Monday, October 15, 2018

PP Presents Plan B to Follow Defeat of Roe v Wade

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Fearful of a future of Roe v. Wade being gutted or overturned now that Brett Kavanaugh is seated on the Supreme Court, Planned Parenthood has introduced its own "morning after" plan.

It's a three-prong plan designed to provide abortions---no matter what.

One journalist supporter is calling it an "abortion underground railroad."

Be informed.


The Plan


Planned Parenthood's plan is called "Care For All."

The introduction begins with this:

A 3-Part Plan to Protect and Expand Access to Abortion in the United States. There’s no way to sugarcoat it.
With Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, we are likely to see the further erosion of Roe v. Wade in the very near future. There are 13 abortion-related cases that are just one step away from the Supreme Court, and 20 states are poised to ban abortion should Roe v. Wade be overturned.

Christian Headlines notes that the plan---"Care For All"---essentially has 3 prongs:

1. Expanding services in states where abortion is likely to remain legal. Planned Parenthood also will invest in “technology and other resources to help people living in hostile states access [to] abortion, no matter what.” From Planned Parenthood’s perspective, this will allow women in other states quick access to abortions when they cross state lines. The plan also seeks to use telemedicine, in which doctors give prescriptions to patients in others states for abortion drugs, which would be mailed.

2. Working to pass laws supporting abortion rights.“We’ll partner with state advocates and coalition partners to determine how we can use state policies to ensure there’s an ironclad network of states across the country where abortion will still be legal.”

3. Changing the culture. “We’ll be fighting abortion restrictions at their source: the stigma that still surrounds abortion in this country,” the plan says. “We’ll be enhancing our efforts to destigmatize abortion in the media and across popular culture -- including working with the music, fashion, movie, and television industries, and announcing additional public awareness campaigns in the coming months.”

"The Plan " also includes this:

"Planned Parenthood is not going to let this become a country where people can no longer access abortion — or where they ultimately lose the fundamental right to decide if or when to become a parent. We have a plan — a plan we have been working on since before Trump and Pence took office. With the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, we are kicking our plan into high gear. This multi-million dollar, nationwide effort will be working to ensure that abortion is still accessible in the United States, no matter what happens at the Supreme Court."

I noted that this is not actually a "Plan for All." It obviously overlooks the unborn baby who has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Amanda Marcotte, a far Left feminist activist writing for the far Left magazine Solon, after taking on Sen. Susan Collins (R-MA) for voting to confirm Kavanaugh although she is "pro-choice", Marcotte takes on the Religious Right.

She says:
"More than a dozen cases are winding through the federal court system right now that pose overt challenges to legal abortion, and with a five-justice majority that opposes reproductive rights, it's just a matter of how soon and how badly the right to abortion is nullified, not whether it will happen."

She also says:
"And while the Religious Right would have you believe that one in four women who get an abortion at some point in their lives will simply stop needing the service---either because they give up sex or will suddenly welcome every unplanned pregnancy---evidence shows that banning abortion doesn't actually reduce demand."

There is a great deal of argument on the subject of whether banning reduces the number of abortions, or not.

Obviously, I strongly support overturning Roe v Wade---and I believe the stage is set for that to happen.

Ironically, Rachel Sussman, the national director of state policy for Planned Parenthood Action Fund, told Solon that making sure abortion is available to women who need it, "is not optional" and that Planned Parenthood has "a moral obligation to plan for a day when Roe v Wade may be gone."

Moral obligation?


Today's so-called progressives labor under a very awkward misconception---namely that they are "progressive" in any sense.

In reading through the Bible, most Christians are familiar with the worship of Baal, and know that God strongly condemned it and punished Israel for practicing it.

It's important that we know that Baal was a half-bull, half-man god of fertility.

The rituals of Baal worship, as described in the Bible and ancient extra-biblical historical texts, is well documented and went something like this:

Adults would gather around the altar of Baal. Infants would then be burned alive as a sacrificial offering to the deity. Amid horrific screams and the stench of charred human flesh, congregants---men and women alike--- would engage in sexual orgies. The ritual of "convenience" was intended to produce economic prosperity by prompting Baal to bring rain for the fertility of "mother earth."

The natural consequences of Baal worship were often pregnancy and childbirth---and the associated financial burdens of "unplanned parenthood."

Baal worship provided choices. A woman could choose. Child sacrifice was an acceptable option and was available on demand, as was other procedures to terminate the unborn unwanted child. Sometimes people chose to participate in homosexual conduct as opposed to heterosexual relations, rather than risk pregnancy.

Today's secular progressivism prides itself in moral elitism and progressive thinking. It's neither.

The worship of "fertility" has been replaced with worship of "reproductive freedom" or "choice." Child sacrifice via burnt offering has been updated, ever so slightly, to become child sacrifice by way of abortion. The ritualistic promotion, practice, and celebration of both heterosexual and homosexual immorality and promiscuity have been carefully whitewashed---yet wholeheartedly embraced by the cults of radical feminism, militant "gay rights," and comprehensive sex education. And the pantheistic worship of "mother earth" has been substituted ---in name only---for radical environmentalism.

Abortion is only a moral obligation when you understand and see it through the perverted lens of the secular, anti-God so-called progressive worldview.

None of this is progress. It's regressive paganism.

Ecclesiastes 1:9 says, "That which has been is what will be, That which is done is what will be done, And there is nothing new under the sun."

Outside the deliverance and restoration of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, individuals and societies revolve in the cesspool of paganism calling it "progressivism" and morality."

Be Informed. Be Faithful. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful.


3 comments:

  1. I believe the whole abortion situation is primarily a power trip. A woman engages in activity which has been known to result in pregnancy, then when she becomes pregnant from that activity, insists the pregnancy is not her fault and she must be absolved of the consequences of her activity. Supporting the contention it is a power trip I submit women themselves insist they be the ones who decide whether the unborn baby lives or dies and no one else has any right in the matter.

    Since liberal women do not need men, why is the matter even an issue? Having no need for men, they would not be in a position to become pregnant, would they?

    Please do not argue rape or incest because those are crimes and as such need to be reported so the perpetrator may be caught and punished. If they are not reported, they never happened; just ask Bill Clinton.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Legal abortion", what a joke. As our constitution is to be the law of the land, there is nothing legal about talking the life of another. It's not just "a part of the woman's body." It is another human being, in it's developing time of life. If it were "just a part of her body", would it ever eventually pass, one way or another?

    When should a woman have the right to take the life of another human being? Is it when her right to privacy should be protected by the 14th amendment? Roe v. Wade makes no constitutional sense. There was no precedent for it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Women have the right to chose to abstain, or use another method to keep from getting pregnant. They sure do not have the right to murder an innocent baby, who will endure terrible torture before it dies, so a woman can walk away with no consequences. Giving the baby up for adoption is another option. Many women are pressured by the man who pushes her to abort, so he won't have any responsibility to care for it. If the man or woman could view the whole baby as it is being ruthlessly killed by the money hungry so called doctors, maybe half of them wouldn't do it.

    ReplyDelete

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