Home - List All Discussions

Blacklists, Whitelists and Good Recipes

State Farm Insurance Promotes Abortion with Komen

by: nancyu

I recently received a letter from my auto insurer State Farm asking me to support Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure.
I emailed my representative that I would not support Komen because of their ties to Planned Parenthood. I don't want my money going to support the killing of any babies if I can help it.
So now, I'm thinking I want a new insurance company since they are now tied in with the whole thing. Does anyone have an insurance co. they would recommend. I checked out Allstate, I think they are "clean" but their rates are a little higher than what I am paying. I'd rather pay more than support PP, but I'd rather pay less, if possible since I have limited income at the moment.
If anyone can help I will be very appreciative.

reply from: nancyu

P.S. I'm looking for auto insurance.

reply from: sander

Whatever you do, DO NOT use "Progressive Insurance".
They have the name, "progressive" for a reason.

reply from: AshMarie88

I have State Farm but only because I'm on my parents' "account" so I can't get different insurance. Not yet anyways.
Altho I'd like to point out, support for a cancer research event doesn't necessarily mean support for companies they event itself supports. It's possible State Farm supports Klanned Barrenhood but is there a 100% proof positive online? Not to say I'd support the event tho, cause I don't support anything that supports PP.

reply from: galen

i have USAA... if you or your spouse are/ were in the military they are pretty good...( i have them because of my husband's dad) I do not think they support anything but military families...
also i believe GEICO is ok..

reply from: nancyu

I just remembered I can get coverage through the letter carriers union through GMAC. I'm looking into that now.

reply from: nancyu

Good point. But, I emailed my State Farm agent and told him of Komen's ties with Planned Parenthood, and why I was considering changing insurers because of it. His email answer didn't satisfy. That is why I decided to change. Maybe if he had said he had no idea about the ties, or that he would contact headquarters or something like that I would have stayed on.
Here's the email and the reply:
Nancy,

Thanks for your email and letting me know your concerns with Susan G. Komen's Foundation. I am sad to see you go but if your ideals and true passion is as you say I would expect you to do as you are. I know you understand that State Farm is a privately held company and they make decisions through their board of directors. I personally don't have any input or control over who they support and or contribute funds to. Your right as a US citizen to make educated and informed decisions when it comes to who you give your business to is a blessing.


Good luck and let me know if I can be of any help in the future.

Thanks for your business,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nancy ***
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 11:39 AM
To: Glen ***
Subject: Susan G Komen
Dear Glen,

As someone who is very opposed to abortion, I am upset to learn that State Farm is supporting the Susan G Komen foundation. Komen has direct ties with Planned Parenthood, the world's largest abortion provider.

I have enjoyed doing business with you, but unless these ties are severed, I will seek insurance coverage elsewhere. Although I don't have complete control over it I won't willingly allow any of my money to go toward killing any babies. An unborn child is a person.

Sincerely,

Nancy ***
P.S.

If you are interested in more information, please visit: http://www.lifenews.com/state3059.html

reply from: churchmouse

nancy way to go.......if I were you I would write every person on the board to let them know. Telling your agent.....a starting point but certainly not all you could do to make a big impact. Go up the ladder to the CEO.
I belong to Concerned Woman for America. They are a super group and I bet they could give this some national attention. They are a national pro-life group.
http://www.cwfa.org/main.asp

Their website is awesome check it out and get on the list. They email me daily and inform me of stuff going on all over the country.
I dont have that kind of insurance, but if you give me the names of the people on the board and where to write or email.......I would be happy to do just that.

reply from: nancyu

Thanks churchmouse. I think I'll do that.

reply from: nancyu

Here is the corporate address if anyone would like to write letters:
State Farm Insurance
One State Farm Plaza
Bloomington, IL 61710
and the address on my policy is:
Insurance Support Center
P. O. Box 588002
North Metro, GA 30029-8002
State Farm Insurance Companies
P. O. Box 830854
Birmingham AL 35283-0854
(Don't forget to include some IAAP cards.)

reply from: Psupple

I wanted to respond to the information contained in nancyu's postings, and clarify facts around our company's donation to Susan G. Komen for the Cure. I am Phil Supple, Director in the Public Affairs Department at State Farm Insurance corporate headquarters in Bloomington, Ill.
The letter nancyu received is indeed part of a one-time fundraising campaign in which we participated. Through this campaign, State Farm will donate up to $100,000 toward the fight against breast cancer.
With the understanding there is intense social debate concerning certain activities within the Planned Parenthood organization, we contacted Susan G. Komen for the Cure to ensure that none of the $100,000 we contributed would be allocated to Planned Parenthood. We were assured the money will go to fund Komen research initiatives to find better treatments, and ultimately, a cure to this dreaded disease.
We understand our many customers, employees and agents come from all walks of life, with differing viewpoints on many issues; therefore, State Farm does not take positions on highly emotional social issues such as this.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond, and I hope this helps clarify our funding of these important research initiatives.

reply from: ProInformed

"we contacted Susan G. Komen for the Cure to ensure that none of the $100,000 we contributed would be allocated to Planned Parenthood."
The United Fund also gives a similar response, saying pro-lifers' donations won't go to the abortion industry, but it still allows them to redistribute contributions so that PP does in effect get more money because of pro-lifer's contributions.
(If I were addicted to alcohol and gambling, then somebody gave me money but said they didn't want me to use it on something like gambling or booze, so instead I pay my electric bill with THAT money, it could still free up the money I would have used for the electric bill to go get drunk at the casino...)
If you really want to ensure that your donations don't end up in the hands of the abortion industry, don't give money to any organizations that give money to the abortion industry.

reply from: sander

Nice try, but no go.
Biggest clue and biggest mistake: "State Farm does not take positions on highly emotional social issues such as this."
This isn't a "social issue" as viewed by the prolife movement, it's a LIFE AND DEATH issue. And a company darn well better take a pro life position if they want the business of the prolife movement.
We're a little more sophisticated and wise to the workings of PP and the trickery language used by companies, such as you represent, then you give us credit for.

reply from: nancyu

I am going to bump up another thread about Komen, in case of any doubts.

reply from: nancyu

As an alternative to Komen:
http://www.bcpinstitute.org/
and another:
http://www.bcrfcure.org/pdf/ab_majordonors_07.pdf

reply from: galen

_________________________________________________
then why not give directly to a breat cancer research group... they too are listed on the web. I'll bet there are any number of clinical trials going on thru the Mayo clinic that would look kindly to haveing that size donation. I personally sent this info to everyone i knew at church.. many people at mass said they were tired of the higher rates of your company and more than willing to go else where for insurance .. especially to a company who did not participate in such an add campaign.

reply from: nancyu

_________________________________________________
then why not give directly to a breat cancer research group... they too are listed on the web. I'll bet there are any number of clinical trials going on thru the Mayo clinic that would look kindly to haveing that size donation. I personally sent this info to everyone i knew at church.. many people at mass said they were tired of the higher rates of your company and more than willing to go else where for insurance .. especially to a company who did not participate in such an add campaign.
Way to go, Mary. I ended up getting a much lower rate with GMAC insurance, and better coverage also.

reply from: galen

unfortunately i also found out that GEICO gives to the united way... who sponsors PP>
Allstate and Nationwide are also on this list....

reply from: galen

i also found out Wal- Mart has stopped ALL funding to PP even through United Way...

reply from: sander

Good for them! Thanks for letting us know, Galen!

reply from: nancyu

I had a good feeling about Wal mart. I noticed they don't have Komen products in their store. They promote BCRF instead. Whew, I almost bought allstate insurance. ( They missed me by that much.) thanks!

reply from: galen

they actually have picked up the pace... i also noticed that their employees are allowed to give part of their checks to several different charities... or to one that they choose on their own.
incidently they also have the highest rated insurance coverage in their industry( retail) from the rates i've sen even the part times can afford to opt in on this... not a bad deal.
like any company they still have their flaws... but at least they seem to listen to what drives their market.

reply from: nancyu

Allstate had me sold at first. They quoted me a lower price then State Farm, with "accident forgiveness" Until they found out that I had an accident last year (a not at fault accident, even) and they told me my rate would be about $25 per month higher because of it. How's that for "accident forgiveness?" I'm lucky they told me this just before I went to sign the paperwork. It seems like someone was looking out for me.

reply from: nancyu

My nephew works for them, and he has several friends working there, who have been there for several years. They seem to treat their employees well.
You may be right that they're not perfect, but I hope they keep going in the right direction.

reply from: nancyu

If so, I hope that means I'm doing right by them. Like everyone else, I wish I could do more.

reply from: sander

No company is perfect, but Wal-Mart gets stiffed by the PC crowd and the MSM at every turn. Very unfair, imo, because stores like Target and K-Mart treat their employees like cattle and you never hear anyone saying a word about them. But, the latter two donate to UW.

reply from: nancyu

And the March of Dimes, too. All charities that are supposed to help babies. I guess they think killing them is the same as helping them.

reply from: faithman

All who believe that United Way gives massive funding to Planned Parenthood raise your http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html [Click "HANDS" for results]

reply from: galen

____________________________________________
I agree... i wonder how many of them in this economy will end up shopping there...?
Have you seen their newest .. the Redi Clinics.. 20.00 for a school/ sports physical... most insurance co do not cover them... and most docs charge 75.00 to 100.00 ... i like that idea.!

reply from: sander

____________________________________________
I agree... i wonder how many of them in this economy will end up shopping there...?
Have you seen their newest .. the Redi Clinics.. 20.00 for a school/ sports physical... most insurance co do not cover them... and most docs charge 75.00 to 100.00 ... i like that idea.!
Yes, I have heard. That will be a real blessing for the lower income.
Notice how the MSM never covers that?
You can bet they'll be shopping at Wal-Mart too, just look for the disguised, the cowards.

reply from: nancyu

____________________________________________
I agree... i wonder how many of them in this economy will end up shopping there...?
Have you seen their newest .. the Redi Clinics.. 20.00 for a school/ sports physical... most insurance co do not cover them... and most docs charge 75.00 to 100.00 ... i like that idea.!
Yes, I have heard. That will be a real blessing for the lower income.
Notice how the MSM never covers that?
You can bet they'll be shopping at Wal-Mart too, just look for the disguised, the cowards.
I hadn't heard of the Redi Clinics. What a good idea, I hope they do this in Maine.
I like this topic. You hear about the blacklist, I think we should make a white list, of the good guys that we can feel good about doing business with.

reply from: faithman

____________________________________________
I agree... i wonder how many of them in this economy will end up shopping there...?
Have you seen their newest .. the Redi Clinics.. 20.00 for a school/ sports physical... most insurance co do not cover them... and most docs charge 75.00 to 100.00 ... i like that idea.!
Yes, I have heard. That will be a real blessing for the lower income.
Notice how the MSM never covers that?
You can bet they'll be shopping at Wal-Mart too, just look for the disguised, the cowards.
I hadn't heard of the Redi Clinics. What a good idea, I hope they do this in Maine.
I like this topic. You hear about the blacklist, I think we should make a white list, of the good guys that we can feel good about doing business with.
Dominos Pizza

reply from: galen

here is one to stay away from... darden restaurants give to the united way..
http://www.dardenrestaurants.com/default.asp

reply from: galen

Arby's , subway, american heart association,possibly quiznoes, anyone using pepsi products or sam's choice products... are all good so far.
Coke seems good but do give to the united way..however their grant is small and you can find out more at their website.. it listed all contributions as grants.

reply from: galen

cracker barrell is safe...so is little ceasars, mcalister's deli....long john silvers,
KFC and the UPS group are bad... they donate to united way.

reply from: galen

applebees and ihop are good. add to that dairy queen , red robbin, so is chic fil a

reply from: galen

ryan's steakhouse is a united way supporter...so does Golden corrall...
they also directly support the march of dimes...and dennhy's restaurants are in this list also...

reply from: sander

After all those yummy restaurants listed, Curves is prolife.

reply from: galen

kewl!
My hubby and i have really gotten in to this tonight... its neat 'cause all the charity and grant info is on the web and right at your fingertips...so make a plan for your week and look up the companies... some made me sad.. like mcdonalds... cause the other charities connected w/ them are great.. others just didn;t surprise me.
We promise to update more later tomarrow.

reply from: sander

My husband and I haven't eaten at McDonald's for years...probably added a few years to our lives anyway.
Thank you for doing this, Galen...it's great to know we can do just a little more towards the prolife cause and thank your hubby too.

reply from: galen

np its fun...
Jiffy lube seems a good one. electronic arts inc..too. ncsoft is another gaming company that seems to do lots of good solid charity work.. on its own not through UW...also cryptic studios... such video games as those city of heros and city of villians...marvel and star trak online mmp games...

reply from: sander

When in doubt, choosing to eat at a local "mom and pop" restaurant is probably safe, don't you think, Galen?

reply from: galen

probably... if you know them well...

reply from: galen

_______________________________________________
possibly it is easy enough to go to a large companies site though and check before you buy ... say ... an x-box... BTW Capcom is fine... it gives a lot away to charity and as far as we can tell all go directly to the charity involved... but none so far to UW or PP.

reply from: galen

well it worked with wal - mart... too many people objected to their support of PP and UW that it relented and took them off their charitble grants.. they now give money directly to certain charities...so it does work sometimes and sometimes not... but if you are a small franchise... and you don't want to piss of your neighbors you tend to go with what they want... neighbors have to be vocal.

reply from: Faramir

What if Curves bought a piece of exercise equipment from a company that supported prochoice causes? Should they be boycotted, then?
I don't see how in an economy that is so intertwined that we can ever boycott all those who support something we oppose.
The main issue ought to be whether that is their main purpose for being in business. If McDonald's supports a lot of good charities, why punish those good charities and the honest people working at McDonald's trying to earn a living?

reply from: sander

What if Curves bought a piece of exercise equipment from a company that supported prochoice causes? Should they be boycotted, then?
I don't see how in an economy that is so intertwined that we can ever boycott all those who support something we oppose.
The main issue ought to be whether that is their main purpose for being in business. If McDonald's supports a lot of good charities, why punish those good charities and the honest people working at McDonald's trying to earn a living?
All we can do is the best we know how. I'm realistic enough to know that there's no guarantee and no way of knowing 100% what any company ultimatley does with their money.
But, I need to be true as I can be to my own conscience and leave others to decide for themselves.

reply from: faithman

Curves head quaters is in our town, and has contributed to IAAP card and poster production. They also contributed $750,000 to family practice so they could provide health care to low income expecting mothers. They are as pro-life as it comes.

reply from: ChristianLott2

ug, unicef is pro abort:
http://www.illinoisrighttolife.org/UNICEFdeception.htm
I wonder if I can get my money back?

reply from: sander

Anything to do with the UN is proabort.
I doubt you can get your money back, but the next time they call you can tell them why they'll never see another red cent.
I tell that to the American Cancer Society everytime they call, and happily enough, they eventually stopped bothering me in the middle of dinner!
I've told the breast cancer research people that as soon as they reconized the link between abortion and bc and stopped lying to women, I'd take them seriously. And they too stopped calling and I no longer get their junk mail.

reply from: ChristianLott2

I want to sue. Misrepresentation. I gave them money to help children live, not murder them!

reply from: nancyu

I think you should do that.

reply from: galen

i do too... it would be a most interesting case...go for it.

reply from: galen

i thought i would bump this up... just to keep it around for others to add too..

reply from: nancyu

I'm glad you did. This is a good one.
I'm trying to find more, but my computer is slow tonight.

reply from: galen

you know nancy... i was thinking... with the economy as bad as it is we are getting many more requests at the shelter for help w/ food and groceries etc... why not add to this thread any ideas we have for economizing on things like diapers and formula and such..
i know we teach our women on how to do budget shopping for food and stuff for under 350.00 per month.. i wonder if any one here thinks this would be good info to give out... especially for any of the lurkers coming around the site..? who knows .. if they see they can feed their family its one less reason to abort.

reply from: nancyu

You're full of good ideas galen.
I used to make my own baby food. Just put fruits, and/or vegetables in blender, and freeze them in ice cube trays. Then keep the baby food cubes in freezer bags, and thaw them out as needed.

reply from: galen

good idea...
The one i most often go with is never buy name brand and never buy more than a $1 per pound or a $1 per package ( this goes for meat portions too)
you'll be amazed at what you can find out there... and learn to be creative w/ herbs and such ( these can be grown in old soda cans for pennies at the window), this will liven up the flavours of the more mundane dinner kits...or even mac and cheese..

reply from: nancyu

Anything to do with the UN is proabort.
I doubt you can get your money back, but the next time they call you can tell them why they'll never see another red cent.
I tell that to the American Cancer Society everytime they call, and happily enough, they eventually stopped bothering me in the middle of dinner!
I've told the breast cancer research people that as soon as they reconized the link between abortion and bc and stopped lying to women, I'd take them seriously. And they too stopped calling and I no longer get their junk mail.
Did you know....
Support Unicef
Help UNICEF Protect Newborns
Worldwide from Tetanus. Join Now.
www.Pampers.com/UNICEF
How much sense does this make?

reply from: nancyu

Shopping around is always a good idea.
If you look around sometimes you can find stores where you can buy items at wholesale prices. Our town has a packaging plant that allows the public to shop there. Most of the items are in bulk but sometimes you can get together with a neighbor, and split up the portions and the costs. Big savings, and good stuff.

reply from: galen

Anything to do with the UN is proabort.
I doubt you can get your money back, but the next time they call you can tell them why they'll never see another red cent.
I tell that to the American Cancer Society everytime they call, and happily enough, they eventually stopped bothering me in the middle of dinner!
I've told the breast cancer research people that as soon as they reconized the link between abortion and bc and stopped lying to women, I'd take them seriously. And they too stopped calling and I no longer get their junk mail.
Did you know....
Support Unicef
Help UNICEF Protect Newborns
Worldwide from Tetanus. Join Now.
www.Pampers.com/UNICEF
How much sense does this make?
_______________________________________________________________
none... and its sad... i was thrilled to hear about the package of pampers = 1 vaccine programme... then i saw who they had their pact with and shuddered..
oh well huggies are good... and cheaper.. and so are the off brands.. in fact i know of no diaper yet that has been considered really terrible in the last 5 years.

reply from: sander

If you support the killing of your customers to the tune of 4,000 per day in this country, how smart a business tactic is that?
Thanks for the info, Nancy. I'll remember that when our third grandson is born in a few months and will pass that on to all the mothers I know.

reply from: galen

thought it was time to bump this up again....

reply from: nancyu

Lean Cuisine, and Nestle Corporation have ties to Komen.
I'm so sorry 4given. I should have done my research before buying you that chocolate.
"Named one of "America's Most Admired Food Companies" in Fortune magazine for the eighth consecutive year, Nestle USA provides quality brands and products that bring flavor to life every day. From nutritious meals with Stouffer's(R) Lean Cuisine(R), to baking traditions with Nestle(R) Toll House(R), to advancing life for pets with Purina(R), Nestle USA makes delicious, convenient, and nutritious food and beverage products that enrich the very experience of life itself. That's what "Nestle. Good Food, Good Life" is all about. Nestle USA, with 2004 sales of $12.5 billion, includes Nestle Brands Company, Nestle Prepared Foods Company, Buitoni North America and Nestle Purina Pet Care Company. Nestle USA is part of Nestle S.A. in Vevey, Switzerland-the world's largest food company with sales of $69.9 billion. For product news and information, visit Nestleusa.com or NestleNewsroom.com."
There seems to be no escape from supporting this horrible crime.
Let's send Nestle some emails: http://www.nestleusa.com/PubNutrition/Overview.aspx
http://www.nestleusa.com/Public/ContactUs.aspx

reply from: yoda

I don't know of any good OR evil that is permanent....... the only thing that we can count on is that nothing stays the same....

reply from: galen

_________________________________________________
carob is a good chocolate substitute

reply from: nancyu

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/32922.html
American Life League is asking community members to call Wal-Mart at (509) 628-8420 or 1-800-WAL-MART and demand they stop Planned Parenthood from this literature distribution.

reply from: galen

i heard about this and spoke to the store manager at our local... he said he had not heard that was possinle... for PP to do this... he says they often support church groups and such but had not heard of this one. he also said that it is up to individual store managers to approve or disapprove what goes on outside thier stores..ie who to let stand outside as a promotion. so call the store manager at this location and complain too!

reply from: carolemarie

I think it is a big help to families to help budget.
Once a month cooking is a big help, and it doesn't take up tons of space and you can have healthy well balanced meals for a fraction of the cost. You buy in bulk and then prepare in advance. I can send you some links if you would like....
(Also great for working moms)

reply from: galen

sure post the links... this thread is here to help... also i think i'm going to start posting recepies and thier cost , like the large one we use at the shelter... great freezer food that you can store portion size for later.

reply from: 4given

Bless your heart Nancy. I will (we will) enjoy every last bit of it one last time. How disappointing! Purina, Buitoni, Tollhouse! As you said- is there anything that is not somehow tied to the abortion industry? (outside of some organic farmers and small local companies)

reply from: sander

Bless your heart Nancy. I will (we will) enjoy every last bit of it one last time. How disappointing! Purina, Buitoni, Tollhouse! As you said- is there anything that is not somehow tied to the abortion industry? (outside of some organic farmers and small local companies)
Oh my gosh, no more chocolate chip cookies! My family will be sorely disappointed, but they'll have to get over it.
Wait, Hershey's makes chocolate chips, right? Please tell me they're not supporting abortion!

reply from: galen

here is a link... unfortunately hershey is there ... but only in 1998...10,000.00 grant.
http://www.dianedew.com/PPfundg-E-M.htm

reply from: sander

Oh my gosh, who the heck else makes chocolate chips? Christmas will not be the same!

reply from: galen

i use carob chips... vegan chocolate.... i get them at wal-mart... they incidently make chocolate chips that are the GV brand ... they ar emade through someplace in benton ville...thats as far as i could trace it.

reply from: sander

Okay, thanks Mary. You're a treasure.
I guess I could try carbo, think my family will notice?

reply from: 4given

What about Ghirardelli chocolate? I know they are based out of California and they donate to charitable causes, but I haven't found the exacts yet. My children love their chocolate..

reply from: sander

That based out of San Francisco, right? I fear they may have been infulenced by that giant mecca of liberals.

reply from: Faramir

I'm not going to dispute anyone's motivation or conviction to boycott those who support abortion, but isn't it fair to consider how much money is going to the objectionable cause, compared to their overall sales?
For example, if XYZ company does a billion dollars in sales, and donates $100k per year to PP, that's chicken feed in comparison to the overall sales. It would be like buying a $20,000 car, and the dealer donating 2 cents of it to a bad cause.
Besides that, shouldn't it also be considered if they are doing any other kind of giving that would balance it out?
We have an economy in which business relations are so intertwined, it would be almost impossible to sort it all out, and stop buying from all companies that directly or inderectly supports a cause we object to.
The way I would look at it would first be to see if the main purpose of their business is to support abortion rights causes. Those businesses should definately be ruled out.
But if, for example, Starbucks matches employee donations to PP, (among other causes which we would approve), then I don't see any reason to boycott them. PP exists (unfortunately) and some think it is a good cause and will support them. I don't see why that should be a reason to not enjoy their products, or take away business from those who need the work. What would be going to PP in relation to sales would be a small fraction of a percent. And buying coffee someplace else would not mean that you could avoid it. It could be that the owner of the mom and pop shop makes donations to PP, or that the place where he buys the coffee beans does, or that the shop is in business because a lot of prochoice people support it.
As a Catholic I have to see contraception as morally unacceptable, yet I shop at Wal-Mart, and sometimes pass the "condom wall," and there's not much I can do about it. Where else can I go? They sell them in the store next door too. And I get the best prices at Wal-Mart, giving me more resources to good things.
A horrible movie called "Priest" (I think) was made about ten years ago, and it misrepresented Catholicism and the priesthood badly. Since the company that made the film was owned by Disney, there was an outcry by some Catholics that we boycott Disney.
In my opinion, that was extreme. It was one movie out many hundreds of productions that we would have found acceptable, and it was not made by Disney directly, anyway. It didn't seem fair to me that Mickey and Pluto should suffer because of this one bad film.

reply from: galen

ghehardelli does not appear to fund PP.

reply from: carolemarie

Our local Starbucks donates coffee to the Center for the women (and staff). The manager of the local one is prolife.
I have given up on boycotting. I just don't have the time to keep up with everything.

reply from: faithman

Planning how to fight against real pro-personhood legislation that would truely stop the slaughter and bring killers to justice I suppose? But of course being a killer, you could care less about real justice for the womb child.

reply from: sander

Whew...now I won't have to explain why no chocolate chip cookies come Christmas!

reply from: galen

BTW my family didn't notice the carob chips for 6 months...they helped with cookies one day and were really surprised..its also a great substitue for people who have migraines that are made worse by chocolate a nd caffiene.

reply from: sander

I understand your point. I don't expect everyone to boycott and really don't think it has much of an impact, unless it's done in mass.
But, it's just something I feel on a personal level I'd like to do. It's only nickle and dimes when it comes down to it, but for my conscience it's not about the money.
I don't cry foul when my family or friends don't join in. I reserve that for my hubby and he always agrees. We are prolife partners.

reply from: sander

I'll have to try those, at least there will be something else healthy in the cookies besides the walnuts. I cringe eveytime I get out that white flour and sugar, but it's such a treat for the family, I can't deny them.

reply from: galen

i agree with sander... my kids are old enough to understand why we do this. do thier own research and come to their own conclusions on where they spend thier hard earned paychecks.
they will also respect our descisions when sometimes we don't join them.
they have lived with a vegan mom for so long they kinda expect me not to have a long list of rstaraunts and the like that i won't go to, and the rest of it is just legwork. If i REALLY object to a brand or something there is always someone out there willing to take their place in the chocolate/ bread/veggie/vaccine/hair colour department.

reply from: galen

her is a great recepie that doubles or triples well... and freezes great too
we are able to make a double recepie for less than $10.00 US.
Vegetarian Soup
Ingredients:
1 can or dry mix onion or mushroom broth
6 Bay Leaves
? Sage
1/2 cup dry split peas
1/2 cup dry lentils
1/2 cup pearl barley
2 garlic cloves (optional)
1 onion
4 celery stalks
4 large carrots
6 potatoes
1 rutabaga
(vege measurements are approximate -- add as much as you like)
Directions:
Add as much water to broth as you want (I usually use a large stock pot and fill it about 2/3 full).
Add onion and spices to broth and simmer.
Add peas, lentils and barley to simmering broth.
While soup continues to simmer, clean, peel (when necessary), cut and add vegetables in the following order:
1. celery
2. carrots
3. rutabega
4. potatoes
When the potatoes are done, the soup is ready to eat. This soup refrigerates well and keeps for several days, so it's a great "one-pot dinner" to make on a weekend and eat over several days.
Comments: Fresh or frozen peas can be substituted for the dry split peas, but they should then be added last.

reply from: sander

Sounds wonderful, Mary.
I'll copy it and save....thanks!

reply from: galen

here is another... we make this one for around 8.00 without the meat sub. and 13.00 with, it serves 16. this recipie can also be easily doubled and frozen.
if you are vegan nondairy than substitute a soy or tofu based cheese.
SERVES 16

Ingredients
12 lasagna noodles (estimate)
1 onion
1 garlic clove, chopped
2 tablespoons
2 tablespoons olive oil
1 (19 ounce) can of worthington veggie burgers (you can also use another vegemeat like crumblers or gluten)
1 (26 ounce) can spaghetti sauce (I like Hunt's Garlic and Herb Spaghetti Sauce)
1/4 cup chopped parsley
1 lb firm tofu
1 (300 g) package frozen chopped spinach (or you can substitute fresh asia eggplant our personal favorite, or another type of eggplant)
3/4 cup shredded mozzarella cheese or
1 tablespoon nutritional yeast flakes (optional)
parmesan cheese (optional)
Directions
1Cook lasagna noodles according to the package directions.
2Saute onion and garlic in oil until tender. Add vegeburger or gluten.
3Stir in speggetti sauce and parsley; simmer for 5 minutes.
4Combine tofu and spinach and yeast flakes (if using eggplant instead, don't combine with tofu. Instead slice eggplant into thin pieces and set aside).
5Put a thin layer of sauce and vegemeat on the bottom of a Large baking dish (our baking dish was bought in Asia and doesn't have the measurements listed, but it's big).
6Place on layer of (3-4) noodles (slightly overlapped)
on top of the sauce. Add another layer of sauce (can add a sprinkle of parmesan cheese and now is when you would add some sliced eggplant if you are using it).
7Repeat the last step until you get to the middle layer (usually there are 3-5 layers total depending on the depth of your pan).
8In the middle layer the tofu & spinach (or layer the tofu and then add another layer of eggplant on top). Then continue with the previous layering of sauce & vegemeat and noodles.
9The top layer should be covered in sauce with the Mozzarella or Soy Cheese sprinkled on top.
10Bake for 1 hour at 350 degrees F or 180 degrees Celsius.

reply from: sander

You're making me hungry!
Another good one!

reply from: galen

last one for today.. this one can run as expensive or inexpensive as yu make it... we usually spend about 7.00 and make a double portion.. it also freezes well a great summer dish cold.
Ingredients:
3 tbsp olive oil
1 onion, diced
3 cloves garlic, minced
1 tbsp dried basil
6 tbsp flour
3 cups soy milk
1/4 cup nutritional yeast
1 small head broccoli, cut into florets
1 medium carrot, sliced
1/2 pound sliced fresh mushrooms
1 cup frozen peas
salt and pepper to taste
1 pound angel hair pasta
Preparation:
Heat the olive oil in a large saucepan over medium heat. Cook the onion, garlic and basil until the onion becomes translucent, about 5-7 minutes. Stir in the flour to make a paste.
Slowly add the soy milk, stirring constantly. Stir in the nutritional yeast, then cook over low heat until the mixture thickens.
Steam the broccoli and carrot, and add to the sauce along with the mushrooms and peas. Add salt and pepper to taste, then cook until heated through.
Cook the pasta according to package directions, then serve sauce over pasta.

reply from: Faramir

I do a lot of our shopping and I see how cheap many of the staples are like rice, oats, and lentils, for example. (Also, we were vegans for over a year, some years ago, and I remember how cheap it was to buy wheat, soy, beeans, etc. We saved a lot of money as vegans).
It seems to me that a person's food budget could be very low if he buys the right things--without sacrificing nutrition (or perhaps even making some good improvements over what many do).
Anyway, Galen, what would you say is the minimum food budget a person could live on, while getting the necessary nutrition.
I figure it could be as cheap as $2 per day, and allowing $3 per day, could allow for some "luxuries." What do you think?
At any rate, if I'm right, then one person could feed himself for $100 per month or less. So all it would take is three or four hours per week of low pay to cover the food budget.

reply from: sander

Wait until the fuel prices completely catch up to the food prices, not to mention the devestation with the corn crops recently.
It may go alot higher than $100 a month per person.

reply from: Faramir

Wait until the fuel prices completely catch up to the food prices, not to mention the devestation with the corn crops recently.
It may go alot higher than $100 a month per person.
I don't know if I'm right or not--just asking.
But a lot of staples like rice and beans can be purchased now, and it wouldn't take much money to buy a supply lasting many months.
It always seems inefficient to me to see how much is spent on shipping water from one location to another. Canned goods are mostly water. Even meat is mostly water.
But grains and beans are dehydrated, and are therefore much more economical to ship, besides the fact that for all the food value they have, they are very cheap.
I think the higher fuel prices will not only make some things more costly, but will cause some things to be not shipped at all.

reply from: galen

things with corn have gone up as the crops this year were wiped for the most part... add to that the increased use of ethanol.
our family has gotten by on about $200.00 US per month on food alone. That also includes a meat budget as i am the only vegan in our house.
2 years ago this budget was 150.00 US even with 2 growing teenagers.
however inflation has increased costs somewhat.

reply from: carolemarie

This is a great site to a once a month cooking site, complete with receipes and all.
http://snider.mardox.com/OAMC.htm

reply from: Faramir

For four people that is dirt cheap.
That's $50 per month per person, or just $1.75 per day per person.

reply from: galen

yep... most people can not believe it... but can and SHOULD be done. if people knew just how little it would cost i wonder how many people in this country would stay hungry?. We as a nation live on the name brand stuff and for the most part do not take the time to learn to shop. Convienence is one thing nutrition and service another. The money we save can go to a family without.

reply from: nancyu

GRASSROOTS PRO-LIFE VICTORY! WAL-MART TELLS PLANNED PARENTHOOD: NOT IN OUR PARKING LOT
by Katie Walker
Released June 27, 2008
Washington, DC (27 June 2008)- A Wal-Mart parking lot in Richland, Washington was the latest front-line in the battle against abortion-giant, Planned Parenthood.
At the request of hundreds of pro-lifers, the store canceled an event in which Planned Parenthood would pass out information in the lot June 27.
American Life League sent out a press release June 26 to pro-lifers across the country informing them of this latest Planned Parenthood encroachment into neighborhood retailers.
"It's hard enough for parents to safeguard their children from Planned Parenthood's pervasive sexualized propaganda," said Marie Hahnenberg, a researcher with American Life League. "They shouldn't have to worry about exposing their kids to Planned Parenthood's aggressive agenda even in Wal-Mart's parking lot."
Local protests were led by Jim Toth, pro-life chairman of the Knight of Columbus for the state of Washington, and after hundreds of calls and e-mails, the store decided to cancel the event.
"We thank Wal-Mart for taking a stand against Planned Parenthood," Hahnenberg continued. "In the spirit of Sam Walton, Wal-Mart has put the best interest of its customers first and they are to be commended for their decision. We'd also like to especially congratulate Jim and the Knights of Columbus, St. Joseph Council in Kennewick, Washington, as well as the hundreds of pro-lifers across the country who responded with calls, prayers, and support."
Hooray for Walmart---I KNEW they were good guys!

reply from: nancyu

Rule of thumb:
With regard to all sentences which begin with this type of phrase: "I'm not going to dispute anyone's motivation or conviction to boycott those who support abortion, but... "
Everything before "but" is usually a lie.
(just a generalized observation I've made which almost always seems to be supported by everything that comes after the "but.")

reply from: Faramir

I've heard the saying and sometimes it's true, but (see I'm using it again--it's not a bad word), can you show me how it applies in the statement of mine she quoted?
I was saying I understand why YOU might have an issue with a certain vendor, BUT this is why I don't see it the same way.
There is nothing wrong with that, and the statment before the but was not "a lie."

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Why on earth would any pro-lifer support Wal-Mart? Most of their inventory comes from CHINA, a country which FORCES women to have abortions?
Every time you buy something at WallyMart that came from China, you have supported abortion on a very large scale.
Please re-think your support of this huge, lying corporation.

reply from: sander

I love supporting American made products, can you point me to a store that sells only those or who does not sell products made in China?

reply from: nancyu

China's government forces its citizens to a one child policy. This is not a country such as ours which is of, for and by the people. Why then should China's people be shown hatred for this?
I too, look for American made products, and I have no problem finding "made in the USA" on many Walmart products. But buying from China's people, doesn't mean I am in support of abortion, in my opinion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

reply from: galen

i am for any company that makes it easier for poor people to be able to feed their families... and for the working poor to be able to afford health insurance and medicine... and i am w/ nancy and sander on this one... show me a place where you can but made in the USA exclusively and i'll go there.
Besides all the other big stores and even the mom and pops around here are not willing to pay their employees a living wage. At least the people i know that work at Wal-Mart are able to feed their families... buy a car and insure it and their own health..i can't say that about any of the others. The people who work for Target and Sears that i know can not even get enough hours to afford gas half the time... and they all have 2-3 jobs..

reply from: RiverMoonLady

I simply do not buy cheap junk that I don't really need. I have not been inside a Sears, KMart, Target or any other discount store in years, nor do I go to malls. I do shop at Dollar Tree, Family Dollar and the Dollar Store but mostly for food and health care items.
We buy used furniture and cars and have no need for most material goods. I do buy new underwear and some new clothes, mostly at inexpensive chain stores.
So, I cannot direct anyone to other replacements for Wal-Mart. I suggest that when you think you "need" something, wait a week and see if it's still important to have. You would be surprised how much you can go without.
I do buy locally-grown and processed food (except for citrus, which doesn't grow in PA) because it's healthier.

reply from: galen

Let me give you a little insight about Wal- Mart and its employees...
Like any large chain it has had its ups and downs...some good and some bad.. on the whole however its employees have fewer claims on welfare and fewer problems with the insurance... and it covers more conditions than any other employee plan i've encountered.
I have yet to see a company, this large, that has not been sued, the thing i've noticed about this particular company is that when its wrong it corrects the problem.
I can send a pregnant woman there for a job and she will end her stay with us 15% quicker than if i send her to any other major employer in the area.. and she will have affordable insurance for herself and her child. She will be able to afford daycare if she must and she will be able to feed said child and cloth them and diaper them. She will also get an employee discount card and save additional ammounts that she would not otherwise be able to do.
i admire your use of used goods.. we too use 2nd hand furniture and cars etc. remember though that the dolar store etc is usually MORE expensive than wal-mart for 90% of the 'cheap' stuff they carry.
All in all i have not been able to find too much wrong with them.
not enough registers open is not my idea of a reson to not shop a place. If you do not like an employees attitude complain to the store manager. Believe me enough complaints and that person will no longer have a job there.

reply from: galen

here is a recepie that we used today and tripled for a cost of 10.00 US and note we used vodka from a friend... as we don't drink it here... with vodka add 1.00US.
anyway this is a great meal and freezes well too.!
Penne Pasta with Tomato Vodka "Cream" Sauce
Ingredients (use vegan versions):
1 lb. penne pasta
3 - 14.5 oz cans of stewed tomatoes
3 1/2 cups plain soy milk
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon dried basil
1/2 teaspoon dried oregano
2 tablespoons vodka
freshly ground black pepper, to taste
Directions:
Cook soy milk on stovetop over medium heat until it reduces to 2 cups. Puree tomatoes in blender. Add milk and blend until well mixed.
In a large wok (or really big pot) cook tomato mixture for 15 minutes, stirring occasionally. If it starts to sputter, turn the heat down.
Add basil, salt and oregano. Cook 5 more minutes.
Add vodka, simmer 5 more minutes. Lastly, add pepper. Ladle over cooked penne pasta noodles.
Serves: 4
Preparation time: 30 minutes

reply from: lukesmom

That sounds good Mary! I'll have to try it. I am sure my rugrats will love it esp since it has an ingrediant they all will think is "naughty"!

reply from: sander

Mary finds a way to make me hungry!
That sounds delicious! I must know somebody that has some vodka...*thinking*

reply from: galen

hear is dessert about 5.00 for a double recipe.
Recipe: Banana Pineapple Sorbet
A cool recipe with tropical flavor.
Yield 4 servings
Time 5 minutes
Tools food processor or blender
4 bowls, chilled

Ingredients 2 ripe bananas, sliced and frozen
3 oz pineapple juice
3 oz frozen pineapple juice
2 T shredded coconut

Directions Place all ingredients in food processor or blender and purée until smooth. Serve immediately.

reply from: galen

here is one that is about 15.00 US and its not totaly vegan... but a great treat for a birthday... my kids get this on thier B-days and it always goes over better than a bakery cake.
Recipe: Ginger-Brandy Cheesecake
Sweet, rich cheesecake with a ginger snap crust and orange glaze.
Yield 8-10 servings
Time 1 hour plus time to chill
Tools small bowl
wooden spoon
9 or 10 inch pie plate or springform pan
food processor
small saucepan
whisk
rubber spatula

Ingredients 2 c ginger snaps, ground into crumbs
5 T butter, melted
12 oz cream cheese, softened
1½ c sour cream and/or yogurt
4 eggs
¼ c + 2 T honey or sugar
¼ c + 1 T brandy
2 T fresh ginger, minced
dash of salt
2 T cornstarch
¾ c orange juice
½ t orange zest

Directions Preheat oven to 350.
Combine ginger snap crumbs and butter, press into pie plate.
Place cream cheese, sour cream, eggs, ¼ c honey, ¼ c brandy, ginger, and salt in food processor and blend until smooth. Taste and add more honey if needed.
Pour into crust and bake until slightly brown on the edges and firm in the middle, about 40 minutes. Let cool. If using a springform pan, remove the rim once cool.
Combine cornstarch and orange juice, and cook over medium heat, whisking constantly, for about 5 minutes, until smooth. Remove from heat, and whisk in 2 T honey, T brandy, and zest.
Spread glaze over cheesecake and chill for several hours before serving.

reply from: galen

one more recipe and this one costs about 10.00 US and serves a family of four over 2-3 days... great leftovers and easy freezing.. so we eat one day and freeze the rest in single serving freezer bags.. the leftovers can be reheated in a microwave easily and used as take to work lunches.. or quick snaks after school, or on weekends.. teenagers especially like this.
Recipe: Greek Lasagna
A light, vegan lasagna made with artichokes, eggplant, and lemons.
Yield 8-10 servings
Time 2 hours
Tools steamer OR large pot with metal colander fitted over it and lid
large frying pan with lid
wooden spoon
large bowl
large saucepan
2 small frying pans or saucepans, 1 non-reactive
grater
whisk
food processor
8x12x2.5 inch non-reactive baking dish
aluminum foil

Ingredients 4-6 artichokes, trimmed
1 eggplant, cubed
2 T olive oil
large red onion, chopped
2 carrots, diced
1 c tomato sauce
salt and pepper
8 oz lasagna noodles
3 c chickpeas, soaked and cooked or canned
3 cloves garlic
2 T cornstarch
1/3 c parsley
1½ c vegetable stock
½ c dry white wine
1 T tomato paste
1 lemon
4 t flour
1 c bread crumbs

Directions There are four main ingredients for this lasagna: vegetable mixture, lemon sauce, noodles, and chickpea mixture. They are numbered here to help you stay organized.
1. Boil a large pot of water over high heat. Add artichokes, bring to a boil, lower heat to medium, and simmer for 30-40 minutes, until tender and a tugged leaf comes off easily. Remove the leaves (reserve to eat separately) and choke so that you're left with the artichoke hearts - set aside.
Meanwhile, bring water to boil in the steamer, add eggplant to basket, cover, and steam for about 6 minutes, until just tender. Set aside in a bowl.
Heat 1 T oil in frying pan over medium heat. Sauté the onion about 4 minutes, until translucent. Add carrots, cook 3 minutes, cover, slower heat, and cook for 5 more minutes.
Combine artichokes, eggplant, onion/carrot mixture, tomato sauce, salt, and pepper. Set aside.
2. Meanwhile, in the small saucepan, combine stock, wine, and tomato paste and bring to a boil. Reduce heat, half cover, and let simmer for 10 minutes.
Grate the lemon skin for zest and juice the lemons (discard seeds).
Heat remaining T olive oil in non-reactive saucepan and whisk in the flour. Cook for 2 minutes, then whisk in stock mixture, lemon juice, and lemon zest. Cook for 1 minute, whisking constantly.
3. Meanwhile, cook the lasagna noodles in boiling water.
4. Drain the chickpeas and reserve the liquid. Place chickpeas, garlic, and cornstarch in the food processor and process until smooth. Add enough liquid to make mixture creamy and spreadable - ¼-½ c or so. Add parsley and pulse until finely chopped.
Preheat oven to 375.
Put a few T of lemon sauce into baking dish and arrange a layer of noodles on top. Spread with half the vegetable filling and press it down lightly. Add another layer of noodles, then all of the chickpea purée, the remaining vegetable mixture, and another layer of noodles. Pour the rest of the lemon juice over the top and cover tightly with aluminum foil.
Bake until very hot, about 50-60 minutes. Uncover and sprinkle with bread crumbs. Turn the heat up to 500 and bake until bread crumbs are brown, 7-10 minutes. Let stand for 10 minutes, then serve.

reply from: galen

bumping a great thread.

reply from: nancyu

Thanks for the great recipes galen. From the sound of Vexing's latest posts, I'm going to need these vegetarian recipes. Becoming a vegetarian is going to be difficult for me, I must admit. Please help and support me any way you can. (Do they make tofu baloney?)

reply from: galen

they make a soy based luncheon meat... here is a site link about going vegan. Just remember to go get a checkup and vitamin levels from your doc first. that way you'll know what supplements and how much you should take untill you have reached a good level of all especially the B's and D.
http://www.theseriouswayvegan.com/
">http://www.theseriouswayvegan.com/
of course you can ask me stuff!

reply from: galen

its cheaper to be vegan... in this economy maybe you should consider it...

reply from: galen

another link for nancy
http://www.happycow.net/becoming_vegetarian.html

reply from: galen

grilled portabella sandwiches
about $10.00US
4 sesame seed buns
2 large golf-ball sizes balls fresh mozzarella cheese
2 portabella mushrooms, sliced in half horizontally
1 large red bell pepper, sliced into 4 long pieces
2 tbsp balsamic vinegar
2 tsp olive oil
2 tbsp dried basil
1 tbsp chopped fresh chives
alfalfa sprouts, onions or your favorite vegetable (optional)
Preparation:
Combine cheese, oil, basil, chives and vinegar in a blender. Blend until smooth; set aside.
Grill or broil the mushrooms about 3 minutes per side or until tender. Grill peppers (do not peel) until tender, about 5 minutes per side. Skin will be wrinkled and lightly brown.
Slightly toast the buns on the grill and spread the mozzarella mixture evenly on the bottom of each bun. Cover with mushroom slice and red pepper. Serve immediately.
Servings: 4
Grilled sweet corn w/ glaze
4 ears corn
2 tbsp margarine
1 tsp brown sugar
3 cloves garlic, minced and crushed
dash cayenne pepper (optional)
Preparation:
Grill the corn for 20 to 25 minutes, or until done.
Combine the remaining ingredients in a small saucepan over low heat, and whisk together until well combined. Pour this glaze over the barbecued corn.

reply from: galen

Barbecue Tandoori Seitan
1 onion
1/2 cup tomato sauce
1/2 cup soy yogurt
1 tsp fresh ginger, minced
2 cloves garlic
1/4 tsp cayenne pepper
1/2 tsp cumin or cumin seeds
1 tsp garam masala
1/4 tsp ground cloves or 2 whole cloves
1/2 tsp salt
1 pound seitan, sliced into large chunks
Preparation:
Process all ingredients except the seitanin a blender or food processor until smooth.
Transfer the mixture to a bowl and add the seitan. Stir to coat the seitan well.
Skewer the seitan pieces and grill until browned, basting with any leftover sauce.
Prepared seitan can be found in the refrigerated section of most health food stores.

reply from: galen

for all you meat eaters out there today can be a good day to scout bargains for large portions of everything from beef to chicken that were not bought up yesterday by the BBQers.
we were able to find tyson chickens at the local WM for 2.50 for a whole chicken over 4lbs in size... got some for the men of the house and some for the shelter...
also saw some good deals on sausage and beef cuts...
here is a site for leftovers..
http://www.recipegoldmine.com/leftovers/leftovers.html

reply from: nancyu

I have no idea what seitanin is, but I'll give it a try. Thanks for the recipe.

reply from: galen

seitan is a wheat protien that is used as a meat substitute...
tastes pretty good too w/ BBQ sauce.

reply from: 4given

They have faken bacon and not dogs.. My boys think they are actually pretty close.. I don't care for tofu.. and soy doesn't agree with everyone. I am pretty sure you could find something similar to bologna if truly interested. Thing is a lot of the organic and vegan products are far more costly.. Why I mostly stick to pasta, vegetables.. Rice etc. I would love to cook some good vegetarian meals for you. My boys are omnivorous, but will try a lot of different products. I like Amy's veggie burgers, but they absolutely do not like any garden burgers etc... If I didn't eat dairy products.. it would be much more difficult to find things I actually enjoyed to eat. Anyway.. not dogs are pretty close.. If you are used to eating meat everyday, it could be challenging. My husband learned how to cook meatless meals and didn't eat meat for about 2 years. Just getting rid of red meat helped my brothers cholesterol and bp drop.. The Daniel fast is good. No sweets or meat.
Thanks for the recipes Galen.. and the cost-saving tips. We always have left-overs and I have never frozen any meals. I will do so from now on.

reply from: 4given

I find it to be more costly- generally. I suppose now that I can grow my own vegetables, it is not. One of my children was on a gluten-free diet and many of the snacks etc. are pretty expensive. It is less costly to make meals and desserts, so I agree with you there. Pasta and rice is generally not that expensive...Maybe it is more costly to purchase organic...?

reply from: galen

organic is definately more expensive..
I found that if you buy local produce you usually do not have to worry too much about pesticides. For instance we stay away from the prepackaged salads etc.. and the large chain growers and pick up veggies at the local stand..what we don't eat fresh i freeze.
As for meat and eggs.. eggs and dairy i can get locally .. the eggs are free range and i trade with the owner of the farm for herbs i've grown at home... so i don't pay for those. Chicken and such we can get from WM when not in season and thier organic prices are better than the large natural food chains. My husband's parents have a ranch and so red meat comes from them...we pay maket price to them. same $$ as WM prices, but at least i know where it comes from.
I agree w/ you about soy some people can eat it and some can not.. that was why i put up the seitan recepie , because it is a pretty good alternative unless you can not eat wheat.
we make our own trail mix so we are not too big on snacking... my youngest can't seem to digest junk food very well. so he eats a lot of fruit and nuts anyway and the rest of us just followed suit. As for bakery items i make them mainlyw/ whole wheat so that is where we save as opposed to buying ready made.
i usually have a baking/ cooking to freeze project going on every 2 days or so.

reply from: galen

for nancy...
vegatarian fajitas
2 red bell peppers, cut into strips
1 1/2 cups sliced fresh mushrooms ( i use portabella)
1 onion, sliced
1 tbsp olive oil
1/2 tsp curry powder
1/2 tsp chili powder
1/4 tsp cumin
flour tortillas
sour cream (optional)( there is a soy version)
Preparation:
Sautee the peppers, mushrooms and onion in olive oil for 3 to 5 minutes. Add the spices and continue cooking for another 2 minutes, or until veggies are tender.
Place a few spoonfuls of the mixture in a flour tortilla, top with sour cream if desired. We also use chunky salsa as a side.

reply from: galen

http://www.bocaburger.com/ link to bocca... sold at WM
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10759

they seem to have no united way ties or ties to PP.

reply from: nancyu

Boca burgers are DELIcious! Even my son (who is pretty fussy) loved them. Tomorrow, I'll do more shopping, and try some of your recipes, galen. Those vegetarian fajitas sound great.

reply from: galen

glad to help...also try some of the other products they offer if you liked those. Boca has sausage and bacon ground meat and such even chicken type patties..

reply from: galen

________________________________________-----
i wonder what happened to this guy?

reply from: carolemarie

I have to cook a no salt diet for my husband who has heart failure and EVERYTHING has salt!
So I have a bunch of low-salt receipes that actually taste good if you all want me to post them.
Here is the best peanut butter cookie receipe and it is easy & cheap
1 cup sugar
1 cup peanut butter
1 egg
mix together, roll into balls,, do the crisscross thing with the fork, place on cookie sheet (ungreased) and bake at 350 for 7 mins. Makes 48 cookies
No salt. I suppose you could use Splenda, but I never do. The trick is to let them cool on the cookie sheet after taking out of the oven for about 5 min.
Yum-o!

reply from: galen

sounds good thanks.. also sounds very inexpensive...

reply from: galen

this one costs about 5.00 when you buy all the ingrediants.. but some like the rice can be bought large and used over time.
leftovers and rice
1/2 of and meat or seitan
2 cans of GV cream of celery soup
2 cups of dry rice
1/4 cup dry white wine
make the rice.. yeild will be about 4 cups.
combine rice with 2 cans of soup and white wine.. mix well. Add meat or seitan. spread in a large glass baking dish. Heat in microwave or oven untill bubbly.
you can substitue cream of cheddar or cream of mushroom soup for variety.
this also freezes well and makes good 'comfort food' for when times are rough.
the economy is such that i'm going to post as many of these as i can in order to help people stretch things.

reply from: nancyu

I went to my local health food store yesterday. I couldn't find the seitan, but I found garden veggie tempeh. I haven't tried this yet. Anyone have suggestions for preparing this? I hope it's good. I also bought some veggie luncheon meats which I haven't tried yet.
I haven't eaten meat since...I really can't remember. I know that on 4th of July I had a lobster roll... does that count? I think it probably does. And I had a tuna sandwich that day, too. But no meat whatsoever since, and I'm still alive, and full. And I've been eating delicious food.
Yesterday I had a veggie omelet for breakfast with spinach, mushrooms, tomatoes and cheese.
For dinner we had twice baked potatoes:
Cut in half and scoop out the insides of baked russet potatoes and mash together with steamed broccoli, sour cream, cheddar cheese, salt and pepper and whatever else you want to add. Spoon the mashed potato mixture back into the potato skins, and put under the broiler for 5 or 10 minutes.
Anyone want to try vegetarian with me? It's not so bad so far. I might be challenged at Thanksgiving, but I think I can do it.

reply from: galen

good recipie nancy.. i just had one for lunch!
tempeh can be used in any recipie that calls for a meat substitue.
as far as fish.. vegans don't eat anything that comes from an animal.. meat eggs fish milk etc.
vegetarians can be ovo lacto and aquatic.. so you can look at it that way.
i never recommend anyone go vegan all at once because it takes a while for your body to adjust to the change internally...yogurt ( soy) can help this. When i went vegan it took me 6 months to become totally plant based.

reply from: nancyu

bump

I think vegetarian is all I can do right now, anyway. I like milk, cheese and eggs, way too much. I wouldn't even know how to survive without those.

reply from: galen

no problem.. i'll have more recipies for you soon.

reply from: 4given

God knows if I didn't have cheese... What were your vegetarian stereotypes Nancy? Were we all birkenstock wearing, patchoulli loving mmm kays? I have to laugh as I do so myself.. stereotype.. human nature, right? Funny thing is that I would never see you and think "That person is a meat eater".. Just curious. Do veggies ride bikes and do yoga and grow organic plants and herbs? Do they occasionally wear a 100% cotton earth friendly head band while power walking to their favorite natural foods store?.. I guess from my experience any of the listed are actually true.. I have a lot of awesome recipes also- whatever dish you are used to.. without meat.. Equally as good. Add some extra vegetables- especially for color. If you continue to eat dairy- there are many dishes available. And Thanksgiving-? Same as usual.. if you give up the bird.. I always was plenty full of potatoes, turnip etc...What do your children think? Do you still purchase meat for them?
Mary- Did you become a vegan for ethical reasons or health?

reply from: galen

i became vegan for health.. i'm not one of those' i won't eat anything with a face' people. Its funny because most people associate 'goth' with vampirism.. and they kind look at me funny when i say i'm vegan. it has other perks.. like i can bring my own snacks to movies because they don't have any vegan fare. If anyone says anything i explain my dietary requirements preclude me from eating any animal protien.. i'll get a look and then a smile..our theatre knows me now and they just let me go on w/ my water and trail mix.. its less expensive too.
my docs were concerned because they thought i could not get enough protien to heal from the radiation treatments..they wanted me to add dairy and eggs to my diet. But i love nuts and pistachios are my favorite.. i snack on them all the time.. so far so good on my protien intake..and i upped my B and D supplements.. soo i think its going ok.

reply from: 4given

What matters is that you are receiving what you need supplement wise anyway, right? Mary- I was called a "goth" and a "new- waver" and a "punk" and at one time a "hippie"... I don't associate the word "goth" with Vampirism, although I had some friends back in the day that would have appreciated that reference.. What makes you Gothic?
Oh and I became a vegetarian after watching a series of "Faces of Death" videos 20 years ago. I was a Vegan for 2 years.. and ate fish and poultry after 15 years of no animals meat.. Each person to their own, right? Do you also take herbs.. superalgae etc?

reply from: carolemarie

Lemonaide Chicken
6 (4 oz) skinless chicken breast
3/4 cup of lemonaid concentrate
3 TBPS Catsup (use the no salt kind)
2 TBSP brown sugar
1 TBSP cider vinegar
2 TBSP cornstarch
2 TBSP cold water
Put chicken in crockpot. Combind all ingrediants except cornstarch and water in a small bowl and wisk. Pour over chicken. Cook on low for 2.5 hours or until chicken juices run clear.
Remove the chicken from the crock pot. Keep warm.
Pour the juice into a small sauce pan.
Heat on medium and add the water and cornstarch together, mix well and add to the sausepan. Cook until it thickens, stiring often.
Serve with salad and french bread, pour sauce over chicken breast before serving
1 chicken breast with 1/2 cup sause=
208 calories
3 grams of fat
63 mg cholestrol
147 mg sodium
22 g. carbs.

reply from: galen

no super algea..i do like the sweet seaweed they sell at the local asian market.. i supplement right now with vegan vitamins depending on my bloodwork each week.. the radiation eats up more vitamins than i can eat naturally.. before this i used very few supplements.
lets see what makes me 'goth'
well you could start with the way i dress.. very victorian most of the time.. i love the clothing and mourning garb.. lots of black and crepe when i go out w/ my husband and want to look pretty.I also love corsets. then there is the haicolour.. it changes every week or so ( but i'm beginning to loose some hair so i might use a wig soon).
i have kind of a meloncholy attitude at times.. and that shows when i talk about abortion w/ people face to face. My kids say i'm a romantic goth.. in fact they were the ones who told me i was 'goth'.. i never used the term until recently. at work i'm pretty conservative except for the hair.. i wear a black or navy suit from Brooks Brother's and the only thing that sets me apart is my hair.. no makeup at work.. i'm pretty light skinned.. so i don't use the white makeup or anything.But people say they always detect a certain sadness from me during the course of the day. usually when i deal with this topic of abortion.. so i guess that adds to it. When people ask me who died i tend to say 4000 babies today.. and they are real quiet. sometimes that gets the point across...
its funny though because the women at th shelter say i'm one of the happiest and sunniest people they know...so go figure right?

reply from: galen

BTW i get mysuits from the local salvation army store.. its wonderful and really cheap.. the rest of my clothing i make myself.. Victorian antiques are REALLY expensive.

reply from: galen

that recipie looks good CM.. i'll have to try it for my kids.

reply from: 4given

I am quite sure, despite your appearance and all you have been through that your presence brings new life to those around you. I am familiar with the wardrobe style etc. .. Do you know how many more treatments you will need, or is it all dependant on your bloodwork? Is it strictly radiation? Have they recommended any chemotherapy? You don't have to answer.. Why God allows certain trials... I don't know. May you be healed and strengthened in Jesus Name. Is the tumor gone completely? Is the radiation a precautionary thing?

reply from: 4given

I would never think of combining lemonaide and ketchup. Is this something for picky boys? You have a little one- Do you think my boys would like it? Does he like it?

reply from: galen

the tumor is now completely irradiated.. it was in an inoperable area.. so they use a gamma knife to do pinpiont radiation to the tumor and in lay terms it burns away most of it.. then they sent me back to my home state to do the finish up radiation of the area.. to kill any cells in the margins the gamma knife may have missed. My type of tumour does not usually respond well to chemo so that is a wait and see thing. If it all dies off from the radiation then no chemo.
thankyou for the kind thoughts and prayers... i'm sure they are working. God works in mysterious ways.. if i had not lost my balance and broke my ankle and struck my head i would never have had an MRI for a check. They probably would not have found the tumour untill it had almost killed me. He knew this and sent my dizzy spell and so on.. so even though my leg still hurts i am gratefull for my accident. and the chance to kill the tumour.

reply from: 4given

I guess one never knows what the next day will bring, right?! Are you children handling it okay? You have had an extraordinairy journey thus far.. almost feel bad for any female that comes along- given your sons standards and expectations.. Blessed that you spend your time here Mary. I have learned a lot from you and I appreciate your time and patience here..
Back to topic.. Do you have a quick stir fry recipe.. (W/out mushrooms, tomatoes..) Beyond what my boys dislike- is their limited okay list- which only sometimes includes onions, peppers, brocolli.. what is a good meat substitute for beef? So a stir fry on rice... Any good 15 minute ideas?

reply from: nancyu

My daughter shows an interest in being vegetarian, too. Since she follows the Buddhist philosophy, she said she feels a little guilty when people ask her if she is vegetarian. She still likes meat. She asked me to buy her some "real" baloney (we like baloney--I guess you could say we are full of it) My son really likes the veggie burgers and he seems really positive about my decision. Both are supportive. I still have meat in my freezer, but no one has asked me to prepare any in quite some time. My son often makes pizza for dinner w/ peperoni, that's about all.
I did find some vegetarian luncheon meats, and they're very good.

reply from: nancyu

________________________________________-----
i wonder what happened to this guy?
I don't know, and NO Phil, you haven't clarified a thing.

reply from: carolemarie

I would never think of combining lemonaide and ketchup. Is this something for picky boys? You have a little one- Do you think my boys would like it? Does he like it?
Noah loves it, and so do grownups. It is citrus-y. Of course Noah likes veggies and despises chocolate. He loves yogart with blueberries for breakfast.

reply from: galen

stir fry on rice
1 green bell pepper
1 yellow bell pepper
1 red bell pepper
1 can baby corn
1 can water chestnuts
2 portabella mushrooms
1 carrot
1 cup broccoli florets
1/2 cup orange juice
1/4 cup soy sauce
1/4 brown sugar
2 tbsp lemon zest
2 tbsp peanut oil
8 cups cooked jasmine rice
heat large wok pan to hot and add 2 tbsp oil ( i use peanut)
while heating slice all veg into strips except for corn and water chestnuts. when oil is hot add veg. turn down heat to meduim and sweat out veg untill just barely wilted but still crispy.. stir often. Add orange juice , soy sauces brown sugar and zest..stir several times and turn down heat to low.. continue to stir and cook until veg are covered w/ heated mixture..serve over sticky jasmine rice... about 6 servings.
cook and prep about 20 min.

reply from: galen

we just had this one for lunch at the shelter...
very yummy.
Wild Risotto
"This recipe contains wild rice, hence the name wild risotto. Both wild rice and Italian Arborio rice can be found at most grocery stores."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREP TIME 30 Min
COOK TIME 1 Hr
READY IN 1 Hr 30 Min
SERVINGS (Help)
Servings
US METRIC

INGREDIENTS
5 cups water
1/4 cup uncooked wild rice
2 teaspoons olive oil
6 green onions, chopped
2 cloves garlic, minced
1 1/2 cups uncooked Arborio rice
1/2 cup white wine
1 teaspoon chopped fresh tarragon
2 roma (plum) tomatoes, chopped
2/3 cup coconut milk
1 cup frozen green peas, thawed


DIRECTIONS
In a saucepan, bring 1 cup water to a boil. Add the wild rice, cover the pan, and reduce the heat. Simmer for 25 minutes; drain well.
Bring 4 cups water to simmer in a large saucepan. Keep the water simmering while you begin step number 3.
Heat the olive oil in a large frying pan. Saute the scallions and garlic over medium-high heat for 1 minute. Add the Arborio rice; stir it for 2 minutes.
Pour the wine, the wild rice, and the tarragon into the frying pan. Cook, stirring frequently, for 2 minutes.
Pour 1/2 cup of the heated water into the frying pan. Stir frequently until the liquid is absorbed, then add 1/2 cup more water. Continue adding the water in this manner, waiting between additions until the liquid is absorbed and stirring frequently. After about 18 to 20 minutes most of the liquid should be absorbed, and the rice should be tender but still slightly chewy.
When all of the water is absorbed, add the tomatoes, coconut milk, and peas. Stir in the mixture, and simmer it, stirring often, until most of the liquid is absorbed. Serve at once.

reply from: galen

here is a link to the boca website nancy...
its to thier recipie area...
http://www.bocaburger.com/main.aspx?s=recipe&m=recipe/knet_recipe_display&recipe_id=75701

reply from: nancyu

galen, you've been quiet lately. I hope you're well!

reply from: yoda

They advertise the gamma knife in this area, it is apparently the "cutting edge" in radiation therapy. I understand it works by moving around the patient in a 360 degree x 360 degree sweep with a highly focused beam, so that the radiation is concentrated in the target area and is less harmful to adjacent areas as compared to conventional radiation therapy. That sounds like a major improvement, do you suffer much from the usual radiation side effects?

reply from: galen

They advertise the gamma knife in this area, it is apparently the "cutting edge" in radiation therapy. I understand it works by moving around the patient in a 360 degree x 360 degree sweep with a highly focused beam, so that the radiation is concentrated in the target area and is less harmful to adjacent areas as compared to conventional radiation therapy. That sounds like a major improvement, do you suffer much from the usual radiation side effects?
_____________________________________________________________
it is definately an improvement..otherwise i probably would be dead by now.. i still had to undergo some adjacent rediation therapy so i do have some side effects..
The gamma knife is sort of a giant 'helmet thing tyou put your head into.. the one that goes around your head is a cyberknife i believe...the procedure i had involved having a halo screwwed into your skull to hold your head still and then several MRIs to map out your brain and lesion. and then the treatments last about and hour.

reply from: galen

__________________________________________
just taking care of some health related stuff.. be back soon!

reply from: nancyu

Glad to hear you're doing well, seeya when you come back!

reply from: nancyu

http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/88/48/
For an undisclosed amount (17Oct03, Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas). The plaintiff was a 17-year-old PA resident when a second-trimester abortion was performed in NJ without parental knowledge/consent.
Although she hasn't developed breast cancer, she sued her abortion provider, Charles Benjamin, for neglecting to warn her about the physical and emotional risks of abortion. Karen Malec [Coalition On Abortion/Breast Cancer president] said that the settlement would alert "the medical establishment that it can no longer profit by keeping women in the dark about the breast cancer risk. This case also establishes that abortion providers can be sued for battery if the abortion provider performs no parental consent abortions on minors from neighboring states (with parental consent statutes), even if the state where the abortion is performed does not have a parental consent statute." On the eve of trial, Dr. Benjamin and the Cherry Hill Women's Center in Cherry Hill, NJ, agreed to settle claims it violated parental-consent law and failed to inform its then-17-year-old patient about the emotional and physical risks of abortion - including increased risk of breast cancer. When the plaintiff, who goes by the fictitious name of "Sarah," got pregnant at the age of 16, her high school guidance counselor facilitated her second-trimester abortion at the NJ clinic across the Delaware River without her parents' knowledge. NJ was chosen because it has no parental-consent laws regarding abortions for minors. Sarah is said to have suffered tremendously since having her abortion. Attorney Susan Gertz, executive director of the Women's Injury Network, the national charity which covered Sarah's case expenses, reports she was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress syndrome following the abortion. Gertz applauded the undisclosed settlement, which was based on Sarah's need for medical monitoring for early detection of breast cancer. Doctors estimated that cost to be $2,500 annually. The settlement also includes funding to cover future psychological counseling. "Abortion malpractice lawsuits help expose the deceptive practices of the abortion industry and hold doctors legally and financially accountable to the women they've harmed," Gertz said in a statement. Sarah's parents successfully sued the high school in a separate lawsuit for violating their 14th Amendment rights to raise their child without interference by the public school. This lawsuit makes it possible for the abortion providers to be sued for battery. "...Abortion centers can't escape civil penalties by aborting for kids from other states when they know the state where they come from has parental-consent statute," said Sarah's attorney Stanton [215/886-6780]. According to Stanton's statistics, an average of 43 women from PA travel to NJ every month to have abortions. Ten of those are teens, some as young as 12. The ABC link has been called "the elephant in medicine's parlor." Medical experts privately say abortion causes breast cancer, but it is too volatile to publicly acknowledge. According to a National Cancer Institute (NCI) commissioned study, teens who procure abortions before age 18, more than double their risk. [1] Girls and women have a predominance of immature, cancer-vulnerable Types 1 & 2 breast lobules, which aren't matured into cancer-resistant Types 3 & 4 lobules until a term pregnancy takes place. Abortion can increase the statistical odds of developing breast cancer in two ways: 1) It delays a first term pregnancy; and 2) It increases the number of cancer-vulnerable breast cells because estrogen overexposure during a normal pregnancy stimulates cell multiplication. Women don't receive protection from estrogen overexposure until third trimester hormones mature their breast tissue into milk-producing Types 3 & 4 lobules. Differentiated (mature) cells are not vulnerable to carcinogens. Scientists are incapable of refuting the biological explanation for the ABC link: 17 of 29 worldwide studies are statistically significant, which means there's a 95 percent certainty that the association is not by chance. Seven of these 17 report more than a two-fold risk increase. 13 of 16 U.S. studies report risk elevations.
The NCI provided at least partial funding for 10 studies. "It's common sense," adds Malec. "Doctors should be erring on the side of caution and should be telling patients 'Yes, there is research going back 46 years that supports an abortion-breast cancer link'. That's the minimum owed to women." [1. Daling et al. (1994) J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1584-92. 2. National Physicians Center for Family Resources, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Polycarp Research Institute, Breast Cancer Prevention Institute. COALITION ON ABORTION/BREAST CANCER, 1-877-803-0102, www.AbortionBreastCancer.com, Karen Malec, 21Oct03 & 23Oct03, Pro-Life E-News < tgerk@shaw.ca; http://
]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35222]
">http://www.worldnetdaily.com/n...e.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35222
The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer is an international women's organization founded to protect the health and save the lives of women by educating and providing information on abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer.

reply from: nancyu

I received a phone call yesterday from Beth Ward from State Farm in Bloomington IL. She told me that until a client brought it to their attention they had no idea about Susan G Komen's ties with Planned Parenthood.
She said as soon as they learned this they contacted Komen, and made it very clear that none of the funds were to go to Planned Parenthood.
According to Ms. Ward, State Farm's intent was to do something positive for Breast Cancer research, and had no idea that any funds would go toward funding abortion.
I stressed to her that Komen is definitely tied with Planned Parenthood, and there are many breast cancer research foundations with no such ties. She said State Farm is a conservative company, but she seemed to imply that State Farm won't take a position on either side because it is such an "emotionally charged issue"
I hope we will keep writing letters to them. Maybe we can convince State Farm to take a stand in defense of unborn persons.
Here are the addresses again:
State Farm Insurance
One State Farm Plaza
Bloomington, IL 61710
(send to the attention of Beth Ward)
and the address on my policy is:
Insurance Support Center
P. O. Box 588002
North Metro, GA 30029-8002
State Farm Insurance Companies
P. O. Box 830854
Birmingham AL 35283-0854
(Don't forget to include some IAAP cards!)

reply from: yoda

Well, that's complete nonsense. All funds received by State Farm are "fungible"... that is to say they all go in basically the same big "hopper".
Fortunately for me, I don't have any of their insurance.

reply from: nancyu

THE KOMEN - ABORTION CONNECTION. "Pro-Life organizations have thoroughly researched the connection between the Susan G. Komen for the Cure and Planned Parenthood.
According to Life Decisions International, pro-life oppostition to Komen is based on two indisputable facts:
1) Komen allows its affiliates to donate funds to Planned Parenthood; and
2) Consistent with the position held by Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen for the Cure has refused to act upon the many studies that have shown a connection between abortion and breast cancer.
If you would like to support a pro-life organization that is fighting breast cancer, and which recognizes the link between abortion and/or hormonal birth control and breast cancer, please contact:
"The Breast Cancer Prevention Institute
9 Vassar St
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
1.86.NOCANCER (1.866.622.6237)
www.bcpinstitute.org

"Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer
POB 957133
Hoffman Estates IL 60195-3051
1.877.803.0102
www.abortionbreastcancer.com"
[Pro-Life Action News, April 2008]

reply from: nancyu

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmsctech/1045/1045we15.htmBarriers to Informed Consent
http://www.jpands.org/vol13no1/lanfranchi.pdf

reply from: nancyu

http://www.bcpinstitute.org/ABCUKParliamenttestimony-2007.htm

reply from: galen

found this recipie in BH&G and tried it out today at the shelter... it was GREAT!
total cost for 10 servings was about 10.00.. not bad... i'll tell you about leftovers but there were none.

Vegetarian Shepherd's Pie
Prep: 35 minutes
Bake: 25 minutes
3 small potatoes (3/4 pound)
2 cloves garlic, minced
1/2 teaspoon dried basil, crushed
2 tablespoons margarine or butter
1/4 teaspoon salt
2 to 4 tablespoons milk
1 medium onion, chopped (1/2 cup)
1 medium carrot, sliced (1/2 cup)
1 tablespoon cooking oil
1 15-ounce can kidney beans, rinsed and drained
1 14-1/2-ounce can whole tomatoes, drained and cut up
1 10-ounce package frozen whole kernel corn or mixed vegetables
1 8-ounce can tomato sauce
1 teaspoon Worcestershire sauce
1/2 teaspoon sugar
1 cup shredded cheddar cheese (4 ounces)
Paprika (optional)
Directions
1. Peel and quarter potatoes. Cook, covered, in a small amount of boiling lightly salted water for 20 to 25 minutes or until tender. Drain. Mash with a potato masher or beat with an electric mixer on low speed. In a small saucepan cook garlic and dried basil in margarine or butter for 15 seconds. Add to mashed potatoes along with salt. Gradually beat in enough milk to make light and fluffy. Set aside.
2. For filling, in a medium saucepan cook onion and carrot in hot oil until onion is tender but not brown. Stir in kidney beans, tomatoes, frozen vegetables, tomato sauce, Worcestershire sauce, and sugar. Heat until bubbly.
3. Transfer vegetable mixture to an 8x8x2-inch square baking pan. Drop mashed potatoes in 4 mounds over vegetable mixture. Sprinkle with cheddar cheese and, if desired, paprika. Bake, uncovered, in a 375 degree F. oven for 25 to 30 minutes or until heated through and cheese begins to brown. Makes 4 servings.

reply from: galen

i found out a little tidbit about McDonald's that i will pass along..
Each franchise is owned individually .. each owner/s is allowed to support diffrent local charities.. IMO if your local franchise supports something that you do not belive in then you can choose not to be a patron. On the whole the national comapny does support the united way... but as of the last 2-3 years they have been much more involved in thier own charitble organisations...

reply from: nancyu

That's cool. Good for McDonald's.

reply from: nancyu

Thanks! I love shepherd's pie, and I tried making it once with that tempeh. (It was yuck!)
I'll try this. I found some big packages of boca burgers at BJs Wholesale club yesterday. I bought two. They are really, really good, but I had been having trouble finding them before. Our local Walmart doesn't sell them, I had only found them at out of town stores.
Did I say welcome back galen? Welcome back!

reply from: nancyu

Our list so far:
Good: Dominoe's Pizza, Wendy's, Jiffy Lube, Walmart, Arby's, Subway, Pepsi, American Heart Association, Sam's Choice, Cracker Barrel, Little Caesar's, Mcalister's deli, Long John Silvers, Applebee's, IHOP, Dairy Queen, Red Robin, Chic fil a, Curves, Electronic Arts, ncsoft, Cryptic Studios, marvel and star trak online mmp games, Capcom, Ghirardelli, McDonald's

Bad: First, anything associated with United Way, Unicef, March of Dimes, Susan G Komen;
State Farm (until they stand up for the unborn), KFC (darn I forgot about that one), UPS, GEICO, Allstate, Nationwide, KMart, Darden Restaurants including Red Lobster, Olive Garden, The Capital Grille, Bahama Breeze, Season's 52, Longhorn; Ryan's Steakhouse, Golden Corrall, Denny's, American Cancer Society, Pampers, Lean Cuisine, anything Nestle (they sell bottled water now, it's not even chocolate flavored! Get an identity will ya?) Purina, Buitoni North America, Scott Tissue, Target, Sears.
To be continued...
P. S.Check out the great recipes, and money saving tips in this thread.

reply from: Agape

Wal-Mart sells Plan B.

reply from: nancyu

Yup, you're right. Some might want to know this, thanks agape.
Wal-Mart to carry Plan B contraception
Retailer's pharmacies currently only carry the product in 2 states -- Illinois and Massachusetts -- as mandated by law.
March 3, 2006: 4:55 PM EST
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - In a major turnaround, Wal-Mart will begin stocking Plan B contraceptives -- commonly referred to as the "morning-after pill" -- at all of its pharmacies, the company said Friday.
"We expected more states to require us to sell emergency contraceptives in the months ahead," said Ron Chumiuk, vice president of Pharmacy for Wal-Mart, in a statement.
"Because of this, and the fact that this is an FDA-approved product, we feel it is difficult to justify being the country's only major pharmacy chain not selling it."
Wal-Mart pharmacies in Massachusetts were required to carry emergency contraception pills after the state's pharmacy board ruled in February in favor of three women who filed complaints against the retailer. (Full story)
The company said it will maintain its conscientious objection policy, which lets employees who don't feel comfortable dispensing a prescription to refer customers to another pharmacist or pharmacy
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/03/news/companies/walmart_contraception/
Does anyone have more info on Plan B? Is it abortifacient or contraceptive, or possibly a little of both?

reply from: galen

Plan b is both aborto/ contra...
Wal Mart in our state practicaly never sells plan b as the pharmacists here don't think its good for it to be OTC. the company policy on it is still the same though. federal regulations pretty much say all pharmacies that take medicaid have to make all things like it available to all consumers... go figure. But on the whole Wal-mart is better than others as far as the respect for life thing goes.

reply from: galen

nancy-- portabela mushrooms minced and fried in olive oil make a great substitute also. Should work well in the pie.
go to your grocery manager at wal-mart and let him know you want the Boca stuff and they should be able to order it... all the chains' stores have accsess to boca products.

reply from: nancyu

Great, I will do that. Thanks again.

reply from: nancyu

I did, and they did. Boca Bacon, and sausage for breakfast in the AM, can hardly wait to try them.
Good night everyone. Pleasant dreams!

reply from: nancyu

I just found this:
http://www.prolifecomm.com/

reply from: nancyu

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/1055018/posts

reply from: nancyu

http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/719/26/
Legal Implications of a Link Between Abortion and Breast Cancer (6/05)
Dozens of studies have shown that the greater the number of abortions, the higher the incidence of breast cancer. Three states require physicians to disclose to patients seeking abortion that the procedure may increase the risk of breast cancer; 3 other states have more general disclosure requirements in connection with abortion.
There is a legal obligation of informed consent for any medical procedure. With the majority of studies showing that abortion increases the breast cancer risk, and even the minority studies reinforcing the well-established principle that childbirth is protective against breast cancer, patients seeking abortion have an obvious right to this information.
The patient who received an abortion and later develops breast cancer may have a valid claim against the provider. Already there has been at least one settlement in a lawsuit brought for such failure to disclose.
Unfortunately, misinformation has circulated in the media by virtue of an article published last year in the Lancet medical journal. That article did not deny that increased abortions result in greater incidence of breast cancer. Rather, the article merely claimed that abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer compared to someone who delayed pregnancy altogether. The Lancet article and its published data are consistent with the prevailing medical view that the more abortions in a society, the greater the number of breast cancer cases.
Failure to diagnose this higher incidence of breast cancer has now become the most common type of malpractice case. While only a small percentage of physicians perform abortions in their practices, most physicians will encounter a patient who has an abortion in her medical history. The overall rate in the United States of a patient contracting breast cancer is 1 in 7.5 and tragically continues to rise.
The likelihood of a patient developing breast cancer may be higher if there is an abortion in the patient's medical history and physicians may be held accountable for a heightened duty to screen that patient for cancer.
There is also a public policy issue about who should pay for the enormous costs of increased breast cancer cases. Tobacco companies have ultimately been held liable for health care costs imposed by the increased risk of cancer from smoking. Attorney Generals of various states have sued to obtain enormous settlements from the tobacco industry. Should the logic be any different for abortion providers?

Informed Consent Laws. There is a general duty at common law for physicians to procure informed consent from a patient before an operation. Failure to do so can result in criminal battery or, at a minimum, malpractice. Consent is plainly not meaningful if not fully informed. Consent to an operation based on an understanding of no long-term adverse effects is invalid if the operation does increase a risk of a long-term condition and the patient was not informed of this fact.
The lack of completely informed consent by a patient can impose liability on the physician. Courts in New York have held that even emotional distress brought on by misinformation about abortions serves as the basis for a valid claim and the acting physician can thereby be held liable. In 1987, the New York Court of Appeals allowed recovery by a patient because she had received incorrect information resulting in an abortion that caused emotional distress.
In 2004, a trial court in New York upheld a claim of medical malpractice where a breach of duty by a physician and misinformation caused emotional distress. The mother had been told that her condition of fibroid tumors rendered it unlikely that she could carry her pregnancy to term. She then submitted to a chemical abortion, but it failed to be completed successfully. The patient ultimately decided to give birth. Her child was then born with severe defects, which were caused by the attempted chemical abortion. If the patient had been correctly informed, she would have chosen to continue her pregnancy and given birth to a healthy child.
Lawsuits may be filed against abortion providers who fail to disclose that the procedure might increase the chance of breast cancer. One such suit, in Pennsylvania, has already settled on confidential terms.
Pennsylvania does not have a law expressly requiring that abortion providers disclose a connection with breast cancer, but the common law imposes a duty of informed consent nationwide.
Three states do expressly require that abortion providers inform their patients that the operation may increase the risk of breast cancer: Texas, Mississippi and Minnesota.
Minnesota mandates this disclosure but the Department of Health has added a disclaimer to its publications as described below. A fourth state, Kansas provides the information through state publications including its website.
Two other states, Alabama and Louisiana, have backed away from disclosing the possibility of an increased risk. Neither Alabama nor Louisiana, however, has altered the common law duty to provide all relevant information to a patient in procuring consent.
Texas, the second most populous state, has a statutory mandate that informed consent be given 24 hours prior to an abortion. Texas law expressly establishes that consent is informed only if "the physician who is to perform the abortion informs the woman [of] the possibility of increased risk of breast cancer following an induced abortion and the natural protective effect of a completed pregnancy in avoiding breast cancer ...." Additionally, the woman to receive an abortion must certify in writing that she has been informed of this increased risk. This law was enacted in 2003 and its effect on abortions in that state is not yet known.
Mississippi law requires that women preparing to receive an abortion sign a form indicating they have been specifically told about a possible link between abortion and breast cancer.
Effective beginning in 1996, this requirement and others have had a dramatic affect on the numbers of women obtaining abortions in that state. In response to the requirements, abortions have fallen by more than 50 percent in Mississippi. In 1991 the number of abortions performed was 8,814; in 2002, the latest year for which data is available, this number had dropped to 3,605, representing a decline of 59%.
Minnesota law requires informed consent and disclosure of the abortion/breast cancer link at least 24 hours prior to an abortion. According to Minnesota law, "no abortion shall be performed ..." unless the female is told of "the particular medical risks associated with the abortion procedure to be employed including ... the risk of breast cancer."
Additionally, the Minnesota Department of Health's "Report of Informed Consent for Induced Abortion" lists the risk of breast cancer associated with abortion. Although the state mandates this disclosure and the Department does claim the risk exists, they also add a disclaimer: two recent studies claim there is no link, adding that "[w]omen who have a strong family history of cancer or who have clinical findings of breast disease should seek medical advice from a physician regardless of their decision to become pregnant or have an abortion."
Kansas law expressly requires that women be informed of "a description of risks related to the proposed abortion method," and the state-mandated pamphlet which is handed out to potential patients warns: "[s]everal studies have found no overall increase in risk of developing breast cancer after an induced abortion, while several studies do show an increase[d] risk..." However, Kansas does not specifically require informing patients of abortion and its related increased risk of breast cancer.
In Louisiana, a state-mandated brochure and its Department of Health and Hospitals had been informing women of the potential risks of the abortion procedure, voluntarily including information on the increased risk of breast cancer.
Under pressure from media representations about an article that appeared in Lancet, discussed in greater detail below, Louisiana hastily removed the abortion/breast cancer link information.
In June of 2004, a United States District Court judge approved a settlement involving a challenge to the 2002 Alabama "Women's Right to Know Act." The constitutionality of the law, which required disclosure of the effects of abortion on the body, the risks involved and the alternatives available, was well established. But the court-approved settlement specifically stated that the warning of the increased risk of breast cancer due to an abortion was to be removed from the state-mandated brochures. Apparently abortion providers oppose informing patients about the increased risk of breast cancer more than other disclosure requirements.

The Flawed Lancet Article. In March 2004, the medical journal Lancet published an article that was widely - and inaccurately - portrayed as disproving the link between abortion and breast cancer.
Not even the article itself denied that more abortions increase breast cancer incidence, a fact observed by the vast majority of studies and by changes in breast cancer rates worldwide in response to changes in abortion rates. Delaying or avoiding childbirth elevates the risk of breast cancer, and abortion has that adverse effect.
According to most studies, abortion also causes additional risk.
The Lancet article did claim that "[p]regnancies that end as a spontaneous or induced abortion do not increase woman's risk of developing breast cancer."16 This was the strongest assertion in the article, but it does not deny that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer.
Instead, this assertion compares the risk of breast cancer from an abortion to a hypothetical case when no pregnancy occurred in the first place. Once a pregnancy occurs, aborting that pregnancy does increase the risk of breast cancer for that individual. For society as a whole, more abortions do cause greater incidence of breast cancer in the future. Not even the Lancet article doubts this.
Ignored in the media reports is that the Lancet article relies entirely on a purely hypothetical comparison between (i) pregnancy followed by abortion and (ii) no pregnancy at all. But neither the patient, nor the abortion provider, nor the government has the option of turning back the clock and undoing a pregnancy after it occurs, and childbirth is beneficial to health.
The only intentional alternatives are between childbirth and abortion, and the Lancet article tacitly concedes that the latter increases the risk of breast cancer with respect to the former. Nearly all studies have concluded likewise. The medical consensus is that carrying a pregnancy to term is healthier than terminating it by abortion. Women consenting to an abortion need this information in order for their consent to be informed.
This effect of abortion is illustrated by countries that have banned or restricted abortion. Under two decades of rule by Nicolae Ceausescu, Romania prohibited abortion and enjoyed one of the lowest breast cancer rates in the entire world during that time, far lower than comparable Western countries. Romania's breast cancer rate was an astounding one-sixth the rate of the United States.
But after the execution of Ceausescu on Christmas Day, 1989, Romania has taken the entirely opposite approach, embracing abortion to the point where Romania now has one of the highest abortion rates in the world.
Science predicts that breast cancer rates will rise as the women having abortions reach ages susceptible to the disease. Indeed, that is exactly what is happening, with the worse still ahead as women who had abortions as teenagers and in their twenties in the 1990's reach ages more susceptible to breast cancer.
Similar observations of cause-and-effect are evident in Poland and Ireland: Poland limits abortion and now enjoys one of the lowest breast cancer rates in Europe, despite a high rate of cancer in men, while Ireland prohibits abortion and benefits from a breast cancer rate of only 1 in 13, nearly half of the United States' rate.
Even in the Far East, where breast cancer rates have historically been much lower than the West, increased abortions have apparently caused alarming increases in breast cancer incidence.
In Taiwan, for example, abortion was traditionally rare but Taiwan has followed its pervasive practice in the West. A sharp increase in abortions in Taiwan would predictably lead to relatively higher breast cancer incidence among the younger age group affected by the change.
This has indeed occurred, as "breast cancer patients younger than 40 years of age account for only 6 percent of total breast cancer victims in West European countries, but the ratio reaches a high of 29 percent in Taiwan." No plausible explanation for this phenomenon (other than abortion) has been advanced.
The data republished in the Lancet article do show an increased risk among breast cancer victims asked if they had obtained an abortion. Specifically, the article reveals that about 33 out of 39 large studies of breast cancer patients had an increased risk of breast cancer from abortion beyond the affect of avoiding a pregnancy.16
The Lancet article disingenuously excludes the studies showing the highest correlation and includes dubious studies, but even then its data still illustrate a clear correlation. Its tables show studies in France, Greece, Australia and Germany displaying relative risks of breast cancer of 1.35 or above for abortion compared to no pregnancy at all.
The risk of breast cancer from abortion compared to childbirth, which is the real alternative, is of course far higher given the protective benefits of childbirth.
The Lancet article errs, however, in emphasizing small "prospective" studies that rely on self-reporting of abortion by patients who do not have cancer and may not even be sick. In contrast to the cancer patients, who have every incentive to disclose a medical history of abortion, women who are not ill have an incentive to keep that personal information entirely private. The only healthy women who have reason to disclose a prior abortion are those preparing for childbirth, which has beneficial effects that mask the health impact of the abortion.
By effect if not design, the Lancet article relied on samples consisting of the least likely breast cancer victims among women who had abortions. For the small prospective studies used by the Lancet article, "[o]n average, the age of the women with breast cancer was 50.4 years and they had 2.4 births."16
But about 80% of breast cancer victims are over 50, and the typical breast cancer patient has had fewer than 2.4 births. The obvious disincentives for healthy women to report their own abortions, and the masking effect of the large average number of childbirths, negate any effect of abortion in this sample.
It is no surprise that the effects of abortion are offset by other factors in this unrepresentative group. There are many additional flaws to the Lancet article, already explained elsewhere.
The Lancet article contains political language favoring abortion, such as the phrase that certain women "have been at risk of illegal abortion for part of their reproductive lives."16 The authors apparently picked studies advancing their agenda, and admitted to excluding studies showing higher correlations between abortion and breast cancer.27 They also excluded older women, who are most likely to contract breast cancer, by an irrational elimination of studies predating the full legalization of abortion in many countries.
The article cannot accomplish its purported goal of surveying other studies by selectively excluding studies that do not serve its conclusion. Moreover, the article failed to include details about how the prospective studies were really performed.
Regional variations in breast cancer rates among similar ethnic groups confirm the link between abortion and breast cancer. In Great Britain, for example, the rate of breast cancer decreases steadily as one travels from England, where abortion has been common, to Northern Ireland, where abortion has been uncommon, to Ireland, where it has been prohibited.
In the United States, similar relationships between abortion and breast cancer can be observed. The San Francisco Bay Area, including Berkeley, is known for its longstanding acceptance of abortion and it has a breast cancer rate 9% higher than the rest of the state, according to information from the state Department of Finance and the state Office of Vital Records.
Long Island has suffered from a high rate of breast cancer that politicians have blamed on the environment. But the boroughs of New York and Long Island have long had a thriving abortion industry, dating back to 1970 when the State legalized the procedure even before Roe v. Wade (1973), and many of the earliest and busiest abortion clinics in the United States have been on Long Island. In contrast, Wyoming has the lowest abortion rate among states. Though its smoking rate is higher than 30 other states and its typical diet is far from ideal, Wyoming has one of the lowest breast cancer rates among women nationwide.
Malpractice and Failure to Diagnose. The alarming increase in breast cancer in the wake of abortion has been well documented. But this issue has not yet been addressed: who is paying the costs?
Physicians are. Not the small percentage that perform abortions, but the large percentage that do not.
The physicians bearing the costs here are those sued for failure to diagnose breast cancer, and the other physicians who have endured rising malpractice premiums.
The most common type of malpractice case is now failure to diagnose breast cancer.
This type of lawsuit now surpasses all other suits against physicians. The average payout for these failures to diagnose cases is substantial: about $200,000 apiece. Added to that are substantial costs of defense, lost time and income for the defendant physician, and significant administrative costs.
These malpractice costs are borne by all physicians in the form of rising premiums. The over 50% increase in breast cancer in America since Roe v. Wade has likely caused a greater than 50% increase in lawsuits for failure to diagnose it, as lawyers develop practices specializing in this particular type of action. Even when detected, a failure to diagnose lawsuit can be filed for not detecting sooner. (Abortions and breast cancer both increased before Roe v. Wade also.)
About 5% of breast cancer is inherited, and thus delineated in a routine medical history that documents parental illness, but a physician faces a difficult task of defending against a failure to diagnose claim in everyone else.
About 80% of women with breast cancer are the first in their families to be stricken by the disease. Even a proper diagnosis can lead to a malpractice lawsuit, if the attorney wants to argue that the breast cancer should have been detected sooner.
With abortion recognized as a risk factor for breast cancer by consensus in the medical literature and by several state laws, physicians should be aware of the likelihood of being sued for failure to diagnose breast cancer in a patient who had an abortion.
A physician can save lives and protect himself against lawsuits by being vigilant for the possibility of breast cancer in patients with a medical history of abortion.
The Alan Guttmacher Institute estimates that about 1 in 3 American women will have had an abortion by the time she reaches the age of 45 years. Accordingly, physicians can expect that roughly a third of their patients around that age will have had an abortion, though this can vary widely due to location and demographics.
It is helpful to know what percentage of those patients will ultimately develop breast cancer, in order to screen for it early and save lives. The overall rate is 1 in 7.5 in the United States. But more abortions mean more breast cancers under the prevailing medical view, thereby implying a higher rate of breast cancer among women who have had an abortion.37 How much higher?
About 80% of breast cancer victims are over the age of 50, but that population was already past the teenage years when abortion rates increased sharply after the national legalization of abortion.
Half of all abortions are by women aged 24 or younger, and the numbers of abortions in the United States did not reach its highest levels until many years after Roe v. Wade.
The vast majority of abortions performed in the United States (and the world) occurred after 1980, and a woman aged 24 or less then is still shy of 50 years today. Any increase in breast cancer by abortion already witnessed would be merely the beginning of much greater increases in breast cancer in the future. The largest expense to physicians and society from the effect of abortion on breast cancer lies ahead.
While ultimately a third of American women will have abortions by the age of 45, far fewer women had abortions in the 1960s and 1970s than in the 1980s and 1990s. Among women who have reached 50 years today (and thus were already 25 years or older by 1980), perhaps only about a fifth of that group has had abortions.
If the 50% rise in breast cancer rates since abortion became legal nationwide is primarily attributable to this fifth, then that implies a 3.5-fold increase in relative risk for it.
Given that the overall lifetime risk of breast cancer has risen to 1 in 7.5, a relative lifetime risk of 3.5 for breast cancer by the fifth who have reached 50 years and have had an abortion translates into an absolute lifetime risk for them of about 1 in 3. The risk would be even higher when all types of cancer are included.

The United States has not yet felt the full impact of the abortions performed on over twenty million young women since 1980. The vast majority are well under 50 years old; many millions of them have not yet reached 30 years.
If 1 in 3 of these younger women develops breast cancer, or even half that rate for 1 in 6, the costs in terms of lives lost, medical expenses, failure to diagnose lawsuits, and forgone opportunities are staggering. Studies show that breast cancer deprives a woman who dies from it of 20 years of her life, and those who survive also lose a great deal.31
Ultimately the tobacco companies have been held liable for the costs they impose on individuals and society. Will the same occur for the abortion industry, or will those costs continue to be borne by other physicians in the form of malpractice premiums and by society at large?
Are we currently in a period of denial similar to what happened for decades in connection with tobacco?
The States of Mississippi and Texas, and the countries of Ireland and Poland, have adopted abortion policies that will minimize the occurrence of breast cancer in the future. Meanwhile, the country of Romania is changing from having among the lowest incidence of breast cancer to having the highest.
"The liberalization of abortions in Romania in 1990, the significant increase of the number of abortions at relatively short intervals, determined a raise in the incidence of breast and uterine cervix cancer in my country." Its population faces increasing breast cancer for the next few decades, cutting short many women's lives and devastating its health system.
Less than 20 years after Roe v. Wade, the rate of breast cancer in the United States had risen to 1 in 10, and Time Magazine sounded a national alarm with a cover story describing it as the "puzzling plague." Yet the article did not mention abortion even once. Now the breast cancer rate has risen further to 1 in 7.5, but articles about causation have vanished from the established media. Most of the women who had uninformed abortions in the 1980s and 1990s have not yet reached ages most vulnerable to breast cancer.
The full impact of abortion on health is yet to come.
Conclusion. Consent to any operation is meaningless unless fully informed. The overwhelming consensus in the medical literature is that abortion does increase the incidence of breast cancer.
This information is of obvious significance to women who may consider having an abortion, and their consent without it is legally deficient. Failure to diagnose breast cancer has become the most popular type of malpractice lawsuit.
To save lives and guard against possible lawsuit, physicians would be well-advised to warn of the link prior to the operation and to be vigilant looking for breast cancer in patients having a medical history of abortion.
The costs to individuals and society from withholding or ignoring this information about abortion and breast cancer are enormous. In contrast to the tobacco industry, the abortion industry pays nothing to offset the substantial costs to society of increased cancer. States and countries, already strained to their breaking point in their health budgets, face a rising tide of costly breast cancer cases. Disseminating information is the best way to save lives and scarce resources. [Andrew L. Schlafly, Esq.]
References
1. Natanson v. Kline, 186 Kan. 393, 406-407, clarified by, 187 Kan. 186 (1960).
2. Martinez v. Long Island Jewish Hillside Medical Center, 70 N.Y.2d 697, 699 (1987).
3. Sheppard-Mobley v. King, 10 A.D.3d 70 (2004).
4. United States Representative Patrick Toomey to Address Over 1,500 at the Wyndham Franklin. Business Wire, 22Nov03.
5. Chipping away at abortion. The Washington Times, 29Oct03, p. A20.
6. Tex. Health & Safety Code § 171.012.
7. Miss. Code Ann. § 41-41-33.
8. Crary D. In abortion debate, Mississippi shows how far a state can go with array of restrictions. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, December 28, 2004, Tuesday, BC cycle.
9. Minn. Stat. § 145.4242.
10. http://www.health.state.mn.us/wrtk/handbook.html.
11. K.S.A. § 65-6709.
12. If You Are Pregnant, published by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.
13. Meckler L. Some women considering abortion are wrongly told it could increase breast cancer risk. Associated Press, November 10, 2004, Wednesday, BC Cycle.
14. Abortion; Corrections being made to Louisiana abortion brochure. Oncology Business Week, 12Dec 04.
15. Johnson B. Court approves distribution of materials before an abortion. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, June 28, 2004, Monday, BC Cycle.
16. Breast cancer and abortion: collaborative reanalysis of data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 83 000 women with breast cancer from 16 countries. Lancet, March 27, 2004, Vol. 363, p. 1007.
17.Breast Cancer: Pregnancies ending in abortion do not increase breast cancer risk. Oncology Business Week, 18Apr04, p. 16.
18.Study: No Abortion, Breast Cancer Link, The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN), March 28, 2004, A5.
19.Corrections being made to Louisiana abortion brochure. Patient Care Law Weekly, December 12, 2004, p. 21.
20.Corrections being made to Louisiana abortion brochure. Healthcare Mergers, Acquisitions & Ventures Week, December 11, 2004, p. 18.
21. Corrections being made to Louisiana abortion brochure. MD Week, December 10, 2004, p. 7.
22. Corrections being made to Louisiana abortion brochure. Medical Verdicts & Law Weekly, 9Dec04, p. 19.
23.Khan A. The Role of Fat in Breast Cancer. The Independent, May 18, 1998.
24. Abdullaev N. Russians Are Quickest to Marry and Divorce. Moscow Times, December 8, 2004.
25. O'Flaherty K, Oakley R. Self-checks 'useless' in breast cancer fight. Sunday Tribune (Ireland), 6Oct02, p. 8.
26.Wu S. Taiwan's Breast Cancer Patients Far Younger Than Europeans: Report. Central News Agency (Taiwan), December 16, 2000, Saturday.
27. http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/breastcancer/a/breastcancfacts.htm.
28. Furton E. The Corruption of Science by Ideology. Ethics and Medics, December 2004, Vol. 29, No. 12.
29. Lanfranchi A. The Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Revisited. Ethics & Medics, November 2004, Vol. 29, No. 11.
30. O'Reilly R. New Weapon in War Against Breast Cancer. The Press Association Limited, Dec. 17, 1998.
31. With BC-Portugal-Abortion Referendum. Associated Press Worldstream, June 27, 1998.
32. "Environmental Contributors to Breast Cancer: What Does the Science Say?" Field Hearing of the House Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards, Committee on Science, 22June02, Serial No. 107-74.
33. Wyoming ranks 16th for health, well-being of women. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, November 27, 2004, Saturday, BC Cycle.
34. Malec K. The Abortion-Breast Cancer Link: How Politics Trumped Science and Informed Consent. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Summer 2003, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 41-45.
35.Church E. Legal trends in imaging; CE Directed Reading. Radiologic Technology, September 1, 2004, Vol. 76, No. 1, p. 31.
36. International Breast Cancer Fact Sheet, Women's Environment and Development Organization (WEDO), September 1997, Vol. 10, No. 2.
37.http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/texas.html.
38."Probability of Breast Cancer in American Women," Cancer Facts, National Cancer Institute, Dec. 23, 2004, http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/5_6.htm.
39.Fournier R, Schmid R. Elizabeth Edwards has breast cancer. Associated Press, Nov. 04, 2004.
40.Women's Environment and Development Organization (WEDO) World Conference on Breast Cancer-July 1997-Information Packet.
41.A Puzzling Plague; What is it about the American way of life that causes breast cancer? Time Magazine, Jan. 14, 1991, p. 48.
[In PDF file below:
_Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons ^_
(http://
]http://www.freerepublic.com/^http://www.jpands.org/vol10no1/aschlafly.pdf)]
[Spring 2005 Journal of American Phys

reply from: nancyu

Illinois Right to Life Committee
Will UNICEF Stop Promoting Abortion?
given the latest news, apparently not!
2007 Update on UNICEF Activities
(NEW YORK - C-FAM) The latest report from the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has prioritized women's rights over child protection and survival. UNICEF's "State of the World's Children Report 2007" tells states that the achievement of "gender equality" and promotion of women's rights are necessary for the well-being of children. Complete article

2006 Update on UNICEF Activities
(NEW YORK - C-FAM) The UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) has attempted to intervene in a national debate in Nicaragua over new legislation that would ban abortion for any reason. Complete article

2005 Update on UNICEF Activities
President Bush has nominated a new leader for UNICEF. Ann Veneman will take over at UNICEF in May 2005. Veneman has already stated her intention to focus UNICEF on addressing hunger and disease issues. Asked by a reporter about "reproductive health" issues, she responded: "I don't believe that these issues are relevant to the missions of UNICEF." Until May, you can anticipate that UNICEF will continue pushing "reproductive health" (namely, abortion and contraceptives) hard.
New UNICEF Head Says Abortion Issues "Irrelevant" to Group's Mission

2004 Update on UNICEF Activities
In 2004, criticism of UNICEFcontinued because of the agency's promotion of abortion around the world. In 2003, IRLC reported on how UNICEF promotes abortion while seeking funds through children who are trick or treating for Halloween. Those 2003 articles appear below, but here are the 2004 updates on UNICEF activities:
Medical Journal Slams UNICEF for Putting Children 'Rights'
Over Saving Their Lives
Pro-Life Group Condemns UNICEF Halloween Fundraiser Over Abortion
UNICEF: The Mask is Off!
UNICEF Demands Abortion for Underage Girls without Parents Knowledge

Trick or Treat Continues at UNICEF
Before Halloween, Mary Anne Hackett, president of Illlinois Right to Life Committee, wrote about UNICEF's trick or treat fundraising. She pointed out that "UNICEF actively promotes abortion and sexual rights for children." A response from Lisa Szarkowski, Managing Director, Public Relations, U.S. Fund for UNICEF, completely denied these charges. However, that response conveniently ignored the evidence presented by Mary Anne, including a quote from a UNICEF manual, and the Vatican's 1996 decision (never rescinded) to withdraw support because of UNICEF's promotion of abortion and contraception.
A 2003 report (95 pages with many footnotes) from Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute gives details showing that, under the guise of AIDS prevention, UNICEF financially supports a South African organization called loveLife that promotes "complete sexual autonomy for adolescents." The web site of loveLife has almost pornographic details to promote sexual activity among children at any age. When questions were raised in a letter from the U.S. Department of State about the UNICEF tie to loveLife, UNICEF's response came from Alejandro Palacios, UNICEF Senior Advisor, who defended the association with loveLife, citing their important role in the fight against AIDS. No offer was made to even investigate any potential abuses that might have occurred in loveLife's approach to fight AIDS.
One can only conclude that UNICEF's denial of support for and promotion of abortion and sexual rights for children is based on semantics and distortions. The evidence indicates that UNICEF contracts with other organizations, such as loveLife, under its goal of AIDS prevention. UNICEF makes no effort to prevent these organizations from promoting unrestricted sexual activity, "safe sex" and abortion with funds they receive from UNICEF.
In the name of AIDS prevention, a UNICEF-funded sex education manual describes a variety of ways to obtain sexual pleasure, and specifies that reproductive health includes counseling on sexuality, pregnancy, methods of contraception, abortion, infertility, infections and disease. The manual makes no reference to abstinence because UNICEF simply does not believe in it. UNICEF funds the distribution of this manual in Mexico, El Salvador, and other Latin American nations. Through distribution of this UNICEF-funded manual, contracted organizations and governments are directly promoting unrestricted sexual activity, "safe sex" and abortion.
How do these facts align with UNICEF's rebuttal that it "does not spend a penny on abortion or abortion-related activities"? No, UNICEF does not spend a penny; rather, they spend millions of dollars, and keep trying to cover it up. Some people might call that lying through your teeth.
Bill Beckman
Executive Director
Illinois Right to Life Committee

GUEST OPINION: UNICEF responds: Our name matters
(this is the response from UNICEF to the article shown below)

The New UNICEF - What's in a Name
As Halloween approaches, children will be bringing home their bright orange boxes to collect money to help poor children as they go "trick or treating. They will be told that it only takes pennies to change kids' lives. Many schools have been deceived by the propaganda from UNICEF to publicize this project and honestly believe they are encouraging children to help other children. In truth, I believe parents would be scandalized to know that UNICEF actively promotes abortion and sexual rights for children and these programs are fueled by donations from children on Halloween.
UNICEF was founded in 1946 to help starving children after World War II. Over the past couple of decades, UNICEF has changed direction promoting population control and children's sexual and reproductive rights (read that abortion and contraception), including promotion of so-called emergency contraception (early abortion) for adolescents and children as young as 10 years of age. According to their controversial manual issued in conjunction with the World Health Organization (WHO), Reproductive Health in Refugee Stations: . . . "patients access to services should not be contingent on social or cultural backgrounds nor on age, sexual orientation or parental consent."
In 1996, the Vatican withdrew it symbolic contribution to UNICEF, stating as the reason its promotion of abortion and contraception. It has not been reinstated. Unfortunately, with its new direction, UNICEF has abandoned its original mandate to provide basic health care and education services to the poorest children of the world. UNICEF has moved far beyond its original purpose of protecting and defending children to actively assisting in the destruction of millions of tiny lives. It is a cynical program, indeed, that uses children to prevent the birth of other children.
Mary Anne Hackett, President
Illinois Right to Life Committee

reply from: BossMomma

Have you tried Gieco?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.fightpp.org/

reply from: nancyu

http://www.fightpp.org/downloads/pubs/SUMMER%20-%20Rotary%27s%20Dance%20With%20Death.pdf

reply from: nancyu

Just in case Mr. Supple checks in...
http://www.lifeissues.org/AbortionBreastcancer/komen/fact_sheet.pdf

reply from: scopia1982

I believe they started selling it. I worked for walmart in high school for 2 years and the way it treats its emplyees, especially female employess is abominable. There customer service is crappy... need I say more.

reply from: nancyu

Grrrrr. I just came from my bank and saw a fundraising display in their lobby for the March of Dimes. I wrote them an email with some informative links, and I'm hoping for a reply that will allow me to keep doing business there. It's downright inconvenient to be anti choice in a pro abort world.
An alternative to MOD:
Please support http://www.michaelfund.org/

reply from: nancyu

P.S.
I just got a call from my bank telling me that they were removing their March of Dimes Beanie Baby display and will no longer be selling them. They thanked me for writing them, they were unaware of March of Dimes support and advocacy of abortion.
It never hurts to write a letter, and once in a while it helps.
Thank you, Franklin Savings Bank.

reply from: nancyu

Wow, I can't believe I'm bumping a faramir post, but this is a good one.

reply from: nancyu

Anyone on a shoestring budget should look more through this topic. Galen posted many great recipes. Many are vegan and vegetarian, too.

reply from: scopia19822

"Anyone on a shoestring budget should look more through this topic. Galen posted many great recipes. Many are vegan and vegetarian, too."
I usually buy tofu at 2.00 a pound. I like the Nasoya cubed extra firm tofu. I will buy frozen stirfry vegatables and put the tofu into that. Sadly when I look for other vegeterian/vegan oriented food products I cannot afford them , they are too expensive. My husband years ago said it used to be cheap to be a vegeterian, but once the "yuppies" caught on too it the prices skyrocketed through the roof.

reply from: nancyu

I bought some Fleishman's yeast and when I arrived home realized they are raising money for Susan G Komen foundation
Anyone up for writing letters with me?
http://breadworld.com/Contact.aspx

reply from: ProInformed

http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/news/090107/index.htm

reply from: nancyu

I bought some Fleishman's yeast and when I arrived home realized they are raising money for Susan G Komen foundation
Anyone up for writing letters with me?
http://breadworld.com/Contact.aspx
Funny story. After receiving my letter the company sent me a coupon for a free sample of Karo Syrup. Not exactly what I was hoping for...

reply from: faithman

When's this order gonna be up faithman?
[you could help take up the slack you know, Spama bama]What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10161#35

reply from: nancyu

http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10161#35
Avon Empowerment Fund
1345 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10105-0196
866-505-AVON
info@avonfoundation.org
In early 2008, Avon established the Empowerment Fund, a campaign to end violence against women and began marketing a bracelet that "could change the world." Proceeds from sales of the bracelet are deposited into the Empowerment Fund and the first $500,000 is matched by the Avon Foundation for a total donation of $1 million to UNIFEM.

UNIFEM is the United Nations Development Fund for Women. Established in 1976, it is self-described as "fostering women's empowerment and gender equality" and helping to make the "voices of women heard at the United Nations."

Two international agreements form the framework for UNIFEM's mission and goals: the Beijing Platform for Action and the Convention on the Elimination for All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

The Beijing Platform for Action was the result of the Fourth World Conference on Women held in September of 1995 in Beijing, China. It is a wide-ranging plan for promoting and protecting women's human rights worldwide. Adopted by 197 governments, it addresses twelve "critical" areas of concern, not the least of which is "Women and Health".

CEDAW, created in 1979, is actually a global Equal Rights Amendment. The preamble of this treaty states, "A change in the traditional role of men as well as the role of women in society and in the family is needed to achieve full equality between men and women."

CEDAW mandates gender re-education, access to abortion services, homosexual and lesbian rights and the legalization of "voluntary" prostitution as a valid form of professional employment.

See: http://www.all.org/newsroom_judieblog.php?id=2043

reply from: micah

You must really hate paying taxes then, as Planned Parenthood has far more ties to the government.

reply from: nancyu

Susan G. Komen for the Cure
(formerly known as the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation)
5005 LBJ Freeway, Suite 250
Dallas, TX 75244
972-855-1600
Susan G. Komen for the Cure maintains a policy allowing affiliates to offer financial support to abortion-providing facilities and endorses human embryonic stem cell research.
Public records indicate that Komen affiliates in at least 22 states have provided sizable grants to local Planned Parenthood chapters for breast health care services. Despite Komen donations for breast health care services, Planned Parenthood stated in its 2004-2005 annual report that 9,900 more abortions were performed and 26,000 fewer breast exams were provided in 2004 than in 2003.
Donors cannot control how an organization designates its funds; therefore, money donated for a specific service like breast health care directly frees up funds to support other areas of that organization's agenda - such as contraception services, "safe sex" education and abortion services. Furthermore, Komen dismisses the link between procured abortion and the increased risk of breast cancer.
Komen endorses human embryonic stem cell research stating that "embryonic stem cells have the most potential for cancer stem cell research." See: "Cancer Stem Cell Research Shows Promise," Frontline: The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation's newsletter. Fall 2006.
April 9, 2008 Update: See http://]http://www.all.org/stopp/wsr080409.htm">http://www.all.org/stopp/wsr080409.htm[/I

reply from: nancyu

John Paul II Stem Cell Research Institute
540 E. Jefferson Street, Suite 305
Iowa City, IA 52245
319-688-7367
www.jp2sri.org

The John Paul II Stem Cell Research Institute (JP2SRI) is a non-profit research institute whose mission is to advance research and education on stem cell research in a manner consistent with a pro-life bioethics. JP2SRI is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service. The Institute strictly focuses on adult and cord blood stem cell research and education. The Institute's goal is to focus on reducing the barriers of translating basic research into clinical research. JP2SRI mission is to coordinate research activities between the Institute, academia and industry and to find treatment solutions for patients with disorders that could potentially benefit from adult and umbilical cord stem cells.
JP2SRI was founded by Dr. Alan Moy. Dr. Moy is a physician-scientist whose previous academic appointment was at the University of Iowa College of Medicine and College of Engineering. He is also the Founder and President of Cellular Engineering Technologies Inc., a biotechnology company located in Iowa, which focuses on pre-clinical industrial applications in adult and umbilical cord stem cell research. Dr. Moy is currently a practicing physician in private practice and holds an Adjunct Associate Professor position in the College of Engineering at the University of Iowa.
The Institute represents an opportunity for pro-life individuals to support ethical-derived stem cell research consistent with pro-life values. JP2SRI DOES NOT conduct human embryonic stem cell research and does not perform therapeutic cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer.

reply from: micah

haha. Don't worry. I hate taxes a lot too.
How did you guess?

reply from: Skippy

Just a little FYI: The current Board of Directors of Domino's Pizza don't appear to care about abortion one way or the other. That was founder Tom Monaghan's thing, and he sold his interest in Domino's in 1998.
If your heartburn is with the Susan G. Komen Foundation, you need to check with the individual franchise owners, because some of them donate pizza and beverages to "pink ribbon" events.

reply from: scopia19822

"If your heartburn is with the Susan G. Komen Foundation, you need to check with the individual franchise owners, because some of them donate pizza and beverages to "pink ribbon" events."
Why is that I get so sick of hearing about breast cancer on TV all of the time or that stupid vaccine to prevent cervial cancer. It seems to me the media is too occupied with focusing on exclusily womens anatomy even it comes to talking about cancer, we occassionally will hear the importance of men checking themselves for testicular and prostate cancers , but not nearly as much as breast or cervical etc. Why dont we hear more about brain cancer, leukemia, pancreatic cancers, skin cancers as much/

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Because currently the most effort is going into promoting the search for a cure to breast cancer and cervical cancer. Are you saying you don't care about breast cancer and cervical cancer?
(I know that's not what you're saying )
The advertising honestly doesn't bother me at all.

reply from: scopia19822

"Because currently the most effort is going into promoting the search for a cure to breast cancer and cervical cancer. Are you saying you don't care about breast cancer and cervical cancer?
Of course I care I just get so sick of the media focusing on boobs, butts and cats. Even with cancer they are more concearned about that part of the womens anatomy. I am more inclined to want to give money to fight leukemia as that is what killed my aunt and urging more people to become bone marrow donors and colon cancer is what killed my maternal grandmother. I know colon cancer can be associated with butts, but it affects both men and women and when caught early enough it is one of the most curable cancers there is. My grandmother started having the early warning signs of colon cancer and maybe had it been covered on the media she would have gotten to the doctor sooner....

reply from: Rosalie

Are you serious? STUPID VACCINE? Stupid vaccine that saves lives? Oh yeah, that'ss very stupid to significantly decrease the chance that you will ever die of cervical cancer! How utterly dumb of someone to promote that and to raise awareness.
They concentrate on this because these are the most frequent types of cancer.
The most frequent types of cancer in women: breast, lung, colon, uterus, ovary. (http://www.bccancer.bc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/2FB52EE7-FDAD-4684-A141-47194C1C6B7A/24858/TenMostFrequentCancerTypesinBC.pdf).
I don't know what the ***** you have been thinking while typing these two comments but you have seriously crossed the line.
Wake up for god's sake. Not everything is a conspiracy so someone could look at or talk about your boobs.
I rarely get worked up about things on the internet but you did it, with all this attitude and dismissal of breast and cervical cancer. Good job.

reply from: scopia19822

"Are you serious? STUPID VACCINE? Stupid vaccine that saves lives? Oh yeah, that'ss very stupid to significantly decrease the chance that you will ever die of cervical cancer! How utterly dumb of someone to promote that and to raise awareness. "
There have not been enough studies to convince me that this vaccine is safe. It was rushed to the market rather quickly.. and I dont like the idea that some states including my own are trying to make it mandatory for girls in order for them to stay in public schools. I have no problem with the other vaccines as they are given to both boys and girls and the diseases they prevent can be spread through casual contact. I consider mandating this shot as a form of sex discrimination. If a mother thinks it would be best for her daughter to get it, fine, but unless kids are actually having sex in school why is there a need for it to be mandatory?If my state is going to mandate that girls have to get this shot or be denied an education than they ought to mandate that boys be circumcised as uncircumcised men/boys can be carriers for HPV as well.
"I rarely get worked up about things on the internet but you did it, with all this attitude and dismissal of breast and cervical cancer"
I was not trying to dismiss anything in regards to breast/cervical cancer. However with all the media hype one would think that these are the only types of cancers for women. I would love to see more awareness made about colon cancer and emphasizing the importance of colonosphcys(sp) . You will see it covered from time to time, but not much. My late grandmother was a avid watcher of the Today show and when they talk about cancer its usually breast cancer. I just think maybe if colon cancer got the same attention as breast cancer she would have went to the doctor sooner and would still be alive today. When she was diagnosed it has spread to her liver, the doctor said if she had come 2 months earlier they could have performed surgery and most likely cured her. I would also like to see more pieces ran about leukemia and emphasizing the importance of bone marrow donations. There are so many other cancers we dont hear about, sadly they are often the most deadly.

reply from: Rosalie

Well that's YOUR opinion. The thing is that you spoke of something that saves lives with such dismissal and anger, you'd thought it was a poision from how you have been speaking about it.
I'm not sold on it being mandatory, either, because unfortunately, if some parents want to be the world's biggest douches and would rather risk their daughters getting cancer than paying for a shot, it's still their prerogative.
That's really stupid. Sorry but it is. There's nothing sexist about a vaccine for women.
Do you think you will actually have information about every single moment of your kid's live until he/she is 18? REALLY? Do you think you will be able to control them ALL THE TIME? Do you think kids do not have any free will and that kids do not have sex? Or do you just think YOUR kids won't?
Why WOULDN'T a mom give her daughter the vaccine? No one has or should have their kid on leash, you never know. Better safe than sorry. Always.
This reminds me strongly of the most idiotic argument ever, it came from your part of the country - "If we give them the vaccine, they will start sleeping around!"
To the people who are obviously retarded enough to think that, I have really nothing to say because they are beyond any logical reasoning.
Bull*****. Getting a shot and getting circumsized is UNCOMPARABLE.
THEY ARE THE MOST FREQUENT TYPES AND THERE IS OBVIOUSLY NOT ENOUGH AWARENESS, AS THERE ARE STILL WAY TOO MANY NEEDLESS DEATHS.
Then do something about it.

reply from: scopia19822

"That's really stupid. Sorry but it is. There's nothing sexist about a vaccine for women. "
I am not saying that a vaccine for women is sex discrimination. Im saying that mandating it for girls in order for them to go to school is sex discrimination.

reply from: Rosalie

No, it's not. Unless you prove that if the same vaccine was available for men as well and it WOULDN'T be mandatory for them to get the shots, you have no ground for a statement like this.

reply from: scopia19822

"Bull*****. Getting a shot and getting circumsized is UNCOMPARABLE. "
Of course it is, I had my son done at birth. However I am saying that if they are so concerned about HPV being spread among teens and want to take precautions and require that girls be made to take this painful, expensive vaccine than boys ought to be required to be circed in order for them to continue school. I dont think either should be mandated. I think if a state did make it mandatory alot of parents would raise objections as it being a form of sex discrimination, as the message the girls would be clear , no vaccine, no education.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Why can't we just require the boys to get the shot too? No, it's not going to prevent them from getting cervical cancer (lol) but it WILL stop them from catching/passing on HPV.

reply from: micah

This is great. All of a sudden the anti-choicers are all feminists.

reply from: AshMarie88

Speaking of circ, it's a baby boy's right to choose whether or not he wants part of his body chopped off or not...
Right to choose to live? Right to keep on or cut off what he wants from his body, too.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

That's what I believe too. I'm against mandatory circumcision.

reply from: scopia19822

"Why can't we just require the boys to get the shot too? No, it's not going to prevent them from getting cervical cancer (lol) but it WILL stop them from catching/passing on HPV"
Im against mandating this vaccine for either gender. This isnt measles, mumps or many of the other communicable diseases that can be spread in the schools through casual contact or being in close proximty to a person who is infected. This can only be spread through sexual contact and I hope to God that kids arent being permitted to have sex in school. If that is the case than there is a bigger issue that needs to be addressed. I am not against a parent doing there own research and getting their daughter vaccinated, I just dont think it should be mandated for a girl to be allowed an education. That would be pure sex discrimination. I was just saying that if one is going to mandate it for the girls, than to be fair it should be mandated that boys be circed. Mandating either one sound ridiculous. This is something that should be left between the girl, her parents and their doctor.

reply from: scopia19822

"Speaking of circ, it's a baby boy's right to choose whether or not he wants part of his body chopped off or not...
Right to choose to live? Right to keep on or cut off what he wants from his body, too."
My husband and I choose to have our son done for various reasons mainly for health concearns such as being a carrier of HPV. Many parents such as Jews and Muslims have their boys circed for religious reasons.

reply from: Rosalie

But WHY? It's not making any sense. Circumcision will not prevent anyone from anything. Circumcision will NOT prevent any diseases on its own. It may LOWER the chance that the boy will become the carrier but not that significantly.
And just so you know, the vaccine is not all THAT painful. It's just like any other vaccine.
Circumcision LOWERS the chance to be a carrier but it does not PREVENT or CURES anything.
I really disagree with circumcision. If the guy wants it done, he can have it done once he's an adult and capable of making his own decision about his own body.

reply from: scopia19822

"And just so you know, the vaccine is not all THAT painful. It's just like any other vaccine. "
Not according the report I heard on the NBC nightly news a few months ago. For some reason this vaccine is more painful than most. My point is this isnt a vaccine that should be mandated by the government. The others I can understand, but this should be purely left to a girl and her parents if she is a minor.
"Circumcision LOWERS the chance to be a carrier but it does not PREVENT or CURES anything. "
Women with circumcised partners are less likely to get HPV than those with intact partners. They have also done studies in Africa where it shows that circed men are less likely to transmit Hiv as well. That of course doesnt mean that one should not take precautions to keep the disease from spreading.
"I really disagree with circumcision. If the guy wants it done, he can have it done once he's an adult and capable of making his own decision about his own body."
It is easier to do it on a baby than an adult man. The healing time is quicker and doesnt require stitches. My husband did not get done until he was 21 when he married his 1st wife was an Orthodox Jew and it required that he be put under a general and he was pulling stitches out months later. Of course this was back in the late 1970s.Our son was done when he was 2 days old and his pediatrician used a local anesthetic. She used a technique that left some of the foreskin intact and as he grows it will retract back. Some have compared this with female genital mutilation and it is hardly the same thing. Removing the clitoris is the same as removing the entire penis. Big difference between removing a piece of skin verses the removal of the clitoris and sewing a girl women up which makes urination, menstration, sex and child birth painful and often can make child birth fatal. I think the decision on whether or not to circumscise ones son at birth should be left up to the parents.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I do understand; I was simply postulating a situation in which the vaccine wouldn't be sexist. It is NOT a fair comparison between a vaccination and circumcision; that is why I offered MY situation, in which BOTH genders get the shot. Don't you agree that makes a little bit more sense?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

So you're also okay with female circumcision for religious and "health" reasons too, I assume?
Look it up if you're not exactly sure what it is. [edit] I see that you (sort of) do.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Please. They'll say that about any new vaccine they have a problem with.
That's EXACTLY what she said above. It LOWERS your chances. A vaccine outright PREVENTS the disease. The two situations are quite different. Would you prefer to take a medicine that only LOWERED your chances of catching a new hypothetical deadly disease, or would you prefer the vaccine that PREVENTS you from getting it entirely?
It's also easier to kill a baby than a man. Doesn't make it right.
It actually depends; plus, you haven't learned that male circumcision removes more than 50% of the man's ability to feel during sex. It also makes sex more painful for the woman. That's a bit more than just the removal of "some skin".
Not all forms of female genital mutilation involve the complete removal of the clitoris, clitoral hood, labia, and the sewing shut of the vaginal entrance. Some kinds of FGM only involve the removal of the labia, clitoral hood, stitching, or any combination of the three. The same exact religious and "sanitary" reasons are used to justify it. The most extreme kinds involve complete removal, but this does not make the "lesser" types any less horrific. It should not be done, to little girls or little boys.

reply from: scopia19822

"So you're also okay with female circumcision for religious and "health" reasons too, I assume?"
No I am not ok with Female circumcision at all. It involves often removing the entire clitoris, in some cases even all of the external gentialia. Often the girl is sewn up and has to be "ripped"open for sex and childbirth and then resewn up again. Removing the clitoris would be the equvilant to removing the entire penis, where in males is simply removal of the foreskin. I can understand why some people are opposed to male circumcision as well, however it doesnt involve pure mutilation like FGM. FGM is a tribal custom done mostly in African and other Mideastern countries to "cool" a womans sexual passion so that she will not be unfaithful to her husband. While a male being circed is usually done as welcoming into the faith such as in Judiasm. Moyles who peform the bris in the Jewish faith apprentice with a urologist to gain surgical skills to be able to do the circumcision when the baby is 8 days old. I am not sure about Islamic tradition, but I am sure they require who does the circ to have surgical training as well. Whereas in the case of FMG it is done by a village wise woman or midwife often with broken bottle, razor blades you name it.

reply from: scopia19822

"It actually depends; plus, you haven't learned that male circumcision removes more than 50% of the man's ability to feel during sex. It also makes sex more painful for the woman. That's a bit more than just the removal of "some skin"."
My husband said IHE that it actually increased his sexual pleasure. Phimosis where the foreskin is fused to the head has occured with a few males in both sides of our family, that was another reason we decided to do it. My stepson had to be circed when he was 3 because the skin would not retract and he developed frequent UTIs. I know that to some mothers Im a monster for having my son circed, not breastfeeding and God forbid had pain meds during delivery. I also would let me son cry it out if he wasnt hungary and didnt need a diaper change often he was just tired.I didnt wear the baby sling and I didnt let him sleep in the bed with us. I went through all of that judgment and scrutinty in my early years as a new mom. We made the best decision with what information we had at the time.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

IHE? For him, as an adult, it may have increased his sexual pleasure because the super-sensitive head of his penis had never been exposed to that much stimulation before. But truth be told, circumcision is provided to adult men as a CURE for premature ejaculation, which is caused by too MUCH stimulation: aka, circumcision reduces sensitivity, allowing these men to last longer.
If there is a medical reason, that's completely different. Phimosis is an example. You should know that; medical exceptions are brought up all the time in the abortion debate. We're not talking about the exceptions.

reply from: scopia19822

"IHE?"
In His experience. His was done for religious reason as he was marrying into the Jewish faith. Circumcisions were routine during the time my husband was born. He obviously wasnt done, but his brother who was born a year later was. Strange. I dont think Im a bad mom for choosing it for my son given that his half brother had developed phimosis and we were concearned it could happen to our son as well. I could sit here all night justifying and rationalizing my choice, however the reason I brought it up is that the Gardasil Vaccine being mandated for girls is just as ridiculous sounding as mandating that boys be circed for the same reason. To lower the chance of getting HPV. The HPV vaccine does not protect against all types of HPV that cause cervical cancer, so one can contract one of the forms of HPV that it doesnt protect against and get cervical cancer. Its a crap shot, much like getting the flu shot every year. The flu shot doesnt protect against every strain of the flu.

reply from: AshMarie88

I thank God my boyfriend isn't circed... We both feel he's safer with foreskin and our future sons will not be circed. If it's attached to the rest of his skin, and it's not harming anything... don't remove it. I honestly don't understand pro-lifers that are for circumcision... Maybe it's just me but to me it's just so 360ish.
Scopia, just because one boy developed something, doesn't mean your son would have. The majority of uncirced boys are healthy. Are you for female circumcision? Females have the same kind of foreskin as males, but it's their own foreskin on their genitals.
I don't think choosing to cut off a piece of your CHILD's own body (HIS body, his choice?) is rational in my opinion.
Blah.

reply from: AshMarie88

I really disagree with circumcision. If the guy wants it done, he can have it done once he's an adult and capable of making his own decision about his own body.
Yay, we agree on something.

reply from: AshMarie88

Funny... in Africa, they have the highest ratings of HIV/AIDS and babies dying from catching it from their mothers. African men are circumcised. I don't see the connection of Africans being circumcised and NOT catching HIV/AIDS...

reply from: AshMarie88

Cause the baby can't defend itself while a part of him is being forcefully chopped off?
Were you in the room with your son when he was being circumcised? I've seen videos of babies being circumcised, screaming their lungs out, passing out, etc. etc. and that's enough for me to be against it. If a child is screaming like that in intense, horrible pain because of a procedure that is NOT necessary unless there's something wrong with him... Why do it? I feel so bad for those babies.
Save the babies but then circumcise the boys? Sorry... I just don't get it. And I'm arguing because I'm hormonal. And I just hate circumcision. It's sick.

reply from: AshMarie88

Actually, there are three different types of female circumcision. One is removing the clit. The second is removing the skin around it. Three is removing the labia (the skin around the vagigi).
Women aren't so special they are an exception to the rule... If we can cut parts off of boys, why not girls? Genital integrity!!

reply from: Rosalie

Maybe the ones reporting that had a very low pain threshold. My younger friends compared it to a flu shot.
And it of course depends on the skills of the doctor, too.
Less likely, yes. But that's not reason good enough to circumcise.
I don' care that it is easier. It's a part of their body, an important one at that, and they should have the right to decide about it. I just don't agree with anyone infringing upon somebody else's bodily autonomy, be it a man or a woman.

reply from: scopia19822

"Cause the baby can't defend itself while a part of him is being forcefully chopped off?"
No because the nerves and blood vessels are not developed in a baby like on a adult male. My son was healed within a week. It was just a matter of keeping the area clean while it was healing.
"Were you in the room with your son when he was being circumcised? I've seen videos of babies being circumcised, screaming their lungs out, passing out, etc. etc. and that's enough for me to be against it. If a child is screaming like that in intense, horrible pain because of a procedure that is NOT necessary unless there's something wrong with him... Why do it? I feel so bad for those babies."
I have seen some of those videos and often that will happen if no anesthetic is given. Sadly that used to be the case. My son had a local block as I would not have permitted any surgical procedure without pain meds. What about Jewish parents who have a baby boy and circumscion is part of their religious belief. It is commanded in Genesis for Jewish boys to be circumscised on the 8th day of life. My husband attended a bris of his wifes nephew and the moyle gave the child a local block and didnt let out those screams you often hear on those videos where no pain meds given.
"Save the babies but then circumcise the boys? Sorry... I just don't get it. And I'm arguing because I'm hormonal. And I just hate circumcision. It's sick."
Circumcising the boys isnt something that should be mandated, however its a decision that a parent has to carefully consider. We had our son done, because we thought it would be the best for our son. I know it may be hard for you to see that. I have been judged in my early years as a new mom by other moms because I had my son circed and also because I didnt breastfeed, cosleep and God forbid I let the baby cry it out when he wasnt hungary, need a clean diaper and wasnt running a fever. It is amazing how judgemental women, especially moms can be of one another. Ok Im a bad mom, I had my son circumcised. I bet I am not the only mom on this forum whos prolife and has a circed son.

reply from: scopia19822

" I don' care that it is easier. It's a part of their body, an important one at that, and they should have the right to decide about it. I just don't agree with anyone infringing upon somebody else's bodily autonomy, be it a man or a woman."
Yet the child is only a few days of being in the class of being allowed that bodily autonomy. What about the preborns right not be dismembered and killed in the womb? Where is their right to body autonomy?A baby can legally be aborted up until the due date, unless of course you support restrictions on late term abortions. To get back on the topic of abortion, do you support any restrictions on 1st and 2nd trimester abortions? Or do you support abortion at anytime for any reason? It just does not make any sense to me that one day a child can be legally killed and the next bestowed the full rights to personhood and bodily autonomy.

reply from: Teresa18

Gardasil contains too many risks to be made mandatory:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2008/jun/judicial-watch-uncovers-new-fda-records-detailing-ten-new-deaths-140-serious-adverse-e

reply from: scopia19822

Thanks Teresa for the link. I can understand the reasoning behind mandating the other shots, but I dont think people understand that some of the preservatives in these childhood vaccines are poison. Themarasol is still present in the flu shots kids are given, not to mention ethylin glycol which is the main ingrediant in antifreeze, not to mention a string of others. I dont think the government should mandate that we should have to inject anything into our children. My son is completly in compliance with his shots, but I just dont think the American public is aware of what is in these vaccines and the side effects. I have a cousin whos 2 yrs younger than me who was born completly normal but when he was 18 months old my aunt dutifully took him in for his DPT shot. That night he had a fever of 105 and was having violent convulsions. Now is he 24 with the mentality of a 3 yr old and he still has violent seizures. So maybe that is why Im very leery of mandatory vaccines of anykind, but I can understand the reasoning behind the others.

reply from: Teresa18

I support vaccines that prevent serious, easily spread illnesses like chicken pox, mumps, measles, etc. I don't support vaccines like Gardasil because the only way this virus is spread is through sexual activity, and I feel the potential side affects outweigh benefits. If HPV was spread by general body contact like a hand shake, then I could see the need, but not in this instance. I'm not saying parents and young ladies can't get the vaccine if they so choose. I'm just saying that at this point I or any children I have won't get it.

reply from: Rosalie

A baby can legally be aborted up until the due date --- where? Where can you have an elective abortion a couple days before your due date?
And where are the crowds of women changing their minds three days before their due date?
Don't be ridiculous.
The thing about "fetal bodily autonomy" is that they have none because you have no bodily autonomy while you are depending on another person for survival. The "hosting" organism - aka the woman - has all the rights because it has always been, still is and always will be her body, no matter if she's pregnant or not, and because her body is the one that's providing everything.

reply from: Rosalie

You make no sense. This sentence of your makes absolutely no sense.
Or are you in denial that your kids will eventually be sexually active and that they may choose a path different from yours and will be sexually active - gasp! - before marriage? And how can you be sure that their husband will not have HPV?
You'd rather risk all this than make an attempt to save them from cervical cancer. Well, that speaks volumes.

reply from: faithman

You make no sense. This sentence of your makes absolutely no sense.
Or are you in denial that your kids will eventually be sexually active and that they may choose a path different from yours and will be sexually active - gasp! - before marriage? And how can you be sure that their husband will not have HPV?
You'd rather risk all this than make an attempt to save them from cervical cancer. Well, that speaks volumes.
Killers have to blur that line to justify their evil deeds. Darkness avoids light, because it is exposed for what it is in light. The borties want to cover their issue, and as the profetii killer has said herself," fight tooth and toenail" against the light of personhood for the womb child. Personhood is the light. The line drawn in the sand. The distinction between false and true. If things seem shadowy, it is no time to compromise. It is time to turn up the light of personhood until there is no more "what if" shadows. Just the simple fact of womb child personhood, and the final judgment of citizen jurist as to what punishment for those who destroy the preborn. That is the way it is for the born person, that is the way it should be with the womb child person.

reply from: scopia19822

"A baby can legally be aborted up until the due date --- where? Where can you have an elective abortion a couple days before your due date? "
Witchita Kansas as George the Killer Tillers Womens Clinic. His specialty is 2nd and 3rd trimester abortions. As long as you have the cash he will do it, no questions asked. Under the ruling of DoeVBolton a woman can have an abortion anytime throughout the pregnancy.

reply from: scopia19822

"You'd rather risk all this than make an attempt to save them from cervical cancer. Well, that speaks volumes."
Gardasil doenst protect from ALL forms of HPV that cause cervical cancer. So one can get the vaccine and still get a strain of HPV and develope cervical cancer. The best way to prevent cervical cancer is to get routine screenings and if caught early it is one of the most easily cured forms of cancer. I think what Teresa is trying to say like myself is that this vaccine should not be madanted. If a parent chooses to get it for their minor daughter there is nothing wrong with it, its just not the governments business.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

UTERINE CANCER ISN'T SERIOUS!? HPV IS easily communicable! That's why over half the US population has it!
REALLY. Uterine cancer ISN'T SERIOUS to you?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Actually, there are three different types of female circumcision. One is removing the clit. The second is removing the skin around it. Three is removing the labia (the skin around the vagigi).
Women aren't so special they are an exception to the rule... If we can cut parts off of boys, why not girls? Genital integrity!!
Actually there are more than just three, and any of them can be used in combination with any of the others. Let's set this record straight right here and now.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/
Female genital mutilation
key facts
* Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or injure female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
* An estimated 100 to 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM.
* In Africa, about three million girls are at risk for FGM annually.
* The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women.
* Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later, potential childbirth complications and newborn deaths.
* It is mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15 years.
* FGM is internationally recognized as a violation of the human rights of girls and women.
Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
The practice is mostly carried out by traditional circumcisers, who often play other central roles in communities, such as attending childbirths. Increasingly, however, FGM is being performed by medically trained personnel.
:: Female genital mutilation: a topical overview
FGM is recognized internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women. It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes, and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. It is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children. The practice also violates a person's rights to health, security and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure results in death.
Procedures
Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types:
* Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, rarely, the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris) as well.
* Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are "the lips" that surround the vagina).
* Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, and sometimes outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.
* Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.
Health consequences
FGM has no health benefits, and it harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing and damaging healthy and normal female genital tissue, and interferes with the natural functions of girls' and women's bodies.
Immediate complications can include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage (bleeding), tetanus or sepsis (bacterial infection), urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue.
Long-term consequences can include:
* recurrent bladder and urinary tract infections;
* cysts;
* infertility;
* the need for later surgeries. For example, the FGM procedure that seals or narrows a vaginal opening (type 3 above) is surgically changed to allow for sexual intercourse and childbirth, and sometimes stitched close again afterwards;
* an increased risk of childbirth complications and newborn deaths.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I already said that medical situations are exceptions and we are NOT DISCUSSING THAT.
We are discussing completely useless mutilation of babies' genitals for "religious" reasons or sometimes just "because that way he'll look like daddy".

reply from: scopia19822

UTERINE CANCER ISN'T SERIOUS!? HPV IS easily communicable! That's why over half the US population has it!
REALLY. Uterine cancer ISN'T SERIOUS to you?
The point was that this isnt a vaccine that should be madated in order to attend school.

reply from: Teresa18

I don't have kids at this point, but I will teach my kids abstinence because they'll be raised Catholic. If their husband had been sexually active before them, I would think that out of respect for them he would get tested for STDs. I do not want to expose them to the side effects of the shot. Did you see the link I posted?

reply from: Teresa18

It's not casually communicable. Over half the US population has it due to the rampant promiscuity in our culture. It's communicable via sex. I will not risk my kids being expose to the side effects of the shot when there is a safer way to prevent getting HPV.

reply from: scopia19822

"I don't have kids at this point, but I will teach my kids abstinence because they'll be raised Catholic."
Are you a cradle catholic or a convert? I grew up in a very strict Irish Catholic home. My aunt/uncle taught us abstinence and that sex was only for marriage. They also taught us about BC and STDS because they wanted us to have a comrehensive sex education. They taught that BC was a sin, however they educated us on how the various methods worked, especially the hormonal forms abortificent effects so that we would understand why they were not permitted by the Church. Of the 4 of us only I and my oldest cousin Antoine had sex outside of marriage. He now has chosen the life of a celibate layman and could not be happier with his vocation. My cousin Amanda is now married and living in Ireland near my uncle and his new wife. My cousin Jessica whos only 3 years older than me is now a member of the Sisters of the Holy Family in New Orleans that was founded by Henriette Delille as the 1st black order in America. They of course accept people of all races now and she is a teacher. She took her final vows last year . I guess 2 out of 4 isnt bad and those of us that did stray didnt turn out too bad.

reply from: Rosalie

Teach your kids whatever you want but you will have kids, not little robots who will always do everything mommy taught them. If you don't get this then it's a good thing you don't have them yet as you are clearly nowhere near ready for them.
I did see that link, I have been researching the vaccine for a long time and actually communicating with doctors in real life because I want to make an informed choice when my daughter is older.

reply from: faithman

Take a glass of milk, and add a few drops of arsnic. Now how much of the glass is milk, and how much is poison? Just a few drops of pro-death poison makes one pro-death, no matter how much good pro-life milk is in your glass. To vow to fight personhood for the womb child, for what ever reason, is deadly borthead poison. It is no act of "compassion" to ignore that fact.
Teach your kids whatever you want but you will have kids, not little robots who will always do everything mommy taught them. If you don't get this then it's a good thing you don't have them yet as you are clearly nowhere near ready for them.
I did see that link, I have been researching the vaccine for a long time and actually communicating with doctors in real life because I want to make an informed choice when my daughter is older.
Take a glass of milk, and add a few drops of arsnic. Now how much of the glass is milk, and how much is poison? Just a few drops of pro-death poison makes one pro-death, no matter how much good pro-life milk is in your glass. To vow to fight personhood for the womb child, for what ever reason, is deadly borthead poison. It is no act of "compassion" to ignore that fact.

reply from: Rosalie

Ah yeah, Tiller. Well, mentioning Tiller in an abortion debate would be like me saying that all pro-lifers are like ChristianLott who seeks to abuse women and would not hesitate for a moment to abuse them if they wanted to have an abortion.
Yes, I know it doesn't. That doesn't change anything, though. It's still extremely effective with the forms it DOES prevent. So why not lower the chance as much as possible? It's like refusing to get the flu shot because there's always a chance that the type you get vaccinated against will not be the one that will actually be going around that particular year.

reply from: faithman

Ah yeah, Tiller. Well, mentioning Tiller in an abortion debate would be like me saying that all pro-lifers are like ChristianLott who seeks to abuse women and would not hesitate for a moment to abuse them if they wanted to have an abortion.
Yes, I know it doesn't. That doesn't change anything, though. It's still extremely effective with the forms it DOES prevent. So why not lower the chance as much as possible? It's like refusing to get the flu shot because there's always a chance that the type you get vaccinated against will not be the one that will actually be going around that particular year.
Take a glass of milk, and add a few drops of arsnic. Now how much of the glass is milk, and how much is poison? Just a few drops of pro-death poison makes one pro-death, no matter how much good pro-life milk is in your glass. To vow to fight personhood for the womb child, for what ever reason, is deadly borthead poison. It is no act of "compassion" to ignore that fact.

reply from: scopia19822

"Yes, I know it doesn't. That doesn't change anything, though. It's still extremely effective with the forms it DOES prevent. So why not lower the chance as much as possible? It's like refusing to get the flu shot because there's always a chance that the type you get vaccinated against will not be the one that will actually be going around that particular year."
Actually I dont do flu shots either, Im not in a high risk category. I got the flu shot once in college when they were given them for free on campus , 2 days later I got the flu. I just was my hands, cover my mouth, and stay out of peoples faces. It seems to work most of the time.

reply from: BossMomma

they are trying to save women's lives, that is hardly stupid. I was given the vaccine to prevent cervical cancer and I will encourage my daughter's to do the same.

reply from: Rosalie

Yes, because you got it too late. Two days are not long enough for the vaccine to become effective, it needs 10 to 14 days to become effective. That's why people need to get vaccinated in advance.

reply from: faithman

What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

It's not casually communicable. Over half the US population has it due to the rampant promiscuity in our culture. It's communicable via sex. I will not risk my kids being expose to the side effects of the shot when there is a safer way to prevent getting HPV.
Okay, I'll say this slowly: It is easily communicable through sex. Lots of people have more than one sex partner in their life - even two is enough to spread this disease. Every time you have sex, you have sex with every person your partner had sex with, and every person each of THOSE people had sex with, etc etc. Even with just TWO partners in your entire lifetime (which I would NOT consider "rampant promiscuity") HPV is easily spread.
HPV is also spread non sexual ways in case you didn't know. But none of those kinds cause uterine cancer.
The only safer way to prevent HPV is abstinence, and then only having ONE partner. That is NEVER going to happen for everyone. MOST people will have at least two sex partners in their lifetimes.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Of course not. But her comments were horrifying.

reply from: galen

so back to another part of the topic... here is a great dessert and it costs about 1.50 US to make.
carmelised apples...
3 macintosh apples peeled cored and sliced.
1/4 cup brown sugar
dash of salt
dab of butter
1/8 cup water.
melt butter on low heat in a non stick pan
add apples and turn heat to medium,
cook for 3 minutes turning every so often. Add sugar and salt and turn apples untill coated.. juice will mix w/ butter and sugar and start to turn brown, this is the carmelization. add water and reduce.. serve with ice cream or over pan cakes or just by themselves.
Yummy!

reply from: nancyu

I'm shopping for a new clothes dryer. I've doing searches in an attempt to find "clean" (abortion free) appliances. The results so far:
Whirlpool+Susan g Komen Positive
Maytag + Susan g Komen Positive
Home Depot + Susan g Komen Positive
Electrolux + Susan g Komen Positive
LG + Susan g Komen Positive
GE + Susan g Komen Positive
amana + Susan g Komen Positive
I guess I'll get a clothes line.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flJQlOu70ss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHZBLs17osk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxVA0AwN0mU&feature=related

reply from: micah

I can bet you're not going to like paying taxes this year.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.facinglife.tv/episode/season_3/episode_11/episode_311_video_full.htm
Facing Life Head On episode discusses Susan G Komen foundation

reply from: faithman

But then you are going to have to check out all the wire makers!!!!!

reply from: nancyu

Nothing more to say Psupple?
I look at my bottle of shampoo and see statements assuring me that no animals were harmed in testing their products. How about a statement in defense of the human person.
I'm putting forth a challenge to all companies of all kinds. If you want my business, and that of others who believe that an unborn child is a person, I dare you to place a statement such as this on your products:
"We support and promote defense and respect for life of all human beings -- from conception until natural death"
or this: (even better!)
"An unborn child is a person"

reply from: nancyu

But then you are going to have to check out all the wire makers!!!!!
Good grief!!!!!!
But good news, we had our dryer repaired.

reply from: faithman

Nothing more to say Psupple?
I look at my bottle of shampoo and see statements assuring me that no animals were harmed in testing their products. How about a statement in defense of the human person.
I'm putting forth a challenge to all companies of all kinds. If you want my business, and that of others who believe that an unborn child is a person, I dare you to place a statement such as this on your products:
"We support and promote defense and respect for life of all human beings -- from conception until natural death"
or this: (even better!)
"An unborn child is a person"
Heres the other cute little trick they will play on you. they say that the money will not go to PP. But if PP gets their cut off the top,a nd you up an organizations gross.... United Way are masters of this one. They will tell you you can "designate" what group under their umbrella the money goes to, and it won't go to PP. But PP gets their cut from a percentage of the gross. SSSSSOOOOO if your donation ups the gross? That is a question that need to be asked of komen. I bet you will find it is the same deal. They are going to take the cream off the top and make Planned parenthood butter out of it, and make you think your donation milk didn't help PP.

reply from: yoda

There is an old saying that all money is "fungible", meaning that they can send all of your money to some group other than PP, and then increase the amount of someone else's money they send to PP to make up the difference.
It's all smoke and mirrors.

reply from: nancyu

From epm.org
54 Babies
Posted in: Standing for Life
By George F. Will
CHINO HILLS, Calif.: Where Route 71 crosses over Payton Drive, at the bottom of the steeply sloping embankment, two boys, who were playing nearby, found the boxes. The boys bicycled home and said they had found boxes of "babies."
Do not be impatient with the imprecision of their language. They have not read the opposite Supreme Court opinions. So when they stumbled on the boxes stuffed with 54 fetuses, which looked a lot like babies, they jumped to conclusions. Besides, young boys are apt to believe their eyes rather than the Supreme Court.
The first count came to a lot less than 54. Forgive the counters' imprecision. Many fetuses had been dismembered-hands, arms, legs, heads jumbled together-by the abortionist's vigor. An accurate count required a lot of sorting out.
The fetuses had been dumped here, about 30 miles east of Los Angeles, on March 14, 1997, by a trucker who may not have known what the Los Angeles abortion clinic had hired him to dispose of. He later served 71 days in jail for the improper disposal of medical waste. Society must be strict about its important standards.
What local authorities dealt with as a problem of solid waste disposal struck a few local residents as rather more troubling than that. They started talking to each other, and one thing led to another, and to the formation of Cradles of Love, which had the modest purpose of providing a burial for the 54 babies.
The members of Cradles of Love-just a few normal walking-around middle-class Americans-called them babies, and still do. These people are opposed to abortion, in spite of the Supreme Court's assurance in 1973 that abortions end only "potential life." (Twenty-five years later the Supreme Court has not yet explained how a life that is merely "potential" can be ended.)
Some will say the members of Cradles of Love, who are churchgoers, have been unduly influenced by theology. Or perhaps the real culprit is biology. It teaches that after the DNA of the sperm fuse with those of the ovum a new and unique DNA complex is formed that directs the growth of the organism. It soon is called a fetus, which takes in nourishment and converts it to energy through its own distinct, unique organic functioning, and very soon it looks a lot like a baby.
Anyway, theology or biology or maybe their eyes told the members of Cradles of Love that there were some babies in need of burials. So they asked the coroner to give them the fetuses. Then the American Civil Liberties Union was heard from.
It professed itself scandalized by this threat to . . . what? The ACLU frequently works itself into lathers of anxiety about threats to the separation of church and state. It is difficult, however, to identify any person whose civil liberties were going to be menaced if the fetuses were (these are the ACLU's words) "released to the church groups for the express purpose of holding religious services." The ACLU said it opposed "facilitation" of services by a public official.
The ACLU's attack on the constitutionally protected right to the free exercise of religion failed to intimidate, and in October the babies were buried in a plot provided at no charge by a cemetery in nearby Riverside.
Each baby was given a name by a participating church group. Each name was engraved on a brass plate that was affixed to each of the 54 small, white, wooden caskets made, at no charge, by a volunteer who took three days off from work to do it. Fifty clergy and four persons active in the right-to-life movement carried the caskets. Each baby's name is inscribed on a large headstone, also provided at no charge. Fifty-four doves, provided at no charge by the cemetery, were released at the services.
The ACLU trembled for the Constitution.
We hear much about the few "extremists" in the right-to-life movement. But the vast majority of the movement's members are like the kindly, peaceable people here, who were minding their own business until some of the results of the abortion culture tumbled down a roadside embankment and into their lives.
Which is not to say that this episode was untainted by ugly extremism. It would be nice if the media, which are nothing if not diligent in documenting and deploring right-to-life extremism, could bring themselves to disapprove the extremism of the ACLU, which here attempted a bullying nastiness unredeemed by any connection to a civic purpose.

Permissions: Feel free to reproduce and distribute any articles written by Randy Alcorn, in part or in whole, in any format, provided that you do not alter the wording in any way or charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. It is our desire to spread this information, not protect or restrict it. Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: by Randy Alcorn, Eternal Perspective Ministries, 39085 Pioneer Blvd., Suite 206, Sandy, OR 97055, 503-668-5200, www.epm.org, www.randyalcorn.blogspot.com
Eternal Perspective Ministries, 39085 Pioneer Blvd., Suite 206, Sandy, OR 97055
Phone: 503-668-5200 I Email: info@epm.org
©2008 Eternal Perspective Ministries. All rights reserved.

reply from: 4given

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A leading expert on breast cancer says the results of a recent study showing women who are diagnosed with cancer don't have to choose between an abortion or treatment doesn't surprise him. Dr. Joel Brind, a Baruch College professor says studies have shown that for decades. On Monday, LifeNews.com reported on a new study showing doctors don't need to suggest an abortion to pregnant women who want cancer treatment. The study involves a concept called pregnancy associated breast cancer -- breast cancer that is diagnosed when a woman is pregnant or within a year after delivery. The mainstream media highlighted the study as if it showed a new concept, somehow finally dismissing the notion that pregnant women undergoing breast cancer treatment should have an abortion. Professor Brind tells LifeNews.com that the notion has been a myth for decades and the study merely confirms what he and other experts already knew. "Actually, this finding has been reported many times in the last 15 years," Brind explained. "Unfortunately, many doctors still recommend abortion for women diagnosed with breast cancer while pregnant, so that they can treat the cancer more aggressively. This is despite worldwide research going back as far as the 1930's that shows that so-called 'therapeutic abortion' substantially shortens lifespan, whereas carrying the pregnancy to term makes long-term cure more likely," he said. Full story at LifeNews.com

reply from: 4given

TV Program Exposes Komen for the Cure and Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz Link
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new video released by a group that serves as a watchdog for information on the link between abortion and breast cancer exposes the relationship between Susan G. Komen for the Cure and Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business. Karen Malec, the head of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer tells LifeNews.com that the video, "Komen's Dark Side," exposes the irregular relationship between the breast cancer organization and Planned Parenthood. In 2007 alone, Komen chapters gave $711,485 from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006 to Planned Parenthood affiliates. The amount of the grants from Komen affiliates to Planned Parenthood appears to be on the rise and 25 Komen affiliates now have a partnership with the abortion business. The video reports on the cover-up of the abortion-breast cancer link and, with an airing soon on EWTN, could explain the link and the relationship to millions of households. "Komen's officials have no right to keep women in the dark about a breast cancer risk, while at the same time giving funds to Planned Parenthood, a primary cause of the breast cancer epidemic," Malec says. Full story at LifeNews.com

reply from: nancyu

http://www.allbusiness.com/society-social/philanthropy-fundraising/11384410-1.html
OOOOhhh look how stylish it is to support the killing of women and children.
AVON is in deep with Komen.

reply from: nancyu

This is a little bit funny. Dell is trying to give away computers to benefit SGK, and if you read the comments seems people are getting "sick of the pink."
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/07/dell-promise-pink-laptops-fight-breast-cancer/

reply from: nancyu

Related Searches
Susan G Komen Merchandise
History of Susan G Komen
Susan G Komen Bracelet
Circuit City
Best Buy
Avon
TV Guide
Bank of America
Amazon
Target
Susan Goodman Komen
Nancy Brinker

reply from: Teresa18

I wish that Komen didn't donate to PP. My mom is a breast cancer survivor. We went to the walk one year and had a good time. Sadly, we found out that they donate to PP, so we never did the walk again, and we won't support them.

reply from: faithman

Get an IAAP poster, and go back. You will be suprised just how many don't know about the connection.

reply from: yoda

TV Program Exposes Komen for the Cure and Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz Link
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 10, 2009
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new video released by a group that serves as a watchdog for information on the link between abortion and breast cancer exposes the relationship between Susan G. Komen for the Cure and Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business.
Karen Malec, the head of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer tells LifeNews.com that the video, "Komen's Dark Side," exposes the irregular relationship between the breast cancer organization and Planned Parenthood.
in 2007 alone, Komen chapters gave $711,485 from April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006 to Planned Parenthood affiliates.
The amount of the grants from Komen affiliates to Planned Parenthood appears to be on the rise and 25 Komen affiliates now have a partnership with the abortion business.
The video reports on the cover-up of the abortion-breast cancer link and, with an airing soon on EWTN, could explain the link and the relationship to millions of households.
"Komen's officials have no right to keep women in the dark about a breast cancer risk, while at the same time giving funds to Planned Parenthood, a primary cause of the breast cancer epidemic," Malec says.
The video explains the biological explanation behind the abortion-breast cancer link and how abortion advocates and cancer groups are preventing women from getting the information.
"The cancer fundraising industry is covering up the link, in part, because it is not good for fundraising to tell donors their abortions may be responsible for their breast cancers," Malec added.
The video features television host Brad Mattes along with Malec; Eve Sanchez Silver, president of Clear Research and former Latina adviser for Komen; and Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, clinical assistant professor of surgery at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical Center and a breast cancer surgeon.
The show "Facing Life Head-On" will broadcast the video on selected cable television stations during the week of March 8.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4827.html

reply from: nancyu

Get an IAAP poster, and go back. You will be suprised just how many don't know about the connection.
This is a good idea. Let's do it!

reply from: micah

I have an idea for the pro-lifers on here. Why don't you go to a Komen Race for the Cure, and when the parade-of-pink survivors go by, tell them they'd be cured of breast cancer if they'd stop having so many abortions? Get really big protest signs out and let everyone know how you think. I figure it would be a good chance to let everyone know about the abortion-breast cancer link.

reply from: yoda

That might do some good, who knows? OTOH, some women really wouldn't care if abortion did cause breast cancer, they just want a cure for it. They'd go right on having abortions and crusading for a cure.

reply from: galen

new recipie:
organic lemon chicken soup ( greek)
put 1 organic chicken in a pot of boiling water.
simmer for 3 hours, debone and return to broth. Add 6 cups of water.
Add 1 cut up Bok choy head. 1 onion diced 1 tbsp ginger salt and pepper to taste, and the juice of 3 lemons.
simmer for 1 hour. Add 3 cupd of cooked rice.
makes about 10 servings .
Cost about 5.00 US

reply from: nancyu

I think I've found one appliance company that does NOT appear to have any ties with Komen or Planned Parenthood.
http://www.miele.com/
Unfortunately they seem to be very expensive.

reply from: nancyu

Bump for a new title.

reply from: nancyu

Add to the blacklist:
http://www.newlightfgbc.org/contact_us.aspx
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6238&STARTPAGE=1&FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear
http://hamptonroads.com/2009/03/planned-parenthood-church-team-sex-ed-teens

reply from: nancyu

http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/For-the-Pro-Vaccine-people-read-this-if-you-dare-Eugenics-at-its-best
For the Pro-Vaccine people - read this if you dare - Eugenics at its best
poulianna Posted by poulianna on Sat, 10/25/2008 - 7:52pm in
* Your Thoughts About News and Politics (General)
According to the CDC, the human papilloma virus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted disease in America. More than 6 million women contract it annually, yet cervical cancer claims less than 3,900 women - most of which are due to not getting regular Pap smears. In the U.K., cervical cancer claims a mere 400 lives per year.
Why is your risk of dying from cervical cancer so low?
Because your immune system is usually strong enough to clear up this kind of infection on its own, and does so in more than 90 percent of all cases. The CDC even admits to this fact on their website.
And, as long as you're getting regular PAP smears, cervical cancer can be caught in its early, and easily treatable, stages.
So, the question begs to be asked: WHY is the HPV vaccine being pushed so vigorously when:
1. it prevents a type of cancer that is very rare to begin with
2. it protects against a virus that, 98 percent of the time, is not the cause of cervical cancer
3. it prevents a type of cancer that can be easily caught and treated by promoting regular gynecological exams
4. it offers less protection than what promotion of safe sex practices could accomplish
5. it is promoted to girls years before becoming sexually active, even though the vaccine may only offer about three years worth of protection
6. it prevents just 4 out of more than 100 strains of HPV; all of which your body can clear up on its own in 90 percent of all cases anyway
7. it has NOT been proven safe. No one knows if it can cause cancer or infertility, for example
And why would the feds go so far as to add Gardasil to the list of vaccinations that all female immigrants ages 11 to 26 MUST get before they can obtain a green card? We're not dealing with potential import of bubonic plague here...
According to a New England Journal of Medicine study, the use of condoms reduces the incidence of HPV by 70 percent, offering FAR better protection than Gardasil, for example.
The HPV vaccine is a total head-scratcher of a mystery as far as what its ultimate purpose is, because "curing the rampant health disaster of cervical cancer" is certainly NOT it.
And since when do we have to be vaccinated against cancer in order to be let into a country?
Does the HPV Vaccine LITERALLY Mean "One Less"?
Marketing geniuses are known to play on words and create slogans with quirky double meanings, and if you've been tracking the concerns raised about the potential hazards of Gardasil and Cervarix, the potential for these HPV vaccines to cause infertility - whether purposely or inadvertently - is being heard with ever increasing frequency.
The federal government's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) has received over 9,000 reports of problems since the vaccine's introduction in 2006, which include at least 28 spontaneous abortions, and 27 deaths.
Is it possible that Gardasil's cry to fame, 'One Less', is turning out to be nothing but a sick, ironic play on words?
Anti-Fertility Vaccines
The World Health Organization (WHO) and its subsidiaries have been actively researching and funding the development of contraceptive / anti-fertility vaccines that prevent full-term pregnancies to take place, for over 20 years. There's even a Task Force on Birth Control Vaccines of the WHO!
However, no anti-fertility vaccine has ever been placed on the market and promoted as such as of yet.
Instead, as described in a 1993 journal paper published in The British Medical Bulletin, anti-fertility vaccines were being engineered "incorporating tetanus or diphtheria toxoid linked to a variety of hCG-based peptides."
The authors of this article state,
"The fundamental principle behind this approach to contraceptive vaccine development is to prevent the maternal recognition of pregnancy by inducing a state of immunity against hGC, the hormone that signals the presence of the embryo to the maternal endocrine system."
Free tetanus vaccines that were offered to young women of childbearing age for years in countries such as Tanzania, Nigeria, Mexico, and the Philippines, were found to contain human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG), which causes spontaneous abortions if the woman becomes pregnant.
While the woman is not technically sterilized, once injected with hCG, she may never be able to carry a child full term thereafter.
HCG-containing anti-fertility vaccines have also been pursued for more than two decades by the Indian National Institute of Immunology, and The Population Council of the Rockefeller University, among others.
In fact, there are no less than 50 research papers detailing research on "contraceptive vaccines" in the PubMed database.
One disturbing paper published in the FASEB Journal in 1993 states:
"... we initiated studies relating to possible mechanisms of action and potential side effects of this vaccine, which should be relevant to world-wide regulation of population growth."
So again, why the frantic push for the HPV vaccine, created for young, fertile women, when there's NO solid, rational basis for its use?
Massive Brazilian Vaccination Program Raises Suspicions of Covert Sterilization Plans
A much more recent case of illogical mass vaccinations against a minor health problem is that of the massive, mandatory vaccination program in Brazil, which has raised suspicions among international pro-life activists, who note that the program is similar to other vaccination programs in recent years that have included a hidden sterilizing agent in the vaccines.
The campaign to "annihilate rubella" began in early August this year, mandating rubella vaccinations for all women ages 12 to 49, and 12 to 39 for men; a total of 70 million people, despite the fact that only 17 Brazilian children per year suffer birth defects from the disease.
Adolfo Castañeda of Human Life International notes that just two years ago, researchers found that the rubella vaccine used in a similar campaign in Argentina was laced with human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG).
"The suspicion that brought about the investigation [into the rubella vaccine] was caused by the fact that there were very few cases of the disease in Argentina, which didn't merit a large-scale campaign," Castañeda said, adding, "The ages for women are the same as those who received the vaccines in Nicaragua, where they included a hormone that sterilizes the woman who receives it, and similar to the age of those who received another sterilizing hormone in the Philippines."
Polysorbate-80 - One Less Mouse, Researchers Found
Now, let me state clearly that there's no proof of hCG being present in any of the current HPV vaccines.
I am merely playing devil's advocate as I examine the similarities between these other irrational vaccination programs in other countries for relatively minor public health concerns -- that turn out to have far more sinister agendas than mere greed - compared to the fervent, irrational push behind the HPV vaccine here in the U.S.
However, Gardasil does contain Polysorbate-80 - a surfactant used in pharmacology to deliver certain drugs or chemical agents across the blood-brain barrier -- which has been linked to infertility in mice.
Researchers Gajdova et.al. found that administration of Polysorbate-80 decreased the weight of the uterus and ovaries, and caused chronic estrogenic stimulation. The ovaries of the mice were also without corpora lutea (a mass of progesterone-secreting endocrine tissue that forms immediately after ovulation) and had degenerative follicles.
So what might the estrogenic effects of Polysorbate-80 be on pre-adolescent girls and pregnant women?
Anti-Fertility Vaccine Ingredient Also Has Clinical Application in Cancer Vaccines...
A potential coincidence I find most disturbing is some of the more recent research detailing the use of hCG, and other molecules, in vaccines against hCG-producing cancers, such as - certain cervical cancers.
One 2005 paper titled, Recent advances in contraceptive vaccine development: a mini-review published in the journal Human Reproduction concludes:
"At the present time, studies are focused on increasing the immunogenicity and efficacy of the birth control vaccine, and examining its clinical applications in various HCG-producing cancers."
But research published just a few months ago in the journal Molecular Cancer states that the free ?-subunit of hCG (hCG?) - which was originally considered biologically non-functional -- has recently been shown to stimulate tumor growth, and lead to more aggressive tumors that are more resistant to therapy.
Again, I'm mentioning all of this because it just goes to show that pharmaceutical companies have little or no clue of the extent of harm these vaccines might cause, especially long-term. Something believed to be completely non-functional or harmless can turn out to be a MAJOR cause for concern after more thorough investigation.
For example, Gardasil also contains L-histadine, and histamines have been found to increase clot production five-fold when combined with, guess what? Surfactants! (L-histidine can also pass through your placental wall to your fetus.)
Granted, this laboratory investigative report titled Surfactants Attenuate Gas Embolism-induced Thrombin Production used surfactants like Perftoran, not Polysorbate-80, in their trials, but could Polysorbate-80 have a similar effect?
Could this explain why death from blood clots within hours or days is the MOST COMMON form of death after receiving Gardasil?
The HPV vaccine clearly has a lot of questions left to be answered. And those questions should be answered BEFORE pushing Gardasil on an unsuspecting public at the rate that it's being done.
Be One Less to Get Gardasil
I think this would be a more appropriate message to send out to young women: There is absolutely no reason to risk the serious side effects of this vaccine to prevent an infection that goes away on its own 90 percent of the time. And there's no guarantee that you'll be protected anyway, since you can still get HPV once you've had the vaccine. It's really a no-win situation for those who receive it.
Of course, you can radically reduce your risk of getting HPV in the first place if you follow safe-sex practices, or wait to have sex until you're in a committed relationship. Then, keep your immune system in tip-top shape, and it will be more than able to shake any HPV virus that comes its way.

reply from: Faramir

I think I've found one appliance company that does NOT appear to have any ties with Komen or Planned Parenthood.
http://www.miele.com/
Unfortunately they seem to be very expensive.
I can't shop at Wal-Mart anymore. I found out that there is a woman working there who donates some of her pay to Planned Parenthood, and by shopping at any Wal Mart, I'd be supporting her and Planned Parenthood.
So Wal Mart is out, now.
And there is a young woman at the coffee stand I go to who is saving some of her tips to pay for an abortion, so I can't buy coffee anymore.
And I heard an oil executive is donating some of his bonuses to Planned Parenthood, and heck if I know if some of HIS oil is mixed in with the gas I buy, so I can't drive anymore.
All I can do now is lock myself up and grow my own food and communicate on the internet.
Except...people use the internet to promote abortion, and I'm supporting the internet...

reply from: 4given

In regards to the HPV vaccine.. Newmom posted on it some time ago.. I will look for it. She suffered a premature delivery and death of a child.. and I believe she had the vaccine while pregnant.. I will find the thread..

reply from: 4given

Found it.. http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=3737&highlight_key=y

reply from: nancyu

Wow. Something's fishy with that vaccine for sure.

reply from: Yuuki

Wha moron would get a vaccine while pregnant!? I'm sorry but it's just common knowledge you should not take any unecessary medications while pregnant.

reply from: nancyu

Wha moron would get a vaccine while pregnant!? I'm sorry but it's just common knowledge you should not take any unecessary medications while pregnant.
What kind of moron doesn't read the post before making such a hasty judgment. She took the first series of shots before becoming pregnant, she found out before the third shot that she was pregnant, and was assured by her OB GYN that proceeding with the third shot was safe.
Maybe a new question should be, "what kind of moron would trust their physician?"?

reply from: Yuuki

Wha moron would get a vaccine while pregnant!? I'm sorry but it's just common knowledge you should not take any unecessary medications while pregnant.
What kind of moron doesn't read the post before making such a hasty judgment. She took the first series of shots before becoming pregnant, she found out before the third shot that she was pregnant, and was assured by her OB GYN that proceeding with the third shot was safe.
Maybe a new question should be, "what kind of moron would trust their physician?"?
And according to the information posted in the other thread, there is actually NO PROOF that Guardasil is dangerous at all, and in fact, only 40 pregnancies had problems as opposed to 41 OFF of it!!

reply from: nancyu

Wha moron would get a vaccine while pregnant!? I'm sorry but it's just common knowledge you should not take any unecessary medications while pregnant.
What kind of moron doesn't read the post before making such a hasty judgment. She took the first series of shots before becoming pregnant, she found out before the third shot that she was pregnant, and was assured by her OB GYN that proceeding with the third shot was safe.
Maybe a new question should be, "what kind of moron would trust their physician?"?
And according to the information posted in the other thread, there is actually NO PROOF that Guardasil is dangerous at all, and in fact, only 40 pregnancies had problems as opposed to 41 OFF of it!!
There is also NO PROOF that Guardasil is NECESSARY at all--so BOMB on YOU and the rest of you PP-prolifers!

reply from: nancyu

http://www.peanutbutterlovers.com/recipes/pudding.html

reply from: nancyu

http://bdfund.org/breastcancer.asp
October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Breast cancer detection, prevention, research and treatment are of the utmost importance due to the devastating impact that this disease has on women and their families.
Pro-life citizens who are interested in fighting this deadly disease should be aware that one breast cancer organization, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, has a policy of explicitly allowing its state affiliates to give monetary grants to abortion providing facilities.
Not all state affiliates give grants to Planned Parenthood using the 75% of the funds that they raise in a state. However, each state affiliate must forward at least 25% of funds raised in their state to the Komen National office. These funds are under the discretion of a board that refuses to disassociate itself from Planned Parenthood as shown by the facts below:
* Planned Parenthood is the number one provider of abortions in the United States. During its 2005-2006 fiscal year, the nonprofit Planned Parenthood Federation of America performed a record 264,943 abortions according to its annual report.
* At least 13 Susan G. Komen for the Cure affiliates have awarded at least 55 grants to Planned Parenthood afflilates during the years 2000 through 2005. These grants are reported on the Susan G. Komen website by entering "Planned Parenthood" on Komen's searchable grant page.
* Komen claims that money raised by affiliates who give money grants to Planned Parenthood is for breast services only. However, Planned Parenthood documents in its 2005-2006 annual report that 9,900 more abortions were performed and 81,500 fewer breast exams were provided in 2005 than in 2004.
* KOMEN'S EXPRESS POLICY ALLOWING PLANNED PARENTHOOD GRANTS: Because Komen refused their request to stop providing grants to Planned Parenthood, Curves, a privately held fitness franchise firm owned by women's health advocate Gary Heavin, ceased supporting Komen events. Here is Komen's response by its Public Relations Manager Kristin Kelly:
"The Komen Foundation is confident that none of its community Affiliates have stopped funding Planned Parenthood as a result of the pressure from Curves, Operation Save America or any other organization. In fact, when faced with opposition from Curves or the threat that Curves franchises would no longer support the Foundation unless Planned Parenthood funding was eliminated, the Komen Foundation told Mr. Heavin (founder and CEO of Curves) that we would not, in any way, undermine the integrity of our grant-making process. In addition the Foundation told Mr. Heavin that it would continue to allow Komen Affiliates to provide breast health education and screening grants to Planned Parenthood if the grant application was approved through the process outlined above. As a result, Curves chose to suspend its support of Komen Affiliate events, including sponsorship of the Komen Race for the Cure (r). In 2003, Komen Affiliates awarded $38.4 million in grants to support community outreach programs, including 21 grants to their local Planned Parenthood chapters totaling more than $475,000."
Source: Komen website as copied into Powerpoint Presentation by Eve Sanchez, former Komen board member, http://stopabortionbreastcancer.org/talks/denver_silver060930.pdf

* In March 2008, the St. Louis Archdiocese renewed its June 2007 policy of non-support for Komen due to Komen's national policy of allowing affiliates to give grants to Planned Parenthood, and of promoting embryonic stem cell research. This statement was made even though the Missouri affiliate did not give grants to Missouri Planned Parenthood because at least 25% of locally raised funds are under the discretion of Komen's national office.
Background Facts: Why is Komen tied to Planned Parenthood?
* Nancy Brinker, Komen Founder, was listed as an advisory board member in the 2002 annual report of Planned Parenthood of North Texas, the fifth largest Planned Parenthood affiliate in the nation.
* In September of 2004, Eve Sanchez Silver, a breast cancer survivor and charter member of Komen's Hispanic/Latina Advisory Council, resigned from Komen, stating, "As a Christian and life affirming citizen I can not reconcile the Foundation's decision to affirm life with one hand and support its destruction with the other."
BDF encourages you to contact Susan G. Komen for the Cure (5005 LBJ Freeway, Suite 250, Dallas, TX 75244) and call for an end to all associations between Komen affiliates and Planned Parenthood, for funding of further studies on the link between breast cancer and abortion, and for an end to the endorsement of research that leads to the destruction of any human life.
Please encourage the Komen Foundation to focus all funds on research to find causes and cures for breast cancer and refuse to give financial or other support to any abortion provider or organization that promotes the destruction of human life.
ALTERNATE BREAST CANCER ORGANIZATIONS:
Click here for breast cancer organizations that do not support abortion facilities or destructive human embryo experimentation.
Yay curves!

reply from: nancyu

One more for the black.
http://www.individual.com/storyrss.php?story=97991435&hash=0fcbea4954be6d629808a60cddfc3855
Massage Envy Clinics

reply from: yoda

I don't have a link yet, but there's going to be a "March for the Cure" to find a cure for "Pro-Abortion Dyslexia" (a condition which prevents proaborts from being able to read dictionaries). They're going to hold it inside a stadium so the marchers won't get lost.

reply from: Yuuki

Wha moron would get a vaccine while pregnant!? I'm sorry but it's just common knowledge you should not take any unecessary medications while pregnant.
What kind of moron doesn't read the post before making such a hasty judgment. She took the first series of shots before becoming pregnant, she found out before the third shot that she was pregnant, and was assured by her OB GYN that proceeding with the third shot was safe.
Maybe a new question should be, "what kind of moron would trust their physician?"?
And according to the information posted in the other thread, there is actually NO PROOF that Guardasil is dangerous at all, and in fact, only 40 pregnancies had problems as opposed to 41 OFF of it!!
There is also NO PROOF that Guardasil is NECESSARY at all--so BOMB on YOU and the rest of you PP-prolifers!
Necessary? Of course it's not necessary. It is an elective vaccine to prevent some of the more common forms of HPV that can cause cervical cancer. Where on earth did you get the idea that I thought it was necessary, or that this has anything to do with PP? Also, was that a death threat?

reply from: yoda

Good for him.
How typical of you, spinweenie, to make a nasty personal attack rather than address the issue about Komen's support of PP.
Sooo typical........

reply from: nancyu

Good for him.
How typical of you, spinweenie, to make a nasty personal attack rather than address the issue about Komen's support of PP.
Sooo typical........
NO Way! Spinwiddy would never do that.

reply from: yoda

Only if a proabort kills their baby at birth, spinny.....

reply from: Teresa18

He was wrong there, but how is that relevant to Komen donating to an organization that supports the destruction of unborn human beings? He's right in not supporting Komen.

reply from: Teresa18

Indeed, and Obama supports allowing a baby that dodges the abortionist to be left to die.

reply from: nancyu

No we believe that life starts at conception and ends at natural death.
How many born children are prolifers killing today in a child slaughtering facility, spinwiddy? How many pro lifers are fighting for their "right to choose" to kill born children? Even if we do treat unborn better than born people we are still way ahead of you pro aborts who (oops) just slaughtered another one.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.davethomasfoundation.org/
I ate at Wendy's today and put my change in the plastic container on the counter. The cashier said, "thank you, that is very nice of you."
That is very nice of you Wendy's. Thank you.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.davethomasfoundation.org/About-Us

reply from: nancyu

http://library.thinkquest.org/11799/data/dys.html
The website is up and running for all you dyslexic proaborterates

reply from: nancyu

Whitelist (so far) Hooray for the good guys!
Walmart
Domino's Pizza
Wendy's
Arby's ,
subway,
american heart association,
quiznos,
Pepsi products or
sam's choice products.
Coca Cola
Cracker Barrel (great cheese!)
Little Ceasars
Mcalister's Deli
Long John Silvers
applebees
ihop
dairy queen
red robbin,
chic fil a
Curves
Jiffy Lube
electronic arts inc
cryptic studios...
marvel and star trak online mmp games.
x-box...
Capcom
Pampered Chef
McDonalds
Meile
And thanks to galen for her research!

reply from: nancyu

Blacklist (so far) thumbs down for the bad guys
United Way
UNICEF
March of Dimes
Susan G Komen Foundation
Statefarm
Progressive
Nestle
Purina
Geico
Allstate
K Mart
UPS
Target
Darden Restaurants (includes Red Lobster, Olive Garden, LongHorn Steakhouse, The Capital Grille, Bahama Breeze and Seasons 52.)
KFC
Ryan's Steakhouse
Golden Corall
Denny's
Pampers
Lean Cuisine
Stouffers
Purina
Buitoni
Avon
Scott Tissue
Target
Sears
American Cancer Society
Whirlpool
Maytag
Home Depot
Electrolux
LG
GE
amana
You guys can always change your mind and get on the other list!

reply from: yoda

Or, for spinny, life begins at conception and ends at abortion.

reply from: Faramir

Of course we also need to boycott anyone who sells to them and anyone who buys from them.
Which means we can't buy ANYTHING!

reply from: BossMomma

WTF? March of Dimes has saved thousands of preemies, they get my donations until I can no longer make money.

reply from: Faramir

Wal-Mart sells Nestle and Purina products.
Wal-Mart is probably responsible for lots of their profits.
You said Wal-Mart is one of the "good guys."
Now what do we do?

reply from: nancyu

Of course we also need to boycott anyone who sells to them and anyone who buys from them.
Which means we can't buy ANYTHING!
You can buy what ever you want! I don't want MY money going directly to support abortions, and some others don't either.
I know I can't know where every dollar goes, and I know my little bit isn't going to defund the abortion industry, but the apparent hopelessness of stopping abortion won't keep me from trying.

reply from: nancyu

WTF? March of Dimes has saved thousands of preemies, they get my donations until I can no longer make money.
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=press&action=display&ID=84
Like I said. Send your money where every you want to. But they save lives by sacrificing others, and I don't happen to agree with that kind of thing.
http://www.michaelfund.org/

reply from: Faramir

What percentage of profits of Purina, for example, goes to fund abortions?
All you have is a list of names, but no data and no proof.
And again, you say Wal-Mart is good and Purina is bad, but Wal-Mart sells Purina, and Wal-Mart is the largest retailer in the US, and would be responsible for much of their profit, so how come Wal-Mart is ok?

reply from: BossMomma

WTF? March of Dimes has saved thousands of preemies, they get my donations until I can no longer make money.
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=press&action=display&ID=84
Like I said. Send your money where every you want to. But they save lives by sacrificing others, and I don't happen to agree with that kind of thing.
http://www.michaelfund.org/
MoD does not support or endorse abortion in any way, they fight to save the lives of babies born too soon. You are basing your misguided opinions on misrepresentation by an equally misguided pro-lie website. The MoD has saved more babies than any pro-fetal extremist alive but of course you wouldn't recognize true pro-life work to save your soul.

reply from: scopia19822

WTF? March of Dimes has saved thousands of preemies, they get my donations until I can no longer make money.
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=press&action=display&ID=84
Like I said. Send your money where every you want to. But they save lives by sacrificing others, and I don't happen to agree with that kind of thing.
http://www.michaelfund.org/
MoD does not support or endorse abortion in any way, they fight to save the lives of babies born too soon. You are basing your misguided opinions on misrepresentation by an equally misguided pro-lie website. The MoD has saved more babies than any pro-fetal extremist alive but of course you wouldn't recognize true pro-life work to save your soul.
Many of the test for biirth defects that are endorsed and often pushed by the MOD are eugenic in nature and abortion is most often the "remedy " recommended if the test come back postive. OVer 90% of Down Syndrome pregnancies are aborted. But its your money, I agree with Nancy on this and will not give my money to them.

reply from: BossMomma

WTF? March of Dimes has saved thousands of preemies, they get my donations until I can no longer make money.
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=press&action=display&ID=84
Like I said. Send your money where every you want to. But they save lives by sacrificing others, and I don't happen to agree with that kind of thing.
http://www.michaelfund.org/
MoD does not support or endorse abortion in any way, they fight to save the lives of babies born too soon. You are basing your misguided opinions on misrepresentation by an equally misguided pro-lie website. The MoD has saved more babies than any pro-fetal extremist alive but of course you wouldn't recognize true pro-life work to save your soul.
Many of the test for biirth defects that are endorsed and often pushed by the MOD are eugenic in nature and abortion is most often the "remedy " recommended if the test come back postive. OVer 90% of Down Syndrome pregnancies are aborted. But its your money, I agree with Nancy on this and will not give my money to them.
So it's best just to surprise parents with their Trisomy 21 baby and hope they can cope? I got genetic testing done just incase there was a problem so I could prepare for it. With this logic ultrasound is pro-abortion too as deformities such as dwarfism, anecephaly, hydrocephaly, acardia etc. can all be spotted and abortion is sometimes the result.

reply from: scopia19822

WTF? March of Dimes has saved thousands of preemies, they get my donations until I can no longer make money.
http://www.fightpp.org/show.cfm?page=press&action=display&ID=84
Like I said. Send your money where every you want to. But they save lives by sacrificing others, and I don't happen to agree with that kind of thing.
http://www.michaelfund.org/
MoD does not support or endorse abortion in any way, they fight to save the lives of babies born too soon. You are basing your misguided opinions on misrepresentation by an equally misguided pro-lie website. The MoD has saved more babies than any pro-fetal extremist alive but of course you wouldn't recognize true pro-life work to save your soul.
Many of the test for biirth defects that are endorsed and often pushed by the MOD are eugenic in nature and abortion is most often the "remedy " recommended if the test come back postive. OVer 90% of Down Syndrome pregnancies are aborted. But its your money, I agree with Nancy on this and will not give my money to them.
So it's best just to surprise parents with their Trisomy 21 baby and hope they can cope? I got genetic testing done just incase there was a problem so I could prepare for it. With this logic ultrasound is pro-abortion too as deformities such as dwarfism, anecephaly, hydrocephaly, acardia etc. can all be spotted and abortion is sometimes the result.
I have a little bit of time to answer this I have a layoever in Atlanta at the moment. These tests that are offered can be faulty and a perfectly healthy baby can test positive for Downs and be aborted. Other times the test come back negative and the child has Downs Syndrome. Many of these test are pushed by some Ob/gyns and abortion is often what they counsel to remedy the problem if not downright push it. The MOD has been tied in to various probabortion organizations including PP. It is one thing to have the test just to prepare so that you can make sure the child has proper medical care, but often those who have them done do it for eugenic reasons, after all God forbid they dont have a perfect child. Some people will abort a child because an sonogram shows it has a cleft lip/palate, both of which is easily correctable with surgery. MOD claims it wants to reduce the rate of premature births and birth defects, but how is that to be accomplished? I rarely hear of them pushing good nutrition and abstaining from drug/alcholol use during pregnanc to insure that a baby will be healthy. Instead they push for these test where abortion is often the solution. Of course if these children are aborted the premature birth rate will decrease and those with birth defects as well.

reply from: galen

i agree w/ nancy and scopia... MoD started out as a great organisation, however more often than not in the recent past screening tests have been followed by advice to terminate... when they start going back to the old ways of looking for a way to cure defects... or prevent them, that does not involve eugenics then they can have my $$$ untill then, i think i'll pass.
Faramir, Wal Mart does not actively promote PP the way some like Purina and Avon do. They also listen to thier customer base, and when the customers say NO!... they stop. So Yeah in my eyes they are one of the good guys... if you don't like what they do then don't shop there... shop at Target and be REALLY sure that at least some of your $$ will end up in PP's hands.
Reminder... all of those corporations listed have sites on the web where they list those contributions made to various organisations... a new listing should be out in june or july... i'd love to see how many turn down PP and start putting $$ back into thier customer base, because the local economy needs it more.

reply from: galen

So here is a hint for Wal Mart shoppers... if you have any other stores adds that are cheaper they will price match. Just make sure you bring the dated adds w/ you when you shop...
This is great it means that you can go to 1 store and still get the same prices... no wasted gass, time etc.
I tried this at Walgreens opnce and they told me they were not Wal Mart... go figure?!?!

reply from: BossMomma

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp

I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.

reply from: Teresa18

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55410

reply from: BossMomma

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55410
Stanek is full of crap and utterly biased.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.lenlibby.com/
Len Libby Candies ---- Pro LIFE all the way!

reply from: yoda

Jill is one of the true heroes of the prolife movement. Her dedication and perseverance are inspirational. And her "bias" in favor of unborn babies is beautiful to see.
Her website is very informational, too:
http://www.jillstanek.com/

reply from: nancyu

Jill is one of the true heroes of the prolife movement. Her dedication and perseverance are inspirational. And her "bias" in favor of unborn babies is beautiful to see.
Her website is very informational, too:
http://www.jillstanek.com/
When it comes to being pro life, everyone should be as biased as possible. It's a good thing.

reply from: yoda

Absolutely.... the more prolife bias, the better.
Of course, every literate person ought to know that "bias" and "honesty" are two totally different things.

reply from: BossMomma

Jill is one of the true heroes of the prolife movement. Her dedication and perseverance are inspirational. And her "bias" in favor of unborn babies is beautiful to see.
Her website is very informational, too:
http://www.jillstanek.com/
When it comes to being pro life, everyone should be as biased as possible. It's a good thing.
Sorry but I can't cast aside fact and just blindly accept some nut case's opinion. Stanek couldn't even take care of her own child, I would hardly call her a hero.

reply from: yoda

Any genuine prolifer will be biased in favor of the babies. Any faux lifer will show the opposite bias, and will make personal attacks on genuine leaders in the PL movement.

reply from: BossMomma

Any genuine prolifer will be biased in favor of the babies. Any faux lifer will show the opposite bias, and will make personal attacks on genuine leaders in the PL movement.
No, real pro-lifers save babies, not just stand like yapping dogs behind the heels of others. And to save the babies one must stand with logic, reason and, fact, not bias

reply from: nancyu

Any genuine prolifer will be biased in favor of the babies. Any faux lifer will show the opposite bias, and will make personal attacks on genuine leaders in the PL movement.
No, real pro-lifers save babies, not just stand like yapping dogs behind the heels of others. And to save the babies one must stand with logic, reason and, fact, not bias
You are biased in favor of Planned Parenthood and March of Dimes. So it's okay for you to be biased but no one else?

reply from: yoda

You got it! Only those who are willing to cuss everyone else out at the drop of a hat are allowed to be biased!

reply from: BossMomma

Any genuine prolifer will be biased in favor of the babies. Any faux lifer will show the opposite bias, and will make personal attacks on genuine leaders in the PL movement.
No, real pro-lifers save babies, not just stand like yapping dogs behind the heels of others. And to save the babies one must stand with logic, reason and, fact, not bias
You are biased in favor of Planned Parenthood and March of Dimes. So it's okay for you to be biased but no one else?
I'm not biased, I read facts, I accepted facts, where's the bias? You are going off the rantings of some nut who wouldn't even properly care for her child, you base your opinions on the opinions of others with no fact or evidence to back it up.

reply from: BossMomma

You got it! Only those who are willing to cuss everyone else out at the drop of a hat are allowed to be biased!
Who have I cussed out? The last person I cussed out was an idiotic inmate last week, are you kin to him?

reply from: scopia19822

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
">http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.

reply from: nancyu

Any genuine prolifer will be biased in favor of the babies. Any faux lifer will show the opposite bias, and will make personal attacks on genuine leaders in the PL movement.
No, real pro-lifers save babies, not just stand like yapping dogs behind the heels of others. And to save the babies one must stand with logic, reason and, fact, not bias
You are biased in favor of Planned Parenthood and March of Dimes. So it's okay for you to be biased but no one else?
I'm not biased, I read facts, I accepted facts, where's the bias? You are going off the rantings of some nut who wouldn't even properly care for her child, you base your opinions on the opinions of others with no fact or evidence to back it up.
Accepted facts? Accepted by who? I don't accept Planned Parenthood's facts at all.
Show me some Planned Parenthood facts.
YOU ARE BIASED.

reply from: yoda

Everyone is biased. There is no such thing as an "unbiased person", and most especially on the subject of abortion, for anyone who even knows what the word means.

reply from: scopia19822

I admit that Im biased on many issues, espeically abortion. No issue has divided this country other than slavery.

reply from: BossMomma

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
<br ">http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp
I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.
Better start pushing to ban ultrasounds, fetal heart monitors, pregnancy tests and, anything else that might reveal anything about the pregnancy and result in an abortion. BTW, where is your UNBIASED FACTUAL source of information stating that MoD has anything to do with abortion?

reply from: scopia19822

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp
"><br ">http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
<br ">http://...ofdim...m/pn....asp
...>
I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.
Better start pushing to ban ultrasounds, fetal heart monitors, pregnancy tests and, anything else that might reveal anything about the pregnancy and result in an abortion. BTW, where is your UNBIASED FACTUAL source of information stating that MoD has anything to do with abortion?
Now whos being childish. I oppose mandatory prenatal testing. If a person wants its done in order to prepare and look into treatment options for their child fine, but it should not be used to "weed out the undesirables". Offically the MOD takes a neutral stance on abortion,however they have to be aware that the test they push are oftene ugenic in nature and do not speak out against the practiice of eugenics.

reply from: BossMomma

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp

"><br "><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp

<br ">http://...ofdim...m/pn....asp
...>
]http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp
[/L]
I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.
Better start pushing to ban ultrasounds, fetal heart monitors, pregnancy tests and, anything else that might reveal anything about the pregnancy and result in an abortion. BTW, where is your UNBIASED FACTUAL source of information stating that MoD has anything to do with abortion?
Now whos being childish. I oppose mandatory prenatal testing. If a person wants its done in order to prepare and look into treatment options for their child fine, but it should not be used to "weed out the undesirables". Offically the MOD takes a neutral stance on abortion,however they have to be aware that the test they push are oftene ugenic in nature and do not speak out against the practiice of eugenics.
No such thing as Mandatory testing, I could have chosen not to get the triple screen if I'd been inclined to.

reply from: scopia19822

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
">"><a target=_blank class...es.com/pnhec/4439.asp
"><br "><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
">http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
<br ">http://...ofdim...m/pn....asp
">http://...ofdim...m/pn....asp
...>
]http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp
[/L]
I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.
Better start pushing to ban ultrasounds, fetal heart monitors, pregnancy tests and, anything else that might reveal anything about the pregnancy and result in an abortion. BTW, where is your UNBIASED FACTUAL source of information stating that MoD has anything to do with abortion?
Now whos being childish. I oppose mandatory prenatal testing. If a person wants its done in order to prepare and look into treatment options for their child fine, but it should not be used to "weed out the undesirables". Offically the MOD takes a neutral stance on abortion,however they have to be aware that the test they push are oftene ugenic in nature and do not speak out against the practiice of eugenics.
No such thing as Mandatory testing, I could have chosen not to get the triple screen if I'd been inclined to.
It depends on where you live in Virginia Medicaid receiptants are "required" to get these test done and to "comply" with the orders of their doctor in all matter in order to recieve coverage. I declined them I didnt see the need for them, the orginal OB wasnt happy and threatened to call CPS. So I went to another doctor who didnt push the eugenic prenatal testing but the quality of care I got sucked even there.. But in the end all I had to do is sign a paper waiving liabilty if I had a "defective" baby because I refused the test. You will be amazed at how many patients especially Medicaid patients that arent aware that they do have rights to informed consent and to refuse procedures. I also refused the gestational diabetes as my urine always came back normal, they didnt like that at all. They told me it was "required" because there malpractive insurance required it, but I stuck to my guns.

reply from: rooforlife

I'm also apart of Concerned Women of America also.

reply from: BossMomma

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
<br ">">"><a target=_blank class...es.com/pnhec/4439.asp
"><br "><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.marchofdimes.com/pnhec/4439.asp
<br ">http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp
<br ">http://...ofdim...m/pn....asp
<br ">http://...ofdim...m/pn....asp
...>
]http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp
[/L]
I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.
Better start pushing to ban ultrasounds, fetal heart monitors, pregnancy tests and, anything else that might reveal anything about the pregnancy and result in an abortion. BTW, where is your UNBIASED FACTUAL source of information stating that MoD has anything to do with abortion?
Now whos being childish. I oppose mandatory prenatal testing. If a person wants its done in order to prepare and look into treatment options for their child fine, but it should not be used to "weed out the undesirables". Offically the MOD takes a neutral stance on abortion,however they have to be aware that the test they push are oftene ugenic in nature and do not speak out against the practiice of eugenics.
No such thing as Mandatory testing, I could have chosen not to get the triple screen if I'd been inclined to.
It depends on where you live in Virginia Medicaid receiptants are "required" to get these test done and to "comply" with the orders of their doctor in all matter in order to recieve coverage. I declined them I didnt see the need for them, the orginal OB wasnt happy and threatened to call CPS. So I went to another doctor who didnt push the eugenic prenatal testing but the quality of care I got sucked even there.. But in the end all I had to do is sign a paper waiving liabilty if I had a "defective" baby because I refused the test. You will be amazed at how many patients especially Medicaid patients that arent aware that they do have rights to informed consent and to refuse procedures. I also refused the gestational diabetes as my urine always came back normal, they didnt like that at all. They told me it was "required" because there malpractive insurance required it, but I stuck to my guns.
If your doctor advises abortion it is just that, advice, you can take it or leave it. Not testing is kinda idiotic as if you do have a 'defective baby' you'll have no idea what's coming and you likely wont know how to take care of the disabled infant. In the case of terminal Dx you will have no time to accept the inevitable, the dead or dying child will be a total shock. That is why I and many mothers have testing done and, why such abortions total only 1% of all abortions performed. Bad news does not always mean dead baby.
As for your quality of care? Your care was provided out of the pockets of tax payers, beggers should not be choosers but should be happy for what they have. My ex's sister is due next month and has no insurence, her husband makes too much for medicaid but not enough for private insurence. She will recieve basic labor and delivery care and be loaded with an enormous bill, you want to talk about crappy pre-natal care?

reply from: nancyu

Have you ever even read the March of Dimes site? Nowhere does it push abortion or even suggest abortion, instead it offers advice on how to cope and gives the positives. http://www.marchofdimes.com/pn....asp

I think your prejudice against anything that might result in abortion has utterly blinded you, that or you're just ignorantly following the extremist crowd.
I am prolife so o f course I would be prejudice against anything that would/could result in an abortion and for that I make no apologies. I am far from ignorant on the abortion issue. The MOD and Komen have both been tied in with PP in some fashion or another. I will not give any of them a dime of my hard earned money as that is my right. If you want to give money to them that is your right as its your hard earned money. Most of the test that MOD councels people to have often the ob/gyn is going to push/suggest an abortion and the MOD has to be aware of these sitautions.
Better start pushing to ban ultrasounds, fetal heart monitors, pregnancy tests and, anything else that might reveal anything about the pregnancy and result in an abortion. BTW, where is your UNBIASED FACTUAL source of information stating that MoD has anything to do with abortion?
Can't you read? NO ONE is UNBIASED. Bias has no relation one way or another with being FACTUAL.

reply from: nancyu

Here is an article that is NOT unbiased but it is FACTUAL.
Now how does one determine whether or not something is FACTUAL? By checking to see if it is BIASED? NO. The way to determine whether or not something is FACTUAL is by READING IT.
So you actually have to read it for yourself and use your own brain to decide. That is if you trust your own brain.
http://www.pregnantpause.org/people/mod3.htm

reply from: scopia19822

Infomative article Nancy, thanks for researching and posting it.

reply from: BossMomma

Neutrality seems to be beyond you Nancy, it means they are neither here nor there with abortion. As it stands abortion is a legal option that parents are free to consider. MoD clearly states that abortion is not the answer. If they experiment on fetal tissue oh well, the child is dead, his/her remains serve a worthy cause when trying to discover/eliminate the cause of the defects. Much in the same way parents of a dead infant might choose to donate the unfortunant child's organs to possibly spare another child untimely death. You have nothing to convict the MoD of pushing abortion.

reply from: yoda

That seems to be a difficult fact to convey to some posters here.....
Even biased people are right some of the time.......

reply from: BossMomma

That seems to be a difficult fact to convey to some posters here.....
Even biased people are right some of the time.......
Facts are not biased, facts are proven information, something you obviously have an issue with. All you have against the MoD is your own biased opinion and the opinions of others like you.

reply from: nancyu

I am not neutral on this subject. If you want neutrality you need to talk to someone else.
MOD is not neutral either. MOD opposes personhood for unborn children. That is a pro abortion stance. There's nothing neutral about it.

reply from: scopia19822

I cant believe you can support using aborted babies for fetal tissue experiments or anyone whos prolife. These children have been slaughtered now we need to further exploit them by desecrating their remains beyond throwing them in the trash can?

reply from: Yuuki

I cant believe you can support using aborted babies for fetal tissue experiments or anyone whos prolife. These children have been slaughtered now we need to further exploit them by desecrating their remains beyond throwing them in the trash can?
By aborting their child, the mother has pretty much consented to donating the body to science. This happens all the time; through organ donation and through whole-body donation. Relatives of the deceased can have the body donated. The only point of the body is to placate the family anyway. Really, they're dead; they don't need a body any more. And using it for life-saving research gives that child life beyond death. I think it's much more respectful than throwing them in the trash, actually.
Perhaps you would agree with this more if the mother had to sign a waiver, giving the body over to scientific research?

reply from: yoda

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.

reply from: scopia19822

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.
To me using the remains of an aborted unborn children or using embryos to experiment on is wrong. A human being is a human being and I find the practice of using any human being without their explicit consent revolting. Did you know that not that long ago orphans and children in foster care were used for varirous medical experiments? I guess thats ok after all they were burdens on the taxpayer right? Does the name Josef Mengele mean anything to you? He loved to experiment on people, especially children and twins were his favorite.

reply from: Yuuki

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.
To me using the remains of an aborted unborn children or using embryos to experiment on is wrong. A human being is a human being and I find the practice of using any human being without their explicit consent revolting. Did you know that not that long ago orphans and children in foster care were used for varirous medical experiments? I guess thats ok after all they were burdens on the taxpayer right? Does the name Josef Mengele mean anything to you? He loved to experiment on people, especially children and twins were his favorite.
Even if it was the person's dying wish to have heir body donated to science? At lweast you're consistent and apply this to ALL people.Also, I'm not talking about experimenting on born people; YOU brought that up. Not me.

reply from: Yuuki

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.
You think using the body for science imparts dignity on the abortion? I think it imparts dignity on the poor child. To be truly honest, a dead body to me is just a dead body. I've been to several funerals and wouldn't have been any less or more sad if it had been closed casket because the body wasn't actually there, but elsewhere being used for science. And no, I wouldn't care if my body were used for science either. I'm an organ donor on my license.
I feel if the person did not make or could not make their intent on this clear, that it should be up to the family.

reply from: scopia19822

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.
To me using the remains of an aborted unborn children or using embryos to experiment on is wrong. A human being is a human being and I find the practice of using any human being without their explicit consent revolting. Did you know that not that long ago orphans and children in foster care were used for varirous medical experiments? I guess thats ok after all they were burdens on the taxpayer right? Does the name Josef Mengele mean anything to you? He loved to experiment on people, especially children and twins were his favorite.
Even if it was the person's dying wish to have heir body donated to science? At lweast you're consistent and apply this to ALL people.Also, I'm not talking about experimenting on born people; YOU brought that up. Not me.
Because experimenting on embryos and aborted fetal tissue is a possible gateway to Mengle like experiments on people without their consent. If a person wants to donate their body to science that is there right just as it is for a person to say they want to be buried or cremeated. We have seen in history where using people as human guinea pigs or performing medical procedures without their consent can lead too. Auschiwitz, the forciably sterilizations in Virginia of the "feeble minded", the various states using orphans and foster care children. Eventaully that was stopped and we now have strict protocols for medical research using human beings. I have been in a couple of studies for migraine medications, everything was clearly explained to me and I had to sign several forms. In the case of adults only the person who will do the study can sign the forms, in the case of minor a parent can consent. But only if the child has a medical condition. So if my son had cancer it would ethical to sign him up for a experimantal treatment because Im trying to get him treatment to save his life . Not to have him used as a guniea pig .

reply from: yoda

Riiiiight.... by cutting their bodies up and doing experiments on them, they are afforded a lot of "dignity", right? We're not just treating them like so much "genetic material", right? We're not really "commodifying" them, right?
Yes, it is. And it's one that doesn't belong to you, or to any medical lab. And you have no right to slice and dice it, nor do they.
I disagree. I think that's disgusting.

reply from: Yuuki

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.
To me using the remains of an aborted unborn children or using embryos to experiment on is wrong. A human being is a human being and I find the practice of using any human being without their explicit consent revolting. Did you know that not that long ago orphans and children in foster care were used for varirous medical experiments? I guess thats ok after all they were burdens on the taxpayer right? Does the name Josef Mengele mean anything to you? He loved to experiment on people, especially children and twins were his favorite.
Even if it was the person's dying wish to have heir body donated to science? At lweast you're consistent and apply this to ALL people.Also, I'm not talking about experimenting on born people; YOU brought that up. Not me.
Because experimenting on embryos and aborted fetal tissue is a possible gateway to Mengle like experiments on people without their consent. If a person wants to donate their body to science that is there right just as it is for a person to say they want to be buried or cremeated. We have seen in history where using people as human guinea pigs or performing medical procedures without their consent can lead too. Auschiwitz, the forciably sterilizations in Virginia of the "feeble minded", the various states using orphans and foster care children. Eventaully that was stopped and we now have strict protocols for medical research using human beings. I have been in a couple of studies for migraine medications, everything was clearly explained to me and I had to sign several forms. In the case of adults only the person who will do the study can sign the forms, in the case of minor a parent can consent. But only if the child has a medical condition. So if my son had cancer it would ethical to sign him up for a experimantal treatment because Im trying to get him treatment to save his life . Not to have him used as a guniea pig .
If it's a possible gateway then why hasn't it happened already? Children are experimented on with the consent of their parents. Experimental cancer treatments, experimental surgery, etc. This is not unusual.
Also, do you donate blood? Do you consider yourself to be a "guinea pig" when ou donate? Probably not, since it is not YOU that any experimenting is being done on; it is your donated blood. The same goes for embryos. The cell is donated, not the netire embryo.

reply from: Yuuki

Riiiiight.... by cutting their bodies up and doing experiments on them, they are afforded a lot of "dignity", right? We're not just treating them like so much "genetic material", right? We're not really "commodifying" them, right?
Yes, it is. And it's one that doesn't belong to you, or to any medical lab. And you have no right to slice and dice it, nor do they.
I disagree. I think that's disgusting.
You were the one that included dignity in the first place. And you have no idea what the experimenting would involve. For all you know, they could simply draw blood and be done. You're going to extremes here.

reply from: nancyu

March of Dimes does not take a neutral position on the subject of abortion. This is not a neutral position. This is PRO ABORTION.

reply from: nancyu

http://familyreformation.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/why-does-the-united-way-support-planned-parenthood/

reply from: Rosalie

Why doesn't that surprise me?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.youtube.com/user/jillstanek
More from the very biased, yet truthful, Jill Stanek and Laura Ingraham

reply from: galen

another great veggie crock pot chilli
Smokey White Bean Chili
Ingredients
2 1/2 cups cooked great northern beans
3 cans (14 oz/ea) stewed tomatoes
1 cup green bell peppers, chopped
1 cup yellow carrots, chopped
1/2 small yellow onion, minced
2 cloves garlic, minced
4 tablespoons chili powder
2 tablespoons hickory bacon salt
2 tablespoons red pepper flakes
2 tablespoons liquid smoke
1 tablespoon vegan Worcestershire sauce
salt and pepper to taste
Directions:
Cook white beans according to directions on bag. Put everything in a large crock pot. turn temperature to high and let stew for 6-8 hours. Be sure to stir every once in a while so nothing burns, especially when you are closer to the 6 hour mark
Serve with cornbread!
Makes: 1 crockpot (serves 4-5), Preparation time: 30 minutes, Cooking time: 6-8 hours
cost to us was about 1.50 US per serving.
weather here is still chilly so this goes over well on a cool rainy day.

reply from: yoda

The nature of the experiments is irrelevant. To be experimented upon is to be treated like a commodity.

reply from: scopia19822

I agree with you 100% Yoda. It will first start with the embryonic steam cells than it will gradually evolve to using people without their consent, especially the indigent, mentally ill/retarded etc. If we allow ESR where do we draw the line? Arent a good portion of the same people who support this also ones who oppose animal testing? Its ok to experiment on human beings, but not animals. And I dont support using animals for research and product testing other than lab rats.

reply from: Yuuki

Yes, because allowing gay marriage in Massachusetts has led to people marrying goats, too.

reply from: Yuuki

The nature of the experiments is irrelevant. To be experimented upon is to be treated like a commodity.
But the embryo itself is NOT being experimented on. That's the point. The nature of the cell extraction is comparable to having your blood drawn. Do you consider donating blood to being "experimented on"?

reply from: Yuuki

I feel if the family wishes to give meaning to the body then their wishes should be respected and any reasonable action should be taken to satisfy them. If that wish is to donate the body, then that should be allowed.

reply from: galen

the nature of the extraction is only comprable to a blood draw if you are bleeding someone dry...
you can not extract from an embryo and then have it go on and live... however in a phlebotomy draw ( at least the type you seem to imply) you give a bit and go on about your buisness...after you mess with the intergrety of an embryo, there ( at least at this point) is no buisness to go about. Its no longer capable of living and growing.. there for you have killed it , there for it is wrong.

reply from: scopia19822

I have been intimant with both sexes in my past and even then I always thought marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Marriage is a state rights issue, if Mass wants to have it and thats what the people vote on fine. What I have a problem with it the courts making this sort of thing law.

reply from: Yuuki

If the child was already dead, what's the problem? No, the parents shouldn't be allowed to deny the lives of a thousand other people. I assume this dead child will have to be completely destroyed for the vaccine to be made, otherwise there really would be no excuse at all. You notice I said "any reasonable action". Condemning a thousand people to death is not reasonable.

reply from: Yuuki

I have been intimant with both sexes in my past and even then I always thought marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Marriage is a state rights issue, if Mass wants to have it and thats what the people vote on fine. What I have a problem with it the courts making this sort of thing law.
Should it have remained the state's rights to end slavery or discrimination? This is a form of discrimination. It is wrong.

reply from: Yuuki

The extraction I'm discussing is non lethal. It is commonly used at the 8 cell stage for genetic testing. I'm not talking about extracting from a blastocyst, which is the old way of getting stem cells. I'm talking about a different method that is proven to work and be nonlethal for the embryo.
So yes, it is comparable to a normal blood donation.

reply from: nancyu

The extraction I'm discussing is non lethal. It is commonly used at the 8 cell stage for genetic testing. I'm not talking about extracting from a blastocyst, which is the old way of getting stem cells. I'm talking about a different method that is proven to work and be nonlethal for the embryo.
So yes, it is comparable to a normal blood donation.
How about a link to an unbiased source explaining this non lethal ESCR?

reply from: yoda

I don't think that's true. The process of extracting "just one cell" and then letting the rest develop into a normal fetus has never been achieved. I don't believe it's a real alternative.

reply from: yoda

Wow, now you're even eliminating the parents from the decision..... it's easy to tell you've never been a parent.
You have no right to take anyone's body for any purpose, without consent. Donate your own, now, if you think it's such a great idea. Lead by example!

reply from: yoda

No, it isn't. I already posted documentation proving that in that experiment, they intentionally destroyed the embryos anyway.

reply from: Yuuki

No, it isn't. I already posted documentation proving that in that experiment, they intentionally destroyed the embryos anyway.
And yet the article I read and posted stated it was regularly used to est for genetic diseases during the IVF procedure...

reply from: Yuuki

The extraction I'm discussing is non lethal. It is commonly used at the 8 cell stage for genetic testing. I'm not talking about extracting from a blastocyst, which is the old way of getting stem cells. I'm talking about a different method that is proven to work and be nonlethal for the embryo.
So yes, it is comparable to a normal blood donation.
How about a link to an unbiased source explaining this non lethal ESCR?
Go find the topic I made about it a week ago.

reply from: nancyu

There is no such thing as "non lethal" ESCR!

reply from: Yuuki

Go read your own topic!

reply from: galen

No, it isn't. I already posted documentation proving that in that experiment, they intentionally destroyed the embryos anyway.
And yet the article I read and posted stated it was regularly used to est for genetic diseases during the IVF procedure...
__________________________________
Sorry Yukki i can not find the article you referr to...
anyhow, they do not produce3 cell lines, nor did they produce vaccines from embryos that were later allowed to develope naturally...its just not done. IVF is a whole diffrent ballgame and is not done for experimentation, only for diagnosis... if a problem is found the embryo is discarded.
CP, i am all for organ donation, but i am not for creating humans for dissection/ experimentation purposes. A parent who does IVF who donates the embryos for experiments because they do not wish another Joe or Sally, violates the spirit of the whole process in my opinion.
the moral of this argument is do not create the kids you do not wish to have....

reply from: Yuuki

Go look at the new post Nancyu made. The article is posted there.

reply from: Yuuki

Here it is (the topic):
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6507&enterthread=y

Another case of Nancyu's supreme ignorance.

reply from: galen

actually i see it as another case of you oversimplifying what is a great deal more complicated...
_______________________________
The technique usually does not harm the embryo, which is frozen for possible future implantation into the mother's womb
___________________________________
the above quote from the article is what i believe you are hinging on... there is nothinmg in the above quote that gives you the stats.
It seems to me that once again you are confusing experimentation and diagnosis.
No one has grown a cell line as yet from an embryo and then gone on to implant and deliver that child... the embyo cells usede for diagnosis and those used for experiments are likely much more diffrent than many would have us believe... just based on morphology etc.

reply from: galen

thanks for the link though BTW>>>>

reply from: Yuuki

It seems to me you are confusing what's going on here.
We are not growing a cell line from an embryo. We are extracting one cell from the embryo (look here, I hold it in my hand!) and then using that CELL, not the EMBRYO, to create stem cells. No experimentation is done on the EMBRYO. The EMBRYO is over there, being implanted into the mother. See?

reply from: galen

so far what you have described is not and has not happened... the researchers have not even TRIED it yet.
all they have done is removed a cell, worked a line, and destryoed the embryo...
You've taken a fluff story and quoted it as actual acience... its not... its a fluff/ feel good piece done on MSN to further the idea that maybe ESC will cure big diseases...
Other countries have been doing work with ESC for years to cure parkinson's etc... it does not work.
ESC are too hard to controll and very often produce disease that will be worse than the condition you are trying to treat with it.

reply from: Yuuki

Just because they haven't TRIED doesn't mean they cannot. They probably couldn't get any funding until now, because of Bush's damned restrictions.

reply from: galen

ummmm... hate to tell you but MANY countries with all the funding in the world have tried... for years... it does not work.

reply from: galen

and as far as i can tell the purported people in the article have not produced a viable line of ESC.. just a few cells that have divided...no publications and no others that have replicated...so again.. a fluffy feelgood no science involved piece....

reply from: Yuuki

If you could pull up some exact research of all ESC cure attempts and all ASC cure attempts, you'll find that ASCR isn't doing much better. It's just getting better pres in America.

reply from: galen

really??
cause i've actually dones that in regards to my brain tumour... and the resultsa are astonishing....
DId you know they have CURED people with cancer.. lupus.. and MS with thier own adult stem cells??
how many have been CURED with ESC?? none.

reply from: Yuuki

It is a viable technique that does not kill the embryo. Why do you hate it so much? Would you prefer the keep using the lethal method? ESCR isn't going away, so which version do you prefer, the lethal version or the non lethal version?
The thing is (that people don't seem to get) using embryonic stem cells is like building a house with no instruction manual. There is a TON of potential, but it's going to take a lot LONGER to figure everything out. It IS taking longer, and that's the nature of the research. If you want miracles, turn to God. But the end potential is so great that we cannot turn away from it.
Adult stem cells are less pluripotent. That means (on a bit of a plus side) they already have some of the blueprints in place. They're more restrictive in what they can do, but you don't have to guess as much. And there is a place for this research. But ASC will never be able to cure the wide range of diseases and conditions that ESCR will be able to. ASC research is thus a little easier and is getting results faster. But faster isn't always better. The easy path isn't always the right path.

reply from: galen

and just because you want something to work does not mean its going to .
face it Yuuki... i may want meteorite dust to cure cancer... but wishing does not make it so.

reply from: galen

But if they are already taking a cell from embryos for testing, and those embryos are being successfully used for IVF, doesn't that show that the cell can be removed without harming the embryo? Why would they have to successfully implant the embryo who's cell was used to create the stem cells? The embryo wouldn't know what the cell was used for, and that would make no difference to the viability of the embryo, right?
You're saying that we don't know if it will be viable after being frozen, but that's not really the point. The point is that, since they can use the embryo after removing the cell, and it doesn't harm it, then this is a way to get ESCs without killing the embryo. As for the freezing, I think I read that something like 70% of frozen embryos do not survive or are not viable after thawing anyway. I can't say whether these had already been tested or not, though, so I don't know whether they had the single cell removed.
________________________
that is the point... most are NOT viable.. and the tested cells are extracted with the sole purpose of creating a viable embryo... not a cell line for ESC...what tends to drive research is the thought process behind it...no one is purposeing that we are going to creat a stem cell line for each and every human out there... we have cord blood for that...so what will they do with the embryos used to make the new lines?...if its the company quoted.. they will flush them... just like all the rest.
and it still does not get around the fact thet ESC has been researched for a long while... does not work and the $$$ could be used twards more promising research. ..
And that if you use a person's own stem cells there is not need for all that pesky matching and things like immune suppressants.

reply from: galen

look i don't like when anyone is called a liar... but i also like to broaden peoples horizens...you can't just accept that because its in a paper today that its true...especially when the reorters back it up with no science.. just a few feel good statements...
anyway.. here is a bit of brain food.
http://www.nature.com/stemcells/2009/0904/090409/full/stemcells.2009.54.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19295520?dopt=Citation

reply from: galen

here is a link of the countries that have been promoting ESC research... none of whome have done anything but cause tumours...
http://www.mbbnet.umn.edu/scmap.html

CP... i think that sometimes science becomes so focused on what they think should happen with something that they forget to look in other directions....also the cost is something that everyone jumps on the bandwagon with...right now w/ obama in office ESC has become the new fad... and all sorts of crazy industry has popped up around it... how many $$$ will go to the hype.. and not research... its kinda like Komen.... they raise all sorts of $$$ but most does not go to the researchers.
asnd back to fluff pieces... watch the $$ flow to the start ups for this programme and trac them....it'll end up being worse than Vioxx.

reply from: BossMomma

And by using the bodies of aborted babies for "science", a certain amount of dignity and purpose is imparted upon the original act of abortion, and I think that is immoral. Unless you approve of using born humans dead bodies for medical experiments without their consent, you cannot morally support using aborted babies bodies and remain consistent.
To me using the remains of an aborted unborn children or using embryos to experiment on is wrong. A human being is a human being and I find the practice of using any human being without their explicit consent revolting. Did you know that not that long ago orphans and children in foster care were used for varirous medical experiments? I guess thats ok after all they were burdens on the taxpayer right? Does the name Josef Mengele mean anything to you? He loved to experiment on people, especially children and twins were his favorite.
A dead body can't give concent, concent is given by the next of kin..aka mom. And as far as what you think is wrong, do you think it's wrong of a woman to donate her dead child's organs to save the life of another child?

reply from: scopia19822

"And as far as what you think is wrong, do you think it's wrong of a woman to donate her dead child's organs to save the life of another child?"
No I dont if the child hasnt died as the result of an abortion, but may have been killed in a tragic accident, SIDS etc then I believe that something good should be done to come out of a bad sitation that was beyond anyones control.

reply from: galen

_______________________________________-
UMM.. scientific publications must be publishe on the web...and other places so that they may be reviewed and the experiments done by others, it is part of the scientific process. A therory is not prooven untill another lab can reproduce the results and publish them also. Then you will get the back and forth of ideas that allows progress...
If my research seems one sided.. its because so far the only ESC results to be published are multiple failures.. many in rats...no one has been able to move past the rodent modles and get things to work. This often happens as rodents are not people and they behave diffrently in many reactions, to drugs, etc. Many times in the past pharma. companies and research labs have falsified data to make it seem as if a treatment would work...it has alsways been to the humans detriment.
there for look not as if the beating rat heart on a mtrix has promise... it only prooves that you can put rat cells on a frame and make them beat...look for why they are touting a rat heart as great and not trying to do so with a pig or chimp cell line wich is much closer to a human one.
the answer is that they did try and those did not work.

reply from: yoda

But think of all the rats that can maybe be saved by ESCR.......

reply from: galen

yeah... like we don't have enough rats in this world...

reply from: nancyu

I made this today. It's very good. How did you know I was looking for a veggie chili recipe?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.stemcellgo.com/recent-advances-in-escr/
The point is even if it is WILDLY successful, we still should NOT do ANYTHING THAT DESTROYS innocent HUMAN BEINGS.
We may be able to get from point A to point B by driving a bulldozer over that person, but wouldn't it be BETTER to go AROUND that person? I understand it might take longer that way. Gosh what a terrible inconvenience.

reply from: ProInformed

But think of all the rats that can maybe be saved by ESCR.......
The researchers themselves are increasingly admitting that the non-ESCR, adult stem cell research has the most chance of success. The pro-aborts defend ESCR, not in spite of the fact that it kills innocent humans, but BECAUSE it does.

reply from: Yuuki

Oh please that's utter nonsense.

reply from: nancyu

The point is even if it is WILDLY successful, we still should NOT do ANYTHING THAT DESTROYS innocent HUMAN BEINGS.
We may be able to get from point A to point B by driving a bulldozer over that person, but wouldn't it be BETTER to go AROUND that person? I understand it might take longer that way. Gosh what a terrible inconvenience.

reply from: nancyu

Jill Stanek: The biggest boobs
WorldNetDaily ^ | 5/17/06 | Jill Stanek
Posted on Wednesday, May 17, 2006 7:13:28 PM by wagglebee
According to its president, the National Breast Cancer Coalition has "revolutionized" public policy in the quest to eradicate breast cancer.
But NBCC has an odd way of running its revolution.
On May 4, NBCC announced the Golden Boob Awards, to "highlight the biggest boobs of all - the organizations that are using breast cancer purely as a way to make money or to promote an ideology."
"Biggest boobs"? That NBCC would so crassly refer to a body part carrying such deep sexual and maternal significance to those mourning or fearing its loss is shameful - the equivalent to announcing the Little Baldy Awards for child leukemia research.
NBCC's top nominee was the Coalition on Abortion-Breast Cancer, of which I am an advisery board member.
NBCC accused CABC of "using breast cancer as a scare tactic" by "assert[ing] abortion leads to an increased risk of breast cancer."
Meanwhile, NBCC's president, Fran Visco, recently insisted her group had "no agenda other than to end breast cancer."
If that were true, why would they worry whether women were scared from abortion?
NBCC's treasurer, Cynthia Pearson, is the former director of both a San Diego abortion mill and a Colorado NARAL group. She is currently president of National Women's Health Network, an organization promoting abortion. She has taught women to commit self abortions known as "menstrual extractions," for over 20 years.
Allowing Pearson on the board of NBCC is like allowing a tobacco executive on the board of the American Lung Association in the 1960s. Does no one see a conflict of interest?
But I suspect it's not just NBCC. Any breast-cancer advocacy or science organization that allows abortion proponents to hold positions of influence is suspect.
And here's something I find remarkable. No group disputing a link between abortion and breast cancer knows the cause of breast cancer:
* "We don't know the precise causes of breast cancer." - Susan B. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation
* "No one knows the exact causes of breast cancer." - National Cancer Institute
* "We want to know the cause." - Fran Visco, NBCC
* "We do not yet know exactly what causes breast cancer." - American Cancer Society
But each of those groups is sure abortion is not one of the causes they do not know.
"The fact is that abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer," stated Visco.
Really? She's absolutely sure that a medical procedure tampering with a breast carcinogen has nothing to do with inflicting cancer in the breast?
Yes, the federal government announced five years ago that estrogen is a "known carcinogen" of breast tissue.
Estrogen is the major female hormone that tells a woman's body to do womanly things - like grow breasts.
But too much estrogen can be problematic. This is why those ignorant breast-cancer organizations at least know the following breast-cancer risks:
* Starting menstruation early or entering menopause late, due to increased exposure to estrogen.
* Taking estrogen-progesterone birth-control pills (classified as "highly carcinogenic" by the World Health Organization).
* Undergoing estrogen-progesterone hormone replacement therapy.
Further, they agree the following factors decrease risks:
* A full-term pregnancy, the earlier the better, because only at the end of a first full-term pregnancy are breasts fully mature, and estrogen cannot damage immature breast cell DNA (explaining why lesbians and nuns have greater incidences of breast cancer).
* Irregular periods, breastfeeding, and having many children - all of which result in fewer menstrual cycles and less estrogen exposure.
And these are successful treatments for breast cancer:
* Removal of ovaries, because they make estrogen.
* Anti-cancer drugs that alter the effect of estrogen on breast cells.
Given all that, logically consider induced abortion, which interrupts the release of estrogen to a pregnant woman's breasts during cell differentiation and maturation, leaving cells with no further instructions.
Is it plausible that this phenomenon could increase the risk of breast cancer?
Eight medical organizations think so, including the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which called this "highly plausible" in 2003.
Meanwhile, the National Cancer Institute indicated the incidence of breast cancer rose 25 percent overall between 1973-1996. For ages 65 and younger, it rose 18 percent.
But to date, NBCC refuses CABC's request for experts on both sides to debate the issue.
To date, no debate has ever taken place at any science meeting.
In 2003, NCI concluded there was no ABC link, refusing to allow differing opinion, discounting verified studies, leaning instead on unpublished studies.
Now I have to ask, in the crass words of NBCC: Who are the biggest boobs?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1634021/posts

reply from: ProInformed

"Eight medical organizations think so, including the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which called this "highly plausible" in 2003."
There is no valid excuse for women being denied this info!

reply from: ProInformed

"refusing to allow differing opinion, discounting verified studies, leaning instead on unpublished studies."
Just like the tobacco industry defenders who claimed smoking did NOT cause cancer...

reply from: ProInformed

The thing is the pro-aborts don't really even care.
They don't care if they are killing a human embryo
AND they don't care that alternative forms of research hold more promise of cures.
They just care about 'free sex' and 'abortions-on-demand';
they only pretend to care about other things if by doing so it somehow legitimizes abortions.

reply from: nancyu

Latina Komen Advisor Resigns
Press Release
Cinta Latina Research
Contact: Eve Silver
silver@cintalatina.org
Date:09/20/04
Summary:
Women of color have been the target of Eugenics policies for many years. Margaret Sanger's Planned Parenthood, has its roots in the destruction of people of color. Latina Advisor resigns over Komen's Planned Parenthood funding.
Definition: Eugenics - The study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding. (American Heritage Dictionary, Standard Edition)
[Margaret SangerÉ built Planned Parenthood, on the ideas and resources of the eugenics movement." (blackgenocide.org)
In one town alone, Barceloneta [Puerto Rico, 20,000 women were sterilized between 1956 and 1976 (Garcia 1985).(Garcia, Ana Maria. La operacion. Produced and directed by Ana Maria Garcia. 40 min. New York: Cinema Guild, 1982. Videocassette.)
"In 2003, Komen Affiliates awarded $38.4 million in grants to support community outreach programs, including 21 grants to their local Planned Parenthood chapters totaling more than $475,000. (Kristin Kelly, Public Relations Manager, The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation; curvers.squarespace.com)
Kristin Kelly is no longer working at SGK.
Planned Parenthood is the number one provider of abortions internationally.
Four days ago Eve Sanchez Silver, a charter member of The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation's National Hispanic/Latina Advisory Council, (SGK) received an article from a colleague which suggested that SGK is currently funding Planned Parenthood.
She thought it was a lie. It wasn't.
As a two-time breast cancer survivor and charter member of SGK she had quieted her personal convictions to work with a determined freedom, within The National Hispanic/Latina Advisory Council, towards the eradication of breast cancer as a life-threatening disease, and, with the other honorable multi-cultural councils of SGK. She was honored, purposeful and committed to The SGK Foundation.
Upon investigating the allegations that SGK was indeed funding Planned Parenthood through affiliate grants, she resigned from SGK, canceling several speaking engagements around the country and resigning as well from her own beloved council.
"Not One Life Is Negotible"
"As a Christian and life affirming citizen I can not reconcile The Foundation's decision to affirm life with one hand and support its destruction with the other." Says Silver.
Pro-Choice Colleagues Agreed
"Pro-choice colleagues I spoke with agreed, wondering why Komen was not using its resources to fund more grass-roots initiatives, instead of handing money to a huge, established organization like Planned Parenthood."
"It makes me wonder what other abortion related agendas SGK may be supporting, like the black-out on the 16 statistically significant epidemiological studies linking abortion to breast cancer. Is one hand washing the other?"
Nancy Brinker, Komen Founder
BOARD MEMBER North Texas PLANNED PARENTHOOD
"Nancy Brinker, who founded SGK is listed for 2002 as a member of the advisory board of Planned Parenthood of North Texas...
"In 2002, Planned Parenthood of North Texas became the largest independent family planning provider in the state and the fifth largest Planned Parenthood affiliate in the nation." (North Texas 2002 annual report. Download their report: http://www.ppnt.org/content/2002_Annual_Report.pdf)

Breast services funds from the Foundation will only serve to white-wash Planned Parenthood's abortion agenda.
Why is The Komen Foundation giving Planned Parenthood its Race for the Cure money?" wonders Silver. "That money is earned by sneakered women struggling to raise money for research and grass-roots groups!" Silver says. She spoke directly to leaders within The Komen organization who, she says, were sympathetic but turned a deaf ear to her pleas.
Final Advisory
"It is my final advisory to The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation that it withdraw its continued financial support of
Planned Parenthood, a multi-million dollar, international abattoir,
that is systematically focused upon the abortion and destruction of life."
"Send the Dallas Komen Headquarters your sneakers," says Silver, "And tell them you will not run in The Race For The Cure again until they quit funding Planned Parenthood and ALL abortion related facilities.
Silver commented about her people and the nature of her resignation:
"Breast cancer is no respecter of persons, but abortion is."
"The multi-cultural nature of our councils
makes our people the very focus of that destruction."
"I cannot sit idly by."
http://www.clearresearch.org/latina_advisor_quits_komen.htm

reply from: carolemarie

they give money to pph for doing mamograms for low income women, which helps breast cancer be detected early and helps poor women survivve. I am for this and i wish other organizations could do this in rural areas...
.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.rnclife.org/faxnotes/2007/oct07/07-10-12.html

NANCY BRINKER - WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF PROTOCOL
Nancy Brinker, founder of the Susan B. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, was confirmed last month to the post of White House Chief of Protocol. Ms. Brinker previously served as President Bush's ambassador to Hungary. She is the former wife of Norman Brinker, founder and chairman emeritus of Brinker International Inc., operator of more than 1500 restaurant chains including Chili's Grill & Bar, Maggiano's Little Italy, and On the Border Mexican Grill.
Nancy Brinker was listed as an advisory board member in the 2002 Annual Report of Planned Parenthood of North Texas, the fifth largest Planned Parenthood affiliate in the nation. Planned Parenthood is the number one provider of abortions in the United States. During its 2005-2006 fiscal year the nonprofit Planned Parenthood Federation of America performed a record 264,943 abortions, according to its Annual Report.
The Foundation, as well as Susan G. Komen for the Cure are named for Nancy Brinker's sister, who died of breast cancer. Their declared purpose is to raise funds to find a cure for breast cancer, yet they inexplicably and steadfastly refuse to recognize the link between abortion and breast cancer. Instead, Susan G. Komen for the Cure awarded 72 grants totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars to Planned Parenthood affiliates during the years 2000 through 2005. The grants are reported on the Susan G. Komen website by entering "Planned Parenthood" on Komen's searchable grant page.
In September of 2004, Eve Sanchez Silver, a breast cancer survivor and charter member of Komen's Hispanic/Latina Advisory Council, resigned from Komen, stating, "As a Christian and life affirming citizen I can not reconcile the Foundation's decision to affirm life with one hand and support its destruction with the other."
(Bioethics Defense Fund, http://www.bdfund.org/breastcancer.asp)

reply from: nancyu

http://www.lifeissues.org/AbortionBreastcancer/komen/fact_sheet.pdf

reply from: nancyu

It is absolutely unnecessary for Komen to give funding to planned parenthood. They could donate money elsewhere for women to have cancer screenings, and OTHER healthcare.
Planned Parenthood is a baby killing business. That is a fact. If you want to defend them or support them that makes you an accomplice.

reply from: scopia19822

I agree with nancy. State, county and city health departments can provide the same thing if they had more funding.

reply from: Yuuki

Watch out for those baby-killing condoms!

reply from: Yuuki

Yep.
And you're an accomplice too if you've ever unwittingly donated to or bought things from the "no no" compaines on that list.

reply from: galen

the fact is that SGK has other rescources to fund if they want to offer early mammograms... I would think that if PP could manage its funds and funnel only to mammograms it might be 1 thing... but it can't, its lack of transparency seems to be one of the reasons our current President has had a lot of problems with this org....Why send stimulus money to a large corporation that can't seem to hire admins who don't steal... and can't seem to help women prevent unwanted pregnancies...
Anyhooo I think PP is about to undergo a major overhaul... it seems they may loose thier non profit status under the current admin... or else become part of the feds.

reply from: BossMomma

PP pro lifer.
Yeah, CM is just so evil for supporting life saving procedures for poor women. To be a good pro-lifer you have to support letting these women be blissfully ignorant until death.

reply from: scopia19822

"eah, CM is just so evil for supporting life saving procedures for poor women. To be a good pro-lifer you have to support letting these women be blissfully ignorant until death."
If all PP provided was well woman care, birth control and mammograms I could see given them the money, but since they are the largest providers of abortions in America. I would be reluctant to give them any dime of taxpayer money. Give this money to community hospitals, rural clinics and local health departments, but not to PP.

reply from: Yuuki

They are the "largest providers of abortion" but abortions actually consist of something like less than 20% of ALL their profits and services. So if they're the "largest providers of abortion", then they're even LARGER providers of a ton of stuff NOT related to abortion!

reply from: scopia19822

"They are the "largest providers of abortion" but abortions actually consist of something like less than 20% of ALL their profits and services. So if they're the "largest providers of abortion", then they're even LARGER providers of a ton of stuff NOT related to abortion!"
Abortion is where they make their biggest profits. The fact that they provide abortions at all is reason enough not to fund them. I pay taxes should I have too pay for their abortion business? That money could be used at community hospitals and clinics and health departments to provide these services.

reply from: yoda

It certainly is, and not just from the fees they get from their clients. Abortion is the reason that our government funds them so generously, so as to encourage our citizens to abort rather than have babies that might soak up some "entitlements". Our government is the biggest scrooge in the world when it comes to entitlements.
Oh, and btw, PP is now the largest single abortion provider in the WORLD, not just in the US.

reply from: BossMomma

Are you kidding? If that were the case they'd spend all their time delivering live babies. A OB makes thousands caring for pregnant women until delivery as opposed to the five or six hundred an abortion provider makes.

reply from: Yuuki

NO IT'S NOT. This has already been proven. Abortion is 3% of their business!! Your money is going to the 97% of NON abortion services they supply, too.

reply from: Yuuki

PP prolifer.
Is that supposed to be offensive?

reply from: Yuuki

Damn that felt good. Nice to know I'm not on ignore anymore though. Perhaps you could finally check out the post I'll copy-paste for you, read it, and again tell me how I'm a "pp pro-lifer", whatever the ***** that means. Yes, I like PP and yes, I'm a pro-lifer. Am I supposed to be offended or something? Insults don't work unless they're actually insulting.

reply from: nancyu

Just really really dumb.

reply from: scopia19822

"NO IT'S NOT. This has already been proven. Abortion is 3% of their business!! Your money is going to the 97% of NON abortion services they supply, too."
They take human life I dont care if it is a mere 3 % or 100%. They provide abortions and that is reason enough for me to oppose them. You can go ahead and be an apologist for an organization rooted in the core of it origins in racism and eugenics. I have my convictions and my principals and I will not compromise them. There are many free clinic and rural clinics that would love to provide these services, but cant because they cant get funding. PP gets about 300 million dollars a year, that money would do alot better if it was diverted to other organizations to provide the same services as PP claims it provides. If you are truly against abortion you would not be defended PP.

reply from: galen

spring soup
ingredient list
Serves 4 (makes about 6 cups)
2 Tbs. olive oil
1 large onion, cut into 1/2-inch dice (about 1 1/2 cups)
3 cloves garlic, minced
4 cups mushroom stock
2 cups sliced asparagus (about 3/4 lb.)
8 oz. baby summer squash, cut into 1/2-inch dice
1 cup frozen peas
1 19-oz. can cannellini beans, drained and rinsed
1/2 cup chopped fresh Italian parsley leaves
2 Tbs. lemon juice
2 Tbs. grated Parmesan cheese
Directions
1.Heat oil in large saucepan over medium-high heat. Add onion, and sauté about 8 minutes, until golden. Add garlic; sauté about 30 seconds, or until fragrant.
2.Add stock, asparagus and squash, and reduce heat to medium. Cook 4 minutes, stirring often, or until vegetables are slightly tender. Add peas and beans, and cook 3 to 4 minutes more, until heated through.
3.Stir in parsley, lemon juice and Parmesan; season with salt and freshly ground black pepper. Serve.
great w/ a sourdough bread.

reply from: yoda

Exactly.
Exactly.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.gingiedmonds.com/October21.html
Gingi Edmonds
ProLife Opinion
Oct. 21, 2008 - National Selective Awareness Month
For those of you scratching your heads as to the recent surplus of pink in your town, October is officially the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
Some quick facts: Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer in women worldwide and the most common cause of cancer death in U.S. women aged 20 to 59 years. Each year in the United States, approximately 211,000 women develop breast cancer and more than 47,000 (20%) do so before the age of 50 years. Approximately two in 15 American women are expected to develop breast cancer in their lifetime, and nearly 40,000 U.S. women die of the disease annually.
These are some heavy statistics, and in light of the facts, breast cancer really does warrant the degree of concern that it generates in our communities. However, this month isn't entirely all it's cracked up to be. See, when they called it "awareness" month, you might think that what they meant was "awareness". Here's the deal. There is a wealth of life-saving, medically sound information that women are being deliberately left very much unaware of. And it's all censored in the name of politics and liberal ideology from the party that pretends to care deeply for women.
A study by Patrick Carroll published in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2007 demonstrated that abortion is the "best predictor of breast cancer."
It has long been established that a woman who has an abortion is left with more cancer-vulnerable cells than she had before she ever became pregnant. Biological evidence and more than two dozen studies worldwide support a cause and effect relationship. Fifteen studies were conducted on American women, and 13 of them reported risk elevations. Seven found a more than twofold elevation in risk. Seventeen are statistically significant, 16 of which demonstrated a positive association. (By the way skeptics, the term "statistical significance" means that scientists are at least 95% certain that their findings are not due to chance or error.)
Conclusive worldwide epidemiological studies show an increased risk of breast cancer of approximately 30% among women who have had an abortion. With one out of every six women in America undergoing a surgical abortion at some point in their lives, and 47% having multiple abortions, this might be good information to make women "aware" of during this month of breast cancer "awareness", wouldn't you say?
If you go to the official National Breast Cancer Awareness Month website (NBCAM.com)and type in "abortion" on the websites search engine, you get a page stating, "Sorry but there were no results for your search term."
When perusing the "Risk factors of breast cancer FAQ", (also without a single reference to abortion) the website then urges you to seek more information for your unanswered questions on cancer.org. Having done so and searching the term "abortion", you find that the topic of the abortion and breast cancer link is nonchalantly dismissed with the excuse that it's not worth focusing on because, "Linking these 2 topics creates a great deal of emotion and debate."
So let me get this straight... it's okay if hordes of us women die to breast cancer, just as long as our sensitive, feminine hearts aren't stirred to excess emotion in the process? What a joke. Someone needs to inform these guys that ignorance isn't always bliss when you're slowly dying from a self-induced malignant tumor.
Women have the right to know about the abortion-breast cancer research. In fact, putting the morality of abortion aside, it's blatantly anti-choice that women have been prevented from making informed decisions about this women's health issue. Breast cancer groups violate their mission to "eradicate breast cancer" when they withhold life-saving information about risk factors for the disease. So why would they do it?
It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the close ties of multiple breast cancer groups with abortion providers and supporters, could it? Why would groups like Susan G. Komen for the Cure give roughly half a million dollars a year to abortion provider and breast cancer producer, Planned Parenthood, then publish the truth about abortion causing cancer? Telling women the truth about their health risks would hurt political ties. It would appear that politics far outweigh the rights of women to make informed health decisions.
Think about this: Nancy Goodman Brinker, Komen's founder and former U.S. ambassador to Hungary, sat on Planned Parenthood's advisory board in North Texas five years ago.
Cynthia Pearson, formerly a Colorado organizer for NARAL Pro-Choice America and currently the executive director of the National Women's Health Network, sits on the National Breast Cancer Coalition's board of directors.
Barbara Brenner, Breast Cancer Action's leader, formerly sat on the American Civil Liberties Union's board. The ACLU's abortion advocacy is well known in the courts.
If tobacco executives and asbestos manufacturers were board members at the American Lung Association, donors would be outraged and would question their credibility. Why are we tolerating this blatant conflict of interest? The tobacco-cancer link might never have been brought to the public's attention if tobacco's executives had done what abortion's feminists are doing now - sitting on the boards of cancer fundraising organizations.
So what, you might wonder, is Planned Parenthood doing with the hundreds of thousands of dollars donated from the hard work and labor of women seeking awareness for breast cancer? While the nation is diligently acknowledging October as the Breast Cancer Awareness Month, Planned Parenthood is busy observing October as their self-proclaimed "National Family Sexuality Month".
While women nation-wide are participating in breast cancer walks, marches and fundraisers in the hopes of finding means to save the lives of their daughters and sisters and mothers, Planned Parenthood is occupied with holding events such as, "The Liberation of Women's Pleasure Through The Vibrator" and "Fantasy and Skin Hunger Training Seminars" that they claim are "family workshops" good for ages eight and up. Women are dying daily from abortion induced breast cancer, and yet promoting sexuality is a weightier issue in the minds of pro-choicers.
It would appear that Planned Parenthood is only pro-woman after first being pro-abortion. On the scale of importance, abortion comes first, women's health second. Or maybe women's health comes in third, after teaching second graders how to masturbate. I never can keep the liberal choice agenda straight.
If you look up "breast cancer" on Planned Parenthoods website, they encourage women to "get the facts" and to "not let fears and concerns get in the way of your health." How about not letting the fear of losing your annual income from abortion services get in the way of the health of the women you profess to care for? The website states, "Planned Parenthood is concerned above all with women's health and the risk factors for reproductive health problems." If this is truly the case, then why ignore conclusive and vital evidence that directly pertains to the development of breast cancer due to induced abortion? Stop viewing women as money producing machines that will sell you their 'products of conception', and actually inform these precious individuals that they are putting themselves at risk!
Deceiving women on this issue is anti-woman and anti-choice. An editorial by a National Cancer Institute epidemiologist asserted that "a woman need not worry about the risk of breast cancer" when she contemplates an abortion... bless her ignorant, liberated little heart. I'm sorry, but regardless of being pro-life or pro-choice, all women undergoing abortion are entitled to full informed consent as to all risks involved in their decision.
The NBCAM website states that, "With breast cancer, education is empowerment." I completely agree. That's our cue, ladies. Let's spread the word. Attend a local breast cancer walk, fair, or event and distribute fliers with information on the abortion-breast cancer link. Get media attention. Be controversial! Write letters to fundraising organizations, stressing the importance of uncensored medical education pertaining to breast cancer. This issue is far too important to let anti-woman organizations like Planned Parenthood censor. I know the deep rooted political power of Planned Parenthood can be daunting, but to quote NBCAM on the importance of individual involvement, "Messages from real women can be just as powerful, if not more so."
So let's go raise awareness, shall we?
- Gingi Edmonds

Copyright 2008-2009. Gingi Edmonds. All rights reserved.
Web Hosting Companies
Cheap Hosting

reply from: nancyu

PP prolifer.
Is that supposed to be offensive?
Well... it should be...

reply from: Yuuki

PP prolifer.
Is that supposed to be offensive?
Well... it should be...
Maybe it is to you, but since I have no problem with 90% of what PP does, I can't find anything offensive about the statement.

reply from: yoda

Lots of good, decent folks have no problem with 90% of what the KKK does.
It's that other 10% that really frosts them.

reply from: Yuuki

Lots of good, decent folks have no problem with 90% of what the KKK does.
It's that other 10% that really frosts them.
99% of what the KKK did/does is racist. Their whole existence was ABOUT being racist. PP's entire existence is NOT about providing abortion, and they could easily stop providing it and be just fine if abortion were made illegal.
PP will NOT DISAPPEAR if abortion becomes illegal folks.

reply from: nancyu

Lots of good, decent folks have no problem with 90% of what the KKK does.
It's that other 10% that really frosts them.
99% of what the KKK did/does is racist. Their whole existence was ABOUT being racist. PP's entire existence is NOT about providing abortion, and they could easily stop providing it and be just fine if abortion were made illegal.
PP will NOT DISAPPEAR if abortion becomes illegal folks.
Duh.
Then.... why are they waiting for abortion to become illegal? Abortions comprise a mere less than 3% of their business. Why don't they just cut out doing them right now since they are so great and so pro life like their great pro life founder Margaret Sanger?

reply from: Yuuki

Lots of good, decent folks have no problem with 90% of what the KKK does.
It's that other 10% that really frosts them.
99% of what the KKK did/does is racist. Their whole existence was ABOUT being racist. PP's entire existence is NOT about providing abortion, and they could easily stop providing it and be just fine if abortion were made illegal.
PP will NOT DISAPPEAR if abortion becomes illegal folks.
Duh.
Then.... why are they waiting for abortion to become illegal? Abortions comprise a mere less than 3% of their business. Why don't they just cut out doing them right now since they are so great and so pro life like their great pro life founder Margaret Sanger?
Because they believe abortion is a woman's right. Duh. Would you stop providing a service you felt you had a right to provide, one that you felt was not morally wrong and in fact helped women? Of course you wouldn't. They worry that if they did not provide abortion, women would be shoving coat hangers up their tooties and killing themselves in desperation; they believe that they are providing a safe solution for the woman. And they're right; an abortion in a clinical setting is much safer than trying to do it at home. HOWEVER, they have mentally had to disregard the other patient...
Abortion has been a part of our culture as HUMANS (not just Amercians) since the dawn of time. Women have always been finding herbs to abort with. Coming into the new age of logic and reason, people had to find some logical reason why abortion was okay, despite our growing knowledge of prenatal existence. If you listen to their arguments, they're really just excuses and justifications. "It's okay because it's not developed yet", "because it's not a baby yet", "because it's not independent yet". Those aren't actually sound reasons, not like the law of gravity being the reason we don't fly off the planet. They are actually OPINIONS, not facts.
Yes, it's not developed or independent yet, but that doesn't change what it actually IS, and that doesn't mean it is automatically unworthy of life. They're trying to say that these facts of normal human development are actually FLAWS, flaws so terrible that the child deserves to die. Die because of something it has no control over... And die because of something that is NOT a flaw at all.
They also call pregnancy unnatural - ever heard the parasite argument? Yet their own logic is defeated by the very theory of evolution. We developed this way; this is how we are supposed to reproduce. To recognize the amazing achievement of the unborn is to glorify it, not demonize it. Wow! Look at what life does... all on its own. That's a human being, doing more growing than we do at any other time. The size difference is exponential: from nearly microscopic to 6-10 lbs!!
I'm rambling now. I stopping XD

reply from: yoda

Not from what they claim, it isn't. They claim to do community service work, help with getting government services for the poor, etc.
But it's that other 10% that kinda puts a bad light on them. Sorta like PP, they just can't shake the image of the violence they do, no matter what else they do.
Hard to imagine how a prolifer could overlook their part in the baby slaughter going on in this country.

reply from: nancyu

Lots of good, decent folks have no problem with 90% of what the KKK does.
It's that other 10% that really frosts them.
99% of what the KKK did/does is racist. Their whole existence was ABOUT being racist. PP's entire existence is NOT about providing abortion, and they could easily stop providing it and be just fine if abortion were made illegal.
PP will NOT DISAPPEAR if abortion becomes illegal folks.
Duh.
Then.... why are they waiting for abortion to become illegal? Abortions comprise a mere less than 3% of their business. Why don't they just cut out doing them right now since they are so great and so pro life like their great pro life founder Margaret Sanger?
Because they believe abortion is a woman's right. Duh. Would you stop providing a service you felt you had a right to provide, one that you felt was not morally wrong and in fact helped women? Of course you wouldn't. They worry that if they did not provide abortion, women would be shoving coat hangers up their tooties and killing themselves in desperation; they believe that they are providing a safe solution for the woman. And they're right; an abortion in a clinical setting is much safer than trying to do it at home. HOWEVER, they have mentally had to disregard the other patient...
Abortion has been a part of our culture as HUMANS (not just Amercians) since the dawn of time. Women have always been finding herbs to abort with. Coming into the new age of logic and reason, people had to find some logical reason why abortion was okay, despite our growing knowledge of prenatal existence. If you listen to their arguments, they're really just excuses and justifications. "It's okay because it's not developed yet", "because it's not a baby yet", "because it's not independent yet". Those aren't actually sound reasons, not like the law of gravity being the reason we don't fly off the planet. They are actually OPINIONS, not facts.
Yes, it's not developed or independent yet, but that doesn't change what it actually IS, and that doesn't mean it is automatically unworthy of life. They're trying to say that these facts of normal human development are actually FLAWS, flaws so terrible that the child deserves to die. Die because of something it has no control over... And die because of something that is NOT a flaw at all.
They also call pregnancy unnatural - ever heard the parasite argument? Yet their own logic is defeated by the very theory of evolution. We developed this way; this is how we are supposed to reproduce. To recognize the amazing achievement of the unborn is to glorify it, not demonize it. Wow! Look at what life does... all on its own. That's a human being, doing more growing than we do at any other time. The size difference is exponential: from nearly microscopic to 6-10 lbs!!
I'm rambling now. I stopping XD
Thank you for explaining the pro abort mindset, you know it so well. But I've heard it before, it's not like I don't "get it" It's time for you to stop defending their "logic" and start tearing it down.
Are you pro life or aren't you?
If someone was holding a knife to child's throat would you be sitting here trying to get the two parties to talk calmly and understand each other's point of view, or would you just grab the knife already?

reply from: yoda

"Rights" as relates to political and social rights are meaningful only in so far as they demonstrate the priorities of the society that awards them. As it relates to an organization like PP, all it demonstrates is that the leaders of that organization, and probably the majority of the members, do not want unborn humans beings to have the right to life, unless their mother awards it to them.
Giving one human being the power of life and death over another (innocent) human being is so despicable that I cannot even fathom how a prolifer could endorse any organization that would do that. It is beyond my understanding.

reply from: yoda

That would be a logical expectation....

reply from: Yuuki

Lots of good, decent folks have no problem with 90% of what the KKK does.
It's that other 10% that really frosts them.
99% of what the KKK did/does is racist. Their whole existence was ABOUT being racist. PP's entire existence is NOT about providing abortion, and they could easily stop providing it and be just fine if abortion were made illegal.
PP will NOT DISAPPEAR if abortion becomes illegal folks.
Duh.
Then.... why are they waiting for abortion to become illegal? Abortions comprise a mere less than 3% of their business. Why don't they just cut out doing them right now since they are so great and so pro life like their great pro life founder Margaret Sanger?
Because they believe abortion is a woman's right. Duh. Would you stop providing a service you felt you had a right to provide, one that you felt was not morally wrong and in fact helped women? Of course you wouldn't. They worry that if they did not provide abortion, women would be shoving coat hangers up their tooties and killing themselves in desperation; they believe that they are providing a safe solution for the woman. And they're right; an abortion in a clinical setting is much safer than trying to do it at home. HOWEVER, they have mentally had to disregard the other patient...
Abortion has been a part of our culture as HUMANS (not just Amercians) since the dawn of time. Women have always been finding herbs to abort with. Coming into the new age of logic and reason, people had to find some logical reason why abortion was okay, despite our growing knowledge of prenatal existence. If you listen to their arguments, they're really just excuses and justifications. "It's okay because it's not developed yet", "because it's not a baby yet", "because it's not independent yet". Those aren't actually sound reasons, not like the law of gravity being the reason we don't fly off the planet. They are actually OPINIONS, not facts.
Yes, it's not developed or independent yet, but that doesn't change what it actually IS, and that doesn't mean it is automatically unworthy of life. They're trying to say that these facts of normal human development are actually FLAWS, flaws so terrible that the child deserves to die. Die because of something it has no control over... And die because of something that is NOT a flaw at all.
They also call pregnancy unnatural - ever heard the parasite argument? Yet their own logic is defeated by the very theory of evolution. We developed this way; this is how we are supposed to reproduce. To recognize the amazing achievement of the unborn is to glorify it, not demonize it. Wow! Look at what life does... all on its own. That's a human being, doing more growing than we do at any other time. The size difference is exponential: from nearly microscopic to 6-10 lbs!!
I'm rambling now. I stopping XD
Thank you for explaining the pro abort mindset, you know it so well. But I've heard it before, it's not like I don't "get it" It's time for you to stop defending their "logic" and start tearing it down.
Are you pro life or aren't you?
If someone was holding a knife to child's throat would you be sitting here trying to get the two parties to talk calmly and understand each other's point of view, or would you just grab the knife already?
Did you read the section of the post where I talked about EVERYTHING ELSE? Of course not. You're just human after all.

reply from: Yuuki

That would be a logical expectation....
I wasn't defending, I was explaining. If I was DEFENDING them I'd be saying they're RIGHT, and I'd be PRO-CHOICE, wouldn't I? But I'm not. I think they're wrong. Good intentions, wrong path.

reply from: galen

Best Oat Cookies that Ever Existed
YUMMY!
Ingredients (use vegan versions):
1 mashed banana
1 cup of brown sugar
1/2 of a cup of regular sugar
slightly less than 1/3 of a cup (about 1/4 of a cup plus 1 teaspoon) of oil
1 1/2 teaspoons of vanilla extract
1 1/2 teaspoons of cinnamon
1 1/2 cups of flour
1 teaspoon of baking soda
1/2 of a teaspoon of salt
2 cups plus one my-sized handful (about 1/4 of a cup) of oats
3 tablespoons of water plus maybe a few more drops
Directions:
Mix the vegan brown sugar, vegan sugar, oil, and water. Add the banana and vanilla. then mix in the already pre-mixed together mixture of flour, baking soda, cinnamon, and salt. Stir in the oats. If it is too thin, let stand a bit so the oats can absorb the excess liquid. Bake at 350 degrees Fahrenheit for 13 minutes. To check if they are done, flip one over and it should be browned. Rip off a chunk to see it it is still raw. I usually let them sit a bit before I take them off the cookie sheet because, well, I do not really know, but it makes me not cook them too long because they finish cooking outside of the oven. I should mention to drop them by the tablespoon

reply from: galen

we just had this for Father's Day... much less expensive as there are no eggs or butter or milk.. keeps longer too.
INGREDIENTS (Nutrition)
1 1/2 cups all-purpose flour
1 cup white sugar
1/4 cup cocoa powder
1 teaspoon baking soda
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/3 cup vegetable oil
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1 teaspoon distilled white vinegar
1 cup water

DIRECTIONS
Preheat oven to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C). Lightly grease one 9x5 inch loaf pan.
Sift together the flour, sugar, cocoa, baking soda and salt. Add the oil, vanilla, vinegar and water. Mix together until smooth.
Pour into prepared pan and bake at 350 degrees F (175 degrees C) for 45 minutes. Remove from oven and allow to cool.
FROSTING..
.1 c sugar
.6 tbl corn starch
.4 tbl cocoa
.1/2 tsp salt
.2 tbl oil
.1 c water
.1/2 tsp vanilla
Directions
1.Mix sugar, cornstarch, salt, and cocoa in a medium sauce pan.
2.Whisk in the water.
3.Heat over medium until it gets thick and starts to boil.
4.Boil for 1-2 minutes. (Make sure you don't boil too long, or it will set like taffy.)
5.Remove from heat and stir in oil and vanilla.
6.Cool and spread on cooled cake.

reply from: nancyu

I am not neutral on this subject. If you want neutrality you need to talk to someone else.
MOD is not neutral either. MOD opposes personhood for unborn children. That is a pro abortion stance. There's nothing neutral about it.

reply from: Yuuki

I am not neutral on this subject. If you want neutrality you need to talk to someone else.
MOD is not neutral either. MOD opposes personhood for unborn children. That is a pro abortion stance. There's nothing neutral about it.
They do? Where is that written, "All members of MOD must opposed personhood for the unborn we are trying to protect, and non-personhood is the official stance of our entire organization."

reply from: nancyu

Yuuki. Try re-reading this:
http://www.pregnantpause.org/people/mod3.htm

reply from: nancyu

The Susan G Komen race for funds to donate to Planned Parenthood so they can keep killing babies by the thousands every day...

reply from: nancyu

http://www.frcblog.com/2008/05/susan-g-komen-foundation-has-ties-to-countrys-largest-abortion-provider-planned-parenthood/
I like some of the comments here:

reply from: carolemarie

I think stopping breast cancer is a good thing and I support private groups that raise money for that purpose, as well as providing screening for low income and underserved women.
That has nothing to do with abortion.
PPH gets money to do mamograms. How on earth does that translate into more abortions???????
Breast cancer is bad. Ending it is good. Raising funds for the cure is good. Helping low income women get free mamograms is good. Being paranoid is bad.

reply from: saucie

Since PPH is the BIGGEST abortion provider in this country, they shouldn't get a single dime for anything...not one dime.
There are other organizations that should get the money who don't provide abortions.
Is that clear and simple enough for you to understand?
They kill innocent, helpless babies....for any real prolifer, that's enough reason to want to see this org. stopped from existing.
I'm sure dr. mengele did some really good things too, but maybe he should have been just plain stopped.
If we all would get on the same page, carolmarie, maybe just maybe abortion rights would have been stopped years ago...but, people like you are making it harder and harder.
Does that not give you any pause...ever????
You're an enabler, I've said it before and as long as you keep coming here, I'll keep saying it.
CAROLMARIE IS AN ABORTION ENABLER.

reply from: nancyu

Since PPH is the BIGGEST abortion provider in this country, they shouldn't get a single dime for anything...not one dime.
There are other organizations that should get the money who don't provide abortions.
Is that clear and simple enough for you to understand?
They kill innocent, helpless babies....for any real prolifer, that's enough reason to want to see this org. stopped from existing.
I'm sure dr. mengele did some really good things too, but maybe he should have been just plain stopped.
If we all would get on the same page, carolmarie, maybe just maybe abortion rights would have been stopped years ago...but, people like you are making it harder and harder.
Does that not give you any pause...ever????
You're an enabler, I've said it before and as long as you keep coming here, I'll keep saying it.
CAROLMARIE IS AN ABORTION ENABLER.
Carolemarie, is SGK the only organization that funds mammograms? But you would choose to give THEM your money (and enourage others to do the same) as opposed to the millions of other breast cancer organizations that DON'T fund abortions?

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Because she supports Planned Parenthood?
Planned Parenthood averts more abortions than all of you Bible-thumpers combined.
If girls like Bristol Palin, your daughter, and Jamie Lynne Spears had gone to Planned Parenthood as young teens, perhaps they wouldn't have limited their horizons at 16.
We all know how you think spinwiddy. A life prevented is almost as good as one taken, right?

reply from: nancyu

http://www.sfredportfolio.com/komen/
Seems that State Farm is still in bed with Komen?
Pigs.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10101
One more for the blacklist.

reply from: fetalisa

You actually boycott companies that support birth control? Why don't you get your own country and turn back the clock to 700 AD?

reply from: nancyu

Anything to do with the UN is proabort.
I doubt you can get your money back, but the next time they call you can tell them why they'll never see another red cent.
I tell that to the American Cancer Society everytime they call, and happily enough, they eventually stopped bothering me in the middle of dinner!
I've told the breast cancer research people that as soon as they reconized the link between abortion and bc and stopped lying to women, I'd take them seriously. And they too stopped calling and I no longer get their junk mail.

reply from: nancyu

I'm glad you did. This is a good one.
I'm trying to find more, but my computer is slow tonight.

reply from: nancyu

Apple-Walnut Drop Cookies
3 cups all-purpose flour
1 1/2 tsp baking soda
3/4 cup shortening
2 cups light brown sugar; packed
3/4 tsp salt
1 1/2 tsp cinnamon
1 1/2 tsp cloves
3/4 tsp nutmeg
2 Eggs
1 1/2 cups chopped walnuts
1 1/2 cups finely chopped apple with peels
1 1/2 c dark raisins; chopped (optional)
1/2 c apple juice or milk GLAZE-- (below)
---------------------GLAZE--------------------------
2 cups Confectioners sugar
1 1/2 tbsp Butter or margarine; softened
1/2 tsp Vanilla extract
1/4 tsp salt
1/4 cup milk or apple juice
Preheat oven to 400 F. Lightly grease several cookie sheets.
Sift flour with baking soda.
Mix shortening, brown sugar, salt, cinnamon, cloves, nutmeg, and eggs until well blended.
Stir in half of flour mixture, then nuts, apple, and raisins. Blend in apple juice or milk, then remaining flour mixture.
Drop rounded tablespoonfuls of dough onto cookie sheets, 2 inches apart.
Bake 11 to 14 minutes, or until done. While cookies are still hot, spread thinly with Glaze. Decorate with bits of apple.

reply from: nancyu

ask.com is currently promoting Susan G Komen Foundation.
I need a new search engine. Is there anyone out there who doesn't help fund abortions??!!

reply from: nancyu

http://www.zenit.org/article-24866?l=english
Ran across a discussion about this on facebook. It sounds hopeful to me.

reply from: nancyu

Anything to do with the UN is proabort.
I doubt you can get your money back, but the next time they call you can tell them why they'll never see another red cent.
I tell that to the American Cancer Society everytime they call, and happily enough, they eventually stopped bothering me in the middle of dinner!
I've told the breast cancer research people that as soon as they reconized the link between abortion and bc and stopped lying to women, I'd take them seriously. And they too stopped calling and I no longer get their junk mail.

reply from: nancyu

http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/topfunders/top100assets.html
Found this link at LDI. It is very helpful if you would like to take the time to find out which foundations give money to planned parenthood and other "sexual and reproductive health" facilities aka child slaughterhouses.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.goodsearch.com/nonprofit/foundation-to-preserve-access-to-abortion-inc-.aspx
queasy...
Since I'd rather post a white list than a black list, I am looking for foundations that do NOT support abortion.
Well, when I typed in the search bar "abortion free foundations" this one was near the top. "As seen on Oprah", it said.

reply from: galen

never forget Wendy's ... all our gift cert, for the Holiday's are coming from them.

reply from: nancyu

Chicken Enchiladas
Soft Tortillas
1 can cream of chicken soup
1/2 cup sour cream
2 teaspoons chili powder
1 cup pace Picante Sauce
Combine soup, sour cream chili powder and picante sauce.
Mix one cup of mixture with cut up cooked chicken and about 1 cup of monterey jack cheese
Fill tortillas with chicken mixture and place in 13x9 greased baking pan. Top with remaining sauce.
Bake at 350 for 35-40 minutes

reply from: TechMage

Wow! Looks like I will be dropping State Farm also, just like I dropped Walgreens for my prescriptions when they fired some employees for refusing to give out abortion pills.

reply from: galen

good cookie recipies!

reply from: nancyu

Emerson Toyota of Auburn Maine donated a Van to "Hope House" the local center that exists to help single moms.
I recently purchased a vehicle from them and their service is excellent, friendly, reasonably priced, and they are just plain GOOD PEOPLE.
Have to take this one back. They did me wrong in the service dept.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.slashfood.com/2010/04/16/kfc-buckets-for-breast-cancer/
Blacklist KFC. Supporting Komen who supports Planned Parenthood which is the world's largest provider of professional baby killing.

reply from: B0zo

Do pro-lifers who work at KFC have to quit their jobs?

reply from: faithman

Do pro-lifers who work at KFC have to quit their jobs?
Do "prolifers" who request and recieve free material have a moral responcibility to hand it out. Or has the pope said it is OK to rip people off by waisting their time and money?

reply from: faithman

Nice try, but no go.
Biggest clue and biggest mistake: "State Farm does not take positions on highly emotional social issues such as this."
This isn't a "social issue" as viewed by the prolife movement, it's a LIFE AND DEATH issue. And a company darn well better take a pro life position if they want the business of the prolife movement.
We're a little more sophisticated and wise to the workings of PP and the trickery language used by companies, such as you represent, then you give us credit for.
Here is where they get you. Planned Parenthood gets their cut off the top, off of the gross. So any money contributed, ups the gross, and ups PP's take.

reply from: nancyu

Well that's decent of them! I missed this until today..

reply from: faithman

http://www.myimagespace.com/public/view/4167

reply from: nancyu

One for the blacklist: CredoMobile
I don't know that this necessarily whitelists At&T and Verizon..

reply from: nancyu

LifeSiteNews:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081101.html


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics