NYT: continues it's practice of ignoring the news they do not like....March for Life 2014 one pix on page 17...

Taken  to task by one of their own....Margaret Sullivan, The Public Editor of the New York Times and author of the The Public Editor's Journal Blog,  asks the NYT to explain why  they did not send a reporter to cover the March for Life in Washington DC and why such scant coverage?

"The Times, in print, published only a stand-alone photograph of the event on Page A17 with a two-line caption on Thursday."

Their tepid response was that they can't cover every protest and the crowd this year was smaller than last year due to the freezing temperatures.  Well I had the privileged of attending in 2012 (one of 500,000) and in 2013 (650,000) and the coverage was scant then as well.  I couldn't go this year due to knee surgery. 

The NYT does not pretend to be anything other than giving full throated support of  abortion on demand.  Some readers chastised them for ignoring the news story regardless of their own leanings. 

God bless the Editor who pointed out to them that they gave front page coverage to a handful of students in WA who protested the firing of a principal in a Catholic school for marrying his male partner.

So Gov. Cuomo says pro lifers are not welcome in NY state and the NYT pretends that they don't exist. I think of that every time I see an ad that is running now urging people to come to NY to do business. Really? pass.......

NYT: Abortion supporter becomes a mother and it all changes.

Well here is an article in the abortion supporting NYT just in time for Roe V Wade. Here is another reason we are winning.....the abortion supporters become mothers and then everything changes. I know the feeling. 

"But something changed once I became a mother. Pregnancy went from Scarlet Letter to Holy Grail — something deeply desired and no longer feared. Abortions seemed more something in a campaign platform. What felt most real was the fact that my husband and I wanted another child." 

"As with so many aspects of parenting, we make decisions now and are haunted by them for the rest of our lives. I am a woman who supports abortion rights. Before having children, I would have said that reflexively. As a mother, I no longer can."

NYT: articles of too many babies and too few babies in one week....which is it???

Well which is it New York Times??? NYT sports an article which is is re-tweeted and Facebook posted eagerly by the abortion industry as in ....Aha....see I told you so!! 

"The latest Health and Human Services Commission projections being circulated among Texas lawmakers indicate that during the 2014-15 biennium, poor women will deliver an estimated 23,760 more babies than they would have, as a result of their reduced access to state-subsidized birth control."

Now let's remember how this happened? Texas voted to have family planning services be delivered by organizations not  tied to the abortion giant  Planned Parenthood. Who would that be?? County health departments that's who. Well the abortion friendly administration said.... guess what..... if our friend and favorite fund raiser Planned Parenthood is snubbed we will  pull all the medicaid $$ from you.

"The  U.S. Health and Human Services said on Friday that the federal government plans to withdraw funding for a Texas program the provides over 100,000 women with birth control who are unable to afford it. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said the agency is pulling the funding out because Texas does not divvy up the money to Planned Parenthood clinics. Texas Governor Rick Perry called the decision an “egregious federal overreach” after it was announced. Perry said the decision by the Obama administration was “politically motivated” and that it was an insult that Sebelius had not informed the state of Texas before announcing the move to the press."

Just 6 short days earlier NYT ran a piece on their Opinion Page entitled "More Babies, Please" that says we need more babies....

"Today’s babies are tomorrow’s taxpayers and workers and entrepreneurs, and relatively youthful populations speed economic growth and keep spending commitments affordable. Thanks to our relative demographic dynamism, the America of 50 years hence may not only have more workers per retiree than countries like Japan and Germany, but also have more than emerging powers like China and Brazil.
If, that is, our dynamism persists. But that’s no longer a sure thing. American fertility plunged with the stock market in 2008, and it hasn't recovered. Last week, the Pew Research Center reported that U.S. birthrates hit the lowest rate ever recorded in 2011, with just 63 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age. (The rate was 71 per 1,000 in 1990.) For the first time in recent memory, Americans are having fewer babies than the French or British."

US News and World Reports also laments our declining birth rate....
"The U.S. birth rate has hit a record low, led by a big drop in the portion of immigrant women having babies."So Planned Parenthood sees more babies as a problem and wants tax money to take care of this problem. But other thinkers lament declining birth rates as a problem.  Which is it? They are speaking in economic terms only. Wouldn't it be great to celebrate the humanity of new life??? Just saying.....


Pix: Yahoo! Finance/Thinkstock

Sex selection abortion .. called brave new world

If you want to wake up without the morning cup of coffee, try reading this latest article in the NYT on sex selection kits.  As one of six children (five girls and one boy)  I take this pretty personally. 

PP , NOW,NARAL and the rest of the abortion industry keep tweeting to stop the war on women. Well where are they in this fight. Anyone? Anyone?

“Seven weeks is a different time in pregnancy,” said Dr. James Egan, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Connecticut Health Center who was a co-author of a study on sex selection with Dr. Chapman and others. “Women haven’t had the ultrasound where you see the fetus that looks like a baby. Many people don’t even know that a woman is pregnant. And you can have a medical termination,” using pills like RU-486, which can be used at home discreetly before 10 weeks of pregnancy.

The fetus...Latin for offspring looks like a baby because it is a baby.. and he makes the point that visually viewing the ultrasound viewing increases the chance that abortion vulnerable women will choose LIFE so you can end the life of your baby before you get emotionally attached, other people do not know you are pregnant and you can use the at home chemical abortion, RU 486!!! Better check out the death rate to women first!!! Do you want to scream that medical doctors who have taken the Hippocratic Oath would be saying this??

"But clinics and some ethicists say this type of sex selection is more acceptable because it occurs before embryos are implanted, before pregnancy."

Father of Modern Genetics" Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the lawmakers: "To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion ... it is plain experimental evidence." Notice he did not say after implantation.

“For someone who has two girls and wants to have a boy, so each sibling can grow up with brother and sister, what’s wrong with that?” Dr. Grifo said.

What's wrong with that???

"He said that “if a woman calls to make the appointment, the couple almost always wants a female. If a man calls, they almost always want a male.”

Some fetal DNA test-makers are trying to discourage sex selection by not selling in China and India, and requiring customers to sign waivers saying that is not their motivation"

Yes, that will surely work...sign a waiver saying they are not doing sex selection abortion.  We have no cause to condemn China or India. Isn't our motto in the abortion on demand without apology. They don't ask why you are aborting, just collect the $$$ upfront.

Some states are moving to ban sex selection abortion but the abortion industry is  concerned about the PR image this may have on them as they oppose this....

The laws would probably not survive court challenges, said John Robertson, a professor of law and bioethics at the University of Texas. But while abortion rights groups, like NARAL Pro-Choice America, oppose such bans, they may be less eager to fight them politically or in court because sex selection is not the most socially sympathetic motivation for abortion.

"Still, fetal DNA tests for sex determination and other traits present “issues that I don’t think many general obstetricians are ready to deal with,” Dr. Egan said. “It’s a brave new world.”

Indeed, a brave new world for those who survive as planned, perfect and privileged.

NYT: writes about the push back from liberals on Title X funding but admits it is needed to support facilities that provide abortions

New York Times writes an article meant to highlight a you tube  video put out by Move On.org attempting to scare everyone but I found one line in the article very informative....

"The program, which cost about $317 million in 2010, does not directly fund abortions, but often supports clinics that provide them."

That's it.....in a nutshell and despite the talking points put out there the abortion industry depends on the Title X money to keep their facilities operating and then the profit from the 380,000+ abortions is the icing on the cake.  This tax money, hires the staff, pays benefits, rent and utilities etc. They will resort to any scare tactic to continue the gravy train at the expense of the tax payers who polls show are trending more pro life . 
Let Move On and the abortion friendlies including the Hollywood celebs send in their contributions and support this cause so near and dear to their heart. The party is nearly over.

NYT: reports pro life gains across the US

New York Times article even admits it.... pro life or as they like to call it abortion foes have taken over even in states they used to be able to count on in the pro abortion category or as they like to refer to it as reproductive rights as in the right not to reproduce after the pregnancy was started.

I would take exception to their graph showing TN as not darkened showing that both gov. and state legislature solidly "pro life." See this post showing it.

"The biggest shift is in the state capitols, with 29 governors now considered to be solidly anti-abortion, compared with 21 last year. “This is worrisome because the governors have been the firewall, they’ve vetoed a lot of bad anti-choice legislation,” said Ted Miller, a spokesman for Naral Pro-Choice America.

The politics of abortion have changed profoundly in some larger states including Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. 

In 15 states, compared with 10 last year, both the legislature and the governor are anti-abortion, according to a new report by Naral, and those joining this category include larger states like Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin, as well as Georgia and Oklahoma. Maine and Pennsylvania are now strongly anti-abortion as well, if not quite as solidly."

NYT: The Unborn Paradox Opinion Piece ....could the NYT actually be getting it??

Opinion piece in the New York Times of all places....excellent read  by Russ Douthat  talking about the paradox of abortion, surrogacy, adoption.

 Here is a teaser....

"This is the paradox of America’s unborn. No life is so desperately sought after, so hungrily desired, so carefully nurtured. And yet no life is so legally unprotected, and so frequently destroyed."

Could it be that even the NYT is getting it??