Leftist, Feminist, Atheist, Pro-Life, Rocker Chick: pro-choice

Showing posts with label pro-choice. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

Not wanting kids doesn't make us any more likely to abuse them

Pro-choicers have a tendency to say that having a kid that you don't want means that you will abuse them. For some reason, this oppression against people who don't want kids goes unchallenged, even as pro-choicers claim to support our right to be childfree. But you cannot stand for our rights while saying we're more likely to abuse kids than people who want them. All that does is "other" us and make it seem like you think our natural state of being is abusive, or at least abusive toward vulnerable children, which is even worse and such a huge and patronizing slap in the face.

This doesn't make you seem like you care about someone's right to choose, it makes you seem like assholes. We are not ANY more likely to abuse someone just because we don't want them. We have empathy, a conscience, and the ability to reason. We have the same ability to treat children with respect, kindness, compassion, and love as anyone who wants kids. Just like if someone were to drop a random 5 year old off at the house of someone who wanted kids and there was no one there to take care of them, they would treat them with respect and kindness they deserve even though that particular child was unwanted, the same goes for people who don't want kids having to take care of one from birth.

How fucking dare you. How dare you act like the simple concept of not wanting kids makes us abusive. How dare you act like abuse is about not wanting kids when so many people who were planned and wanted were abused, and so many people who were unwanted were shown love and respect. Abuse has nothing to do with wantedness and everything to do with the parents being raised to believe that things like spanking and tough love and screaming aren't abuse and are actually good for the kid. Most abusive parents don't think of themselves as abusers at all, they think they were good parents. How dare you look down upon someone who just gave birth without wanting to and act like they will then abuse the child.

To go through all the complicated feelings that come along with having a child without wanting to is a vulnerable process, and those dealing with it deserve a hell of a lot better than so called "pro-choicers" claiming that they will hurt these vulnerable beings because of it. To support people's right to be childfree by choice is to cut out this narrative and understand that someone isn't lacking compassion just because they don't want someone else.

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

Unconventional Pro-Life Groups

Wednesday, March 7, 2018

If the unborn is a human...

If the unborn is not a human, no justification for abortion is necessary (all abortions would be no different than using a condom and there would be no reason for abortion to be a "tough, gut-wrenching choice that no one wants to make" as a lot of pro-choicers describe it).

However, if the unborn is a human, no justification for abortion is adequate (not the fact that we're poor, not the fact that we're single, not the fact that we have career goals, not the fact that we don't want to be mothers etc. Being labelled as "unwanted" by someone else could never possibly be a reason to kill someone, lest we want to create the world's most totalitarian society.)

Science does indeed tell us that the unborn are distinct living human beings and not just clumps of human cells.

Why a lot of pro-choicers really don't care about women

So I hear myself saying "These people really don't care about women at all!" more and more as I hear pro-choice arguments, I may have even mentioned that before in this blog, so I figured I'd write down why the pro-choice side seems like the "anti-woman" side, and like they really just hate women. Not all pro-choicers are this way (heck some of the ones who are may not even realize this is anti-woman as they could be blinded by the politics of it all and just say/do things because they are so used to hearing it. And perhaps when not dealing with abortion they are pro-woman in certain ways, but the fact is that there are some things they do/say that couldn't be called pro-woman and do seem like a hatred of them), but it's getting harder and harder to find the good ones.

*Only think the choices are get an abortion or be forced to raise a child you don't want with no means

*Act like women who have unplanned and unwanted children will abuse them once they are born (so many people living today weren't wanted/planned but were NOT abused by their parents, because parents don't have an automatic switch to where they just hurt their children if they didn't decide to have them)

*Say that no woman is happy to have an abortion yet really try to make sure a horrible choice no woman wants, sticks around, even at the expense of helping other choices.

*Fail to mention that most abortions aren't by women who don't want their babies, but rather women who think that they can't do it because of lack of choices or not knowing of their choices. They frame abortion as if you can't force a woman to bear an unwanted child, and all children should be wanted, when most abortions occur with the women wanting their children even if it was unexpected but not knowing how to be the mothers they want to be.

*Force women to choose between a career or school and a child, and then call that liberation.

*It says that women can't do it all. They can't be career women or school women and mothers. They apparently aren't strong enough to do so and shouldn't be trusted to do so.

*Doesn't trust women to make their own decisions by refusing to give them proper info and facts of other choices, the unborn, and abortion, ensuring that they aren't fully informed before making such a big decisions and thus ensuring they will most likely regret it as they made a decisions they weren't informed on. Not only that but it makes women illiterate with the info surrounding all of this. They hide the humanity of the unborn and are against women seeing ultrasounds before the abortion because they know that if they have that knowledge, they won't go through with it.

*They don't let people actually offer women other options. When sidewalk counseling, even if they are being nice and respectful and honestly offering women help, pro-choicers will try and drown them out and walk the woman to the abortion clinics while telling them not to listen to the people trying to offer them help. Here is a video of a pro-choice activist who posed as a woman seeking an abortion and having someone escort her into an abortion center, who shared the video on youtube with her and her boyfriend's commentary, saying she was "terrified" by the pro-life sidewalk counselors, who allegedly "bullied and intimidated" her, and they omitted the commentary the pro-life sidewalk counselor gave so you don't actually hear it but rather are left to assume what they say is true . Want to know what the pro-lifer actually said?...

"Good morning, my name's Kelly. I'd like to talk to you this morning before you go in to have an abortion. On the corner, just past the abortion clinic, on the corner is A Woman's Choice, and you can get a free ultrasound. We want to help you, so whatever brings you in here for this abortion today, we want to help you. We have, um, adoption counseling, financial counseling, free ultrasounds... whatever you need. We have free maternity homes, anything you need. Ma'am, what you have in you is a son or a daughter. It was decided at conception whether you were carrying a son or a daughter. The baby inside you [unintelligible] is still valuable and precious. And we're just [unintelligible]."

*In a feminist society where they successfully made abortion legal and have kept it legal and they have gotten so many other things for women, they haven't done a lot to secure more rights/options for pregnant women and mothers and children. They could have easily done this had they actually cared about women. It tends to be the pro-lifers who do this.

*Forces women to wage war on their very own children, and makes a conflict between women and unborn children.

*By saying women only choose abortion when they feel like they have no other choice and no woman goes into an abortion clinic happy to abort because it isn't about wanting to kill but rather feeling like they have no other options, and then say that that choice should be an option, you are forcing them to choose that, and showing that YOU are the ones who think women can't choose for themselves. You are giving them no choice.

*Make women think they need abortion in order to be equal, even though they also say that it is the woman's choice and men can't have a say, so men already don't have abortion rights

*Refuse getting abortion clinics up to standard, like this article states, if abortion clinics actually cared about women, they would already have these standards in place without the government having to get involved. The abortion industry doesn't care about women, they care about money.

*Refuse to acknowledge all the women who have died in "safe and legal" abortions

* Refuse to acknowledge all the women who regret their abortions and have suicidal thoughts and tendencies and PTSD, and that it is bad for the women as well as the unborn

*Refuse to tell their pro-choice advocates about the facts, thus they feel tricked when they realize it and tend to turn pro-life.

*Refuse to let women choose to be pro-life. They silence pro-life women constantly.

*Refuse to let female fetuses have the choice of life

*Refuse to be against or stand up to sex-selective abortion killing women in the womb

*The whole pro-choice thing makes women put their children in the same spot women were in previously. This is not only horrible for their own children, it degrades women. The first wave of feminism fought against women being seen as "not persons" and the second wave turned women into the people claiming that their children were "not persons." It's the ultimate irony.

*Even beyond all of that, we are hearing more stories of guys coercing or forcing women to miscarry or have abortions, even without them knowing it by slipping them the abortion pill, guys telling people how to convince a girl to get an abortion, or with the "bro-choice" crowd, saying a good reason to be for abortion is so that you can have more casual sex. Sometimes bad guys use "pro-choice" to their advantage to get women to have the abortions they want.

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Pro-Choice Violence.

This is no where near all the stories but I wanted to at least show what I have collected so far.

http://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/category/pro-choice-violence/
http://www.gargaro.com/otherside.html
http://www.rightgrrl.com/2001/belltolls.shtml
http://www.prochoiceviolence.com/
http://www.hli.org/resources/pro-abortion-violence-setting-the-record-straight/
http://blog.secularprolife.org/2017/02/disgusting-so-called-people.html
http://www.mrc.org/eye-culture/media-repeatedly-ignores-violent-attacks-against-pro-lifers
--Jim Poullion murdered by Harlan James Drake:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jim-pouillon-anti-abortion-activist-murdered-in-front-of-school/
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/11/michigan.shooting/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jim_Pouillon
--Anne Gordon murdered by Eric Paul Henry
http://archive.lifenews.com/state3171.html

https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/abortion-advocate-throws-molotov-cocktail-at-pro-lifers-outside-planned-parenthood/

Derrick Doss waving a gun:
https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2015/07/08/2-gun-incidents-outside-abortion-clinics-only-one-arrest/
http://www.guns.com/2015/07/10/man-arrested-after-pulling-gun-on-protesters-at-abortion-clinic-video/

http://www.theinterim.com/events/lifechain/assailant-found-guilty-in-toronto-lifechain-attack/
http://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/pro-lifer-assaulted-in-michigan/
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2001-02-05/article/3313
http://www.hli.org/2011/09/hli-condemns-attacks-on-french-pro-lifers/
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/08/27/pro-choice-man-pleads-guilty-in-case-of-swerving-car-at-pro-lifer/
https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/theft-battery-vandalism-charges-filed-against-pro-choice-professor/

http://www.independent.com/news/2014/mar/21/ucsb-professor-charged-theft-and-battery-after-con/
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/16673/
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/03/12/feminist-studies-professor-leads-angry-mob-to-assault-pro-lifers/

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/abortion-extremist-faces-4-year-jail-term-article-1.1076120
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pro-abortion-extremist-pleads-guilty-making-death-threats-against-pro-life-activists

https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2015/05/06/man-threatens-to-shoot-abortion-protesters-becomes-physical-as-wife-exits-clinic/
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/man-arrested-punching-87-year-old-woman-back-while-she-protested-abortion
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/01/31/police-had-to-form-human-shield-around-pro-lifers-to-protect-them-from-abortion-activists/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhH4Vwy5agc (Pat McKinley on the LAPD's Torture of Pro-Life Protesters with Nunchucks)
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/03/27/abortion-activist-laura-levites-says-pro-life-teen-should-be-murdered/
http://studentsforlife.org/purdue-staff-member-calls-for-rape-of-pro-life-students/
http://studentsforlife.org/purdue-professor-calls-pro-life-students-vile-racist-idiots/
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/video-liberal-arrested-shoving-bloody-maxi-pad-pro-lifers-mouth/
https://www.facebook.com/babeswhodgaf/videos/1516907568321532/?comment_id=1331182580291887
http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/attack-on-pro-life-activist-at-an-abortion-facility-results-in-capture-of-child-rapist/
http://www.denverpost.com/2014/03/06/man-on-trial-in-denver-for-sex-assault-killed-himself/
https://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/why-i-called-the-police-at-the-abortion-facility-last-month/
http://www.dailywire.com/news/22426/pro-abortion-topless-feminists-attack-catholic-amanda-prestigiacomo#exit-modal
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/11/09/professor-wants-to-beat-the-s-out-of-pro-life-students-protesting-planned-parenthood/
http://liveactionnews.org/five-disturbing-pro-choice-insults-extensive-hate-mail-collection/
https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/38680/
http://www.wdam.com/Global/story.asp?S=12743818
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ms-supreme-court/1529928.html
https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/2008-former-planned-parenthood-doc-got-6-years-for-possession-of-child-porn-keep-funding-them/
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Olympia-gynecologist-given-6-1-2-years-in-prison-1271939.php#ixzz1RGJFxO1K
http://unacceptablyprolife.blogspot.com/2013/09/man-kills-girlfriend-for-being-pregnant.html
http://poway.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/poway-man-convicted-of-seconddegree-murder-in-pregnant-girlfriends-death
http://www.teenbreaks.com/abortion/girfriend-executed-refuse-to-have-an-abortion.cfm
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/9214252/Jail-for-punching-pregnant-partner
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2480154/Cheating-boyfriend-jailed-trying-abort-unborn-child-giving-pregnant-partner-miscarriage-inducing-drugs.html
http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm/sd-man-sentenced-for-attempted-fetal-homicide/?id=155601
http://www.wbtv.com/story/24101762/father-of-unborn-child-accused-of-shooting-woman-several-times
http://newcity.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/new-city-man-convicted-on-seven-counts-in-domestic-abuse-case
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2525374/Craig-Thomas-hit-girlfriend-stomach-pipe-beat-baby-her.html
http://www.allourlives.org/more-data-on-abortion-and-intimate-partner-violence/
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/malorie-bantala-kevin-wilson-found-7023040
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/02/21/sexually-abusive-boyfriend-forced-her-to-get-seven-abortions/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cops-man-fed-pregnant-woman-drug-laced-pancake-killed-fetus/
http://mobile.news.com.au/world-news/man-gave-girlfriend-abortion-pill/story-fndir2ev-1226644902205
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/john-andrew-welden-pleads-guilty-in-tampa-abortion-pill-case/2140798
http://liveactionnews.org/man-who-slipped-girlfriend-abortion-drug-receives-maximum-sentence/
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/gwentnews/10688133.Newport_man_made_secret_bid_to_abort_baby/
http://www.thenews-messenger.com/article/20140505/NEWS01/305050027
http://lifedynamics.com/abortionist-convicted-sexually-abusing-patients-will-remain-behind-bars-lost-appeal/
https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/planned-parenthood-employee-court-case-on-charge-of-sexual-battery-set-for-december/
http://abortiondocs.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Thornton-Tony-Indecent-Exposure-Police-Report.pdf
http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/caught-on-video-abortionist-attacks-girlfriend-during-forced-abortion-attempt/
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/03/abortion-clinic-closes-in-michigan-woman-was-forced-to-have-abortion-there/
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/mother-escapes-abortion-by-jumping-out-abortion-facility-window
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/09/high-court-orders-abortion_n_5473628.html
http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/13734/brochoice-how-hb2-hurts-texas-men-who-like-women
http://www.returnofkings.com/16089/how-to-convince-a-girl-to-get-an-abortion
http://www.teenbreaks.com/abortion/kill-unborn-child.cfm#.UhtV3CxY4sU.facebook
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/05/336-million-abortions-have-taken-place-in-china-under-the-one-child-policy/
http://www.pop.org/content/us-state-department-acknowledges-china%E2%80%99s-sex-trade-fueled-one-child-policy
http://www.pritzkerlaw.com/wrongful-death-attorney/death-of-unborn-baby-accident.html
http://whyiamprolife.org/?p=1017
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1921865-updates-and-details-of-arian-fosters-reported-lawsuit

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Why Abortion is Patriarchal Oppression

Cis men often pressure, force, or coerce women and pregnant people into abortions. They threaten us into it or otherwise try and manipulate us. Men (not all but too many to not talk about) use abortion as a way to use women as reusable and disposable sex objects so that they can have sex with them all they want without having to take care of their responsibilities. There are even movements called "bro-choice" and “men for choice” that ironically point this out, with "bros" talking about how abortion is good for them specifically because of that reasoning....and somehow the “no uterus no opinion” idea conveniently doesn’t apply to “pro-choice” men. It treats our bodies as garbage disposals; as in, what you put into us can just be chopped up into little bits and the bloody mess taken out so that you can use us over and over again. Abortion is a deadbeat dad's favorite thing.

Rapists use it to continue to rape and control their victims, as it gets rid of the “evidence” (not only DNA evidence to prove he was the rapist on trial, but suddenly having a child is evidence that she is being raped to everyone around her as well) and thus they can get away with raping her for longer, and pressuring her to abort is another way to control her too. This happens with standard rape and statutory rape as well, and some abortion clinics have even lied about the age of statutory rape victims or didn’t contact social services when she comes in with an older man, so that they can give underage girls abortions. Alice Paul, the feminist who created the Equal Rights Amendment act (ERA) has stated, “Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women.” There are so many ways in which that rings true.

Men also have killed many women and pregnant people for not aborting, or otherwise harmed them by throwing them down stairs etc. to try and cause a miscarriage, or slipped them the abortion pill without them knowing it. Without men and the patriarchy, abortion wouldn't exist. Not only that but it was the men of NARAL who sold abortion to feminists and the world in the late 1960s by making up lies. One of those men, the abortion doctor Bernard Nathanson, flat-out admitted that they lied. And it was men who were the ones to vote on Roe V Wade and men have always been the abortion doctors, and prey on women by telling them that their children are not children but clumps of cells etc., so that they can get their abortion dollars. Some of them have admitted they make lots of money from abortion.

Also, male bosses make women feel like they can't be mothers while working and that abortion is what they should choose, which is just another way to coerce. Same with being single or poor or going to school or what have you. Women get abortions because of the mother shaming society we live in making them feel like they have no other choice. If men could get pregnant, abortion wouldn't exist, because people don't tell men that they can't be career men and fathers at the same time yet women get constantly told that we can't be career women and mothers at the same time so abortion is necessary for our success. This is one of those tactics that those men from NARAL used to get support for abortion. It's just sad that it worked.

The abortion-and-pro-choice-industry tells us that the wombless male body is normative and that in order to have equal rights to men and compete in a male-dominated world, we need have abortion so that we aren't "bothered" and "bothering them" with the concept of having children. Instead of raising women to the equal rights level of men as we are, we are taught to get rid of what makes us uniquely female because it is a "burden", and that we should lower ourselves to what we deem as the worst kind of men--deadbeat dads. Instead, we should be empowering pregnant and parenting women, and telling them we CAN do it. You CAN be pregnant or a mother while going to school, you CAN be pregnant or a mother while working, you CAN be pregnant or a mother while a teenager, you CAN be pregnant or a mother while single, and you CAN be pregnant or a mother while poor. Rosie the riveter is a great example of the "yes we can" concept yet somehow when it comes to pregnancy we have turned it into "No you can't, have an abortion." Having kids does not mean you have to give up a life worth living, yet that is what the abortion industry wants us to believe, but it goes against everything feminism stands for.

There are many women who regret their abortions, and have depression from it, PTSD from it, suicidal tendencies from it, or have actually killed themselves from it. You can find their videos on youtube or their stories in writing, just by looking up "I regret my abortion" or "abortion regret" on google or youtube. Because women are basically told in various ways that we have no other choice to abort yet people turn around and say it is somehow “our choice” when debating abortion, we are the ones who end up as the scapegoats and thus have to deal with all the heaviest feelings from it. We are told we can’t regret it because it was “our choice” despite the fact that we choose it because we are told we have no choice. The men who pressure us into it get out without having to deal with it because it reinforces old-fashioned stereotypes that anything having to do with babies is “women’s work.”

There are so many women who feel this way that there are endless amounts of organizations around to help women with post-abortive regret, which wouldn't be able to be around if women never regretted it, yet these women constantly get ignored so that the abortion industry can act like women rarely regret it to keep women supporting pro-choice politicians and coming into the abortion clinics and giving them their hundreds of dollars for each abortion. Women's voices of regret are being swept under the rug like crazy. That is what misogyny looks like. Although not all men do the things I am describing in this article, and in fact abortion can hurt men and make them regret lost fatherhood just like many women regret their abortions as well, it still happens far too much.

Also, it truly shows we are oppressed when people act like somehow we need to have a right to treat our children the way we have been treated by men, by oppressing them and treating them as our property to be disposed of as we see fit, and instead of giving us actual help for our situations. Offering abortion is an easy way for people to blow off our problems and act like they helped us. An abortion doesn't make a poor woman not poor or a raped woman un-raped or an abused woman not abused etc., it just throws women right back into these situations after she leaves the clinic. All it gives her is a dead child on top of the problems she has, it doesn't help the problem at all. It doesn't solve the root problem.

On top of all of that, sex selective abortion kills females in the womb just for being females because people want sons. This happens in various countries including our own but in the ones where it is most prevalent, there is a gap between the amount of men and women, as a decent chunk of women were killed in the womb. This has led to young women being kidnapped, raped, trafficked, and forced into marriages because the men of the population have a lack of women to choose from in terms of coupling. Pro-lifers believe in women's rights, we just go one step further and say that ALL women should have rights, not just the born ones, for we truly don't have rights if they don't start when we first exist. Women deserve better than all of this. We deserve better than being given a bad choice that no one really wants and we basically just choose because we are told we need to choose it. No woman walks into an abortion clinic happy to do it. This is something that both pro-choicers and pro-lifers agree on. We just need to understand that that horrible choice that no one likes or really wants shouldn't be held up as an example of wonderful women's rights. It's something that comes from our oppression and is something we should always be fighting to end, because it hurts us too.

All of these things are why when I was 14 and found out what abortion was, I was pro-life *on the specific basis* that I am a leftist feminist. I started off by having many feminist reasons to be against abortion before I could even know the politicizing strategies of each side. And when I started to hear the stereotypes that abortion was supported by feminists and opposed by those who aren't, I automatically assumed people were joking, because that would never make any sense. Abortion is pure violence, on our children and us. It would never fit in with feminism. It is just more evidence that we are oppressed.

For more information on Pro-Life feminism, google or facebook search (or enter in the websites of) out the organizations
Feminists for Life : http://www.feministsforlife.org/
Feminists for Nonviolent Choices : http://www.ffnvc.org/
New Wave Feminists: https://www.newwavefeminists.com/
Feminists Choosing Life of New York Action: https://www.fclnyact.org/
and Pro-Life Feminists: https://prolifefeminists.wordpress.com/
These are the organizations that have helped me realize that I am not alone and that Pro-Life feminism has existed since feminism began, as it started off Pro-Life to begin with. All the early feminists, such as Susan B Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Alice Paul, Victoria Woodhull, Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell, Mary Wollstonecraft etc. etc. and even Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood) were pro-life. It was the men from NARAL who made up lies that turned some of the feminists pro-choice. Let's not let men get the better of us, and return to understanding that the violence of abortion is not fit for feminism and a world where we champion peace and equal rights. It is the destruction of everything we stand for. It is the destruction of us.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Parallels of Veganism and Pro-lifeism

When talking about the comparisons of the issues of abortion and animal farming + exploitation, it seems that there are two similar sides that we can look at. The similarities between vegan arguments and pro-life arguments, and the similarities between animal exploitation arguments and pro-choice arguments. Similarities between veganism and pro-lifeism: *Both are centered around the idea of respecting life, especially that of the particularly innocent, vulnerable, voiceless, helpless, defenseless etc. *Right to life is present in both. With pro-lifeism, of course the unborn child is being killed so a focus is put on the fact that they have a right to not be killed and to continue their lives, and with veganism, animals get killed and thus a focus is put on them having a right to not be killed and to continue their lives. *Right to not be harmed and bodily autonomy, as well as the right to not be seen as property to be disposed of as one sees fit, is present in both. In an abortion, the child is dismembered with medical tools or sucked apart or poisoned etc. This harms them and takes away their bodily rights as their bodies are being harmed and destroyed. They are considered their parents’ property and they are at the will of their parents. With animal farming/consuming/exploiting, there are many different ways in which the bodies of animals are harmed and they are treated as objects and their bodily rights are taken away as well, whether that be abuse like being beaten over the head in some factory farms, or the stress of being artificially inseminated and having to give birth and being constantly milked, or going through training in circuses etc. They are literally considered the property of farmers and are at the will of those who farm them, train them, or are otherwise considered their owners. *Both point out that if one can't stand to look at gruesome pictures that are the end result of what they are supporting (abortion pictures/slaugtherhouse pictures), then they don't want to be supporting it in the first place. The idea is that if one finds it offensive then you are saying that something you support is offensive...so why are you supporting it? *Both see the genocide that is happening right before our eyes, and understand that it is prejudice and oppression. Both have trouble understanding why after learning our lesson with the past genocides, we still continue with this one. Some on each side make comparisons to the holocaust and slavery/racism as well as sexism. *Both mention that abortion or animal consuming/using aren't necessary, and talk about the other options that one has. For why should we go out of our way to cause all this death and destruction when we don't have to? For abortion, there is adoption (of which you can have open, closed, or semi-open, and they are free to adopt out), safe-haven/safe-surrender/baby-moses laws which let you leave the child at any police station, hospital, or fire department, no questions asked, kinshipcare or guardianshipcare, where you give the child to a family member or close friend to be raised, and this can be long-term or short-term, or a ton of options for help if the woman does think she can be a parent with the right help. That goes into various avenues such as financial, daycare, baby drives, housing, rights for pregnant women at school or in the workplace and things to make it easier like desks that fit the stomachs of pregnant women or set ups for her to work or learn from home etc. There's also talk of artificial wombs. With veganism, there's literally a vegan version of everything. There are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of edible plants that we have discovered so far and literally a vegan version of everything. If it's possible to make it non-vegan, it's possible to make it vegan. There are tons of vegan options at every store and you can veganize fast food meals as well. Those who are poor can be vegan, as many of us are. There are vegan leathers and soaps and this and that and the other. *Right to rescue is present in both. In the 80s and 90s, the pro-life rescue movement was underway with pro-lifers occupying preborn slaughterhouses to save the women and children inside. There has been a modern resurgence of this lately, led by secular progressive pro-life activists such as in PAAU. Animal rights activists also rescue animals from factory farms and other such things, such as with the recent Smithfield Trial which was a victory for members of DXE who saved a few pigs from slaughter. *Right to continue living so as to continue to use the other rights and choices they would have is present in both. Pro-lifers often talk about how the most important right is the right to life, as all other rights would be meaningless without it as you wouldn't be alive to get to use them. Vegans often point out that animals are here for their own reasons, just like us, to have their own lives and do their own things. They aren't here to be objects for the use of humans. That brings me to a related issue on the reverse... Similarities between non-veganism and pro-choiceism: *Both use a "choice" argument, and forget the victim at hand and their choices, and act like the perpetrator needs to have a choice to harm the victim. With animal using and consuming, they think it has to be the ones partaking in the using or consuming that need to have a choice to do so. Often you'll l hear something like, "It's my choice to eat meat. You can't infringe on other people's choices. If you don't eat meat, that's your own choice, but you can't tell me what to do." With abortion it's the same thing, with the mother getting to choose to take her unborn child to a facility to be dismembered and killed. "It's my choice to get an abortion. You can't infringe on other people's choices. If you wouldn't get an abortion, that's your own choice, but you can't tell me what to do." *Similarly, both use the bodies of those committing the act instead of the bodies of the victims to act like somehow disregarding one's bodily autonomy is the bodily right of another. For abortion, "It's my body, my choice." and sometimes "If it's in my body I can kill it." For animal consuming/wearing, "It's my body, my choice. I get to choose what goes in/on my body." Both actions require harming and killing someone else's body, but only the bodies of the ones doing said harming will ever be paid attention to for these sides. Forgetting the victim and acting like it's the other side that is in the wrong because they are infringing on the rights of those taking away the rights of others is an old way to pass off discrimination. *Both exploit women, those who are pregnant, and the female reproductive system, break up the mother and baby bond, and kill children. The abortion industry and pro-choice movement tell pregnant people that they cannot be mothers in whatever hard situations they are in so they have no other choice but to abort, or that their children are not children but just clumps of cells. This is exploitative and coercive. Abortion pits mother against child, breaking up the mother-baby bond and kills the pregnant person's baby for a profit. Many post-abortive people grieve their dead children afterward and develop PTSD or depression. The dairy, pork, veal, and eggs industries exploit female farm animals by forcing them to get pregnant so that they can produce milk or more animals to farm, stealing their babies so that the milk can go to humans or to kill the babies who are of no use to the egg industry or can become veal, and send the female children back into the same systems their mothers are in. This not only exploits the mothers and kills the children but also breaks up the mother and baby bond. Mothers are known to grieve their children who were taken from them. *Both use overpopulation as an excuse to kill the victims. With abortion, they say that humans are overpopulated and thus we shouldn't have anymore, as well as that since they think the earth is overpopulated, they'll have a horrible life so we might as well not allow them to exist so as to spare them a life in the overpopulated world. With animal consuming/using, they say that animals are overpopulated so we need to kill them so that their overpopulation doesn't get in the way. *Both use things such as pain, sentience, intelligence, size, looks, and ability to contribute to society as a way to belittle the victims and excuse killing and harming. They say that those who have yet to be born can't feel pain, aren't conscious, aren't intelligent, are so small, and that that therefore makes them lesser than us and so we can kill them. They say that those of other species can't feel pain (the classic "fish don't feel pain" myth for example), aren't conscious, aren't intelligent, animals like insects are so small, and that that therefore makes them lesser than us and so we can kill them. Both of these not only are incorrect *at the very least* for some of those who have yet to be born and some animals, but also forget that there are many born humans, such as infants and other children and those along the wide spectrum of disabilities and diseases who also fall in those categories, yet they understand then that those things don't matter at all. How can you argue that if one isn't intelligent, they can be killed, if you understand that a born human who is mentally challenged needs even more protection than the average person? It's a might makes right attitude as well. "I'm bigger than you/smarter than you etc., so since I can kill you because you have less abilities than me, I should be allowed to have that choice." Discriminating against a group based off of their abilities, or Ableism, is another classic way to pass off discrimination, and is closely tied to eugenics. It has been said that you have to look at someone's differences and act like that makes you better, in order to get people to successfully oppress a group. For the unborn it's dehumanizing, for other animals it's speciesism. *Both use the arguments that these things have been happening for so long/are natural, and that people will still do them even if it's outlawed. Abortion is ancient so women will still find a way to do it they say. Animal eating is ancient and what we need to be doing they say. God put animals on earth for us to use they say. God aborts babies all the time they say. *Both try to brush off the act by talking about the fact that it is legal, as if somehow something being legal therefore makes it ok, or that somehow you shouldn’t advocate for the other side as if things can’t change from legal to illegal. *Both try to find ways to defend at least some abortion or animal killing/harming. With abortion they say "well it's ok if it's below a certain amount of weeks/well it's ok if she was raped/well it's ok if the child has a disability etc." With animal killing they usually go for the ones labeled "humane" "organic" "grass fed" “cage free" “free rage" without realizing the problems with these, or they point to specific animals. Or they'll just say "I wouldn't eat a dog but a pig is different." *Ultimately, both look at the differences we have from these groups rather than our similarities and use that as a way to exert power and control over them and "other" them to the point of death, dismemberment, and exploitation.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Margaret Sanger (Planned Parenthood founder) was pro-life

Likewise, so was Marie Stopes (the namesake of the UK version of Planned Parenthood) which I will talk about after Margaret)

So I heard about this from one of the people who posted on my Riot Grrrls For Life Pro-Life facebook page when I first started it. She mentioned that Margaret Sanger was pro-life and she really liked her, and so at first I was shocked, as I had assumed that she was the queen of abortion, as that's what everyone, pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike, make it seem like, and what with her being the founder of the main voice for pro-choice, I guess I assumed it like everyone else does. So I start to look it up, not knowing what to expect, and it turns out, she was right. She hated abortion for several reasons and has a lot of good pro-life quotes. I found this link talking about how that one infanticide quote was totally taken out of context, and what she really said about abortion and infanticide, and how she often linked abortion, infanticide, and child abandonment together, calling them all "horrors" and the like, and other things like that, and this link that said the same stuff and gave more quotes. You can actually go to her book Woman and the New Race from there as it links it, or hey I'll just give it to you here, and it is written all over how much she hates abortion and infanticide and other things like that. Also, you can look at her wikipedia page. Some pro-choicers will try to brush it off like it doesn't matter or she was only against abortion because of how dangerous it is to pregnant women, but she clearly has said at least a few times that it was because it was the taking of a life, so I'm sure it was for both reasons.

In fact, Planned Parenthood pamphlets used to advocate against abortion, saying "An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun. It is dangerous to your life and health. It may make you sterile so that if you want a child you cannot have it. Birth control merely postpones the beginning of life." I guess the phrase "every child a wanted child" was first only meant in reference to birth control as well, since it says that on there too. Here are links I found for that.

I'm not saying she was a good person, and I'm not saying she wasn't racist or for eugenics (though honestly I don't know), but I am saying that everything like that she was for, was only with wanting to prevent them before conception so that no one was killing any human beings. She worked to secure birth control in part to get rid of abortions and infanticide. She knew that it was the taking of a life, so she wanted to take care of the situation before that happened. She seems like one of those people who is both good and bad. Some things about them you love, and others you hate. It did at least give me more respect for her, because in researching this, I found that I liked a lot of what she wrote.

They added abortion to Planned Parenthood after her death, and I'm sure that's why everyone assumes it, and no one corrects people. I'm sure if more people knew their founder worked to get rid of abortion, less people would support PP, or there would be some sort of outrage, and so they probably keep it under wraps. Also, the more conservative and religious pro-lifers really like to paint her as the queen of abortion and infanticide, and I have even posted that she was pro-life on a few pro-life pages, and they argued with me and tried to act like it wasn't true, and one even blocked me, even though I didn't do anything other than simply state that and post those links. So, funny enough the pro-life side is also fueling this false info, when really they could be using the fact that she was pro-life to say it's disrespectful that Planned Parenthood have abortion services. Or like that first link from the livelydust blog states, "And anyway, why would pro-lifers want to base a campaign against abortion on misinformation? Why not just sweetly point out that Planned Parenthood's founder called abortion a horror and devoted her life to making it unnecessary?"

We really should be doing that. Why bother to keep pushing a lie just because it makes someone look like they support abortion, when the people who support her already do, when you could be telling the truth and saying that even the woman pro-choicers love and celebrate as the leader of women owning their bodies and reproductive rights, was against this?

Here are some of her quotes:

"Although abortion may be resorted to in order to save the life of the mother, the practice of it merely for limitation of offspring is dangerous and vicious. I bring up the subject here only because some ill-informed persons have the notion that when we speak of birth control we include abortion as a method. We certainly do not. Abortion destroys the already fertilized ovum or the embryo; contraception, as I have carefully explained, prevents the fertilizing of the ovum by keeping the male cells away. Thus it prevents the beginning of life."
- In her paper "Birth Control Advances: A Reply to the Pope"

"To each group we explained simply what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not begun."
- In her autobiography

"Human society must protect its children–yes, but prenatal care is most essential! The child-to-be, as yet not called into being, has rights no less imperative."
- In her paper "The Children's Era"

"While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization."
- In her paper "Birth Control or Abortion?"

""It is apparent that nothing short of contraceptives can put an end to the horrors of abortion and infanticide"
- In her book "Woman and the New Race" page 25

"[It is] the most barbaric method [of family planning], the killing of babies — infanticide — abortion."
- In her paper "My Fight for Birth Control

"Usually this desire [for family limitation] has been laid to economic pressure... It has asserted itself among the rich and among the poor, among the intelligent and the unintelligent. It has been manifested in such horrors as infanticide, child abandonment and abortion."
- In her book "Woman and the New Race"

"When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become the foundation of a new race. There will be no killing of babies in the womb by abortion, nor through neglect in foundling homes, nor will there be infanticide."
- In her book "Woman and the New Race" page 232

It makes sense that Margaret Sanger was pro-life as all the feminists of the time were.

Marie Stopes was likewise one of these pro-life feminists who worked to further birth control yet had the biggest abortion facility named after her after her death. From her wikipedia,
"Stopes was strongly against the termination of a pregnancy once it had started: her clinics did not offer abortions during her life. She saw birth control as the only way families should limit their size.

The nurses at her clinic had to sign a declaration in which they swore not to "impart any information or lend any assistance whatsoever to any person calculated to lead to the destruction in uteroof the products of conception."^[50]

When she learned that one of Avro Manhattan's woman friends had had an abortion, Stopes accused him of "murdering" the unborn child.^[51]

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/06/22/there-is-no-doubt-the-early-feminists-were-pro-life-on-abortion/
"‘I was glad you gave space to the fact that the Queensland Medical Association is planning an extensive educational campaign against the evil of abortion.’ – Marie Stopes. (When Stopes found out that her contemporary Avro Manhattan had pressured one of his lovers into having an abortion, she called him a murderer to his face. And when William Carpenter named his abortion shop after her, she took legal action against him. But today, the largest abortion business in the UK bears her name since it was founded in 1976, eighteen years after her death.)"

Monday, September 16, 2013

The Pro-Choice side is based on lies

So from searching all of this stuff and trying to find like-minded people, I have found the history on why and how pro-life turned from being a liberal and feminist thing to pro-choice being a liberal and feminist thing, and it turns out, it is all based off of shysters lying to people and them being gullible and eating it up, hook, line, and sinker. I found this article, Why Liberals Should Defend the Unborn, that explains that a lot of what turned liberals pro-choice was the eugenicists and population controllers, and they went and campaigned for abortion, saying that poor women should have access to what rich women had, and framing abortion as a matter of justice to the poor, and there is even a scary quote by Alan Guttmacher, the president of Planned Parenthood, "If you're going to curb population", he said, "it's extremely important not to have it done by the damned Yankee, but by the UN. Because the thing is, then it is not considered genocide. If the united states goes to the black man or the yellow man and says slow down your reproductive rate, we're immediately suspected to have ulterior motives to keep the white man dominant in the world. If you can send in a colorful UN force, you've got much better leverage." In addition to that, the article says it was also the lies about when life begins and abortion and so on the Roe case told, which you can read more about in this new book detailing all of that, Abuse of Discretion: The Inside Story of Roe v. Wade, and that's in addition to the lies they told about what the women in those cases wanted, which I will get to later on in this post, people being led astray by institutions and people they relied on, people being gullible and not going with their own better instincts and bothering to think about how this issue betrayed their key principles, the gloomy European ideologies left over from the 1800s and early 1900s which were more rigid and less hopeful than early American views and liberal views which tended to be pretty optimist and idealist, and that also helped to turn the feminism of the 60s pro-choice, and Karl Marx's materialism and an essay that Friedrich Engels wrote that was hostile toward marriage and indifferent to children, Sigmund Freud's sexual theories making people assume sexual restraint is psychologically harmful, and the sexual revolution of the 60s that treated children as unwanted byproducts of sex.

While I love the sexual revolution and do think that too much sexual restraint is harmful, I could see it being too careless that way and making people think that they don't have to take care of the outcomes of sex as much. I think we can come to a place where we value everyone's sexuality and let them do whatever they want that way, but realize there are consequences and real adults take care of them. It came second nature to me. I have always known sex was incredibly natural and supported things like prostitution as long as all are consenting adults and there was no sex trafficking, and polygamy as long as there is no sexism, and sex whatever way you want it, with whomever you want (of course as long as all are consenting adult humans), and however much you want, yet of course there would be things to look out for such as pregnancy and STDs, so I never guessed people would actually advocate for opting out of their responsibilities. We know there are so many consequences to so many things, yet no one has a problem taking responsibility with anything else, lest they be considered a very immature person who isn't doing what they should.

Here is another article that explains how the left adopted abortion. I'll just pull out quotes that give a good summary of the reasons. "One factor was the popular civil libertarian rationale for freedom of choice in abortion. Many feminists presented it as a right of women to control their own bodies." "Unfortunately, many liberals and radicals accepted this view without further question." "Class issues provided another rationale. In the late 1960s, liberals were troubled by evidence that rich women could obtain abortions regardless of the law, by going to careful society doctors or countries where abortion was legal. Why, they asked, should poor women be barred from something the wealthy could have?" "Many liberals were also persuaded by a church/state argument that followed roughly this line: "Opposition to abortion is a religious viewpoint, particularly a Catholic viewpoint. The Catholics have no business imposing their religious views on the rest of us."" "Still another, more emotional reason is that so many conservatives oppose abortion. Many liberals have difficulty accepting the idea that Jesse Helms can be right about anything. I do not quite understand this attitude. Just by the law of averages, he has to be right about something, sometime. Standing at the March for Life rally at the U.S. Capitol last year, and hearing Senator Helms say that "We reject the philosophy that life should be only for the planned, the perfect, or the privileged," I thought he was making a good civil-rights statement. If much of the leadership of the pro-life movement is right-wing, that is due largely to the default of the Left. We "little people" who marched against the war and now march against abortion would like to see leaders of the Left speaking out on behalf of the unborn. But we see only a few, such as Dick Gregory, Mark Hatfield, Jesse Jackson, Richard Neuhaus, Mary Rose Oakar. Most of the others either avoid the issue or support abortion."

I also found a video, The Feminist Case Against Abortion, where Serrin Foster explains that the reason why feminism ended up taking a pro-choice stance was that Lawrence Lader and Dr. Bernard Nathanson were going around the country, and first seen as pariah, trying to tell people that women should have the right to abort. No one was buying it and there wasn't really an outcry for women to have abortions, but they tried all sorts of tactics and slogans and made up a whole bunch of lies to try and convince people that we need this. They came to Betty Friedan, who was the leader of the National Organization of Women, and the one who wrote The Feminine Mystique, and even she wasn't buying it at first, and her book didn't even have anything about abortion in it until after all this happened, but what really got her was them making up a number saying 100,000 women had died from illegal abortions, and they painted it as a civil rights issue, so she got on board thinking she had to legalize it to make it safe - a common misconception that still is around today. To this day, there has never been any documentation of more than 83 or 89 women who have died from illegal abortions, and if people actually thought about it, they would realize how false the 100,000 number was, as there weren't enough women who had died from causes other than those who were already accounted for, to account for that many deaths by abortion, but people just fell for it and didn't use their common sense. So it wasn't even until 1966 that the National Organization for Women included abortion in its list of goals, and even then it was really not a big priority. It just grew from there, and since then, the National Organization for Women has made legalized abortion it's #1 priority, even stating that access to abortion is the most fundamental right of women, without which, all other rights are meaningless.

In fact, Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was pro-life, and Planned Parenthood actually used to advocate against abortions. Here is an old pamphlet of theirs, stating "An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun. It is dangerous to your life and health. It may make you sterile so that if you want a child you cannot have it. Birth control merely postpones the beginning of life."

Bernard and Larry were trying to think of what women want and what the movement was about, to try and persuade them that they needed and wanted this, so they figured it was equality in the workplace and education, and one of the ways they framed it was by telling women that if they wanted to be hired, educated, promoted, and payed like a man, they can't bother the poor employer with maternity and fertility issues.--The employer shouldn't be burdened with your fertility. You'r tummy's gonna ache for the first trimester and you'll feel sick and won't want to go to work, and then you'll want to have time off to have the baby, and then the baby will get ill with something, so you'll disrupt the workplace even more by taking time off when your kid gets sick.-- To this day, women still don't have adequate care for being pregnant or mothers, especially in the workplace, and now I know it is because of this. We need more help to get rid of all that. Women in America still don't have a federal paid maternity leave. These are the reasons people say abortion should be available. They don't need abortion, they need these things fixed.

Abortion proponents promised the women's movement all sorts of good things to further persuade them; that there would be this world of equality, and reduced poverty, even though the term "feminization of poverty" was coined after Roe V. Wade, and that every child would be a wanted child, because hey, we'll just get rid of the unwanted ones, and they won't bother us (which obviously doesn't happen because no matter how unwanted a child is, even if someone totally believes in abortion, it doesn't mean they will have one, and there are still other options that even the most pro-choice people could choose, not to mention that obviously not everyone would think abortion is ok in the first place, no matter how badly pro-choice people would want it, so you can't get rid of other people's unwanted children like that.). This also seemed to be popular in the eugenics crowd. They thought that if you just get rid of poor people and unwanted people and defective people, all the world's problems would be solved. It definitely isn't that easy. Instead of this world of non-violence, child abuse has escalated in every developed country where there is legalized abortion. Rather than shared responsibility for children, even more of the responsibility of children has shifted to women, do to the pro-choice side's "It's a woman's choice" anthem which really put all the pressure on women to make decisions regarding their offspring, and cultured a world where girls grew up thinking they had to take it all on their shoulders or else they were bad women or weren't strong enough or weren't feminist enough or that's just what women do, and guys grew up thinking they had to respect their girlfriends "right to choose" and do what THEY wanted, so they tell their girls that they will support whatever THEY choose, as if men are just supposed to stay out of it and let women do their thing because they are the mothers so that's women's work, and then of course the bad men taking advantage of this and using it as an excuse to get out of taking care of children. The #1 cause of death for pregnant women isn't abortion, it isn't even on the map, it's being beaten to death by their boyfriends who don't want them pregnant. You have schools and colleges who don't allow women or teenage girls to complete their education if they have a child. You have employers today who do not have maternity coverage in their health insurance, won't accommodate women with job-sharing, flex-time, create a virtual office, or pay a living wage. College students say without housing, without daycare, without maternity coverage, it doesn't feel like they have much of a choice.

As it also turns out, it was actually the Feminists, along with what would become the American Medical Association, and the media, who worked to make abortion illegal in this country in the first place, because they were all in agreement that we needed legal protection for the unborn. I have known all the early American Feminists were pro-life for years now, but I didn't know they were the ones to make abortion illegal in the first place. 100 years later, Roe V. Wade undid everything they worked for.

In addition to that, I found this link that says, "It was in 1827 that the discovery of "conception" revealed when human life begins. As a result, the American Medical Association (AMA) urged state legislators to pass laws protecting the unborn human "from conception" and prohibiting abortion. During the 1800's all states passed laws making abortion a serious crime." and this link that says "The American Medical Association (AMA) declared as far back as 1857 (referenced in the Roe. vs. Wade opinion) that "the independent and actual existence of the child before birth, as a living being” is a matter of objective science. They deplored the “popular ignorance...that the foetus is not alive till after the period of quickening.”" and given the info from Serrin's speech, it seems to fit and give more of the history of how this all went down.

Then of course you have the Roe V. Wade and Doe V. Bolton cases which were also based on lies. Roe was just a pawn used in an attorney's attempt to gain legalized abortion, and was persuaded to lie and say she was raped and needed and abortion, which was not true. She ended up not ever having an abortion. She is now a pro-life advocate vowing to spend the rest of her life undoing Roe V. Wade. Doe never even wanted nor requested an abortion, and she was tricked into signing an affidavit about abortion in the process of filing for divorce from her husband and seeking to regain custody of her other children. She to has become a pro-life spokesperson and is fighting to overturn the court cases. She actually fled the state when her mother and a lawyer tried to force her to have an abortion. She too did not end up ever having an abortion.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/two-women-legalized-abortion-in-america-now-both-of-them-want-it-reversed
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/22/woman-behind-roe-v-wade-im-dedicating-my-life-to-overturning-it/?utm_content=buffer5bb9d&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

There were also Nixon tapes that came out a few years ago that shows that the conservative presidency of the time wasn't all that against abortion, that had this scary quote, “There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,”

Dr. Bernard Nathanson turned pro-life in the 70s after seeing an ultrasound of an abortion, and admitted all the lies he told and the story behind how they were selling abortion. He has come out with a few books, Aborting America, and The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind, telling his story. I'll post a few quotes where he says some of the lies and tactics they used.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/abortion/ab0005.html
"The First Key Tactic was to capture the media

We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favour of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority.

We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200 - 250 annually. The figure constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalization.

The Second Key Tactic was to Play the Catholic Card

We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its “socially backward ideas” and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as “we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics” and “Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform.” And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics in favour of abortion are enlightened and forward-looking. An inference of this tactic was that there were no non-Catholic groups opposing abortion. The fact that other Christian as well as non-Christian religions were (and still are) monolithically opposed to abortion was constantly suppressed, along with pro-life atheists’ opinions.

The Third Key Tactic was the Denigration and Suppression of all Scientific Evidence that Life Begins at Conception

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a perinatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion. It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma. But to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

As a scientist I know, not believe, know that human life begins at conception. Although I am not a formal religionist, I believe with all my heart that there is a divinity of existence which commands us to declare a final and irreversible halt to this infinitely sad and shameful crime against humanity."

I'd like to point out that these are still around today and still just as false, and regarding the false numbers they made up saying most people supported abortion, that stigma is still working to make people believe the hype today, with this gallup poll showing that most Americans falsely think that more people are pro-choice, when really it is pretty even yet actually more people are pro-life.

On the illegalized abortion leading to more women dying lie, Ground Breaking Study From Chile

National Center For Health Statistics

http://prolifequotes.wordpress.com/category/dr-bernard-nathanson/

“We fed the public a line of deceit, dishonesty, a fabrication of statistics and figures. We succeeded because the time was right and the news media co-operated. We sensationalized the effects of illegal abortions, and fabricated polls which indicated that 85 percent of the public favoured unrestricted abortion, when we knew it was only 5 percent. We unashamedly lied, and yet our statements were quoted (by the media) as though they had been written in law.”

http://realweb.ifastnet.com/pcspeaks.html

"How many deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In NARAL, we generally emphasized the frame of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always 5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year. I confess that I knew that the figures were totally false and I suppose that others did too if they stopped to think of it. But in the 'morality' of our revolution, it was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics? The overriding concern was to get the laws eliminated, and anything within reason that had to be done was permissible."

A lot of the false mottos and whatnot that were around in the 70s, still get spewed out today by pro-choicers. That is, after all, where all the "it's just a clump of cells" "it's not alive" "it's just a part of her body" "we need it legal so that it's safe as so many women die from illegal abortions" and so on and so forth came from. Most of the views held today by pro-choicers are false political rhetoric that their side never corrected so they had no reason to stop saying it all. We can actually pity them a bit though. Some of them honesty believe this stuff, or think they are doing the right thing, and don't realize they had the wool pulled over their eyes.