"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

The Graying of Abortionists

Irony is abortionists worrying about where the next generation of abortionists is going to come from. You can't make this stuff up.

One mainstream media organization is saying abortionists are getting old and when the old generation retires who's going to be around to kill the next generation? Salon Magazine is concerned. Me? Not so much. In fact, I'm kind of pleased. Not that I don't think some shell of a human with a medical degree will step up since there's bucks to be made but it's good to see they're having difficulty replacing abortionists.

Salon.com reports:

Carolyn is part of the next generation of abortion providers many people are wondering and worrying about in the aftermath of Dr. George Tiller's murder by an anti-choice zealot and the subsequent closing of Tiller's Women's Health Care Center. Already, 87 percent of counties in the U.S., and 98 percent of rural counties, have no abortion services. Nearly two-thirds of second-trimester abortion providers are over 50 years old and bound to retire sooner rather than later. And, as a recent PBS NOW special highlighted, the number of overall abortion providers has dropped by one-third in recent years: From 2,680 in 1985 to 1,787 in 2005.
Of course Salon.com says this is because of anti-abortion "terrorism" like the murder of Dr. Tiller last week. But I'm pretty sure this drop off didn't start last Sunday. And what this actually shows is that societal pressures are working.
Still, the reasons why schools don't provide comprehensive family planning education go beyond simple time-management issues. For one thing, the same relentless pressure from the anti-choice movement that plagues practicing abortion providers is also directed at medical schools. Susan Wicklund, a Montana OB-GYN and author of "This Common Secret: My Journey as an Abortion Doctor," says, "I've witnessed pressure by antiabortion groups on administrators and professors in medical schools not to discuss abortion. There's the threat of being picketed or boycotted at the school itself if they do any teaching of abortion." Says Creinin, "For anything that creates controversy, it's easy for a med school to say, 'Look, it's not worth it.'"
So that's the good news. The bad news is that abortion is a multi-million dollar industry and as long as they're paying, some shell of a human with an online medical degree will step up and agree to rip babies limb from limb for money.

And when these hacks hurt women with botched abortions Salon.com, I'm sure, will blame you. That's right. You for stigmatizing abortion and making it so difficult to fill those spots.

Your Ad Here

55 comments:

Sebastian S. said...

When we had 40 Days for Life in our city, several "nurses" quit their jobs.

Something about not sleeping at night... ah that pesky conscience!

WillyJ said...

Oh I thought salon.com was pitching the case for 'demographic winter'.

Sir Francis said...

Surely they'll find a way to legally bind all MDs to this ghastly job, if it really comes down to it.

Anonymous said...

If this is the best 'catholic blog', I hope never to stumble upon a less laughable one.

LarryD said...

I agree with Sir Francis - when the O does away with conscience clauses, the abortion industry, unfortunately, have their problem solved for them.

meg said...

I remember reading in the NYT years ago that the reason no medical students wanted become abortionists was because they saw it as kind of icky - like going to law school specifically to become an ambulance chaser or to hand out business cards at the funerals of strangers. They felt there were many more interesting areas of interest to pursue after all those years of study. This makes more sense to me than Salon's take.

David L Alexander said...

Eventually, the abortion industry will cave in on itself, without self-appointed assassins. Even one who accepts it as a legitimate medical procedure must concede, that it is a high-risk elective surgery, with even higher malpractice insurance premiums, and serious side-effects for the would-be mother. This alone will keep away most young medical school graduates with years of student loans to pay off.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm, this is not the story that I hear from pro-life medical & nursing students. I hear the opposite, which is that it is very difficult to find a school which will not force their ob/gyn medical students to perform or at least participate in abortions during their studies. And I also hear that many nursing organizations are pushing so that licensed nurses can perform abortions. Ask any pro-life doctors or nurses, I don't think they are going to say that schools are shrinking from abortion in the curriculum.

Steve said...

Well, the schools aren't shrinking away from it because the public ones have no accountability. Here in Madison, the UW is "stepping up to the plate" because nobody else will butcher a 20 week old baby so they are taking the lead. The pro-abort politicians won't stop them...

David L Alexander said...

"Hmmm, this is not the story that I hear from pro-life medical & nursing students."

Hmmm, I'll just bet it's not, especially when money does the talking.

nightfly said...

It's staggering... they say 'terrorism' when it's an isolated bastard, but 'extremism' when it's a calculated and widespread effort tacitly endorsed by an entire death cult.

And 'eeeek, they'll picket us, and boycott us!' Heaven forfend that the public tell how they feel or choose what to do with their time and money.

Vigilante said...

Thanks to the assassination of George Tiller, I have become a believer in late-term abortion.

Trust Women.

David L Alexander said...

It's an easy position for Vigilante to assume, having survived such a "choice." Would those who did not be just as able to trust their mothers?

j. christian said...

Thanks to the likes of Vigilante, I know the smiley face worn by evil.

Choose Life.

Anonymous said...

Vigilante:

Unfortunately, not all children who have been conceived and are waiting to be born actually CAN
trust women.

That's the problem.

Vigilante said...

Awwww, I see the pro-fetus choir is well and singing their verses this morning.

D. Alexander:

If my mother, aprised that my post-viability abortion was medically indicated, had carried me to birth she would not proven her love for me. As a fetus, I would not wanted to be born. Life would have been too much to bear.

j. christian said...

News flash, Vigilante: Killing is never "medically indicated."

David L Alexander said...

"Awwww, I see the pro-fetus choir is well and singing their verses this morning."

We have a song worth singing: "Let everything that has breath praise the Lord."

"As a fetus, I would not [have] wanted to be born. Life would have been too much to bear."

I think I understand. Your line of reasoning is already "too much to bear."

Anonymous said...

Please notice that Vigilante presents no argument whatever. His idea that as a foetus he would not have wanted to be born is not an argument, it is at best a statement of mood. Besides, it is really an open goal: I would not have wanted HIM to be born either - I would rather that all children who are born are kind, or good, or beautiful, or at any rate decent. Luckily for Vigilante, I do not conceive that I have a right to decide who lives or who dies.

The fact is that this is not only happening in America. In England, fifteen years ago, to be against abortion was to endanger your career within the NHS (if you were a doctor) or to put an end to it (if you were a nurse or paramedic). Today, so few doctors are prepared to commit abortion that one provincial bureaucrat has actually asked for nurses to be allowed to carry out the procedure. This is in a country where groupthink is a habit and where pro-lifers are few, weak and marginalized. Salon sillyzine cannot blame this one on the evil pro-lifers; it is entirely an endogenous event due to the increasing dislike of doctors (and nurses) for killing babies.

Katie said...

Funny that it doesn't occur to them that perhaps many who spend so many years studying to become doctors would rather help people than tear apart unborn children.

Dale Price said...

Thanks to the assassination of George Tiller, I have become a believer in late-term abortion.

Of course you did, dear.

Karen LH said...

If my mother, aprised that my post-viability abortion was medically indicated, had carried me to birth she would not proven her love for me. As a fetus, I would not wanted to be born.

Actually, you probably would have. We've all got disabilities of one sort or another, mental or physical, mild or serious, and not many of us wants to die. People adjust. A great deal of life is simply about learning to deal with whatever hand we've been dealt.

Generally, it's not disabled people who want to die, but healthy people who project that wish onto them.

SherryTex said...

It would prove her love for you, not your love of life. This is your error.

Renee said...

As a fetus, I would not wanted to be born.

I find this comment to be interesting, and to the gist of the argument of being pro-life. No one chooses life, we have no control of the situation not only within our mother's womb, but pretty much our lives we are controlled by others. We're born dependent and rely on others for survival. An when we do become independent we become ultimately responsible for ourselves, which means making obligations to other for independence. Even if one doesn't not have dependents themselves, one must gain employment for their independence. The obligate themselves to some sort of labor or service, mostly likely as a 'cubicle slave', in which the government takes precedence and removes taxes from your paycheck.

Choice is an illusion, especially when you hear of story regarding abortion from women who had one, or even two.

http://www.unfairchoice.info/coerced.htm

"why it matters

Coercion often comes from all sides, personally and professionally ... especially and ironically in many of the "helping" professions. It may also involve a family, friends or even an employer who push for abortion, practice emotional, physical, practical or financial blackmail, or otherwise withhold essential support at the very time when a woman most needs honest answers and a helping hand.Abortion endangers teens and all women who are now at risk of coercion, which can escalate to violence.Women have been subjected to unthinkable abuses, torture and even death for resisting an unwanted abortion. Homicide is the leading killer of pregnant women. Women and others hurt by abortion are often at a loss for words to describe the experience. Words that do come up often are "silenced," "nightmare," "humiliating," "degraded," "dismissed," "herded like cattle," "part of me died," and, ironically, "I was never given a choice.""

Plenty of stats within the link

We're pro-life because we understand that within human nature independent life can not exist unless we understand that life only exists due to value of dependency not just a life of the unborn child within a mother's womb, but society obligation to protect and support the mother through traditional support of family.

To Vigilante to this person the value of life is a joke, s/he doesn't care not what happens to others nor wants to understand the meaning of life, with is very disheartening. It's disturbing this is how a person gets his jollies.

Vigilante said...

This exchange has been rewarding for me. I mischaracterized assembled company as a 'choir': all of you are independently thoughtful and expressive, in addition to being passionate. I just don't agree with you.

I think prospective mothers do not lightly choose a late-term abortions. Post-viability abortions have to be medically indicated. And I do not agree that termination of the unborn amounts to killing.

I have never ventured into this issue before, and I am not getting my jollies. I am just enraged by the unlawful and unwarranted murder of Dr. Tiller.

Anonymous said...

Ane because Tiller has been murdered, it is your argument that babies should go on being murdered. As I said, argument is not your forte.

David L Alexander said...

"And I do not agree that termination of the unborn amounts to killing."

Then what, exactly, is it?

If you cannot answer that, yours is simply a opinion which is not supported by anything, other than your own preference. You may be entitled to that, but I thank God that you were never my mother, for that reason alone.

For all its trials and tribulations, I am glad to have life.

Rick said...

To supply abortion providers, the industry will have to convince med students that the procedure is not evil or wicked. That is one value produced by those demonstrating and praying at abortuaries. That is why the abortionist freak out when they are pointed out as murderers.

Lishi said...

Vigilante, the idea that you have become a believer in late term abortions because a late term abortionist was murdered makes no sense.
Simply put, what that would mean is that anyone who was murdered because of what they did for a living should be advocated, whether or not you agreed with what they did during their life. That would be like saying that if someone murdered a serial killer because of what they did, you would become a big believer in serial killing.
Regardless of the fact that George Tiller was murdered, he was doing a bad thing. The pro life cause does NOT advocate his death, and many of us grieve for it.
I'm still trying to understand what about him getting murdered strengthens his cause in any way, shape, or form.

Vigilante said...

Pro-Fetus Choir:

Life begins at birth. It's called 'birthing'. You cannot murder something which has not been born.

Tiller killed no one. Tiller was killed for practicing medicine. Tiller was killed because medical science offends some religious kooks. You are wrong to consider the practice of medicine as infanticide. This is an example of infanticide. You really need to put some one on paid salary on this site to straighten out your thinking.

Lishi said...

It's amazing that you actually believe only religious kooks are pro-life. There are MANY people who are not in any way religious that still believe that abortion is murder. And through simple science you can prove it. Fetus's grow and take in nourishment and produce waste. That alone proves there is life. You can try to argue that they aren't a PERSON yet, though it's a stupid argument, but you can't argue they're not alive. It is living tissue, that can't be disputed, science has proven it.

MadMike said...

The reality: When abortions become illegal, or when medical practitioners refuse to perform the procedure, it will go to the back alley butchers and thousands of women will die of infections, massive bleeding and other conditions too horrible to describe.

The idea that a tiny cell, as yet unformed, is a viable human life is nonsense. It is born out of a perverse religious belief that defines human life not based on science but on religious mythology.

From a personal standpoint I find abortion to be evil, but, sadly a necessary evil in a world that is becoming more theocratic each day, whether it be the Muslims, or the Christians. A woman should have the right to make the choice, within the boundaries of the law, as to whether or not to keep the cluster of cells growing in her body or whether or not to terminate the growing process. Keep God and the attendant mythologies that surround him out of government and personal choice.

Vigilante said...

Ah.... a glimmer of light!

Beach Bum said...

My wife and I adopted an orphan baby girl from China and since that time I have been confronted with a situational paradox with a large number of Christians.

It goes without saying that the good church folk I have been around are almost entirely "pro-life". In that they will get all teary eyed over the idea of fetuses in the womb being killed. This is all well and good and like MadMike said I personally find the idea of abortion to be evil but what troubles me with the behavior of anti-abortionists is that with a few exceptions this pro-life concern with the care and welfare of babies immediately ends once they are born.

If a "rescued" child happens to be poor and/or a minority what was once a concern about life now is an irritation, at best, over how much it will take to help feed, educate, and provide health care of that child.
Even someone as pro-life as Mike Huckabee has stated that: To Huckabee’s credit, his pro-life stance, one major component of social conservatism, is all-embracing. He prefers to see “pro-life” within the context of one’s entire life span, not simply from conception to birth. Thus, his pro-life stance includes, in his words, “quality education, first-rate healthcare, decent housing in a safe neighborhood, and clean air and drinking water.”

So my point is this, get more of your side to start caring about kids beyond the womb and I'll start see you all less as hypocrites. Because its real funny to show my beautiful daughter off to some good Christian and have that person look at me strangely and ask why my wife what prevents my wife and I from having one of our own.

David L Alexander said...

I find it curious when people accuse pro-lifers of not caring for the child once it is born. In particular, I wonder where they get their proof. I'm inclined to believe they don't have any. In fact, just making the accusation here, with nary a shred of evidence, appears to be enough for them, which would make THEM the hypocrites.

An unborn child is a human life. It has never been demonstrated to be anything else. To end its life, is to end a human life. That such a life is innocent is what makes it murder. Whatever is or is not done about the issue, we start with that which is irrefutable, and move on from there.

After all, it doesn't matter how concerned you are over a child's life, once he no longer has one.

Vigilante said...

An unborn fetus represents a potential child; s/he doesn't cross the threshold into life until permitted by the prospective mother.

David L Alexander said...

Very well. Define "potential" as opposed to "actual." Consider in your answer that a child can be born three to four months prematurely. Is the child more human because of this? Would the child be any less human had it stayed in the womb? If the child is forced out of the womb and has its skull crushed by a surgeon's instrument, is that not murder because the mother sanctioned it?

Vigilante said...

When a fetus is birthed three or four months early, s/he becomes a child.

David L Alexander said...

"When a fetus is birthed three or four months early, s/he becomes a child."

And you have science to support this? What of the child forced out to be put to death? Was that only potential life, or did it require its mother's sanction?

Your position, by your own admission, begs this question.

Scott W. said...

Google pro-life atheists. It ain't just a religious thang. That one can kill based on location. (Outiside the womb, hands off; inside the womb, anything goes) is completely arbitrary. We are talking about a human being. The best that the pro-abortion position can do is argue ambiguity. But that being the case, they lose under the Deerhunter Principle: it is immoral to fire into rustling bushes when you don't know what it is you are firing at.

Vigilante said...

The Deerhunting Principle? I don't think so. I have already said:

Post-viability abortions have to be medically indicated.

Boris said...

I don't care if you shoot deer in your brush. Just stop shooting doctors in our churches.

Anonymous said...

Vigilante has stated he now "cares" about abortion because of the killing of Tiller.

Yet, the state of Kentucky has released documentation that shows he was performing late term abortions for trivial reasons. That opinion is by peer review.

Doctor Tiller should have been investigated and tried for violation of Kentucky law. His murderer should stand trial, and be convicted.

David L Alexander said...

No one in this forum, neither its moderators nor its participants, have advocated shooting any doctors anywhere. Either stick to the issue at hand, or I'll persuade the moderators to block your remarks.

Scott W. said...

I don't care if you shoot deer in your brush. Just stop shooting doctors in our churches.

I don't think my point is that elusive. Namely, it is immoral to unload deadly force on something when that something could be an innocent fellow human being. If you don't know, you must stay your hand. This of course has led to tragicomic attempts to dogmatically declare they are not human, but this is just bluster.

Rick said...

Back alley abortions or coat hangers - the tools of murder. They're no different from cold hand guns, switch blades, hammers and baseball bats. If someone wants to murder somebody - even the child in her womb, then she needs to face all the risks and dangers like any other murder. The state should not facilitate any murder - whether it is the murder of an African-American, a Jewish person, an abortionist or an unborn child.

Vigilante said...

I'm getting tired of repeating myself and you just might extend this long enough for me to lose interest.

You cannot "murder" something that has not been born. Until a fetus has been given birth by a prospective mother, it is not a child.

If a prospective mother, under the advice of her chosen physician, determines that her post-viability fetus would face severe enough medical challenges to prevent the life she wishes for her children, she is within her moral right to terminate her pregnancy.

Her body is ultimately her domain. Not yours or the state's.

I think prospective mothers do not lightly choose a late-term abortions. I didn't used think there were enough late term abortions to amount to a serious political issue. I used to say, if you don't like abortions, don't abort.

But when the members of the fetus-loving wolfpack on the Faux news network barked and howled long enough to wake up lone wolves who are simple-minded, easily mislead, and lethally armed, it became time to take sides.

And I will always side with the living against the un-living. Every damned day.

Rick said...

"Until a fetus has been given birth by a prospective mother, it is not a child." says a man who usurps the authority of the Creator.

"she is within her moral right to terminate her pregnancy." as proclaimed arbitrarily by a people bribed by the butchers of men.

"Her body is ultimately her domain. Not yours or the state's. " And the body of the child is also her domain - not the mothers, nor the state nor the purveyors of death for cash.

"I will always side with the living against the un-living." And the fetus with a beating heart, brain waves and an immortal soul is alive. And with what kind of life? Human life. And human life has inalienable human rights.

Abortionists, abortion supporters and those who tolerate abortion with pro-choice positions have the blood of millions of innocent babies in their souls. When the day of reckoning comes, when that day of damnation will require a reason for choosing the execution of the most innocent life of all, then I say you will have no excuse to give. So, REPENT before it is too late.

Anonymous said...

Pity the poor abortionists' anquish that so few will be able to follow in their footsteps. Could it be that they aborted them?

Vigilante, I hearby revoke your permit to life. Oops, no can do that. You're a human being, same as that unborn child.

As John Kennedy said, "The rights of man come, not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God."

Anonymous said...

Stop impersonating me, and misrepresenting my position!

David L Alexander said...

It never fails. Some loser named "Anonymous" gets on these comboxes and starts arguing with himself.

Boris said...

My conclusion is that Vigilante is the only Pro-Lifer in here; the rest of you are just Pre-Lifers.

Rick said...

life begins at conception not after birth.

Anonymous said...

Rick:

Our devil's advocate may wish for you to define "life" for him.

David L Alexander

Rick said...

Wiki defines death as: "Death was historically believed to be an event that coincided with the onset of clinical death. It is now understood that death is a process, not an event.[29] Where in this process a dividing line is drawn between life and death depends on factors beyond the presence or absence of vital signs. In general, clinical death is neither necessary nor sufficient for a determination of legal death." Take the converse for life.

Post a Comment