Log in

No account? Create an account
The Pro-Life Community
[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends]

Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in Pro-Life Community's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]
Monday, July 2nd, 2012
6:11 pm
debate_abortion  come visit
Tuesday, November 7th, 2006
11:27 pm
South Dakota ban initiative
For those wanting to follow the vote on this, CNN seems to have pretty good info here.
Tuesday, October 31st, 2006
7:41 pm
Volunteer with the Republican Party!
Hey all,

If you are in the Sarasota, FL area, the Republican Party of Florida would LOVE to have you walk door to door with us!

***More info behind the cut!Collapse )
Sunday, June 11th, 2006
4:40 pm
Abortion Is Four Times Deadlier Than Childbirth
This may be old news. It may have been found to be flawed. (If so, please let me know.) But I thought it might be of interest here.

Abortion Is Four Times Deadlier Than Childbirth

Friday, June 2nd, 2006
12:49 am
hi, my name is shannon, and i'm pro-choice, and i was just wondering if you guys can share your reasons as to why you're pro-life, i've only met a handful of pro-life people, and have really only heard a few reasons as to why you believe abortion is morally wrong, i would just like to hear some other opinions, so i can get more insight on this.

also, it seems that the only pro-life people i've talked to are religious, do any of you have any other reasons why you're pro-life that doesn't involve religion?
Sunday, May 7th, 2006
1:25 am
Random question, but I don't know where else to ask it:

What exactly is the abortion law now? Is it legal at any time before the actual birth?
Saturday, May 6th, 2006
2:53 pm
2:17 pm
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006
10:30 pm
Bold statement

I dont think making abortion illegal will stop abortions nor solve anything.

However, I know many of you are baffled about my abortion comment. Me being pro-life and all.
Let me explain...

 Advocating to make abortion illegal is not all there is to being prolife.
Yeah sure, make it illegal. It'll stop women from aborting.

I disagree.

We now have unbelievable access to medical information from the internet. Women will be attempting procedures herbal remedies and will still seek to have abortions. And even if they don't attempt it on themselves, they won't have to go into alley ways to abort their child. There will still be doctors, giving these services. However, since it'll be illegal, it'll be done in secrecy and being its without monitoring from health services, it'll be incredibly dangerous.

But did you get the gist of what I wrote? WOMEN WILL STILL SEEK TO HAVE ABORTIONS.

We should not be concerned with making illegal. I highly doubt that the numbers will decrease enough to make a difference. We should be focused on why women are so determined to go through this procedure. We should be working on stopping abortion, whether its illegal or not and helping women continue pregnanices and live fullfilling lives!!!!

Now my question is... who agrees with me?
Is it just pro-choicers?
Are there pro-lifers who feel the same as I do?
For those who disagree? Why?
Is there any substantial evidence that illegaizing abortion ALSO decreases the number of women seeking them?
Is there another reason?

I thank you for reading my vent.


Current Mood: miffed
Wednesday, November 16th, 2005
10:43 pm
Speak your Mind!!!


I have been allowed a chance to attend a very special gathering this upcoming Saturday. At this meeting will be 300 sisters and brothers coming together with laypeople, such as myself, to discuss the furture. TO talk and come up with ideas in how the Catholic orders can reach out to the local communities, the nation, and even on an international level.
The sisters have sponsoring this meeting to prepare for a large 'congress meeting' of sisters on LI, NY and disuss the election of new delegates, and new issues and programs to iniate.

I need ideas. i always hear people saying this and that of religious people and they don't do enough. So, what can they do?
I do hope this post is clear in what ideas I hope to hear!!

 I am looking for ways that the Sisters can reach out and aid the public and  communities


 for example I am suggesting a free or low cost child care program to be run by the sisters to aid mothers looking to further  their education.

Thursday, October 6th, 2005
11:40 pm
New Community
I just created a new community that some of you may be interested in.

X-posted like woah
Wednesday, October 5th, 2005
7:30 pm
I know that some on this community don't have a moral problem with embryonic stem cell research, but this is not a post to debate that, so let's not let it become that, ok? ;)

An article about a South Korean Catholic church donating a bunch of money toward non-embryonic stem cell research made me wonder how "regular folks" might be able to do the same. Anyone have any ideas? (And no, I'm not talking about the gov'ment doing it & taxing us for it. I'm talking about private donations.)

I also wondered about how one might go about donating thier *own* adult stem cells for research. Any ideas on that either?
Tuesday, October 4th, 2005
10:59 am
Is this true? Is there really a link?
Truth Brings Out Worst at Denver’s “Race for the Cure”
October 04, 2005

Pro-Lifers spit upon, attacked by vicious pro-aborts while warning that abortion causes breast cancer

Denver, CO — Every year, the city of Denver hosts a Race for the Cure .The Race is sponsored by the Susan G. Komen Foundation, and proceeds are designated to fund breast cancer research. Many of the race participants do not realize that the Susan G. Komen Foundation gives hundreds of thousands of dollars to Planned Parenthood, America’s number one abortion provider. In 2003, 21 SGK Foundation affiliate grants totaling over $475,000 were given to Planned Parenthood (Kristen Kelly, Susan G. Komen Public Relations). Not only is the SGK Foundation a financial supporter of Planned Parenthood, they have continually hidden the link between abortion and breast cancer. The SGK Foundation denies such a link, ignoring scientific evidence to the contrary. For this reason, while thousands raced for the cure in Denver, a dozen or so stood on the sidelines to show the truth of abortion.

On October 2, 2005, the Race for the Cure in Denver began with a loud horn and dozens of pink balloons released into the Denver skyline. As the first wave of 60,000 runners hit the first mile of their run, their eyes were drawn to the Truth Truck, parked just across a grassy divide from the Speer Street route. As the runners continued, the truck’s presence was explained by bright pink signs with black letters proclaiming “Abortion Causes Breast Cancer” and “abortionbreastcancer.com”. By the time the second wave of racers were approaching the truck, the protesters were nearly deafened by boos and threats. A seemingly non-stop contingent of rabid pro-choice women threw full water bottles and verbally assaulted the protesters behind the police tape. Several times, bold individuals crossed the tape and attacked the pro-life crowd, incensed at the images on the truth truck and word “abortion.” One protester was punched in the face by an irate woman. Two men exposed themselves to the women and children in the protest area. The pro-life picketers filed several complaints with the Denver Police Department, but the police did not attempt to arrest any of the violent and perverted perpetrators.

As the barrage continued, it became overwhelmingly evident that the racers were angered by the word “ABORTION” and the images on the truck. Phrases such as “My body, my choice!” were continually screamed at the picketers, accompanied by thousands of middle fingers. Few participants cared to address the link between abortion and breast cancer. The vulgar and obscene men and women did not seem to care that their crude language was heard and repeated by their children. Instead, they were determined to ignore the truth and deny any scientific research presented to them. Picketer Jo Scott commented, “This must be the wide road to hell.” Only half a dozen women gave the protesters a discreet “thumbs up.”

The Race for the Cure in Denver made it clear that the pro-choice movement is completely irrational. Not one piece of evidence was given to refute the link between abortion and breast cancer. Not all breast cancers can be avoided, but abortion is avoidable. The racers, as a whole, did not care that they were being lied to. The violence and vulgarity attested to a movement based on emotions and selfishness instead of scientific fact. The Truth Truck’s presence at this event put the multitudes face to face with the evil that they promote, and made it abundantly clear that the images need to be present at every Race for the Cure to show the truth.

Visit Our Website



Not only is the SGK Foundation a financial supporter of Planned Parenthood, they have continually hidden the link between abortion and breast cancer.

WFT mates? Did I miss this memo? Has anyone any information refuting this? I dont want to be passing around lies and myths if this isnt true.....

Current Mood: confused
Wednesday, September 21st, 2005
12:07 pm
Birth Control Pill

I checked Memories to see if this question has been addressed, but I don't see any Memories listed for this community. So I apologize if this is a repeated issue. I also apologize if this sounds like too much of a "debate" for this community--I am not starting nor welcoming a back-and-forth argument at all. But...

I'm sure you guys are aware that many pro-lifers consider the birth control pill to be not just contraceptive in nature but also abortifacient (meaning that, the pill works first and foremost by preventing ovulation, and second, it thickens the cervical mucous, preventing sperm from getting by, but that when these first two methods fail, the third method can kick in, which is disallowing a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall, and in the eyes of many, this is an abortion).

I understand and am inclined to agree with the arguments for why the birth control pill (and the morning-after pill) can be considered abortifacient.

However, what I am looking for is the opposite: Can any pro-lifer here express to me why they think that the birth control pill is OKAY to pro-lifers to use? Has anyone here researched it and come to the conclusion that using the pill does not go against what we pro-lifers believe?

Basically, taking into consideration the third method that the pill sometimes falls back on (preventing a fertilized egg from implanting), can anyone still provide sound reasoning why the pill isn't abortifacient in nature and why it's still okay to take?

I'm not opening a debate here. I just want you to hear your thoughts, which I will let speak for themselves and let stand.
Friday, August 12th, 2005
6:21 pm
Know someone who believes Roberts supported antiabortion violence?
As many of us know, there have been ads stating that Supreme Court Nominee Roberts supported antiabortion violence.

Happily, factcheck.org has a nice article about the truth. :)

(Found by me via factcheckorg)
Thursday, July 28th, 2005
1:16 pm
From the Susan B. Anthony List
"Planned Parenthood is working around the clock to gather 2 million signatures supporting Roe v. Wade and demanding that any judicial nominee support it as well!

Don't let pro-abortion activists be the only voices your Senators hear from. Please send them a letter urging them to bring the President's Supreme Court Nominee to the Senate floor for a full vote.

NARAL is urging its supporters to contact Senators and demand filibustering any pro-life judicial nominees!

Contacting your Senator is a critical component in our fight for an up or down vote for all of President Bush's judicial nominees."

If you go to this site and fill out the form, it sends a letter automatically to the proper Senators of your state.


Current Mood: good
Wednesday, June 22nd, 2005
11:50 pm
Are You really pro-life?

Are You fully ready to pay extra taxes to pay for medical care for 9 months and labor and delivery? And also for medical care if the child is born sick or deformed or adicted to crack?
Are you willing to take a child into your homes, healthy or not? Otherwise where are all those extra babies going to go?
The sad truth is that many more american families are adopting overseas because it is thousands of dollars cheaper and much easier. So you would also be fighting to make adoptions easier and cheaper in america right?
And you would support to raise welfare limits and the taxes to pay for that and food stamps so that all these extra mouths can be fed right? And you would build more womens shelters and homeless shelters and free re-hab centers for these mothers?

Saying abortion is wrong and should be decreased as much as possible is one thing - being prepared to deal with the aftermath is another.

(this post was made possible due to the enlightenment from garden of simple on www.myspace.com )((x-posted to other groups.))

Current Mood: tired of hypocrites
Monday, April 11th, 2005
4:04 pm

Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act

One top prospect for legislative action this year is the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, sponsored by Senator Brownback and Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ). The bill would require any abortionist to provide specified information to any woman seeking an abortion at 20 weeks or later, regarding the pain that would be inflicted on the baby, and to obtain a signed form accepting or rejecting administration of pain-relieving drugs to the baby.

A national poll in November by Wirthlin Worldwide described this legislation and found 75% in support, including 51% strongly in favor. Only 18% opposed the legislation.

For more information on this issue, see the NRLC website section on
The Pain of the Unborn.

for information of helping this billCollapse )</font>

asking for mature and friendly responses and reactions!

Current Mood: cheerful
Wednesday, March 16th, 2005
7:03 pm
Maybe someone can explain this to me...
Got an email from PP. It "warns" about a potential Senate Bill.

Quoting their own email: SB 76 would require a health care provider to offer a pregnant woman the opportunity to view an ultrasound image or hear the heart tones of the fetus before performing an abortion.

Further on: SB 76's blatantly political attempt to interfere with a woman's medical privacy

Um, huh? The doctor (that the woman's already seeing for an abortion) OFFERING (not FORCING) her a chance to see what is in her body (or what is "part" of her body, in many prochoicers language) is somehow interfering with her privacy?

I feel like I'm missing something here...

x-posted to a few places

Current Mood: confused
Sunday, March 13th, 2005
7:59 pm
hey guys! are their any other comms on lj like this one?

is their a pro life catholic journal? i dont really kno how to find comms so it would be great if u could send me links. thanx so much!!!
[ << Previous 20 ]
About LiveJournal.com