancer research by Valerie Beral and her colleagues at Oxford. Here are some of Furton's quotes:

"The published study in the Lancet, purportedly one of the most definitive 'meta-analyses' yet carried out, was seriously flawed. Specifically, it omitted many studies that showed a link between abortion and breast cancer - and as Dr. Lanfranchi showed in our November 2004 issue, Beral and company could give no good reasons for those omissions....

"When a leading scientific journal allows its pages to be used as a political platform, and sets aside objective standards of scientific research, we must begin to wonder whether the spirit of (Jacques) Derrida has infected even scientific discourse....

"Picking conclusions ahead of time, and arrnging the evidence to support them, will only serve to undermine the respect that scientific inquiry deserves....

"The unwillingness of scientists to speak out against the shoddy research that is being advanced by those who deny the abortion-breast cancer link is a very serious breach....

"When the public learns that a causal link between abortion and breast cancer has been downplayed by the scientific community - for reasons that are ideological rather than factual - the feeling of betrayal will be strong...."

Furton's editorial is featured (below) in our "Abortion-Breast Cancer News Headlines."

Many in the news media, including CBS News and the Associated Press (AP), have held up the Lancet's review article as authoritative. Laura Meckler at the AP has no plans to alert women to this editorial because she claims the AP doesn't write about opinion pieces.

There are three problems with this: 1) Meckler has in her possession a factual article by Dr. Lanfranchi which identifies the flaws in the Lancet article; 2) Meckler has not told women that six medical groups recognize a causal relationship and a seventh group called on doctors last year to warn patients of a "highly plausible" relationship; and 3) Women are going to die because many secular journalists are too emotionally entangled with abortion and refuse to tell the truth.

Perhaps this will change when the daughters of journalists develop breast cancer after having had abortions.

CBS News did a program on informed consent legislation in the states on Thanksgiving Day. Its correspondents held up the Lancet review article as authoritative despite having been informed about Furton's editorial on the preceding day. They also cited as authoritative the U.S. National Cancer Institute's statement denying the link in 2003.

Ironically, another segment on the same program revealed that the government isn't a good source of health information because scientists at the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes for Health have a "cozy" relationship with pharmaceutical companies who pay the scientists to moonlight as consultants.

CBS News was basically reporting that government scientists can be bought. It's unfortunate that CBS journalists couldn't connect the dots to the abortion-breast cancer cover up.

CBS News interviewed me, but did not use the interview. If it had been used, then women might have learned too much - that six medical groups recognize the link.

CBS News journalists invited an expert, Jeanette Joyce, to their studio for an interview, but censored her credentials. Jeanette is a mammography educator, registered mammography technologist and mammography lecturer. She's spent many years researching and writing about breast cancer and breast imaging. She is on two boards of directors - the coalition's board and the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute's board.

However, CBS News only gave her first name and identified her as a breast cancer survivor who'd had an abortion. Its correspondent falsely claimed that Jeanette did not want her last name used.

Are there any other circumstances, other than when CBS is discussing the abortion-breast cancer link, that its journalists invite an expert to its studio for an interview, but do not identify that person as an expert? In the wake of the scandal involving Dan Rather's use of forged documents, one might have expected CBS to be up to higher standards of professionalism and integrity.

Action Items:

1) Distribute this document far and wide.

2) Contact CBS News at:

Ben Ferguson fergusonb@cbsnews.com

Cynthia Bowers bowersc@cbsnews.com

3) Contact the Associated Press at:

Laura Meckler lmeckler@ap.org

Sincerely, Karen Malec Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES

"The Corruption of Science by Ideology" http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/E+MDec2004-EFurtonarticle.PDF By Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. Ethics and Medics December 2004

#####

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

Tax-deductible, credit card donations can be made at http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com. Donations can be mailed to: the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, P.O. Box 957133, Hoffman Estates, IL 60195. The IRS recognizes the coalition as a 501(c)3 organization.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Breast Cancer Prevention Institute http://www.BCPInstitute.org

Polycarp Research Institute http://www.polycarp.org

This newsletter can be viewed online at: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/news/041129/index.htm Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer P.O. Box 957133 Hoffman Estates, IL 60195-3051

Toll Free: 877.803.0102 Local Calls: 847.421.4000 Email: response@abortionbreastcancer.com Web Page: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com

To unsubscribe from this newsletter, click the link below: http://pub43.bravenet.com/elist/add.php?action=leave&usernum=3670259665&emailaddress=lesforlife@earthlink.net

From: mail@abortionbreastcancer.com Date: November 29, 2004 11:26:02 AM MST To: "Leslie Hanks" Subject: ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES - "The Corruption of Science by Ideology"

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer Newsletter Dear Friends:

An editor of a bioethics journal, Ethics and Medics, has written a scathing editorial criticizing the British journal Lancet in particular and the scientific community in general for allowing ideology to corrupt science. The editorial by Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. follows an article by Associate Professor of Surgery Angela Lanfranchi, MD, FACS in Ethics and Medics last month. Lanfranchi identified serious flaws in a Lancet "collaborative review" of the abortion-breast cancer research by Valerie Beral and her colleagues at Oxford. Here are some of Furton's quotes:

"The published study in the Lancet, purportedly one of the most definitive 'meta-analyses' yet carried out, was seriously flawed. Specifically, it omitted many studies that showed a link between abortion and breast cancer - and as Dr. Lanfranchi showed in our November 2004 issue, Beral and company could give no good reasons for those omissions....

"When a leading scientific journal allows its pages to be used as a political platform, and sets aside objective standards of scientific research, we must begin to wonder whether the spirit of (Jacques) Derrida has infected even scientific discourse....

"Picking conclusions ahead of time, and arrnging the evidence to support them, will only serve to undermine the respect that scientific inquiry deserves....

"The unwillingness of scientists to speak out against the shoddy research that is being advanced by those who deny the abortion-breast cancer link is a very serious breach....

"When the public learns that a causal link between abortion and breast cancer has been downplayed by the scientific community - for reasons that are ideological rather than factual - the feeling of betrayal will be strong...."

Furton's editorial is featured (below) in our "Abortion-Breast Cancer News Headlines."

Many in the news media, including CBS News and the Associated Press (AP), have held up the Lancet's review article as authoritative. Laura Meckler at the AP has no plans to alert women to this editorial because she claims the AP doesn't write about opinion pieces.

There are three problems with this: 1) Meckler has in her possession a factual article by Dr. Lanfranchi which identifies the flaws in the Lancet article; 2) Meckler has not told women that six medical groups recognize a causal relationship and a seventh group called on doctors last year to warn patients of a "highly plausible" relationship; and 3) Women are going to die because many secular journalists are too emotionally entangled with abortion and refuse to tell the truth.

Perhaps this will change when the daughters of journalists develop breast cancer after having had abortions.

CBS News did a program on informed consent legislation in the states on Thanksgiving Day. Its correspondents held up the Lancet review article as authoritative despite having been informed about Furton's editorial on the preceding day. They also cited as authoritative the U.S. National Cancer Institute's statement denying the link in 2003.

Ironically, another segment on the same program revealed that the government isn't a good source of health information because scientists at the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes for Health have a "cozy" relationship with pharmaceutical companies who pay the scientists to moonlight as consultants.

CBS News was basically reporting that government scientists can be bought. It's unfortunate that CBS journalists couldn't connect the dots to the abortion-breast cancer cover up.

CBS News interviewed me, but did not use the interview. If it had been used, then women might have learned too much - that six medical groups recognize the link.

CBS News journalists invited an expert, Jeanette Joyce, to their studio for an interview, but censored her credentials. Jeanette is a mammography educator, registered mammography technologist and mammography lecturer. She's spent many years researching and writing about breast cancer and breast imaging. She is on two boards of directors - the coalition's board and the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute's board.

However, CBS News only gave her first name and identified her as a breast cancer survivor who'd had an abortion. Its correspondent falsely claimed that Jeanette did not want her last name used.

Are there any other circumstances, other than when CBS is discussing the abortion-breast cancer link, that its journalists invite an expert to its studio for an interview, but do not identify that person as an expert? In the wake of the scandal involving Dan Rather's use of forged documents, one might have expected CBS to be up to higher standards of professionalism and integrity.

Action Items:

1) Distribute this document far and wide.

2) Contact CBS News at:

Ben Ferguson fergusonb@cbsnews.com

Cynthia Bowers bowersc@cbsnews.com

3) Contact the Associated Press at:

Laura Meckler lmeckler@ap.org

Sincerely, Karen Malec Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer

ABORTION-BREAST CANCER NEWS HEADLINES

"The Corruption of Science by Ideology" http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/E+MDec2004-EFurtonarticle.PDF By Ed Furton, MA, Ph.D. Ethics and Medics December 2004

#####

The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

Tax-deductible, credit card donations can be made at http://www.AbortionBreastCancer.com. Donations can be mailed to: the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, P.O. Box 957133, Hoffman Estates, IL 60195. The IRS recognizes the coalition as a 501(c)3 organization.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:

Breast Cancer Prevention Institute http://www.BCPInstitute.org

Polycarp Research Institute http://www.polycarp.org

This newsletter can be viewed online at: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/news/041129/index.htm Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer P.O. Box 957133 Hoffman Estates, IL 60195-3051

Toll Free: 877.803.0102 Local Calls: 847.421.4000 Email: response@abortionbreastcancer.com Web Page: http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com

To unsubscribe from this newsletter, click the link below: http://pub43.bravenet.com/elist/add.php?action=leave&usernum=3670259665&emailaddress=lesforlife@earthlink.net


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: abclink; abortion; angelalanfranchi; breastcancer; lanfranchi; metaanalysis; science

1 posted on 11/29/2004 11:24:16 AM PST by Lesforlife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lesforlife

Can't go letting little things like facts and the health of women get in the way of the abortion agenda now can we!


2 posted on 11/29/2004 11:32:34 AM PST by Free_at_last_-2001 (is clinton in jail yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lesforlife

Dr. Edward Furton of the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Boston...

As if I would listen to anything he has to say... A catholic with an agenda to try and force me to do things because of his beliefs...

Another lie... Not the first nor the last coming from the minions of the RCC...


3 posted on 11/29/2004 11:41:49 AM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
As if I would listen to anything he has to say... A catholic with an agenda to try and force me to do things because of his beliefs...

Never mind the facts?

Cordially,

4 posted on 11/29/2004 11:47:40 AM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lesforlife
Unfortunatly, this adds fuel to the fire that scientific issues such as Evolution are merely frauds. Global Warming and the environment is another issue where too much politics has gotten in the way of real science.

Scientists that look the other way at fraudulent "studies" are damaging their field just as the Creationists are damaging religion, and cannot see that fact for themselves. Both undermine the credibility of their work.

5 posted on 11/29/2004 12:14:17 PM PST by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diamond

I have read the facts... They remind me a lot of the RCC, trying to frighten people with false things, in one case Hell and Jesus and all the mishmash and in this case trying to frighten women with false facts on abortion...

Same modus operandi, same perps!


6 posted on 11/29/2004 12:29:08 PM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

I wonder if the increase in abortions has anything to do with the increase in breast cancer? Oh, there is no connection, yea, right, coincidence.


7 posted on 11/29/2004 12:40:46 PM PST by 1smallVoice (Clinton brought us Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 1smallVoice

Not really... Correlations never mean causation... You may for instance look at the increase in all types of cancer, the increase in life expectancy and the decrease in other illnesses' incidence because of better medecine... All these are similarly correlated to the increase in breast cancer rates...

trying to say it is because of abortion, without proof (and the studies are there to show there are no proof) is akin to trying to frighten people into believing in the Church because of an imaginary "Hell"......

No difference!


8 posted on 11/29/2004 12:44:52 PM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

If women wo got abortions got more breast cancer what would that tell you?


9 posted on 11/29/2004 12:55:39 PM PST by 1smallVoice (Clinton brought us Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 1smallVoice

Could you please explain how the eye evolved? How a blind animal knew there was something to see.


10 posted on 11/29/2004 1:02:45 PM PST by 1smallVoice (Clinton brought us Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

You are correct, correlation does not necessarily mean causation. But the issue here is that the science embodied by these studies has been systematically swept under the rug due to politics - and (as a result) very little has been done to sort out the possible causative relationship between abortion and breast cancer.

You claim that "the studies are there to show there are no proof", but I am curious about those studies - and why they are to be so much more heavily trusted than the studies that show correlation.

Also, the way you phrase your rebuttal sounds like you are claiming negative proof. Scientifically, that's a tall order.


11 posted on 11/29/2004 1:07:14 PM PST by MortMan (On ne voire bien qu'avec la coeur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

If you can not prove there is no heaven or hell, which you can not, then we are both allowed to believe whatever we want and either position is equally plausible.

If women who got abortions got more breast cancer then you would have to consider a connection.

You obviously have no children, if you did you would not be pro-abortion and anti-God.


12 posted on 11/29/2004 1:09:27 PM PST by 1smallVoice (Clinton brought us Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

Let's put that I have read the studies and compared them... the one that makes the most sense is the big european (I don't remember if it was danish or norwegian... Danish I believe) that showed no link...

But let us be honest: even if these studies showed with no doubt that there is no correlation, the RCC lobby would still peddle it... They are trying to frighten women, not convince them...

Even better: there is a clear link between post-partum depression and mania and pregnancy... So that women that become pregnant and are prone to these depressions should get abortions for their health... When did you hear the RCC speak of this?

This isn't about women's health but about trying to impose their views on the bodies of women!


13 posted on 11/29/2004 1:12:55 PM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

BTW:

its has been noted since the 17th century that nuns had a higher rate of breast cancer than other women (having children does reduce the risk)... Where were the RCC questions about it and thinking that a life of virginity was increasing the rate of illnesses? Can you quote it?


14 posted on 11/29/2004 1:19:07 PM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

Murderers often die because of their crimes.


15 posted on 11/29/2004 1:20:50 PM PST by Protagoras (People who have abortions are murderers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

I hear a voice of one whom has gotten an abortion and wants to convince themselves there was nothing wrong with that and every woman should do it too.

Animals who kill their own young are looked on as being disfunctional and demented. Women who drown their own children are prosecuted. Men who kill their pregnant wives are charged with 2 murders. Now you can make your case for abortion but it does not appear to be clear cut.


16 posted on 11/29/2004 1:21:13 PM PST by 1smallVoice (Clinton brought us Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
This isn't about women's health but about trying to impose their views on the bodies of women!

I'm not in a position to contradict you on factual terms, honestly (I don't work in this field, nor do I spend much time studying the internals of the studies), but I do find it striking that you have succinctly rephrased the exact charge being made against the "suppressed" research (suppressed in quotes to avoid arguing that aspect, BTW).

One way or the other, the data should be exposed and explored. To allow ideology to dictate otherwise - in either direction - is reckless and indefensible.

Even better: there is a clear link between post-partum depression and mania and pregnancy... So that women that become pregnant and are prone to these depressions should get abortions for their health... When did you hear the RCC speak of this?

Interesting... You are prescribing death for the unborn in order to resolve a disorder that is treatable with other means. Do you also ascribe to shooting people with broken legs? Hyperbole has little place in this discussion, IMO.

17 posted on 11/29/2004 1:21:41 PM PST by MortMan (On ne voire bien qu'avec la coeur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
Better be doing your self exams regularly.

It's kinda like looking over your shoulder all your live waiting for the homicide cop to finally catch up with you.

18 posted on 11/29/2004 1:22:35 PM PST by Protagoras (People who have abortions are murderers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 1smallVoice
I hear a voice of one whom has gotten an abortion and wants to convince themselves there was nothing wrong with that and every woman should do it too.

Yep, all over FR, spreading the word about how everyone should have an abortion. With a healthy dose of anti Christianty thrown in for good measure.

19 posted on 11/29/2004 1:24:23 PM PST by Protagoras (People who have abortions are murderers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
Correlations never mean causation...

Correlations can mean causation, but do not necessarily mean causation.

20 posted on 11/29/2004 1:27:06 PM PST by Petronski (One night in Bangkok makes a hard man humble, not much between despair and ecstasy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
So that women that become pregnant and are prone to these depressions should get abortions for their health...When did you hear the RCC speak of this?

They don't, because it is nonsense.

21 posted on 11/29/2004 1:29:31 PM PST by Petronski (One night in Bangkok makes a hard man humble, not much between despair and ecstasy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus

I think the elevating the homosexual agenda and offering free abortions are both good practices for a healthy society and do not forget about keeping God out of our schools.


22 posted on 11/29/2004 1:48:17 PM PST by 1smallVoice (Clinton brought us Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 1smallVoice

Well I am for keeping God out of public schools. because you know, before you try to say you want God in schools, we will first have to agree if it is Buddha, Jehova, Allah of Vishnu... I have no problem with abortions for those who want it...

Next?


23 posted on 11/29/2004 2:03:17 PM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
I have no problem with abortions for those who want it...

It would have been better for the world if your mother had wanted it during her pregnacy with you. It would have saved one person at least from being murdered.

Next?

Next? Like next question? OK! What was your screen name before the current one? C'mon, get some guts.

24 posted on 11/29/2004 6:29:47 PM PST by Protagoras (People who have abortions are murderers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras

The stupidest argument of the so-called "pro life" when shown they cannot frighten women...

Why amn't I surprised YOU would use it...


25 posted on 11/30/2004 6:39:50 AM PST by Pitiricus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
Oh, don't worry, you have nothing to worry about. The "pro death" people won't have to answer, in this life. Except of course when they get cancer.

Just like the butt bandits get aids and all manner of STDs. Watch yourself,,,,,, carefully.

26 posted on 11/30/2004 6:47:34 AM PST by Protagoras (People who have abortions are murderers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
Pro choice, anti gay marriage, for civil unions for gays, for a strong foreign policy and for preventive wars... Also believe firmly in the theory of Evolution and in the fact that the Bible hasn't anything to do with science!

Which means I am a moderate!

Signed....John Kerry.

27 posted on 11/30/2004 7:01:00 AM PST by Protagoras (People who have abortions are murderers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pitiricus
That sounds like an ad hominem attack to me...
28 posted on 11/30/2004 2:54:50 PM PST by conservative_crusader (Annuit Coeptis (He has smiled on our undertaking))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson