University Threatens to ‘Silence’ Professor Protesting Genderless Pronouns

/0 Comments/in , /by

A psychology professor at the University of Toronto who is protesting a law that would force him to use certain pronouns for transgender and other gender nonconforming individuals says the school is trying to “silence” him.

“The university, yesterday, basically told me to silence myself,” Jordan Peterson told The Daily Signal. “That’s the second warning letter.”

Peterson has been a vocal opponent of a measure before Canada’s Parliament known as C-16, which would amend the nation’s human rights and criminal codes to make it illegal to discriminate based on gender identity and gender expression.

If passed, failure to refer to a person by the preferred pronoun or refusing to hire someone based on gender identity could qualify as discrimination and be punishable by law.

In a phone interview with The Daily Signal, Peterson said he has no problem with addressing people “as whatever gender they appear to be presenting themselves as.”

Peterson, a clinical psychologist, is a tenured professor.

“If Caitlyn Jenner wants to be called ‘she,’ I don’t give a damn,” he said. “If someone’s going through a fair bit of work to manifest themselves as a female or manifest themselves as a male, I’m not going to make an issue of it.”

What Peterson takes issue with, however, is the Canadian government potentially forcing him to speak in a manner that reflects a particular ideology, such as using the genderless pronouns “zie” or “hir.”

“The law should be very careful when it mandates what people have to say,” Peterson said, adding:

That’s the fundamental issue here. The mistake of this legislation is, it’s an attempt to force people to utter certain words that are not of their choosing. There’s a big difference between being required to not say something, and being required to say something. It’s a different category of law. One is closing your mouth. The other one is putting a hand inside you and forcing you to be a puppet.

As part of his opposition to C-16, which currently is in committee, Peterson got involved in free speech rallies, published a video series online, and wrote articles explaining his stance.

Some students and other members of the University of Toronto community took immediate offense to Peterson’s remarks, telling school leaders they found his comments “unacceptable, emotionally disturbing, and painful.”

Some fear for their safety because of his perspective, two university officials said in a letter to Peterson. David Cameron, dean of the Faculty of Arts & Science, and Sioban Nelson, vice-provost for faculty and academic life, wrote:

Some members of the university community report that the statements and the invective that has followed in the ensuing commentary and debates on social media have caused them to fear for their safety on the university campus.

The university first warned Peterson to stop making “discriminatory” remarks in an Oct. 3 letter from Susanne Ferber, chairwoman of the Department of Psychology, who wrote:

Concerns have been raised by members of the University of Toronto community regarding statements you have made publicly regarding transgendered persons in a recent YouTube presentation. I wish to remind you that in your activities as a University of Toronto faculty member you are expected to comply with applicable human rights law.

The Daily Signal sought comment from the University of Toronto, but did not receive a response by deadline.

The letter signed by Cameron and Nelson, dated Oct. 18, informs Peterson:

The impact of your behavior runs the risk of undermining your ability to conduct essential components of your job as a faculty member and we urge you to consider your obligations as a faculty member to act in a manner that is consistent with the law and with university policy.

Peterson’s tenure status provides “some protection” from being fired, he said, “but the limits of that can always be tested.”

The university officials object to what they call Peterson’s “discriminatory intentions”—that, as a matter of principle, he has said he’d refuse to comply with rules or laws dictating pronoun usage.

“You should also be aware that many members of the university community are concerned and distressed about the declarations of your discriminatory intentions,” Cameron and Nelson write.

The letter also cites the Ontario Human Rights Code, which already bans discrimination based on gender identity and expression. The university is located in Toronto, the capital of Ontario.

“Depending on the context, if personal pronouns are being used, the refusal by a teacher or colleague to use the personal pronoun that is an expression of the person’s gender identity can constitute discrimination,” they add.

Peterson said he doesn’t intend to stop speaking out on the issue, and warned that political correctness is spiraling out of control, particularly in the U.S.

“This has also happened in New York City, where you can be fined $250,000 for misgendering someone,” he said.

Under the New York City policy, landlords, employers, and businesses face civil penalties up to $125,000 per violation and up to $250,000 “for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct.”

Peterson said he was discouraged by the thought of losing his job, and possibly losing his license to practice psychology. He said the situation has been hard for his family to bear.

On principle, however, Peterson told The Daily Signal he refuses to be silenced, and knows that as a result, he stands a real chance of losing his job and livelihood:

I think the university will send me a third warning letter, because I think they’re getting the documentation in order, and then I think there’s a reasonable probability that they’ll take action against me. And I think there’s a nontrivial possibility that I’ll be held up in front of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. I’m obviously prognosticating with regards to something I can’t predict, but the university did yesterday tell me to silence myself, and I didn’t expect them to do that.

(For more from the author of “University Threatens to ‘Silence’ Professor Protesting Genderless Pronouns” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

These Abortion Parties Are the Most Disgusting Thing You Will Read About This Week

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Over 30 parties celebrating abortion were held all over the country Saturday night in tandem with a concert in Cleveland. Hosted by “All Access,” a coalition of groups such as NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, and the Center for Reproductive Rights, the parties gathered attendees in Chicago, Miami, Atlanta, Philadelphia, and even remote places like Sioux Falls, S.D.

The Cleveland event was headlined by Sia, a Grammy-nominated singer whose song “Cheap Thrills” dominated the Billboard Hot 100 this summer. Leslie Jones, a comedian who starred in this year’s “Ghostbusters” revival, and Jessica Williams, a former correspondent on “The Daily Show,” also performed at the event. Despite the big names, however, the venue wasn’t packed:

The photo above was posted 40 minutes before the start of the concert. And while the venue filled out more by the start of the concert, it was by no means packed:

All Access tries hard to portray abortion as a matter of routine health care, as well as a social and religious good. On the All Access website, a rabbi argues that denying abortion rights “rob us of our religious dignity” and restrict women’s “full agency over their own bodies.” Some of the smaller parties around the country got creative in celebrating abortion: The All Access party in South Bend, Ind., featured 200 flags citing reasons why abortion is a social good.

Supporters used the hashtag #Access4All, along with #BeBoldEndHyde, referencing the Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funds being used by Medicaid to pay for abortions (in most cases). For the first time this year, the Democratic Party platform included language to repeal the Hyde Amendment, further deepening the political divide over abortion.

Ignoring the obvious, one supporter maintained, per the South Bend Tribune, “Abortion shouldn’t be politicized and separated out as a controversial issue.” (For more from the author of “These Abortion Parties Are the Most Disgusting Thing You Will Read About This Week” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Super PAC Set to Release Pro-Trump Ad Pitting Michelle Obama Against Hillary Clinton

/0 Comments/in , /by

First lady Michelle Obama’s past words will come back to haunt her this week with the release of a new campaign ad bought by a super PAC that is backing Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The ad, to be aired in Orlando and Tampa, Fla., uses Obama’s quote from 2007 about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who was facing Obama’s husband in the Democratic primary.

“If you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House,” Obama says.

The statement appeared to be a reference to former President Bill Clinton’s extramarital affairs, although Barack Obama denied it at the time.

Make America Number 1, the superPAC that paid for the ad, is hoping it will cause women in the key battleground state of Florida to rethink voting for Clinton.

Clinton leads Trump by 15 points among female voters in the Sunshine State — 54 percent to 39 percent — according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday.

Throughout the course of the election, Trump has struggled to win over many female voters. His efforts were hurt by a recent leaked tape of his lewd comments followed by sexual harassment accusations from several women.

Although Trump apologized for the remarks and denied the women’s claims, his poll numbers with female voters have dropped.

Make America Number 1 is looking to help give him a boost in this area with its ad featuring the first lady.

Michelle Obama has emerged as one of Clinton’s strongest advocates on the campaign trail, giving powerful speeches attacking Trump and how he treats women.

The White House last week gave a subtle warning to Trump not to respond in kind to Obama.

“I can’t think of a bolder way for Donald Trump to lose even more standing than he already has than by engaging the first lady of the United States,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said.

With this new ad, though, Obama isn’t attacked at all. Instead, her words are used to attack Clinton.

Super PACs are restricted by law from directly communicating and coordinating with a campaign, but they have no limits on how much money they can raise.

The commercial initially debuted as an ad on Facebook, where Make America Number 1 spent $72,000 trying to reach and win over women voters in nine major battleground states.

Hogan Gidley, a spokesman for Make America Number 1, said the group now will spend about $400,000 to get the commercial on network television. (For more from the author of “Super PAC Set to Release Pro-Trump Ad Pitting Michelle Obama Against Hillary Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ivanka Trump Breaks Lengthy Silence on Leaked 2005 Video of Her Father

/0 Comments/in , /by

Ivanka Trump has been a loyal and diligent worker in her father’s effort to win the White House.

But the 34-year-old wife and mother had to pause briefly when a 2005 video showed Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump making vulgar comments about women. For more than a week, she had no reaction to the video.

Then, Monday, she released a statement in an interview with Fast Company.

“My father’s comments were clearly inappropriate and offensive, and I’m glad that he acknowledged this fact with an immediate apology to my family and the American people,” she said in a statement.

The statement mirrored words of Trump’s wife, Melania, who issued a statement the day after the video surfaced.

“The words my husband used are unacceptable and offensive to me,” Melania Trump’s statement said. “This does not represent the man that I know. He has the heart and mind of a leader.”

“I hope people will accept his apology, as I have, and focus on the important issues facing our nation and the world,” the statement concluded.

In the Fast Company interview, Ivanka Trump said that despite an onslaught of allegations claiming her father groped or was otherwise inappropriate with women, she stands by his denials that the accusers are wrong.

“The greatest comfort I have is the fact that I know my father,” she said.

”Most of the people who write about him don’t. I do. So that gives me an ability to shrug off the things that I read about him that are wrong,” she added.

Ivanka Trump is not only in the spotlight as the leading female in the Trump entourage, but she is also an entrepreneur who must market herself to America.

“She wants to be the brand of glamorous millennials,” Donald Trump critic Jennifer Rubin commented to Fast Company. “But what young woman wants to be reminded every time she puts on a pair of Ivanka shoes of her father boasting about sexual assault?”

However, for all of Ivanka Trump’s business savvy, nothing has broken the bonds of family.

“Ivanka’s brand has always been built on a really carefully balancing act,” says Rajiv Menon, a cultural analyst with the branding consultancy TruthCo. “She’s really demonstrated a sense of drive, a sense of ingenuity, and really established something strong with her apparel brand and larger public presence. But with all of that, she’s never really lost her sense of family loyalty.”

“And as the campaign has continued, she’s maintained that balancing act — but as the campaign has also mutated and turned into what we see now with the tape that was released … that balancing act becomes a lot more precarious. It becomes much more of a liability for her.”

However, the public understands that family comes first.

“Any child or parent is going to defend their parent or their child,” said leadership consultant Gregg Ward. “That’s her right.”

In fact, were she to turn on her father, it might backfire.

“She would lose points if she didn’t stand by her father,” said Larry Chiagouris, a marketing professor at Pace University. (For more from the author of “Ivanka Trump Breaks Lengthy Silence on Leaked 2005 Video of Her Father” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

15 States Have Moved to Defund Planned Parenthood Since Undercover Videos Were Released

/0 Comments/in , /by

In the wake of a series of undercover videos that hit the abortion industry last year, 15 states have attempted to cut funding to Planned Parenthood.

After the Center for Medical Progress released undercover video footage that raised questions about whether Planned Parenthood was making a profit from selling aborted baby body parts (Planned Parenthood denies illegal activity), Republican lawmakers around the country called for cutting federal and state funding to the abortion provider.

Fifteen states—Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin—have moved to defund Planned Parenthood in wake of the videos.

A handful of states, some mentioned above, along with Indiana, Michigan, Tennessee, and New Jersey, already reduced taxpayer funding to Planned Parenthood before the release of the undercover videos, according to the nonprofit Christian legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom.

In some states, such as Arkansas, defunding efforts have been caught up in legal challenges.

As The Daily Signal has previously reported, “Governors and other officials generally say their state has ‘defunded’ Planned Parenthood by taking one or more of these steps:

Ceased funding the organization through state family planning programs.

Diverted federal Title X family planning grants to other health clinics.

Terminated a Medicaid contract with the organization or barred it from participating in the Medicaid program.”

As Planned Parenthood celebrated its 100th anniversary on Sunday, many in the pro-life community say they reflect on the organization with heavy hearts.

“At Planned Parenthood’s 100-year anniversary, tens of millions of Americans have now seen the shocking and callous way that this abortion factory’s top-level leaders scheme to make an easy and illegal profit off of tiny baby organs,” David Daleiden, Center for Medical Progress founder and investigative lead, said in a statement provided to The Daily Signal. “Millions of Americans are becoming increasingly aware that Planned Parenthood, as the biggest abortion provider in the country, receives over half a billion taxpayer dollars annually.”

Daleiden added:

The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Select Investigative Panel is the only official investigation taking a comprehensive, nationwide look at Planned Parenthood’s harvesting and sale of baby body parts. The panel has so far found probable cause that Planned Parenthood and its business partners profited off the sale of fetal organs, [and] used fraudulent and invalid consent forms to convince patients to give permission for harvesting …

Planned Parenthood has denied any illegal action.

“Planned Parenthood may be in a celebratory mood as it turns 100, but the nation’s largest abortion chain has many reasons to worry,” Ashley McGuire, senior fellow with the Catholic Association, said in a statement provided to The Daily Signal. “At the state level, the trends are clear: Americans want more protections for women and children, not less, and are increasingly skeptical of a for-profit company that places abortion profit ahead of safeguards for women.”

In total, at least 24 states have attempted to defund Planned Parenthood since July 2015, according to Live Action News.

“Planned Parenthood has always claimed to ‘care’ for women and their health, but the evidence shows it’s really an abortion business focused on making money,” said Lila Rose, president of Live Action, a pro-life advocacy group. “Planned Parenthood, which falsely claims that abortion makes up only 3 percent of its services, has become the largest abortion chain in the nation, committing over 320,000 abortions last year alone by starving pre-born children of nutrients until they die or dismembering them alive.”

Planned Parenthood receives roughly half a billion dollars every year from federal funding, mostly through Medicaid and Title X, a family funding program designed for low-income Americans. According to its most recent annual report, Planned Parenthood received $553.7 million in government health services grants and reimbursements for the organization’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2015.

Planned Parenthood claims it is “100 years strong.”

“We’ve made incredible gains during our first century and we’re just getting started,” Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement. “We will build on our proud legacy and launch our second century with as much passion, courage, and conviction as our first.”

The organization touts that nearly one in three women will have an abortion at some point in their lifetime.

“I am saddened that for eight years of my life, I worked for Planned Parenthood and played a role in their deceit,” said Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood director and founder of And Then There Were None, a nonprofit that helps abortion clinic workers leave the abortion industry. She added:

As I reflect on Planned Parenthood’s 100th anniversary, I am haunted by the fact that for 100 years this organization has treated women as second-class citizens and aborted nearly 8 million children.

As of September, 22 states have both Republican governors and Republican-controlled legislatures, Democrats control 8 states, 19 states are split, and one state has a unicameral and nonpartisan legislature, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The Obama administration has warned certain states that cutting off Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood may be against the law. (For more from the author of “15 States Have Moved to Defund Planned Parenthood Since Undercover Videos Were Released” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

I Was Raped. But I Decided to Have My Baby Because, Like Me, She Was Innocent

/0 Comments/in , /by

My name is Julia and I was raped at 14 years old by a friend of the family who we all thought was trustworthy.

I remember when I found out I was pregnant and that the baby was the product of the most horrible crime that a woman can undergo. I remember bursting in tears of despair, fear, because I was only 14. At that age I had had no boyfriend, knew nothing about babies or pregnancy, never got involved in anything about that.

But then the only social media I knew was Facebook and one day by chance I came across this Salvar El 1 page (Save The 1 Spanish Facebook page) and I read many testimonies that touched my heart in a very deep way. I had never thought of abortion but perhaps I had considered giving that baby up for adoption because I did not feel ready to face motherhood being so young. I remember a quote I read that made very clear that if I was a victim of a crime, I wouldn’t become guilty of another one and I decided to have my baby and be a mother forever.

Despise the fact of being just a child myself, I decided to have my baby because, like me, she was innocent and she didn’t have to carry the guilt of the aggressor who, eventually, is the one who deserves being punished.

My beautiful baby girl was born a few days after I turned 15. Her name is Mia Victoria and I love her more than anything else on earth. She is one month and a few days old, and being myself so young, I start learning how to be a mother. (Read more from “I Was Raped. But I Decided to Have My Baby Because, Like Me, She Was Innocent” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Election Proves the American Church Is in Even Worse Shape Than You Think

/0 Comments/in , /by

There’s been a lot of justifiable hand-wringing regarding the Christian vote in this election cycle. Unfortunately, the reality is even worse than the perception.

That’s because data suggests that what’s driving many believers to vote isn’t their beliefs as much as it is their racial/ethnic identity — just like the electorate at large. In other words, voters coming from the institution charged with preserving America’s vitally important moral foundation — the church — collectively aren’t approaching the ballot box any differently than the secularly-minded.

That’s bad news if you’re trying to conserve a society based on God-given (not government granted) rights, but more on that later. First, let’s permit the troubling data to speak for itself.

Let’s begin with Catholic voters, which are a crucial voting bloc for both Republicans and Democrats. Since Roe v. Wade, only once has either side won the presidency without winning the Catholic vote. And that was in 2000 when George W. Bush won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote, so that’s obviously an outlier.

How critical is this bloc of voters? Consider Obama won Catholics by three points in 2012, which mirrored almost precisely his national popular vote advantage (3.8 points).

While polls have shown Democrats with a decided edge among Catholics ever since the race was narrowed to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Trump doesn’t have a Catholic problem as much as he has a minority problem. Trump has narrowly led among white Catholics since last summer. However, that’s not enough to overcome Clinton’s astounding three-to-one lead among Hispanic Catholics.

The same pattern exists among evangelical protestants, but it’s even more striking.

LifeWay Research just published a fascinating survey drawing distinctions between voters who simply identify as evangelicals, and those who actually have evangelical beliefs. Overall, the survey found among whites who hold evangelical beliefs Trump overwhelmingly leads, 65-10. Meanwhile, Clinton holds almost the exact same lead among non-whites with evangelical beliefs, 62-15.

For the sake of its survey, LifeWay defined evangelical beliefs as the following:

Trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

Believe they have a responsibility to share their faith in Christ with others.

Believe the Bible is the final authority in their lives.

What’s unsettling is how those who claim they “believe the Bible is the final authority in their lives” could have such starkly different voting patterns. Especially because the Bible makes it clear the Christian is to set aside their worldly identity (race, ethnicity, gender, family legacy, nation of origin, etc.) in order to find his/her identity in Christ first and foremost.

Sadly, just the opposite appears to be happening with many voters.

Whites with evangelical beliefs are voting for a Republican whose lack of character and tendency to bully/demean flies in the face of what the Bible requires of our leaders. On the other hand, non-whites with evangelical beliefs are voting for a Democrat who is a staunch advocate for infanticide and sexual immorality, which are clearly condemned by the Scriptures. Not to mention Clinton’s willingness to have government violate the First Amendment to punish those who believe in Biblical morality.

Here’s why this trend spells certain doom for American Exceptionalism if it continues.

John Adams once said our Constitution establishing self-government was “meant only for a moral and religious people.” Many of his fellow founding fathers echoed similar sentiments. It’s no coincidence that as the culture has become more decadent the government has gotten bigger. The less moral restraint we have, the more government is needed to suffer the consequences of our actions.

Furthermore, those who fundamentally just believe in big government will seek to further incentivize immorality in order to justify their calls for more government. Thus creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Either way, morality and limited government are hand-in-hand. You cannot have one without the other.

This is why great spiritual awakenings came before liberty in our history, and then later revivals were required to secure that liberty for future generations once it was established. Spiritual revival leads to a morally-restrained people. A morally-restrained people require less government to restrain them.

But if we are now living in a time, as this data suggests, when even those who have inherited that spiritual legacy will instead see things as racially polarized and ethnically balkanized like the general population does, then the last line of defense to preserve our heritage has also been lost.

Many of us long for a day when it seems the majority of Americans once more believe in the right things regardless of our political differences. Those days will not return if believers, who are required to set their cultural biases aside to serve a greater cause, are unable to do so. For if someone is unable to set what divides us aside to serve God, they’ll never do it to serve their fellow man.

This puts us in existential danger. Without a moral and religious people, good luck preserving the notion of God-given rights that empowers individual freedom and limits government intrusion.

Is it any wonder we’re mired in a depressing presidential action between, as 19-year-old Janae Petijean told the Boston Globe, a man who “is everything wrong with America’s culture” and a woman who “is everything wrong with our government,” given everything wrong with the church? (For more from the author of “This Election Proves the American Church Is in Even Worse Shape Than You Think” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New Study: Human Heartbeat Detectable at 16 Days

/0 Comments/in , /by

A new British study says a human heartbeat may be detectable 16 days after a baby’s fertilization, based upon an analysis of fetal mice.

Published on October 11 and conducted by Oxford University, the study utilized high-resolution live imaging to examine fetal mice. In their summary, the authors note that “The heart is the first organ to form and to begin working in an embryo during pregnancy. It must begin pumping early to supply oxygen and nutrients to the developing embryo.”

Coordinated contractions of specialised muscle cells in the heart, called cardiomyocytes, generate the force needed to pump blood. The flow of calcium ions into and out of the cardiomyocytes triggers these heartbeats. In addition to triggering heart contractions, calcium ions also act as a messenger that drives changes in which genes are active in the cardiomyocytes and how these cells behave.

By manipulating the calcium ions, the study’s authors were able to discern more information for the study, which was intended to better understand birth defects of the heart. Pro-life advocates, however, are highlighting the study’s finding that heartbeats were detected in mice at 7.5 days after conception, which is equivalent to 16 days after conception for humans.

Mary Ellen Douglas of the Campaign Life Coalition of Canada told LifeSiteNews that “science is catching up with what we always have known, that life begins with union of the sperm and ovum and what is in the womb after that is a human being with its own DNA, and with its own heart pumping its own blood.”

“It won’t change the thinking of pro-abortion people,” she added. “None is so blind as those who will not see. But this reinforces the fact that there is a human being in the womb directing its own growth and development. And that’s true even before the heart starts beating, from conception.”

Sidewalk activist Lauren Handy used the new study as part of her protests and prayer in front of Planned Parenthood’s new Washington, D.C. headquarters. “This is very helpful for sidewalk counseling,” she said, “The humanity of the baby begins at conception, but it touches the mother to know when her baby’s heartbeat can be detected.”

Carol Tobias of U.S. National Right to Life said, according to LifeSiteNews, “This will make it much more difficult [for abortion advocates] to pass off the unborn child as a ‘blob of cells’ if the heart is already beating.”

A number of bills have been introduced in state legislatures to ban abortions after a heartbeat is detected. One measure that became law in North Dakota was knocked down last year. (For more from the author of “New Study: Human Heartbeat Detectable at 16 Days” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood

/0 Comments/in , /by

Usually the century mark for a person, place, or thing is a momentous and joyous occasion. Not so this time.

On Sunday, Planned Parenthood turned 100. Both pro-lifers and pro-choicers are marking the organization’s birthday in hashtags: #100YearsOfAbuse and #100YearsStrong, respectively.

But the statistics that have emerged from that 100-year reign are staggering. The award for “most notable” goes to—more than 7 million abortions.

And Cecile Richards has claimed: “We’ve made incredible gains during our first century and we’re just getting started. We will build on our proud legacy and launch our second century with as much passion, courage, and conviction as our first.”

Planned Parenthood is likely here to stay (at least for the foreseeable future), but that doesn’t mean we stop having conversations about the organization and the truth behind its practices.

Here are three ways to talk to someone in your life about Planned Parenthood.

Common Ground

Whether pro-life or pro-choice, it’s safe to assume you want women to have access to quality health care.

The definition of “quality health care” is where the two sides diverge. It seems reasonable to claim that quality health care should include a safe and clean environment where nurses and doctors provide all the information to a patient. And if that patient is pregnant, the information provided includes an ultrasound with a detectable heartbeat.

But to start with common ground means to establish the low bar of quality health care as a right we can all support. Don’t wade into the bothersome details just yet.

Examples

Though Planned Parenthood has escaped the restriction of federal funds, the facts don’t lie and are hard to deny. It’s very important to cite the numerous other health care providers, what services they perform, and their accessibility.

First, there are 20 times as many federally qualified health care centers that serve women as Planned Parenthoods. The argument that closing Planned Parenthood clinics or restricting their funds will inhibit access to quality health care for women is ridiculous. Don’t we want women to have access to a health care provider in their neighborhood? Doesn’t proximity matter?

Second, The Daily Signal cited a few interesting numbers. Planned Parenthood claims about 30 percent of all abortions in the United States every year. Compare this outrageous number to the percentage of Pap tests performed (less than 1 percent) and breast exams (less than 2 percent).

If a woman needs a mammogram (which Planned Parenthood is not licensed to perform), why not remove the middleman that Planned Parenthood has become? Don’t we want clinics that offer access to every health service instead of just a few?

Third, we’re all aware of the horrifying videos released by David Daleiden that rasied questions about the selling of baby parts by Planned Parenthood for profit. (Planned Parenthood had denied any illegal activity.) Though the organization has avoided suffering any major consequences, the videos exist and those conversations are difficult to forget.

If we care about women, it’s important to point out that altering abortions (therefore putting a woman’s health in danger) in order to make a profit is not only illegal, but heartbreaking. Women deserve the truth, and they deserve better.

Words

Words are one of the best defenses you have in this conversation. It’s “baby” vs. “fetus,” and neither side can change what terms they use because both risk losing the argument. So, stick with “unborn baby/child.” Humanize the life the other side refuses to.

Also, talk about rights. Pro-choicers love to talk about the human right to do with your body what you want. But their opinion of when the same rights do/don’t apply to an unborn child are loose (at best), and are usually defined by convenience. So, fight back.

Steal the word “rights” to talk about the unborn child and their right to dignity and respect. As medical advances show more clearly when life begins, the battle for the word “rights” becomes more important.

Just make sure that when talking about Planned Parenthood and abortion you don’t demonize the women who’ve chosen this option. Many have been lied to and felt like they had no choice. To win this argument is to show compassion—for the mother and for the baby growing inside her.

Planned Parenthood has been around for 100 years, but that doesn’t mean the organization will celebrate another century of “success”—especially with the rise of health care technology, social media, and your willingness to have a conversation about the true nature of its practice.

Gather your facts, establish common ground (remember: this is a conversation, not a shouting match), cite examples, and choose your words wisely. (For more from the author of “3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Planned Parenthood Abortionist: ‘I Provide Abortions Because I’m a Christian’

/0 Comments/in , /by

October 16, 2016 marks the 100th anniversary of Planned Parenthood’s founding by racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger. Her self-described goal was to exterminate blacks and sterilize “idiots,” “morons” and the “feeble-minded.” In one revealing letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, Sanger described how to handle the issue of black extermination:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

One of her more famous quotes makes the stomach churn:

The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.

Perhaps there are those who still feel that way. Is it possible that there are abortionists who feel that they perform an act of mercy when they kill babies? The following story concerns an abortionist who believes just that.

Dr. Sarah Wallett

There are times in life when, as a Christian, we read or hear something sinful so couched in a mist of Christian ideology that our knee-jerk reaction is one of revulsion. The juxtaposition of faith and sin causes a gut-wrenching and heartsick effect and we want to correct the misunderstanding of Christian faith immediately. Such is my reaction to the story of Dr. Sarah Wallett, a self-proclaimed Christian who performs abortions because she believes “it is the most important thing that I will ever do.”

In early August, Dr. Wallett wrote in her jarring column at Refinery29 that her Christian faith is precisely why she kills unborn children. For an abortion provider to claim that ripping an unborn baby limb from limb is Christ-like is repulsive and couldn’t be further from the truth.

She described her childhood in a Christian home where her family attended church regularly, said prayers before meals and where she was taught “that it was my duty to help people in need and leave the world a better place than I found it,” and added, “The patients I see every day are so clearly people in need — and the medical care I provide them is both life-changing and, in many circumstances, life-saving.”

It calls into question the Christian teaching she actually received — where did she learn that murder was a Christ-like attribute?

She then offered up a list of complaints about the stigma she faces as an abortion provider (“there are no positive images of abortion providers or the value in the work that we do”), legislators who work to revise abortion laws (their “sole goal is clearly to make this work more difficult … create laws that interfere with the medical care I provide, because they do not like the work that I do”) and her concern about abortion laws in other states (“similar to the horrific one in Texas”).

She blasted the laws in her state of Tennessee that “do nothing to keep my patients safe,” such as OB-GYNs like Dr. Wallett having admitting privileges in a local hospital, working in an ambulatory center or providing patients with information about abortion and requiring them to have two visits to the health center prior to having an abortion. Dr. Wallett wrote that “many of these laws, in fact, harm the same women they’re supposedly intended to help,” although it isn’t clear how having access to a hospital or receiving medical information harms the patients.

The abortion provider claimed over and over again that she implements her faith throughout her work of taking tiny human lives — providing compassion and empathy to her patients who have chosen to have an abortion and feel the need to justify it to her, “a task no one should ever have to do.” “My faith teaches me to withhold judgment and to extend acceptance to all,” Dr. Wallett said as she described patients who suffered through the experience of having friends and family beg them not to have an abortion.

One can only imagine the scene of loved ones imploring a pregnant woman to choose life, that they would adopt her baby. But she ended up in the office of a compassionate and accepting killer.

Her patients also have strong faith, she said, and “[g]ood, moral women have abortions every day,” adding that it’s her duty to provide a positive “counterpoint” to the shame and misinformation pregnant women experience and hear that causes pain.

What kind of upbringing was this? How can anyone look at Scripture and believe that God would have us murder the most innocent and vulnerable among us?

The closest analogy from Scripture regarding killing one’s young is the child sacrifice to the pagan deity Molech, which was practiced by the Ammonites and later, the Israelites (1 Kings 11:1-8). God called this practice an “abomination,” and forbid the Israelites to observe the barbaric ritual. “You shall not give any of your children to devote them by fire to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord” (Lev. 18:21). Any Israelite who practiced the child sacrifice was to be put to death (Lev. 20:2).

On the contrary, the Bible is replete with scriptures telling us how much he loved and wanted us before we were born. God called us and named us when we were still in our mother’s womb (Is. 49:1). He formed us with purpose (Ps. 139:13). The Lord says children are an inheritance and a reward (Ps. 127:3). He also tells us that while a mother may not have compassion on the baby in her womb, He will never forget him or her (Is. 49:15).

Slaughtering innocent unborn children has nothing to do with Christianity. It goes against all biblical teaching of protecting human life and the most vulnerable among us. It directly violates the sixth Commandment: “You shall not kill” (Ex. 20:13).

If Dr. Wallett takes pleasure in her work of taking innocent lives, she will answer to God for that. But she cannot tie abortion to the Christian faith in any logical or truthful way. (For more from the author of “Planned Parenthood Abortionist: ‘I Provide Abortions Because I’m a Christian'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.