Monday, March 21, 2011

Dr. Judy Kimelman: "Planned Parenthood Most Trusted"

As the news media works its social agenda, it's always revealing which columnists they choose to publish and which they choose to ignore.

Which story is told---which story is buried, or not told---and how the story is told.

I found it interesting this weekend that the Seattle Times choose to publish an
article by Judy Kimeland, M.D., titled, "GOP-Controlled House Strikes A Blow At Women's Health."

This, following a March 1
article, "Planned Parenthood: Republicans Don't Want Birth Control," by Kyung M. Song.

In her article, Song extols the virtues of Planned Parenthood and notes that Elaine Rose, chief executive of Planned Parenthood Votes Washington, was among those who went to the other Washington and lobbied Congress in favor of Planned Parenthood and their continued funding. Imagine that.

She frames the issue by quoting Rose: "The GOP's agenda is not at all a fiscal argument. What Republicans ultimately want is they don't want birth control."

Really? Some think the issue is about taxpayer funding of abortions.

The Times and Ms. Song would have you believe otherwise.

This weekend, Dr. Judith Kimeland wrote a column the Times chose to publish which says, "GOP-Controlled House Strikes A Blow At Women's Health."

Dr. Kimeland says the message from Republicans is, "No more family planning."

She also says, "By... attacking Planned Parenthood, Congress is attacking the largest and most trusted provider" of so-called reproductive services, family planning, teen sex ed, etc.

Most trusted? Trusted by whom?

I won't even attempt to list the times Planned Parenthood has been caught---on tape---within the past year, violating ethics, lying, breaching trust and likely breaking the law.

Most trusted?

Here's the question the Times avoids and the issue they refuse to address.

If Planned Parenthood, Ms. Song, Dr. Kimeland and a number of other advocates are so very,very concerned about women's health, why were they lined up, in fact crowding to the front of the line, to testify against the Pregnancy Centers only days ago in Olympia?

In demanding that the State Legislature impose requirements on the Pregnancy Centers that would have surely given Planned Parenthood lawyers the opportunity to sue them out of business, I wonder how that translates to protecting women's health care.

Dr. Kimeland, in her closing statement, makes this appeal: "Viewed from any angle, denying women access to family planning and attacking the organizations providing it is bad policy that will harm women, children and families..."

Viewed from "any angle" Dr. Kimeland?

Hypocrisy.

That would be any angle, except a pro-life view. What was the angle when attacking Pregnancy Centers?

The hearings revealed that the Pregnancy Centers don't take taxpayers money, in fact, save taxpayers money, are very much a part of their community and serve an important health care function in each community where they exist.

Fortunately, Washington State Legislators had the political sense or moral integrity to let the Planned Parenthood attack die.

In either event, you, the people, made the case and the lawmakers heard you, even though the news media and the abortion industry continue to charge forward, hand in hand, in support of their "most trusted."

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.

______________
Gary Randall
President
Faith and Freedom

Click here to add these blogs to your email inbox.

22 comments:

  1. Great point Gary. Thank you for the insight.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The media and the abortionists seem to believe the pro-life public will accept anything they say as fact.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dr. Kimeland is a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood, abortion and their agenda. She often writes on this subject. What a waste.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hypocrisy is right. Do these people think we are that uninformed. They are not supportive of women's health care, they are supportive of Planned Parenthood's version of health care. All their health care is based from an abortion point of view. "Most trusted" is offensive. You're right Gary, the abortion people have little regard for pro-life people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Midnight prayers and fasting. . . This is a battle the Lord will win. I am honored to be in His army and on the right side. Kent

    ReplyDelete
  6. So women are dependent upon the government now for family planning? If they are willing to take the risk of pregnancy, which is costly, they certainly should be able to afford the cost of prevention without needing my tax dollars.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Here are the response from Jaime Herrera
    Thank you for contacting me about abortion funding. It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

    I realize families in Southwest Washington are still struggling to gain access to quality and affordable health care, rest assured that I am working to make sure residents of Southwest Washington have access to the basic and preventative services they need. I am also working to ensure all women will continue to have access to these government services, however, many taxpayers have asked that I ensure their tax dollars are not used to fund or offset abortions costs. I must respect their direction on this issue as a matter of conscience. I will be continuing to push for transformational health care reform that ensures everyone is given access to basic and preventative care.

    And a few minutes later.

    Thank you for contacting me about Title X funding to Planned Parenthood. It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

    Families in Southwest Washington are continuing to make tremendous sacrifices in this difficult economic climate, and I ran for Congress with a mission to control spending and cut our budget. We cannot continue to borrow recklessly and mortgage the future of our children and grandchildren.

    As a step towards this, I voted for H.R. 1, the Continuing Appropriations Act, which was passed in the House on February 18th. I also voted for the amendment sponsored by Rep. Mike Pence from Indiana that you mentioned in your letter, because it would reduce our federal deficit by stopping federal funding to Planned Parenthood. This was a responsible place to reduce federal spending because many residents of Southwest Washington have asked me to make certain their tax dollars are not used to fund or offset the cost of abortions. I must respect their directive on this issue as a matter of conscience. I will continue to support legislation that works toward that end, because I have concerns regarding the way Planned Parenthood manages its federal dollars. However, despite cuts to Planned Parenthood, women in Southwest Washington will still have access to health screenings and other preventative services at local clinics that serve our community. I also realize many Americans are struggling to find access to affordable health care, and I believe the answer is to truly transform our health care system to ensure everyone is given access to affordable, quality and preventative care. Rest assured that I will continue to work toward this goal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Last time I checked abortion is still legal is the United States.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thank you Gary - this is a great blog entry. If it's any consolation, I think there are a lot of people who don't take the Seattle Times all that seriously. We need a real newspaper! :-) But that's no excuse for complacency, hence the need for the work you do. Thanks again!

    ReplyDelete
  10. 2:38

    Yes, and the genocide continues....Shame on this country!

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  11. Craig,

    If you really believe this is an actual genocide, and are not just callously misusing a term that represents the suffering of millions of people for political purposes, why are you just sitting by typing personal attacks to other commenters? I know if I were witness to an actual genocide, in my own town no less, I'd take direct action to stop it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Michael

    50 million dead kids, murdered because they were inconvenient or unwanted, sounds political to me. Remember the saying, "all politics is local?".

    Direct action? Surely you're not advocating shooting the doctors? Why would I want to become just like them? A murderer.

    I have spoken out about this to the powers that be and some listen and some don't. I didn't attack you, only your position that some don't deserve to live because it's not expedient or convenient.

    Really think about this for a second, will you? Think of the lives you've touched and those that have touched yours. The ways you've bettered their lives and they yours. Would their lives have been the same if you had been aborted or yours if they had been? Every life has intrinsic value, it is precious,
    a priceless gift, we only get one here on this earth. Have we no humanity? You spoke of callousness, what could be more callous than to deny someone the right to be born? To have a chance to laugh and love and be sad and grieve and all the other things we take for granted. Again, I say shame on us!

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  13. That's some lovely flowery rhetoric, Craig, but again it is considerably less than a sane reaction if faced with 50 million murdered children. No one said anything about shooting doctors, but again your actions fall considerably short of your inflammatory rhetoric. Why not start some sort of underground railroad to ferry these poor children to saftey? Oh, that's right, we're not actually talking about kids here, but fetuses. You see, some of us recognize not just the fetus, but feel that the woman, in whom said fetus resides, is more than just vessel.

    It's ironic that you and Gary get so hysterical over the prospect of renting a womb, yet you are willing to use the force of government to steal the use of that same womb.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 11:49

    "you see, some of us recognize not just the fetus, but feel the woman, in whom said fetus resides, is more than just a vessel".

    You mean unless of course she's a rent-a-womb.

    Underground railroad? So now you think I should try kidnapping,
    huh? Get real!

    If you get drunk, crash your car and cause the death of a pregnant woman you are charged with the death of both. If you are a doctor and render treatment to a pregnant woman and cause harm or death to either you will be charged with a criminal offense. Why is that? Because it's a baby.

    I have never heard a woman say "I can't wait til my fetus is born" or "I'm going to name my fetus ......."

    Life begins at conception, yet you are willing to use the force of government to steal the life of that same womb.

    The battle is for hearts and minds, without a change in both it's impossible to stop the carnage. You didn't answer my question. Did you have the right to be born?

    Craig in Lacey

    ReplyDelete
  15. Craig,

    You're familiar with the old conundrum about what if there was fire at the medical clinic and you had to choose saving dozens of zygotes in a single container or the single live baby. You couldn't carry both and there was one else and no time to return.

    What is your answer? And you can't say both.

    Me? I'd save the baby, no question about it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Michael
    The baby, no question.

    If your house is on fire and ready to collapse, your kids are in there. one in the front, one in the back, can't save both,
    Choose.

    Me, I'd die trying to save both

    ReplyDelete
  17. Exactly,

    So the point is that we both view the living baby as more worthy of saving than the zygotes who are past the point of conception. So the question then becomes, how far along do the zygotes have to develop to be on equal footing with the baby? That is what we disagree on.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The zygotes are not growing in the mother's womb, that's the difference. They have no opportunity to become a child in a petrie dish.

    On the other hand, if there's a pregnant woman in the house and a baby, I would tend to save the woman as there are 2 lives involved, that's the difference. Although I would not be adverse to sacrificing my own to try and save all 3.=)

    ReplyDelete
  19. "opportunity to become a child"

    So you're saying that they do have the opportunity to become a child in the mother's womb? In other words, they are still not a child.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Not in a petrie dish, in the womb, yes.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Actually, they all have the opportunity to become a child. The one in the petrie dish could be implanted into a womb. It's dependent upon others, just as the one in the womb couldn't survive on it's own either. Plus, what happens when science no longer requires a human womb?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I hope that day never comes. I can't imagine the can of worms that will open up. The child in the womb is already there, the one in the petrie dish is not.

    ReplyDelete

Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.