User Tools

Site Tools


A PLINO politician, which stands for “Pro-Life In Name Only,” is a politician who campaigns and is elected by claiming to be pro-life, but then quietly obstructs the passage of pro-life laws or otherwise fails to pass them. Examples would include committee chairmen who fail to schedule hearings on a pro-life bill, or leaders of legislative bodies who fail to call for a floor vote.

Politician Claim Reality
Senator Bob Casey, Jr. (D-PA) Claims to be pro-life as his father was when he was Governor of Pennsylvania Insists on funding Planned Parenthood, the biggest provider of abortion
Jon Brunning, candidate for Senate (R-NE) Claims to be pro-life, and arranged for an endorsement by an ineffective pro-life group Failed to defend an important pro-life bill in court, and instead gave Planned Parenthood virtually everything it wanted in a settlement, forcing the state to pay more than $110,000 to Planned Parenthood
Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA) Says he's pro-life and has ambitions for higher office Has failed to appeal an important decision in favor of the abortion industry
Kirk Adams, congressional candidate (R-AZ) Says he's pro-life As the Arizona Speaker of the House, he refused to allow a floor vote on a simple bill (SB 1095) that has worked well in Missouri for more than five years to protect against harms from abortion. Instead, Adams hastily adjourned for the year on April 20, 2011 without passing any significant pro-life legislation, despite having an overwhelmingly pro-life majority
Governor Robert McDonnell (R-VA) Says he's pro-life and has ambitions for higher office Engineered the removal of a requirement for a transvaginal ultrasound before a women could have an abortion from a bill that was ultimately enacted.
Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ) Says he's pro-life and has ambitions for higher office Has done little to prevent abortions in his state; New Jersey continues to have one of the highest abortion rates in the nation.
Gabriel Gomez, candidate for Senate (R-MA) Claimed the be a “proud Catholic, and pro-life” Said that Roe v. Wade is “settled law” and that he would oppose additional abortion restrictions

Other Examples

Many state politicians in Georgia were elected during the 2010 Midterm Elections by claiming to be pro-life, yet it did not pass a single pro-life law before adjourning for the year in 2011. This occurred despite a rapidly increasing rate of abortion in Georgia. 2012 Presidential candidate Mitt Romney was effectively a RINO and PLINO; Romney espoused pro-choice positions until he ran for President to appeal to the more conservative base in the Republican primaries in a largely unsuccessful attempt to attract religious evangelicals.

See also

Abortion is the induced termination of a pregnancy,<ref>American Heritage Dictionary definition, abortion.</ref> often causing fetal pain. Abortion has two victims: the unborn child, and the mother who can never forget the loss she caused. Breast cancer rates increase by more than six times for women who have abortion, according to a recent study.<ref>AS Bhadoria, U Kapil, N Sareen, P Singh, "Reproductive factors and breast cancer: A case-control study in tertiary care hospital of North India," 50 ''Indian Journal of Cancer'' 4, 316-321 (2013)</ref> Additional victims of abortion also include after-born children, who have a higher rate of premature birth and birth defects due to the harm caused by the prior abortion. Abortion is a billion-dollar industry in the [[United States]. Although Planned Parenthood likes to claim abortion accounts for just 3% of its services, according to its 2007-08 budget, it received $1.038 billion of revenue, and half to two-thirds relates to its abortion services. (See Planned Parenthood's Budget) Dr. George Tiller “estimated that he performed 250 to 300 late-term abortions in 2003, each costing an average of $6,000.”<ref>Hegeman, R. (2009, March 25). Kan. doctor testifies in abortion case against him. Associated Press.</ref> It is estimated there have been over 54 million abortions in the United States since 1973.<ref name=factsheet>National Right to Life Committee. U.S. Abortion Statistics By Year (1973-Current). National Right to Life Factsheet, January 2012.<br>(Privacy laws and likely desire to keep this silent holocaust from raising alarm hinders data collection on abortion. CDC researchers have admitted they probably undercount the total number of abortions because reporting laws vary from state to state and some abortionists probably do not report or under-report the abortions they perform. Abortions from CA and NH have not been counted by the CDC since 1998, and reports from other states are also missing for some years.)</ref>

Right to choose is no solace, because doing something so wrong will have devastating consequences. A right to privacy would not permit the taking of life when that life is inconvenient, whether in the privacy of one's own home or own body.

Saying one can't criticize a woman's choice to murder her children is like saying one can't criticize the president without being the president.<ref name=lucente>Lucente Jr., T.J. (2012, January 29). Right to Privacy is Not a License to Kill. Freedom Communications, Inc.</ref> Rape or life of the mother are extremely rare circumstances accounting for less than 1% of all abortions, with little bearing on the broader “abortion on demand” issue, particularly since all legislation the Pro-Life movement has been putting out recently has included exceptions for them, and many states had laws allowing abortion for such cases before Roe v. Wade - abortion was legalized for other reasons. (See Arguments On Abortion)

Ultimately, this debate is about when a fetus becomes a human being worthy of all applicable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness under the Declaration of Independence, for once it is we should not take its life lightly. And when it comes to that, 18,150 abortions occur after the 21st week of pregnancy<ref name=induced>(2011, August). Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States. Guttmacher Institute.</ref> - the earliest point children can be born prematurely and live.<ref name=tooyoung>Rochman, B. (2011, May 27). A 21-Week-Old Baby Survives and Doctors Ask, How Young is Too Young to Save? Time Magazine.</ref> An additional 45,980 abortions occur in the 16th-20th weeks of pregnancy.<ref name=induced /> These are 60 thousand abortions each year that are clearly murder, since the child is at or near the same stage of pregnancy as children born prematurely via C-Section. Furthermore, substantial fetal development occurs within the first 12 weeks (1st trimester) of pregnancy, including brain wave activity at 6 weeks, complete body sensitivity at 10 weeks, and all facial expressions (including smiling) at 11 weeks.<ref name=clowes>Clowes, Brian, PhD. 2001. The Facts of Life. Ch. 12. Front Royal: Human Life International. Also in: Sharing the Pro-Life Message. Chicago: Pro-Life Action League, 2009. Print.</ref> By not erring on the side of caution when potentially infringing on the inalienable right to life given by our Creator, the Pro-Choice movement has brought the blood of countless children on their hands, and on our nation's. (See When Does Life Begin?)

A growing body of evidence increasingly suggests that abortion is linked to Breast Cancer, later premature births, and other health concerns. Millions of women who had an abortion later suffer psychologically or physically from it, and support groups exist to help.<ref>Rodgers-Melnick, A. (2002, January 20). Groups support those who regret abortions. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.</ref> Many victims of abortion find healing by speaking out against, and discouraging, similar harm to other mothers and their children.<ref>“I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born,” observed President Ronald Reagan. He also observed, “With me, abortion is not a problem of religion, it's a problem of the Constitution. I believe that until and unless someone can establish that the unborn child is not a living human being, then that child is already protected by the Constitution, which guarantees life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to all of us.”</ref> “Abortion doesn't solve your problems, it only creates different ones,” warned a full-page ad by women who had abortions.<ref>Anglicans for Life and Priests for Life. We Regret Our Abortions. Orange County Right to Life.</ref> Abortion always ends the life of the unborn child, typically by dismemberment. Abortion increases the risk of breast cancer, future premature birth, mental illness, and other long-term health problems for the mother, as detailed below. (See Health Concerns)

One of NARAL's founders, Bernard Nathanson, acknowledged that NARAL in the early days of the Pro-Choice movement simply fabricated statistics on back-alley abortions; inflating the actual numbers ten-fold to get abortion legalized. Rather than making abortion rare, the annual number of abortions has increased 1500% since Roe v. Wade.<ref name=nathanson>Kupelian, David (2005, January 20). “Blood Confessions: Ex-Abortionists Spill Their Guts.” Whistleblower Magazine.<br>Whistleblower Magazine (2003, January 2). “Ex-Abortionists Expose America's Greatest Scandal.”</ref> (See History) Gallup polling in 2012 reveals that just 24% of Americans support abortion after the first 12 weeks of pregnancy,<ref name=gallupabortion>Gallup. “Abortion.” Do you think abortion should be legal in most circumstances or only in a few circumstances?</ref> even though abortion is allowed in all 9 months. <ref name=ninemonths>Is Abortion Legal All 9 Months of Pregnancy?</ref> Just 25% believe abortion should be legal under all circumstances, and an additional 13% believe it should be legal under most circumstances. Most Americans believe abortion should usually be illegal save in rare cases.<ref name=gallupabortion /> (See Public Opinion)

Abortion in Poland declined by 99% after communism was overthrown (and abortion abolished<ref>Catholic World News (2007, April 11). Liberal abortion law takes effect in Portugal. Trinity Communications.</ref>), and women's health has dramatically improved there due to fewer abortions.<ref>Johnston, W.R., Dr. (2008, October 9). Historical abortion statistics, Poland. Johnston's Archive'.</ref>

Statistics on abortion

  • As of 2012, it is estimated there has been over 54 million babies murdered by abortion since the Supreme Court handed down its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. After reaching 25 percent from a high of over 1.6 million in the year 1990, the number of abortions performed annually in the U.S. has leveled off at about 1.2 million infants murdered by abortion a year, based on data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI).<ref name=factsheet />
  • Approximately 22% of all U.S. pregnancies ended in abortion.<ref>Jones RK and Kooistra, K., Abortion incidence and access to services in the United States, 2008, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(1):41-50. (Excludes miscarriages.)</ref>
  • Only about 1 percent each year are attributed to rape and incest.<ref name=rare>Johnston, W.R., Dr. (2008, October 9). Reasons given for having abortions in the United States. Johnston's Archive'.</ref> 40% of women ages 15 to 44 have had at least one abortion. 4 out of 10 teen pregnancies end in murder by abortion. Based on the rate of abortion, it was estimated (2000) that 43 percent of American women would have at least one abortion by the age of 45.
  • 7 out of 10 U.S. women are sexually active (usually as fornicators) but do not want to become pregnant.<ref>Alan Guttmacher Institute, In Brief: Fact Sheet, Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States, August 2011.</ref>
  • Women who have never married and are not cohabiting account for 45% of all abortions. 57% of all women having abortions between 15-44 are in their 20’s. 36% of non-Hispanic women are abortions were white, 30% are non-Hispanic black, and 25% are hispanic.<ref name=patients>Jones RK, Finer LB and Singh S, Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients, 2008, New York: Guttmacher Institute, 2010.</ref>
  • 37% of women killing babies by abortion were Protestant, (include those who identified as “Christian” but who did not specify a denomination) while 28% were Catholic, and 20% identified themselves as born-again, evangelical, charismatic or fundamentalist (in 2000, some 13% of abortion patients aged 18 and older identified as born-again or evangelical before the question was reworded slightly for the 2008 survey), while 27% gave no religious affiliation, increasing from 22% in 2000. (Protestants were under-represented among those committing abortion in proportion to the total number of Protestants nationwide, and the relative abortion rate for this group was lower than the rate for all women.)<ref name=patients />
  • Although 66% of women having abortions had some type of health insurance, 57% paid for their abortion out of pocket. Among women with private health insurance, 63% paid out of pocket.<ref name=patients />

Arguments On Abortion

The following are some common Pro-Choice arguments on abortion, and problems with the reasoning.

Right to Choose

The obvious question not being confronted is what choice is at stake? The choice to kill another human being to bypass the consequences and responsibilities that should accompany the choice to create another life; in essence the choice to murder one's own children so sex can be engaged in freely without responsibility or consequence.<ref>Hoffman, M.C. (2012, May 28). Abortion is ‘murder’ for the purpose of population control, says Turkish prime minister. Life Site News.</ref> Sometimes women die from abortion.<ref>See “Documented Incidents of 365 Women Who Have Been Killed by “Safe” and Legal Abortion.” 365 women who have been killed by 'Legal' abortion</ref> Since abortion is deliberate and thought about in advance, it is comparable to a premeditated killing.<ref>First-degree murder is defined as “a killing which is deliberate and premeditated.”<br> First Degree Murder. The Free Dictionary.</ref>

Rare Circumstances: Life of Mother and Rape

BBC News has an article called “Abortion in self-defence” arguing that abortion should be allowed in cases where the mother's life and health are at risk, and that this is justifiable self-defense. However, BBC News acknowledges that abortion is NOT justified for the following reasons:

However, (A) danger to life of the mother, like rape, is a very rare circumstance that accounts for less than 1% of all abortions<ref name=rare />, (B) all major legislation put out by the Right to Life movement over the past decade has included exceptions allowing abortions for rape and life of the mother (e.g. Mexico City Policy, Born Alive Infant Protection Act, Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, etc.) and (C) at least 13 states had legislation allowing abortion for rape or life of the mother BEFORE Roe v. Wade<ref>Abortion History Timeline. National Right to Life Committee.</ref> - abortion was legalized for other reasons.

The bottom line is that apart from such extremely rare circumstances, BBC News acknowledges that “The self-defence argument for abortion seems to fail here, because although a threat to life can be a defence to a charge of killing someone, none of the above would be an adequate defence in a case of homicide, nor would they be regarded as reasons that justified euthanasia.”<ref name=bbc /> Choosing to kill another person, in other words, is unjustifiable unless the mother's life is in danger or, debatably, if rape occurred. In fact, those who bring up cases like rape and life of the mother are doing so because, deep inside, they themselves know that choosing to murder another human being is justifiable only under such extreme circumstances, and NOT for abortion on demand.

The only way to justify abortion apart from such circumstances is, as BBC News says, “if we don't regard the foetus as a person with a right to live, or if we regard it as a being that doesn't have a full right to life”.<ref name=bbc /> You see, this is not about the right to choose at all, and such a slogan distracts from the real issue - the real issue is whether the fetus is a human being deserving of a full right to life. Because if it is a human being worthy of the right to life, then there is no excuse for “choosing to kill” via abortion on demand.

Right to One's Body

The Pro-Choice movement likes to say that women should have a right to their bodies. However, such a right should logically not allow one to harm others with that body, including physical assault, murder, rape, or theft, and therefore, this is not an absolute right, but a privilege that is not intended to exceed another's unalienable rights, including the right to life. As Hugh V. McLachlan of Glasgow Caledonian University pointed out in 1997, there is no entitlement to one's body and “we have rights duties, liabilities, restrictions and disadvantages as well as rights concerning our own bodies.

As McLachlan continues to point out, this emphasis on rights neglects the other side of the coin, responsibilities or duties. He gives on pg. 177 the example of an insurance policy, and how using one's body to commit suicide can invalidate such a contract.<ref name=mclachlan /> Logically, creating another human life should likewise bring responsibly for actions toward that life - how is the decision to create another human life of lesser importance than the decision to sign an insurance contract? Why should one be able to kill a separate person to void the sexual decision to bring about another life, yet not be able to kill oneself without voiding an insurance contract?

Ultimately, the real question is whether the fetus in question is another human being to be accorded unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness under the Declaration of Independence, for if so, no right to one's body should give power to infringe on its unalienable right to life. Your right to your body does not include the right, in other words, to kill others using that body to avoid the responsibilities and consequences of a sexual decision to create another life. That is what in the real world is called “murder” and it is reprehensible. Therefore, the real question is at what point a fetus becomes a human being.

Right to Privacy

To get abortion legalized, the Pro-Choice movement had to argue that women should have a “right to privacy”.<ref>Levin, M.R. (2005, March 14). Death by Privacy. The National Review.</ref> However, logically, if the fetus is a human being and thus murder would be committed, privacy is no excuse for such murder. Logically, killing someone in the privacy of one's own home should no more be an excuse for murder than killing them in the privacy of one's body. Furthermore, as Judge Henry J. Friendly pointed out in the nation's first major abortion case, Hall v. Lefkowitz, abortion is actually a complete violation of privacy when you look at it, requiring intervention in a woman's most private areas by a physician and variety of medical personnel.

Women Choose, Not Men

The Pro-Choice movement likes to say men and fathers should have no say in the abortion debate, only women. However, as Thomas J. Lucente Jr. points out, this is similar to saying one can't criticize the President unless one is the President.

As Alan Keyes has pointed out, the Pro-Choice movement essentially is arguing for the baby's rights to be dependent on the mother's desire for it, making women slave-owners, essentially - this is very different from the Declaration of Independence which says the Creator gives us our unalienable rights, rather than them being dependent upon other people.<ref>Jefferson, T. (1776, July 4). The Declaration of Independence. Retrieved from Independence Hall Association.</ref>

Ultimately, every American has a responsibility to stand up for the rights of other Americans when they are being murdered - regardless of gender. And to say a mother should be able to murder her children whenever she feels like it, apart from the father's opinions, is simply wrong.

When Does Life Begin?

Logically, we ought to be erring on the side of caution when potentially infringing on another person's inalienable right to life, rather than seeing how close we can come to committing murder without doing so. Abortion in the U.S. is legal in all 9 months (36 weeks) of pregnancy.<ref name=ninemonths />

Premature Birth

Even though children can be born as early as 21 weeks after pregnancy<ref name=tooyoung /> the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research arm, reports that 1.5% of the 1.21 million abortions in the United States occur after the 21st week of pregnancy.<ref name=induced /> Therefore, 18,150 abortions occur each year after the earliest point that children can be born prematurely and live. An additional 3.8% occur 16-20 weeks after pregnancy, an additional 45,980 abortions each year that are most certainly murder given proximity to time of premature birth.<ref name=induced /> Why is a baby considered human outside the womb, yet nothing more than a fetus to be aborted at or near the same point in pregnancy if still inside the womb? And what will abortionists argue? That this is “only” 50-60 thousand innocent lives being taken each year?

Fetal Development

According to Brian Clowes, Ph.D<ref name=clowes />, as cited by the Pro-Life Action League<ref>(2009). Sharing the Pro-Life Message. “Life in the Womb.” Pro-Life Action League. Chicago.</ref>, fetal development occurs as follows after conception:

  • 2 weeks: First completed brain cells appear.
  • 3 weeks: Heart begins beating, eyes form; brain, spinal column, and nervous system virtually complete.
  • 4 weeks: Muscle development, arm and leg buds visible, neocortical cells appear, blood flows in baby's veins separate from mother's blood.
  • 5 weeks: Pituitary gland forms, mouth, ears, and nose take shape.
  • 6 weeks: Brain waves can be detected.
  • 7 weeks: Cartilage skeleton completely formed, umbilical cord complete, brain coordinates voluntary muscle movement and involuntary organ movement, lips sensitive to touch.
  • 8 weeks: Based on nervous system development, a fetus can likely feel pain, teeth present, all organs present save lungs, taste buds and fingerprints forming, responds to tapping on amniotic sac.
  • 9 weeks: Fingernails form, can bend its fingers around an object and suck its thumb.
  • 10 weeks: All parts of body sensitive to touch; can swallow, squint, frown, and pucker brow.
  • 11 weeks: Breathing amniotic fluid and does so until birth, urination, all facial expressions (including smiling) possible, taste buds complete.
  • 12 weeks: Can kick, turn over, make a fist, hiccup, cry, open its mouth, press its lips together, and practice breathing.
  • 13 weeks: All senses are present, including vocal chords.
  • 20 weeks: Can be surprised by loud external noises.
  • 23 weeks: A fetus demonstrates REM (Rapid Eye Movement).
  • 4 months: Can grasp, swim, and turn somersaults.
  • 6 months: Hair growth on head and eyebrows, eyelashes form.
  • 7 months: A fetus' hands can support its entire weight.
  • 8 months: Fetus weighs more than 4 lbs., all body systems present.
  • 9 months: After this point, the fetus gains a half lb. each week and 41 of the 45 total generations of cell replication have already taken place.

Given this, it is small wonder that 76% of Americans in 2011 disapprove of abortion after the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. <br>(See Public Polling)

Health Concerns

Mental Health Risks From Abortion

A comprehensive review of literature, published in the British Journal of Psychiatry suggests that “there is a significant increase in mental health problems after abortion.”<ref name=“BJP”>

</ref><ref name=“DavenportMD”>


Abortion and Breast Cancer

The vast majority of scientific studies have shown that abortion causes an increase in breast cancer, including 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies.<ref name=trumped>Malek, K. (2003). The Abortion-Breast Cancer Link: How Politics Trumped Science and Informed Consent. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 8(2), 41-45.</ref> “A new study coming from researchers in Sri Lanka finds women who had abortions … [had a] 3.42 [increased risk] … compared with those who kept their baby. … The Sri Lankan study is the fourth epidemiological study in fourteen months to report an abortion-breast cancer link, including studies from the U.S., China and Turkey.”<ref>Ertelt, S. (2010, June 22). Study Confirms Abortion Triples Breast Cancer Risk Among Sri Lanka Women.</ref> LifeNews also reported in 2009 that a National Cancer Institute researcher admitted there was a link between abortion and breast cancer.<ref>Ertelt, S. (2009, January 1). National Cancer Institute Researcher Admits Abortion-Breast Cancer Link True.</ref> Studies showing that abortion increases breast cancer predate the political controversy.<ref>(2002). Breast Cancer Prevention Institute Online Brochure. Breast Cancer Prevention Institute.</ref> A study at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center published in 2009 confirmed a 40% increase in risk in breast cancer from abortion.<ref>Byrne, D. (2010, January 11). Breast cancer, oral contraceptives, abortion and lies (?) ChicagoNow.</ref><ref>It is undisputed that childbirth protects against breast cancer, and thus early termination of pregnancy must increase the risk of cancer for the mother compared to carrying that same pregnancy to birth.</ref> Yet the abortion industry conceals this increased risk, just as the tobacco industry concealed its cancer risk for decades.<ref>Addison, T.E., M.D. (1998, July). A Chronology of Tobacco in the Civilized World, San Francisco Medicine.</ref>

A new study on breast cancer in Turkey published in April 2009 in the peer-reviewed World Journal of Surgical Oncology found, through a surveying process, that induced abortion was a statistically significant cause of breast cancer risk. The study concludes, “Our findings suggest that age and induced abortion were found to be significantly associated with increased breast cancer risk….”<ref>Ozman, V. et al. (2009, April 8). Breast cancer risk factors in Turkish women – a University Hospital based nested case control study. World Journal of Surgical Oncology, 7(37). doi:10.1186/1477-7819-7-37</ref>

Specifically, the study found that Turkish women who received one or more induced abortions had a 66% higher risk of breast cancer than women who never had an abortion.<ref>Baklinski, T.M. (2009, July 29). Study: Breast Cancer Risk 66% Higher in Turkish Women with Abortions.</ref> <ref>Malek, K. (2009, July 28). Study: Turkish Women with Abortions Have Statistically Significant 66% Increase in Breast Cancer Risk / Researchers Likely Underestimated the Risk, Reports Scientist. Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.</ref>

Dr. Janet Daling, who considers herself supportive of a right to perform abortions, brought the abortion-breast cancer link into the mainstream with her federally funded research on the topic. Her report, released in 1994, found a 50% increase in breast cancer risk due to induced abortion.<ref>Janet R. Daling et al., “Risk of Breast Cancer Among Young Women: Relationship to Induced Abortion,” 86 Journal of the National Cancer Institute; (1994);1584</ref><ref>(2001, March 28). Women's Organization Accuses MAMM of Misleading Public About Abortion-Breast Cancer Link. Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.</ref> She said, “I have three sisters with breast cancer and I resent people messing with the scientific data to further their own agenda, be they pro-choice or pro-life. I would have loved to have found no association between breast cancer and abortion, but our research is rock solid and our data is accurate.”<ref>L.A. Daily News, Sept. 1997.</ref> Similarly, an early study published in Japan in 1957 showed that women who have abortions have a much higher risk of breast cancer than those who decide to keep their baby.<ref>Segi M, et al. An epidemiological study on cancer in Japan. GANN. 1957; 48:1-63.</ref>

In a peer-reviewed medical journal, Karen Malec observed that:<ref name=trumped />

:Thirty-eight epidemiological studies exploring an independent link [between abortion and] breast cancer have been published. Twenty-nine report risk elevations. Thirteen out of 15 American studies found risk elevations. Seventeen studies are statistically significant, 16 of which report increased risk.

Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, M.D., F.A.C.S., a specialist in breast cancer an a clinical assistant professor of surgery at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, has explained the physiology and epidemiology of the abortion-breast cancer link. She made the following observation:<ref>Angela Lanfranchi, M.D., F.A.C.S, “The breast physiology and the epidemiology of the abortion breast cancer link,” 12 Imago Hominis, No. 3, 228 (2005) (emphasis added).</ref>

:This past August in Minneapolis, Patrick Carroll, director of the Pension and Population Research Institute of London, presented a paper to the largest gathering of statisticians in North America. He showed that abortion was the best predictor of breast cancer in Britain. Breast cancer is the only cancer in Britain which has its highest incidence and mortality rate among the upper rather than lower social classes. Abortion before a full term pregnancy and late pregnancy were the best explanations for this incidence. He also found that there had been a 70% increase risk of breast cancer between 1971 and 2002 and that for women between 50 and 54 years of age incidence was highly correlated with abortion.

Demographic evidence of abortion causing breast cancer includes the following. Breast cancer rates are far lower in Western countries that prohibited abortion than in those that promoted it. Ireland, which virtually bans abortion, reportedly has a lifetime rate of breast cancer of only 1 in 13, nearly half the rate of 1 in 7.5 in the United States.<ref>“Probability of breast cancer in American Women,” National Cancer Institute (Apr. 15, 2005); K. O'Flaherty, R. Oakley, “Self-checks 'useless' in breast cancer fight,” Sunday Tribune (Ireland), at 8 (Oct. 6, 2002).</ref> The rate of breast cancer increases steadily as one travels from Ireland, where abortion is illegal, to Northern Ireland, where abortion is legal but rare, to England, where abortion is common. <ref> R. O'Reilly, “New weapon in war against breast cancer,” The Press Association Limited (Dec. 17, 1998); “Portugal-abortion referendum,” Associated Press Worldstream (June 27, 1998).</ref>

In Romania, abortion was illegal under two decades of rule by the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu, and the country 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.<ref>A. Khan, “The role of fat in breast cancer,” The Independent (May 18, 1998).</ref> But after the execution of Ceausescu on Christmas Day, 1989, Romania has taken the opposite approach, embracing abortion to the point that Romania now has one of the highest abortion rates in the world.<ref>N. Abdullaev, “Russians are quickest to marry and divorce,” Moscow Times (Dec 8, 2004).</ref> One Romanian observer decried, “The liberalization of abortions in Romania in 1990, the significant increase of the number of abortions at relatively short intervals, determined a rise in the incidence of breast and uterine cervix cancer in my country.”<ref>Information packet, Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO) World Conference on Breast Cancer (July 1997).</ref>

Studies on rats, which are an accepted method for identifying causes of cancer in humans, further confirm that abortion does indeed increase the risk of breast cancer. As Dr. Joel Brind observed, “Researchers also widely admit to the biological plausibility of abortion as an independent cause of breast cancer, through the estrogen-mediated stimulation of breast growth in the absence of differentiation. This was demonstrated experimentally in rats in the landmark experiments of Russo and Russo.”<ref>Joel Brind, “Induced Abortion as an Independent Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Critical Review of Recent Studies Based on Prospective Data,” J. of Am. Physicians & Surgeons 105 (Winter 2005) (citing Russo J, Russo IH. Susceptibility of the mammary gland to carcinogenesis. 1980;100:497-512).</ref> Additional scientific information on the abortion-breast cancer link is available at

An expert (Dr. Lynn Rosenberg) hired to defend abortion felt compelled to admit, under cross-examination, that a woman increases her risk for breast cancer by having an abortion compared to carrying her pregnancy to childbirth:<ref>Rosenberg's Testimony. Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.</ref>

:Question by the attorney: 'So in other words, a woman who finds herself pregnant at age 15 will have a higher breast cancer risk if she chooses to abort that pregnancy, than if she carries the pregnancy to term, [is that] correct?'

:Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'Probably, yes.'

:Question: 'Looking at that another way, let's compare two women. Let's say both got pregnant at age 15– one terminates the pregnancy, but the other carries the pregnancy to term. And both women go on to get married and have two kids, say, at age 30 and age 35. Is the risk of breast cancer higher for the woman who had an abortion at age 15 or the woman who had a baby at age 15, all other things being equal?'

:Dr. Lynn Rosenberg: 'It's probably higher for the one who had an abortion at age 15.'

Despite the overwhelming evidence – and inescapable logic – for abortion increasing breast cancer, promoters of abortion cite flawed articles in an attempt to deny the link. The flaws in these articles are exposed in the Harvard abortion study and “Legal Implications of a Link Between Abortion and Breast Cancer” by Andrew Schlafly in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.<ref>Schafly, A. (2005, Spring). Legal Implications of a Link Between Abortion and Breast Cancer. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 10(1), 10-14.</ref>

As Dr. Lanfranchi has explained:<ref>Lanfranchi, A. (2008, Spring). The Federal Government and Academic Texts as Barriers to Informed Consent. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 13(1), 12-15.</ref>

:Well-documented breast physiology accounts for the fact that oral contraceptives and abortion are risk factors for breast cancer. There is an effort to suppress this information by federal agencies and those in academic medicine. Without this information, women cannot make a fully informed choice about their method of fertility control or about whether to maintain an unplanned pregnancy. Medical ethics demands that they be informed.

Pro-choice should include informed choice.<ref>The Archdiocese of St. Louis, for example, remarked about abortions and increased risk for breast cancer: “To dismiss that link is irresponsible.”<br> (Link no longer works)</ref> Yet efforts continue to suppress awareness that abortion increases breast cancer. Pro-life scientists were almost entirely barred from the National Cancer Institute's “study” of the link, and its resulting statements were fatally flawed as explained in National Cancer Institute on Abortion.

Just as organizations denied or failed to disclose the connection between smoking and lung cancer, many organizations aligned with liberal politicians deny the correlation between abortion and breast cancer despite numerous studies published in peer reviewed journals indicating a likely connection.

Abortion Causes Future Harm with Premature Births

“At least 49 studies have demonstrated a statistically significant increase in premature births (PB) or low birth weight (LBW) risk in women with prior induced abortions (IAs).”<ref>Brent Rooney and Byron C. Calhoun, “Induced Abortion and Risk of Later Premature Births,” 8 J. Am. Physicians & Surgeons 46 (Summer 2003). ://</ref> Premature birth tragically causes brain damage, and an array of other severe, lifelong injuries ranging from Cerebral Palsy to blindness, or even death, and few mothers would knowingly increase the risk of that happening. “There are at least seventeen (17) studies that have found that previous induced abortions increase preterm birth risk” and thereby increase debilitating Cerebral Palsy in children.”<ref>Brent Rooney, Letter, 96 European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 239 (2001) (citations omitted).</ref>

In 2008, the generally pro-abortion British medical journal, The Lancet, admitted that a procedure often used in abortion increase the risk of premature birth:<ref name=lancet>Dr, Jay D. Iams, Dr. Robert Romero, Jennifer F. Culhane (PhD), Dr. Robert L. Goldenberg. ://,_secondary,_and_tertiary_interventions.....pdfPrimary, secondary, and tertiary interventions to reduce the morbidity and mortality of preterm birth. Lancet 2008;371:164-175. While the text of this article conceals the connection with abortion, it cites as support for its claims two studies showing how abortion increases risk of premature birth: the 2004 'Ancel' study of ten European countries and the 2005 'Moreau' study that used French subjects. Ancel P-Y, Lelong N, Papiernik E, Saurel-Cubizoilles M-J, Kaminski M. History of induced abortion as a risk factor for preterm birth in European countries: results of the EUROPOP survey. Human Reproduction. 2004;112:734-740. Moreau C, Kaminski M, Ancel PY et al. Previous I induced abortions and the risk of very preterm delivery; Results of the EPIPAGE study. British J Obstetrics Gynaecology 2005; 112:430-437.</ref>

:“For example, greater public and professional awareness of evidence that repeated uterine instrumentation–eg, uterine curettage or endometrial biopsy–is associated with increased risk of subsequent preterm birth might over time influence decision-making about the procedure.”

Researchers Rooney and Calhoun observed:<ref name=lancet />

:Large studies have reported a doubling of [early premature birth] EPB risk from two prior IAs. Women who had four or more IAs experienced, on average, nine times the risk of [extremely early premature births] XPB, an increase of 800 percent. These results suggest that women contemplating IA should be informed of this potential risk to subsequent pregnancies, and that physicians should be aware of the potential liability and possible need for intensified prenatal care.

Demographic evidence of how abortion increases premature birth includes the following:

:* The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): “[T]he abortion rate for black women has been approximately three times as high as that for white women (range: 2.6–3.1) since 1991”<ref> (emphasis added)</ref> :* Science Dailys report on a study by the Washington University School of Medicine: “African-American women are three times more likely to deliver babies three to 17 weeks prematurely than Caucasian women”<ref>Washington University School of Medicine (2007, February 12). African-American Mothers. (emphasis added)</ref>

In 2002 an article entitled “Preterm Birth: A Continuing Challenge” noted that premature births are abnormally high in the United States, citing a study that observed that a previous abortion is a “risk factor for both infertility and preterm birth.”<ref>Moore, M.L. (2002, Fall). Preterm Birth: A Continuing Challenge. The Journal of Perinatal Education, 11(4), 37-40. doi: 10.1624/105812402×88948</ref>

The rate of premature birth is elevated by the same amount as the abortion rate, as expected if abortion increases the risk of premature birth.

Other Health Risks from Abortion

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that:<ref>Gonzales v. Carhart, 127 S. Ct. 1610, 1634 (2007).</ref>

A study published in the Southern Medical Journal observed that there are higher death rates associated with women who have abortion, and that these higher death rates persist over time and across socioeconomic boundaries.<ref>D.C. Reardon, P.G. Ney, F.J. Scheuren, J.R. Cougle, P.K. Coleman, T. Strahan, “Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low income women,” 95 Southern Medical Journal 8, at 834-41 (August 2002).</ref>

In England, the “Royal College of Psychiatrists says women should not be allowed to have an abortion until they are counselled on the possible risk to their mental health.” The medical royal college warned that women who have abortions may be at risk of mental health problems.<ref> (Link no longer works)</ref> A New Zealand study found that abortion in young women may be associated with increased risks of mental health problems.<ref>Fergusson, D.M., et. al. (2006, January). Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health. The Journal of Child Psychology andPsychiatry, 47(1), 16-24. PMID: 16405636.</ref> The researcher in this study, who was not pro-life, was shaken by the study and had to go to four journals before he could find one who would publish it. <ref name=gilson>Gilson, T. (2006, February 24). Abortion and Mental Health. Thinking Christian.</ref>

The study concludes with the following statement:

Professor David Fergusson, lead author of the New Zealand study stated:

Another study published in the OB/GYN Survey detailed long-term physical and psychological health consequences of induced abortions.<ref>J.M. Thorp, Jr., K.E. Hartmann, and E.M. Shadigian, “[ Long-Term Physical & Psychological Health Consequences of Induced Abortion: Review of the Evidence],” 58 OB/GYN Survey 1, at 67-79 (2003)</ref>

Suicide rates among women who had abortions are six times higher than women who gave birth in the prior year. Overall, deaths from suicide, homicide and accidents were 248% higher after an abortion, as found by a 13-year study in Finland of its entire population.<ref> (Link no longer works)</ref>

In the United States, only one state (Missouri) requires that the abortionist have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion.<ref>Mo. Rev. Stat. § 188.080 prohibits an abortion by a physician “who does not have clinical privileges at a hospital which offers obstetrical or gynecological care located within thirty miles of the location at which the abortion is performed or induced.”</ref> In the other 49 states, an abortion patient can and often is left without prompt medical care by the treating physician.

One of the largest abortion providers in the United States, the Metropolitan Medical Associates of New Jersey, was shut down in 2007 by state health officials after one of its botched abortions left a 20-year-old woman in a coma for more than four weeks. She “became severely ill following the abortion and was transferred to Newark Beth Israel Medical Center where she needed blood transfusions and had her uterus removed. She also suffered a stroke due to the serious blood loss and had one of her lungs collapse.” The State of New Jersey had shut down the same facility in 1993 also.<ref>Ertelt, S. (2007, March 1). Woman Comatose for a Month After Botched Abortion Caused Center’s Closing.</ref>


Marquis de Sade advocated induced abortion.<ref></ref>]] Please also see: History of abortion

Abortion was an extremely harsh punishment in the Old Testament, imposed against those who have “rebelled against” God:

:“Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.” (Hosea 9:16)

:“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.” (Hosea 13:16)

:“Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.” (2 Kings 15:16)

The father of medicine, Hippocrates, expressly prohibited abortion in his ethical Oath long before Christianity.

The Journal of Medical Ethics article declared concerning the atheist and sadist Marquis de Sade:

Population control is based on pseudoscience and ill founded economic assumptions.<ref>Egnor, M. (2010, November 30). P.Z. Myers on Abortion. Evolution News and Views.</ref>

Adolf Hitler and Abortion

For more information see: Abortion and Adolf Hitler

]]‎In 1942 Adolf Hitler declared:

After World War II, the War Crimes Tribunal indicted ten Nazi leaders for “encouraging and compelling abortion,” which the tribunal considered a “crime against humanity.”<ref>Wilke, J.C., Dr., et. al. (2006). Why Can't We Love Them Both: Chapter 25, Euthanasia.</ref>

Hall v. Lefkowitz

Hall v. Lefkowitz was a court case on November 4, 1969<ref>“Hall v. Lefkowitz.” 305 F.Supp. 1030 (1969).</ref> during which Roy Lucas, an assistant professor at the University of Alabama Law School, and his self-founded James Madison Constitutional Law Institute, sued to challenge New York's abortion laws. A three-judge court presided which included famous judge Henry Friendly. Friendly wrote a draft opinion in the spring of 1970 declaring government had right to regulate abortion and protect a fetus, contrary to the later Roe v. Wade ruling. However, shortly thereafter the New York legislature amended state abortion law to allow abortion within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy, and Hall's case was dismissed as unnecessary.<ref name=friendly>Randolph, A. Raymond. “Before Roe v. Wade: Judge Friendly's Draft Abortion Opinion.” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. Vol. 29.</ref> Read some of Friendly's arguments made years before Roe v. Wade.

NARAL's Lies About Back-Alley Abortions

Bernard Nathanson, one of NARAL's co-founders, described how he and the organization fabricated abortion statistics and used slogans to sway the public during the early days of Roe v. Wade.

Ultrasound images

See Also


plino.txt · Last modified: 2020/03/12 18:37 (external edit)