And now for a message from one of our sponsors

... well, not really. I sponsor myself. Actually, this group doesn't even support me, I support them... but here's the message anyway:


NARAL calls FFL anti-choice? Puh-leaz.‏
From: Feminists for Life (info@feministsforlife.org)
Sent: September 3, 2008 7:50:16 PM

The Washington Post noted that, within minutes of the announcement that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin had been named as Senator John McCain’s running mate, NARAL Pro-Choice America sent out a fundraising appeal as well as a text message to its supporters saying the vice presidential candidate is a "member of the anti-choice group Feminists for Life."

WE are anti-choice???

What’s so anti-choice about Feminists for Life’s work to promote holistic, woman-centered solutions—including housing, childcare, maternity coverage, and telecommuting options?

FFL is all about choices—so that no woman feels that she has no choice but abortion.

Which choice is it that NARAL Pro-Choice America doesn’t support? Marital parenthood? Partnered parenthood? Single parenthood? Or the various adoption options that birthmothers choose as best for themselves and their children?

Maybe NARAL forgot that this “anti-choice” feminist was in the room with their representatives working to give women support and choices by successfully supporting the passage of the Violence Against Women Act and enhanced child support enforcement as well as fighting against cuts in benefits for the children of poor women, which were later proven to have coerced more women to have an abortion.

Perhaps they also forgot FFL’s successful effort to secure healthcare for working poor and pregnant women and their unborn children through changes in regulations in the state Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Oh, wait, NARAL Pro-Choice America actively opposed our effort to give women support and choices.

Then there was my testimony before the US House Judiciary Committee in support of the passage of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, also known as Laci and Connor’s Law, which recognizes the loss of an unborn child through violence—against her choice.

Or maybe they are disturbed by the FFL-inspired Elizabeth Stanton Pregnant and Parenting Student Services Act that will help address the unmet needs of pregnant and parenting students on college campuses (that NARAL has been strangely silent about) and that enjoys bipartisan support?

No, NARAL, we are not anti-choice. We are pro-life, just like our feminist foremothers: Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and so many more.

We proudly remember our roots.

And we remember NARAL’s, too, and how NARAL’s co-founder Dr. Bernard Nathanson later became a pro-life activist. He told FFL’s past president Rosemary Bottcher how he and Larry Lader convinced the leaders of the ‘70s women’s movement to support abortion. The real goal of the movement was equality in the workplace, but Nathanson and Lader convinced them that children were an obstacle to success like men’s—and that abortion was the answer.

And we remember NARAL’s former president, Kate Michelman, telling the Philadelphia Inquirer (on tape) that abortion was “a bad thing.”

The early American feminists would have agreed. They knew abortion was not good for women and that it violated basic human rights—long before sonograms showed the unborn child in meticulous, undeniable detail.

This would all be too ridiculous for words, except for the sad fact that NARAL and like-minded abortion activists have the attention of millions of women who have the highest rate of abortion—college-age women.

Trying to marginalize our work to address the unmet needs of women and the “rest of the choices” by slamming Feminists for Life is just par for NARAL Pro-Choice America’s course.
Apparently they are satisfied with millions more women laying their bodies down to undergo a surgical abortion or swallowing a bitter pill called choice.

Apparently they don’t believe women when they say that lack of resources and support drive them to abortion.

If you think that FFL needs the capacity to promote holistic solutions to the needs of women, especially those with the highest rate of abortion, if you can see, over and over, that FFL is a leading force redirecting the debate toward woman-centered solutions (as evidenced most recently by changes in the Democratic and Republican party platforms), if you think it’s telling that Planned Parenthood’s president and affiliates can’t resist misusing FFL’s trademarked slogan, Women deserve better,® and if you think it is time to help pro-woman, pro-life student leaders “Say NO to the Status Quo” and Rally for Resources, then please, do your part. And do it now.

We are being inundated with requests for information and help.

With the spotlight on Feminists for Life, this is our year to make significant gains to reach those at highest risk of abortion and better serve women.

With your help, our time is now.

Because women deserve better,
Serrin M. Foster President

PS: As you might suspect, interest in Feminists for Life is high, and the phones are ringing off the hook, with interviews in the New York Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, Associated Press, NPR, The Hill, Catholic News Agency, Our Sunday Visitor, mentions on The Today Show, CNN, CBN, Christian News Service, Voice of America and many more.

Please forward this message to someone you know who shares our belief in the strength of women and passion for life, and join us in our efforts to say NO to the status quo.TM We need to grow.

http://www.feministsforlife.org/

"Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women. Women deserve better than abortion."

Say NO to the Status Quo REFUSE TO CHOOSE® WOMEN DESERVE BETTER®

Feminists for Life is a nonpartisan, nonsectarian organization.FFL does not endorse or support candidates of any party.

Feminists for Life is a 501(c)3 organization.All donations and membership contributions are tax deductible to the extent allowed to law. Refuse to Choose and Women Deserve Better are registered trademarks of Feminists for Life of America.

Comments

  1. Anonymous8:43 pm

    Something about the Violence Against Women Act for Feminists for Life to Consider

    Women Want Safety, not Biden's Abuse of Power

    Senator Joe Biden proudly proclaims that he was regularly and severely beaten by his older sister as a child and as an adolescent. This is the same sister that raised his two sons after his wife and daughter were killed in an auto accident.

    Biden has often claimed that the Violence against Women Act is the greatest achievement of his career. Hundreds of studies show that women commit acts of domestic violence as often as, or more often than men. Many studies also show that lesbian women physically attack their intimate partners at least as often as heterosexual men.

    As a result of Biden's Violence against Women Act, the federal government pays states to create laws effectively requiring that men be removed from their homes and families without even an allegation of violence, with no legitimate standards of evidence, when a woman makes a claim that she is afraid.

    Elaine Epstein, president of the Massachusetts Bar Association (1999), has said "the facts have become irrelevant... restraining orders are granted to virtually all who apply. Regarding divorce cases, she states "allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage". According to Epstein, who is also a former president of the Massachusetts Women’s Bar Association, restraining orders are doled out "like candy" and "in virtually all cases, no notice, meaningful hearing, or impartial weighing of evidence is to be had."

    State restraining order laws are starting to fall because they're unconstitutional. The federal law behind them, written by Joe Biden, is likely to fall as well, not because it isn’t popular, but because it is clearly unconstitutional.

    Supporting Documentation

    Here are some of the facts regarding Biden's abuse at the hand of his sister. During senate hearings held on December 11, 1990, Biden testified to the abuse.

    www.ifeminists.net

    This recent CDC study indicates that women between the ages of 18 and 28 initiate reciprocal violence against their intimate partners about as often as men. It also indicates that women initiate non-reciprocal violence against their intimate partners more than twice as often as men.

    pn.psychiatryonline.org


    Here is a link to a bibliography of over 200 studies indicating that women are as violent as men in their intimate relationships:

    www.csulb.edu

    According to the US Department of Justice, women also abuse, neglect and kill their children at significantly higher rates than men. Here’s some of the data on child homicides.

    www.acf.hhs.gov


    Research clearly indicates that lesbian battery is at least as common as heterosexual battery.

    www.musc.edu/vawprevention


    lesbianlife.about.com


    Cathy Young reports on the Elaine Epstein quote and the broader issue at Salon.com here:

    www.salon.com


    and provides in depth analysis here:

    www.iwf.org

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:44 pm

    NJ DV Law Overturned Amid Epidemic of False Allegations

    New Jersey's domestic violence statute has recently been found unconstitutional. The New Jersey Attorney General is taking this case to the state's Supreme Court.

    The New Jersey Law Journal reports that Judge Richard Russell of Ocean City made the following remarks on tape during a judicial training session regarding the issuance of restraining orders.

    (source – scan of print copy: www.fathersandhusbands.org/NJ_Rights_1.pdf)

    “If I had one message to give you today, it is that your job is not to weigh the parties’ rights as you might be inclined to do as having been private practitioners. Your job is not to become concerned about all the constitutional rights of the man that you’re violating as you grant a restraining order. Throw him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and tell him, ‘See ya’ around.’ “

    A new municipal judge attending the training session stated “The statute says we should apply just cause in issuing the order.” “You seem to be saying to grant every order.” Russell quickly replied, “Yeah, that’s what I seem to be saying.”

    The article is full of comments from Russell and his colleagues that are equally inflammatory.

    Perhaps you think Russell should have been disbarred for instructing judges to ignore the constitution. In doing so, he violated his greatest responsibility as a judge in the most blatant way possible. Perhaps you think he should have gone to prison.

    Russell now serves on the New Jersey Supreme Court's State Domestic Violence Working Group, the Executive Committee of the State Bar's Family Law Section, and the New Jersey Supreme Court's Family Practice Committee. He currently is the chair of the court's Child Support Subcommittee.

    Given a recent ruling declaring New Jersey’s domestic violence statute unconstitutional and given the imminent Supreme Court challenge, the truth regarding the real practices that are being used to separate men from their children and their homes must be heard.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with you that women can be as aggressive and abusive as men, and that society makes women out to always be the victim, (even when they are abusing - the poor woman does it because she was abused herself, poor thing) but men (at elast heterosexual men, not gays) are almost always perpetrators, and were apparently never abused themselves? I agree that often men's rights are trampled on in favour of women's rights.

    However I do not see how that has anything to do with FFL or the article I just posted.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sectes

Megamind

Against the Unweaving