Strollerderby : anti choice

UPDATE: President Obama Issues Statement About Dr. George Tiller

Brett Singer — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 02:36:00 GMT

President Barack Obama has issued a statement about the murder of Dr. George Tiller:

I am shocked and outraged by the murder of Dr. George Tiller as he attended church services this morning. However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence.

Well said, Mr. President.

TheRoot.com points out: "It's fairly unusual for the White House to comment on this type of local story. But the news of Tiller's murder, allegedly by an anti-choice activist apprehended this afternoon by local and state police, has reverberated across the country in a matter of hours—and inflamed a longstanding debate about abortion rights in America."

Methinks this won't be the last we hear about the matter.

Original post follows:

*-*-*-*

Sad news from Kansas -- Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed while ushering at church. A suspect is in custody.

From Huffington Post:

WICHITA, Kansas -- Dr. George Tiller, a Kansas doctor whose clinic received national attention for performing late-term abortions, was shot to death as he entered his Wichita church on Sunday.
Tiller has been among the few U.S. physicians performing late-term abortion, making him a favored target of anti-abortion protesters. He testified that he and his family have suffered years of harassment and threats. His clinic was the site of the 1991 "Summer of Mercy" protests marked by mass demonstrations and arrests. His clinic was bombed in 1985, and an abortion opponent shot him in both arms in 1993.

Anti-abortion group Operation Rescue was no fan of Dr. Tiller; there is a "Tiller Watch" page on their web site. The group has issued a statement condemning the murder.

Tiller was recently tried for "allegedly consulting a second physician in late-term abortion cases who was not truly 'independent' as required by Kansas state law." It was a big deal case (we covered it on Strollerdery), with both sides tossing out big deal rhetoric. "Columnist Jack Cashill compared the trial to the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi war criminals, while NYU Professor Jacob Appel described Tiller as 'a genuine hero who ranks alongside Susan B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr. in the pantheon of defenders of human liberty.'" (Source for both quotes: Wikipedia)

This is an ugly end to an ugly story. Hopefully the police have the right person and they will be punished. That won't bring anyone back to life, of course. No matter what side of the abortion debate you are on, I hope you agree that shooting someone in cold blood is a horrible thing to do.

Source: Huffington Post

Image: CrooksAndLiars

Finish Line - Creepy Cakes, Sesame Street, And Much More

They Say: We Don't Know How the Hell to Treat Pregnant Women

No Hugs For You At Some High Schools

Top Cause of Death for Pregnant Women is Murder

Sonogram Cufflinks for Father's Day ... or a Pro-Life March

Designer Baby Born Without Cancer Gene

Brett Singer — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:00:00 GMT

Pop quiz: you have a history of cancer in your family. You want to have children. Science has progressed to the point where you can alter your unborn child's genetics so that they will be born without the particular gene that causes the particular type of cancer in your bloodline. What do you do?

This is no longer a hypothetical question. A baby girl was just born in Britain without the defective BRCA1 gene, which causes cancer in 50 to 85 percent of girls, according to London's Daily Mail. That gene is rampant in this particular London family, who wisely chose to remain anonymous. (No reality TV show for those two.)

When the unborn are mucked with, controversy follows. Various Pro-Life/Anti-Choice advocates, such as James Dowson of LifeLeague, are against the practice, calling it a "slippery slope…It is designer babies. Screening for cancer is an emotive issue - my own father and grandfather both had cancer, so I know - but it is a dangerous road to go down. Today it is cancer, next year it will be IQ, and the year after that blue eyes and blonde hair."

I don't like the term "designer baby". It sounds like something you create in a lab. But isn't that what doctors are doing? I realize that I'm not offering a good analysis of the science involved here. The Daily Mail article is decent, and there is lots of information online if you want to read up on it. I'm going to stick with the more parenting-related issues that come up with this story.

I'm somewhat ambivalent about the idea of genetic screening, and even more hesitant to agree with genetic manipulation. Although I'm not a scientist (I even graduated college without passing a single science class, for what that's worth) I feel strongly that doctors can't possibly know what the long-term effects are of adding and removing genes from anyone, in utero or fully-grown. Like most Jewish parents, my wife and I went through the genetic screening process when she was pregnant, but declined to know all of the information that they found. It's one thing to check and see if you are a carrier for a horrible and incurable disease such as Tay-Sachs. It's something else to find out what the chances are that your child will contract various types of cancers. We decided that we'd rather not know.

And therein lies the core of the issue – choice. If a technique is available and medically possible, it shouldn't be up to me or anyone else to decide whether or not it can be used.

My ambivalence comes from the idea of trying to create a baby with traits that you pick off of a menu of human characteristics – "I'll have the blue eyes with a hint of hazel, and a boy with a strong right leg so he can grow up to be an NFL punter like Jeff Feagles." (Hey, Jeff Feagles is one of the best punters in football. And punters can play longer than any other position in the game because they don't get hit much.) This may sound silly, but I've read enough comic books and seen enough movies to know that messing around with genetics rarely ends well. Eventually some lunatic – Hitler, perhaps – decides to create a Master Race of Super Soldiers and starts World War III. Hm, maybe it's not just a comic book thing.

As with abortion, this is a religious issue. Conservative British politician Ann Widdecombe said, "'A lot of embryos have genes in them that could lead to nothing but them turning into perfectly healthy humans. Once again this shows a worrying precedent that man wants to play God."

This is the argument that nobody ever makes when it comes to the death penalty. But that's a different story.

What do you think? Is this just another issue of personal choice and women's reproductive freedom? Or is it more dangerous? And even if it is more dangerous, does anyone have the right to tell someone not to do it?

Source: Daily Mail

They Say: Smoking While Pregnant Makes Kids Aggressive

Mother Sues OB Who Said She "Deserved Pain"—And Gave It to Her

Most Tasteless Tree Ornament Ever

Tell Obama to Overturn the Global Gag Rule Sooner Rather Than Later

Woman Arrested For Breast Feeding At A Bar

A Quiverfull Of Kids

Brett Singer — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:00:00 GMT

I learned a new word today – Quiverfull.

According to a blog entry on Sodahead.com (doesn't sound very impressive but hey, let's take our new words where we can get them), "Quiverfull…is a growing movement of Protestants" who believe that "since children are blessings from God, we should receive as many as God will give." Therefore, no birth control. The Duggar family is about to have their 18th child, and they are a quiverfull family.

The best line from the Sodahead post is, "I'm not sure how to tell the difference between a husband who wants sex and God saying that it's time to put another bun in the oven." I imagine that someone who has a strong faith in God would say that it's all the same thing – that is, if daddy wants some and that leads to another baby, then it was all God's will. (No, I am not a theologian.) The comments on the post bring up a host of issues ranging from whether or not it's responsible to bring children into the world willy-nilly to abortion rights.

The quiverfull movement takes the following Biblical passage literally:

Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one’s youth.
Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them.

If I may be flippant for a moment, let's analyze this passage.

"Happy is the man" – well sure, he's not the one who has to change all of those diapers! (Well, in my house he is. But remember, I'm being flippant.) And since the quiver in question is, in fact, the type that arrows are stored in, how many babies can one really fit into a quiver? Here's a quiver for sale at Amazon.com that measures 13 x 3 x 2 inches. According to this site the average length of a newborn baby is 20 inches. I don't think you could fit more than one kid in a quiver.

Now, I apologize if that offends anyone, that's not my intention. But it does illustrate something that I find difficult to understand about the quiverfull movement. If you are taking this particular Biblical passage literally, well, put the kids in a quiver! And if not, then you really AREN'T taking the passage literally. Right?

Personally I think there is some validity to the argument made by many commenters on Sodahead that having that many children is a bit selfish and irresponsible. I respect other people's religious beliefs. But is there a point when those beliefs start to negatively impact the rest of the world? On the other hand, this isn't China. Everyone is entitled to have as many kids as they want to. Or, depending on your beliefs, that God wants you to. For me, two is enough; now that I’m a parent, "Eight is Enough" is basically a horror film. (I kid, of course.)

Do people with tons of kids bother you? Or is it none of our business?

Source: Sodahead

Image: People via Babble

Indiana Planned Parenthood Sells Gift Certificates

The Birth of the Duggar’s 18th Child Will be Televised

Mini Baby Sculptures Not Edible, Selling Like Hotcakes

Are You Cutting Back This Holiday Season?

Things You Should Never Say To A Nursing Mother

Hillary Clinton on Repro Rights

Brett Singer — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:00:00 GMT

Hillary Clinton (actually, its Hillary Rodham Clinton again; not sure if she used the middle name while she was still a Presidential candidate) and Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood had an Op-Ed piece in the Times a couple of days ago that I thought would be of interest.

The Op-Ed discusses, "a proposed rule from the Department of Health and Human Services that would…require that any health care entity that receives federal financing — whether it’s a physician in private practice, a hospital or a state government — certify in writing that none of its employees are required to assist in any way with medical services they find objectionable. Laws that have been on the books for some 30 years already allow doctors to refuse to perform abortions. The new rule would go further, ensuring that all employees and volunteers for health care entities can refuse to aid in providing any treatment they object to, which could include not only abortion and sterilization but also contraception."

A clear definition of abortion is left out, which means it is open to the interpretation of the health care provider. "The Bush administration argues that the rule is designed to protect a provider’s conscience. But where are the protections for patients?"

"The 30-day comment period on the proposed rule runs until Sept. 25," which is just a couple of days away. If you feel strongly about this issue, call your Senator or Congressperson.

Source: NYTimes

Strollerderby : anti choice

UPDATE: President Obama Issues Statement About Dr. George Tiller

California School District Approves So-Called Gay Curriculum

Finish Line - Creepy Cakes, Sesame Street, And Much More

They Say: We Don't Know How the Hell to Treat Pregnant Women

No Hugs For You At Some High Schools

Top Cause of Death for Pregnant Women is Murder

Sonogram Cufflinks for Father's Day ... or a Pro-Life March

Designer Baby Born Without Cancer Gene

More News About Missing Child Adam Herrman

They Say: Smoking While Pregnant Makes Kids Aggressive

Mother Sues OB Who Said She "Deserved Pain"—And Gave It to Her

Most Tasteless Tree Ornament Ever

Tell Obama to Overturn the Global Gag Rule Sooner Rather Than Later

Woman Arrested For Breast Feeding At A Bar

A Quiverfull Of Kids

Rite Aid Says They Will Stop Selling Expired Baby Products

Indiana Planned Parenthood Sells Gift Certificates

The Birth of the Duggar’s 18th Child Will be Televised

Mini Baby Sculptures Not Edible, Selling Like Hotcakes

Are You Cutting Back This Holiday Season?

Things You Should Never Say To A Nursing Mother

Hillary Clinton on Repro Rights

McCain, Palin oppose teen pregnancy aid and sex education

UPDATE: Tainted Milk Tally tops 50,000

Arkansas Evangelist's compound raided, six children removed

Preventing Teen Pregnancy, One Tick at a Time

Second Best for the Hard-to-Adopt?

Abortion Blogger Gives Liberal Parents a Bad Name

Babies R Us tells breastfeeding mother to get out

Mom leaves kids in a Jersey parking lot

Teaching Evolution as Theory not fact

They Say: no link between autism and measles vaccine