Bernard Nathanson - a thorn in NARAL's side

When I was researching Dr. Bernard Nathanson for this post, I learned about his colleague Dr. Lawrence Lader. The two of them together made up stuff about abortion (this is a well known fact now). Along with feminist Betty Friedman, the three of them created what would become NARAL:

"Nathanson began performing abortions in the 1960s and later headed a major New York clinic where he oversaw 60,000 abortions. In 1969 he joined with feminist Betty Friedan and activist Lawrence Lader in founding the National Assn. for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, now known as NARAL Pro-Choice America, and served as its medical director."

Here's the interesting thing about Mr. Lader. I found at least five obituaries (1) for him. But not one of them mention his association with Bernard Nathanson. Yet all of them mention his relationship Betty Friedman. I also noticed that none of the obituaries mention the lies the two men made up about abortion.

Nathanson and Lader had three ways of doing this (2):

"The First Key Tactic was to capture the media: We persuaded the media that the cause of permissive abortion was a liberal enlightened, sophisticated one. Knowing that if a true poll were taken, we would be soundly defeated, we simply fabricated the results of fictional polls. We announced to the media that we had taken polls and that 60% of Americans were in favor of permissive abortion. This is the tactic of the self-fulfilling lie. Few people care to be in the minority..." 

"The Second Key Tactic was to Play the Catholic Card: We systematically vilified the Catholic Church and its “socially backward ideas” and picked on the Catholic hierarchy as the villain in opposing abortion. This theme was played endlessly. We fed the media such lies as “we all know that opposition to abortion comes from the hierarchy and not from most Catholics” and “Polls prove time and again that most Catholics want abortion law reform.” And the media drum-fired all this into the American people, persuading them that anyone opposing permissive abortion must be under the influence of the Catholic hierarchy and that Catholics in favor of abortion are enlightened and forward-looking. An inference of this tactic was that there were no non-Catholic groups opposing abortion. The fact that other Christian as well as non-Christian religions were (and still are) monolithically opposed to abortion was constantly suppressed, along with pro-life atheists’ opinions." 

"The Third Key Tactic was the Denigration and Suppression of all Scientific Evidence that Life Begins at Conception
...A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy. 

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion...[note that these numbers were written in 1997. I wonder what the current income from abortion is now in the US?]"

I can only imagine that Dr. Bernard Nathanson became a huge thorn in NARAL's side: after he spilled the beans about their lies and after becoming pro-life.

Of course their relationship wouldn't be mentioned in Lader's obituary. What was I thinking?

(1) Lawrence Lader's obituaries:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/10/nyregion/10lader.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/10/AR2006051002319.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/may/14/local/me-lader14
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1630078/posts
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/obituaries/articles/2006/05/15/lawrence_lader_leading_abortion_rights_activist/?page=full

(2) Source: Bernard Nathanson: “Confessions of an Ex-Abortionist” In The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind. Copyright © 1997 Regenery Publishing (www.regnery.com)

Big abortion - believing the lie

Who can be against justice?

The pro-abortions are at it again. Tomorrow they will "celebrate" 25 years of "Reproductive Justice".

That's the day that the Morgentaler decision came down.

So what is this latest euphemism "Reproductive Justice" anyway?

Wikipedia tells us that:
“Reproductive Justice is the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, economic, and social well-being of women and girls, and will be achieved when women and girls have the economic, social, and political power and resources to make healthy decisions about our bodies, sexuality, and reproduction for ourselves, our families, and our communities in all areas of our lives.”

Well-being you say? Whose well-being? The woman's well being? The pre-born child's well-being? Society's well-being? I don't think so.

And what, exactly, is "just" about "Reproductive Justice"? Everybody knows that abortion harms the "complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, economic, and social well-being of women and girls". Everybody knows that abortion destroys pre-born children, who will never even get a chance to experience any "physical, mental, spiritual, political, economic, and social well-being". Everybody knows that abortion harms families and society. What exactly, is just about all that?

The only ones benefiting from this latest flavour of the week, what are they talking about (you are for justice right?), euphemistic phrase for abortion, are the doctors who earn their living from it.

"Reproductive Justice"; all paid for, courtesy you and me.

In fact the "celebration" tomorrow is brought to you by the Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC).

Maybe "Reproductive Justice" is really for the well-being of Big Abortion. Maybe that is what "Reproductive Justice" is all about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update:

Have a look at this video that shows what "reproductive justice" looks like for babies. This video was made by Bernard Nathanson and is called "Eclipse of Reason". It shows an abortion.

"This is the face of a world of violence."

Watch it and weep. For the children. For the women. For Canada.



(note the statistics quoted here are much lower than today, as this film was produced in 1987).

When abortion euphemisms don't work

It makes perfect sense that our Universities want to shut down pro-life groups like Carleton's Lifeline.

Graphically showing abortion is ugly. Students will see how ugly it is. Such ugly truths make it really hard to deny that abortion kills pre-born children. If the Universities allow these groups to continue, hearts might turn against abortion.

Hearts can and do turn against the destruction of innocent human life.

It happened to Abby Johnson.
It happened to Bernard Nathanson.
It happened to Oskar Schindler.

When you see the result of removing life from a Human life form, you have to question your beliefs.

As Joyce Arthur, Canada's most extreme "pro-choicer" let slip about her real motivation behind opposition to Bill C-484:
“If the fetuses are recognized in this bill, it could bleed into people’s consciousness and make people change their minds about abortion.” (“Fetal rights stir debate on abortion,” by Charles Lewis, National Post, March 1, 2008).

You see, the pro-abortions must prevent people--at all costs--from changing their minds about abortion.

Abby Johnson was present as an unborn child was being aborted from her mother. Johnson watched in horror as the fetus was killed. The truth about abortion hit Abby hard and she became pro-life.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who was responsible for 75,000 abortions, was also finally enlightened by the then, new technology of Ultrasound when he witnessed the same thing. He finally came to the same conclusion as Johnson.

They could no longer deny that abortion was killing a pre-born human being.

It was my recent viewing of Schindler's List that brought this home for me. When you actually use your own eyes to view the truth, the "pro-choice" euphemisms don't work anymore.

For the first part of the movie, Schindler uses his Jewish workers to make pots in his factory. According to Wikipedia:
"As an opportunistic businessman, Schindler was one of many who sought to profit from the German invasion of Poland in 1939. He gained ownership from a bankruptcy court of an idle enamelware factory...with the help of his German-speaking Jewish accountant Itzhak Stern, Schindler obtained around 1,000 Jewish forced labourers to work there.

Schindler soon adapted his lifestyle to his income. He became a well-respected guest at Nazi SS elite parties, having easy chats with high-ranking SS officers, often for his benefit. Initially Schindler may have been motivated by money — Jewish labour was less costly — but later he began shielding his workers without regard for cost. He would, for instance, claim that certain unskilled workers were essential to the factory."

But what happened next is key:
"While witnessing a 1943 raid on the Kraków Ghetto, where soldiers were used to round up the inhabitants for shipment to the concentration camp at Płaszów, Schindler was appalled by the murder of many of the Jews who had been working for him. He was a very persuasive individual, and after the raid, increasingly used all of his skills to protect his Schindlerjuden ("Schindler's Jews"), as they came to be called. Schindler went out of his way to take care of the Jews who worked at DEF, often calling on his legendary charm and ingratiating manner to help his workers get out of difficult situations."

In the scene described above, Schindler is out horse-back riding with one of his girlfriends. He is high up on a hill and he hears shots ring out. He watches in horror as the soldiers shoot the Jewish people below. He watches them fall from the gun shots, dead.

You know that this is the turning point for Schindler. Up until mow, Schindler knew what the Nazis were doing to the Jewish people. But it probably wasn't real to him. Perhaps he was in denial. Who knows?

But now he is witnessing with his own eyes the horror of the Jewish extermination right in front of himself. It was really happening. Jewish people were being slaughtered by soldiers, because some people had said that the Jews were not human.

Because some people say that the pre-born are not human.

The movie ends with the scene of the Jews he has saved extracting a gold tooth from one of their own. They fabricate a gold ring for Schindler as a thank you to the man who saved them. It was in-scripted with this quote from the Talmud:
"Whoever saves one life saves the world entire"

The pro-abortions don't want what happened to Johnson, Nathanson or Schindler to happen to anyone else. They must shut down university pro-life clubs.

What would the Martians think? (Part 2...When the truth isn't the truth)

Vicki Saporta, President and CEO, National Abortion Federation (NAF) provided the opening remarks to the celebration of the 20th Anniversary of Regina v. Morgentaler Of What Difference? Reflections on the Judgment and Abortion in Canada Today.

Ms. Saporta stated: "This landmark decision has undoubtedly protected the health and saved the lives of countless women, and was named as one of the most important and influential Charter cases of the last 25 years."

To say that the lives of countless women have been saved because of abortion is not quite true. Less than 5% of all abortions are because of rape, incest, fetal and maternal problems. That means that 95% of abortions are performed as a means of birth control, not to save women's lives.

It is the lives of the unborn killed by abortion that women like Ms. Saporta never talk about. About 100,000 each year in Canada. Even if Ms. Saporta is referring to the lives of women who died before abortion was legal, those numbers (44 in the five years before 1969) doesn't come close to the 100,000 annual killing of fetuses.

Then Ms. Saporta says
"In fact, abortion is the only time-sensitive and medically necessary procedure excluded from the list of services on the inter-provincial billing agreement."

Abortion is excluded because as stated above at least 95% of them are not medically necessary. Abortion advocates will always say that abortions are medically necessary. I say, prove it.

Next she says:
"The Canadian Medical Association’s policy of allowing physicians to refuse to refer patients for abortion care is a clear violation of CMA’s own Code of Ethics, which requires physicians to:
• Consider the well-being of the patient;
• Practice medicine in a manner that treats the patient with dignity; and
• Provide patients with the information they need to make informed decisions
about their medical care.
The CMA’s policy treats women unfairly and impedes women’s access to care."

Jeff Blackmer of the CMA states:
"CMA policy states that "a physician should not be compelled to participate in the termination of a pregnancy." In addition, "a physician whose moral or religious beliefs prevent him or her from recommending or performing an abortion should inform the patient of this so that she may consult another physician."

Insisting that doctors be allowed to follow their conscience is a fundamental right for doctors. I would never want be advised by my doctor on any matter, knowing that he had parked his conscience at the door that morning.

What is disturbing about Ms. Saporta's comments, and others like her, is that they say things "like abortion is medically necessary" by simply slipping them into the conversation as if it were true. Then they repeat them over and over and eventually people just start believing they are true.

Take Dr. Bernard Nathanson for example. He was responsible for over 75,000 abortions before he finally had a change of heart. He said that slogans like "Women must have control over their own bodies." were made up. That they fabricated the results of fictional polls to simply show what they wanted us to believe.

I suggest you google Dr. Nathanson's name. You won't see his name come up on any pro-choice websites. I don't imagine the abortion advocates were too happy when he started telling the truth.

I think at this point, our Martian friend at the back of the room must be really confused. "You mean the truth isn't always the truth?"

Part 1...Women's "Rights"
Part 2...When the truth isn't the truth
Part 3...Translating Dr. Henry Morgentaler
Part 4...Why late-term abortions are not inconsequential