Showing posts with label Prolife. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prolife. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 22, 2015

What Planned Parenthood's "Tissue Harvesting" Program Means to Me- The Post Abortive Mother, by Sarah St. Onge

This past week has no doubt been an emotional week for many American women. Statistically speaking, {supposedly} one in three of us have ended an "unwanted" pregnancy via abortion.

This means that last Tuesday many of us woke up not to images of a beleaguered, controversial corporation caught in a scandal, but to a reminder of what our very personal, past choices really encompassed.  

It wasn’t made any better when social media was, again, plastered with a callous PP worker bargaining for human organs today.

I terminated my second pregnancy, in the second trimester, in 1994. I was moderately pro-choice. I never thought I would have an abortion, but I didn't believe I should be making the choice for anyone else. When I got pregnant a second time at 19 -- already a single mother-- I did what I believed was right for my family. I believed that it was the only decision I could make. There were medical complications with the pregnancy which made it easier to choose abortion. 

At least I believed it would be easier at the time. 

There were things I saw and heard while in the clinic which still wake me up in a cold sweat. What happened after my surgery made my experience more traumatic than most {if there is such a thing as more traumatic than ending the life of your unborn child}. I found it necessary to return to my physician for further care, because the "procedure" was incomplete and "fetal tissue" had been left behind. I was fortunate to have realized this early because retained "tissue" can cause serious infection which in turn can leave you infertile or even cause death.  

Unfortunately, I was only made aware of the retained "tissue" because it was visible on a sanitary napkin following my abortion -- along with surgical gauze which had been left behind in my cervix.

The current events have been a reminder of an experience which was particularly painful. I've watched a number of anti-Planned Parenthood videos throughout the years but none brought such a feeling of revulsion as the ones which are currently circulating. As Dr. Nucatola described manipulating the unborn child for maximum ease in obtaining intact organs I was reminded of the lack of concern for my health, as evidenced by the retained tissue and gauze which I found in the days following my abortion. I was reminded of my own unborn child's humanity, as she spoke so casually of crushing legs and other fully-formed body parts. I was shown the unfeeling nature of an organization which promotes destruction and financial gain under the guise of empowering women during Dr. Gatta’s conversation about the costs of tissue procurement, in which she made the statement, “I want a Lamborghini”.

This past week has brought out a variety of emotion, but primarily I feel sadness and anger.

Sadness because until this week I was never fully comfortable openly mourning the loss of that one, sweet baby.

Who was I to mourn the loss of a child I chose to throw away? It's not about a baby, after all. It's about choice.



As a 19 year old girl I was mistaken in believing their narrative -- the narrative in which my child's life was an impediment to my own growth, nothing more than a choice. I was mistaken to believe their view, that my unborn baby would be a burden.

This mistake turned out to be deadly for my child, as it has been for millions of children conceived in the U.S. for the last 40 years. 

And angry--

For too many years, women have believed the lie which Planned Parenthood has told us. They have believed the lie which states that our reproductive health depends solely on them, as if a woman can't find and fund alternatives to PP’s monstrous and murderous infrastructure. 

Women have believed the lie which states PP is our only ally  in the fight for women's rights --and that those rights are reliant on the destruction of our unborn children. 

Women have believed PP when they told us that they wanted us to have better lives. 

Women have believed PP when they told us our unborn children were not human

This week was difficult. I am a mother. 

I will now always wonder- was my child's body manipulated for organ harvesting? 

Was my child's termination prolonged so that an intact liver, an intact pair of lungs, or an intact heart was made available for research purposes? 

Was there a possibility that my child felt extended and unnecessary pain during the procedure because someone was attempting to procure intact tissue?

As stated in the long version of the video-- transcripts available here-- not all babies' lives are ended before the "extraction" procedure begins.

The potential pain which my unborn child suffered is something which I have struggled with for over 20 years. I know this is a primary concern for many {most} post-abortive women. There are many women whose hearts are heavy with new-found grief tonight. 

I am sending this message out today not as a pro-life activist, but as a former Planned Parenthood patient. 

Planned Parenthood owes me more than a canned response about legality and tone.

My abortion hurt me. 

My abortion ended the life of my unborn child.

For once, Planned Parenthood needs to address the thousands of women who have been hurt by their abortions. Planned Parenthood needs to address the women who felt taken advantage of today. They need to address the women who may have consented to tissue donation, not realizing that PP wasn’t talking about “a clump of cells” but intact lungs, muscle, and brains, being removed from babies which may have been delivered using less than compassionate methods.

Planned Parenthood owes every woman who has had a procedure in their clinics more than a canned response. 

Preferably before the next set of videos shows up. 

I didn’t consent to tissue donation, because I wanted to help fund their executive’s luxury auto.  

I consented because I was trying to make some sense out of what I instinctively understood was a senseless decision on my part.

Over the past two decades, I’ve grappled with, and admitted to the dishonesty and selfishness inherent in my choice- it’s time that Planned Parenthood does the same. 



{This post was first published on Ms. St. Onge's personal blog on 7/21/15. Reposted with permission}


Sarah St. Onge, mother to Beatrix Elizabeth -- 12/13/10

BIO:  Sarah St. Onge is a wife, mother of 4, step-mother of 2, and pro-life blogger for Save The 1. She blogs on grief, loss, and pro-life issues pertaining to continuing a pregnancy after a lethal anomaly has been diagnosed, at www.shebringsjoy.com.
Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Use Your Power to Stop Abortion ~by Darlene Pawlik

Restored Colonial One-Room Schoolhouse

One of the ways anyone can educate the public and those in positions of power is to write a letter exposing the facts, mingling them with real people’s stories and putting out very specific actions that you want the educated to take.  This can take many forms. 


A letter to the editor may be to get regular people to think a certain way.  The same is true of a blog post or other social media.  If you have a school board member who wants to bring abortion vendors into your school, you would write to the Board member, but then try to get it published as an open letter.  

This is also effective for putting pressure on legislators and other officials, such as the zoning commission of your city or town.  If a letter is strong, many outlets will publish it just to incite discussion and call attention to their publication.  They are not necessarily going to be on your side, but that doesn’t matter if you get the word out.  Write it in such a way that the public will help to give voice to the conversation. 

Below is a letter to a legislator concerning a recent public policy discussion. Notice the pattern: first, she thanks them for service, then points out positive(s), then intersperses personal information, it need not be yours, then addresses the problem head on, offers a different point of view and a potential solution.  

Hooray! You have educated the person who can make a difference.  If you get it published, you may educate many people, well beyond the scope of your imagination.  






Dear Congresswoman Ellmers,

Thank you for your service to our great country.  Thank you for your concern for trafficking victims, in particular.  In your statements, you and Ms Wasserman-Schultz both identified yourselves as women, implying that you were looking out for your demographic by introducing H.R. 398, a bill to Educate and Equip Healthcare Professionals to Recognize Signs of Human Trafficking So They Can Intercede on Patients’ Behalf.  This is admirable.


Sex trafficking is a very prevalent problem and teaching people in health care how to identify it,
is definitely one of the ways to combat it and rescue victims. 

I can more fully identify with the demographic of trafficked women.  I was conceived by rape and that knowledge made me vulnerable to traffickers. I felt worth less than others because of the continued sexual abuse and neglect.  I was first sold on my 14th birthday. Standing in three inches of slush that topped my sneakers, I met with the man who groomed me all summer long.

H.R. 36, the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act specifically singled out trafficking victims, making them vulnerable to the abortion industry.  This further violation is abhorrent.  It would serve traffickers well, keeping their victims subdued and further subjecting them to constant degradation and often brutal rapes. Covering the crime of child sexual abuse is in direct opposition to your H.R. 398. 

H.R. 36 would ban the brutal practice of killing babies after 20 weeks gestation.  Even if one were to suggest that a rape victim is detrimentally impacted by the pregnancy, which is dubious at best, can you justify the affirmation that a rape victim’s baby is somehow less of a human being than a child conceived with wine and roses?  

Does the child’s existence warrant being hacked limb from limb and having her little head crushed or her heart being pierced and injected with potassium chloride to cause an excruciating heart attack or being burned, inside and out, with saline solution?  

When the women realize what they have participated in, what will you do?  As she is reaching adulthood and learns of the level of prenatal development; that her baby was fully formed and needed only weeks to grow before he or she could be delivered and given a chance for a fruitful life, are you willing to have her further torment on your conscience?  Or when she delivers that dead baby and the compounded trauma relegates her to a lifetime of PTSD, will you be able to ignore the effects on society?

The text of H.R. 36 reads, in part, (ii) the pregnancy is the result of rape, or the result of incest against a minor, if the rape has been reported at any time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency, or if the incest against a minor has been reported at any time prior to the abortion to an appropriate law enforcement agency or to a government agency legally authorized to act on reports of child abuse or neglect.

As a runaway, I was arrested numerous times, Child In Need of Service requests were made to the local authorities.  This is very common among trafficked children. There is a report of abuse or neglect by definition. I did get pregnant by a man who bought me as a house pet. He demanded I have an abortion and threatened my life, if I didn’t kill my baby.  This is also common among trafficking victims.  

I implore you to work to remove the rape and incest exceptions from H.R. 36.  If you believe, as I believe, that women and children who have been victims of rape should not be further victimized, then you will work against the exceptions in the bill.  You have already demonstrated the desire to protect your demographic.  Show your courage to be their advocate in this matter.

Respectfully Submitted,

Darlene Pawlik


Follow this kind of format for all of  your educational letters. 

Darlene Pawlik is a Savethe1 speaker, Chair of the Educational Trust for NH Right  to Life and long time homeschool mom.  She resides in New England and travels to speak about trafficking, coerced abortion, and discrimination of rape-conceived victims.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Rebecca Kiessling’s Reply to Ann Coulter


This article is written in response to Ann Coulter’s Column which can be read here.

I knew this would happen! I predicted that Republican party apologists would blame Richard Mourdoch and Todd Akin’s losses on the fact that they are 100% pro-life, instead of acknowledging that the losses were due to how poorly they expressed their positions. And sure enough, the day after the election, Ann Coulter did just that. In her article entitled, “Don’t Blame Romney,” she spent half of the article blaming these two Senate candidates for daring to defend the life of every preborn child. Her exact words were, “because these two idiots decided to come out against abortion in the case of rape and incest,” calling them “pro-life badasses,” “purist grandstanders,” with “insane positions,” who were “showing off.” Unfortunately, Coulter has a huge following and will surely influence many uninformed readers with her misstatement of the facts and her flawed reasoning. I have great concern that these Senate losses will have a chilling effect on pro-life legislators and voters. Hence, a swift and thorough response is in order.

Ann Coulter, referenced “all the hard work intelligent pro-lifers . . . in the trenches” and what they have accomplished, as if she was one of them. Well, I’ve been in the trenches since 1995, and I must point out that Ann Coulter has been missing in action. I’ve never once seen her in here, so I can’t comprehend how she could possibly include herself in this group. I’m a hard-working intelligent pro-life activist, and I’m 100% pro-life – for good reason. I was not only conceived in rape, but nearly aborted at two back-alley abortionists. The only reason I wasn’t killed through a brutal abortion is because I was legally protected. My heroes are those pro-life legislators and activists who were hard-working and intelligent enough to understand that mine was a life worth saving.

Coulter went on to erroneously write that Mourdoch and Akin lost because they had “abortion positions that less than 1 percent of the nation agrees with.” Her figure is way off, and she has totally ignored the fact that their abortion position adheres to the Republican party platform! All she’s doing is further alienating the base. Mitt Romney alienated the base – not only by making the rape exception, but also by his own gaffes, such as when he said, “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.” Pro-life leaders were left to mop up that mess, from which he never recovered. Many pro-lifers who were already skeptical either voted third-party or stayed home. Three million Republicans stayed home, compared to 2008. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/republican-turnout-in-2012-election-less-than-2008-and-2004/ Making matters worse, Romney ran ads in battleground states suggesting that it’s extreme to be 100% pro-life. How could anyone deny that such ads hurt Senate candidates like Akin inMissouri, Mourdoch inIndiana, and Smith inPennsylvania, as well as congressional candidates like Koster inWashington and Bachmann inMinnesota? And let’s not forget how the party leadership threw these candidates under the bus – something Democrats do not do to their own.

Additionally, the 1% figure Coulter threw out there is just not even close to being true. Polls in the last few years have consistently shown that the number is between 20 to 24% of Americans who believe abortion should be illegal in cases of rape. The other 31%+ of Americans who are pro-life with exceptions are 99% of the way there, and only need to be nudged another 1%. My experience shows that this is easy to achieve – if you try, just as how my story changed the heart of Gov. Rick Perry during his presidential campaign. And that’s the key. Who has really tried? I know that the number of 100% pro-life Americans would be much higher if the pro-life movement as a whole actually went after this ground. Instead, Coulter is right in pointing out where the effort has been focused – on things like parental notification laws and efforts to ban partial birth abortion. The lives of children conceived in rape are often minimized with the standard dismissive language of: “Well, it’s only 1%.” Why continue to minimize? Why not stand up and really defend our lives? We need to try to gain ground on this issue, by educating the public, by equipping candidates and legislators on how to most effectively respond to the rape question, by making ads with children conceived in rape available for anyone who wishes to utilize them, and by removing rape exceptions from the law, beginning with the Hyde Amendment.

My response to people like Ann Coulter is – WE ARE NOT CANNON FODDER! You do not get to put us out on the front lines and then take a giant step back. The “burning building” analogy fails because you have no interest in working to save all. You do not get to call yourself pro-life by shutting off the water, sending the fire trucks home, while you stand there watching the building burn down with the 1 inside of it. If you want to see who the real extremist is, Ann Coulter, come on Fox News with me, look me in the eyes and tell me how you think my birthmother should have been able to abort me. Tell me that my life was not worthy of protection and that I don’t deserve to be living, and I’ll show you who is the one who is extreme.

Some strategists will suggest that you have to accept rape exceptions in order to get candidates elected and legislation passed. This is untrue – just look at Right to Life of Michigan as the model. They have been a standard-bearer in this cause and have never accepted the rape exception. You can’t get their PAC endorsement if you make the rape exception, and they will not put their stamp of approval on legislation if it has an exception. When they didn’t have the votes to pass the ban on Medicaid funding of abortion without a rape exception, they worked on the exception-legislators to convince them to change their positions. When they still didn’t have the votes, RLM targeted them in their primaries, got them voted out, then passed the ban without exceptions. That’s how you get it done!

Now Right to Life of Michigan has mentored many other state NRLC affiliates to go to this model of being a standard-bearer, maintaining the principle that all are worthy of protection. Since the change on their Board of Directors nearly 12 years ago, Georgia Right to Life has passed more pro-life legislation then they’d ever passed before. They were told at the time by the Republican party leaders that they were dead, irrelevant, and called extremists. Now, every constitutionally-elected official – Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, are all 100% pro-life with no exceptions. The lobbyist for Georgia Right to Life, Dan Becker, wrote a book about it, “Personhood: A Pragmatic Guide to Prolife Victory in the 21st Century and the Return to First Principles in Politics.” www.tkspublications.com Tennessee Right to Life and Alaska Right to Life are other examples of state affiliates who successfully transitioned from the compromising model of accepting the rape exception to being a standard-bearer with no exceptions.

We must not discriminate! Children conceived in rape are surely the most outcast members of our society, being unfairly demonized and portrayed as a “horrible reminder of the rape,” “the rapist’s baby,” “tainting the gene pool,” and even “demon spawn.” This not only affects the pre-born, but also those born under such circumstances. Can you imagine if a law was introduced with an exception in cases of bi-racial rape? I could hear the rationale, “Well, it’s only 1% of 1%,” and “the child would look more like the rapist and would surely be more of a reminder of the rape” – an argument which I’ve actually heard before. There would be a national outcry for such discrimination! Civil rights leaders would be outraged and demand that the exception not only be removed, but that the legislator who introduced it must immediately step down. And yet, half of pro-lifers think nothing of discriminating against children conceived in rape, and it’s wrong!

If we are going to gain ground in this effort to protect unborn children, we must maintain a standard, and we must make more of an effort to educate. I believe that the best people to do so are those of us who have been on the front-lines as pro-life speakers who were conceived in rape, who have been spending our entire adult lives defending our right to life. We’ve heard every question, every challenge, every argument. Why not utilize us? Just to name a few, there is Ryan Bomberger, Susan Jaramillo, and Pam Stenzel. On my website, there are dozens of stories of others conceived in rape and who became pregnant by rape. We’ve publicly shared our stories for a reason – please use them! www.rebeccakiessling.com/Othersconceivedinrape.html I’m partnering with Personhood Education to form Save The 1 – an organization which will implement the strategies necessary to defend the 1%, as well as the 99%. Here are three of our new ads which will be launched soon. www.youtube.com/savethe1child

Back to Ann Coulter’s article – she wrote that “No law is ever going to require a woman to bear the child of her rapist.” I don’t believe that. Laws DID protect children like me and these protections can and should be restored. She went on to add: “Yes, it’s every bit as much a life as an unborn child that is not the product of rape.” Ann, your words speak volumes as to what you really believe. A preborn child is not an “it.” He or she is a life, a human being, a person, a son or a daughter. They have a gender. This is not a mere philosophical or political exercise, but real people’s lives are at stake. When I represented the mother inMichigan’s “frozen embryo” case, the fertility doctors testified at deposition that from one cell, they are literally male and female, and ascertainably so! Just as it says in Genesis, “male and female, He created them.” Using words of gender serve to demonstrate the humanity of these children.

Lastly, Ann Coulter goes on to suggest being 100% pro-life is not wise because too much of a good thing can harm you – like too much iron, or too much sugar in your coffee. I couldn’t help but think of the words of Mother Teresa: “How can you say there are too many children? That’s like saying there are too many flowers.” No offense Ann, but I’d rather heed the words of a godly woman like Mother Teresa than you.