« 2008 election info | Main | ACLU and other communist fronts »
Monday, August 18, 2008
The Obamessiah supports infanticide!
The Obamessiah supports infanticide. Links below show that he maintained his 100% pro-abortion record in the Illinois legislature.
The following statement was issued on Monday, August 11, 2008, by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) in Washington, D.C.
In 2000, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) was first introduced in Congress. This was a two-paragraph bill intended to clarify that any baby who is entirely expelled from his or her mother, and who shows any signs of life, is to be regarded as a legal "person" for all federal law purposes, whether or not the baby was born during an attempted abortion. (To view the original 2000 BAIPA, click here.)
In 2002, the bill was enacted, after a "neutrality clause" was added to explicitly state that the bill expressed no judgment, in either direction, about the legal status of a human prior to live birth. (The "neutrality" clause read, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being ‘born alive’ as defined in this section.”) The bill passed without a dissenting vote in either house of Congress. (To view the final federal BAIPA as enacted, click here. To view a chronology of events pertaining to the federal BAIPA, click here.)
Meanwhile, Barack Obama, as a member of the Illinois State Senate, actively opposed a state version of the BAIPA during three successive regular legislative sessions. His opposition to the state legislation continued into 2003 -- even after NARAL had withdrawn its initial opposition to the federal bill, and after the final federal bill had been enacted in August 2002.
When Obama was running for the U.S. Senate in 2004, his Republican opponent criticized him for supporting "infanticide." Obama countered this charge by claiming that he had opposed the state BAIPA because it lacked the pre-birth neutrality clause that had been added to the federal bill. As the Chicago Tribune reported on October 4, 2004, "Obama said that had he been in the U.S. Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even though he voted against a state version of the proposal. The federal version was approved; the state version was not. . . . The difference between the state and federal versions, Obama explained, was that the state measure lacked the federal language clarifying that the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that legalized abortion."
During Obama's 2008 run for President, his campaign and his defenders have asserted repeatedly and forcefully that it is a distortion, or even a smear, to suggest that Obama opposed a state born-alive bill that was the same as the federal bill. See, for example, this June 30, 2008 "factcheck" issued by the Obama campaign, in the form that it still appeared on the Obama website on August 7, 2008. The Obama "cover story" has often been repeated as fact, or at least without challenge, in major organs of the news media. (Two recent examples: CNN reported on June 30, 2008, "Senator Obama says if he had been in the U.S. Senate in 2002, he, too, would have voted in favor of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act because unlike the Illinois bill, it included language protecting Roe v. Wade." The New York Times reported in a story on August 7, 2008 that Obama "said he had opposed the bill because it was poorly drafted and would have threatened the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade that established abortion as a constitutional right. He said he would have voted for a similar bill that passed the United States Senate because it did not have the same constitutional flaw as the Illinois bill.")
National Right to Life and other pro-life observers have always regarded Obama's "defense" as contrived, since the original two-paragraph BAIPA on its face applied only after a live birth; the "neutrality clause" added in 2001 merely made this explicit, and therefore the new clause did not change the substance of the original bill.
Moreover, the overwhelming majority of liberal, pro-abortion members of the U.S. House of Representatives did not embrace the initial NARAL position that the original bill was an attack on Roe v. Wade. The Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee, then as now, were a solidly liberal group, yet only one of them voted against the original BAIPA, without the "neutrality clause," and he cited a different reason. Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), who supported the bill and who described himself as "as pro-choice as anybody on Earth" -- argued that under his understanding of Roe "if an abortion is performed, or a natural birth occurred, at any age, [even] three months, and the product of that was living outside the mother, and somebody came and shot him, I don't think there's any doubt that person would be prosecuted for murder." When the original bill -- with no "neutrality clause" -- came up on the House floor on September 26, 2000, it passed 380-15.These facts should give pause to those who have unskeptically accepted Obama's claim that the Illinois BAIPA bills that he opposed in 2001 and 2002, which were modeled on the original federal BAIPA, were crafted to attack Roe v. Wade.
For the moment we can set that debate aside, however, for this reason: Documents obtained by NRLC now demonstrate conclusively that Obama's entire defense is based on a brazen factual misrepresentation.
The documents prove that in March 2003, state Senator Obama, then the chairman of the Illinois state Senate Health and Human Services Committee, presided over a committee meeting in which the "neutrality clause" (copied verbatim from the federal bill) was added to the state BAIPA, with Obama voting in support of adding the revision. Yet, immediately afterwards, Obama led the committee Democrats in voting against the amended bill, and it was killed, 6-4.
The bill that Chairman Obama killed, as amended, was virtually identical to the federal law; the only remaining differences were on minor points of bill-drafting style. To see the language of the two bills side by side, click here.
To see the official "Senate Committee Action Report" on this meeting, click on one of the links below. (The document is dated March 12, 2003, which is the day that the committee convened, but Chairman Obama recessed the meeting until March 13, which is the day that these votes actually occurred.)
To view the text of SB 1082 as it was originally introduced (without the neutrality clause), click here. To view the text of Senate Amendment No. 1 (the neutrality clause copied from the federal law), which Obama and his colleagues added to the bill at the March 13 meeting (before killing the bill), click here.
NRLC has also obtained two additional documents that report information on these events that is fully consistent with the Senate Committee Action Report.
To see the "Senate Republican Staff Analysis: Senate Bill No. 1082," click here. (If this Word document requests a password, simply hit "cancel" and it will be displayed.) The first portion of this analysis was written before the March 12-13, 2003, meeting of the committee that Senator Obama chaired. The committee's actions, amending the bill to exactly track the federal born-alive law, and then defeating the bill, are reported on the bottom half of the second page.)
Finally, to see an Associated Press dispatch dated March 13, 2003, reporting on the 6-4 committee vote that killed the bill, click here.
Less than two years after this meeting, Obama began to publicly claim that he opposed the state BAIPA because it lacked the "neutrality" clause, and that he would have supported the federal version (had he been a member of Congress) because it contained the "neutrality" clause. His claim has been accepted on its face by various media outlets, producing stories that have in turn been quoted by the Obama campaign and Obama defenders in attacking anyone who asserts that Obama opposed born-alive legislation similar to the federal bill. It has also been forcefully repeated by advocacy groups such as NARAL (see, for example, this June 30, 2008 "alert" from NARAL).
It appears that as of August 7, 2008, only one writer -- Terence Jeffrey, a contributing editor to HumanEvents.com -- had correctly reported the essence of this story, in a column posted on January 16, 2008 (read it here), but his report was ignored by the Obama campaign and overlooked by others at the time.
Now, the uncovering of the Senate Committee Action Report and the contemporary Associated Press report shed new light on Senator Obama's four-year effort to cover up his real record of refusing to protect live-born survivors of abortion.
Index
of Documents Regarding Obama Cover-up on Born-Alive Abortion Survivors
Bill (will be updated as new items come in)
Technorati Tags:obamessiah,
abortion
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator
Edited on: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:44 AM EDT
Categories: 2008 election info, abortion, Cross Posts (Yahoo, VDare, etc.), Obama - The Obamessiah
PermaLink
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Obamessiah wants to be Abortionist In Chief of the USA but says...
Obama says pointed abortion query “above his pay grade”
Posted by: Ed Stoddard
DALLAS - U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama side-stepped a pointed query about abortion on Saturday by “mega-pastor” Rick Warren during a televised forum.
Asked at what point a baby gets “human rights,” Obama, who strongly supports abortion rights, said: “… whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity … is above my pay grade.”
He went on to reiterate his view that it was important to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.
[more]
===
...Above his pay grade until he is elected and ascends to his godhead position as the Obamessiah.
Translation of the above statement by Obama, "I dont need to decide. I'd kill them ALL!" (as his solution to pregnancies unwanted or otherwise...)
Obamessiah is the most liberal Senator in the US Senate. Omamessiah has a 100% pro-abortion voting record. He is recognized for this by NARAL (the National Abortion Rights Action League).
He specifically voted to allow "partial birth abortion" where the live baby is delivered feet first utill the skull still remains in the birth canal. Then the brains are sucked out, collapsing the skull.
This is the ULTIMATE sacrament to abortion lovers like Obamessiah.
Technorati Tags:obamessiah,
rick warren,
abortion, pay
grade
Generated By Technorati
Tag Generator
Edited on: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:03 AM EDT
Categories: 2008 election info, abortion, appeasers, hypocrits, and traitors, Blogs, Forums, and The Media, Cross Posts (Yahoo, VDare, etc.), Democrat Wackiness and Hypocrisy, Local, National, World News, Obama - The Obamessiah, Religion
PermaLink
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
The Current Blue Dog Democrats Membership List
Here is an updated list of the Blue Dog Democrats. I am in progress of updating their pro-abortion ratings as listed at the official source for this info, The National Abortion Rights Action League aka NARAL.
===
A majority of Democrat legislators including the Blue Dogs support the killing of an infant just before live delivery, pulling the baby out feet first, leaving only the head still in the birth canal, then sucking out the brain of the baby to collapse the skull. WHAT?!?! You didn't know that is the procedure used to kill a live baby at the moment of birth, so that the (doctor/butcher) can get away without being charged with murder?
Here is a quiz:
[Q] Two of the Three Political Stooges are 100% Pro-Abortion including the particularly gruesome partial birth abortion. Who are they?
[A] Moebama and HilLarry
Supporting the killing of babies is a weird way for someone who is a "Christian" such as Moebama, a member of the very racist Trinity UCC with the head race baiter Jeremiah Wright, and also associated with racist Michael Pfleger of Saint Sabina RCC. I wonder if the Pfleger desecrates the altar at Saint Sabina to celebrate the black mass. He is an ardent supporter of hard pro-abortion political candidates.
Technorati Tags:blue
dogs, naral
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator
Edited on: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:19 AM EDT
Categories: 2008 election info, abortion, Clinton, Obama - The Obamessiah
PermaLink
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Religious Convictions of Socialist Liberals: Totally Amoral
The latest brou-ha-ha about Obama, what he knew and when he knew it, about his racist pastor brings back the point that to be a good socialist liberal there must be a lack of a moral compass. Most liberals belong to the "let it all hang out", feel good, touchy feely crowd.
This latest incident is spin, trying to convince us that they really DO practice some form of Christianity. They desperately want to identify with Christian conservatives in a "ME TOO" way.
How can an abortion loving liberal claim to be saved?
The truth is, socialist Democrats are totally amoral and if they worship at all, the deity is jesus the homosexual abortionist. (note: lower case intentional)
Check out the NARAL ratings of our current crop of US Senators. final-2007-voting-records.pdf
And here is a rogues gallery of our Senate High Priests, Elders, and Super Delegates of the church of jesus the homosexual abortionist where the high sacrament is abortion. The congregation practices every perversion imaginable.
===
note: Both Michigan Senators (Levin and Stabenow) are charter members as 100% NARAL rated abortion lovers.
Technorati Tags:obama,
socialist
democrats, amoral,
abortion, high
sacrament, church
of jesus the homosexual abortionist, rogues
gallery, naral
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator
Categories: 2008 election info, abortion, Democrat Wackiness and Hypocrisy, Obama - The Obamessiah, Religion
PermaLink
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Obama and Reverend Wright - The Rev is like an Uncle
Obama told MSNBC that he would not repudiate Wright as a man, describing him as "like an uncle" who says something that he disagrees with and must speak out against. He also said he expects his political opponents will use video of the sermons to attack him as the campaign goes on.
So Barack Hussein Obama will just give him a slap on the wrist and tell him to go to the back of the bus. In the 20 years since Wright brought Obama to this version of Christianity, Barack claims to have never heard any of the racism spewed by Reverend Wright.
Words from the pulpit of the racist Reverend Wright:
"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Wright said. "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."
and
"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."
and
"Barack knows what it means to be a black man to be living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a nigger."
Suggestions that these old words are no longer operative are met with the argument that if former members of other racist regimes are tarred with that brush for life, how can he escape it? Through the forgiveness of political convenience? Go and do no political sins in public?
Easy... the Democrats will always excuse one of their own.
It all comes back to roost on the fact that to be a good socialist Democrat you must be totally amoral. A good socialist Democrat that claims to be a christian (notice the lower case, it is indicative) worships a savior known as jesus the homosexual abortionist. It can be the only explanation for their slavish devotion to abortion as their high sacrament and homosexuality as a vehicle to worship. A HUGE number of liberals and moderates in the Republican party also attend and worship this same savior. This explains how the Republican party has been lead astray from the conservative fold.
Question: What is the Reverend Wright's religious position on abortion? What does he preach on the subject?
Has he ever used any of his vitriol to mention how Planned Parenthood was formed as a vehicle using abortion to rid the USA of blacks by a very racist Margaret Sanger?
Friday, the United Church of Christ issued a 1,400-word statement defending Wright (this has to include his racist rantings)!
"It's time for all of us to say no to these attacks and to declare that we will not allow anyone to undermine or destroy the ministries of any of our congregations in order to serve their own narrow political or ideological ends," John H. Thomas, United Church of Christ's president.
[ed: There, now you know where UCC stands! Hmmm... Barack surrounds himself with all sorts. I wonder if his wife is proud of Reverend Wright? She certainly was not proud of the USA.]
Technorati Tags:obama,
Reverend
wright, god
damn america, nigger
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator
Edited on: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:40 AM EDT
Categories: 2008 election info, abortion, appeasers, hypocrits, and traitors, Democrat Wackiness and Hypocrisy, Obama - The Obamessiah, Random Thoughts and Comments, Religion
PermaLink
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Giuliani's Catholic Problem Won't Go Away
During the last presidential election cycle, this was Kerry's problem too. All pro-abortion Catholics look for a way to justify taking the life of a baby. There is no better example of helpless innocence than a baby. The article excerpted below talks on the subject. I have included images of aborted babies to show what pro-abortion candidates and their supporters find acceptable. With exceptions, moderate Republicans and nearly all Democrats are pro-abortion. To them these images are just lumps of tissue to be discarded.
To read the whole article go to NewsMax
Giuliani's Catholic Problem Won't Go Away
Monday, November 19, 2007 4:47 PM
By: George J. Marlin
A 2008 voters guide created by Catholic bishops no doubt has Giuliani
supporters scrambling for loopholes that can be used to convince
Catholics that it’s OK to vote for Rudy Giuliani 
despite his pro-abortion stand.
At the conclusion of their national conference held in Baltimore, the American Catholic Bishops announced they adopted "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," a statement of principles to guide Catholic voters in the 2008 presidential election.
The Bishop's guide affirms the Vatican's "Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion — General Principles," written by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 2004.
All Moral Issues Not Created Equal
In that statement, Ratzinger pulled the rug out from under the proponents of the "seamless garment" argument by making it perfectly clear that not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.
"There may be," he declared, "a legitimate diversity of opinion even
among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, 
but not, however, with regard to abortion and euthanasia." When it comes
to abortion, death penalty, or the war in Iraq, only abortion is
intrinsically wrong because it destroys innocent human life.
---
Catholics are free to oppose using the death penalty in particular situations, but Catholics are not free to condemn it in the name of the Church as always morally wrong.
---
In 2004, Catholic Kerry supporters jumped on Ratzinger's last paragraph to rationalize their support for the pro-abortion presidential candidate: "When a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons."
The [disgraced and defrocked] Rev. Andrew Greeley led the way, declaring that Catholics could, in good conscience, vote for Kerry because the right-wing Ratzinger said so.
In his nationally syndicated column, Greeley quoted that final paragraph and concluded: "It is as close to an official statement on the subject as one is likely to get. It says that Catholics are not obliged to vote on one issue, no matter how important the issue might be. They may vote for Kerry ‘for other reasons' so long as they are not supporting him merely for his pro-choice stance. This ought to settle the matter."
Quoting only one paragraph of the statement and not properly explaining the phrase "proportionate reasoning" allowed Greeley to mislead his readers.
Dr. Robert Royal, president of the Washington-based Faith and Reason Institute, had this reaction to Greeley's pronouncement:
- Some liberal American Catholics, like Fr. Andrew Greeley, chose deliberately to misunderstand then-Cardinal Ratzinger's directive about voting for pro-abortion Catholics only for "proportionate reasons." Democrats and their hangers-on tried to spin this as meaning if they were good for "the poor," meaning they passed out other people's money, they had equal moral footing. In fact, as anyone who follows these issues in the Church knows, proportionate reasons means serious offenses against life such as a massacre or genocide, and even then abortion is killing 1.2 million Americans alone a year, so it would have to be a rather large massacre or genocide intended by some pro-life Republicans that would explode their moral superiority on abortion per se.
Some Flexibility
Similarly, in 2008, expect Giuliani partisans to zero in on this sentence in the Bishop's statement to rationalize a vote for Rudy: "There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons."
A Nov. 15 New York Times article laid the groundwork for exploitation with this headline: "Catholic Bishops Offer Voting Guide, Allowing Some Flexibility on Issue of Abortion." The article quoted liberal theologian Thomas J. Reese, who when asked, "Can a Catholic in good conscience vote for a candidate who is pro-choice?" said "What [the Bishops] are saying is, ‘Yes.'"
If Giuliani is the Republican presidential nominee, to carry the closely contested swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Wisconsin, he will have to receive the support of a key voting bloc — practicing Catholics.
To achieve this end, Giuliani's handlers will make sure that Rudy, whose third marriage is outside the church, avoids alienating Catholics by not receiving Holy Communion at Mass. And since his extreme pro-abortion paper trail cannot be eradicated, his supporters might use the Bishop's statement as the basis for portraying Giuliani as the lesser of two evils.
They could argue the Brooklyn-born Italian is really "one of them" because, proportionally, Giuliani is much more in tune with the basic values cherished by Catholics than his Democratic opponent.
Anyone who suggests that Catholics should give Rudy a pass based on "proportional reasoning" is wrong.
Because the sole intention of abortion is to take innocent human life, it is by its nature intrinsically evil and can never be on the same moral plane as the issues of poverty or healthcare or the war on terrorism.
Technorati Tags:giuliani,
catholic, abortion
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator
Edited on: Thursday, December 20, 2007 8:38 AM EST
Categories: 2008 election info, abortion, Cross Posts (Yahoo, VDare, etc.), Guest Editorial, Religion
PermaLink
Monday, July 23, 2007
Abortion, images the pro-abortion crowd hopes you will ignore
I have some shocking images to show you. The pro-abortion crowd hopes that no one will see this sort of thing because unborn babies are just lumps of tissue until they breathe on their own... so they say!
The head is ripped off this baby!
There are other images more gruesome than these.
These are images of the high sacrament of the liberals in the USA and elsewhere.
If you want to look at the abortions of pro-abortion groups (such as Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger's equal opportunity genocide group) take a look at the images in the link.
(note: Planned Parenthood was originally formed by a very racist Margaret Sanger to abort black babies, trying to eradicate blacks from the USA. Now Plannned Parenthood has morphed into an equal opportunity liberal genocide organization which is the central purveyor of abortion on demand.)
Technorati Tags:abortion
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Planned Parenthood Abortionists recruiting gradeschool kids
My wife and I are legal guardians of our oldest grand daughter who is eleven years old.
Saturday's mail delivery contained a newletter addressed to my grand daughter from Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Michigan.
We are greatly disturbed that this band of baby killers would try to recruit grade school girls.
[psssst! Italicized comments below are mine, but are true nonetheless!]
Planned Parenthood was originally formed as a racist pro-genocide, anti-black organization by Margaret Sanger.
The Truth About Margaret Sanger
Planned Parenthood has morphed into being an equal opportunity pro-genocide organization. They do not care what race, creed or color, as long as they can continue to abort babies.
Who are the PPAM Board of Directors? As of the Spring 2007, Volume 20 - Issue 1 Michigan's VOICE
President = Mary Brown, 1st Vice Pres.= Rev. Mark Pawloski, 2nd Vice Pres.= Paul Pratt, Treasurer = James Richardson, Secretary = Jan Dolan, and Board Members = Mary Currie, Tom Greene, Barbara Hill, Katherine Humphrey, Katie Jacob, Judy Karendjeff, Lori Lamerand, Bob Lohrmann, Mike Nichols, Lisa Oliver-King [dontcha just love those hoity- toity feminist hyphenated names? I wonder if "King" is her domestic partner? ...just idle curiousity.], Sally Shaheen Joseph, and Karen Walker.
One of the articles has the header:
Faith, Choice & Action
On Tuesday, April 24, 2007, join Planned Parenthood Affiliates...
Rev. Dr. Ignacio Castuera (High Priest of the Church of Jesus the Homosexual Abortionist), Chaplain for the Plannned Parenthood Abortion on Demand Federation of America, along with other liberal pro-abortion clergy from a variety of traditions (wicca, satan worship, etc.) will give testimony that a majority of Americans are pro-choice and that a majority of the world's most beloved religions have authentic pro-choice (pro-abortion) positions.
From the Michigan PPAM web page, Prevention First = Healthy Families. Since we know that Prevention = Abortion we can translate that to say Abortion First = Healthy Families by their way of thinking.
In all truth, they never mention Jesus Christ or print the word Christian anywhere in their article. They use heavy implication that they worship something and that a lot of other people do also but they never really come out and say it... maybe because their high sacrament is abortion.
Prevention First = Healthy Families
[translation - Abortion First = Healthy Families]
http://www.ppaction.org/mppan/notice-description.tcl?newsletter_id=7033190
As the nation’s leading advocate and provider of reproductive health services (abortions), Planned Parenthood...
Nationally, the Prevention [Abortion] First Act, introduced in Congress by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) and Representative Louise Slaughter (D–NY) and cosponsored by Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow (D) and Representatives John Dingell (D–District 15) and Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D–District 13), will expand access [to abortion]...
Get fired up for Roe in Lansing
http://www.ppaction.org/mppan/notice-description.tcl?newsletter_id=5858557
January 21, 2007
4:00-6:00 p.m.
34th Anniversary Celebration of the U.S. Supreme Court Roe v Wade Decision...
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1998/roe.wade/stories/roe.profile/
...even though Jane Roe (pseudonym) has had a change of heart and now says that abortion is WRONG!
Who is 'Jane Roe'?
Anonymous no more, Norma McCorvey no longer supports abortion rights. From CNN Interactive Writer Douglas S. Wood
(CNN) -- Norma McCorvey won't be celebrating the anniversary of the historic Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion.
McCorvey is "Jane Roe," the pseudonym she assumed to remain anonymous as the lead plaintiff in the case that legalized abortion in the United States.
"I'm very sad (about the anniversary)," she told CNN Interactive in a telephone interview. "But this year, I've got so much to do, I don't have time to sit down and be sad."
Once an abortion-rights supporter, the 50-year-old McCorvey has switched sides: She's now a vocal anti-abortion activist. She has started a ministry called Roe No More to fight against abortion rights with the aim of creating a mobile counseling center for pregnant women in Dallas.
McCorvey, who was 21 when the case was filed and was on her third pregnancy, never had an abortion and gave birth to a girl, who was given up for adoption.
Technorati Tags:planned
parenthood, abortion,
sacrament,
margaret
sanger, genocide,
roe no more,
racist
Generated
By Technorati
Tag Generator