Speaking of…our freedoms. People, we had better start paying closer attention to what is going on. We speak of the Constitutionally protected Freedom of Speech, but the fact is, we have already lost it to a certain degree, under the guise of Political Correctness, Human Rights and Hate Laws. A new McCarthyism is alive and well in one of our closest neighbors, Canada, and should be more than a cautionary tale – it should be call to arms.

I’m sure most are aware of Canada’s infamous Human Rights Commission, who, for the crime of saying one thinks homosexuality is against God’s Law, or for drawing a link between Islam and terrorism, can fine, and ensure that an author is never published or able to write or be read in Canada again. You don’t even have to live in Canada, or the piece have originated in Canada, as has been shown by the current case of Mark Steyn. After excerpts of his book, America Alone, were published in a Canadian magazine, he was accused of “subject[ing] Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt” and being “flagrantly Islamophobic.” If the writing, not even the author, appears in Canada, it’s fair game for the CHRC.

If found guilty by the CHRC Tribunal, which he surely will be, as they have a 100% conviction rate, among other things, Steyn will no longer be able to write anything that is published or heard in Canada. While the determination has yet to made on what turned out to be a kangaroo court, Steyn has commented, “I’m done in Canada.” Nor will the magazine, Maclean’s, who excerpted his book and published his column, be allowed to publish it, or any other articles, which may be ”likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.”

Note the word “likely.” They may as well have used the word “might.” No one has to prove the writings or words inspired any crime, any assault – or that they are even the genesis of a “hate crime.” Just that perhaps, sometime in the future “maybe” they would. That something that person wrote or said “may” make another look disparagingly at the group or person in question.

In his book, Steyn eloquently discusses the challenges and issues facing the West by Islamic fundamentalism. Many of his columns addressed the same issues.

Rev. Scott Boisoin, a Canandian, was convicted last November by the CHRC because he sent a letter to the editor of a local newspaper critical of the active homosexual agenda. “…this is aimed precisely at every individual that in any way supports the homosexual machine that has been mercilessly gaining ground in our society since the 1960s. I cannot pity you any longer and remain inactive. You have caused far too much damage…Your children are being warped into believing that same-sex families are acceptable; that men kissing men is appropriate. ”

Just recently the “remedy” was ordered: Boisoin, a pastor, and his organization, The Concerned Christian Organization, have been banned for life to speak or publish “in the newspapers, by email, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.. they … are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about … Lund [the complainant] or … Lund's witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further, all disparaging remarks…[regarding] homosexuals are directed to be removed from current Web sites and publications of Mr. Boissoin [sic] and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc.,” by the quasi-judicial group, the CHRC.

Boisoin and his group, jointly and severally, must also pay a $5,000 fine to the complainant and $2,000 to the “judge” for her time. Additionally, while he has said he will not do it, Boisoin and his group have been ordered to write a public apology to the complainant, and publish it in the same newspaper that published his letter to the editor.

The funny thing about this is, according to the CHRC, there was “no specific individual who can be compensated as there is no direct victim who has come forward.”

Get that? No actual victim. So the complainant, who alleges he is not gay, and no harm was actually done to him, was compensated, as was the “judge,” a divorce attorney, who laid down the punishment. Curiously, a prominent gay group, and a gay magazine, while not supportive of Boisoin’s sentiments, have both supported his right to express them. Certainly, if anyone would have been a “victim” of Boisoin’s letter, it would have been someone actually in the homosexual community.

 Notice also, no disparaging remarks about homosexuals. That means no disapproval, no reproach, nothing critical or, according to the American Heritage Dictionary, to not “speak of in a slighting or disrespectful way.” The means, Boisoin cannot even read verses from the Bible, which speak against homosexuality.

The CHRCs were established in the 1970s to initially address discrimination in housing and employment. They soon began using their authority, however, “to silence citizens who declined to embrace the new vision of Canada … by then-Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau: multicultural and pacifist; blindly tolerant; anti-tradition, anti-family and anti-life.”

But, don’t get this wrong – this isn’t about Canada, sexual preference, or religion, or even the people who have been hauled in front of this egregious tribunal. This is about free speech. The right to express one’s thoughts and opinions, even if they go against the grain. Or, “hurts someone feelings.”

This is about the United States, and what is, and has been happening here. While we don’t yet have anything like the CHRC, we have the government and our “anti-intimidation laws”, now in place in 47 states, the courts, and our educational monitors. And, we are hobbled with political correctness – to the point where one cannot tell the truth and must couch it in ambiguities, or fear public or judicial reprisal. 

Generally, it is conservatives who are targeted.

The people, who are concerned about the many problems illegal immigration brings, and want secure borders, are considered racist. Somehow the concerns about the one are translated into a bias against all Latinos.

 Those who question the current global warming hysteria, and “refuse to join the fight,” have been likened to Hitler or to Josef Fritzl in Austria, who locked his daughter and her children in a cellar for 24 years. To be skeptical “about the conventional wisdom on climate change is akin to the monstrous crime committed by Fritzl.” Those who question the veracity of global warming have also been likened to Holocaust Deniers.

The people who fear the encroaching Islamic jihad are called Islamophobic. Those who speak about or discuss the negative and frightening aspects of Islam are accused of religious intolerance, or xenophobia, and are accused of hating all Muslims and all of Arab descent. One must question why Muslims are so sensitive to concerns regarding their beliefs. Christians’ beliefs are questioned and bashed all the time. “It is illogical for a member of a religion to fear the articulation of other beliefs if he is certain of its truth.”

Portions of the Bible are considered by many to be hate speech. Christians are considered to be purveyors of hatred and intolerance if they follow their beliefs. They are often considered extremists and fundamentalists if they believe and follow their scriptures. Historical information becomes a hate issue, rather than what it is – historical fact or detail.

A recent report to congress, the U.S. State Department “Office of Global Anti-Semitism, said “the New Testament record that the Jews had Christ crucified is ‘classical anti-semitism.’ This edict makes millions of bible-believing Christians into ‘anti-semites – potential ‘hate criminals.’ Anti-semitisim is…a hate crime in Canada, Australia, and most European countries, punishable by harsh fines and imprisonment.” The one question one must ask, is why is it anti-Semitism to record historical facts?

In some countries, to deny the Holocaust is a crime, punishable by fines and imprisonment. Frankly, while I cannot understand how one could deny that it took place in the face of masses of historical data and substantiation, it should not be a crime to deny a historical event or evidence.

To think a certain way, and to publicize those thoughts, when not censured due to political correctness, and the fear that it might incite violence, “hurt someone’s feelings” or put someone in a bad light, even if justified, has become a crime. Such nonsense is being bolstered by the judicial system; with the effect that rational dialogue on a number of issues is being quashed.

The courts are being used more effectively than ever before to stifle the dissemination of thought and public discourse on issues. While this is not specifically about Islam, “lawfare,” a legal jihad, which is being waged, is a prime example. The practice is predatory, often without a serious expectation of winning, but used as a means to “intimidate and bankrupt defendants.” It is a method, using the Western democratic court systems to “suppress freedom of expression [and] abolish public discourse critical of Islam…”

“Forum shopping, whereby plaintiffs bring actions in jurisdictions most likely to rule in their favor, has enabled a wave of ‘libel tourism’ that has resulted in foreign judgments against European and now American authors mandating the destruction of American-authored literary material.”

Rather than face lengthy and expensive litigation, regardless of the merit of the works, “most authors and publishers targeted have issued apologies and retractions, while some have paid fines…” The recent case of Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of Funding Evil, published in the United States, who alleged financial ties between wealthy Saudis and terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda, is a good example.

Ehrenfeld, an anti-terrorism analyst and director of the American Center for Democracy, was sued in a UK court, because something like 23 copies of her book were sold online by Amazon. com to people who live in the UK. This is despite the fact neither she nor her accuser lives in the UK. “Ehrenfeld lost on default and was ordered to pay heavy fines, apologize, and destroy her books -- all of which she has refused to do.” Instead, she counter-sued in a New York State court in an attempt to have the UK judgment declared unenforceable in the United States.

She lost the case because the NY court ruled that it “lacked jurisdiction over the Saudi resident who, the court said, did not have sufficient connections to the state.” Afterwards, the Association of American Publishers criticized the ruling “as a blow to intellectual freedom and ‘a deep disappointment for publishers and other First Amendment advocates.’"

When Cambridge Press was threatened with a lawsuit for publishing Alms for Jihad by American authors Robert Collins and J. Millard Burr, the “publisher immediately capitulated, offered a public apology…pulped the unsold copies of the book, and took it out of print.”

There is a real danger in censuring thought and the verbal or written expression of it. We are quickly moving into an Orwellian society. What many in the United States and other Western nations don’t seem to understand yet, when some ideas are censured, others will surely follow. This excludes those who are waging jihad against us, because they clearly understand that. It is their purpose to quash anything that may be perceived as derogatory.

Basically, what has already happened in Europe, Australia and Canada (all which used to have the freedom to express one’s thoughts and ideas), is happening here in the United States. To think a certain way, and to express those thoughts, are fast becoming crimes – or dangerous. Making a statement of fact, if it wounds someone’s sensibilities, can be cause to be fired, fined, and perhaps even jailed. In some cases, people sometimes actually fear for their lives due to community response.

Take, for example, what happened to a teacher several years ago, when, during a public forum, he explained that at his school, it was the male black teenage boys who were causing the bulk of the problems. The audience was aghast, and he was promptly accused of racism. He lost his job, and the media had a field day with him. Ultimately, he was vindicated, but the whole event made one thing clear – even if it was the truth, substantiated by facts, making such a statement could be dangerous and have severe consequences.

It wasn’t politically correct to state, or even imply, that one group was causing problems over another, even if it was true. Rather than being a statement of fact, which it was, it was seen as racist. Which is what has happened with illegal immigration. Rather than recognizing that people are concerned about illegal immigration, which coincidentally happens to be primarily from Mexico, it becomes an indictment of all Latinos. That’s like assuming because a women fears rape, she hates all men. An equally absurd conclusion.

Public opinion isn’t always right. It wasn’t right when people thought African Americans were less than human. It wasn’t right when people thought the earth was flat. Just because a segment of the population, including much of the media, thinks certain things shouldn’t be said because they may somehow physiologically injure someone else, doesn’t make it right. Just because many are convinced of the veracity of global warming, doesn’t make it right. And, just because the courts have decreed someone’s feelings might be hurt by saying something, doesn’t make it right. The intolerance we are now seeing towards “alternative and dissident opinions betrays the powerful anti-democratic impulse” now prevalent in our society.

What is right, however, is to uphold and defend our Constitutionally protected First Amendment right of Free Speech. The expression of our thoughts. Our country was founded on controversy. We broke from the subservience of European thought and edicts when we became a free nation. If we don’t fight for this right on every front, for the right to express our thoughts, we will lose it. It will slip away, unnoticed by many until it’s too late – and the expressions of our thoughts, our words, and our every deed, will be governed by whoever is in power.

In a recent thread in the ATS Conspiracy Forum, “So I just signed up on a Muslim extremist board…” I was floored by some of the comments from the posters. The original poster Sublime620  signed up because he “wanted to discuss politics with the ‘enemy’. People that don't like white Americans and Jews. While they don't actively state that they want to destroy America, it is clearly stated as an objective of theirs to make the world dominated by Islam.”

Sublime620 joined the board because “it was featured on Fox News as being a Muslim extremist website…” But, his real question was, after joining this board, if he would be “added to the terrorist watch list? Will my phone be tapped? Will they personally monitor my internet activity? Will I have trouble flying?”

He continues: “As for Christian extremists... Do you mean the neo-cons? I discuss them all the time. Hate 'em. But I know everything about Christian extremists. I have never argued with a Muslim extremist. I really was just curious as to what it would be like to have a casual debate with them [Muslim extremists].”

“…I have a different opinion and I wanted to discuss and debate that with them. Doesn't that show that I have more respect for them than most people do?”

JmanFIVek: “I love chatting with islamic extremist. It's interesting to try and understand their perspective.”

ANOK; “Why can't people see extremists Muslims as just a 'bunch of nuts' instead of painting the whole religion as evil? …It has nothing to do with religion, but a lot to do with the media and the power of persuasion.”

Res Ipsa: “I hate being ignorant about the different Muslim groups and what is pissing them off so bad. I just hate being ignorant about anything…”

SpartanKingLeonidas: pointed folks to some other thread he had begun, One called “Muslim’s Are Not The Problem, You Are!!! ” You have been duped by ignorance and are blind to the truth. The Muslim religion, is just like Christianity, exactly like it in fact…”

Sometimes it amazes me that my enemy is so naïve, superficial, and stupid…Syrian Ambassador to the U.S. 'Imad Mustafa, which aired on Al-Jazeera TV on May 5, 2008

These comments and comments like them show exactly what most of the American people are – ignorant of Islam, ignorant of their beliefs, and ignorant or the threat they pose. Unfortunately, it isn’t only “extremists” who are a threat.  There is abundant material from so-called “moderate” Muslims who speak about world domination and the destruction of those who do not follow the faith. The Muslims who do not believe this are apostates…in order to adapt within whatever culture they are in, and not become jihadists, they must ignore huge chunks of their holy book, the Qur’an and the hadiths. It is nothing like Christianity, as some would attest. The Muslims themselves agree their belief is nothing like Christianity.

In a sermon that aired on Hamas' Al-Aqsa TV on April 11, 2008, Yunis Al-Astal, Hamas MP and cleric, told worshipers that Rome, "the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital," would soon be conquered by Islam, just as Constantinople was. It then, he said, would become "an advanced post for the Islamic conquests, which will spread through Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas, and even Eastern Europe."

"If the Islamic shari'a is applied in America… "I am proud to be a fundamentalist Muslim, because I know, I follow, and I strive to practice the teachings of Islam. Every Muslim should be proud to be a fundamentalist Muslim... it gives benefits to society. On the basis of this knowledge, every Muslim should be proud to be a fundamentalist Muslim." [...]

"I would stress that every Muslim should be a terrorist. I repeat: Every Muslim should be a terrorist. A terrorist is a person who terrifies others, who terrorizes others. Public address delivered by Indian cleric Ashraf Mohamedy, which aired on Peace TV on April 22, 2008:

In late August, 2004 at the Egyptian Journalists' Union in Cairo, Sheikh Dr. Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood movement and one of the most important religious authorities in Islamist circles, issued a religious legal opinion permitting the abduction and killing of American civilians in Iraq.

Statements like the one from ANOK, “ Why can't people see extremists Muslims as just a 'bunch of nuts' instead of painting the whole religion as evil? …It has nothing to do with religion, but a lot to do with the media and the power of persuasion” show how little people really understand Islam. Their religion and their political ideology are one and the same – all “penned” from the same man. From the mouth of the same man they revere as their prophet. The man who if cartoons or pictures are made of, they will kill because of. And, please, for any who want a make a comparison with other religions – let us first remember that Muhammad, Abu l-Qasim Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Hashimi al-Qurashi, was a man. Not a god. Not God. Or even the Son of God. He was an illiterate man who saw and heard things, including at one point djinns – or in English, a genie. He related having conversations with one. In fact, the Qur'an has a whole discourse on them, and it states that Muhammad was sent as a prophet to both “humanity and the Djinn”.

What many want to call extremists, are, in fact, fundamental Muslims. The only valid comparison one can make between them and Christians is that fundamental Christians also believe every jot and tittle in their holy book, the Bible, and they believe in God. But, it is not the same God. Other than that, there is no comparison on any level.

Plus, Muslims lie. It is not only an accepted behavior, it is expected. It is so written in the Qur’an and in their hadiths.  They all believe in taqqiyah, which basically means to simulate whatever status you need to in order to win the war against the enemy…which is everyone who does not follow Muhammed. From The Truth About Islam, Taqqiyah & Jihad (Deception & Holy War), taqqiyah, or dissimulation, is a form of deception, which Muslims use to conceal the truth. This Islamic concept to deceive an enemy (i.e., non-Muslim, infidel, kafir, etc.) is not only a common practice, but is considered a virtue among Muslims. It is used by all Muslims, not just Shias, as Sunnis will assert.

Just remember this practice of deception whenever you hear ludicrous remarks like "Islam is a religion of peace," or "Violence is completely foreign to Islam."

So, aside from any other issue regarding Islam, one must remember that what they say (such as in an open forum, during a debate or political negotiations) must always be questioned. The fruit of the tree is where one sees the truth. There are good Muslims – Muslims who want the Qur’an to be reinterpreted. To adapt. But remember, they do not accept the Qur’an in its entirety. Because if they did, they would be jihadists. It is so written.

The Quilliam Foundation is one such group. They are a counter extremism think tank, created by former activists of radical Islamist organizations. They believe that Western Muslims should revive Western Islam, and find harmony in West-Islam relations.

And, of course, there are duplicitous Christians and Jews and folks of other beliefs. But, their scriptures say lying is wrong. It is not acceptable behavior. In Islam, however, it is not only considered acceptable, it is often considered necessary as it serves their belief and their cause.

From Understanding Dishonesty and Deceit in Islam

When someone first becomes curious and wishes to begin learning about Islam, it is imperative that they first understand the degree to which lying is not only permitted, but actually fostered and even, at times, commanded in Islam.  When a Christian wishes to teach others about Christianity, it is simply understood that honesty will be an essential aspect of that sharing.  In Islam however, most westerners have a hard time relating to the fact that purposeful exaggerations, covering of the truth and occasionally – outright-deliberate lying is a core part of the religion of Islam.  There are actually specific doctrines and traditions that foster a culture of dishonesty within Islam…of course, there are some verses and traditions in Islam that discourage lying:

 And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know (what it is). -Surah 2:42 (Yusuf Ali)

 But, it is the exceptions to the rule that have actually become the rule itself. 

In order to understand how a religion can rationalize and justify lying, the model of jihad and the goals of Islam must be examined.  Within Islam, jihad is essentially viewed as a struggle to bring all things into submission to Allah and Islam.  This is critical. There is the personal inner struggle, which is fought by every Muslim to overcome his or her own weaknesses. Then there is the need to wage jihad to make others submit to Islam.  This is similar to what Christians call evangelism.  In Islam it is called Dawah.  “Flowing on down the spectrum, there is the imperative for Islam to take over local and eventually national governments.  This is the point, unfortunately where the true face, the violent face of Islam is often revealed and, where jihad usually begins to get bloody.”

This is what is we’re seeing throughout the world today.  So, while many non-Muslims think of jihad as personal struggle, and simply fighting against non-Muslim governments and nations, the concept in Islam actually includes all aspects of life, which the western world is beginning to see as shari’a law, among other things. “ In the Muslim mind, even the struggle to convert non-Muslims to Islam is part of jihad.  Evangelism in Islam is more than just “sharing the good news, it is war.” Muhammad said, “War is deception.”  So, in this context,  “Islam encourages Muslims to use an aggressive jihad/war-time mentality that is literally defined by deception.”

And, until people realize the degree to which this mentality plays out, people in the western world, who are being purposefully deceived, are like sheep being led to the slaughter.

So, yes – most of us are as stupid and naïve as they think we are. And, people will continue to be so until they truly inform themselves about Islam and not listen to the Muslim apologists who continue to compare Islam with Christianity or tell us it is a religion of peace. Because anyone who has actually reads the Qur’an know that isn’t true.

Speaking of…a set of brass ones! When I read the article from CNSNews.com regarding  Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s (PPFA) president, Cecile Richards, having sent a request for recipients to “Make a Mother’s Gift” to the organization, I was beyond appalled. Stunned. For a few seconds, I was speechless…and anyone who knows me knows that doesn’t happen often.

Especially considering the fact that, among other things, the PPFA is the leading provider of surgical abortions in the United States and receives more than $300 million in government grants. PPFA provides more abortions than any other provider in the U.S. In 2005 PPFA provided 264,943 surgical and medical abortions, according to its 2004-2005 Annual Report.

According to the same report, between government grants and contracts, private contributions and bequests ($212.2 million), clinic income ($345.1 million) and other sources, they received a total of $902.8 million. Approximately one-third of its revenue is from government grants and contracts.

The May 3 email from Richards follows:

"Dear Friend, Join us! Make a Mother's Day gift. My daughter, Hannah, recently wrote this for a national magazine:

'I was raised by strong women. My mom, Cecile Richards, fights daily for women's reproductive rights and social justice as president of Planned Parenthood. It's a legacy she got from her mom (my late grandma), Ann Richards, the former governor of Texas. I've learned that the most rewarding battles in life are those waged for something you truly believe in.' ...

"... As Mother's Day approaches, I am grateful for the opportunity to make a difference and hope you'll join me. Happy Mother's Day."

End email.

John Jansen, co-director of Generations for Life, the youth outreach program for the Pro-Life Action League, told Cybercast News Service (CNS) he felt it was ironic that “that an organization dedicated to helping women avoid motherhood is celebrating motherhood.”

CNS stated Georgette Forney, co-founder of Silent No More Awareness Campaign (SNMAC), found irony in Planned Parenthood using motherhood as a marketing tool. They reach out to those who are in pain after their abortion and let them know help is available. They are Christians who “make the public aware of the devastation abortion brings to women and men. The campaign seeks to expose and heal the secrecy and silence surrounding the emotional and physical pain of abortion.”  Their goal is to educate the public that “abortion is harmful emotionally, physically and spiritually with lasting consequences,” and encourage those who are ready to share their stories. The actress and model Jennifer O'Neill is the National Spokeswoman for the Campaign.

Groups like the SNMAC and Ramah International speak of Post-abortion Syndrome (PAS), a form of post-traumatic stress disorder, which may not strike until years later.

I’ve known many women who would tell you how old their child or children would have been had they been born. Some, due to the abortion or complications were unable to have children. I cannot begin to tell you the guilt and despair some of these women felt. A number of them said had they really known or understood what they were doing, and the impact it would have on them, they would have made a different choice.

According to the PPFA  site, “Abortions are very common. In fact, more than 1 in 3 women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45 years old.” I would have to question those numbers. But, even if it’s close, it’s more than tragic.

On their page about “Pregnant, Now What?” the PPFA says, “Beware of so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" that are anti-abortion. These fake clinics advertise free pregnancy testing to lure women into their anti-choice agenda.” In their exegesis about “Crisis pregnancy centers”, they assert:

1.)    May perform your pregnancy tests without medical supervision. (Since when do people need a doctor to read a “plus” on a pee stick? But, most “crisis” pregnancy centers offer medical care. I am unaware of any who do not either have medical personnel involved with their organization, or have a medical clinic or physician they can send a woman to. I have no doubt that when a medical opinion is needed they procure one. Or, send the woman to a medical clinic or physician. To describe them otherwise is specious.)

2.)    Won’t give you complete and correct information about all options. (Obviously, a place that does not believe in the efficacy of abortion isn’t going to give that as an option – unless there is a real medical need for it. However, I question the veracity of this statement. There are a number of organizations such as Birthright International who are independent, interdenominational, and not affiliated with any religious or political group or public agency. They also do not ...use "scare tactics" or pressure; show abortion slides or pictures; picket or harass abortion clinics; evangelize or lobby for legislative changes or engage in the public debate on abortion.” Or, such as The Nurturing Network or Bethany Christian Services who among the many things they offer are nurturing homes, medical services, legal assistance, counseling support, financial aid, adoption services and educational and employment opportunities, and post-pregnancy help. A more inclusive list, in fact, than PPFA.)

3.)    May try to frighten you with misleading films and pictures that are designed to keep you from choosing abortion. (Oh, they show them real pictures of what actually happens to that little life they’re thinking about snuffing out. And, depending in the method and how late in the game it is, the reality is pretty gruesome. Fr. Frank Pavone, one of the most prominent pro-life leaders in the nation has posted two challenging videos on You Tube in which he demonstrates the most common abortion procedures, using the actual abortion instruments and fetal models. The first is an explanation of Dismemberment D&E Procedure. The second, a Suction Abortion Procedure. A video on Development of the Unborn Baby is doubtless another one they wouldn’t want a woman to see when contemplating an abortion. Organizations like the PPFA resist the idea of giving pregnant women ultra sound [sonograms] who seek abortion as an alternative. Because once a woman has one, she can clearly see it’s not a blob of protoplasm in there – it’s a real live human being. “Although the terms ultrasound and sonogram are technically different, they are used interchangeably and reference the same exam.” The results are seen immediately on a monitor during the procedure. There is an interesting video regard the issue of Informed Consent. The author contends that if women contemplating an abortion were shown the sonograms, were actually informed about what they were about to do, which would include the visual aspect of what’s inside, they may look at it differently. At the very least, they would no longer be able to fool themselves into thinking what they are about to abort is a blob of protoplasm…Pavone and others believe that if the American people can actually see what an abortion is, and what is going to happen and to what, they may reconsider it as an option for birth control.)

4.)    Will lie to you about the medical and emotional effects of abortion. (No, I think it is the folks at places like PPFA that lie – they minimize the emotional and physiological repercussions, giving the sense that it is essentially has no more impact that getting a tooth pulled or “like having your tonsils out." If it had no residual impact there would be no need for organizations like SNMC or Rachel’s Vineyard Ministries or the dozens of other organizations dedicated to dealing with the trauma, both short and long term, of abortion.)

5.)    May tell you that you are not pregnant even if you are, to fool you into continuing your pregnancy without knowing— the delay would make abortion more risky and keep you from getting prenatal care. (I would have to see real proof on this. Not anecdotal evidence from PPFA. From women, once frightened and scared because they believed they were pregnant, or were pregnant)

6.)    May discourage you from using the most reliable methods of birth control. (Again, I would have to see real proof on this issue. These organizations are not trying to get woman pregnant – only to deal with the repercussions of it.)

But, of course, “If you need help, call your local Planned Parenthood center.” After all, in their opinion, they offer the best help and the only real sane way to look at things.

Their site on “Pregnant, Now What?” Does offer some good advice, however. Aside from its characterization of pro-life crisis centers, it offers a fairly good run-through of one’s options and the things to consider when pregnant. It also offers a cursory view on abortion and the types of abortion. However, they state, “Abortions performed later in pregnancy may be more complicated but are still safer than labor and delivery.”

Safer? In whose mind? And, on what level? For the most part, we’re not talking about people here who don’t have access to medical attention and who have to give birth on the streets or in the fields. This isn’t Africa or the 18^th century. Such a statement makes it clear what their agenda is. And, sounds like statistical manipulation to me.

All these issues make the Mother’s Day request for funds from the PPFA even more egregious.

CNS also reported that in another e-mail, Richards shared "some reflections on Mother's Day" by asking recipients to combat efforts to stop the federal government from giving Planned Parenthood the more than $300 million a year under its Title X family planning program, and “in particular the campaign spearheaded by the conservative Family Research Council.”

"The extreme right-wing Family Research Council (FRC) will deliver petitions to the White House with the express goal of totally defunding 'groups like Planned Parenthood,'" she wrote. "What's worse ... the Bush Administration ... will be inside to receive them with open arms."

Tony Perkins, FRC President said, "Allegations of fraud, reports of statutory rape cover-ups, the documented racism of several state branches, and clinic deficiencies are pushing leaders' support for Planned Parenthood to the brink. If President Bush agrees, U.S. funds would no longer be used to promote and facilitate abortion… Instead, federally-supported 'family planning' clinics would be completely separate from abortion services.”

Perkins felt maybe “then Richards would stop and reflect on what Mother's Day truly means to millions of would-be moms who, because of her clinics, will never hold the child whose life ended inside the clinic walls."

Perhaps Richards should listen to some of the women who had abortions. From Peggy in Tennessee,” … This abortion would meet my needs of the moment. It would be the solution to my family’s financial burdens, and my personal energy and convenience concerns. 

But in my heart and soul I knew that it was wrong. The abortion that I chose to have not only murdered my innocent baby, it damaged me physically, mentally and spiritually. It was not a solution to my problem. 

Because of the physical damage I had to have a hysterectomy 3 months later. 

The guilt and shame of allowing my child to be murdered made it much easier to use and abuse myself in many other ways.” 

Or from Lillian, “My boyfriend was abusive…Unfortunately, nothing my boyfriend could have done to me would compare to what that abortion clinic did to me. I made my appointment and went to my local Planned Parenthood for my abortion…The workers were very ineffectual and not very nice at all…I told her [a nurse] I was having second thoughts… I lost consciousness for a while, when I came too, the procedure was already underway.

… As he [the doctor] worked, he said to me, "This is best for you… All I could think about was how I could ever atone for the murder of my child. I heard the sucking of the machine as he worked I swear I could hear my baby's soul crying as it was torn apart.

… Those awful people forced me to have an abortion against my will. The minute I expressed any doubts about my abortion, they took steps to make sure they got my money from me.

I have never forgotten that awful experience. I tried to sue the clinic but, I was told that I didn't have a case because I had been given a lot of paperwork to sign and one page granted the permission to sedate me during the procedure if needed. One of the side effects of the sedative they used was mild hallucinations. There was also no proof that I had asked for the abortion to stop.

It has been five years and I have not forgotten it or stopped feeling guilty. Last year, suffering severe depression from the abortion, I tried to kill myself using my antidepressants. I asked for the abortion to stop, but I walked into that clinic and made the appointment. The clinic would help with the abortion, but they offered no help for my regret and depression afterward. I have looked to my church and I still feel unforgiven. I looked to psychology to help me with the guilt and they just gave me drugs. Finally, I decided that maybe if I tried to help other women and girls, I might be able to get redemption. Everyone needs to know that abortion mills are dangerous. Women and girls need to think through their decisions very carefully because their very souls are in danger.

No matter the circumstances, there is always a better choice than abortion. Help is available. I didn't ask for help because I was scared for my safety and I didn't think my family would help. I thought they would be mad at me for getting pregnant out of wedlock, but they would have helped me if I told them.  I was just so confused that I didn't think I had anyone in whom I could confide. But there is help out there. Don't make the same mistake I made.”