Posts Tagged ‘abortion’

O que acontece à mulher que assassina seu filho:

28/08/2013

Eight facts most don’t know about physical and psychological consequences of abortion for women

by Peter SaundersTue Aug 27, 2013 09:46 EST

Contrary to popular opinion abortion hurts women.

TheUnChoice.com is an evidence-based Elliot Institute campaign to raise awareness about unwanted abortions, post-abortion issues and maternal deaths and to provide help, hope and healing.

The US-based Elliot Institute  publishes research and educational materials and works as an advocate for women and men seeking post-abortion healing.

The following figures, referenced below from an Elliott Institute publication, are eight evidence-based facts about the consequences of abortion for women’ health.  I have, where possible linked the references to the original sources.

1. 31% of women having abortions report suffering physical health complications (1)

2. 10% of women having abortions suffer immediate, potentially life-threatening complications (2, 3, 4)

3. Women have a 65% higher risk of clinical depression following abortion vs. childbirth (5)

4. 65% of women suffer symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after abortion (1)

5. Women’s death rates from various causes after abortion are 3.5 times higher than after giving birth  (6, 7)

6. Many women describe their experience as ‘a nightmare’, which can hardly equated with ‘choice’. 60% of women surveyed after abortion responded that: ’Part of me died’ (1)

7. Suicide rates among women who have abortions are six times higher than those who give birth (7, 8)

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

8. Abortion increases a woman’s risk of future miscarriages by 60% (9)

References

1. Source: Rue et. al., “Induced abortion and traumatic stress: A preliminary comparison of American and Russian women,” Medical Science Monitor 10(10): SR5-16, 2004.

2. Frank, et.al., “Induced Abortion Operations and Their Early Sequelae,” Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 35(73):175-180, April 1985.

3. Grimes and Cates, “Abortion: Methods and Complications”, in Human Reproduction, 2nd ed., 796-813.

4. M.A. Freedman, “Comparison of complication rates in first trimester abortions performed by physician assistants and physicians,” Am. J. Public Health76(5):550-554, 1986).

5. JR Cougle et. al., “Depression Associated With Abortion and Childbirth: A Long-Term Analysis of the NLSY Cohort,” Medical Science Monitor 9(4):CR105-112, 2003.

6. M Gissler et. al., “Pregnancy Associated Deaths in Finland 1987-1994 — definition problems and benefits of record linkage,” Acta Obsetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 76:651-657, 1997.

7. M. Gissler, “Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy, Finland 1987-2000,” European J. Public Health 15(5):459-63, 2005.

8. Gissler, Hemminki & Lonnqvist, “Suicides after pregnancy in Finland, 1987-94: register linkage study,” British Journal of Medicine 313:1431-4, 1996.

9. N. Maconochie, P. Doyle, S. Prior, R. Simmons, “Risk factors for first trimester miscarriage—results from a UK-population-based case–control study,” BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Dec 2006.

Note: Studies 6, 7 and 8 looked at death rates for an average for up to one year after the end of the pregnancy. Another study found that looked at suicide rates for up to eight years found that, compared to women who gave birth, women who had abortions had a 62% higher risk of death from all causes and a 2.5 times higher suicide rate. Source: DC Reardon et. al., “Deaths Associated With Pregnancy Outcome: A Record Linkage Study of Low Income Women,” Southern Medical Journal 95(8):834-41, Aug. 2002.

Reprinted with permssion from PJ Saunders

O Bebê de 12 semanas fazendo sinal de positivo

09/02/2013

Letter From 12-Week-Old Unborn Baby: Please Don’t Abort Me

Imagem

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/08/letter-from-12-week-old-unborn-baby-please-dont-abort-me/

by Adam Cassandra | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 2/8/12 11:57 AM

In New York, abortion of an unborn child after the 24th week of pregnancy is defined as homicide, but prior to that the killing of such a child is legal. This beautiful letter is another creative and truthful attempt to encourage our nation’s leaders to recognize that abortion is not a human right, but rather, ends an innocent human life.

That letter, written from the perspective of the 12-week old baby in the womb, is shared with you below:

Dear Member of the NY State Senate or Assembly:

 

I am not a blob of tissue to be disposed of. When I became a zygote at fertilization, I was already composed of 39,000 genes made up of 3.2 billion base pair sequences. Hard to believe, I know, but it’s scientifically true! These detailed directions for my development have been compared to the amount of information found in two hundred New York City phone books.

After this beginning, I worked actively to prevent any other sperm from fertilizing the same egg, and on my own impetus took a journey down the fallopian tube to implant upon my mother’s uterus.

At 5 weeks, my cerebral cortex was developing, and well before I reached 12 weeks my brain was functioning. I was already responding to stimuli.

So how can you allow me to be tortured? Shouldn’t you be working to protect me from suffering? Why allow me to be torn limb from limb?

At 12 weeks, I am not merely a design for a house yet to be built, I am already “a tiny house that constructs itself larger and more complex through its active self-development towards maturity” (Patrick Lee). If I live and grow to maturity, this growth will not involve a change in my identity or substance, only the development of what’s already there.

I am not a “potential” child, but a real child. Take a good look at the image of me that you received. My mother cannot “choose” to have a child – she already has one! Her only “choice” is whether or not to let me live.

Size has nothing to do with human rights. The sun may be vast in size, but it can’t think or love. It is only matter. It will never be part of an American family and community, nor will it ever serve my country. It will never ponder the mystery of life and the beauty of the night-skies, nor will it ever be able to conceive of the universe or meditate on Scripture.

Small as I am at 12 weeks, I can say that I am more precious than that huge and majestic sun, because I am made in the image of God, the One who created the sun, the night skies and the universe. All those things will pass away, but I am made for eternity.”

LifeNews.com Note:  Reprinted with permission from Human Life International’s  Truth and Charityforum. Adam Cassandra is a Communications Specialist at Human Life International.

78% das grávidas que fazem ultrassom desistem de abortar

07/02/2013

http://www.lifenews.com/2013/02/07/78-of-pregnant-women-seeing-an-ultrasound-reject-abortions/

40 anos de aborto totalmente livre nos Eua – 22 janeiro de 1973

22/01/2013

55,772,015 Abortions in America Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 1/18/13 1:13 PM

The United States marks 40 years of legalized abortion in all fifty states at any time for any reason throughout pregnancy on January 22nd, the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. Since that time, there have been approximately 55,772,015 abortions that have destroyed the lives of unborn children.

An estimate published by the National Right to Life Committee this time in 2011 indicated there have been an estimated 54,559,615 abortions since the Supreme Court handed down its 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision allowing virtually unlimited abortions.

In the document, “Abortion Statistics: United States Data and Trends,” NRLC education director Dr. Randall K. O’Bannon estimates that there have been 54,559,615 abortions since 1973 based on data from both the Centers for Disease Control and the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, a former Planned Parenthood research arm.

Guttmacher receives numbers directly from abortion centers themselves and is the prime source for more current figures because the Centers for Disease Control has never tabulated accurate numbers of abortions.

The CDC relies on figures from state health departments, some of which rely on voluntary reporting — and it hasn’t had data from some states such as California and New Hampshire for more than a decade.

“Because of these different methods of data collection, GI has consistently obtained higher counts than the CDC. CDC researchers have admitted it probably undercounts the total number of abortions because reporting laws vary from state to state and some abortionists probably do not report or under-report the abortions they perform,” O’Bannon says.

The number means there are more than 3,300 abortions daily and 137 abortions per hour every hour in the United States. Translated another way, an abortion is done about every 30 seconds in the United States.

The analysis also found that the best estimate for the current number of annual abortions in the United States — involving both the surgical abortion procedure as well as the dangerous abortion drug RU 486 — is 1.2 million.

Adding another year of 1.2 million abortions to the 2011 total National Right to Life estimated based on Guttmacher and CDC figures, and America has seen 55,772.015 abortions since Roe v. Wade.

The number of total abortions in the United States overall is higher because some states, such as California, New York, and Colorado, legalized abortions prior to Roe. Those pre-Roe abortion figures are difficult to obtain — though some estimate at least one million abortions may have occurred in these states in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

The good news for pro-life advocates is that abortions are on the decline. Abortions fell five percent nationwide in 2009, according to the most recent information from the CDC, the biggest drop in 10 years.

The NRLC analysis shows abortion numbers rising in the 1970s and, in the 1980s, abortion eventually mainstreamed itself to the point that about 1.55 million abortions were done annually until the early 1990s. At that point, as crisis pregnancy centers began turning the corner with the use of ultrasounds, pro-life state legislation began to take hold and the Internet allowed the pro-life perspective to flourish, abortions began to decline.

The partial-birth abortion ban and the use of 3-D and 4-D ultrasounds is also credited.

“After reaching a high of over 1.6 million in 1990, the number of abortions annually performed in the U.S. has dropped back to levels not seen since the late 1970s,” NRLC says.

The Guttmacher Institute’s most recent abortion figures, from 2005, confirm the downward trend from a high of 1.6 million abortions in 1990 to 1.2 million that year. Without any hard figures in the last few years, NRLC estimates the number of abortions from 2006 to today at the same rate of 1.2 million that GI reported.

To calculate the overall number of abortions, NRLC includes the hard figures from 1973-2005, the estimates for the last few years and also includes the Guttmacher Institute’s admission that its own figures are likely about three percent lower than the actual totals because of potential errors in reporting.

“Abortion has taken a terrible toll on America. We’ve now lost more than 54 million of our sons, daughters, friends, and neighbors and we are a much poorer nation for it,” O’Bannon said.

CLICK LIKE IF YOU’RE PRO-LIFE!

40 anos da liberação do aborto nos Eua coincide com a segunda posse de Obama

19/01/2013

‎40 anos da liberação do aborto nos Eua coincide com a segunda posse de Obama;

Liberado há exatos 40 anos, o Aborto nos Eua causou a morte de 55,772,015 crianças.

Abortions in America Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZS.html

A decisão da Suprema Corte que custou a morte de 55,772,015 milhões de crianças:

O sujeito que foi obrigado a mentir dizendo que fora violência sexual e foi o pivô de tudo, hoje é pro life:

Syllabus

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES


410 U.S. 113

Roe v. Wade

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS


No. 70-18 Argued: December 13, 1971 — Decided: January 22, 1973


A pregnant single woman (Roe) brought a class action challenging the constitutionality of the Texas criminal abortion laws, which proscribe procuring or attempting an abortion except on medical advice for the purpose of saving the mother’s life. A licensed physician (Hallford), who had two state abortion prosecutions pending against him, was permitted to intervene. A childless married couple (the Does), the wife not being pregnant, separately attacked the laws, basing alleged injury on the future possibilities of contraceptive failure, pregnancy, unpreparedness for parenthood, and impairment of the wife’s health. A three-judge District Court, which consolidated the actions, held that Roe and Hallford, and members of their classes, had standing to sue and presented justiciable controversies. Ruling that declaratory, though not injunctive, relief was warranted, the court declared the abortion statutes void as vague and overbroadly infringing those plaintiffs’ Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court ruled the Does’ complaint not justiciable. Appellants directly appealed to this Court on the injunctive rulings, and appellee cross-appealed from the District Court’s grant of declaratory relief to Roe and Hallford.

Held:

1. While 28 U.S.C. § 1253 authorizes no direct appeal to this Court from the grant or denial of declaratory relief alone, review is not foreclosed when the case is properly before the Court on appeal from specific denial of injunctive relief and the arguments as to both injunctive and declaratory relief are necessarily identical. P. 123.

2. Roe has standing to sue; the Does and Hallford do not. Pp. 123-129.

(a) Contrary to appellee’s contention, the natural termination of Roe’s pregnancy did not moot her suit. Litigation involving pregnancy, which is “capable of repetition, yet evading review,” is an exception to the usual federal rule that an actual controversy [p114] must exist at review stages, and not simply when the action is initiated. Pp. 124-125.

(b) The District Court correctly refused injunctive, but erred in granting declaratory, relief to Hallford, who alleged no federally protected right not assertable as a defense against the good faith state prosecutions pending against him. Samuels v. Mackell, 401 U.S. 66. Pp. 125-127.

(c) The Does’ complaint, based as it is on contingencies, any one or more of which may not occur, is too speculative to present an actual case or controversy. Pp. 127-129.

3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother’s behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman’s qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman’s health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a “compelling” point at various stages of the woman’s approach to term. Pp. 147-164.

(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician. Pp. 163, 164.

(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health. Pp. 163, 164.

(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. Pp. 163-164; 164-165.

4. The State may define the term “physician” to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined. P. 165.

5. It is unnecessary to decide the injunctive relief issue, since the Texas authorities will doubtless fully recognize the Court’s ruling [p115] that the Texas criminal abortion statutes are unconstitutional. P. 166.

BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, STEWART, MARSHALL, and POWELL, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., post, p. 207, DOUGLAS, J., post, p. 209, and STEWART, J., post, p. 167, filed concurring opinions. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which REHNQUIST, J., joined, post, p. 221. REHNQUIST, J., filed a dissenting opinion,post, p. 171. [p116]

Cada mulher russa mata, em média, 7 filhos.

19/12/2012

Will Russia Recover From Its Massive Underpopulation Problems?

by Steven W. Mosher and Elizabeth Crnkovich | Moscow, Russia | LifeNews.com | 12/18/12 7:22 PM

What do you do when your country is dying, one coffin at a time? Well, if you are Russian President Vladimir Putin, you call upon Russian couples to be fruitful and multiply, and have at least three children.

It is hard to exaggerate the demographic straits that Mother Russia finds itself in. According to the projections of the UN Population Division–we are speaking here of the so-called “low variant,” historically the most accurate–the Russian population will shrink by more than 30 million by mid-century if current trends continue. The population will age rapidly, from an average age of 37.9 in 2010 to and average age of 49 by 2050. In other words, most Russians will be beyond their childbearing years, and Russia’s demographic fate will be sealed.

The economy will follow the population into the tank. No economy can thrive when a population is moribund, filling more coffins than cradles.

This is not the first time that Putin has urged his fellow citizens to be prolific. In fact, he has been working more than a decade to reverse his country’s demographic decline.

Back in 2005, Putin announced that Russian couples would receive the equivalent of $9,000 upon the birth of a second child or higher order child. While this baby bonus created a bump in the birth rate, the numbers of births have begun to level off again. Many couples have already reached their desired number of children, received their bonuses, and are aborting any subsequent children they conceive. Abortion is still occurring in epidemic proportions in Russia. The birth rate has remained slightly higher than before, but is still too low to offset population losses. Russia continues to lose several hundred thousands people a year.

Putin took the occasion of his annual State of the Nation address to issue a call for more children. “The three child family should become the norm in Russia,” he declared. Since the average Russian woman has only one child, this would mean a considerable increase in fertility. Along with encouraging Russian women to have more children, he said, Russia must also look for ways to support and help them once they have had the children.

Putin was vague about what this additional support might entail, but his administration is in discussions with pro-life and pro-family groups on this point.

For their part, hundreds of pro-life and pro-family organizations, together with large families and activists from all over the Russian Federation, are joining together into a National Parents Association (NPA).

The CEO of the fledgling NPA, Alexey Komov, says that “President Putin, in his inaugural address, gave a clear message to everyone: Three children must become the norm in Russia or the country will face a serious demographic challenge going forward. We at the NPA are promoting the natural family-a husband and wife and their natural or adoptive children–and are in dialogue with State authorities to define effective family and demographic policy.”

One major obstacle to raising the Russian birthrate is the prevalence of abortion.

The average Russian woman has seven abortions in her lifetime.

As long as society fails to recognize the value of human life, and wantonly destroys it in large numbers, it will be difficult to establish a new three-child norm. Abortion must cease being a way of life in Russia if her people are to survive.

Putin has given Russian families a tangible incentive, the baby bonus, to have children.

He and his administration are now attempting to shift cultural norms in favor of the three-child family.

But whether or not he succeeds will depend upon pro-life and pro-family advocates like Alexey Komov, and their efforts to turn Putin’s exhortations and financial support into a nationwide movement. On their success hinges the fate of the Russian people.

Aborteiro admite: Eu mato SIM uma criança que está para nascer

09/11/2012

Abortion Practitioner Admits “Yes I Am” Killing Unborn Children During Abortions

by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor, November 5, 2009

Dallas, TX (LifeNews.com)

The late-term abortion practitioner at the new abortion center in Dallas has admitted in a shocking interview that he kills unborn children during abortions. Curtis Boyd is one of the few abortion practitioners to admit what he is doing, but he has no qualms with his job.

Boyd opened the first abortion center in Dallas in 1973 after the Supreme Court handed down the roe v. Wade decision allowing virtually unlimited abortions.

In an interview with WFAA yesterday after news surfaced that he re-opened his late-term abortion center, Southwestern Women’s Surgery Center, in the huge metro area last week after more than a year following the closure of the Aaron’s abortion facility, he makes a startling admission.

“Am I killing?” Boyd said. “Yes, I am. I know that.”

He told WFAA that he is a former Baptist ordained minister who is now a part of the pro-abortion Unitarian Universalist church who says he prays often about the abortions he does.

“I’ll ask that the spirit of this pregnancy be returned to God with love and understanding,” he said.

Boyd must operate an ambulatory surgical center in order to qualify under state law to do abortions after 16 weeks of pregnancy and he says women from across the south central United States come to him for late-term abortions.

“We see patients from Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana and across Texas,” he said.

“The hardest ones are the young girls,” he added, saying that girls as young as 9 and 10 years of age have been to his center for abortions.

Boyd says he was a close friend of George Tiller, the late-term abortion practitioner who was shot and killed at his church earlier this year — allegedly by militia activist Scott Roeder, who is not affiliated with any pro-life groups.

He says he takes precautions such as keeping his address and phone number private but isn’t afraid of doing abortions.

“I don’t want the fate that befell Dr. Tiller, but I’m not going to be deterred because what I’m doing is important,” he said.

Opinião de Obama sobre aborto:

15/09/2008

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/last_chance_for_life.html

I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

“”’Análise da mente obamística:

1. Primeiro, ele vai ensinar valores e moralidade para as filhas.

2. Mas se elas engravidarem e a gravidez for inoportuna, é só correr para a primeira clínica de aborto e retalhar o feto, mandando pro cacete o valor da vida humana assim como a assunção de responsabilidade perante os próprios atos.

Realmente, é uma lição de valores e moral como nunca vi antes.”

 comentário do orkut. 

 

Last Chance — For Life

By Patrick Buchanan

Near the end of a town hall meeting in Johnstown, Pa., a woman arose to offer a passionate plea to Barack Obama to “stop these abortions.”

Obama’s response was cool, direct, unequivocal.

“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old. … I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

“Punished with a baby.”

Obama sees an unwanted pregnancy as a cruel and punitive sanction for a teenager who has made a mistake, and abortion as the way out, the road to absolution and redemption.

The contrast with Sarah Palin could not be more stark. At the birth of her son Trig, who has Down syndrome, Gov. Palin said: “We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives.

“We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed.”

Between the convictions and values of Palin and those of Barack, then, there is a world of difference. In the culture war that is rooted in religious faith, they are on opposite sides of the dividing line.

But more crucial than their conflicting beliefs is the political reality. This election is America’s last hope to reverse Roe v. Wade. Upon its outcome will rest the life, or death, of millions of unborn children. The great social cause of the Catholic Church and the Knights of Columbus, of the Evangelical and Pentecostal churches, of the entire right-to-life movement, hangs today in the balance.

Why? It is not just that Obama is a pro-choice absolutist who defends the grisly procedure known as partial-birth abortion, who backs a Freedom of Choice Act to abolish every restriction in every state, who even opposed a born-alive infant protection act.