Posted on 07/21/2008 6:29:46 PM PDT by rhema
So few realize that pregnancy termination to save a woman's life was legal in all 50 states and the protectorate at the time Roe was being argued in the SCOTUS. Even the people who argued the Roe case seeking blanket approval for slaughtering the alive unborn with impugnity have admitted they lied repeatedly to influence the Court. Yet the court--in an effort to sustain the specious notion that the judges are immune to falsehoods--will not revisit the horrific mistaken ruling! Evil is always based upon lies, even when puffed up black=robed judges are the tools of that evil.
Cockroaches scurry for the shadows when a light is turned on.
Telling, indeed.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Thank you, God!
It seems our many prayers are being answered.
There is a wide range of “maternal health” from trivial to truly permanently disabling and true possible death.
I am willing to bet that a large percentage of the 2.8% fell within the range of trivial.
Before everyone gets exuberant...where did this information come from? I ride by there on my way to work and yesterday they were not closed. I prayed in front of the place daily last year. I am having a hard time believing this. Let me do some checking with things here in Sioux Falls.
Actually Des Moines is about 4 hrs away and Minneapolis is about the same...they could drive to either location if they were wanting one. The people who will be hit the most with this are those in Wyoming and Nebraska, North Dakota and eastern Montana...if this it is true that it is closing or closed. (I saw plates from these other states drive in during the past year.)
And, as a physician it doesn't strike you as strange that the murderers closed their doors on the very day the law requires them to tell women the truth, the whole, truth and nothing but the truth about killing their children and the possible aftermath??? Or are you objecting only to the fact that a rather obvious conclustion was drawn by a pro-life organixation? Contrary to your stand on the matter, I think I will stick with the pro-life folks, and condemn the murderers.
Or maybe they're just pouting and having a little temper tantrum. A "I'm going to take my ball and go home" moment. I'm sure when push comes to shove, they'll re-open their murder factories. There's money to be made!
You have incorrectly assessed my stand on this matter.
And you have replied, to the only part of my post that wasn't a direct question, but my opinion; which is based on your attacking the pro-life organization, and defending the murderers. Based purely on your post, what other conclusion could I have drawn???
And, you still haven't answered my questions, which of course is your right. But, it is also my right to ask you 'why?'
Thank you, LORD!
In this particular piece, it states that Planned Parenthood took an action because of the new law. The report did not give any response from PP. That is unseemly at best and likely yellow journalism. This practice undermines the credibility of LifeNews.
I have been following LifeNews for about a year and it seems this practice characterizes the style of this publication. They do not have to do this, especially if they want to reach beyond members of the choir. It would have been better to at least give the titular response from PP. The point would have been conveyed and LifeNews' credibility would be intact.
I am not certain that LIFENEWS is all to blame. Dr. Unruh seems to speak as if he knows, from the quote, but my question for him would be where and how he obtained the information that the reason PP in Sioux Falls was closed had anything to do with the law or a fearful doctor.
Fact: there was a sign on the door of PP that stated the office would close at 3:00pm. Fact: women were turned away by a locked door. Fact: there were a couple of women present praying in front of PP (there is question as to whether they were really sidewalk counselors with training or merely people praying).
So...to go further. After having prayed in front of PP myself for a long period of time on a regular basis, one becomes aware of the vehicles of employees, what the doctors look like when they come in, the behavior of the area (in other words, timing on cars arriving in the parking lot and leaving), and if there is a regular schedule. What I see in the article and the quote could be assumptions. Incorrect assumptions are greatly possible, and we all know what ASSUME can mean (break the word down).
PP has NOT been running on a regular schedule for the past 2 months. IF someone were there on a regular basis they would know this. They are not aborting on the same days each week, nor or they starting at the same time each day! Whether these changes are being done intentionally to give a slip to those praying and sidewalk counseling is unclear and WOULD BE speculation. But I can tell you with certainty they have not stayed with a consistant day or time schedule. Thus, someone may be assuming they were to abort on Monday, and could have been wrong...unless they were scheduled for an appointment. Do you see where this is going?
Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls, South Dakota is not closed. I am sorry to rain on the parade here and dash hopes. The fact that they closed for one day, may or may not even be related to the law coming into effect in SD. Unless someone has proof of it, and solid, it would again be speculation and not fact. Planned Parenthood is still scheduling abortions, still answering the phone and still has employees coming to work so.... I guess the only other question would be when is their next abort day? Could be Friday. The next date they are scheduling for is August 4. The other days could already be full or they are taking a vacation! WHO KNOWS!
I truly wish the truth of the matter was they were closed for good. From the bottom of my heart that has been my prayer and will remain my prayer. I am sorry to be the bearer of news that is the opposite.
It concerns me greatly that information like this is not checked into completely before it is published. It leaves a bad name and a mar on reputations. I am sure that some will leave this thread saying, well, at least the news (accurate or not) may have kept a few people away and save a few babies. Maybe, but chances are greater they will just come back in a few weeks, when they find out the truth. Bigger issue...the end does not justify the means! Is this all bad journalism, or was it set up by someone who knew the truth and shaded it a little? (rhema, this is not pointed at you by any means.) Or did someone hear only what they wanted to hear and read only what they wanted to read? "PP will be CLOSED today at 3:00pm".
Some day it will be closed permanently, however, this is not yet the day.
At any rate, thanks for the added clarification.
It was my impression from the story that they’d closed only for that day. The closure seemed unexpected, though, since the sign on the door stated a closing time of 3:00 (only for that day), but the clinic was closed all day, inconveniencing several women who had abortions scheduled for that morning and showed up to find a locked clinic. I’d say it’s a divine inconvenience; may there be many more such inconveniences in PP’s future.
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.