“Haunted” Photos of Woman Who Filmed Own Abortion

Elizabeth Scalia writes about the abortion video of the woman I mentioned earlier:

If you let yourself become distracted by what is coming from her mouth, you miss all that is revealed in her face, which tells the whole, and very different story. A month after the abortion — with the dramatic change in hairstyle that so many women effect when emotions are high and they need to feel in control of something — watch Emily, then. The light is gone from her eyes. The seeming disconnect between pc-fed head and instinctive heart is laid out in breathtaking and stark incongruity, even down to the shadows, the blue note, the lack of energy. Devastating. Cognizant of it or not, she is a mother in grief.

Here’s what she’s talking about.  Though I’m not going to link to her video, here are screen shots of her before and after she aborted her own child:

Elizabeth has some insight into this:

What this young woman now knows — what resonates so clearly in her assertion that if her house were afire, she would grab the sonogram of her extinguished baby, and run — is that when she consented to kill her baby, she killed a very real piece of herself.

Even after a woman delivers a baby, or miscarries, or aborts, there remains within her, for the rest of her life, microscopic bits of her child — of each child she has ever conceived. Look up microchimerism and you will understand there is no such thing as “getting rid” of one’s baby, only of stopping it’s life and disposing of it, while carrying it within one’s very blood and sinew, forever.

A body is made of living tissue and living tissue has memory. Pretty it up on video however you like, the insertion of a vacuum into a woman’s body and the perpetration a violent, limb-shredding execution within the deep recesses of her womb cannot help but reverberate like dark energy, throughout the woman’s body, mind and soul. You want to grab a sonogram of the baby you killed because the living part of that baby, still residing within you, is calling out for more of you, all of you.

What a horrific, nightmarish way to have to live, and she is so young; actuarial tables suggest she will live for a very long time. No wonder she looks so very haunted.

Read more on the Patheos Faith and Family Channel, fan me on Facebook and follow this blog on Twitter!

  • dr. woo

    Some here will hoping for her death soon enough.

  • Tess46

    When she matures, perhaps even has a family in the future, she will wonder about her child and what might have been.

  • Cedric Marc Klein

    I would like this to be true- to think that the after picture is an honest glimpse of a soul who eventually will surrender to Jesus. Alas, I suspect it just happens to be a variance of expression that doesn’t mean anything. I didn’t watch her video but I did read her article, and the next dictionary should have her picture next to the word “vacuous”.

  • Jerry Lee

    I don’t believe that the two photos are the same woman. The hair color isn’t close to being similar, and you have no idea what the woman on the right was talking or thinking about to make that expression.

    • MissHetha

      You might want to watch the video then, and see for yourself what she was talking about ….

  • Bhgy

    Rather than read Elizabeth’s ” insight ” into it, you should read what Emily herself has to say. Sounds like Elizabeth doesn’t have a clue what she’s talking about.

    http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/05/07/emily-letts-abortion-video-philly-actress-cosmopolitan/

    • dr. woo

      BBC also has an interview.

      • Bhgy

        People like Elizabeth , the writer of Bristol blog and Prolifers in general like people to think every woman regrets having an abortion when that’s not the case. They want woman to be publicly shamed ( earlier post applauding Mayweather’s childish antics is an example) and obviously don’t want something like this out there.

        • Kyle Bradelle

          The women I know who have had abortions all regret them bitterly. Some regretted the abortion immediately, others gave in because they felt they had no choice. A few never blinked an eye–until later in life. But people live a long time. Every one lives with regrets, but this particular regret is so avoidable. If you don’t want kids, be careful, be prudent, be intentional, and don’t conceive them.

          • Bhgy

            I know woman who don’t regret theirs.

          • Michelle Pack

            Are you one of them?

            Again…presence of regret or not does not justify the killing act.

        • edawg90 .

          the shame comes from your own action, dipshit…We pity you re-re’s because until the day you die you will be haunted by what you did.

          • Bhgy

            What I did? Sounds like you’re assuming I have had an abortion. I haven’t by the way.

            And that’s quite a way you have about you. How’s that working out for you in real life?

    • Jacqueline Gilmore Estrella

      I couldn’t watch the video, any more than I could watch a lynching. But I read Emily Lett’s narrative, and was appalled. You see, if she took birth control pills, they would make her gain weight….(first time I’ve heard of abortion as a diet aid). I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed such a desperate and selfish way to gain attention and fame in my life. And Cosmopolitan featured her as an abortion counselor, and praised her courage. After that, I consider that magazine as Nazi lite reading material. What’s next; an abortion on Mother’s Day? I’m sure some wing nut would have one just for the attention. This photo is of someone saving their baby with surgery. She chose life.

    • bash0001

      It’s easy to lie. . .

      • Bhgy

        Yes, I suppose for some people like Elizabeth it is , especially if you think it’s fir a good cause.

        • bash0001

          The eyes are incapable of hiding lies.

  • Guest

    The same face can be seen on mothers after childbirth, adoption, 2 am feelings, beating your unwanted child…aren’t we lucky we live in a nation where we have a choice and don’t get judged by others…oh wait! Well, at least we have a choice; aren’t we lucky.

    • Matthew Stump

      I think you missed the point. She claimed the abortion was no big deal and doesn’t cause problems. What a choice…to end a babies life.

      • Angela Marien

        It’s not ending a baby’s life…it’s not even a life until it takes it’s first breath. Who are you to judge or decide what a woman does with her body. Some Catholics believe when men masturbate, it’s a sin, killing of potential children. Are you a murderer? Not my place to judge you or anyone.

        • Vicki M Booth

          Apparently you are very unaware of human biology. A baby’s heart beats at 6 weeks after conception. It’s a life way before it takes its first breath. Or were your babies dead (not a life) up to the point you gave birth? By saying you have a choice (free will given by God) to murder a baby in the womb, what you are actually saying is that you believe you should have the right to usurp God’s authority. He is the author of life, not you.

          • Angela Marien

            Legally, you are alive when you are born. That is when your age starts to advance. You don’t come out being 9 or 10 months old. Hey, I chose to plan and give birth to two babies. I did not chose to murder them, so don’t judge me. I am just willing to let others make their own choice and be judged by their higher power. So do come down on me so self righteously. I don’t think I should have the right to murder anyone.

          • Tex Dyess

            Legally it is against the law to walk backwards and eat a donut in Columbus OH. That doesnt mean the law is accurate. Doctors legally determine death when a persons heart stops beating. LEGALLY that is the determination of death. So when the heart starts beating, it is by all scientific purposes alive.

          • Bhgy

            Tex, ” by all scientific purposes” it is not alive. There are several points that can be argued scientifically as the beginning of life. Conception is just one of them. Don’t confuse science with religious belief.

          • Michelle Pack

            He didn’t use religion. Obviously your entire viewpoint is going to be laced with a rant against a God you say doesn’t exist.

            If the unborn child is not alive, the OB tells you they have died. Even abortionists and many prominent abortion supporters themselves freely admit the unborn are alive and abortion kills.

            Don’t confuse your ignorance with biological facts.

          • edawg90 .

            sounds like Angela is trying to appease her guilty conscience from killing her own unborn child

          • Michelle L. MacLean

            Oh…good to know we’re only alive if the government says we are. Do you have any idea of how many people are mistakenly declared dead by the government? And you’re saying that when that happens you’re no longer alive because the government says so? And BTW, many Native Americans count your age from the time of conception….so does that mean that THEY are alive before birth?

          • Michelle Pack

            Choice to do what? Kill their child at their mercy in their womb?

            Life isn’t determined by a legal paper stating your age AFTER the birth event. You think you did not exist or were alive until after you hit air in the delivery room? Do you have biological proof of that? No. You have a pro-killing opinion void of any biological reality.

            You are judging others while telling them not to judge you. Kind of hypocritical. :)

        • anonymous

          “Thou shalt not KIll” God. He is the Juge and jury and He will judge according to what she did. She murdered her daughter.

        • Diana1511

          It’s not even alive until it takes it’s first breath? Why do they have a heart beat? Why do they grow? Only living beings and living plants grow. When a woman has an abortion, the abortionist is ripping her baby limb from limb not her body. You can’t even use science to back up your argument. All you pro- aborts do is make up excuses to justify abortion. Science, technology, reason, TRUTH is all on the pro- lifers side. This is not a religious issue, it is not a women’s rights issue this is a human rights issue. A woman has no right to impose her beliefs on her unborn child. Aborting an unborn child is not killing potential children. It is killing children with potential. Great difference. The abortion industry is loosing big because the youth is using the Internet to inform themselves about abortion not just follow the abortion industry like sheep as many of you do. I hope one day you get your head out of the sand and stop justifying the barbaric murder of unborn children.

        • Michelle L. MacLean

          So then what’s the problem? Why do you need an abortion? Only living things grow. If it’s not alive, it will not grow…don’t worry about it.

        • Michelle Pack

          There is so much ignorance in that post I don’t even know where to begin! Sperm are not bilogically defined as human beings. At fertilization, biologically a new, living organism and biologically defined human being comes into existence. Everything about that human is determined at that time. Gender, eye color, hair color, etc.

          No woman aborts “her body”. Abortion at its core is about ANOTHER human body.

          Expert testimony from Senate judiciary subcommittee
          EXPERT TESTIMONY RELATING TO LIFE’S BEGINNING
          In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981):

          “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

          Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
          Harvard University Medical School

          “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

          Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
          Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

          “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

          Dr. Jerome LeJeune
          Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

          “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

          Professor Hymie Gordon
          Mayo Clinic

          “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

          Dr. Watson A. Bowes
          University of Colorado Medical School

          The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

          “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

        • Michelle Pack

          So if you strangle a baby as they are being born, break their necks, suction their brains out, or snip their spinal cords…before this magical first breath into the lungs…you think they were never alive and that was not a killing? Try to produce a biology reference for that crap!

          Planned Parenthood 1964 ad – “An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun”

          http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2261931/posts

      • anonymous

        Personally, I believe she is as good as dead. I think she will reap what she has sown and will take her own life in a cowardly act of suicide.

        • Guest

          Who made you judge and jury?

          • anonymous

            Who made you judge and jury?

          • edawg90 .

            you mean the judge and jury to kill an unborn child? You have apparently…dumbass

          • Michelle L. MacLean

            Are you developmentally disabled? She didn’t say the woman WILL take her own life because she so deems it (which would be her acting as jury and judge)…she said she THINKS she will, implying the reason will be out of painful regret. Hmmm….are YOU that woman??

        • Bhgy

          Wow Isabel. It sounds like you relish the thought.

          Did it ever occur to you how many women out there went on to happy lives after an abortion and even had children? I suppose many of them wonder what if and then look to their children and think well, these ones would likely not be here.

          • anonymous

            No, I just relish the truth. This happens quite often after abortion. The woman kills herself in her grief that can not be consoled. There may be some who go on to have other children but how do they reconcile that these children grow in a womb where a gruesome bloody murder took place and where their mother is the murderer of their siblings? Just how does a mother who killed her child ever escape her own body which will forever be the scene of a gruesome attack and murder of an innocent child? Do you know?

        • Jaime Jimenez

          She will have a child one day and understand the joy of being a mother.

    • Ron

      Sick. Very sick.

      • Guest

        Take some meds and get over your self righteous self.

        • https://www.facebook.com/THESQUATCHINGPOST Ronald Murphy

          Maybe you should give the meds up and take a look at your self in the mirror. Who gave you the right to decide when a life begins? Talk about being self righteous.

          • Guest

            Who gave you the right?

          • Ron

            Let’s see…Scripture, which says this:

            Jeremiah 1:5a:
            Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
            and before you were born I consecrated you;

            We have a right to agree with God about when life begins. And He says it begins at conception. He also says that every person, born or pre-born, was planned by Him in advance.

            On this point, we’re not saying anything new. This information has been around for thousands of years.

            We also have a right to agree with Science, which has proven irrefutably that at the very moment of conception, a unique human being is created, with a unique DNA fingerprint that will never be repeated. Science also tells us that by the fifth week of the gestation period, the heart starts beating and divides into chambers.

            This is new information. And as a society of progress, we are compelled to assimilate and adapt to new information as it becomes available.

            And that new information is conclusive: abortion, at all stages of gestation, results in the death of a unique human being who has as much right to life as you or me. Therefore, abortion is murder. End of argument.

            You’re welcome to rebut, but seriously…don’t rehash the lame arguments from the left. They are all without merit, and have all been discredited and soundly refuted.

          • Bhgy

            It’s your personal religious belief Ron. And scientists do not have consensus on when life begins.

          • Ron

            They do have consensus on the points which I made. Any “scientist” which cannot grasp the very simple concepts which I pointed out, is not worthy to be called a scientist. The points I made are enough for any clear-thinking, sane person to conclude that human life begins at conception. We don’t need religion to prove this.

            Where what you’re calling “religion” comes into play (Christianity is NOT a religion; it’s a relationship), is in proving the infinite VALUE of every unique human life. Human life is valuable because the Creator of the universe — before Whom we ALL (including you) will be required to stand and give an account of our lives, our every thought, our every action — that Creator SAYS it is valuable. What HE says is THE TRUTH. You don’t get to dismiss that, because without it, I can do anything I want to you, even take your life, and you have no valid argument against it. As long as I don’t fear punishment from men, I can do anything I want — but God has the power to punish me eternally. And He says, “Do NOT commit murder.” So you had better be thankful for my “religion.”

            My “religion” commands me to love you, even though I detest the murder you’re condoning. My “religion” commands me to be civilized toward you, when those who practice other (false) religions would simply chop off your head, shoot you, or blow you to pieces. A wise, prudent and sane person would be very thankful for my “religion.”

          • Bhgy

            Well Ron, if you don’t see the value in human life and being a good person without God, then it’s probably a good think you believe in him.

            And no, scientists do not have consensus on when life begins. But you believe it begins at conception. Just as you believe God created the universe and he lives up in heaven and angels live up there too. That’s okay.

          • Ron

            As I said, scientists agree on the points which I made. And it’s not difficult to arrive at the conclusion that human life begins at conception, from only those points which I made. Don’t twist my words. Whether the person can survive on their own is of zero importance. You have the blueprint for a human being which, if not murdered, will grow, be born, and potentially live a long life. Hopefully spending time helping others.

            You mentioned the ridiculous idea of being a “good person” (without God). This totally ignores human nature. There is no such thing as a “good person”, only a self-righteous and deceived person.

            God’s take on the subject:
            Jeremiah 17:9-10:
            9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? 10 I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

            Isaiah 64:6:
            But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

            I’m sorry, but if you’re trusting in your own good works to make you a “good person”, you’ll be in for quite a shock on judgment day. Not a good situation to be in.

            No, Scripture is clear. We have no righteousness of our own. Only when we turn from our sin, change our thinking, realize that we are spiritual paupers and helpless to save ourselves, turn to Christ, put our trust in Him…then we are clothed in His perfect righteousness. Our sins are forgotten, never to be remembered again. Every bad thought, evil deed…washed away. You can have that peace of mind. The just penalty for our sins was paid on the Cross. Don’t live one more day without that payment being applied to your sins. Turn to Christ, and be saved.

            Thank you for opening the door for me to share the Gospel message. If you want to learn more, go to livingwaters.com. They have a ton of resources for you there.

          • Bhgy

            No point quoting scripture or warning about Judgement Day Ron to someone who doesn’t believe in God. Good to know…..

            And on a science basis there are five points at which life coukd be argued to begin. Conception is only one of them.

            And like I said, if you think humans need to believe in god to be good and do the right thing, then it’s a good thing you believe in god. And it’s too bad so many who believe in god and aren’t good people. Funny, some of the kindest, most giving, good hearted, empathetic people I know are agnostic.

          • Michelle Pack

            On what basis exactly do you form what is good or bad? Moral relativism destroys itself. Who are you to say what is good and what is bad on any given topic?

            Expert testimony from Senate judiciary subcommittee
            EXPERT TESTIMONY RELATING TO LIFE’S BEGINNING
            In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981):

            “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
            Harvard University Medical School

            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
            Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

            “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune
            Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

            “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon
            Mayo Clinic

            “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes
            University of Colorado Medical School

            The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

          • Michelle Pack

            Expert testimony from Senate judiciary subcommittee
            EXPERT TESTIMONY RELATING TO LIFE’S BEGINNING
            In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981):

            “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
            Harvard University Medical School

            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
            Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

            “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune
            Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

            “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon
            Mayo Clinic

            “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes
            University of Colorado Medical School

            The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

          • Michelle Pack
        • Tex Dyess

          I agree its a womans RIGHT to kill that thing she is carrying inside her! Its a growth till its born. Nevermind that it has a heartbeat, and will someday have potential and a life. That thing may be alive, by that fact there is no denying, but if you think it is self righteous to be against killing it, hell, who am I to argue. By the way, in case you couldnt figure it out, yes… I am being sarcastic.

          • Guest

            Not even worth it.

        • Michelle L. MacLean

          How is saying this is sick being ‘self righteous’? If you say abusing kids, or abusing animals, beating the crap out of someone because you’re mad at them, etc. etc. etc. – is sick are you being self righteous? Freedom of choice or not, abortion is murder. And murdering innocent children – in the womb or out of it – is sick. Get over YOURself and stop being self centered! One would think by your comments that you are feeling very guilty about murdering your own child. Sorry to inform you, but everyone in the world could tell you that you weren’t wrong for doing it and you’d still hurt over it….because you lost something and you know it was wrong!

        • Ron

          There is nothing self-righteous about following Christ, or calling evil out for what it is. There is, however, something quite self-righteous about condemning someone for calling out evil. Therefore, ironically, I must recommend that you heed your own advice. Oh…and stop trolling. If you have something to say, at least use your real name. Cowardly.

    • anonymous

      My joy could not be contained after giving birth to my children. You know, the Muslims have a choice too. They can legally murder their wives, daughters and slaves (usually underage girls). No legal consequenses will be imposed upon them because it is considered merely a legal choice. Now, tens of thousands of women and children are dead because of this legal choice to abort these women’s lives. You are pro choice though so rejoice!

      • Guest

        It is my choice what I do with my body. I chose to have two happy healthy boys. My point is, I had the choice. I was not made to give them up, abort them, or murder them. I was adopted and am thankful that my birth mother had the choice to put me up for adoption and was not made to abort me or raise me in poverty. It’s all about choices, not murder. So I do rejoice in the fact. Bristol Palin had a choice. She chose to keep her baby. Her mother stated that! Good for her and I applaud her choice. The fact is she had a choice and she chose what was best for her. I do not judge her for that and I should not be judged for liking my freedom of choice.
        God gave us free will and it should not be taken away by self righteous judgmental people who have never had to make the choice.

        • anonymous

          But, it is not your body that is torn limb by limb in a gruesome act of torture. It is not your body (most of the time) that is killed. It is anothers body that is gruesomely attacked and savagely dismembered in an abortion murder. It is the body of another person, another human being. Presently, there are two hundred and thirty girls who’s existence depends on the will of terrorists. They can be sold, or killed at the hands of terrorists. In abortion, the mother is a terorist. She decids, just like the terrorists who lives and who dies. However, she will always be a terrorist and a failed mother.

          • Tex Dyess

            And I totally agree with you Isabel. It is not her body being destroyed. It is a helpless baby. No doubt.

          • Bhgy

            Tex, it sounds like you need to make sure your partner feels the same as you before you have sex.

          • Michelle Pack

            You say that like women have not aborted for revenge or to hide infidelity. Do you have a crystal ball to predict the actions of your sex partner for life? No.

            http://observer.ug/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=31167:women-increasingly-aborting-behind-their-husbands-backs

            Years ago we had one woman post who said she aborted her child several months in because she knew she’d get caught for infidelity if she had the child. Her and her husband were white, her affair was with a back man.

          • Bhgy

            Sounds like Tex better be extra careful
            Then since its not his choice

          • Michelle Pack

            The “choice” to do what exactly? Kill?

            Was slavery okay when it was legal just because someone slapped a propaganda label like “choice” on it?

            Can you defend your pro-killing, pro-abortion stance without the bumper sticker “choice”? Obviously not.

        • Tex Dyess

          I agree it is a choice whether you want to be a mom or not. Question. Why dont men have a choice whether they want to be a dad or not? If a man chooses not to be a Dad, he is labeled a dead beat! You dont like a woman being labeled a murderer by exercising her choice, shouldnt it be a 2 way street? Just sayin…

          • Guest

            You do have a choice. Keep it zipped.

          • edawg90 .

            then you have a choice…keep them closed. BOOM!

          • Bhgy

            Because the woman endures the pregnancy and birth Tex. Its her body. That and the connection formed during pregnancy is different than the mans role. He really does nothing until after the baby is born. And sadly too often, he does nothing or too little. So….. If you feel strongly aboit abortion, it us up to you to make sure your partner feels the same before you have sex.

          • Michelle Pack

            Her body is not killed in the abortion procedure. Another human being and body is however. BE TRUTHFUL.

        • Michelle Pack

          Choice to do what EXACTLY? Kill your unborn child or not? That is not justified simply because you slapped a proabortion propaganda bumper sticker slogan on it. Even Planned Parenthood abandoned the “cjoice” slogan last January in 2013. Look it up.

          FYI… No woman has ever aborted “her body”. “Her body” is not at the core of the abortion issue. ANOTHER human body is.

          You said “choice” 12 times in that short snippet you wrote. Keep clinging to the propaganda slogan. It still won’t justify your killing stance.

      • Guest

        I like how you lump all the Muslims into one group. I happen to know several Muslim families who do not and have never killed family females. Not all Muslims are alike and not all conservative Christians are either. Thank God!

      • Bhgy

        Here comes Isabel with her rant against Muslims. Do you know any Muslims Isabel?

      • Moviesforlife

        You’re a bigot by the way.

        • anonymous

          You’re a racist.

    • peaches

      Her voice, face, affect were that of a sad woman. New mothers up with 2am feedings are tired, not sad. I can’t judge her, but I can judge her actions, and killing is evil.

      • Guest

        Those suffering from PPD sure are sad. Guess you wouldn’t know.

        • edawg90 .

          those who kill their unborn children are sad too…pathetisad

    • dginga

      Just curious: What do you care if anonymous people on a website judge you? Obviously you don’t care if God judges you one day, why concern yourself with the opinions of a bunch of people you will never know? Clearly you are comfortable with the idea (if not the reality) of abortion. Why isn’t that enough for you? Why does everyone else have to agree with you? I thought that’s what being pro-choice was about. You can choose to abort your kids and I can choose not to.

    • Michelle Pack

      Choice to do what EXACTLY? Have the unborn offspring at your mercy killed at your whim?

  • anonymous

    Before the abortion, she was a mother. After the abortion, she was a murderer.

    • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpZHUjKnDpE Roomba

      Before the nephrectomy, she was a mother. After the nephrectomy, she was a murderer.

      • CattyK

        Neph-rec-to-my?? I’m a Christian… I can’t count that high.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpZHUjKnDpE Roomba

    This is some crazy-ass shit. “I can’t find any internal conflict so I’ll make some up based on a couple frames of this video she posted”.

    Good luck with your spectres and superstitions. The rest of us will continue living in the real world.

    • Tex Dyess

      TROLL

    • edawg90 .

      there is no real world with liberals. You idiots live in some delusional realm with unicorns and rainbows…

      • Bhgy

        That’s kind of funny coming from someone who believes in God.

        • Michelle Pack
          • Bhgy

            You’re trying to argue that edawg90 doesn’t believe in God????Careful there sparky……

          • Michelle Pack

            I was showing *you* that all against abortion are not religious. It flew right over your prokilling, anti-God head. Why do proabortion people like yourself always bring up God when the one posting doesn’t?

            The poster said, /// −

            edawg90 . GiveBackOurPublicDomain • 18 hours ago
            there is no real world with liberals. You idiots live in some delusional realm with unicorns and rainbows…
            15 • Reply•Share › ///

            Where Is the mention of God there? You attack people for a belief in God in posts where they do not even MENTION God in any way, because you obviously cannot focus and actually defend what you support in abortion. It is a maneuver used to try to deflect. Nice try Sparky, but fail.

          • Bhgy

            Sorry, the fail is yours. Edawg has mentioned soul and judgement day in comments. Pretty safe bet he believes in God. Don’t believe me? Click his name.

            Too funny Michelle.

          • Michelle Pack

            The fail will ultimately be yours when you see one day they were right. Keep on laughing.

            You obviously do not realize ON THIS TOPIC there are also atheists, pagans, secularists and agnostics AGAINST ABORTION, correct? Keep attacking a God you don’t believe in though to justify killing in abortion.. It is very telling on how weak your position is in reality.

          • feedsthecorgi

            Bhgy is getting more and more desparate Michelle. Grasping at straws, spewing & ranting, being patronizing…he/she displays his frustration this way. Guessing this is someone who is trying to legitimize their abortion, or perhaps paid for someone to get one…or someone in the “health care” field that assists with abortions.

  • Melannie Cox

    she should have kept her dam legs closed bitches like this disgust me!

    • wagnerfilm

      Women who are misogynistic towards other women disgust me.

      • edawg90 .

        retarded liberals who come to conservative blogs to troll disgust me…

      • Diana1511

        The fact that you pretend to care about women disgusts me. You are trying to portray yourself as an intelligent individual but the fact that you are a pro – abort means you desperately need to pick up a biology book. No science can back up your argument. You pretending to care about children already born disgusts me. Pro – aborts claimed child abuse was going to drop dramatically after abortion became legalized, it didn’t, in fact it is now worst. Parents are killing their new babies and toddlers in record numbers and it’s all no thanks to the abortion mentality. These people don’t respect life and think their children are disposable. Inside the womb outside the womb, what’s the difference? It’s a mentality fueled by pure selfishness.

        • Ken Witherell

          Thank you Miss Diana.

        • Bhgy

          Diana, your belief against a portion is not s I emcee based. And oh, please tell us where you got this link between abortion and child abuse.

          • Michelle Pack

            http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/11/prweb311414.htm

            New Study Links Abortion to Increased Risk of Child Abuse

            Authors Say Emotional Healing After Abortion
            Will Increase Likelihood of “Violence Free” Families
            Springfield, IL (October 24, 2005)

            — A new study published in the medical journal Acta Paediatrica has found that women who have had an abortion are 2.4 times more likely to physically abuse their children.

            The study, led by Priscilla Coleman of Bowling Green State University, looked at data taken from a survey of 518 low-income women in Baltimore who were receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children and who had at least one child aged 12 years or younger. The data compared rates of child abuse and neglect among women who had experienced either an involuntary (miscarriage or stillbirth) or voluntary (induced abortion) pregnancy loss.

            The results showed that women with a history of one induced abortion were 2.4 times more likely to physically abuse their children than women who had not had an abortion. In addition, the increase in risk among women who had experienced an abortion was more significant than the increase among women who had experienced a miscarriage or stillbirth.

            The authors suggested that “emotional difficulties and unresolved grief responses” from pregnancy loss, whether voluntary or involuntary, could have a negative impact on women’s mental health and lead to unhealthy parenting responses. Past studies have linked pregnancy loss to an increase in grief reactions, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, all of which can have a negative impact on parent/child relationships.

            In addition, induced abortion has been linked to an increased risk of substance abuse and suicidal thoughts, and a 2002 study published in the Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology found that children whose mothers had a history of abortion tended to have less supportive home environments and more behavioral difficulties.

            The current study showed that although a single involuntary pregnancy loss did not significantly increase the risk of child abuse or neglect, physical abuse was more common among women who had experienced multiple involuntary pregnancy losses. However, women who had repeat abortions were not more likely to abuse their children than women who had one abortion, although abortion increased the risk of physical abuse overall.

            In addition, neither form of pregnancy loss was linked to child neglect, leading the authors to speculate that mothers with unresolved losses may be able to “go through the motions” of meeting their children’s basic needs but have difficulty coping with issues such as anger or parent/child conflict.

            “Regardless of the specific mechanisms at play, maternal history of one induced abortion does appear to be a marker for increased risk of physical abuse,” the authors wrote.

            They also noted that while emotional difficulties related to miscarriage or stillbirth are usually resolved within a few years, women who have abortions are often not given an opportunity to resolve feelings of grief or other related emotions. According to Elliot Institute director Dr. David Reardon, who has worked on more than a dozen published studies documenting abortion’s negative impact on women, many women either feel a need to keep the abortion a secret or are told to simply “move on” when they try to discuss their pain.

            Reardon said that greater attention needs to be focused on the long-term effects of abortion on women and their families.

            “The common perception seems to be that abortion solves the immediate problem of a crisis pregnancy and that therefore it must be a positive thing for women,” he said. “However, more and more studies such as this one show that abortion can have a severe and lasting impact on women’s lives, shaping their futures and the futures of their families for years to come.”

            The current study is one of the first to compare rates of child abuse among women who had experienced an involuntary pregnancy loss as opposed to those who experienced a voluntary loss. However, the authors noted that the findings were limited by the size of the study and called for more research to be done using larger groups of women.

            “In the event that such a large scale effort yields robust findings consistent with those described … more efforts should be directed toward helping women restore their emotional health following abortion,” the authors wrote. “Investment in such programs is likely to improve the quality of their lives and increase the likelihood that their future families will be violence free.”

            ###

            Study Citation:

            Priscilla K. Coleman, Charles D. Maxey, Vincent M. Rue, and Catherine T. Coyle, “Associations between voluntary and involuntary forms of perintal loss and child maltreatment among low-income mothers,” Acta Paediatrica 94, 2005.

          • Bhgy

            Seriously? A PR web piece written by a Prolife group about a flawed study published by Priscilla Coleman, a pro life advocate who regularly conducts “research” with “Dr.” David Reardon of the lofty sounding Elliott ” Institute”. Seriously?

          • Michelle Pack

            I bet you quote Planned Parenthood and Guttmacher Institute (for example) though…right?

            And again:

            Legal abortion was supposed to reduce the incidence of child abuse, since fewer “unwanted” children would be born. Yet government data shows that between 1977 and 1998, when our policy of abortion on demand was in effect, the child population grew by 8.8% while child abuse rose by 259%.

            U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 103rd through 121st editions,Washington, D.C.: 1982 through 2003.

            Why is there so much more child abuse when abortion was sold as preventing all those “unwanted” children?

            Abortion IS child abuse in the womb.

            I can give you direct links to survivors missing one or more limbs, injured, disabled, disfigured, and even who suffered slow deaths from injuries lasting years…tell us again abortion is not child abuse so you can look like a massive hypocrite.

          • Bhgy

            Did it not occur to you Michelle that the number of REPORTED cases of abuse could rise without a corresponding rise in abuse? That’s one possibility. Again correlation is not causation. Do you know anything about research? It seems not.

          • Michelle Pack

            I don’t know anything about research?! That is cute.

            http://www.springpad.com/michellepack

            That is an app I got a few months ago to start compiling my referenced research within and can share online for starters. I also admin on 5 different abortion debate forums on Facebook and have researched the abortion topic for over 25 years.

            Try again. :)

          • Bhgy

            Scientific research is something entirely different . And apparently you don’t even know the difference between causation and correlation nor how to take a critical look at sources.

          • Michelle Pack

            You deny even biology, medical amd embryology texts, biologists, embryologists, scientists and doctors on when human life begins…and you think you are an expert on scientific research? That is comical.

            A recent report confirms that women who have abortions show higher rates of later mental health problems, including depression, substance abuse, and suicidal behaviors.  Prof. David M. Fergusson, who issued the report, is the director of the New Zealand Health and Development study, a project that has tracked 500 women from birth to 25 years of age.

            Fergusson, who is pro-choice, had set out to prove that mental health problems occurring after abortion could be linked back to similar problems before abortion, but the results contradicted his hypothesis. The data showed that even when pre-existing conditions were considered, abortion was still clearly apparent as a strong contributing factor to mental health problems.

            Fergusson said that while the results surprised him, he believes they are accurate because they “persist across a series of disorders and a series of ages….Abortion is a traumatic life event; that is, it involves loss, it involves grief, it involves difficulties. And the trauma may, in fact, predispose people to having mental illness.”

            Abortion is a permanent decision. Once you have an abortion, you can never take it back.

          • Bhgy

            And scientists will argue amongst themselves as to when life begins. Perhaps you are unaware of this. Scott Gilbert, a prominent human development biologist who pro lifers love to quote argues that it is not a question for science alone. Science will probably never answer it. It goes beyond science to personal belief and ethics.

            And yes, it appears from what you have written you know very little about scientific research or even critical review of literature.

          • Michelle Pack

            He uses personal philosophy…not strictly biology in his PERSONAL views.

            It is very clear from everything you have written, you have a personal issue with a God you don’t even believe exists, and you have a personal stake in justifying abortion being a ethical and moral “choice”.

          • Michelle Pack

            Is what happeed to Sarah Elizabeth abuse?

            http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=64416216

            Oh, that’s right…it isn’t to you. She should of died and since she survived so she was just a medical accident. Right?

            What about Nik Hoot (lost both his lower legs in abortion but survived), Ana Rosa Rodriguez (lost an arm in a 8 month abortion but survived), and Carrie Holland Fischer (my friend whose face was permanently disfigured and her speech severely affected from her mother’s abortion attempt at 7 months). Just to name a few. No biggie, right? After all…to you, the only tragedy is the abortionist did not succeed in killing them. Correct?

          • Diana1511

            Thanks Michells Pack! It is usually a waste of time to provide sources to pro- aborts because all they do is deny and make up excuses. Kudos to you for taking the time to provide the sources anyways.

          • Bhgy

            One is a Prolife source. The other is simply showing there is an increase in reported case and no mention of it being caused by abortion. Pro choicers tend to look at be better at critical reading it appears. I get that.

          • Hoytmandoo

            Michelle you must remember that the majority of those advocating for abortions don’t want them to happen, it is for those who really do need it, however it is hard to decide who needs it or not, so it is easy for those with little care for other peoples life in the first place to take advantage of this. There might be a correlation between abortion and child abuse, but it is coming from the people who likely would have abused their children despite an abortion. Also remember that the US has been significantly widening its scope on what it defines as child abuse for many years. leading to what can be seen as an increase in child abuse rates.

          • Michelle Pack

            Wait….back up there sparky. Is there something Inheritantly *wrong* with abortion? Why do those who support abortion not want them to happen if there is allegedly nothing wrong with it? Heck…you all try to claim it is safer than pregnancy…so why aren’t you advocating that every woman should abort every pregnancy to stay safe from childbirth?!?!

            Explain.

          • Michelle Pack

            Study: Unreliability of deaths certificates associated with abortion and birth
            Post Moretem: Death Investigation in America — (February, 2011) An NPR News investigation in partnership with ProPublica and PBS Frontline explores the nation’s 2,300 coroner and medical examiner offices, and finds a troubled system that literally buries its mistakes.
            This expose underscores the unreliability of relying on death certificates to quantify deaths associated with abortion and childbirth.

            http://video.pbs.org/video/1774485437/

          • Michelle Pack

            Legal abortion was supposed to reduce the incidence of child abuse, since fewer “unwanted” children would be born. Yet government data shows that between 1977 and 1998, when our policy of abortion on demand was in effect, the child population grew by 8.8% while child abuse rose by 259%.

            U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 103rd through 121st editions,Washington, D.C.: 1982 through 2003.

            Now what were you saying Bhgy?

          • Bhgy

            I was saying you haven’t shown that abirtion causes child abuse. And you still haven’t. Corelation is not causation. You don’t think there are other reasons for the increase?Come on……

          • Michelle Pack

            Care to fill us in? When you devalue the same human beings to kill them before birth like disposable objects…you think this makes mothers and fathers miraculously think of them differently the second they hit air? Abortion IS child abuse in the womb.

          • Bhgy

            About 75% of Americans think abortion should be allowed in all or some cases. And yet they value the lives of born children. And many woman have abortions and go on to be good mothers later. Wow….. a miracle!!!! (Snicker.)

          • Michelle Pack

            Post the referenced stat for that. Quit pulling crap out of your backside like it is a fact. I guarantee if I gave a full on educational speech with graphics, medical illustrations, biology photos from scientific photographer Lennart Nilsson, and actual abortion procedures that abortionists have videoed, then a poll was given, an overwhelming majority would not agree with abortion. I can even provide numerous actual former abortionists (like Anthony Levatino) who have testified before Congress about details of the types of abortion he performed.

            How do you go on to be a “good mother” when you think your children you conceive in your womb are disposable for 9 months?

            And what is funny about killing human beings in abortion? You are exhibiting the typical demented proabort mindset. Bravo.

            Doe v Bolton….ruled later the same day as Roe…legalized abortion ALL 9 MONTHS by the way.

            Be back with info.

          • Bhgy

            Surely you are aware of the Gallup polls on abortion? No? Ill post. I don’t make this stuff up. Not do I reference people with fake PhDs who call themselves an” Institute”. Too funny.

          • Bhgy

            Here you go Michelle. Look at the very first graph. 2013 data for the dark green and medium green lines equals 78%.

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

            Surely you’ve seen this before. No?

          • Bhgy

            Well sounds like in all you ” research” you missed this part of the oft-cited Gallup polls.

          • Michelle Pack

            David C. Reardon, Ph.D.
            David C. Reardon, Ph.D., director of the Elliot Institute,  is widely recognized as one of the leading experts on the aftereffects of abortion on women, a field in which he has specialized since 1983. He is the author of numerous books and popular and scholarly articles on this topic.

            His studies have been published in such prestigious medical journals as the British Medical Journal and the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and have proven that abortion compared to childbirth is associated with higher rates of maternal death, psychiatric hospitalization, subsequent substance abuse, clinical depression, and numerous other complications.

            Articles about Dr. Reardon and his work have appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers, including Newsweek and the New York Times.  He is a frequent guest on Christian radio and Christian television talk shows and has been a key note speaker at many state and national conventions for crisis pregnancy centers and pro-life organizations.

          • Bhgy

            Omg, you just quoted from Rearfon’s own biographical sketch. Dud you not realize he wrote that? Dud you also not realize he bought his PhD from an unaccredited online ” university” and the ” Elliott Institute” is him and that his ” research” is self published???? Oh you are easy prey Michelle. But thanks for that bit of fun!

          • Michelle Pack

            Tell me, did you learn grammar, spelling, and research at an accredited school? ;)

          • feedsthecorgi

            Michelle, your heart is in the right place, but (just my opinion) your efforts at helping Bhgy to see/accept the pro life position are hopeless. Move on. This person will go down in flames before he/she conceeds that ALL human life should be protected, regardless of location (womb) or age. This is an exercise in futility (plus, it’s getting ugly…as it often does when one is backed in a corner, as Bhgy clearly is)

          • Michelle Pack

            *The U.S. Congress has barred the use of federal Medicaid funds to pay for abortions, except when the woman’s life would be endangered by a full-term pregnancy or in cases of rape or incest (AGI).

            What constitutes “endangered” *exactly? Well Doe v Bolton ruled later the same day as Roe v Wade, legalized abortion all 9 months. Doe is significant primarily because it describes the extent of the post-viability health exception that is also used in Roe. In Doe, the Court defined “health” to include not just physical health, but also psychological, mental and emotional health. The Court cited age, familial circumstances and anything relevant to the woman’s general feeling of well being as reasons that would justify a late-term abortion—and thus override what Roe decided was a legitimate state interest in protecting the unborn after viability. The Court explained:

            “The medical judgment [for a late-term abortion] may be exercised in the light of all factors—physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age—relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment. And it is room that operates for the benefit, not the disadvantage, of the pregnant woman.”

            On this criteria, virtually any reason a woman gives to have a third-trimester abortion is sufficient. “After viability, the state may ‘proscribe’ abortion only when the woman considering abortion can find no physician willing to say that her mental health would, for example, be ‘taxed by child care’ or suffer ‘distress … associated with the unwanted child,’” write Dennis J. Horan and Thomas J. Balch. In effect, if a woman could find an abortionist willing to perform a third-trimester abortion, she could have one.

            -17 states (AK, AZ, CA, CT, HI, IL, MA, MD, MN, MT, NJ, NM, NY, OR, VT, WA and WV) do use public funds to pay for abortions for some poor women. About 14% of all abortions in the United States are paid for with public funds (virtually all from the state).
            -AGI

          • Michelle Pack

            Ron Fitzsimmons, the executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers admitted on ABC’s “Nightline” (11/95) that he had lied when he asserted the partial birth procedure was used rarely and only on women whose lives were in danger. The reality is, this gruesome method of killing partially born babies was done many thousands of times a year. Abortionist, Dr. McMahon, admitted in 1995 to performing over 2,000 partial birth abortions.

            The abortion industry would like you to believe they are only performed on severely deformed babies. However, Dr. Haskell said in a tape recorded interview with the AMA’s American Medical News:

            “…and I’ll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective (not medically necessary) in that 20-24 week range … In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective.”

            An article in the L.A. Times (8/28/96) listed some of the medical reasons for this type of abortion. They included cleft palates, cystic hygroma, (both easily corrected problems) and cystic fibrosis. The medical conditions present in the mother that warranted this type of abortion were, “depression, chicken pox, diabetes, vomiting …” In other words, even those partial birth abortions that are done for the “health of the mother” or because of a “defective fetus” are often performed for minor, easily correctable conditions.

          • Michelle Pack

            Late-term Abortions and the REAL reasons they are performed

            One of the biggest lies coming from overly zealous supporters of abortion is that late-term abortions are only performed because of some physical defect with the fetus, or because of the woman’s health. While there certainly are instances where this is indeed the case, these situations are actually very rare, and certainly not representative of the vast majority of late-term abortions.

            Over 18,000 elective late-term abortions are performed in the USA every year. This number only includes fetuses at least 21 weeks old.

            The vast majority of late-term abortions occur not because of any health problems, but because of delay in diagnosis of pregnancy.
            source: Cassing Hammond, “Recent Advances in Second Trimester Abortion: An Evidenced-based Review” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 200 (April 2009): 347–356.

            For the actual reasons that late-term abortions are carried out, the most detailed information currently available is a very old 1988 Guttmacher survey of abortions taking place after 16 weeks, which listed these reasons for why an abortion was happening late in the gestational cycle:

            71% — Woman didn’t recognize she was pregnant or misjudged gestation

            48% — Woman found it hard to make arrangements for abortion

            33% — Woman was afraid to tell her partner or parents

            24% — Woman took time to decide to have an abortion

            8% — Woman waited for her relationship to change

            8% — Someone pressured woman not to have abortion

            6% — Something changed after woman became pregnant

            6% — Woman didn’t know timing is important

            5% — Woman didn’t know she could get an abortion

            2% — A fetal problem was diagnosed late in pregnancy

            11% — Other

            Here is a baby at 18 weeks by scientific photographer Lennart Nilsson:

            http://oddstuffmagazine.com/child-born-pictures-by-lennart-nilsson-foetus-increasing-in-the-womb.html/photo-of-18-weeks-child

            Remember that not all of those fetuses aborted in this survey were 16 weeks, many of them were older. Here is a picture of a fetus aborted in China, at the age of only 19 weeks:
            http://www.drabruzzi.com/images/fetu…19weeks2.gif

            Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, shocked the general public in 1997 when he admitted that the vast majority of partial-birth abortions were performed on healthy mothers and babies.

            For more information about why most late term abortions are performed:
            http://www.lifenews.com/2012/08/10/medical-reasons/

            The Mother’s Health and Fetal Defects

            It sometimes claimed that serious health problems with the mother often necessitate abortions. Intentional abortion for maternal health, particularly after viability, is one of the great deceptions used to justify all abortion. The very fact that the baby of an ill mother is viable raises the question of why, indeed, it is necessary to perform an abortion to end the pregnancy. With any serious maternal health problem, termination of pregnancy can be accomplished by inducing labor or performing a caesarean section, saving both mother and baby. If a mother needs radiation or chemotherapy for cancer, the mother’s treatment can be postponed until viability, or regimens can be selected that will be better tolerated by the unborn baby. In modern neonatal intensive care units, 90 percent of babies at 28 weeks survive, as do a significant percentage of those at earlier gestations.

            T. Murphy Goodwin, M.D., a distinguished professor of maternal-fetal medicine at the University of Southern California, has written describing how women are told they need abortions for their own health when this is patently untrue. A major reason for unnecessary abortion referrals is ignorance, to put it bluntly, especially on the part of physicians in medical specialties inexperienced in treating women with high-risk pregnancies. According to Goodwin, there are only three very rare conditions that result in a maternal mortality greater than 20 percent in the setting of late pregnancy — these medical conditions are Marfan’s syndrome with aortic root involvement, complicated coarctation of the aorta, and possibly peripartum cardiomyopathy with residual dysfunction. Even in these three situations, there is the option to wait for fetal viability if the mother chooses to accept some increased risk.
            T. Murphy Goodwin. “Medicalizing Abortion Decisions.” First Things, 61 (March 1996): 33–36.

            Goodwin presents several cases in which pregnant women with cardiac conditions, cancer, or severe renal and autoimmune disease have been told plainly that they “needed” an abortion for their health or to save their life, despite being given incomplete information and not offered any other alternatives besides abortion.

            Ultrasound imaging is not always accurate for a few of these conditions. Pregnant women who have declined abortion for fetuses diagnosed by ultrasound with fatal birth defects such as Potter’s syndrome (kidney disease with no amniotic fluid) or thanatophoric dwarfism (a fatal form of skeletal disease), have sometimes ended up giving birth to normal babies. Other parents have resisted recommended abortions for serious anatomical problems such as prune belly syndrome, omphalocele, congenital absence of the diaphragm, and other severe birth defects and had their babies undergo surgical repair after birth. C. Everett Koop, M.D., the former surgeon general and renowned pediatric surgeon, was asked during the partial-birth abortion hearings if he had treated children “born with organs outside of their bodies” (omphalocele). Dr. Koop replied, “Oh, yes indeed. I’ve done that many times. The prognosis usually is good. … The first child I ever did, with a huge omphalocele much bigger than her head, went on to develop well and become the head nurse in my intensive care unit many years later.”

          • Michelle Pack

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/154838/pro-choice-americans-record-low.aspx

            The 41% of Americans who now identify themselves as “pro-choice” is down from 47% last July and is one percentage point below the previous record low in Gallup trends, recorded in May 2009. Fifty percent now call themselves “pro-life,” one point shy of the record high, also from May 2009.

            Gallup began asking Americans to define themselves as pro-choice or pro-life on abortion in 1995, and since then, identification with the labels has shifted from a wide lead for the pro-choice position in the mid-1990s, to a generally narrower lead for “pro-choice” — from 1998 through 2008 — to a close division between the two positions since 2009. However, in the last period, Gallup has found the pro-life position significantly ahead on two occasions, once in May 2009 and again today. It remains to be seen whether the pro-life spike found this month proves temporary, as it did in 2009, or is sustained for some period.

            The decline in Americans’ self-identification as “pro-choice” is seen across the three U.S. political groups.

            While Americans’ identification as “pro-choice” has waned over the past year, their fundamental views about the morality and legality of abortion have held steady. Half of Americans, 51%, consider abortion morally wrong and 38% say it is morally acceptable — nearly identical to the results in May 2011.

          • Bhgy

            Problem is they don’t define pro life in the poll. Don’t make the mistake of thinking this means most americans want abortion illegal in all cases. I have already left that data fir you in your other comment. It may be news to you.

          • Michelle Pack

            I listed NUMEROUS polls. Numerous.

            Show me your 75% stat in a referenced poll. Go ahead. Just try.

          • Bhgy

            Already did. An hour ago further down this thread

          • Bhgy

            Already did below. Here it again, first graph

            http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

          • Michelle Pack
          • Michelle Pack
          • Michelle Pack
          • Diana1511

                  Bhyg: You have to be blind not to see the connection between abortion and child abuse and child murder. In most cases of child abuse the child is mistreated or murdered because they are seen as a burden many times by their very own mothers, fathers or step parent. Sometimes when the abuser is the father or mother’s boyfriend they don’t stop the abuse because they fear they will lose their ‘man’ ( using term loosely). They don’t care that their child is being abused or is murdered as long as they have their happiness.  A great example is the Casey Anthony case. The woman murdered her child to be free to party! Most children murdered through child abuse by a parent are under the age of 1. The abortion industry has taught people that children are disposable if unwanted. We actually have scientists advocating for after birth abortions. Just Google Abortion and infanticide, what’s the difference?

          • Bhgy

            You still haven’t provided anything further on a supposed link behind absorption and child abuse other than your own idea of it. Anything????

            And um no Diana…. Scientists have not advocated for after birth abortions. You are probably referring to an ethics discussion published regarding after birth abirtion and muisundetstood it or you read about it in a secondary Prolife report on the paper ad took it for accurate when in fact it was a misrepresentation. . Careful what you believe Diana.

          • Michelle Pack

            I have. Care to address both posts?

          • Bhgy

            Just saw them. Just did.

          • Diana1511

                  Bhgy: “Careful what you believe?”  I’m not the one following a cause blindly. You tell me I haven’t provided anything which is funny since you can’t give a shred of scientific evidence to support your ’cause’. Science,  technology,  reason, and TRUTH are on the pro-life side. All the pro -aborts do is repeat the same slogan (like mindless robots)  created by the abortion industry, “abortion is a woman’s right” and do nothing but make up excuses to justify it. It doesn’t matter what sources I provide because all you will do is deny it and make up excuses the way you have with Michelle Pack. Have you noticed pro-life laws are passing left and right in most states? That’s because today’s youth is using the Internet to educate themselves about abortion and are refusing to follow an industry blindly. The March for life in Washington  DC has drawn close to 300,000 pro-lifers mostly young people. It is a sight of beauty and it had shocked Cecil Richards. The pro aborts don’t have that many people passionate about their ’cause’. If you truly really want to educate yourself Google Bernard Nathanson Co founder of NARAL and Norma McCorvey of Roe v Wade.

          • Bhgy

            No sorry Diana but science is not in your side. You try to use science ( which us especially funny seeing as fundamentalists are the ones that tend to be Prolife) but it doesn’t work. And guess what? The population is becoming less religious, esoe I ally the young and educated.

            And yes careful what you believe. You took the misrepresentation of that ethics article as accurate. Or maybe I give you too much credit. Perhaps you are misrepresenting it yourself. Either way, you’re wrong.

          • Michelle Pack

            How exactly is science not on our side? Explain.

          • Bhgy

            As I have said many times, there is no consensus amongst scientists as to when life begins. There are several points where one could say life begins based on science. And yet, pro lifers try to argue that it begins at conception. That is just one point that one could argue scientifically that it does.

            And you really should look at “Dr” David Reardon who you tried to use as your reference to support the abortion and child abuse claim. Pro lifers like to use him too to support such claims and its junk science, self published and he bought his PhD. Maybe you didnt know…..

          • Michelle Pack

            Study: Unreliability of deaths certificates associated with abortion and birth
            Post Moretem: Death Investigation in America — (February, 2011) An NPR News investigation in partnership with ProPublica and PBS Frontline explores the nation’s 2,300 coroner and medical examiner offices, and finds a troubled system that literally buries its mistakes.
            This expose underscores the unreliability of relying on death certificates to quantify deaths associated with abortion and childbirth.

            http://video.pbs.org/video/1774485437/

          • Michelle Pack

            No consensus?! Ha!

            “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a ‘moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”

            Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

            “Since the old ethic has not yet been fully displaced, it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or extra-uterine until death. The very considerable semantic gymnastics which are required to rationalize abortion as anything but taking a human life would be ludicrous if they were not so often put forth under socially impeccable auspices.”

            “A New Ethic for Medicine and Society” California Medicine: The Western Journal of Medicine, 113, no. 3, (1970), pp. 67-68.

            “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a ‘moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”

            Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

            “It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitues the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

            Clark Edward Corliss, Patten’s Human Embryology: Elements of Clinical Development. New York: McGraw Hill, 1976. p. 30.

            “The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops.”

            “The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.”

            J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman, Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1974. pp. 17, 23.

            “Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.”

            E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975. p. vii.

          • Michelle Pack

            “Every baby begins life within the tiny globe of the mother’s egg… It is beautifully translucent and fragile and it encompasses the vital links in which life is carried from one generation to the next. Within this tiny sphere great events take place. When one of the father’s sperm cells, like the ones gathered here around the egg, succeeds in penetrating the egg and becomes united with it, a new life can begin.”

            Geraldine Lux Flanagan, Beginning Life. New York: DK, 1996. p. 13.

          • Michelle Pack

            Expert testimony from Senate judiciary subcommittee
            EXPERT TESTIMONY RELATING TO LIFE’S BEGINNING
            In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981):

            “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
            Harvard University Medical School

            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
            Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

            “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune
            Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

            “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon
            Mayo Clinic

            “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes
            University of Colorado Medical School

            The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

          • Michelle Pack

            Some of the world’s most prominent scientists and physicians testified to a U.S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception:
            A United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. All of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:
            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence, from conception to adulthood, and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life….
            I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty…is not a human being. This is human life at every stage.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Downs syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception…. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School: “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter-the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals.”
            A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, “Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who would specifically testify that life begins at any point other than conception or implantation. Only one witness said no one can tell when life begins.”

            Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception:

            Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the pro-life cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, “The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception.”

            Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was a cofounder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.
            Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”
            In his film, The Silent Scream, Nathanson later stated, “Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from any of us.” Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader. At the time, Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.

            Dr. Landrum Shettles was the attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York for 27 years. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female-producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles states,
            “I oppose abortion. I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest-that human life commences at the time of conception – and, second, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.”

            The First International Symposium on Abortion came to the following conclusion:
            The changes occurring between implantation, a six-week embryo, a six-month fetus, a one-week-old child, or a mature adult are merely stages of development and maturation. The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of sperm and egg, or at least the blastocyst stage, and the birth of the infant at which point we could say that this was not a human life.

            The Official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:
            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

            Footnotes:

            Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981.

            Landrum Shettles and David Rorvik, Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence of Life Before Birth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983), 113.

            Ashley Montague, Life Before Birth (New York: Signet Books, 1977), vi.

            Bernard N. Nathanson, “Deeper into Abortion”, New England Journal of Medicine 291 (1974): 1189_90.

            Bernard Nathanson, Aborting America (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1979).

            Shettles and Rorvik, Rites of Life, 103.

            John C. Willke, Abortion Questions and Answers (Cincinnati, OH: Hayes Publishing, 1988), 42.

            Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.

          • Michelle Pack

            And before you try to try to sell the proabort lie Silent Scream was disproven:

            Affidavit of Dr. Ian Donald – the man who developed ultrasound

            “I, the undersigned Ian Donald of the above address and formerly Regius Professor of Midwifery at Glasgow University from 1954 until 1976 and thereafter Honorary Obstetrician at the Western General Hospital Edinburgh until 1981 and Honorary Research Consultant at the National Maternity Hospital Dublin, having had experience in the development and exploitation of Diagnostic Ultrasound, particularly in Obstetrics from 1955 onwards until 1981, the last four years of which were much taken up with filming fetal activity at various stages of pregnancy, particularly the first half thereof, have now studied Dr. Nathanson’s video-tape film entitled “The Silent Scream” not less than four times and affirm that I am of the opinion that the fetal activities depicted by ultrasonic real-time scanning in this film are not faked nor the result of artifact intentional or otherwise.”

            &

            “Nathanson’s conversion to the pro-life movement was sparked by the advent of the ultrasound machine in the early 1970s. He related how his heart was moved to realize that a fetus is in fact a human being after he watched an unborn baby recoil from a vacuum abortion device before being sucked from its mother’s womb.

            Nathanson titled the video of this incident “The Silent Scream” and began using it to spread the pro-life message. Planned Parenthood, however, took a page out of NARAL’s book when the abortion giant spread rumors that the video was a fake. Nathanson confirmed that these rumors, like the tactics of NARAL, were lies.

            “Planned Parenthood was responsible for that,” he said. “But it was not faked and what we did in order to validate it was to go to Dr. Ian Donald in Scotland, who is the father of ultra-sound, the inventor of ultra-sound and he looked at the film and he swore an affidavit that everything was as it was shown and there was no doctoring or manipulation or any changes in the speed or anything else.””

            http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/jul/08072904

            **

            A Realtime ultrasound video tape and movie of a 12-week suction abortion is commercially available as,The Silent Scream,narrated by Dr. B. Nathanson, a former abortionist. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its body being dismembered, the baby’s mouth clearly opens wide — hence, the title (available from American Portrait Films, P.O. Box 19266, Cleveland, OH 44119, 216-531-8600). Proabortionists have attempted to discredit this film. A well documented paper refuting their charges is available from National Right toLife, 419 7th St. NW, Washington, DC 20004, $2.00 p.p.

            A short, 10-minute video showing the testimony of the doctor who did the abortion in Silent Scream definitely debunks any criticism of Silent Scream’s accuracy. The Answer, Bernadel, Inc., P.O. Box 1897, Old Chelsea Station, New York,NY, 10011.

            http://www.theinterim.com/issues/abortion/affidavit-of-dr-ian-donald-–-the-man-who-developed-ultrasound/print/

          • feedsthecorgi

            “Lame”

          • Brandon Wilson

            Abortion is a vile thing, but even if you were to make it illegal again, it would still happen, in a more dangerous scenario.

            Once again, i’m confronted with a radical who has no sense of compromise.

            And dont you dare bring the youth into this discussion, I am a part of today’s youth, and I definitely dont share your ideals. The youth you’re referring to is the youth that is forced to swallow their parent’s ideals. And congratulations, 300,000 people that never had the opportunity to look at things from a perspective that wasn’t fed to them from early childhood. 77% of Americans are christian. proportionally, there should have been a lot MORE people there.

          • Diana1511

            Yeah because 77% of Christians are pro-life? What a ridiculous statement! Also not all of us have the money to make the trip, ever thought of that.  My parents never force fed me anything. As a matter of fact the topic was never brought up at my home and they were not very religious. I knew abortion existed and although I didn’t know any details, I knew in my heart it was wrong.  I finally researched it on my own when I was a senior in high school because  a pro- abort friend tried to convince me abortion was a “woman’s right”. All the information I gathered led me to become pro- life. The abortion industry doesn’t care about women, they are in it for the money.  You can easily tell by the fact that they insist in operating with hardly any restrictions and regulations.  Investigations have discovered that most abortion facilities have not been inspected for years some even decades!  Let’s bring up Butcher Gosnell.  That man was able to operate in filthy conditions because his facility had not been inspected in years!  Gosnell treated women like cattle and butchered babies born alive after abortions failed! I don’t believe for one second this is an isolated case. The abortion industry conceals and never address the fact that many women are killed in their facilities because of botched abortions. Women have died because the abortionist and workers don’t respond quickly like call for help when an abortion goes wrong because they fear the bad publicity. They have been busted covering and not reporting suspected sexual abuse when under age girls are taken many times by the abuser himself. Now the argument that abortion should remain legal because women are going to do it anyways is weak. Why not let drivers drive drunk, they are going to do it anyways? The late Dr. Bernard Nathanson former abortionist and Co founder of NARAL admitted to making up stories about the number of back alley abortions and coat hanger abortions. Abortion became legal based on lies. Dr. Nathanson admitted to being responsible for thousands of abortions. He became became pro-life after he performed an abortion with the guidance of a sonogram. He made The Silent Scream . Pro – aborts keep claiming that pro-lifers are religious extremist. The truth is we have many pro-life atheists. Thisis a human right issue, some of us just use religion to strengthen us in our fight.  We are accused of imposing our beliefs on others but what gives a woman the right to impose her beliefs on her unborn baby? We all know the unborn is a separate individual and not a part of a woman’s body.  That argument is out.  What about hard cases like rape and incest. The truth is that only 1% of all abortions are hard cases and even then studies have shown that 80% of that 1% regret their abortion. Most claim they were pressured by family and friends to have the abortion assuming that would decrease the victims emotional pain. They claim the abortion made them feel even more violated. Again I repeat, it is a thing of beauty to see so many young EDUCATED pro-lifers out there fighting against this vile industry and selfish mentality that victimizes both women and babies. Good day.

          • Michelle Pack

            You have bought into the thousands of women dying in back alley abortions lie I see.

            The claim thousands died annually from back-alley abortions prior to 1973—when Roe. v. Wade legalized abortion in the U.S.—is just plain false. Dr. Mary Calderone, former medical director for Planned Parenthood, wrote in 1960 that illegal abortions were performed safely by physicians in good standing in their communities. True, this doesn’t prove no woman will ever die from an illegal abortion, but it does put to rest NOW’s claim of high mortality rates for the years prior to legalization. Here’s Calderone’s quote in context:

            “Fact No. 3—Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physicians. In 1957 there were only 260 deaths in the whole country attributed to abortions of any kind. In New York City in 1921 there were 144 abortion deaths, in 1951 there were only 15; and, while the abortion death rate was going down so strikingly in that 30 year period, we know what happened to the population and the birth rate. Two corollary factors must be mentioned here: first, chemotherapy and antibiotics have come in, benefiting all surgical procedures as well as abortion. Second, and even more important, the conference estimated that 90 per cent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians. Call them what you will, abortionists or anything else, they are still physicians, trained as such; and many of them are in good standing in their communities. They must do a pretty good job if the death rate is as low as it is. Whatever trouble arises usually comes after self-induced abortions, which comprise approximately 8 percent, or with the very small percentage that go to some kind of non-medical abortionist. Another corollary fact: physicians of impeccable standing are referring their patients for these illegal abortions to the colleagues whom they know are willing to perform them, or they are sending their patients to certain sources outside of this country where abortion is performed under excellent medical conditions. The acceptance of these facts was such that one outstanding gynecologist at the conference declared: “From the ethical standpoint, I see no difference between recommending an abortion and performing it. The moral responsibility is equal.” So remember fact number three; abortion, whether therapeutic or illegal, is in the main no longer dangerous, because it is being done well by physicians.”

            Source: Mary S. Calderone, “Illegal Abortion as a Public Health Problem,” American Journal of Public Health, July 1960.

            In addition, the Centers for Disease Control report 39 women died from illegal abortion in 1972, the year prior to legalization, not 5,000 to 10,000 as claimed by abortion advocates for each year prior to Roe. (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Centers for Disease Control Surveillance Summaries, 9/4/92, p. 33)

          • Michelle Pack

            http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2261931/posts

            Planned Parenthood 1964 ad – “An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.”

            Ironic, huh?

            Here is the info on several of the ethicists who have argued for after birth abortions:

            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/02/27/ethicists-argue-in-favor-of-after-birth-abortions-as-newborns-are-not-persons/

            Peter Singer also has been very vocal in support of this as well.

            Careful of the BS koolaid you are guzzling.

    • CattyK

      I think you’re just jealous because she doesn’t have your weight problem.

      • feedsthecorgi

        Wow. Just wow.

  • Brenda

    She could easily pass for a new tired mother, as well. The light was gone from my eyes for months after I had my kids.

    • lilly

      because your child was ALIVE and keeping you awake at night. Her child will never be given the chance to be rocked through the night, snuggled into her chest or laid to rest in a bassinet near her bed. She does not look like a new mother, she stripped herself of that title when she chose to abort her baby.

    • Michelle Pack

      Is she a new, tired mother? No.

      • Brenda

        What I was trying to say was that the picture doesn’t really mean anything. It could mean anything. It could be the look of a tired new mother, it could be the look of someone that didn’t get much sleep the night before… really anything.

        • Michelle Pack

          Except she is not a tired, new mother is she? Far from it. She is a woman who laughed and hummed and gleefully chatted on a video of her own abortion she made for youtube. Happily admitting she fell pregnant after, “oops”, using no birth control….and she is a birth control counselor at an abortion clinic.

          Why is the ONLY concern of hers in a house fire, a sonogram photo of a little human being…her offspring…a LIFE she admits…she so gleefully skipped off with cameras to have killed in an abortion?

          Deep down, she knows.

          • Hoytmandoo

            If a person doesn’t like a tattoo they got a while ago, do they regret it? Not necessarily, it was a part of their life and it was their decision at the time, just because they don’t like it anymore doesn’t mean they’ll remove it or cover it up. Deep down the only thing we can assume for her was that it was an important decision for her, we do not know if she regrets it(and don’t use the picture as evidence, that’s what Brenda was saying) Just that it was a part of her life. Stop trying to put words in her mouth. You may very well be right, she might regret it, but I might be right, she might not regret it, maybe she just wants to remember her decision, not from regret, but something else; maybe neither of us are right. We are not the ones who decide that, she is. The whole scenario has been her decision(well, besides the fire), so stop please assuming things and counting those assumptions as fact

          • Michelle Pack

            There is no assumption she gleefully skipped off to an abortion clinic to kill the biologically proven human being she conceived after knowingly risking pregnancy by having unprotected sex. A human being is dead that was innocent and at her complete mercy, her biological offspring, and she was more concerned about looking joyful on a youtube video as her little one was killed. She has a sonogram picture of her child’s last moments of life. That is not an assumption. It is a sick, demented reality.

          • Brenda

            But, don’t assume that she is so depressed and sad over it and hating her life and decision, just because her face looks a little different in the second photo. A picture is just a picture. Don’t assume to know someone’s mental and emotional status by looking at it.

          • Michelle Pack

            And don’t assume a picture does not speak louder than words. You compared her to looking like a tired new mother who didn’t get much sleep mother because she was caring for her child. Can you NOT see how with this issue and what this woman did…that is a DISGUSTING comparison? Not even in the same ballpark.

          • Brenda

            Well, hey… if we are gonna just judge a picture without any information….. I think she looks like I did after I had my kids.
            Maybe its a hormonal thing and her body is adjusting to not being pregnant anymore.

          • Michelle Pack

            With the huge difference you did not have your offspring killed under a propaganda slogan.

  • wagnerfilm

    With the mind-reading powers Elizabeth Scalia clearly has, I wonder why she is not making millions as a celebrity psychic with guest appearances on Oprah. After all, it could not be that she is simply projecting emotions she *wishes* this woman was having onto her, could it? Oh heavens no!

    Also, the usual conflation of “blastocyst” with “baby” for emotional button-mashing effect is noted.

    • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpZHUjKnDpE Roomba

      I wonder:
      If these people had to choose between saving an IVF clinic tray with 20 blastocysts and a live two-year-old, which one would the choose?

      • wagnerfilm

        They’re also the same people who, every time some psychopath shoots up an elementary school (you know, those places that are full of precious children), immediately get angry, NOT at the shooter, but at all the dam libruls who want to “use this as an excuse to take away our guns.”

        • robertshane

          Where is the proof of that? Your assumption that gun owners love abortion is majorly flawed. I am a hunter I have lived in the woods for most of my life. I don’t look at a school shooting and rant about the government taking guns away that would be stupid i feel for the families of the victims not for a lifeless piece of metal.

        • Michelle Pack

          Where do you get the idea they are not concerned with the deaths of the precious children and do not care about the psycho shooter?!?! Please. Good grief.

          The 2nd Amendment is a separate issue and responsible, law abiding gun owners are not the cause of crazy psychopaths who break the law and kill. Quit drinking the liberal koolaid. The left is constantly trying to use these horrific tragedies to strip our Constitutional rights. We are not responsible for the insanity of others, and FYI…crazies do not obey the law to begin with. This does not make those who protect the right to bear arms uncaring and not caring about justice towards the nut who commited the heinous act. Generally, they are the ones who support swift justice and the death penalty more often than not.

          Yeah…they are not angry at the shooter at all are they? Come on.

        • Joe Kaminski

          You’re not very bright, are you? The usual feelings after a shooting are that of sorrow and loss for the innocent victims. Then those feelings are immediately followed by total bewilderment when we hear liberal hypocrites and their faux rage screaming we need to ban guns ‘for the children’. These same people that condone the in utero massacre of hundreds of thousands of babies every year are suddenly concerned with the health and well being of children? If that’s not hypocritical I don’t know what is.

          And for the record..I don’t think there should be any laws one way or another dealing with abortion. I’m personally pro-life (sounds kinda stupid, I’m sure everyone is pro-life because saying you were pro-death would probably get you a one way ticket to the funny farm) but feel that if the person getting the abortion, and the doctor performing the abortion see nothing morally wrong then who the hell is anyone else to tell them otherwise? It’s not mine, or anyone else’s job to push morality in whatever form on others. Judge not, lest ye be judged.

          Just wanted to get that out of the way before you started screaming about how I shouldn’t be pushing my beliefs on others.

          • Michelle Pack

            Don’t misquote the Bible. You are judging WHILE you are saying do not judge here right now. Read:

            http://www.cfirecm.com/QandA/Judge%20Not%20Lest%20Ye%20Be%20Judged.htm

            Does abortion force the mother’s opinion and morality on another human’s life to the point of deliberately causing their death? Yes. Who is pushing their morality on others again?

          • Joe Kaminski

            I’m failing to see where I was judging anyone. And again, I’ll reiterate..who are YOU to tell people what they can or cannot do? Until a court of law determines life starts at conception, there is nothing illegal about abortion no matter how immoral you or I may think it is. If the people getting them and performing them don’t have a problem with it then leave them be. It is not our job to push our morality on them and it is not our job to judge them. Pretty sure your bible will tell you it isn’t your job to judge. And I’m pretty confident in saying that you probably don’t want people telling you how to live your life, so why do you feel it is ok to attempt to tell others how to live theirs?

          • Michelle Pack

            Would you of said that when slavery was legal too?

            Didn’t think so.

            Does abortion force a mothers “morality” and opinion on ANOTHER human life to the point of deliberately causing their death? Yep. Is an abortion seeking mother telling her child they have NO right to live so she can kill them at will? Yep.

            Read the link on judgment from the Bible. Misquoting the Bible is ignorant. You have NO IDEA what the Bible says on the subject obviously. We make moral judgements every day. The Bible is VERY clear on making righteous judgment. The problem comes from HYPOCRITICAL judgment.

            You are such a hypocrite telling us not to judge horrific killing WHILE you are making personal judgments of what is okay or not and telling us we are wrong. WAKE UP.

          • Joe Kaminski

            Yo, bible thumper…..if all these scientists agree that life begins at conception then why don’t you form a lobbying organization to get it recognized by Congress, get a law passed, and then abortion will be illegal. Just make sure that the costs involved with supporting all the illegitimate children will be borne only by your organization because frankly, I’m sick of having to support all the welfare babies as it is and if abortion is banned we’re gonna be waist deep in them.

            Until you do something like that, you should just shut your mouth because you’re not changing anyone’s mind going off on your little rant here on an internet message board. If anyone is a hypocrite here it would be you, screaming and howling on about the bible and how wrong abortion is but really, what do you ACTUALLY do to change it? I’m gonna go out on a limb and say not a damn thing.

            From a legal standpoint abortion is legal. From a moral standpoint it varies by individual. Newsflash: there are a LOT of people that don’t share your beliefs or morals. Again I’ll say…who in the blue hell are YOU to tell anyone what to do? Who are YOU to determine what is right and what is wrong? There have been cultures that held human sacrifices. Today there are cultures that condone honor killings. As far as they are concerned these actions are morally right and their version of the magic sky creature will allow them into heaven or paradise or whatever you want to call it. So just because you have certain beliefs doesn’t make it ok for you to push them on others.

            Oh, and don’t come back at me with the whole “The USA is a Christian nation” bullshit because last time I checked the USA is to remain neutral on the matter, and we have people of all different cultures and religions here. Some of whom won’t share your beliefs and have a different set of morals.

          • Michelle Pack

            Nice little hate rant. Still does not justify killing other innocent and defenseless human beings.

            And for the record, a record number of abortion clinics closured in 2013. Last year, 87 surgical abortion clinics halted abortions.

            The total number of surgical abortion clinics left in the U.S. is now 582. This represents an impressive 12% net decrease in surgical abortion clinics in 2013 alone, and a 73% drop from a high in 1991 of 2,176.

            That is 73% LESS abortion clinics than in 1991. Catch that?

            Abortion-pill-only clinics had 4 documented closures in 2013.

            The abortion industry is collapsing. Why? Because they cannot hide from the truth. The internet allows you to easily research abortion procedures, view human development biology photos and even video in great detail. The work of scientific photographer, Lennart Nilsson, has captured such amazing photos of the developing human being in the womb all 9 months, his work is featured in medical, embryology, and biology texts, videos and on websites. Antiabortion supporters are passing record restrictions and closing clinics in record numbers.

            As for “Bible thumper”…when someone ignorant of the Bible tries to make a claim of its contents (and more than likely has never read or studied it at all), then I have every right to correct them.

            Your argument is pathetic and desperate.

          • feedsthecorgi

            (ahem: name calling, ranting) Unspoken issues need addressing perhaps? Don’t lash out at others please.

          • feedsthecorgi

            Michelle you are awesome, and I applaud you. Sometimes it seems like such a waste of effort to comment on these boards. Too many posts are simple angry rants, while your comments are carefully documented and on-topic. I appreciate that you avoid name-calling. Your passion regarding the sanctitiy of life is inspiring!

          • Michelle Pack

            Some of the world’s most prominent scientists and physicians testified to a U.S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception:
            A United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. All of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.1

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:
            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence, from conception to adulthood, and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life….
            I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty…is not a human being. This is human life at every stage.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Downs syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception…. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School: “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter-the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals.”
            A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, “Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who would specifically testify that life begins at any point other than conception or implantation. Only one witness said no one can tell when life begins.”2

            Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception:

            Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the pro-life cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, “The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception.”3

            Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was a cofounder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.
            Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”4
            In his film, The Silent Scream, Nathanson later stated, “Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from any of us.” Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader.5 At the time, Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.

            Dr. Landrum Shettles was the attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York for 27 years. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female-producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles states,
            “I oppose abortion. I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest-that human life commences at the time of conception – and, second, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.6″

            The First International Symposium on Abortion came to the following conclusion:
            The changes occurring between implantation, a six-week embryo, a six-month fetus, a one-week-old child, or a mature adult are merely stages of development and maturation. The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of sperm and egg, or at least the blastocyst stage, and the birth of the infant at which point we could say that this was not a human life.7

            The Official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:
            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”8

            Footnotes:

            Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981.

            Landrum Shettles and David Rorvik, Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence of Life Before Birth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983), 113.

            Ashley Montague, Life Before Birth (New York: Signet Books, 1977), vi.

            Bernard N. Nathanson, “Deeper into Abortion”, New England Journal of Medicine 291 (1974): 1189_90.

            Bernard Nathanson, Aborting America (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1979).

            Shettles and Rorvik, Rites of Life, 103.

            John C. Willke, Abortion Questions and Answers (Cincinnati, OH: Hayes Publishing, 1988), 42.

            Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.

          • Michelle Pack

            Expert testimony from Senate judiciary subcommittee
            EXPERT TESTIMONY RELATING TO LIFE’S BEGINNING
            In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981):

            “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
            Harvard University Medical School

            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
            Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

            “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune
            Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

            “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon
            Mayo Clinic

            “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes
            University of Colorado Medical School

            The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

          • Michelle Pack

            When “living your life” involves you deliberately killing other innocent and defenseless human beings at your mercy…it is EVERYONE’S business. Do you feel the same way about slavery, child abuse, rape, serial killing, molestation, sex trafficking, drug dealers, …heck, what about Hitler? After all…don’t want to tell people how to “live their life”, right?

            Ignorance. Sheer ignorance.

            History lesson:

            Stupid discriminatory man-made laws in history that denied groups of people were a person with rights in order to be abused, owned, sold, discriminated against and even killed.

            “..in the eyes of the law…the slave is not a person.” (Bailey/als. v. Poindexter’s Ex’or, 1858, Virginia Supreme Court)

            “An Indian is not a person within the meaning of the Constitution.” (George Canfield, American Law Review, 1881)

            “The statutory word ‘person’ did not in these circumstances include women.” –British Voting Rights case, 1909

            “The Reichsgericht itself refused to recognize Jews…as ‘persons’ in the legal sense.” (1936 German Supreme Court decision)

            “The word ‘person’ as used in the 14th Amendment, does not include the unborn.” (U.S. Supreme Court decision, 1973)

            If at one time the people owning, selling, abusing, and killing slaves had no problem with it…then what was the big deal? Nobody had the right to judge slavery as being wrong or immoral according to your view.

            Good gref. Reread and THINK about what you wrote.

        • homeisthehunter

          Wow Martin…from looking at the comments it looks like you’ve already been to the woodshed. You could be the poster child for the “same people” from whom we hear such weeping and outrage over a tragedy at a school and who then want to punish people who had absolutely nothing to do with the tragedy. The “same people” who said absolutely nothing when the horrors of the “butcher” Gosnell were uncovered. The “same people” who have butchered nearly 60 million unborn children. The “same people” who make the crazies look like pikers. Yes, you are a piece of work….

      • Michelle Pack

        A human blastocyst is still biologically defined as a real living human being. The 2 year old was also once a blastocyst in their life or they would not even be in your made up scenario. It is called HUMAN DEVELOPMENT. All are human beings. You do realize there are several proabortion”ethicists” who have even been published, who have advocated for even post natal killings from 1-3 months, some even up to 3 years. (3 is when one of the ethicists who agree with this said in a debate with me that is when we become “aware” of our existence and therefore killing is only then wrong). Where does that leave the mentally disabled? The ones with dementia, Alzheimers, head injuries, in comas? Guess they are not real people worth living and us caring for either, right?

        When faced with needing to choose to try to save a unborn human being throughout 9 months of pregnancy from the violent death through abortion, the proabortion people (like yourself) will stand by and do nothing and only make up scenarios like this instead.
        In fact, even when the likes of Gosnell show up in all their gory glory, and Karpen, and Carhart for killing multiple women in abortions now…the proabortion side is quite silent.

        • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpZHUjKnDpE Roomba

          Fine, dodge the question.

  • Spence N Tristina W

    You may have seen this before but it is worth the read & makes such a great point!

    A worried woman went to
    her gynecologist and said: ‘Doctor, I have a serious problem and
    desperately need your help! My baby is not even 1 year old and I’m
    pregnant again. I don’t want kids so close together. So the doctor said:
    ‘OK and what do you want me to do?’ She said: ‘I want you to end my
    pregnancy, and I’m counting on your help with this.’ The doctor thought
    for a little, and after some silence he said to the lady: ‘I think I have a better solution for your problem. It’s less dangerous for you too.’

    She smiled, thinking that the doctor was going to accept her request.
    Then he continued: ‘You see, in order for you not to have to take care
    of 2 babies at the same time, let’s kill the one in your arms. This way,
    you could rest some before the other one is born. If we’re going to
    kill one of them, it doesn’t matter which one it is. There would be no
    risk for your body if you chose the one in your arms. The lady was
    horrified and said: ‘No doctor! How terrible! It’s a crime to kill a
    child! ‘I agree’, the doctor replied. ‘But you seemed to be OK with it,
    so I thought maybe that was the best solution.’

    The doctor
    smiled, realizing that he had made his point by opening the mother’s
    eyes and helping her realize that there is no difference in killing a
    child that’s already been born and one that’s still in the womb.

    • Brandon Wilson

      She then died because she was afraid to rid herself of an undeveloped, unfeeling mass of tissue. She realized her mistake all too late, for she had actually been consulting the local pastor, as any real doctor would never try to force his beliefs down a patient’s throat, despite their legitimate cause for concern and pleas.

      • Rat Pyan

        Typical. As described she had no health issue that would risk her life by continuing the pregnancy. You have skewed the story to justify your beliefs and have succeeded in looking like an over simplifying, over emotional partisan who doesn’t look at the whole picture because to do so you would need to modify your slogan defined worldview.

    • DUH

      No. It makes no point, since it’s not a real story. Your trite little copy and paste “story” is not going to convince anyone of anything.

  • edawg90 .

    so she has a soul after all…

  • sadlyso

    There are consequences for every actions, good or bad.

  • Ken Witherell

    I don’t believe in the feds right to tell anybody what to do, but murder is murder. No matter how a child is conceived, their innocence is intact, and they deserve a chance to live.

  • dr. woo

    Not so easy to spread disinformation anymore here, is it? Look at the bright side. More clicks = more revenue.

  • https://youtu.be/h82D5ZvcALM CrustyB

    Her womb, the most intimate part of herself, is a murder scene.

    • Moviesforlife

      Really?

    • Brandon Wilson

      i’m laughing at you right now. your radical beliefs could single-handedly fuel an entire routine for stand-up.

  • Barb E

    There is help for those suffering from the aftermath of abortion—-Rachel’s Vinyard. Check it out online, it is available nationwide.

    • Bhgy

      There is. And there are also many women who don’t suffer from their choice.

      • Michelle Pack

        Choice to do WHAT exactly? Whether one feels remorse or not, for killing their own offspring at their mercy, is not ultimately why abortion is wrong anyway. Many do not feel remorse for hurting and even killing other innocent human beings at their mercy. It is still horrifically wrong.

        • Bhgy

          That’s your view. But not everyone shares your view. Especially for early abortion.

          • Michelle Pack

            Killing innocent human beings at your mercy based on your opinion is okay? Your killing stance for taking another life at your mercy is not justified simply because you FEEL it is okay.

            This is personal, isn’t it?

          • Bhgy

            It is a personal belief, most often religious, as to when life begins. So yes, it is personal

          • Thomas J.Stratford

            The sciences of Genetics, Chemistry, and Biology says otherwise. Life begins when their is cellular growth, since such an occurrence has never been observed without the existence of life. You’re another Liberal media dupe.

          • Barry A Wright

            Life begins at conception or there would be nothing growing to later terminate. How can you not get that ? And let me help you with something else that escapes you … 2 + 2 = 4.

          • Michelle Pack

            Expert testimony from Senate judiciary subcommittee
            EXPERT TESTIMONY RELATING TO LIFE’S BEGINNING
            In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981):

            “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
            Harvard University Medical School

            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni
            Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

            “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune
            Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

            “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon
            Mayo Clinic

            “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes
            University of Colorado Medical School

            The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

            Now, where is the religion mentioned?

          • Michelle Pack

            Some of the world’s most prominent scientists and physicians testified to a U.S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception:
            A United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. All of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.1

            Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:
            “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence, from conception to adulthood, and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life….
            I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty…is not a human being. This is human life at every stage.”

            Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Downs syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

            Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

            Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception…. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”

            Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School: “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter-the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals.”
            A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, “Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who would specifically testify that life begins at any point other than conception or implantation. Only one witness said no one can tell when life begins.”2

            Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception:

            Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the pro-life cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, “The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception.”3

            Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was a cofounder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.
            Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”4
            In his film, The Silent Scream, Nathanson later stated, “Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from any of us.” Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader.5 At the time, Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.

            Dr. Landrum Shettles was the attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York for 27 years. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female-producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles states,
            “I oppose abortion. I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest-that human life commences at the time of conception – and, second, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.6″

            The First International Symposium on Abortion came to the following conclusion:
            The changes occurring between implantation, a six-week embryo, a six-month fetus, a one-week-old child, or a mature adult are merely stages of development and maturation. The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of sperm and egg, or at least the blastocyst stage, and the birth of the infant at which point we could say that this was not a human life.7

            The Official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:
            “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”8

            Footnotes:

            Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981.

            Landrum Shettles and David Rorvik, Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence of Life Before Birth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983), 113.

            Ashley Montague, Life Before Birth (New York: Signet Books, 1977), vi.

            Bernard N. Nathanson, “Deeper into Abortion”, New England Journal of Medicine 291 (1974): 1189_90.

            Bernard Nathanson, Aborting America (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1979).

            Shettles and Rorvik, Rites of Life, 103.

            John C. Willke, Abortion Questions and Answers (Cincinnati, OH: Hayes Publishing, 1988), 42.

            Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.

          • Dean

            When two sets of reproductive DNA meet and fuse, they are a human life. Any other comments to the contrary are simply weasel words meant for political grandstanding.

      • Al Cpone

        Bhgy i dont think you really know of the after effects of abortion on every woman or your comments wouldn’t sound so….well…. thoughtless and void of intellegence

  • onesoldiersmom

    She killed her soul.

  • Pan

    Oh my god you are such an idiot. We should have mandatory abortions for everyone, that way the pro life and the pro choice people would finally come together and fight as one. Meanwhile, plenty of people have abortions, and are just fine with the decision. Like me. Best choice ever. Good thing I’m pro life, huh.

    • Notforgotten47

      huh?

    • Thomas J.Stratford

      What’s the chance of you posting a cogent comment? As another confused, dizzy brain stem chimes in.

    • moovova

      I’m thinking “Pan-fried”.

      As in that old commercial…”This is your mind on drugs…”

    • Mike Crognale

      No you’re not, pro-life that is.

    • Dom Selgrade

      If you had an abortion do you ever wonder what that child would have been like? Ever wonder what a hug from that child would feel like? Do you wonder would they have looked like you? Or do you just not care?

  • kjlx2

    During the Vietnam war, liberals like this woman spit on the military and what did they call the military? Baby killers! Now these scum kill babies because they’re inconvenient then celebrate the killing. I’ll pray for her but I can’t help hoping the sad spirit of her beautiful child is a fixture in her dreams for a very long time.

    • Brandon Wilson

      Soldiers have killed countless children, and they were out of the womb, with families, and potentially great minds with bright futures on the horizon. I realize that these are casualties, they’re unintended. but they still happened, is it fair to call them murders? No. Is it fair to judge soldiers for following orders? No. We accept and try to stomach that what happened was supposed to be for the greater good. Why is it that we cant have faith in our own citizens to make a decision with life-altering consequences? We let our soldiers do it? right?

      • homeisthehunter

        “they’re unintended”….think on that comparison.

      • Thomas J.Stratford

        History says otherwise. Civilians are often targeted in war, and many like those in Germany, and Japan were in no way “innocent”, since they knew of their governments atrocities, and fully supported them.

    • Moviesforlife

      How many defenseless children have been killed by soldiers in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq? How many women and girls have been raped? Soldiers are scumbags not liberals.

    • CattyK

      Who wants the prayers of a spiteful person like you?

  • Notforgotten47

    She clearly already regrets her choice, obviously she was paid off to make this video.

    • CattyK

      Sounding a little crazy there…

  • Thomas J.Stratford

    Sorry, no sympathy here for this cretin. She had ample opportunity to talk to those women who also had abortions only to regret it. Society is full of such women.

    • Jarod

      A little compassion for a woman who has been lied to about how okay abortion is and how much better her life will be after she has the abortion? The propaganda tells her that her life will be over if she has the child and if she doesn’t, she gets to continue her life just the way it is. We believe it to be a lie and there are many women who have had an abortion who can confirm. I agree she shouldn’t have believed, but she did believe the lie and now she has to live the rest of her life with regret. She, along with her aborted baby, are victims. Victims of different offenses, but still victims.

  • sadlyso

    Why go through that length to express how happy she is of her murder decision unless she is trying so hard, telling herself it is okay. I am not going to criticize this young lady but to let her know that (in case she comes across Bristol’s blogger, there are people who care for her and praying for God’s peace in her heart. I want you to know that we do unthinkable thing but God’s love is greater than all our sins put together. Please see God’s mercy because He’s the only one that can comfort and forgive you.

  • http://safermidwiferyutah.wordpress.com/ Safer Midwifery Utah

    Holy shit this is the dumbest thing I have ever read. Haunted by fetus pieces. Ooookay then.

  • Miranda Crue

    http://www.cosmopolitan.com/advice/health/why-i-filmed-my-abortion Bristol apparently didn’t see the photo at the top of the article. That’s one beautiful, peaceful face.

    • Leroy Whitby

      Her eyes look red and sad in that picture as well, her face puffy, and it was the best they had given the tenor of the piece. Compare the photo there to her pre-abortion photo. Bristol Palin is right. The pictures do tell the story.

  • CattyK

    These photos are ridiculous; Emily Letts undoubtedly experienced a full range of emotions, complete with matching facial expressions, before her abortion, and she’ll experience a full range of emotions after. Cherry picking Happy/Before and Sad/After photos is meaningless. But this post clearly demonstrates that nothing makes women like Bristol madder than a woman who hangs onto her freedom and has no regrets about it! I suspect Bristol is very sorry she got stuck with a child when she should have been able to enjoy being young, instead. Most adamant pro-Birthers are secretly sorry they didn’t have more freedom in life.

    • Michelle Pack

      Freedom to do what exactly? Kill another biologically proven human at their mercy? Their own offspring?

      That is “freedom” to you?

      You think Bristol is sorry she didn’t have her child killed in utero so that she could have this “freedom” you claim exists when you take the life of your own offspring?

      Amazing.

      And FYI, all abortions force the birth of a dead or actively dying human offspring.

    • Dom Selgrade

      More freedom in my life? I wil trade my life and an eternity of suffering to save my child’s life. If you have a child you would know how important they are to you. That once they come into your life they are your life they are your freedom they are worth anything and everything to keep them safe. I would happily give up my youth to at least provide my child with the opportunity of having a youth.

  • mel mariner

    This is an excellent Christian response to Emily Letts http://garrettkell.com/my-abortion-story-an-open-letter-to-emily-letts/

  • Kenny Ried

    If your going to discus what she did in the video, you should link it to. That way, everyone has the opportunity to see it for them selves, and have an INFORMED discussion. After watching the video, I am glad she did what she did. I wouldn’t want any child to grow up with a mother like her.

    • pro_life

      She could have done the right thing and given the baby up for adoption when it was born if she didn’t want it.

      • Kenny Ried

        People like that have no concept of right and wrong. Any child raised by her alone won’t have anyone to teach them the difference. In other words, they will be as damaged as she is. If her mental issues are genetic, her children may suffer from the same wretched disease she does. And who wants to give up 9 months of there lives and suffer all that discomfort ? She didn’t seem to understand how she even got pregnant in the first place. No, it’s much easier just to kill the unborn child, (ehhhem… as they would say, abort the fetus)

    • Chris Liby

      You must be related to Harry Reid…..you are as stupidif not stupider than him….


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X